HOME Featured Stories January 2005 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 31, 2005.

Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen - his adopted Terrorist nickname) has returned to Russia to visit his trainers. This is the man who wrote his thesis in the Soviet Union that the Holocaust was merely a fable. This is the man who Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has started to support - with fervor!

It is instructive to note that Abu Mazen returns to meet Vladimir Putin, Russia's President now, but formerly high in their KGB. Putin himself has started to return to his KGB days and Cold War attitudes.

Abu Mazen follows a four day visit by Bashar Assad, President of Syria, cutting a deal for Russia supplies SS-18 Missiles (that we know about)! Clearly, itis time to once again re-target Russia with our own ICBMs as Putin deploys new Ballistic Missiles.

What does Abu Mazen want from his former and present handlers of the Soviet Union - now Russia? What weapons will he request once there is an open Airport in Gaza and Sea Terminals? Will he get artillery, missiles, armor and shoulder-fired missiles - all shipped out in the open - thanks to Sharon.

With the first major attacks by the Arab Muslim Palestinians against Israeli cities which should be followed by dismissing the Israeli government. This should be followed by mass arrests of top Government officials of both Likud and the Labor Parties - for treason. Trials to follow but, in the interim, enforced detention to insure those responsible are cut off from communicating with either the Palestinians or such foreign nations with whom they have been working...under the table.

In the meantime, the Left Liberal Press in Israel, the U.S., Foreign Media are gleefully cheering a few days of seeming quiet, although there have been numerous mortar and Kassem Rockets attacks - not worth reporting. Several weeks of arranged quiet, in order to push the Sharon-Bush evacuation is a typical betrayal of Jews. When Arab Muslim Terrorists are quiet for 5, 10 or 50 years only then can one say there is a possible opportunity for peace.

Abu Mazen's short-term agreement with his Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezb'Allah, Tanzim, Fatah Terrorists is merely grim humor as the Jew-hating Media puts out cheerful stories of how the Jihadists have shown their peaceful side.

Serendipity: As I was penning these thoughts, my friend Murray Kahl sent me the following article. It is called "Russia Backs Abbas As Middle East Peace Hopes Build" and was in today's Israeli and Global News.

MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia pledged its "active" support for the Palestinians amid growing signs of a revival in the long-dormant Middle East peace process as visiting Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas voiced "high hopes" Moscow would advance the drive to restart peace talks.

"You are the recognized leader of the Palestinian people and we will actively support you," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Abbas in front of reporters after the two held talks.

Speaking afterwards at the Kremlin where he held a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites), Abbas said there was now a "historic" opportunity to rekindle the Middle East peace process and said Russia had a decisive role to play in doing so.

"There is a historic chance to bring about peace in the region," Abbas said. "Russia's support in bilateral relations and in the framework of the quartet will be of decisive neimportance in establishing a universal and stable peace in the Middle East," the Palestinian leader said in remarks spoken in Arabic and translated into Russian by an interpreter.

Putin said he hoped Abbas would succeed in implementing measures needed to improve the Palestinian-Israeli relationship and bolster the Palestinian economy.

"We are ready to cooperate with you and the international community in an active way to resolve these issues," Putin said.

Abbas underscored that his decision to travel to Moscow before visiting the United States or the European Union (news - web sites) was deliberate and said the Palestinians "have placed high hopes in Russia advancing the peace process."

Abbas' trip to Moscow came as Israeli media reported that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - - web sites) was deliberate and said the Palestinians "have placed high hopes in Russia advancing the peace process."

Abbas' trip to Moscow came as Israeli media reported that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's (news - web sites) top advisors were to meet Monday in Washington with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) to discuss prospects for an Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire.

Rice was scheduled to travel to the region February 6 and 7 and an Israeli official said a summit between Sharon and Abbas could take place the week beginning February 6, coinciding with Rice's trip.

Moscow, a member of the Middle East "quartet," enjoyed close relations in Soviet times with the Palestinians and other Arab states but its influence in the region has dwindled since the break-up of the Soviet Union.

Analysts said Russia, which has also developed warm relations with Israel since then, was examining various ways to reassert its interests in the Middle East and elsewhere, and Abbas' visit marked Putin's first direct engagement in the peace process in four years.

"The main goal of the Palestinian visitor is to obtain Russia's support in anticipation of difficult negotiations with the Israelis," the respected centrist daily Izvestia said Monday.

"But the question remains open: Is Moscow ready at this time to support the representative of the late Arafat -- not just with words but with concrete deeds?" the paper added, referring to the former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (news - web sites). Both the Palestinians and Israelis have taken several critical steps towards resuming peace talks since Arafat's death.

On Sunday, tens of thousands of Israelis demonstrated against their government's plans to pull out of the Gaza Strip (news - web sites), as officials announced the army could pull back from several West Bank towns within days.

Abbas has also secured an unofficial "cooling down" period from Palestinian militant leaders but wants Israel to reciprocate by ending military operations and starting to release Palestinian prisoners so that he can cement a full ceasefire.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 31, 2005.


After having failed before at ending the Arab-Israel conflict, ex-Senator Mitchell, now at Columbia U., arranged a conference at his Institute there, to try again. He called the subject peace in the Middle East, as if the Arab-Israel conflict were the only one in the Mideast and an insurgency were not raging in Iraq. Is the over-reaching title due to carelessness or conceit?

Mitchell invited Israel's ambassador. The ambassador was inclined to come. US Jewish leaders strongly advised him both to accept and to reject the invitation. Those who urged him to decline said his presence would symbolize Israel's condoning of Islamist professors' biased treatment of Jewish students. Those who urged him to attend said he was needed to engage the University and use the opportunity to raise the issue of biased treatment.

Some advisors are exercised not over what he might accomplish, but over what they think his presence symbolizes. Anything connection to Columbia, even debating it, they take as approval of everything to do with the University. On the whole, neither side recognizes or admits that there is another side to that matter. It is common for people to see only their own side.

I think he should go, so long as the particular host is not vicious, the format allows for presentation of his view, and some people there would be open-minded enough to give the presentation some thought.

An interesting aside is whether Sen. Mitchell modified his position since his failed diplomacy. His approach had distorted international law in favor of the Arab aggressors. He thought a solution would be appeasement of the fanatical aggressors, a stance that must fail. Bias for one side could cost the cooperation of the other. In this case, there can be no amicable solution when one side seethes with implacable bigotry and wants to annihilate the other. Evil simply must be fought. Why not oppose Arab aggression?

The State Dept. has not modified its similarly flawed and failed position. Inflexibility could mean inability to learn, but given the State Department's traditional anti-Zionist bias, its relentlessness reflects unregenerate hostility to Israel. What is Mitchell's excuse?


Unfamiliar with the proper names for distant countries, many Americans are confused by overlapping jurisdictions and synonyms. Propagandists exploit their perplexity.

The Palestine Mandate, originally to be co-terminus with the Land of Israel, was delineated by the British and French. Britain then lopped off the Golan Heights and illegally excluded the Transjordanian provinces from Jewish development, the main purpose of the Mandate. When Britain violated the Mandate again, this time barring Jewish immigration into the other provinces, Jewish nationalists eventually revolted and won independence. The UNO proposed another partition, but that had no binding force and was irrelevant. Upon declaration of statehood, modern Israel was beset with civil war and invasion. By the time of armistice, it had a fraction of the area in the Land of Israel, a.k.a. Palestine. In the later, Six Day War that the Arabs started with a blockade and mobilization to invade again, Israel ended up in possession of the provinces of Judea, Samaria, Gaza (and the Golan and the Sinai).

Although Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are part of the Land of Israel, they are not part of the State of Israel. Israel has the right, under international law and Jewish law to annex those provinces, but it did not. It incorporated only the Golan and small portions of Judea for the normal expansion of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, some Jewish nationalist writers blur the distinction between Land and State of Israel. When they refer to "Israel," meaning the State, they include the territories.


Deputy Sec. of State Armitage said, "And we'll work rigorously to try to get the disengagement from Gaza into effect, which will be a first, and the first time the Palestinian people are reclaiming land that was occupied, taken from them." IMRA points out that this is not a relocation of troop from one area to another, but an abandonment of territorial claims and the chance to return (IMRA, 1/8). Sec. Armitage implies that there would be no Israeli return.

There is and was no "Palestinian" people, there are Arabs. The Deputy Sec. of State is referring to Arabs who did not have sovereign title to the land. They also did not have military possession of it. It was illegally possessed by Jordan and Egypt. Legal title to the land was held by the Palestine Mandate, under whose terms, the Jewish people were supposed to be settled on the land. Therefore, the land was neither taken from the Palestinian Arabs nor occupied. Doesn't the State Dept. know that? Probably it does, but it asserts what suits its machiavellian maneuvering, to take the land from the Jews.


The U.S. has given more than $10 million to the new P.A. leadership, hoping to win its favor. The money is meant to be channeled into the same officers in the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Force 17 whom Arafat had subsidized, to ensure their loyalty to him. The EU pays the salaries of the P.A. police (IMRA, 1/8).

Imagine, while supposedly engaged in a war on terrorism, the West is subsidizing P.A. terrorists! Shouldn't that be found illegal in the US?


When Syria was split off from the Turkish Empire and turned into a Mandate, the Hatay province (known to the Arabs as Alexandretta), was left with Turkey although it was populated mostly with Arabs. Syria claimed it. Now in the interest of good relations, Syria has recognized full Turkish sovereignty over the province.

The Turkish Ambassador to Israel was asked if that were a precedent for Syrian claims to the Golan, now officially part of Israel. He denied any analogy for two reasons: (1) the Golan is contested (but so was Hatay); and (2) The UN determined that the Golan is occupied (IMRA, 1/9).

The UN is politically biased. Its decisions flout international law and justice. It is no judge.


Sec. of State Powell asserted that the conditions defined in the Road Map must be met. Then he asked for additional, "confidence-building" measures from Israel (i.e., futile gestures of appeasement), such as the release of Arab prisoners (IMRA, 1/9) likely to murder more Israelis.

Why does the US ask for more from Israel than is in the agreement, and less from the Arabs than is in the agreement? Why should Israel offer anything to the Arabs, who are trying to murder Israelis? Wouldn't you call that State Dept. ploy biased, not being pro-Israel?


Everyone talks about the need to reform the P.A. and the opportunity to do so now that Arafat no longer runs it. People should be aware of the need to reform the NGOs, such as Amnesty Intl, Oxfam, Christian Aid, and Human Rights Watch, equally part of jihad. Those "and dozens of smaller allied groups in the region have contributed to incitement to terrorism -- when they should support reconciliation. Their activities amplify Palestinian (s.b. western Palestinian Arab) rhetoric that labels Israel as an 'apartheid regime', and Jews as 'imperialists' and 'colonialists', while whitewashing terror and condemning the Israel defensive actions."

Those biased NGOs call Israeli defense war crimes, but excuse non-state terrorism by the P.A. militias as exempt from international law. Thus those NGOs protect terrorists from censure and unfairly censure Israel. That promotes war. Hypocritically, the NGOs present themselves as peacemakers, rather than opponents of human rights that they are.

Those same groups practically ignore mass-murder in less publicized areas, such as Central Africa and until recently, Sudan. It seems that their activities are self-serving publicity-seeking. (It must help in fundraising).

Unfortunately, there is no accountability for those NGOs. Coasting on past reputations, their motives and methods are not questioned. They should be questioned when they falsely allege an Israeli land-grab as the reason for the war (that the PLO's Marwan Barghouti admitted setting off for jihad), and ignore P.A. incitement to violence and its corruption.

Other groups, such as the Ford Foundation, church groups, and European governments pour money into those NGOs. These subsidizers of evil pretend to be champions of peace. Finally, Ford Foundation went too far, its excesses became noticed, Congress took umbrage, Ford had to apologize, and there has come some scrutiny. Ford Foundation now demands "transparency" in other groups' activities or finances, but does not exhibit it with its own beneficiaries (IMRA, 1/10 from NGO Monitor). Thus the Foundation still supports terrorism against Israel, but no longer honestly can claim it is inadvertent.


Preachers on the P.A. payroll accuse the US of conducting itself in Iraq as did the Mongol hordes there in the past, burning everything its troops come across, like terrorists. (The troops rebuild what the Arab terrorists destroy.) The P.A. preacher in Jerusalem accuses the US of disseminating a false Koran, to deceive Muslims (though the US distinguishes between ordinary Muslims and Islamist radicals). He claims that the US is making war on Islam, itself. He depicts the US as giving Israel a free hand (as the US actually demands that Israel uproot its settlements in the Territories).

P.A. preachers complain that the US supports dictatorships (such as the P.A.).

Israel is described as a cancer spreading throughout the Mideast (where it is banned). Israel invested in Southeast Asia, which caused the area to be corrupt, which is why it had the disaster. (IMRA, 1/10). According to some Arabs, Israel tested atomic bombs, casing the earthquake that set the waves off.


Israel razed five structures that Bedouin build illegally in the Negev. Thousands more remain untouched (Arutz-7, 1/10).

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 31, 2005.

Clearly, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres have made their position clear. They have declared war on part, if not all, of the Jews of Israel. Having declared war, their next step will be to use the Israeli Military and Police Force which would leave open charges of being war criminals. Since, in Israel, high ranking political scoundrels never go to jail, it will be the Military and the Police who will be individually charged.

Every Commander - on down to the private - will be charged with their only defense being: "I was only obeying orders!" The next message to the soldiers and Police will be: "Are you ready to be charged and go to jail as war criminals?" Will this be what will be your reputation for years to follow? Will you be forever marked as a Jewish Kapo who attacked and dispossessed Jews?

There will be future elections, with new people who may decide to indict and try soldiers and police who beat Jews and dragged them from their homes. Sharon's plans will likely turn into a disaster where Kassam and Katyusha Rockets will rain down from improved Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorist positions.

Who will then be blamed for the evacuation of Jews and the disaster that inevitably follows? The blame will fall upon those who carried out Sharon's 'Disengagement' [read: Retreat] mission.

This article is called "Training to Expel Jews," and was in today's Arutz Sheva, www.IsraelNationalNews.com.

A Border Guard police base near Beit Horon in the Binyamin region - northwest of Jerusalem - is being turned into an expulsion training school.

Thousands of Border Guardsmen will be trained there to carry out the mission of removing close to 9,000 Jews from their homes in northern Samaria and Gush Katif.

The training course includes breaking into houses, isolating homes in which opponents of the plan have holed themselves up, and dealing with those inside. Destroying buildings and arresting groups of resisters are also featured in the course.

The trainees will take breaks from their physical training with lectures and workshops on democracy, refusal, civil rights and the like. [Freeman Ed. Note: [Lectures will be in Orwellian Newspeak: black is white, war is peace, civil disobedience is anti-democratic etc]

No fewer than 18,000 policemen will take the course in the coming months.

At the same time, some withdrawal opponents are stepping up their efforts to encourage policemen and soldiers to refuse orders to expel Jews from their homes in the Land of Israel. Over 10,000 soldiers and policemen have already signed their commitment not to fulfill orders. Police and Border Guard officials say that refusers will be fired outright, while those who fulfill the orders will receive a pay raise.

At least one commanding officer, in a recent letter accompanying a reserves call-up notice to his soldiers, noted prominently that the tour of duty does not include missions related to the disengagement/expulsion. In the apparent fear that soldiers might not want to show up for duty, the commander wrote, "The dates of active duty do not correlate to the expected dates for the disengagement, such that dilemmas regarding this matter are not relevant."

Posters at last night's giant anti-disengagement rally showed a picture of a soldier about to enter a Yesha home, greeted by a sad-faced family of young parents and several children standing in apprehension at the door. The caption reads, "Commander, I can't do it."

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, January 31, 2005.
This was written by Prof. Yehuda Lapidot. It is archived at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Altalena.html

The Altalena, purchased by Irgun members abroad, was originally intended to reach Israel on May 15, 1948, loaded with fighters and military equipment. Weapons purchase and organizational matters took longer than expected, however, and the sailing was postponed for several weeks. Meanwhile, on June 1st, an agreement had been signed for the absorption of the Irgun into the IDF and one of the clauses stated that the Irgun had to cease all independent arms acquisition activities. Consequently, representatives of the Israel Government were informed about the ship and its sailing schedule.

The Irgun headquarters in Paris did their best to keep the Altalena's preparations for departure a secret, but it was difficult to conceal the movement of 940 fighters and the loading of a large quantity of arms and ammunition. It was feared that if the plans were discovered, attempts might be made to sabotage the Altalena at sea. For this reason, when it raised anchor on June 11th, no cable was sent to the Irgun command in Israel, for fear that it would fall into the wrong hands. These precautionary measures proved fruitless, however, and the following day Radio London reported that the Altalena had sailed from Port-de-Bouc (France) in the direction of Israel with 1,000 Jewish volunteers and a large quantity of weapons on board.

It should be recalled that the first truce had begun on June 11th. When the Irgun leaders in Israel learned through the broadcast of the embarkation of the vessel, they feared that this breach of the truce conditions (i.e., the ban on bringing military equipment and fighters into the country) would be revealed. Menachem Begin decided therefore to postpone the arrival of the ship, and the Irgun staff secretary, Zippora Levi-Kessel, sent a wireless message to the Altalena to stay put and await orders. A similar cable was sent to Shmuel Katz (member of the General Headquarters), who was then in Paris, but contact with the ship was poor and the message was not understood.

On June 15th, Begin and his comrades held a meeting with government representatives, at which Begin announced that the ship had sailed without his knowledge and that he wanted to hold consultations on how to proceed. In his diary for June 16th, David Ben-Gurion wrote the following about the meeting:

Yisrael [Galili] and Skolnik [Levi Eshkol] met yesterday with Begin. Tomorrow or the next day their ship is due to arrive: 4,500 tons, bringing 800-900 men, 5,000 rifles, 250 Bren guns, 5 million bullets, 50 Bazoukas, 10 Bren carriers. Zipstein (director of Tel Aviv port) assumes that at night it will be possible to unload it all. I believe we should not endanger Tel Aviv port. They should not be sent back. They should be disembarked at an unknown shore.

Galili informed Begin of Ben-Gurion's consent to the landing of the ship, adding a request that it be done as fast as possible. Zippora Levi-Kessel then wirelessed the vessel to come in at full speed. The following day, a working meeting was held between Irgun representatives and Ministry of Defence personnel. While the Irgun proposed directing the Altalena to Tel Aviv beach, Ministry of Defence representatives claimed that the Kfar Vitkin beach was preferable, since it would be easier to evade UN observers there. The ship was therefore instructed to make for Kfar Vitkin.

Whilst there was agreement on the anchoring place of the Altalena, there were differences of opinion about the allocation of the cargo. Ben-Gurion agreed to Begin's initial request that 20% of the weapons be despatched to the Jerusalem Battalion. His second request, however, that the remainder be transferred to the IDF to equip the newly-incorporated Irgun battalions, was rejected by the Government representatives, who interpreted the request as a demand to reinforce an 'army within an army'. This was far from Begin's intention; rather, he saw it as a question of honor that the fighters enlist in the IDF fully-equipped.

The Altalena reached Kfar Vitkin in the late afternoon of Sunday, June 20th. Among the Irgun members waiting on the shore was Menachem Begin, who greeted the arrivals with great emotion. After the passengers had disembarked, members of the fishing village of Michmoret helped unload the cargo of military equipment. Concomitantly with the events at Kfar Vitkin, the government had convened in Tel Aviv for its weekly meeting. Ben-Gurion reported on the meetings which had preceded the arrival of the Altalena, and was adamant in his demand that Begin surrender and hand over of all the weapons:

We must decide whether to hand over power to Begin or to order him to cease his separate activities. If he does not do so, we will open fire! Otherwise, we must decide to disperse our own army.

The debate ended in a resolution to empower the army to use force if necessary to overcome the Irgun and to confiscate the ship and its cargo. Implementation of this decision was assigned to the Alexandroni Brigade, commanded by Dan Even (Epstein), which the following day surrounded the Kfar Vitkin area. Dan Even issued the following ultimatum:

To: M. Begin

By special order from the Chief of the General Staff of the Israel Defence Forces, I am empowered to confiscate the weapons and military materials which have arrived on the Israeli coast in the area of my jurisdiction in the name of the Israel Government. I have been authorized to demand that you hand over the weapons to me for safekeeping and to inform you that you should establish contact with the supreme command. You are required to carry out this order immediately.

If you do not agree to carry out this order, I shall use all the means at my disposal in order to implement the order and to requisition the weapons which have reached shore and transfer them from private possession into the possession of the Israel government.

I wish to inform you that the entire area is surrounded by fully armed military units and armored cars, and all roads are blocked.

I hold you fully responsible for any consequences in the event of your refusal to carry out this order.

The immigrants - unarmed - will be permitted to travel to the camps in accordance with your arrangements. You have ten minutes to give me your answer.

D.E., Brigade Commander

The ultimatum, and in particular the demand for an answer within ten minutes, was insulting and unrealistic. It was made, according to Even "in order not to give the Irgun commander time for lengthy considerations and to gain the advantage of surprise." Begin refused to respond to the ultimatum, and all attempts at mediation failed. Begin's failure to respond was a blow to Even's prestige, and a clash was now inevitable. Fighting ensued and there were a number of casualties. In order to prevent further bloodshed, the Kfar Vitkin settlers initiated negotiations between Yaakov Meridor (Begin's deputy) and Dan Even, which ended in a general ceasefire and the transfer of the weapons on shore to the local IDF commander.

Begin had meanwhile boarded the Altalena, which was now heading for Tel Aviv. He hoped that it would be possible to enter into a dialogue with the Provisional Government and to unload the remaining weapons peacefully. But this was not the case. Ben-Gurion ordered Yigael Yadin (acting Chief of Staff) to concentrate large forces on the Tel Aviv beach and to take the ship by force. Heavy guns were transferred to the area and at four in the afternoon, Ben-Gurion ordered the shelling of the Altalena. One of the shells hit the ship, which began to burn. There was danger that the fire would spread to the holds which contained explosives, and the captain ordered all aboard to abandon ship. People jumped into the water, whilst their comrades on shore set out to meet them on rafts. Although the captain flew the white flag of surrender, automatic fire continued to be directed at the unarmed survivors. Begin, who was on deck, agreed to leave the ship only after the last of the wounded had been evacuated.

Sixteen Irgun fighters were killed in the confrontation with the army; six were killed in the Kfar Vitkin area and ten on Tel Aviv beach. Three IDF soldiers were killed: two at Kfar Vitkin and one in Tel Aviv.

After the shelling of the Altalena, more than 200 Irgun fighters were arrested on Ben-Gurion's orders. Most of them were released several weeks later, with the exception of five senior commanders (Moshe Hason, Eliyahu Lankin, Yaakov Meridor, Bezalel Amitzur and Hillel Kook), who were detained for more than two months. (They were released, thanks to public pressure, on August 27, 1948).

Years later, on the eve of the Six-Day War, in June 1967 (after Ben-Gurion had retired from political activity and Levi Eshkol was Prime Minister), Menachem Begin joined a delegation which visited Sde Boker to ask David Ben-Gurion to return and accept the premiership again. After that meeting, Ben-Gurion said that if he had then known Begin as he did now, the face of history would have been different.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Anne Bayesky, January 31, 2005.

On Monday, the United Nations marked the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp with a day-long special session of the U.N. General Assembly, followed by the opening of an exhibition. Throughout the event, the words "never again" were repeated many times. But what exactly did they mean to U.N. members and officials?

Here is the cynical response: They meant that the secretary-general has been seriously weakened by the Oil-for-Food scandal and ongoing congressional and criminal investigations, as well as the sexual abuse of refugees in the Congo by U.N. peacekeepers and the mishandling of sexual-harassment charges in-house. A secretary-general seeking to serve out his remaining two years in office finds throwing something toward the Jews, in the form of commemorating a 60-year-old catastrophe, a relatively inexpensive means of redemption.

The scope of the exercise was strictly controlled. The Europeans agreed to promote the special session on the condition that there were no resolutions and no final declaration - in other words no lasting statement of purpose or resolve. They were not prepared to do battle with Arab and Muslim states over texts or outcomes. Not a single substantive U.N. document was distributed. The ground rules for the special sessions of the General Assembly for the previous decade were completely different - this one would be "commemorative" only.

One hundred thirty-eight U.N. members agreed with the proposition to hold the special session, and one more decided to speak at the actual event. Of the remaining 50 U.N. members, half were from the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

U.N. member states delivered 41 speeches over the course of the day. Only five of those speeches mentioned Israel. Even the speeches of the United States, the European Union, Canada, and Australia failed to refer to Israel. Nobel-laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Weisel, who spoke at the outset, mentioned Israel once; citing a number of examples of steps that the allies might have taken, he added "if Britain had allowed more Jews to return to Palestine, now Israel, their ancestral land...it would have prevented or reduced the scope of the tragedy." Weisel also called for condemnation and prosecution of suicide-terrorism as a crime against humanity (without mentioning the context).

An evening reception brought hundreds of Jews to the public entrance of the U.N. where an exhibit containing photographs and artwork from Yad Vashem was unveiled. Walking through it, one comes across the word "Israel" on one occasion, in the last sentence, which reads: "Most of the Holocaust survivors immigrated to the state of Israel after its establishment in 1945 following a resolution of the United Nations." When the exhibit was opened, the assembled crowd sang Hatikva, the Israeli national anthem - although this breach of U.N. protocol is said to have been approved on the grounds that the song was for all victims of the Holocaust.

The rules of the game were articulated by U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz while speaking on behalf of the United States: "We have agreed today to set aside contemporary political issues, in order to reflect on those events of 60 years ago in a spirit of unanimity." And except for an indirect comment by Jordan and a direct reference to Palestinians by Venezuela during the day's speeches, the game plan was followed.

The upshot? The United Nations looks better in the eyes of many. The secretary-general improved his image. Israel, the perpetual U.N.-loser, was queen-for-a-day.

But the nagging question is, where does this leave "never again"?

Widening the lens, we notice that last month the U.N. adopted 22 resolutions condemning the state of Israel, and four country-specific resolutions criticizing the human-rights records of the other 190 U.N. member states. Also in December the public entrance of the U.N. sported the annual solidarity with the Palestinian people exhibit, featuring a display about Palestinian humiliation at having to bare midriffs at Israeli checkpoints. (No mention was made of the purpose of the checkpoints or the Israelis who have died from suicide belts on Palestinians who circumvent them.) On exactly the same day that the secretary-general announced the holding of the commemorative session, January 11, 2005, he also pushed forward the U.N. plan to create a register of the Palestinian victims of Israel's non-violent security fence. (There are no plans to create a register of Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism.) In March the U.N. will begin its annual session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, at which Israel will be the only U.N. member state not allowed to participate in full because U.N. states continue to prevent it from gaining equal membership in a regional group. The U.N. remains without a definition of terrorism, never having transformed the names of Palestinian terrorists from abstract entities into the targets of specific U.N. condemnation or consequences of any kind. And any day now we can expect the secretary-general to continue his pattern of denouncing Israel's lawful exercise of self-defense as "extrajudicial killing" or as a morally reprehensible contribution to "a cycle of violence." In other words, U.N. demonization of Israel and the green light to the killers of Israelis that such demonization portends will not skip a beat. This is the face of modern anti-Semitism.

Jews everywhere are indebted to the willingness and ability of Israelis to live and breathe self-determination. When contemporary political issues are set aside, and an affirmation of the centrality of the Jewish state's well-being to the Jewish people's well-being is not key to a commemoration of the Holocaust, "never again" is an empty phrase. Worse, situated in a place where a U.N. General Assembly resolution said Zionism was racism until 1991 and the 2001 U.N. Durban Declaration delivers the same message, it plays into the hands of those who would separate Jews from Israel for no other reason than to divide and conquer.

The speaker of the Italian senate, Marcello Pera, was the only non-Israeli participant who was prepared to stand against the wheeling and dealing in the backrooms, telling the General Assembly that the anti-Semitism of "today...feeds on...insidious distinctions...made between Israel and the Jewish state, Israel and its governments, Zionism and Semitism. Or...when the struggle for life led by...Israelis is labelled 'state terrorism.'"

The less-cynical response to our original question - about the meaning of "never again"? Some Holocaust survivors such as Nesse Godin and Congressman Tom Lantos were able to speak directly - during the unofficial lunchtime break organized by Bnai Brith, in a room far from the General Assembly. Some people listened. Some people heard. The pictures of Auschwitz are still in the front hall of the U.N. for a little while longer. A blow was struck against Holocaust deniers. And for one day, the democratic state of Israel was not the most reviled member of the U.N. (less than half of whose members can be called "free" according to Freedom House).

When all was said and done, however, the U.N. got a lot more than it gave. Improving the image of the U.N. and its secretary-general could prove more costly than Israelis have bargained.

Anne Bayefsky is an international lawyer and a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. She is a visiting professor at Touro and Metropolitan Colleges in New York.

To Go To Top
Posted by Jim Baxter, January 31, 2005.


The way we define 'human' determines our view of self, others, relationships, institutions, life, and future. Important? Only the Creator who made us in His own image is qualified to define us accurately. Choose wisely... there are results.

Many problems in human experience are the result of false and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised in man- made religions and humanistic philosophies.

Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe. The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human reason cannot fully function in such a void, thus, the intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it perceives and measures values.

Humanism makes man his own standard of measure. However, as with all measuring systems, a standard must be greater than the value measured. Based on preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appetites, desires, feelings, emotions, and glands.

Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament, cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist lacks a predictive capability. Without instinct or transcendent criteria, humanism cannot evaluate options with foresight and vision for progression and survival. Lacking foresight, man is blind to potential consequence and is unwittingly committed to mediocrity, averages, and regression - and worse. Humanism is an unworthy worship.

The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the foot- dragging growth of human knowledge and behavior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcendent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philosophies and religions are man- made, humanism, and thereby lack what only the Bible has:

1.Transcendent Criteria and
2.Fulfilled Prophetic Validation.

The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival equip- ment for today and the future.

Man is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by nature and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural foundation of his environments, institutions, and respectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is oriented to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the universe.

See the complete article at Homesite: "Human Defined: Earth's Choicemaker" http://www.choicemaker.net/

Jim Baxter can be reached at jbaxter@choicemaker.net.

To Go To Top
Posted by David Wilder, January 31, 2005.

Last night some 200,000 people stood in the streets between the Knesset and the Prime Minister's office, ostensibly demanding either elections or a national referendum as a prerequisite to implementation of Sharon's expulsion policy. "Let the nation decide!"

In all actuality though, the mass gathering screamed to the heavens: please - stop this madness.

The Yesha Council did a good job getting people out, but part of the message they espoused was disappointing. As reported by Israel National News, "Yesha officials called on the crowd to reject calls for the refusal of orders in the IDF, stressing such a move would destroy the military. They also decried the raising of a hand against soldiers, police, and border police, setting the ground rules for a tough fight, but one that does not cross the lines of a law-abiding society."

What's the problem with these points? They show a complete and total misunderstanding of how to lead opposition to Sharon's plans. They suggest that we 'play by the rules,' - not Sharon's rules, rather those established by a normal society. However, Sharon is not playing by those rules: he's devising his own rules as the game progresses, doing whatever he wants, however he wants. The fact that he has totally reversed his own campaign promises, the fact that he is now implementing the policies voiced by his opponent, Amram Mitzne, who was thoroughly trounced in the last election, the fact that he ignored a supposedly binding Likud referendum as well as a vote of the Likud Central Committee, the fact that he refuses to go to the people because he is scared that he might actually lose, the fact that he is conducting a massive campaign to delegitimize the same people he once regarded as heroes, that fact that he is returning to the one-way street called Oslo, leading to an inevitable head-on collision we've already experienced, again and again and again, with over 1,500 fatalities and thousands of casualties, the fact that according to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Minister Meir Shitrit, not to mention Peres and all the other poodles presently serving as ministers under Sharon, the expulsion and destruction of Gush Katif and the northern Shomron communities is only the beginning - the remainder of communities of Judea and Samaria are on line for the guillotine - all these facts, and many more, clearly establish two sets of rules: one for Sharon and one for everyone else.

Two examples: During my interview with David Bedein last week, he revealed that police invaded homes of Sderot residents, warning and threatening them not to protest during a governmental visit to the city - this despite continued missile attacks and fatalities there.

And last night, buses on the way to the demonstration were randomly stopped and 'searched' - what did the police expect to find - child suicide bombers? One of the buses was stopped a few kilometers outside Jerusalem, on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road, and the search crew took its time looking for hard, criminal evidence against its passengers. Losing patience, the travelers left the bus and started walking down the middle of the highway - 'if you won't let us drive, we'll go by foot.' All traffic came to a stop and the police caught the message fast. Soon the bus was on its way into Jerusalem.

This second incident provides a good example of 'not playing by the rules' - and it works. This is what the Yesha Council has yet to learn. If we continue to 'play by the rules' we are bound to lose.

First and foremost on the list of 'our rules' is refusal to obey orders to evict families from their homes. The claim that refusal to obey orders will destroy the army is a moot point. Why? Because what good is an army without a land to defend? It is the declared intent of many members of the current government, in conjunction with the United States, Russia, Europe and the United Nations, to dismember Eretz Yisrael. Forget George W. - Sharon has, time and time again, declared his allegiance to the 'roadmap,' a plan leading to the disintegration of the State of Israel and the rise of the State of Palestine, G-d forbid. We will not have to worry about whether or not our soldiers obey orders in the future; should they refuse, there will be foreign forces here to do the work for them. So states the 'roadmap!'

True, under ordinary circumstances, refusal to obey orders should and would be viewed as virtually unthinkable. However, our lives, privately and collectively, are ruled by priorities: in this case, without Eretz Yisrael, our armed forces are unnecessary - Eretz Yisrael certainly takes priority over a dictator's decree. I have difficulty comprehending why the leaders of the Yesha council do not understand this.

You know, last week everyone was making a big whop-de-do about the events marking the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Aushwitz. This too, I had trouble fathoming. Speeches in the UN, a memorial to the slaughtered, singing HaTikava, our national anthem, it didn't move me.

Why not?

Many times, during meetings with correspondents from around the world, I tell them: "There is much we must learn from the Holocaust. One of the main lessons I have learned is from the refusal of the allied forces, including Britain and the United States, to bomb the camps and stop the mass murders. This taught me that the United States and Europeans were basically telling us, in other words, 'we don't want you here.' For had they valued Jewish lives, they would not have allowed the Nazis to continue exterminating them, by the millions.

So, what did Jews do? They came to live in Eretz Yisrael and established the State of Israel. Now, we are being told that we cannot continue to live in our land - and the same people who refused to stop the Nazi extermination are leading the call to expel us from our homeland.

So, I ask the reporters, where do they want us to go - they don't want us in their countries, but they refuse to allow us to live with security in our own land - so where should we go?"

The journalists look at me with a blank stare and, as a rule, do not respond.

My problem with the 60th anniversary events is exactly that - why did it take SIXTY YEARS for the nations of the world to stand up and recognize, in some manner, what they were responsible for. The proceedings at the UN should not have taken sixty years to occur. They should have taken place annually since the founding of the organization.

More significantly, in my opinion, in truth, Aushwitz has not been liberated. We are still there, behind barbed wire fences, being led like sheep to the crematorium. Then, the Jews had little recourse - there was no IDF, there was no State of Israel. But today there is. Yet, we are continuing to be led by the nose, by the same peoples who assisted, either actively or passively, with the Nazi extermination machine sixty years ago. The massive world attempt to force us to rid ourselves of our land is certainly nothing less than Aushwitz - because the world still does not recognize the legitimate, G-d-given right of our people to our land. There really is no doubt: Gush Katif will lead to Beit El and Shilo, and they will lead to Hebron and Hebron will lead to Jerusalem. Tel Aviv and Haifa are only a matter of time. That is the way they see it - those who refused to destroy Aushwitz - they are the same people, the same cultures, the same mentality. They haven't changed. And it seems, neither have we. We still haven't learned.

This past Shabbat morning, sitting in Ma'arat HaMachpela, I listened as we read in the Torah, the Ten Commandments. It is normally a very spiritually uplifting experience, especially at such a holy place. But this year, hearing the ancient words chanted, I couldn't help but think, what about the eleventh commandment. Why have we forgotten the eleventh commandment? Why don't we remember - we are we so good at forgetting? Again, meetings between Dachlan and Mufaz, Abu Mazen and Sharon, terrorist prisoner releases, pulling the army out of the 'cities, ' the same show we've seen so many times before. And we know what the results will be.

The Eleventh Commandment: Never Forget.

With blessings from Hebron.

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by NGO Monitor Organization, January 31, 2005.
SUMMARY: Promoting a politicized and ideological agenda supported by government and humanitarian funding agencies, the BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights is one of the most active NGOs promoting the "right of return". The second part of NGO Monitor's analysis examines the activities of this and some other Palestinian NGOs on this issue.

Following NGO Monitor's analysis of the promotion of the Palestinian position regarding the 'right of return' by prominent human rights organizations, the second part of this analysis examines the activities of BADIL and briefly highlights some statements of other Palestinian NGOs on this issue.

The NGO network, including many Palestinian and Israeli Arab groups, is actively involved in promoting the extremist political demand known as 'the right of return'. The BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights, established in Bethlehem in 1998, is one of the most active on this issue. Its declared goal is to "provide a resource pool of alternative, critical and progressive information and analysis on the question of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons." With a budget of over $400,000, BADIL receives funding from sources including Oxfam, the MCC, Canadian International Development Agency, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, the Swiss Foreign Ministry and church groups.

BADIL's 2003 Annual Report says that the organization "has pending applications for 'special consultative status' with UN ECOSOC and for membership with the highly politicized Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO). PNGO's website does not, however, currently list BADIL as a member.

Adopting the language of demonization and a highly distorted version of the 1947/8 war, BADIL claims that "Sources of flight [of Palestinian refugees] include indiscriminate attacks on civilians, massacres, looting, destruction of property (including entire villages), and forced expulsion. Israeli military forces adopted 'shoot to kill' policies along the armistice lines to prevent the return of refugees...A smaller number of Palestinians have become refugees due to policies and practices akin to low-intensity transfer."

Regarding the 'right of return', BADIL claims that "there is no legal contradiction between the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the right of refugees to return." The organization refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, openly declaring the goal of using the 'right of return' to "alter the demographic balance in Israel so much that it would destroy Israel's Zionist, exclusionist character...But the preservation of this character of Israel is neither an international responsibility nor a moral-juridical-political fact that outweighs in importance the restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people."

Despite the support it receives from a number of governments and philanthropies, BADIL further makes the statement that "The UN has no obligation to protect or safeguard the Zionist character of Israel, particularly in its demographic aspect; On the contrary, the United Nations is a guarantor of the rights whose denial was a prerequisite of the Zionization of Israel; and The UN is obligated to the Palestinian Arabs to restore their rights and to undo the actions of Israel which led to the denial of those rights."

BADIL uses UN Resolutions selectively in order to promote its agenda. Thus it claims that Resolution 194 states: "refugees wishing to return to their homes...should be permitted to do so." Quoting selectively, BADIL purposely excludes significant parts of this Resolution which actually states "that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property...Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of refugees and payment of compensation..." (emphasis added).

BADIL's agenda of demonization and distortion of history is evident in a 15 September 2004 press release misleadingly titled "They say 9/11 changed the world. What about September 16?" Failing to mention the role of Christian Phalangist militias in the events surrounding the 1982 Sabra and Shatilla massacres, BADIL attributes the blame solely to Ariel Sharon claiming that "An Israeli commission of inquiry found that he and other Israelis were responsible for the massacre."

BADIL also publishes the "al-Majdal" magazine whose September 2004 editorial addresses the ICJ ruling on Israel's security barrier, arguing that "Academic, consumer, cultural, and sports boycotts, divestment and a campaign for sanctions by states must all be considered." BADIL was also a signatory to an August 2002 call to boycott Israel, including an endorsement of the NGO Program of Action conceived at the 2001 Durban conference. BADIL's statement emphasizes the Durban declaration's call for the "launch of an international anti-Israeli Apartheid movement as implemented against the South African Apartheid..."

It is evident that BADIL has engaged in promoting a politicized and ideological agenda. The basis for funding by government and ostensibly humanitarian funding agencies to such a blatant Palestinian political group is entirely unclear.


The politicized agendas of Palestinian NGOs MIFTAH and Al-Haq have previously been the subject of NGO Monitor analyses. MIFTAH claims that the refugee issue was the result of "a systematic policy of ethnic cleansing" and "attacks aimed to annihilate the entire Palestinian territory and population".

MIFTAH also accuses Israel of carrying out a "continued pursuit of "transfer"". Dismissing Israeli security concerns, MIFTAH claims that "Palestinian refugees broadly accept that exercising their right to return would not be based on the eviction of Jewish citizens but on the principles of equality and human rights." This is a thinly veiled reference to a single state solution that would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state. Indeed, MIFTAH refers to Israel as "a Jewish democracy, and this oxymoron should not be confused with real democracy." Al-Haq, an active participant at the 2001 Durban conference also promotes the 'right of return' based on UN Resolution 194, criticizing US President George W. Bush's April 2004 remarks on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Referring to the resolution, Al-Haq claims that "Israel's rejection of this fundamental right on the ground of protecting the demographic balance within its borders is not merely ironic in light of their ongoing efforts to change the demographics of the OPT, but without basis."

The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict.

Note that the original article contained dynamic links to additional material on the organizations discussed - see http://www.ngo-monitor.org. [Editor's Note: The original contains live links to additional material.]

To Go To Top
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, January 30, 2005.

I think the closing of Auschwitz was at least as monumental an event as the Exodus. Of course, everyone, except me, calls it liberation rather than closing. To me however, every reference to liberty in connection with Auschwitz is too reminiscent of the famous inscription over its gates: Arbacht Macht Frei.

Somewhere between 1.1 and 1.5 million Jews - many times more than followed Moses out of Egypt - had been liberated there of the burden of their lives before the Soviet army arrived at the camp's gates. Yes, I know, other people suffered and died there along with Jews, and my heart aches for them too; but they were collateral damage, accidental victims of the killing machine built with the specific purpose of exterminating my people. A machine that could have never been built had not most Christians around the world been, at least, silently complicit in its construction.

Yes, I know about Raoul Wallenberg and other Righteous Gentiles who risked and often lost their lives trying to save Jews. Each of those heroes has a tree planted in his name at Yad Vashem. Unfortunately, the resulting forest will be insufficient to provide an operational base or even a hiding place for the Jewish partisan movement when Arabs occupy the rest of Israel. Obviously, were there enough Gentiles believing that merely being Jewish is not a good enough reason to be murdered, Israel would be in no danger of Arab occupation.

The six million Jews who perished in the Holocaust constituted less than one-tenth of all World War II casualties. But mine is a tiny nation. The enormity of evil unleashed against us is incomprehensible. The Holocaust took away between one-third and one half of the entire Jewish population of the world. I don't know if today, six decades later, it has reached its pre-World War II numbers. What I do know, however, is that Jewish communities that had existed in Europe for many centuries before being destroyed by the Holocaust will never come back. They were alive with a unique blend of ancient Jewish and local culture. They financed kingdoms that let them stay on their land. They gave the world uncountable doctors, philosophers, poets, and musicians. They produced Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein. They are as dead as every Jew killed at Auschwitz. Their few survivors were scattered around the world. They left behind a vacuum reeking of burned Torah scrolls and burned human flesh. Today, this vacuum is being filled by Muslim invaders irreversibly turning the continent into a province of the Caliphate, ruthlessly pushing it back to the darkest of the Dark Ages. Such is the price Europe is paying for the betrayal of its Jews. But is it justice? No, it's suicide; it is the continuation of the Holocaust.

Today, the world is poised to uproot and scatter Jewish communities in Israel and to replace their population with Arab terrorists. Calling those communities settlements does not change the meaning of what's happening. The Holocaust is raging on. Or is this already the next one?

If we keep reminding ourselves that we, every single one of us, personally came out of Egypt three thousand years ago, then there are six million reasons for us to feel that the Holocaust was committed against every one of us personally. If you are a Jew born after World War II, you were born only because Germans and their enthusiastic helpers failed to kill your parents or grandparents. Not that they didn't try.

Whenever and wherever you were born, every Jew who left a German death camp through the chimney of its crematorium took a part of your soul with him. You might not feel the loss because you were born with it, but trust me, the loss is there. It's yours forever, and it's very personal. Considering the entire history of the Jews, it's not the only scar on your soul. Judging by the direction the world is going, it won't be the last one either. Every time a Jew in Israel gets blown up by an Arab murderer, a part of your soul dies along with that Jew even before you hear of it in the news.

Everyone's soul is different. Some people's souls are big and strong; every loss hardens them against the enemy. Some people's souls are small and weak, and they end up like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres. Unfortunately, my theory does not explain how these soulless cripples become so powerful. Can it be that the Jews, just like every other nation on earth, have the government they deserve?

What can we do? Cause a tsunami? Nah, that's silly. Let's do a Jewish thing instead. Let us observe Yom Auschwitz every year, in every family. Even though I am an ignorant person and don't know what date January 27, 1945 was on the Jewish calendar, I feel we should leave January 27 to the Gentiles to contemplate their betrayal of us if they choose to do so; or to go about their business as usual if they don't. We will celebrate Yom Auschwitz according to our own calendar, our own count of days and sorrows.

I can imagine a conversation at the office on the eve of Yom Auschwitz.
"Why are you taking a day off tomorrow?" the Gentile manager asks his Jewish employee.
"Tomorrow is a Jewish holiday,: the employee explains.
"Which one is that?" the boss wants to know.
"Yom Auschwitz," the Jew says.
"Yom what? Oh, never mind. Have a merry one!"
"Thanks, boss!"

The next day, the entire family will gather around the dinner table wearing striped clothes. Truly observant people will have special garments modeled after prisoners' uniforms. For the rest of us, anything with stripes will do, just like a pair of green socks would suffice on St. Patrick's Day. It would be appropriate to borrow a part of the Yom Kippur ritual and abstain from eating for the preceding 24 hours, to have the pangs of hunger remind the celebrants of their suffering at the hands of the enemy.

At each table, two places will be set aside for two of those who did not survive the Holocaust. Why two? Because there are less that six million Jewish families in the world. If we only set aside one, some of the victims' souls will feel forgotten, and we don't want that to happen. Fortunately, there are more than 3 million Jewish families, so there will be more than 6 million chairs set aside. That's good. The extra chairs will be there for those homosexuals, and Gypsies, and Ukrainians, and Poles, and everybody else who burned in the same ovens with us. Often without realizing it, they weren't that different from us when they were alive; they certainly aren't different enough from us now to be excluded from these festivities.

Similar to the way it is done at a Passover Seder, questions will be asked by children and answered by wise elders. Thus, a child who, against all evidence, believes in the inherent goodness of all human beings, might ask, "What despicable crimes have we committed to deserve such a terrible fate?"

A child who recently started kindergarten, might ask, "Daddy, why did you kill Jesus?"

An obnoxious child might ask, "What did we do to Arabs in Jenin that was similar to what Germans did to us at Auschwitz?"

And an innocent child might ask, "What does it mean - 'Never again?'"

Responding to the child who believes in human goodness, the elders will explain that Jews have been persecuted throughout history not for crimes they might have committed but simply for being Jews. They should make it clear to the children present that every single accusation that has ever been leveled against Jews as a community was a libel; that in all cases, without exception, the accusers knew their accusations to be false, but neither such knowledge nor the innocence of the Jews has ever prevented a pogrom.

To the child who just began attending kindergarten, the elders will respond that neither her father, nor any other Jew killed Jesus. Killing Jesus was only one of the Jewish crimes invented by anti-Semites. The elders will emphasize that no matter how many centuries have passed since the alleged crucifixion, every Jew who has ever lived has been held personally responsible for that particular crime, and many Jews have paid for this fabrication with their lives.

The elders will refuse to insult the memory of Holocaust victims by explaining to the obnoxious child the sheer idiocy of his question.

And to the innocent child they will say that the words "Never again!" were originally used to express the determination of the Jews to never again allow themselves to be treated the way Germans treated them during the Holocaust; but, since Israel began its gradual surrender to its weak and infinitely evil enemy, those words have become completely meaningless. As a result, we are as defenseless today as we were on the eve of Kristallnacht.

At the conclusion of the feast, the eldest person present will ask everyone the most important question: "Those who were first to accuse Jews of killing Jesus, knew they were lying." Those who accused us of killing Gentile children and using their blood to make matzos, knew that was not true. The authors of the Protocols knew their creation to be libelous from its very first word to the very last one. The authors of the Iranian TV series about Jews stealing Arab children's organs know Jews don't do that. Those who compare Jenin to Auschwitz, know the difference between the two. Why do they do it? Why do they keep regurgitating old lies against us and inventing new ones?"

A child would answer, "Because they hate us."
"But what do they really hate us for if we are not guilty of anything they accuse us of?
And why do we never hate our haters back?"

For a few moments, the room will be very quiet. So quiet, that if you hold your breath, you will be almost able to hear Gentile victims of the Holocaust weeping.

Happy Yom Auschwitz, everybody!

Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, January 30, 2005.

Is Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to uproot dozens of Jewish communities in Gush Katif and northern Samaria in trouble?

If Prime Minister Sharon were to listen to the people, the answer would be `yes.' An estimated 150,000 gathered outside Israel's parliament building on Sunday evening for a mass demonstration that organizers dubbed "the mother of all Israeli demonstrations."

Under the theme of "Let the People Decide," the huge crowd waved placards and Israeli flags and listened to speeches from a long line of politicians and rabbis, all of whom berated the once right-wing leader for his about face on giving away Israeli land.

Several speakers were from Sharon's Likud party. They warned the prime minister that if the so-called disengagement plan is carried out, irreparable harm would be done to the fabric of Israeli society.

Popular Likud Knesset member, Uzi Landau railed against Sharon's tactic of bringing the leftist Labor party into the government. "They call this a unity government?" he asked. "It's a lie. Sharon threw out the parties who didn't agree with him. This government has no mandate for a one sided withdrawal," Landau concluded.

David Levy, a veteran Likud Knesset member, told his fellow Likudniks to "wake up!" As the crowd roared its approval, Levy asked how the Likudniks could sleep at night knowing that the plan they narrowly approved is "pitting brother against brother."

Levy warned that the withdrawal would endanger the whole country, as terrorists will be emboldened and have closer access to Israel's population centers.

Cheers went up from the crowd, as National Religious Party leader, Effie Eitam declared: "We are telling you Ariel Sharon - you have no mandate to expel Jews. "We are telling you - you have no right to divide this nation."

Israel's media repeatedly claims that a majority of the public supports the Sharon plan, but actual poll figures are hard to come by. For protestor Hannah Baum of Netanya, the ninety-minute drive to Jerusalem was worthwhile, just to show that not all those who are opposed to the uprooting of Jewish communities are over the Green Line "settlers."

Months before Ukrainian democracy supporters started sporting orange, the Gush Katif campaign decided to use the color as a symbol of the sun and sand that marks their region. At the Sunday demo, every speaker on the dais was decked out in orange scarves, and most demonstrators wore at least one piece of orange clothing. At one point, officials asked for the crowd to raise their orange placards over their heads, so that an entire sea of orange would cover the streets directly in front of the Knesset building.

A centerpiece of the protest was a mass pledge to go to Gaza to prevent the evacuation should it take place.

In a series of film clips, demonstrators viewed the `before' and `after' Sharon. Before the last election, Sharon spoke out strongly against his opponent's ideas of dismantling Jewish communities.

Little more than a year after his election, the new Sharon announced his eviction plan.

As the last clip drew to a close, the chant of "Arik, Go Home," swelled through the streets. Speaker after speaker called on Sharon to hold a referendum or go to new elections. "This is not about our homes only," said Gush Katif's leading rabbi, Yigal Kaminetsky, "It's about our national home." Golan Regional Council head Eli Malka, who pledged the assistance of Golan residents for the anti-disengagement campaign, reiterated the theme.

Tens of thousands of mostly religious teenagers were on the streets in a show of commitment to the country. Their representative, 14 year old Neve Dekalim resident Smadar Golan, addressed the gathering. "I was born in the first intifada," she noted. "I don't know what it is to live without terror," she continued in a steady voice. She told the crowd that her community in Gush Katif is "the security fence for the whole country."

Speaking to Prime Minister Sharon on behalf of the demonstrators, Golan honed in on what appears to have been one of Sharon's worst political moves. "You didn't even come to talk to us to explain what was going to happen," she complained. "We had to hear about it through the media - and you portrayed us as obstacles to peace." [Editor's Note: 141 pictures of Sunday's Jerusalem Rally can be seen at http://www.jr.co.il/rally/r058.htm Contact Jacob Richman by email at jrichman@jr.co.il]

Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 30, 2005.

Many of us concerned with the continued existence of Israel have often spoken out about what we saw as the re-partition of Israel. We tried to bring the betrayal of Israel into the sunlight - to show what the Left is doing in the shadows, while proclaiming their patriotism.

Many of us have written about Oslo as the method which the Leftists used to direct the nation in favor of Palestinians while trying to establish a bi-national State. That translates into eliminating the Jewish part of the State with a flood of incoming Arab Muslims.

Now we see Sharon's hand-picked State's Attorney Menachem (Mani) Mazuz selected as a solid Leftist who might overlook Sharon's sons in their questionable deals for dear old Dad. But now, Mazuz has tried to create a ruling wherein the JNF (Jewish National Fund) no longer had control of the land, presumably intended for an only Jewish State.

Remember those pushka coin boxes for the JNF forests? Remember collecting all your weekly tzadaka (charity) coins in those boxes...saving up to buy Land for the Jews to have a State finally - as refuge to build a country of their own.

Well, Mazuz, Sharon's pick, says that the Land purchased by the JNF organization with countless coins from Jews the world over must be sold to Arab Muslims equally.

Clearly, Mazuz is another Lefty insider - like Sharon, like Chief Justice Aaron Barak, gnawing away at the pillars that support a Jewish State.

Sharon, who has never shown loyalty to the Likud Party (or any Party) has now come out of the closet as a fully blown Leftist, dedicated to re-partitioning the Jewish Land of Israel as if he actually held personal title to the Land.

Mazuz is merely a smaller version of Sharon, Peres and the Oslo Gang leading the parade into a secular nation. Sharon has already demonstrated that he is ready to bring hostile Arab Muslim Terrorists into Gaza, followed by abandoning Judea and Samaria, then the Golan and finally Jerusalem. This will merely serve to bring the inflowing Arab Muslim Terrorists into closer killing range of the Israeli cities. Sharon is cleverly dividing the Jewish people into handleable sections, either by intimidation, bribery or merely by ignoring large sections of the public, counting on their apathy.

There are many components to the re-partition of the Jewish State of Israel. Oslo was and is still one. The Labor Left held meetings with Arafat and the PLO while it was illegal to do so in the early 1980s. Rabin and Peres were never investigated for these illegal meetings because they and the Supreme Court were party to the legislation that made that law. Crooks and traitors simply are not held to account for their perfidy - let alone be indicted, tried and sent to jail.

Those early meetings led to Oslo. Oslo 1 & 2, Wye, Beilin's Geneva Agreements, and now Sharon's Disengagement. They were all moved ahead through the efforts of foreign nations who had vested interests in Arab nations. In most countries that is called "treason" but, in Israel traitors, crooks never seem to go to jail if they are in high places.

You cannot imagine how many foreign nations became involved in manipulating Israel through the political Left. Their interests swirled around oil, weapons' sales, and always the cash flow to the Banks and other investment institutions. Naturally, there was a back flow of cash, commissions and other bribery to the political Party who made the greatest effort to appease the Arab Islamists and their supporting foreign interests.

It has now become a toss-up between the Labor Left of Peres and Sharon's co-opted Likud. I would call it a dead heat as to which one was best at betraying the Jewish nation and the Jewish people.

So, what else can these corrupt scoundrels do to re-partition Israel? Well, Oslo has failed but, like a voodoo corpse, it keeps coming back - rotting and carrying the stench of betrayal. Since Oslo was signed on September 13, 1993, more than 1700 Israelis have been murdered by homicide bombers, snipers, etc. - with tens of thousands wounded, many maimed for life.

Sharon has offered "Disengagement" meaning "Kick the Jews off the Land in Gaza and give it to the Palestinian Arab Muslims" since they generally cannot or will not build it up for themselves.

Even now, Sharon is negotiating the release of 900 convicted and jailed Terrorists as one of those infamous gestures of "confidence building". Then there is the planned grant of immunity for 300 wanted Arab Muslim Terrorist terrorists (not yet in jail) - all of this as a display for Condoleezza Rice's visit. (See January 29th article: "A PARTNER IN CRIME" by E. Winston)

But, following ethnically cleansing the Gaza District of Jews, Sharon's poodles, namely Mofaz, Olmert, Mazuz, the next fragmentation will be the elimination of the Jews of Judea, Samaria, Golan and Jerusalem.

Don't you believe the denials that will be forthcoming from these corrupt leaders because they lie like any Arab. The simple fact is that the government of Israel is composed of low minded, uninspiring officials who would sell their mothers for a shekel and then deliver her up.

Mazuz is merely a small shot trying to keep up with the big shots in deceit and corruption. I guess if there were fewer Judges, lawyers and corrupt politicians, the people would use the old laws. The Bible recommends stoning. The early West of America used tar and feathers with the crooks driven out of town on a rail. But, we're too civilized to treat corrupt politicians as they should be treated.

Remember, we told you so - about the breaking up of Israel into smaller and smaller pieces so in the end it will all belong to the Arab Muslims. Then Sharon and Peres will have to escape from the remaining Jews rage to any of the nations they were dealing with under the table.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Tamar Rush, January 30, 2005.
"Propaganda Against Jews, Christians mainstreamed Within Our Borders" is from World Net Daily.

The government of Saudi Arabia is disseminating propaganda through American mosques that teaches hatred of Jews and Christians and instructs Muslims that they are on a mission behind enemy lines in a land of unbelievers, according to a year-long study by a Washington human-rights group.

The 89-page report by Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom, "Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Fill American Mosques," concludes the Saudi government propaganda examined reflects a "totalitarian ideology of hatred that can incite to violence."

The report says the fact it is "being mainstreamed within our borders through the efforts of a foreign government, namely Saudi Arabia, demands our urgent attention."

The report asserts: "Not only does the government of Saudi Arabia not have a right - under the First Amendment or any other legal document - to spread hate ideology within U.S. borders, it is committing a human-rights violation by doing so."

The Center for Religious Freedom says Saudi Arabia's "extremist Wahhabi ideology" is followed by a distinct minority of Sunni Muslims worldwide, "as is evident by the millions of Muslims who have chosen to make America their home and are upstanding, law-abiding citizens and neighbors."

Former CIA chief James Woolsey, chairman of the board of Freedom House, writes in the forward that such publications that "advocate an ideology of hatred have no place in a nation founded on religious freedom and toleration."

Among the key findings of the report:

  • Various Saudi government publications gathered for the study, most of which are in Arabic, assert it is a religious obligation for Muslims to hate Christians and Jews and warn against imitating, befriending, or helping them in any way or taking part in their festivities and celebrations;

  • The documents promote contempt for the United States because it is ruled by legislated civil law rather than by totalitarian Wahhabi-style Islamic law. They condemn democracy as un-Islamic;

  • The documents stress that when Muslims are in the lands of the unbelievers, they must behave as if on a mission behind enemy lines. Either they are there to acquire new knowledge and make money to be later employed in the jihad against the infidels, or they are there to proselytize the infidels until at least some convert to Islam.

    Any other reason for lingering among the unbelievers in their lands is illegitimate, and unless a Muslim leaves as quickly as possible, he or she is not a true Muslim and so too must be condemned. For example, a document in the collection for the "Immigrant Muslim" bears the words "Greetings from the Cultural Attache in Washington, D.C." of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, and is published by the government of Saudi Arabia.

    In an authoritative religious voice, it gives detailed instructions on how to "hate" the Christian and Jew: Never greet them first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never imitate the infidel. Do not become a naturalized citizen of the United States. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel;

  • Other Muslims, especially those who advocate tolerance, are condemned as infidels. The opening fatwa in one Saudi embassy-distributed book, published by the Saudi Air Force, responds to a question about a Muslim preacher in a European mosque who taught that it is not right to condemn Jews and Christians as infidels. The Saudi state cleric's reply rebukes the Muslim cleric: "He who casts doubts about their infidelity leaves no doubt about his." Since, under Saudi law, "apostates' from Islam can be sentenced to death, this is an implied death threat against the tolerant Muslim imam, as well as an incitement to vigilante violence;

  • Sufi and Shiite Muslims are viciously condemned;

  • For a Muslim who fails to uphold the Saudi Wahhabi sect's sexual mores [i.e. through homosexual activity or heterosexual activity outside of marriage], the edicts published by the Saudi government's Ministry of Islamic Affairs and found in American mosques advise "it would be lawful for Muslims to spill his blood and to take his money";

  • Regarding those who convert out of Islam, the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs explicitly asserts, they "should be killed";

  • Saudi textbooks and other publications in the collection, propagate a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim's duty is to eliminate the state of Israel;

  • Regarding women, the Saudi publications instruct that they should be veiled, segregated from men and barred from certain employment and roles;

The report states: "While the government of Saudi Arabia claims to be 'updating' or reforming its textbooks and study materials within the kingdom, its publications propagating an ideology of hatred remain plentiful in some prominent American mosques and Islamic centers, and continue to be a principal resource available to students of Islam within the United States."

The Center for Religious Freedom said the research, translation and principle analysis of the materials for the report were carried out by both Muslims and non-Muslims who wish to remain anonymous for reasons of security.

To Go To Top
Posted by Marion Dreyfus, January 30, 2005.

Deplorable 'debate' with disgraceful underpinnings and gang-up. A replay of the tactics of WWII, but done by the 'good-guy' side this time.

This article was written by Melanie Phillips and is called "Intelligence Squelched" (http://www.currentviewpoint.com).

On Tuesday evening I had the misfortune to take part in a high-profile and packed debate in London in the 'Intelligence Squared' series. The motion was 'Zionism today is the real enemy of the Jews'. The motion was proposed by three Jews: Avi Shlaim, the 'revisionist' Israeli historian; Jacqueline Rose, a professor of English; and Amira Hass, a journalist for Ha'aretz in the disputed territories. Opposing it were three Jews: myself, Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli Labour foreign minister, and Raphael Israeli, professor of Islamic, Middle Eastern and Chinese history at the Hebrew University.

My side lost by 355 to 320. It is hard to convey the sickening nature of this event, and not just because we lost. The sub-text of the motion was that the Jews are responsible for their own destruction; the real danger they are in comes not from Islamic terrorism, nor the attempt to ethnically cleanse the Jews from Israel, nor the rise in anti-Jewish feeling in Britain and Europe, but from the Jews themselves because the Israelis have turned into monsters. Thus the attacks on them, far from being deplored, are implicitly endorsed; and, to carry this thinking to its logical conclusion, the way to defend the Jews is to remove the source of the contagion - in other words, to destroy the state of Israel.

This grotesque libel, which doubly victimizes the Jews - first by ignoring and even inciting the real terror they face, and second by blaming them for it - is of course now a commonplace in Britain. What made this debate all the more troubling was that this shocking motion was proposed by three Jews. The Jews who were opposing it were therefore placed in the appalling position of having to defend the Jewish people from a calumny about Jews which was issuing from the mouths of other Jews.

This sport of Jew-baiting has now become the vogue among the British media, which uses Jews to unleash the most blatant untruths and vicious lies and libels about Israel so that the media can disavow any anti-Jewish prejudice, on the grounds that Jews cannot be anti-Jew. Alas, would that this were so. Without claiming to understand the motives of the three Jewish persecutors of Israel who strutted their repellent stuff on Tuesday night, the history of the Jewish people has always been punctuated by Jews with a troubled relationship with their own ethnic identity who have gone along with or even become the prime instigators - see Marx or Freud, for example - of diabolical calumnies against their own people.

They, of course, do not see it this way. Indeed, one of the most astonishing and odious aspects of their behaviour is the way they claim the moral high ground. Israel, they say, has betrayed the ethics of the Jewish people. To arrive at this analysis, they rely upon blatant lies, omissions and distortions about both the history and present situation of the Jews in first Palestine and now Israel. They single out and concentrate on examples of bad behaviour by Israel - which undoubtedly happen and should be deplored - while decontextualising them so that the rarity of such events is not acknowledged, Israel is held to an impossibly perfect standard of behaviour which would be expected of no other country in such a parlous situation, self-defence is turned into aggression, and the ways in which Israel behaves infinitely better than most other countries faced with a similar situation are resolutely ignored. They take the existential threat to Israel and twist it into its opposite, so that Israel is presented instead as posing an existential threat to the Palestinians. They dwell obsessively, maliciously and disproportionately upon the 'crimes' of Israel - which are for the most part actually examples of Israel's attempt to defend itself - while ignoring totally the real crimes, the massacres and aggression and tyrannies, which are perpetrated against the peoples of Arab countries, including the Palestinians, by Arab states.

This scapegoating of the Jews, this moral inversion which blames them for their own destruction, is a calumny which has repeated itself over and over again throughout the long history of the oldest hatred. For this ancient libel to be perpetrated by Jews themselves is, as I have said, nothing new. It is nonetheless unutterably shocking to hear it in action in 21st century Britain. I came away from that debate feeling the kind of emotion one feels - in a totally different context - when forced to listen to or even watch the details of pedophile assaults on children. It is a physical numbness, a feeling of the very darkest despair; a feeling that a very great evil has been unleashed which reveals the depths of pathological malice to which human beings can descend - to turn on their own at a time when they are already under murderous attack. It seems like a repudiation not just of their Jewishness but their humanity.

And all this wrapped up in the highest level of sanctimoniousness, humbug and sheer, laughable, intellectual dishonesty and vacuousness. Thus Professor Avi Shlaim - whose 'scholarship' has been comprehensively shredded by Ephraim Karsh and others - brazenly re-interpreted the motion to allow him to defame Israel by claiming that 'Zionism today' was one and the same thing as the policies of Ariel Sharon in the disputed territories. Not only did he grossly distort the history and present circumstances of Israel's presence in those territories, but his approach begged the question of what in heaven's name - if Sharonism was 'Zionism today' - the myriad political parties in Israel opposed to Sharonism were. Were these not Zionists too?

The fact was that by proposing this motion, Shlaim has associated himself with a statement which - despite his denials - singles out the Jews as having no right to their own country, and singles out Israel as the one country in the world whose existence is illegitimate. Zionism is today, as it has always been, the national liberation movement of the Jewish people and Israel is its territorial expression. There are many different types of Zionism today, as ever; Sharon's version is but one. The motion condemned Zionism today, full stop. As a result, this debate will be used by the enemies of Israel and of the Jewish people to do them further harm - and Shlaim, Rose and Hass made that possible.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 30, 2005.
This was written by Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent. It is called "CIA set to oversee the PA-Israel security cooperation" (www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/533515.html). It is archived at IMRA (http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=23887).

IMRA notes: To the CIA's credit they did an excellent job training a generation of Palestinian snipers. The problem was that instead of using their skills to fight Palestinian terrorists, these CIA trained snipers have been murdering Israelis ever since.

The CIA faces a tremendous conflict-of-interest challenge when put in the "monitoring" role. The CIA is involved in American efforts to deal with terrorists impacting American interests around the world and the Palestinian security officials have intimate contacts and relations with their terrorist brothers around the world. The CIA can ignore illegal Palestinian activity in return for Palestinian information and assistance relating to other terrorist groups.

It should also be kept in mind that the CIA's mandate is not to serve the truth but to serve American interests. If it serves American interests to proclaim that night is day, up is down or that the Palestinians are in compliance the CIA will do just that.

Speculation? Hardly. Representatives of the CIA were sharing pitas and coffee with Palestinian security officials while they were busy coordinating and directing terrorist operations and weapons producing projects. The CIA didn't expose the operations - Israel did.]

The Central Intelligence Agency is set to resume its role in security coordination between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in an effort to stabilize the situation in the territories, senior officials said Saturday. The Bush administration has been eager to establish a mechanism that will prevent the escalation of sporadic violent incidents into yet another total conflagration between the two sides.

More specifically, the U.S. is concerned about an extreme Israeli reaction to acts of Palestinian violence that are initiated by groups interested in undermining the diplomatic process.

As such, U.S. officials would like to see a stabilization on the ground at this critical juncture, when terrorist acts are at a minimum, and find ways of neutralizing the effect of any possible terrorist attacks.

This the Americans believe can be done through the revival of a tripartite consultative group, headed by officials of the CIA in the area, and including Israeli and Palestinian security officials.

CIA chief Porter Goss and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley discussed the matter with Shin Bet head Avi Dichter when he visited the American capital.

Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom had similar talks in his meetings with Hadley, and the same message was brought by outgoing State Department chief of the Middle East section, William Burns, in talks in Jerusalem.

However, during weekend deliberations at the Defense Ministry, no enthusiasm was expressed at the possibility of a revived three-way security coordination mechanism.

The tripartite security coordination meetings were set up as a result of the 1998 Wye Accord and collapsed at the start of the intifada in late September 2000.

Nonetheless, the conclusion of the discussions at the Defense Ministry suggest that if the U.S. is keen to revive the mechanism and asks Israel to participate, there is no possibility that Jerusalem can refuse. Sources say it is not clear whether the Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas will be interested in cooperating with the United States in matters of security.

In their talks with senior American officials, Israel took the stance that any progress on the issue will depend on the effort undertaken by the PA in preventing terrorism, and in dealing with perpetrators of terrorist acts and punishing them.

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and senior Palestinian Authority security official Mohammed Dahlan met late Saturday night in an effort to achieve further progress on matters of security coordination. The two men concentrated on the sensitive security situation in the West Bank and sources close to the talks said that the possibility exists that Israel will transfer security responsibility of major towns to the PA in a week.

The Mofaz-Dahlan meeting was also part of paving the way for the meeting between Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, scheduled for the second week of February.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 29, 2005.

Matthias Dapfner, Chief Executive of the huge German publisher Axel Springer AG, has written a blistering attack in Die Welt, Germany's largest daily newspaper, against the timid reaction of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat. He is one German who gets it.

A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.

Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.

Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us.

Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.

Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush.. Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U. N Oil-for-Food program.

And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement... How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany.

I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists.

One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time".

What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.

Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.

His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed.

In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China.

On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.

For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.

While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive".

These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.

Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter.

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 29, 2005.

If the following report by DEBKAfile is accurate, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz have become co-conspirators in protecting 300 top ranking Terrorists by providing them immunity. That would mean that all their prior crimes against the Jewish people - including murder - would be declared null and void. Not only would they NOT be targeted for assassination but, they could not be arrested for past crimes.

Sharon has gone completely mindless or brain-dead and has drawn others into his sphere - like Mofaz. By this crass decision, he has made every Jew an expendable target. He, like Rabin and Peres before him has casually made these gestures of Terrorist releases, many of whom have gone back to killing Jews.

If ever a dictator and his men belonged in prison, it is Sharon, Peres, Mofaz for releasing killers to kill more Jews. This concept of immunity goes well beyond mistakes of judgement. Nor is it merely dementia. We are facing a government that has gone completely mad. Mofaz meets with known the Terrorist and killer of Jews, Mohammed Dahlan offering a deal of immunity for 300 hunted Terrorists.

While Sharon, Mofaz and Peres are ready to jail Jews for defying his orders, they offer freedom and future immunity to known Arab killers of the highest order.

What did it cost in men, blood and just plain police and/or military work to get killers behind bars in the first place, only to be released to kill again? Those who should be assassinated for Terror crimes will now be protected by Sharon, Peres and Mofaz, et al.

What will it cost in dead Jews, civilians, police and military for the betrayal of the State that is about to occur?

Is this the great protector that we depended upon or have we invited the devil into our home. Sharon and his gang cannot be trusted anymore than the Oslo Gang.

So, kill a Jew and you are guaranteed a Grant of Immunity?

"Israel to Offer 300 Top-Flight Terrorists Immunity" DEBKAfile Exclusive Report January 29, 2005.

An offer of immunity for 300 wanted Palestinian terrorists in the Gaza Strip and West Bank will be put by Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz before Mahmud Abbas's informal representative Mohammed Dahlan Saturday night, January 29 - according to DEBKAfile's exclusive counter-terror sources. The beneficiaries, members of Hamas, al Aqsa Brigdes, Tanzim, Jihad Islami and the Palestinian Fronts, include also wanted murderers. Israel's provisos are that the men withdraw from active orchestration and execution of terrorist attacks and refrain from crossing into Israel. If caught outside Palestinian territory, they will be put on trial. To show the offer- which is still secret - is serious, on Thursday, Israeli authorities freed Said Massaini of Nablus, described by DEBKAfile's military sources as a senior al Aqsa Brigades operative who holds the rank of colonel in the Palestinian security service. He was captured a day earlier in his hideout and released by order of Mofaz.

The expected immunity is the most sweeping allowed in the 12 years since Israel signed the 1993 Oslo peace framework accords.

According to DEBKAfile's Palestinian sources, Abu Mazen will offer the men coming out of hiding a fresh start in good jobs with the Palestinian Authority's administration in the hoping of keeping them away from their former pursuits.

Israel's policy-makers find this multiple immunity gesture an easier pill to swallow than opening up its jails to the massive release of hardened terrorists "with blood on their hands" - even though they recognize that it does not preclude any future demands.

It follow on the heels of a series of Israeli gestures designed to shore up Mahmoud Abbas' authority as Palestinian leader and give him every chance to bring an end to the war. They include a halt in the targeted killings of terrorists (which decapitated the Hamas leadership), suspension of military action in Gaza Strip areas handed over to Palestinian security forces, curbs on counter-terror activity in the West Bank, resumption of diplomatic contacts with Palestinian leaders that were frozen after six Israelis were killed in bombing attack at Karni border terminal, the temporary reopening of that terminal Friday for perishable Palestinian goods (strawberries) to reach Israeli markets and a promise to reopen all three border terminals from Gaza to Israel next week. The transfer of security in West Bank towns to Palestinian control is due soon.

Not a single Palestinian terrorist group has responded with a quid pro quo commitment to call off hostilities and terrorist action. On the list of 300 is top West Bank terrorist mastermind Ibrahim Bader, nephew of the Hamas overseas master Khaled Mashal, whom Israel has hunted for four years. He stands to gain his freedom from pursuit even though the disposition of his and his fellowers' logistical resources and weapons stores is still up in the air, along with the dismantling terrorist organizations in toto.

Many Israelis are celebrating the ten-day decline in Qassam and mortar fire from the Gaza Strip while Palestinian security forces take up their new positions. However, no attempt is being made to stop the manufacture of war materials in Gaza workshops or curb the flow of illegal weapons through smuggling tunnels from Sinai.

Abbas says often and encouragingly that the Hamas and Jihad Islami are close to a truce - albeit one adamantly opposed by the Popular Front, al Aqsa Brigades factions and sections of the Gazan Popular Resistance Committees. He explains that he needs Israel's concessions to "stabilize" the current reduction of hostilities and make it a lasting reality. His people are demanding that his meeting with Sharon, provisionally set for February 8, will be used to proclaim a unilateral Israeli ceasefire. He will then seek a corresponding pledge from the Palestinian groups.

The Israeli government led by prime minister Sharon and Mofaz is taking Abbas unreservedly on trust although it is not clear on whose behalf he and Dahlan speak - the more so since Friday, January 28, when a landslide municipal election victory was announced for Hamas. The terrorist group carried seven out of ten Gaza Strip districts, capturing 75 of the 118 council seats. This is not just a grave blow for Abbas and Dahlan and their ruling Fatah but also for Israel and its efforts to ease the lives of the territory's population which were supposed to benefit Abbas - not the group that is dedicated to the Jewish state's destruction.

By their vote, the Gazan masses demonstrated their belief that they owe Israel's relaxations - not to Israeli goodwill, Abbas' diplomacy or Dahlan's credibility, but to Hamas and its implacable Qassam blitz and murderous suicide offensive, which they perceive as having brought the Sharon government to its knees. Dahlan's failure to bring in the vote for Fatah, although he was credited as the boss of Gaza for more than a decade by Israel and the Americans, is the story of the emperor's clothes.

If the Fatah wants to avert a similar contretemps at the July 17 elections to the Palestinian legislative council, it will have to invest in much more serious campaigning than the effort mounted by Dahlan in Gaza. The problem here is far more acute: Hamas needs no more than 40 percent of Palestinian parliamentary seats. Together with the smaller rejectionist, pro-terror Palestinian Front factions, the Islamist terrorist group will then be able to exert control over Palestinian government policy from the second half of 2005. If by then, the terrorist groups have not been fully dismantled and disarmed, they will be in a position to resume violent operations under the leadership of 300 top-flight masterminds.


To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, January 29, 2005.
This article is by Adina Kutnicki and was written January 12, 2005.

Imagine these glaring headlines: "Bush Unleashes Terror Prisoners, Empties Guantanamo as Gesture to Osama"; "Bush Satisfied With 100% Effort from Osama to Halt Terror Attacks -- Results Irrelevant".

If the above headlines sound too farfetched, you have not been reading Israeli newspapers, nor listening to Israeli newscasts. As Israel's war with the Arab "Palestinians" enters its fifth year, the following urgent question needs to be asked and answered immediately: why in heavens name isn't there a collective roar from the Israeli public when headlines continually blare that Sharon "contemplates" (doublespeak for "intends") new prisoner releases?

Let all sane and rational people digest these salient points. Are unsuccessful murderers, due to incompetence or happenstance, "A OK" to unleash on the public? And is the ONLY thing required of Abbas to receive this most magnanimous "gesture" to exert "100% effort"? Does it mean that if Abbas speaks in forked, elegant English to his western audiences (but truthfully to his Arab audience), that is all which is required of him? If he repeats ad infinitum that he is trying his very, very best to rein in the terrorists -- but can't/won't stop the bombers, the shooters and the rocket launchers from killing -- that Sharon and his gang will STILL release CAPTURED terrorists? Has Sharon gone mad?

As a non-mental health professional, I am not in the position to give a qualified psychiatric diagnosis to Sharon's inner demons. However, it is an open secret that politicians cynically abuse their elected mandates in pursuit of self-interested goals. This is despicable, but unfortunately not a new phenomenon, especially in the realm of dirty Israeli politics. The mere fact that Sharon's two closest confidants are Weissglas and Peres speaks volumes as to the corruption of this government. Both are "in bed" with PA/PLO financial ventures. One is rightfully be judged by the company they keep, whether in or out of politics.

Let all lovers of Jewish Israel stop repeating the tired mantras -- Sharon is a war hero! He would never lead his people astray! He must know things that he just can't say. What he sees from there we can't see from here. This is all for our collective benefit. Nonsense. Of course, Sharon has information to which the average Israeli is not privy. All leaders in government do. However, every signal, overt or otherwise, oozing from Sharon should lead one's inner voice to the conclusion that he is now beating to his own drummer. Whether he is going back to his leftist roots, to keep himself or his sons out of prison, or changing horses for other reasons is irrelevant. All that matters is this: he is leading Israel down the road to ruin.

There are some issues in life not worth fighting over because of the time and energy required to expend. However, the abuses by the current government, mainly orchestrated by Sharon (with Peres pulling strings in the background) demands that the Israeli public exert all measures of civil disobedience and democratic means available to topple the present government.

Sharon is not only Israel's Prime Minister, he is its Commander-In-Chief. He has abrogated his most important mandate to the people -- to protect them from enemies near and far. This government has been by every rational standard failing to protect its citizens. Every other disastrous decision of this government emanates from this dereliction of this sacred duty. Imagine on a smaller scale a General purposefully leading his troops into an enemy trap. Upon capture, this General would be first put up for court martial, and then tarred and feathered by its citizens.

What can the public-at-large do at this very dangerous juncture in Israel's history? Top flight civil and criminal lawyers should be flooding the courts with massive Class Action lawsuits. While there is a very strong case against him for violating generally accepted democratic norms/principles, the crux of the lawsuits should address his failure to protect. In any normal country such a leader would be ousted immediately, and brought to trial. Each and every elected government official who facilitated Sharon's dereliction should be named as co-defendants.

This is not at all farfetched or unworkable. It has become a legal tactic by many groups/people infected by the cancer of Islamic terrorism to sue and hold responsible foreign governments, banks and assorted others for their crimes against humanity. The inherent immorality of unleashing CAPTURED terrorists is beyond dispute throughout the civilized world.

The first logical step in correcting this grave injustice is to first sue Israel's governmental leaders, for in effect, aiding and abetting terrorists. Can anyone honestly argue that this isn't EXACTLY what the Sharon government is doing?

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Annie Cohen, January 29, 2005.
Enlightened' Europe turning even uglier as Jew hatred spirals out of control. This article is by Matthew Schofield.

PARIS - For the past four years - as friends erased "Dirty Jew" graffiti from their office plaques and her French-born daughter puzzled over "go back where you belong" comments from strangers on the street - Evelyne Chiche has spent a piece of each day wondering if she was living in the wrong country.

This spring, the 62-year-old Jewish radio host plans to move to Miami. "I think it's important for my grandchildren here that I move, to provide them with a safe place should they need to get away," she said, waiting until a nearby businessman left the restaurant before talking about being Jewish. "France has changed."

Today, 27 world leaders - a king and queen, presidents and prime ministers - will gather in Poland to mark the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, where 1 million people, mostly Jews, were murdered.

But as the world focuses on the past, an increasing number of European Jews are concerned, to quote Sammy Ghozlan, a retired Calais police chief who now investigates anti-Semitic crimes, that "After decades of peace, the old taboos against anti-Semitism are broken. There is no future here for a Jew." Nobody maintains that Europe is again suffering the kind of hatred that gave rise to Auschwitz and other death camps that claimed 6 million Jews in Adolf Hitler's mad rush to his "final solution" to the "Jewish problem."

But the rise in anti-Semitism, chronicled in upward trend lines of European reports on attacks and threats against Jews, has prompted open concern in a continent whose history, from the Spanish Inquisition and medieval ghettos to the Dreyfuss affair and Hitler's rise, is riven with attacks on Jews. In the past few months a Jewish school has been firebombed in suburban Paris, Jewish gravestones have been painted with swastikas in Germany, France and Russia, and Jews have been verbally abused, spat on and beaten in England and France.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, an international Jewish human-rights organization, calls the wave of violence "the largest onslaught against European synagogues and Jewish schools since Kristallnacht," the night in 1938 when Nazi sympathizers stormed the shops and homes of Jews throughout Germany, smashing property and beating people. Nearly 100 Jews were killed.

This week, leaders throughout Europe have taken pains to use the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz as a pledge not to forget or repeat the atrocities. On Tuesday, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder told a gathering of Holocaust survivors, "Never again should anti-Semites succeed in haunting and hurting Jewish citizens and bringing shame over our nation."

Still, Deidre Berger, the director of the American Jewish Council in Berlin, admits to an eerie feeling as she tracks studies from around the continent that show rising attacks and threats against Jews. She speaks in an office that's protected by three sets of security doors.

"The medieval stereotypes of Jews - controlling, bloodthirsty, vengeful, unscrupulous - are back," she said.

Why anti-Semitism is growing is open to debate. Ghozlan, who grew up in the Paris suburbs and founded an organization to track anti- Semitic attacks, traces the rise to the Palestinian uprising against Israel that began four years ago. He also thinks that part of the rise is demographic: Arab immigrants now make up about 10 percent of the French population.

Berger echoed Ghozlan and other workers who track anti-Semitism across the continent in saying the Palestinian uprising had fueled anti-Semitism, particularly among leftist political parties. She finds that trend especially worrisome, since it broadens the anti- Semitic base from its traditional repository among neo-Nazi and neo- nationalist movements.

What began as a pro-Palestinian movement turned into an anti-Israel movement then became anti-Jewish, she said.

"The left and the right of the political spectrum can't be divorced from the mainstream," she said. "When the center is so strongly anti- Israel, it gives license to the extremes."

There are no official statistics on what percentage of anti-Semitic acts have been committed by ethnic Arabs. In France, for example, it's illegal even officially to quantify the population by ethnic categories. Comprehensive European figures are also difficult to come by. Figures collected by the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia, the European Union's clearinghouse for data on the subject, show an uptick in attacks since 2000, though the most recent report contains comprehensive statistics only through 2002.

Tracking anti-Semitism also is complicated because each country has a different way of collecting statistics and a different way of defining an anti-Semitic crime. For example, uttering the words "the Jews should be gassed" is a crime in Germany, while in Belgium the threshold is much higher.

Still, the trend seems clear. In Germany, according to statistics from the Federal Office for Internal Security, crimes "with an anti- Semitic background" grew from 817 in 1999 to 1,334 in 2002. More ominous may be the increase in the number of crimes German police described as violent: from 16 percent of the total in 1999 to 28 percent in 2002.

In Belgium, police recorded a 72 percent increase in anti-Semitic acts from 2000 to 2002, from 36 to 62. The Netherlands reported 46 cases of anti-Semitic violence in 2002.

Nowhere is the trend more visible than in France, where numbers from the Interior Ministry show that anti-Semitic acts - attacks and threats - reached a high of 1,513 in 2004, up from 593 the previous year. And Jewish groups say most anti-Semitic acts aren't reported.

Ghozlan said it was understandable that France would be the focus of Europe's anti-Semitic tensions. It's home to both Europe's largest Jewish population, 600,000, and its largest Muslim population, about 6 million.

French President Jacques Chirac speaks urgently about the need to fight anti-Semitism and has formed high-level committees to study it. He's said there's no need for Jews to leave France.

Yet concern remains high among many Jews that anti-Semitism is growing faster than officials are willing to acknowledge.

Ghozlan founded the Bureau Against Anti-Semitism in France in the fall of 2001 and began logging incidents that the police hadn't categorized as anti-Semitic. When he began, he figured it would be a short-lived diversion. But more than three years into it, he can't see the workload lessening.

"In the beginning, buildings were the victims," he said. "So security was increased, and the buildings are fortresses now. But people - on the Metro (subway), in school, at work, on the sidewalk - are not safe, and the phone calls come every day."

Sylvie Rasset, a lifelong Parisian, is another one who worries. Last April, her 17-year-old son was riding a city bus home when a group of Arab-looking young men - guessing his heritage - forced "the dirty Jew" off the bus at knifepoint, before beating, kicking and spitting on him as he lay on the sidewalk.

"He worries about leaving the house since then," she said. "I do too. I have two years before retirement, but when that has passed, we will move, to Israel or the United States, but away from the fear."

In 2004, the number of French Jews immigrating to Israel rose by 15 percent, to about 2,400, according to Emmanuel Weintraub, executive committee member for a coalition of Jewish groups in France. There are no similar figures for how many may have left for the United States or elsewhere, but Weintraub said talk of leaving France was a constant source of conversation among Jews.

He maintains that while he's convinced the French government is working on the problem, concern is warranted.

"I equate today's problems to the anti-Semitism of 120 years ago," he said. "This is not progress. People everywhere are wondering if there is a Jewish future in Europe. The question is not easily answered."

The concern is common.

"More and more, we hear that while we're doing a very good job of being concerned about dead Jews, there's not much interest is dealing with the issues of living ones," said Anne-Elisabeth Moutet, a journalist who tracks the rise in anti-Semitism for a number of European publications. "Nobody would say that Paris 2005 is Berlin 1935. But there is an increasing feeling here that nobody really cares about what happens to the Jews."

Added Ghozlan: "I would very much like to say that our work will result in a change for the better in France, but I am a pessimist. Look, Jews in France come from families who either survived the Holocaust or were chased from northern Africa. This does not breed optimism."

This was distributed by Communaute-Juive-France, the Jewish Community of France.

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 29, 2005.


I've got a problem with people who wax poetically contrite about dead Jews, but continue to fund the killing of live ones. U.N., spare me your memorials, and put your money where your mouth is. This article is called "Despite Israeli Alerts, U.N. Transfers Thousands to Hamas Affiliates" (from http://www.nysun.com/article/8395). It is by Benny Avni - Special to the Sun, January 28, 2005. Naomi

UNITED NATIONS - A United Nations agency transferred thousands of dollars to a Palestinian Arab charity affiliated with terrorism long after Israel warned of the terror connection, though the U.N. publicly claimed payments to the organization had stopped.

The blunder points to trouble inside the U.N. Development Program, a huge operation headed by Mark Maloch Brown, who has recently been appointed Secretary-General Annan's chief of staff, largely for his organizational skills and his ability to handle the press. The U.N. plans to launch an internal probe as a result of the revelations uncovered by The New York Sun.

According to a UNDP letter that was seen by the Sun, the agency transferred the sum of $6,000 to an account in the Jenin branch of Cairo Amman Bank in September 11, 2003. The account belongs to the Jenin Zaka, or charity committee.

A subsequent letter from UNDP, dated October 3, 2003, written in Arabic and addressed to the head of the Jenin organization, actually states that the transfer was a mistake and demands a return of the funds. "It was transferred to your account by mistake," the letter states, adding that the money "was intended for the Tul Karem Charity Committee."

Both committees were identified by the Israeli Defense Force as part of a charity network affiliated with Hamas, the terror organization that has boycotted the recent election in the Palestinian Arab areas. The head of the Jenin committee, Ahmed Salaatnah, spent time in Israeli jails between 1993 and 1995 for terrorist activities in the Izz a Din al Kassem, the operational military branch of Hamas responsible for a chain of suicide bombings.

The money transfers in the fall of 2003 are interesting because it was made clear to the head of the UNDP office in Jerusalem, Timothy Rothermel, by the IDF four months earlier that the charity organizations were fronts for Hamas.

In a June 25, 2003, letter to the Israeli authorities Mr. Rothermel acknowledged that he has "taken note" of Israeli concerns about the Hamas af filiation, but claims that money transfers to them would stop only once the "deteriorating humanitarian status" of the population ended.

Dore Gold, the former Israeli ambassador to the U.N., exposed the UNDP support for the two charity committees in a recent op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal. In a subsequent letter to the editor of the Journal, U.N. undersecretary-general for communication, Shashi Tharoor, claimed that after the June 25 letter, which acknowledged the Israeli complaints, "no further payments were made by the U.N." to the Hamas affiliates.

The documents, however, clearly show that at least one transfer of thousands of dollars was made in September. Mr. Tharoor told the Sun that he relied on information from UNDP. A UNDP spokesman, William Orme, said yesterday that his agency is checking into the new facts, and that if the documents discovered by the Sun are accurate, an internal investigation will be launched immediately. "We were told no payments were made following June 2003," he said. Mr. Maloch Brown was not available for comment.

The gentle request to return the money, which was made by the UNDP's Mr. Rothermel to the formerly jailed terrorist Mr. Salaatnah, makes little difference, since according to Israeli intelligence sources both the Jenin and the Tul Karem committees are part of the Hamas civil infrastructure in the territories.

That infrastructure, according to an Israeli intelligence document seen by the Sun, has turned the terror organization into the most powerful political force there. The Jenin charity and its sister organization in Tul Karem, which was founded in 1981, are part of the Hamas vision of creating an Islamic state as an alternative to the secular leadership of Fatah, now headed by the recently-elected Mahmoud Abbas.

Both the Tul Karem and the Jenin committees were outlawed by Israel in 2002 for their terrorist connections. Unlike the U.N., which makes a distinction between the terrorist and civilian parts of Hamas, American and European authorities do not.

Israeli soldiers discovered documents in the office of the Tul Karem committee that show direct connection to the now-infamous Holy Land Foundation, the American-based Hamas charity that was shut down by the Bush administration in December 2001, in a post-September 11 attempt to shut down terror-funding charities.

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter.

To Go To Top
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, January 29, 2005.

Yesterday marked the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. While others were tragically murdered there and elsewhere by the Nazis as well, Jews were marked for total extermination. Indeed, one of every three Jews alive at that time fell victim to the Final Solution.

Months earlier, with both Holocaust Memorial and Israel Independence Days fast approaching, I was reminded of a incident which exposed a lingering problem that just wouldn't go away..

Since Auschwitz, the world has become fairly adept--with some notable exceptions (including the former Palestinian Arab Prime Minister and now newly-elected Arafatian successor, Mahmoud Abbas, much of the "Arab" world, and the family of Mel Gibson who are Holocaust deniers)--at sympathy for dead Jews. Indeed, many showed up to commemorate that anniversary.

It's empathy for live ones that's still the problem...

An intelligent and caring non-Jewish colleague and I had been discussing events in the Middle East. For the sake of my friend's privacy, let's call him "Jim." It was after one of the Arabs' latest acts of "heroism"...another civilian bus blown up, more innocents incinerated, maimed, etc. Among Jim's many attributes, he's also a history buff.

After our discussion, Jim was honest with me: "You know, I like you, Jerry, so that's why I listened to you.....otherwise your passion would have turned me off."

G_d bless Jim. Why, he has even taught students about the Holocaust.....but ouch, anyway! And within this episode lies the much bigger problem.

How is it that the Gentile world--especially the intelligent and caring portion of it--does not understand the passion of a people who not long ago were turned into lampshades and soap simply for being who they are...a people whom the Gospel of John declared to be sons of the devil, the perpetually condemned wandering deicide folk, so all tragedies encountered were explained away simply as their "just due"? How is it that the two thousand-year existence of this people, since it dared take on the mighty Roman conqueror for its freedom, is apparently unknown or brushed aside by far too many others having the same conversation that Jim and I were having the other day? But, back to the Middle East...

Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, the no-nonsense realist and patron saint of the Likud, perhaps said it best when he spoke of appetite versus desperation and need.

Love him or hate him, Jabotinsky was honest. And unlike many of his starry-eyed Zionist colleagues almost a century ago, he saw the true nature of the conflict between Arab and Jew in the Middle East.

Leo Pinsker spoke of the need for the "autoemancipation" of the Jews, the perpetual, unwanted guest--never host--ghost people, even before the harsh realities of a supposedly enlightened France opened Theodore Herzl's eyes. The Dreyfus Affair would soon lead Herzl, the father of modern political Zionism, to write Der Judenstat....The Jewish State. Jabotinsky, likewise, understood all of this as well when he spoke of the Jewish condition both during the pre-and mandatory period for Palestine.

He knew that Arabs also had rights in the region, but when he spoke of this, he expressed it in terms of appetite versus desperation. It was understandable that Arabs, who remembered their own proud, conquering, and caliphal imperial past (imperialism is evidently only a nasty word when non-Arabs so indulge), should want to return to those days of dominance and glory after the collapse of their own rival successor, the over four centuries old Ottoman Turkish Empire.

That Arabs would want to make Palestine their 6th, 7th, or 8th state (today almost two dozen) made perfect sense to Jabotinsky. But Jews didn't have this luxury. For them, the familiar pattern of millennial existence-- most lately and violently manifested in the pogroms of Eastern Europe and Russia and hints of what was yet to come in Germany--added desperation and necessity to the quest for the rebirth of their own sole state. And while the frightened mellahs of dhimmi Jewish existence in the Arab/Muslim world experienced no "Holocaust" per se, their experience over the ages was also not without memories of massacres, forced conversions, subjugation, humiliation, and existence as kilab yahud "Jew dogs" of their neighbors.

While it is true that the suicide/homicide bomber who today deliberately kills innocents also does this out of "passion" and "desperation," Jabotinsky saw the difference...something that too many others today still don't--or won't-- see. There was no need for this situation to have arisen among the Arabs.

There are those today who like to make the argument, "if Jews can have a state, why not Palestinians?" For some, this is simply an honest slip of ignorance. But for far too many others--academics included--it represents something far worse, for they know better. While I won't get into argument over whether a distinct Palestinian Arab nationalism exists today, it certainly didn't exist before the rise of modern political Zionism. In fact, the former arose specifically to negate the latter. There's volumes of evidence to support this. Virtually all the writings of politically conscious Arabs on the eve of the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish Empire spoke of a greater Syrian Arab or Pan Arab identity. The "Palestinians" were the Jews.

When the Middle East and North Africa were being divided after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the hopes and dreams of many diverse subject peoples were once again reawakened. Britain's Sir Mark Sykes, America's President Woodrow Wilson, and others fueled the fires with talk of self determination for those populations. Arabs made out very well in the long term aftermath. Unfortunately, they refused to grant anyone else even the right to think in such terms in what they declared to be "purely Arab patrimony"... be they Kurd, Jew, Berber, black African Sudanese, or whomever..

Since Muhammad and successor imperial Arab armies had also once conquered much of the region (occupying and settling much of it), they saw themselves as the sole legitimate heirs to the Turks. We're still living with the results of this mindset today. The majority Berbers' language and culture have been largely "outlawed" in North Africa. A reading of the Kurdish nationalist Ismet Cherif Vanly's book, The Syrian 'Mein Kampf' Against the Kurds (Amsterdam 1968), is instructive as well. Two million Black African Sudanese have been killed, maimed, enslaved, etc. resisting this forced Arabization, and nothing further needs to be said regarding similar attitudes Arabs have had regarding the mere thought of kilab yahud Jews--half of whom were refugees themselves from Arab/Muslim lands--having any such political rights in the Dar al-Islam.

None other than the eminent Arab historian, Philip Hitti, had this to say about the matter in his History of the Arabs: "This bipartite (Arab) division of the world into an abode of peace and an abode of war finds parallel in the communistic theory of Soviet Russia."

Yet the problem is even worse than it first appears. Berbers and Kurds, for example, had largely been converted to Islam. It turns out that that was still not enough. Those same Arabs who propagandize today about "racist Zionists" saw/see themselves as the only fit rulers in the region....even over fellow, but non-Arab, Muslims. This attitude helped to lead to the Abbasid Revolution and the uprising of the non-Arab (particularly Iranian) Mawali populations centuries earlier. And it had subsequent implications for the largely ethnic divide between Sunni and Shia Islam as well.

When, in 1922, the British divided the original land of the Mandate for Palestine they received on April 25, 1920 so that all of the territory east of the Jordan River was excluded from the Jews (an act Emir Abdullah attributed to Allah in his memoirs) -- 80% of the total area-- a story has it that Jabotinsky remained silent. Many, including the British, expected "otherwise," to say the least. Later, when he was asked why he did not speak up after Colonial Secretary Churchill's machinations, he explained that he wanted to prove the same point that Ehud Barak's offer at Camp David and Taba seventy-eight years later did: It didn't matter to Arabs how big a Jewish State was. Any Israel, regardless of size, would not be tolerated. Arabs refused a much-truncated Jewish State after their acquisition of Transjordan in 1922 the same way Arafat insisted that a 9-mile wide Israel, left in peace, was still too much to ask for. Abbas and his fellow Arafatians offer, instead, in their own videotaped words, an updated version of the "peace of the Quraysh," the pagan tribe the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad, made a temporary truce--a hudna-- with until he gained the strength to deal the final blow.

While it's been stated over and over a thousand times, it needs to be said yet again. The passion of the Arab homicide bomber was born because Arabs used their own people as pawns in a political game to deny Jews a tiny sliver of the rights so fervently demanded for themselves. It's not a matter of Jews wanting to deny "stateless Palestinians" a nation, yet that is often how Israel's detractors portray the situation. In their attempt to create yet another state of their own--on the ashes of Israel, not along side it--Arabs came to realize that it would make better press to speak in terms of creating a state for "stateless Palestinians" than calling for the creation of a 22nd or 23rd Arab state at the expense of the one of the Jews.

Listen to Zuheir Mohsein, official with the PLO's military wing and Executive Council, in his interview with the Dutch newspaper, Trouw, on 3/31/77:

" There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, etc...It is only for political reasons that we now carefully underline Palestinian identity....this serves only a tactical purpose...a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel."

In contrast, the passion of the Jew grew out of millennia of exile, massacres, forced conversions, demonization, dehumanization, ghettoization, expulsions, inquisitions, blood libels, existence as kilab yahud and/or "deicide people," the Holocaust, and--as Pinsker eloquently put it in the late 19th century--his status as perpetual stranger in someone else's land.

My zealousness has also grown out of all these differences.

I get no pleasure when an Arab child is killed. But all of this was truly unnecessary. And the Arab child is not deliberately targeted as his Jewish counterparts are, but is a victim of his own murderous brethren using him as a human shield--a direct violation, by the way, of the Perfidy Clause of the Geneva Conventions.

My passion grows with every pizzeria, teen club, bus, Passover Seder, Bar Mitzvah, and such that is attacked, the victims being killed or disfigured and maimed for life. It is the passion born of the heads of Jewish children deliberately smashed beyond recognition, their blood smeared on the walls of caves where their Arab abductors took them, a generation after Nazis took sadistic pleasure in doing likewise to Jewish infants in front of the eyes of their mothers before sending the latter to the gas chambers. It is the passion born of Arab public displays of fabricated Jewish body parts hanging from ceilings to commemorate such heroic deeds as the pizza parlor disembowelments and incineration. And it is the passion born of the silence of that same United Nations regarding all of this while it is so quick to condemn Israel for the measures it's forced to take to survive.

So, Jim, I plead guilty. No one will ever claim that I have been ambiguous about any of these issues. And, I must admit, I find it amazing (probably worse) that intelligent and caring people don't "get it." It's simply called self-preservation. Or, are Jews not allowed this?

Many in the non-Jewish world don't want to be reminded of such things because, inevitably, it leads to soul-searching about the role much of the Gentile world had in paving the long and tortured road to Auschwitz over the ages--something, understandably, it would rather not do. It's much better for one's own sanity to virtually portray Hitler or Eichmann as alien Martians than to see them as simply the logical, updated byproducts of centuries of violent and indoctrinated Jew-hatred.

Fair and just plans have repeatedly been offered to--and rejected by--Arabs to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. And it's necessary to place the very core issue of Arab refugees itself into a much broader perspective.

Hundreds of millions of people became refugees over the last two centuries....many resulting from the partition of the Indian subcontinent into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India at the same time a similar partition was planned for Arabs and Jews in Palestine. There would have been no Arab refugees had they accepted the 1947 U.N. partition of the 20% of the land left into a Jewish and another Arab state, the latter having already received the lion's share of the land with the creation of Transjordan in 1922.

Arabs rejected the partition and invaded a newborn, miniscule Israel instead from the surrounding countries...hence the Arab refugees. Before this, Arabs came pouring into Palestine--due to the economic development by the Jews--from all over the Arab world, but especially from Egypt and Syria...Arab settlers building Arab settlements in the land. Scores of thousands were recorded, in just a brief period of time, by the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission, coming in from Syria alone.

Regarding the one half of Israel's Jewish population who were refugees themselves from Arab/Muslim lands, here's what Sabri Jiryis, Palestinian Arab researcher at the Institute for Palestinian Studies in Beirut, had to say about this in the publication, Al-Nahar, on 5/15/75:

"This is hardly the place to describe how the Jews of Arab states were driven out...how they were shamefully deported to Israel after their property had been confiscated...actually, therefore, what happened was only a kind of 'population and property exchange,' and each party must bear the consequences."

President Bush, in his official April 2004 response to Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza Plan, addressed the refugee issue nicely: Israel would not be required to commit national suicide by absorbing the descendants of real or alleged Arab refugees. Now, if the State Department doesn't muddy the waters with Foggy doublespeak in an attempt to emasculate the potential for good this statement can bring about by requiring the Arabs to dismiss their pipedream of Israel being delivered up to them on a silver platter a la Czechoslovakia 1938, real progress towards peace might actually become possible.

Unfortunately, Arafat's "moderate " successor, Mahmoud Abbas, while dressed in a coat and tie and a practitioner of the sugar-coated word, still has such ultimate plans in mind and openly ran for office on a platform calling for Israel's destruction...but "by other means." His recent deployment of police in Gaza to ward off a major Israeli offensive in response to the latest Arab atrocity--committed under his watch--must thus be understood within this broader context as well.

Arabs could have had their additional state decades ago. The sad reality, however, is that poll after poll taken amongst them still show that even if Israel caved in to virtually all of their demands regarding the disputed territories, as in Jabotinsky's day, it still would not make a difference in terms of their acceptance of the sole Jewish State. It would simply turn Arafat's "peace of the Quraysh" into reality.

Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites.

To Go To Top
Posted by Elan Journo, January , 2005.

President Bush claims that holding elections on January 30 will bring Iraq a step closer to freedom, an outcome allegedly vital to America's security. But the Iraqi election will bring neither freedom to Iraq nor security to America.

Consider the beliefs of the Iraqis who will be voting for "freedom" in the upcoming election. Like so many peoples in the Middle East, Iraqis regard themselves as defined by their membership in some larger group, not by their own ideas and goals. Most Iraqis owe their loyalties--and derive their honor from belonging--to their familial clan, tribe or religious sect, to which the individual is subservient. This deep-seated tribalism is reflected in the parties running in the elections: there is a spectrum ranging from advocates of secular collectivist ideologies (communists and Ba'athists) to those defined by bloodlines (such as Kurds and Turkmens) to members of various religious sects.

What will be the result of an election featuring such voters and candidates? Iraqis will merely bring to power some assortment of collectivists and Islamists. Whatever constitution those leaders eventually frame will reflect their desire to arrogate power to their particular group and to settle old scores, such as the longstanding enmity between the Shi'ite majority and Sunnis. It may well permit barbaric treatment of individuals, commonly accepted throughout the Islamic world, such as "honor-killings" of women believed to have had sex before marriage, or the banning of "un-Islamic" speech. And in the long term, the new nation may become an active sponsor of Islamic terrorism.

Perhaps the most alarming outcome for U.S. security would be a popularly elected theocracy aligned with or highly sympathetic to Iran's totalitarian regime. Iran is reported to have smuggled nearly one million people into Iraq to vote and has donated millions of dollars to sway the election in favor of a Shi'ite-led government. Already, Iranian intelligence officials are said to roam the hallways of Iraqi party offices, on whose walls hang pictures of Iran's supreme leader.

That a theocracy may rise to power in Iraq appears to be totally compatible with the President's conception of "freedom." As he told Fox News in October, if Iraq votes in a fundamentalist government, he would "be disappointed. But democracy is democracy... If that's what the people choose, that's what the people choose."

This certainly is democracy--in its literal sense of unlimited majority rule. But it is not freedom.

Political freedom does not mean the expression of a collective will, nor the granting of power to one pressure group to exploit others. It means the protection of an individual from the initiation of physical force by others. Freedom rests on the idea of individualism: the principle that every man is an independent, sovereign being, that he is not an interchangeable fragment of the tribe; that his life, liberty, and possessions are his by right, not by the permission of any group. Democracy (i.e., majority rule) rests on the primacy of the group; if your gang is strong enough, you can get away with whatever you want, sacrificing the life and wealth of whoever stands in your way. This is why America's Founders rejected democracy and created a republican form of government, limited by the inalienable rights of the smallest "minority": the individual. Our system does have elections, of course, but they are only legitimate within a constitutional framework that prohibits the majority from voting away the rights of anyone.

Can freedom be achieved in Iraq? In the near future, no--which is one of many reasons why it is suicidal for Bush to treat Iraqi freedom as the centerpiece of American self-defense. American security does not require that the terrorism-sponsoring nations of the Middle East be free, only that they be non-threatening--a goal that can be achieved by making it clear to the leaders of these nations that any continued sponsorship of terrorism will mean their immediate destruction.

In the long run, if Iraqis or other peoples of the Middle East are to become free--a task that is their responsibility, not America's--they must first recognize that their current ideas and practices are incompatible with freedom. They must recognize that they need to adopt a philosophy of individualism. A good first step toward teaching this lesson would be not granting them the pretense of elections.

Elan Journo is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (http://www.aynrand.org/), in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand--best-selling author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" and originator of the philosophy she called "Objectivism." Send reactions to reaction@aynrand.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, January 28, 2005.
This was written by Professor Louis Rene Beres, Professor of International Law at Purdue U. He can be reached at beres@polsci.purdue.edu

Israel now faces grave dangers from Iran, a hostile Islamic state deeply involved in production of nuclear and certain other weapons of mass destruction. In essence, the Jewish State will soon have only two options vis-a-vis Iran: (1) sit tight, do nothing militarily, and hope that deterrence, political agreements and/or economic sanctions will prevent Iranian mega-aggression; or (2) strike preemptively against pertinent military targets, thereby expressing what international law calls "anticipatory self-defense." Should it choose the former, Israel would avoid offending the "international community," Yet, this choice would carry a substantial risk of inviting unconventional war and unconventional terrorism. Should it choose the second option, Israel would give offense to the international community and very likely undermine its special relationship with Washington, but it would also likely reduce the risk of overwhelming destruction from Iran. The second option would generate unpopularity for Israel, and would probably be less than entirely effective, but it would assuredly be more gainful than being popularly dead.

Does Israel have the right to strike first under international law? In the best of all possible worlds, reasonable concerns about an overbroad right of anticipatory self-defense would be well taken. Here, for example, a specially-constituted world body - a UN-type institution displaying both real authority and real capability - could ensure that powerful aggressor states do not act at will. But we do not yet live in such a world. Instead, states continue to coexist within the decentralized dynamics of Westphalian law that have obtained since the middle of the seventeenth century. In this world, one still very much like the world satirized by Voltaire's Candide, states that would renounce altogether the right of anticipatory self-defense could be blatantly suicidal. For a state such as Israel, a state less than half the size of San Bernardino County in California and smaller than Lake Michigan, a state that is surrounded by twenty-two hostile Arab states, (soon to be twenty-three, after the creation of "Palestine") such renunciation could be tantamount to an acceptance of its own genocide.

It is true that the right of anticipatory self-defense can be abused and that maintaining this right under international law always carries certain serious risks. Yet, an across the board renunciation of anticipatory self-defense would carry even greater risks. Indeed, where it is supported by distinguished scholars, the informed argument for anticipatory self-defense has assuredly grown stronger in the nuclear age. Waiting patiently to absorb an enemy attack before striking could now represent the reductio ad absurdum of "legalism" in international law. This is the fallacy or error in reasoning that treats law as an automatically effective set of rules.

The right of self-defense by forestalling an attack appears in Hugo Grotius' THE LAW OF WAR AND PEACE. (1625). Recognizing the need for protection against "present danger" and threatening behavior that is imminent in point of time, Grotius indicates that self-defense is permitted not only after an attack has already been suffered, but also in advance, where "the deed may be anticipated." Or, as he says a bit further on in the same chapter, "It be lawful to kill him who is preparing to kill...."

Emmerich de Vattel takes a similar position in his THE LAW OF NATIONS (1758). Here, he argues that it is lawful to resist and even to anticipate attacks by other nations so long as aggression is truly forthcoming. "The safest plan," says Vattel, "is to prevent evil, where that is possible. A Nation has the right to resist the injury another seeks to inflict upon it, and to use force and every other just means of resistance against the aggressor."

Today, some scholars argue that the specific language of Article 51 of the UN Charter overrides the customary right of anticipatory self-defense. In this view, which effectively undermines the authoritative non-treaty sources of international law identified at Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, Article 51 fashions a new and far more restrictive statement of self-defense. This narrow interpretation ignores that international law must refuse to compel a state to wait until it absorbs a devastating or even lethal first strike before acting to protect itself. Regarding Israel's preemptive attack in June 1967, neither the Security Council nor the General Assembly censured this attack, thereby signifying implicit approval by the United Nations of this particular resort to anticipatory self-defense.

During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, in a flagrantly lawless action, Iraq launched thirty-nine Scud missile attacks directly against Israeli civilian populations. On October 7, 1991, more than seven months after the conclusion of hostilities, UN inspectors discovered a complex of buildings that had served as Saddam Hussein's covert nuclear weapons program. It was here, at an installation called Al Atheer, about 40 miles south of Baghdad, that Iraq planned to "design and produce a nuclear device." And these preparations were underway after Israel's strike at the Osiraq reactor ten years earlier. What would have been Israel's fate, after absorbing 39 Iraqi missile attacks during the Gulf War, if Prime Minister Begin had not previously asserted the right of anticipatory self-defense under international law in Israel's 1981 destruction of Baghdad's Osiraq reactor? One needn't have a good imagination to answer this particular question! Would Israel's critics have preferred Israel to absorb multiple nuclear attacks as the price of conforming to his restrictive view of permissible self-defense? Would this have been a reasonable preference under international law? I think not.

For the Arab world, Israel was the aggressor in 1948 and, again, in 1967. Significantly, when Israel avoided preemptive measures in 1973, an avoidance Israel's critics would doubtless describe as lawful, the resultant Arab surprise attack on Yom Kippur almost ended in a total Israeli defeat.

Regarding the War of 1948, the United Nations placed responsibility for aggression on the Arab states. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or the British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution of the General Assembly. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council: "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."

The Arabs themselves were altogether open in accepting responsibility for starting their first war on Israel. Jamal Husseini told the Security Council on April 16, 1948: "The representatives of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday they they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight." As for the British commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb, he commented as follows: "Early in January, the first detachments of the Arab Liberation Army began to infiltrate into Palestine from Syria. Some came through Jordan and even through Amman....They were in reality to strike the first blow in the ruin of the Arabs of Palestine."

Israel came into being on May 14, 1948. The five Arab armies of Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq immediately invaded the new ministate. Their combined intention was expressed publicly by Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." This is the war Arab states still seek to defend under international law.

Let us consider the 1967 (Six-Day) War. On May 15, Israel's Independence Day, Egyptian troops began moving into the Sinai, massing near the Israeli border. By May 18, Syrian troops, too, were preapring for battle along the Golan Heights, where - from 3000 feet above the Galilee, they had shelled Israel's farms and villages with impunity for years. Egypt's Nasser ordered the UN Emergency Force, stationed in the Sinai since 1956, to withdraw. After the withdrawal of the UNEF, the Voice of the Arabs proclaimed, on May 18, 1967: "As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain any more to the UN about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence." Two days later an enthusiastic echo came from Hafez Assad, then Syria's Defense Minister: "Our forces are now entirely ready...to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. ...the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation."

President Abdur Rahman Aref of Iraq, a country now more closely identified with the aggressions of recently-deposed Saddam Hussein, joined the chorus of genocidal threats: "The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear - to wipe Israel off the map." On June 4, Iraq formally joined the military alliance with Egypt, Jordan and Syria.

On June 7, 1981, Israeli fighter-bombers destroyed Iraq's Osiraq nuclear reactor shortly before it was to go "on line." At the time, the general community reaction was overwhelmingly hostile. Even the UN Security Council, in Resolution 487 of June 19, 1981, indicated that it "strongly condemns" the attack and that "Iraq is entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction it has suffered."

No less than Israel's own citizens, both Jews and Arabs, American and other coalition soldiers who fought in the 1991 Gulf War may owe their lives to Israel's courage, skill and foresight in June 1981. Had it not been for the raid at Osiraq, Saddam Hussein's forces might have been equipped with atomic warheads in 1991. Ironically, the Saudis, too, are in Jerusalem's debt. Had it not been for Prime Minister Begin's resolve, Saddam's Scuds falling on Saudi Arabia might have spawned immense casualties and lethal irradiation.

The jurisprudential correctness of Israel's 1981 expression of anticipatory self-defense against Iraq is manifestly obvious. International law is not a suicide pact. Narrowly technical interpretations of permissible force notwithstanding, no state - Israel included - can be required to invite overwhelming aggression. Recently this point was made with considerable specificity in a report to Prime Minister Sharon by "Project Daniel." This report, ISRAEL'S STRATEGIC FUTURE, is now available online, and should be studied closely in the months ahead by all interested parties.

To Go To Top
Posted by Israel Zwick, January 28, 2005.

I consider myself fortunate that I get to travel to Israel about twice per year. I would love to visit the Jewish communities in YESHA, which are more commonly known as 'settlements' in the West Bank and Gaza. However, the precious little time that I have there is usually devoted to spending time with my children and little grandchildren. On my last visit, I was playing with my 22-month old grandson, Avi, when his mother, Sara, called out, 'Avi, it's almost shabbos, you have to put your toys away.' Avi then proceeded to identify his muktse toys, the ones that he is not allowed to play with on shabbos, and put them away in a designated area. With great pride, I watched how he diligently completed the task while Sara praised him and then rewarded him with a big hug.

Excitedly, I remarked to my wife, Devorah, 'Our little grandson just gave me the key to everlasting peace for the State of Israel.'

'Is that so?' she asked incredulously, 'Did you also find the goose that lays golden eggs?'

' Seriously,' I said, 'I believe that the world's great diplomats ' George, Tony, Kofi, Arik, and Mahmoud ' have a lot to learn from our little grandson.'

'I can agree with that,' Devorah responded, 'but why would the Palestinians have to put away their muktse toys before shabbos, their holy day is on Friday?'

'Not exactly, 'I tried to explain, 'but they need to learn some of the basic principles of parenting skills. At each stage in a child's development, parents try to teach independence, responsibility, and social skills according to the developmental capabilities of the child. So at 2-years, parents can teach a child to put away his toys, share toys with other children, and not hit his baby sister. At 3 years, a child can learn to verbalize his needs instead of whining, crying, and throwing tantrums. As the child goes into the school-age years, he learns to develop greater independence and responsibility. He learns to dress himself, cross the street, do homework, and to respect the needs of other children in school. He learns to accept responsibility for more household chores such as sorting laundry or taking out the garbage. At each stage, parents and teachers try to teach behavior that is socially and developmentally appropriate, while discouraging behaviors that are inappropriate. They do this by exposing the child to positive and adverse consequences for his behaviors.

'I get it now,' exclaimed Devorah, 'Israelis and Arabs need to learn to share their toys together.'

'Now you're getting closer,' I explained, 'Israelis and Arabs need to learn to get along with each other in progressive stages, according to their capabilities. You wouldn't ask a 5-year old child to go to the store by himself and bring back milk and eggs. Similarly, you can't expect a Palestinian State to function adjacent to Israel until they both develop the skills for harmonious coexistence and mutual cooperation.'

Devorah looked puzzled, 'Now you lost me with all those big words.'

'It's simple,' I explained, 'You can't have two independent states in such a small area without extensive cooperation between the two. This cooperation has to develop in progressive stages. You can't do step 2 before step 1, you can't put the cart before the horse.'

'Why would the Arabs have to learn to use carts and horses if they are so good at driving trucks and blowing them up in crowded places?'

'Now, you're getting even closer. The first step is that the Arabs must cease and renounce terrorism. It must be made emphatically clear that this is not acceptable behavior in civilized society and that they will get nowhere as long as they persist in this barbaric activity. The State of Israel must emphasize that as long as terrorist activity continues, there can be no concessions to the Arabs. The IDF will do whatever is necessary to provide security for its citizens, even if it has to conduct an operation similar to what the US military did in Fallujah. On the other hand, when terrorist activity ceases, then the IDF can withdraw forces from civilian areas, reduce checkpoints, and improve the quality of life for the Arabs living in the territories. Do you want to hear the rest of plan?'

'I see that I'm not going to be able to get out of this so easily. OK, so what's the plan?'

'The next step is that the Arabs must stop the incitement to hatred, violence, and jihad from the media and classrooms. The Europeans can help here by providing assistance to develop new textbooks and children's programming on TV. When the incitement stops, then Israel can offer to initiate academic exchange programs in the high schools and colleges. This would continue to foster confidence, understanding, and tolerance between Arabs and Jews.

Step 3 would be to reduce the high population density in the Arab refugee camps. The UNRWA camps in Gaza and the West Bank have some of the highest population densities in the world. Polls indicate that as many as 40% of the residents would be happy to resettle elsewhere if a suitable offer were made. It's time for the international community to make an effort towards voluntary resettlement of these so-called refugees. For $10 billion dollars, over 5 years, many of these families can be resettled in other Arab countries, Europe, and North America. Resettlement would be strictly voluntary with no coercion. Israel would reciprocate by promising not to use the vacated land for Jewish settlements. The areas vacated by the Arabs would be used for new housing, recreational, and commercial areas. The housing would be for Arabs, but the recreational and commercial areas would be open to Arabs, Jews, and tourists.

Step 4 would initiate mutually beneficial projects between Israelis and Palestinians. There could be a joint Chamber of Commerce that would promote trade between the two, and with European countries. There could also be a joint Bureau of Tourism that would assist travel agencies in organizing tours through Arab and Jewish areas, such as a four-day tour through Old Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem, Jericho, Massada, and the Dead Sea. There could also be a joint Emergency Response Team that would respond to large-scale disasters such as airplane crashes, sinking ships, explosions, and large fires.

When mutual cooperation is established and operational, then Step 5 could be considered. This would establish a semi-independent Palestinian State, modeled after the relationship of the Vatican to Italy, or Puerto Rico to the United States. Other creative governmental relationships could also be considered.'

'What comes after that,' asked Devorah.

'Actually, I haven't given much thought yet to Step 6 because so far there is no indication that the Arabs are even ready for Step 1.'

'So what do you think are the chances of this plan being adopted?'

'Now it's probably close to zero, but with Arafat gone, there is some slim hope.'

'So why do you bother with all this?' asked Devorah.

'Because it's the right thing to do. The Arabs and Jews have been fighting for the last 80 years, not just since 1967 as many believe. The conflict has been fueled and driven by hatred, intolerance, greed, money, oil, and politics. Maybe it's time to recognize that this hasn't worked and a new approach is needed based on tolerance, acceptance, understanding, and mutual cooperation.'

'Stop dreaming and get ready for shabbos. Hadlokos nerot is in a half-hour.'

I always admired Devorah for her common-sense wisdom. Shabbat Sholom.

Israel Zwick can be contacted at israel.zwick@earthlink.net

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 28, 2005.


Strategic decisions in Iran are made by extremist clerics. They do not fall in with the mutual deterrence of nuclear power during the Cold War, but threaten to unleash their bombs, when they get them, especially on Israel, regardless of the consequences. What should Israel do?

Choice one, wait and pray for internal reform in Iran. Unfortunately, Iranian reformers have been crushed.

Two, wait and hope for US military action. Hope is diminishing, as the countdown to Iranian nuclear capability has only a few months to go (and the US has not prepared public opinion). Israel does not do well in depending upon outside rescue.

Three, strike Iran's facilities. Israeli forces would have to travel far, penetrate Iranian defenses, find dispersed targets, and repel retaliation. It probably could do this, if it acts swiftly. Unfortunately, the facilities could be rebuilt swiftly (with the Russians making still more money from it). An otherwise friendly successor regime might resent Israel for it.

Four, Israel would negotiate its own nuclear disarmament in return for international guarantees on Iran. International guarantees don't work, as proved again by Iran's development of weaponry contrary to IAEA safeguards and NPT pledges (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/04, p.13 from Gerald Steinberg, Jer. Post, 10/5).

What international guarantees would there be that the Arabs wouldn't develop nuclear weapons? Israel needs its own as deterrent against other weapons of mass-destruction and even against a concerted Arab attack with overwhelming force. This would be all the more true, if Israel relinquishes territory now affording it secure borders. "International guarantees" offered to Israel usually are a fraudulent enticement for Israeli appeasement.


Iranian opposition movements have united. The people want democracy to replace theocracy. Although he pledges his second term to freedom, Pres. Bush denies funds to Iranian freedom-fighters. If Iranians overthrew their dictatorship, they would pose less of a threat to other countries, even if, out of national pride, they continued to develop nuclear weapons (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/4, p.12 from Wall t. J, 12/8, Ed.).

The "Wall St. J." is puzzled over Pres. Bush's seeming self-contradiction. I think it is rooted in State Dept. politics, a poor reason. In any case, the new unity of pro-democracy movements among Iranians invites another examination of the opportunity to change regimes in Iran.

Pres. Bush may have waited too long. Iran may become too close to having nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, for the new movement to take power. The US should be preparing its military option now, to be ready on short notice. The alternative could be worse than 9/11.


Poor countries earn needed foreign exchange by providing UNO peacekeepers. A third of those countries have the highest AIDS rates, but, except for S. Africa, refuse to have their troops tested. They are suspected of spreading AIDS (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 7/24).


While the US spends hundreds of billions of dollars on defending, building up, and relieving Muslim areas, Islamic terrorists blow up places all over, even in Iraq. Nevertheless, Fox News has a new theme, echoed by our Sec. of State, which is to hope that our aid to Muslim tsunami relief victims may invoke Muslim goodwill.

It won't. It can't. Since we are not Islamic, and they don't care what good works we do, they wish to deem us enemies (Winston Mid East Analysis, 1/6). Nor do they give much aid to innocent Muslims.

Our Sec. of State is not attuned to foreign cultures. An understanding of the implacable hatred of Islamists must be had, if we are to ward off jihad.


Led by Mexico, foreign governments have been issuing ID to their nationals in our country. Many of the recipients are here illegally. Identification cards enable them to use banks, thereby pouring billions into the US economy. Banks welcome the change, though N.Y. State Gov. Pataki does not accept such ID. The ID helps illegal aliens to stay here.

This foreign move infringes on US sovereignty, for it is the federal government's duty to determine who receives legal residency and may benefit from it. The federal and state governments should not collaborate in helping illegal aliens to evade our immigration laws, but should be enforcing them (NY Sun, 1/24, letter).

Among the illegal aliens are terrorists. The ease of obtaining ID facilitated 9/11.


Former General Ehud Barak agrees with the secret service assessment that if the IDF abandons the Philadelphi arms smuggling, border-straddling town, in addition to the rest of Gaza, the P.A. would bring in long-range rockets to bombard Israel's cities with. He said the solution was to withdraw from all of Yesha and build security fences at the new border.

How would fences stop the rocket attacks from flying over and past? (IMRA, 1/6.) Wouldn't running away from the terrorists encourage their pursuit?


Unemployment rages in the P.A., where Abu Mazen and associates have stolen development funds and continue to praise terrorism. He is the West's unlikely hope for reforming the P.A. economy and taking the belligerence out of its military forces. He wants Palestinian Arab refugee descendants to go to Israel, but if Israel won't accept them, he would. What would they do there? Help him try to conquer Israel and share the loot? PM Sharon's withdrawal plan would create the vacuum into which those refugee descendants would move.

Instead of considering such strategic defects in the abandonment plan, the largely leftist Israeli media focuses mostly on growing Israeli resistance to the plan. Prominent leftists call for a civil war (IMRA, 1/7).

Can't persuade fellow Jews to abandon key Jewish territory to the jihadists? Then kill them? Rather extremist ideologues, the leftists are.


Jonathan Pollard has asked the Israeli government for recognition as a "prisoner of Zion." The government rejected his application on the grounds that: (1) It does not know that he would want to live in Israel. But it does know. He constantly refers to his desire to live there (IMRA, 1/6). (2) The spy's espionage was not a Zionist activity. Mrs. Pollard disputes that contention. Does the government pretend that its intelligence agencies do not serve the country by espionage? (IMRA, 1/8.) Remember Mossad's reputation of great service to the country?

The government knows as well about Pollard's Zionist proclivity as it did about any of the other prisoners of Zion from the former USSR.

The government excuses are so shoddy, that they reveal bias. What a shameful government!


Israel accorded Egyptian and Jordanian airliners over-flights at designated points. "Unauthorized Egyptian passenger aircraft have been increasingly violating Israel's airspace near Eilat, prompting the IAF to station Hawk anti-aircraft missile batteries and fighter planes close by, ready to shoot down the Egyptian planes if they take a hostile turn. In several cases, fighter jets have actually been scrambled, then returned quietly to base." Egypt has ignored Israeli complaints.

"The beefed-up air defense is also there to deal with potential attacks by Saudi Arabian F-15s, deployed at the Tobuq air base just 200 kilometers away despite Israeli protests. Israel has received intelligence that al-Qaida has recruited Saudi fighter pilots and fears they could stage a 9/11-type surprise attack." (IMRA, 1/6.)


Anticipating US sanctions against Syria, Iran is investing billions of dollars in Syria to cushion the blow and to build up a Syrian port in case the US embargoes an Iranian one (IMRA, 1/6).


"Israel warned the Palestinian Authority it is considering renewing its operations in the territories following Friday's killing of an Israel Defense Forces soldier in the West Bank, Israel Radio reported..."

"IMRA: Obviously an empty threat, since Israel gives no deadline and does not specify what is expected. If serious, Israel would insist the Martyrs' Brigades be disarmed.

Abbas denounced the attack, done by his Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, "but Abbas didn't denounce his Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. By assigning "lots of reasons behind it," Abbas shields the attackers and deflects blame to Israel (IMRA, 1/6). Arafat also denounced attacks but not the attackers and did nothing to prevent future attacks.

Most Israeli threats are empty. The government could not get away with them if the country had an independent media. If it did, some journal or TV station would note that the threats are not fulfilled. A watchdog media would teach the people that the threats are just meant for public relations with Iran. When the public will have become skeptical, it would not let empty threats against the Arabs stop the public from agitating for action.

The threats impair public relations for nothing. Retaliation, being infrequent, comes as a shock and also impairs Israel's reputation.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, January 28, 2005.
1. ISRAEL TOOK TWO OF THE TOP THREE PLACES in the WALL ST. JOURNAL's 2004 Technology Innovation Awards: The silver award wet to Given Imaging, Ltd (pill size video camera) and the bronze award went to InSightec Image Guided Treatment, Ltd. (breakthrough surgical system). For further info: http://www.dowjones.com/innovation/ei-winners-2004.html. INTEL's sales of the Intel-Israel-developed Centrino have exceeded $5BN (Globes, Jan. 20). HP employs 2,000 persons in its 4 sites in Israel. 150 were hired during 2004. $22MN were recently invested in the new (Indigo) ink plant in Kiryat Gat (Globes, Jan. 20). CISCO' R&D center in Israel is the largest outside the US, employing 400 persons (Globes, Jan. 11). Switzerland's Serono is investing $20MN in anew bio-tech R&D center in Ness Ziona (Dec. 30, 2004). $66BN is the market value of the 110 Israeli companies traded in overseas stock exchanges. According to Yediot Achronot (Dec. 30, 2004). Seven Israeli companies raised $1.2BN in the US stock market (Sineron, Signature, Shopping.Com, Lipman, Ness, PowerDesign, Ormat). $2.8BN Applied Materials employs 1,000 Israelis - including 600 R&D employees - up from the initial 100 during the early 1990s, when it acquired Israel's Orbot ($110MN) and Opal ($175MN). Five years later, Applied acquired Israel's Ormid for $27MN.

2. 2004 A TURNAROUND YEAR: A 46% rise in funds raised by Israel's high tech companies ($1.46MN - compared with $1MN - raised by 428 companies). $366MN were raised during the 4th quarter of 2004, compared with $246MN in the 4th quarter of 2003 (Globes Business daily, Jan. 25, 2004). Israel's hitech 2004 exports have reached the level of 2000 - $13BN (Globes, Jan. 4). 3. STANDARD & POOR has upgraded Israel's ratings outlook to stable (from negative), noting Israel's fiscal responsibility, the $9BN US loan guarantees, the renewed economic growth and the improved balance of payment. According to Globes (Jan. 12) S&P raised Israel's credit ratings to "A" and "A1" (domestic currency) and "A-" and "A1" (foreign exchange). Citigroup's SMITH BARNEY has upgraded Israel to "overweight" from "Neutral": "[Israel's] positive domestic trends that we highlighted last October continue to strengthen...Our Israeli equities combine value and defensive characteristics that will be important in the more volatile environment we expect to see this year. We see Israel's long period of underperformance as reversing in 2005...Growth is likely to have reached 4% in 2004, compared with expectations of 2.6% just a year ago, leaving the prolonged early-decade recession behind. Exports remain the key driver of growth (40% of GDP), although private consumption should continue to strengthen in 2005, growing 5.1% (having risen 3.2% in 2004). With inflation negligible, interest rates are likely to remain at around 3.5% for some time...External balance remain healthy, boosted by an increase in tourism revenues...and the appointment of Stanley Fischer, formerly of the IMF and Citigroup, as governor of the Central Bank of Israel (Globes, Jan. 24).

4. Cadence has acquired Israel's Verisity for $282MN (Globes, Jan. 14). US-based UGS has acquired Israel's Technomatics for $228MN in cash (Globes, Jan. 5). Kodak has acquired Israel's Orex for $50MN in cash (Yediot Achronot, Jan. 19). The $4BN SanDisk has acquired Israel's MDRM for $15MN (Globes, Jan. 5). Germany's AG Software has acquired Israel's SabraTec fro $12MN (Globes, Jan. 10). Shamrock has acquired 25% of Israel's Polimar (Globes, Dec. 28).

5. JAFCO, Yamanouchi, Yasuda, Novel BioVentrues, OrbiMed Advisors, Millenia Partners, Forward Ventures, CMEA Ventures, PA Consulting, HBM BioVnetures and SR One participated in a $43MN 3rd round by Israel's Predix Pharmaceuticals (The Marker, Jan. 26, 2005). Medical equipment giant, Guidant led a $10MN round in Israel's Rimon Medical, completed a $26MN round. Carlisle, USVP, France Telecom and Nova participated in a $23MN 4th round by Israel's Actelis (Globes, Jan. 25). BGV (3Com), Accell VC Fund and APEX participated in the 1st $20MN round by Israel's GoNetworks (Jan. 28). APEX, Benchmark, Sigma Partners participated in a $20MN 4th round by Israel's Digital Fuel (Ha'aretz, Jan. 6). NY-based Radius VC fund and Hospital For Special Surgery participated in an $18MN round by Israel's Impliant (The Marker, Dec. 29). Intel Capital co-led, with Pitango, a 1st round of $12MN by Israel's Gteko (The Marker, Dec. 29). The first part of the round was led by Liley Ventures and LBK (The Marker, Dec. 29). INTEL, SAP, Walden, Index Ventures, Azure and Platinum participated in a $10MN round by Israel's Zend (Globes, Jan. 25). Sequoia and APEX participated in an $8MN 3rd round by Israel's BitBand (Dec. 28, 2005). US-based Bessmer VC Fund led a $7MN round by Israel's Cyota (Ha'aretz, Dec. 23). Motorola participated in a $6MN round by Israel's Lomus (Globes, Jan. 25). Toibb Enterprises led a 3rd round of $4.4MN in Israel's VKB (Globes, Jan. 20).

Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is an editor and consultant who lives in Jerusalem.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 28, 2005.

1. This article, "Unilateral withdrawal is irresponsible," was written by Michael Rubin, who is resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and editor of the Middle East Quarterly. It is from today's Ha'aretz.

The Baghdad restaurant grew silent, all eyes on the television. It was January 29, 2004. Every Arabic news channel had its cameras trained on a Beirut runway, where a German transport plane was due to land. Israel had just released Sheikh Abdel Karim Obeid, once leader of Hezbollah's southern Lebanon operations, after almost 15 years in an Israeli prison. The group of largely pro-Western Iraqis had tears in their eyes. "The first Arab victory over Israel was [the withdrawal from Lebanon] in May 2000. This is the second," an Iraqi professor explained.

Six weeks earlier, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had announced plans to withdraw unilaterally from the Gaza Strip. A broad range of Israeli politicians cautiously endorsed the move. While European diplomats wrung their hands nervously, President George W. Bush called Sharon's plan "historic and courageous."

Nothing could be more untrue. While Israelis might fear civil and political strife if settlers are forced from their homes, Sharon's plan will reinvigorate terrorism not only in Israel, but as an international tactic of choice.

The power of television is tremendous across the Middle East. Arabic satellite stations like the Qatar-based Al Jazeera, Hezbollah's Al-Manar, and Iran's Al-Alam deluge their audiences with images of American defeat: the 1983 U.S. withdrawal from Beirut, and the flight from Mogadishu a decade later. Watching television on any Baghdad evening, I would see American diplomats fleeing Vietnam. To the Iraqi audience the message was clear: Bush may say America has staying power, but it is weak. Al Jazeera mastered has information warfare. On days without American casualties, the station simply rebroadcasts images of the previous day's roadside bomb.

The Iranian government primes its audience with similar messages. While critics rave about the latest Iranian art films, the normal fare for ordinary Iranians is far different. Sitting among Iranian soldiers packed into a Shiraz movie theater, I watched a Rambo-type film pitting Hezbollah characters against hapless Israeli soldiers. I tried to be inconspicuous as the crowd began to shout "kill the Jew" in anticipation of events on screen. The message to the soldiers was clear: Violence works.

Imagery can be equally powerful on Israeli television. More than 20 years later, older Israelis remember television pictures of residents of Yamit battling soldiers during that settlement's 1982 evacuation. But while such images will have a profound impact on the Israeli electorate and their replication may cause some government ministers to reconsider their support for Sharon's plan, far more damaging to Israel and the United States would be the subsequent pictures. Images of Hezbollah and Hamas flags flying over Jewish settlements like Netzarim and Kfar Yam will torpedo hope not only of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, but also of an end to terrorism in Iraq, Turkey, Kashmir and against the West in general.

Israelis and some in the Palestinian Authority may be sincere in a desire for peace, but rejectionists abound, not only in Lebanese and Syrian refugee camps, but also in Iraq's Sunni Triangle, Iran's Revolutionary Guard bases and Pakistani seminaries. A Hamas flag over Netzarim will justify 37 years of terrorism. The reasons for Israel's withdrawal will be irrelevant on the streets of the Islamic world. If terrorism can free Gaza, why not the West Bank, the Galilee, Indian Kashmir or democratic Iraq? Why compromise if terrorism obviates the need for concession? There is a limit to the West's stamina. Neither Israelis nor Americans should assume their opponents would be unwilling to pay the price of continued violence. As the Shi'ite commemoration of `Ashura approaches, millions will commemorate the 680 martyrdom of Imam Husayn, ritually cursing Sunni leaders of the day, as if Husayn's death was yesterday.

The price of continued terrorism and insurgency might be high, but terror masters themselves often do not pay the price. Earlier this month in Baghdad, I interviewed Iraqis fleeing violence in the northern city of Mosul. Without exception, each said that the insurgents who invaded the city were in their mid to late teens; they complained that the insurgent leaders were using impressionable youth as cannon fodder. But so long as oil-rich Arab states and Iran are willing to subsidize incitement on television, in schools and in mosques, there will be no shortage of recruits. Not only Israelis, but also Iraqis, Indians, Turks, Americans and Europeans will pay the price.

Seeking peace is honorable, but Sharon is gambling. Whether motivated by a sincere desire for peace or for an egotistical need to rewrite his place in history is irrelevant. Unilateral withdrawal is irresponsible. Should Gaza be part of a comprehensive deal, pictures of Hamas flags over Gaza will be immaterial, for they can be counterbalanced with images of Israeli embassies hoisting flags in Damascus, Riyadh and Tehran. But if Sharon goes ahead with Gaza disengagement, generations both inside and outside Israel will be sacrificed upon the alter of his legacy.

2. Ah, the honor of being called "totalitarian" by America's chief Stalinist, by the Khmer Rouge's favorite professor, and by the friend of Holocaust Deniers everywhere. This is from the UK Times Higher Education Supplement (http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2019130). It is called 'We have our eye on you...so watch out' and was written by Michael North, 28 January 2005.

Do websites such as Campus Watch seek balance or do they undermine integrity?

Michael North reports Israeli academic Neve Gordon was not too bothered by the image of himself transmuting into Hitler posted on Masada2000 - a website containing a "hitlist" of 7,000 people it deems "enemies of the Israeli state". He says: "I didn't take it seriously. It was totally pornographic."

More worrying, says Gordon, a professor of politics at Ben Gurion University, is that such sites have the same audience as the less sensational right-wing websites that target academics who express views sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. They also share, he says, a myopia about the nuances of the Middle East debate.

Campus Watch, in the US, and Israel Academic Monitor, in Israel, post articles that attack academics' work, encourage donors to these academics' institutions to withdraw funding and urge universities either to sack the academics or to thwart their progress up the career ladder - all in the name of free speech.

Gordon, who is on sabbatical at the University of California, Berkeley, has been targeted by both websites. He says that the Israeli site, written in English, is failing to have a big impact. "It is asking students to become collaborators and to report professors, but it needs a broader Hebrew audience." In contrast, Campus Watch, a slick site sponsored by the Middle East Forum in the US, has, according to Gordon and other US academics, strongly contributed to the post 9/11 campaigns to discredit left-wing academics.

Joseph Massad, assistant professor in modern Arab politics at Columbia University, New York, is at the sharp end of the pro-Israeli groups' zero tolerance approach. His bid for tenure is being opposed. He says: "The Campus Watch website appears to be the first salvo in a much larger campaign targeting US universities and especially academics doing work on the Middle East who have critical views of the policies of the state of Israel and of US Middle East policy. Since then, there have been more protracted campaigns, the latest of which is one targeting me that is spearheaded by a Boston-based Zionist group called the David Project and the right-wing newspaper the New York Sun. The campaign has led a congressman to ask Columbia to fire me."

Rachid Khalidi, professor of Arab studies at the Middle East Institute at Columbia and an American of Palestinian origin, has also been targeted by Campus Watch. He has a taped phone message that says: "Khalidi, Columbia, alumni love Campus Watch because they keep an eye on thugs like you. We have our eye on you. You'd better watch out."

Khalidi believes the aim of Campus Watch is to have a "chilling effect" on free speech - a term echoed by two other academics targeted by the website, Eric Foner, professor of history at Columbia and Yvonne Haddad, professor of the history of Islam at the Center for Muslim Christian Understanding at Georgetown University. Foner says: "The purpose of these sites is intimidation, not information. Encouraging students to report on comments professors make that they deem unfair or unpatriotic could have a chilling effect on education."

Khalidi adds: "There is a dearth of proper debate in the media and politics about the Middle East. The only place where these views can be found is in academia. They want to shut down this last window."

Khalidi claims Campus Watch is closely linked to a wider campaign of actions against so-called pro-Palestinian academics. He cites the recent attempt by some members of Congress to push through a law threatening funding to universities whose faculties do not stick to the defence of US government policies; changes in grant proposals demanded by rich university funders, such as the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, to affirm that beneficiaries do not support terrorism; and the back-door (recess) nomination of Daniel Pipes, founder of Campus Watch, to the government-funded United States Institute of Peace - an event, according to Foner, that proved the US Administration "at least retains a sense of irony".

Pipes, who is also director of the Middle East Forum, recently stood down from the board of USIP, which makes key research grants to academics working in Middle East studies, saying that "at times I felt frustrated".

Khalidi is delighted at the development and also pleased that key members of the institute attacked Pipes publicly for objecting to the institute hosting a conference with the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy last year.

But Khalidi concedes that academics can do little against the power of neoconservatives such as Pipes and the extensive and rich networks of pro-Israeli groups, such as the new Israel on Campus Coalition.

Pipes, for his part, succinctly defends Campus Watch's mission to "alert outsiders about the problems in Middle East studies and to challenge Middle East studies specialists to think about their field". He says the aim is "to improve and balance, not to cause anyone to lose a job". Asked if he is fuelling an unhealthy bias in the US media, he says: "You must be kidding", then refers to the website of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, which gives examples of numerous anti-Israeli reports.

The driving force behind the Israel Academic Monitor website is more forthcoming in his defence of his group's work. Steven Plaut, professor of economics at Haifa University, refers to his crusade against "the crazies" using the classroom "to impose their extremism on their students" and as a "bully pulpit for their political agendas". And he names US academic Noam Chomsky as an example of such people "who passionately hate their country".

To which Chomsky, professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, replies: "He is borrowing from the lexicon of totalitarianism: Soviet dissidents were accused of 'passionately hating their country' because of their criticism of state policies. For the totalitarian mind, the state is identified with the country, its culture and its people."

Gordon is suing Plaut for libel for, he says, alleging that he is a Holocaust denier. Plaut denies libel and his supporters accuse Gordon of censoring free speech.

However, Gordon and other Israeli academics say that debate in Israel is far healthier than in the US. Khalidi comments that many Israeli journalists would not be published in American newspapers.

Anat Biletzki, chair of philosophy at Tel Aviv University, says that only a handful of radicals are really targeted by the Right, but adds that there is self-censorship. She gives an example of such "undercurrents of McCarthyism". "I was called to the dean when two students complained about me sneaking politics into my teaching. The university constitution says we are perfectly within our rights to talk politics in class. Two weeks later the rector called me up to say he had heard I talked politics in class. He said 'in times such as these we have to think twice about everything we say'. I said 'in times such as these there are things that have to be said'."

For now, European academics critical of Israeli government policies work in a less intimidating environment. Anoush Ehteshami, director of Durham University's Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, says the debate is more polarised in the US than anywhere else. "I have lots of contacts with colleagues here and in Finland, Germany and France. None of them has complained of intimidation."

Ehteshami says the "poisoned atmosphere" in the US since 9/11 is deterring UK academics from applying for posts across the pond. He knows two, but refuses to name them. "They don't want pressure to be 'patriotic'," he says.

But he adds that resistance to the neocons is taking hold, a view confirmed by Lynne Segal, professor of psychology at Birkbeck, London University, and a member of the international group Faculty for Israeli/Palestinian Peace as well as Jews for Justice for Palestinians in Britain. Such groups campaign in the name of academics who find themselves threatened, holding seminars and conferences and distributing their views to a wide audience.

"I think intimidation is possible. These are very troubling developments and we need to be watchful," Segal says.

Ehteshami says that, for now, inquiries by students about his political views are just "inquiries, not a challenge". He adds: "This is a witch-hunt that compromises academic integrity and freedom that, ironically, in the past the US was very proud of. God forbid it happens in the UK."

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, January 28, 2005.

The Left and Sharon are deliberately pushing Israel into a civil war. We shall defend Gush Katif and the State valiantly. We shall not permit the Left, that desires Jewish blood to be shed, to create provocative acts of mutual firing. We shall never bring weapons to the regions of the confrontation. Anyone who does so will be regarded as an agent provocateur and removed from the area.

We are happy to announce that the new Manhigut Yehudit website in English is on the air. It is the fruit of the initiative of Louis Gordon, who has devoted countless hours to the project, on a volunteer basis. The new features of the website include not only an improved appearance but the creation of a new virtual conception for the presentation of our messages. We intend to subsequently bring the websites in Hebrew and Russian into line with the English one.

The website has a link to Shmuel Sackett's "Jewish Leadership Show". We HIGHLY recommend you listen to this very informative and entertaining program. The new website address is very simple. Since our goal is to make Israel Jewish, the website is simply: www.jewishisrael.org

In addition, the website contains Moshe Feiglin and Shmuel Sackett's action packed schedules, details on upcoming events in the USA and ISRAEL, press releases, detailed bios and pictures of all Manhigut leaders and even a Manhigut STORE where you can buy anything from hooded sweatshirts to mouse pads with the new and exciting Manhigut Yehudit logo!!!

The English website will be run by Dovid Shirel from Hebron, who will join Rabbi Elitzur Segal and Asya Entova, who manage the Hebrew and Russian websites, respectively. We should like to warmly thank Lewis for his efforts, and hope that this professionalism in the field of the Internet will accelerate the belief-based revolution.

Publication of the Booklet: Clarification of the Obligation to Refuse to Obey Orders

To view the booklet (in Hebrew only) http://he.manhigut.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=docclick& Itemid=105&bid=33&limitstart=0&limit=5

The intensity of the attacks caused by the publication of the booklet by Manhigut Yehudit clearly indicates that we have hit the target. 70,000 copies have been printed and distributed, and they have all been eagerly grabbed. We are preparing to print an even larger amount, to be distributed by Young Manhigut Yehudit at road junctions, bus stops, and in all other possible ways.

Why did the publication of the booklet cause so much noise? Why is it so important?

In his heart every soldier and civilian with a conscience knows that the expulsion order is a crime. Even Sharon attempted to bypass these feelings by giving a public direction that every soldier is permitted to ask his officer to exempt him from expelling his own parents. You see what he means? I shall expel your parents, you shall expel mine, and everyone will be happy.

The entire uprooting plan is based on the assumption that we shall act as robots and not as humans. Those who raise their heads and explain to people that they were created in G-d's image, also explain that they have personal responsibility and should not take part in perpetrating these crimes. Those who do this are endangering the basis without which it will be impossible to carry out this devilish plan. Consequently we are witnessing panic-driven opposition to refusal to obey orders. Naturally this did not occur when the Left made extensive use of this weapon.

About 10,000 soldiers have already signed the declaration circulated by the Mateh Homat Magen, led by Noam Livnat, stating that they will not obey this criminal order. In the face of the attack against refusal it is very important to explain to the broad public the justification for the action, and to strengthen it from aspects of belief and democracy.

It was quite clear that the "nice guys" in the Likud would try to use the publication of the booklet to expel the heads of Manhigut Yehudit from the party. We knew this when we published it. However, we did not enter politics in order to match ourselves to the caprices of one politician or another. We came in order to lead, and if for tactical reasons we were to remain silent when fundamental issues related to the soul of the nation come into debate, there would have been no point in our entering the arena of leadership of Israeli society.

The meaning of leadership is to designate a target and indicate the way to achieving it. Leadership gives backing, legitimacy, and a feeling of justice to the public. It does not hide behind activists or attempt to be strengthened by them. This may well be the difference between leaders and politicians, and we have to make sure that we remain on the right side of the equation. We shall of course oppose any attempts to expel us from the Likud, but it should be kept in mind that Manhigut Yehudit is not a personal affair, but a new awareness being developed by tens of thousands of people. Members of Manhigut Yehudit, and veteran members of the Likud who support them, now represent more than 10% of all members of the party and the Likud Central Committee, and it is impossible to expel them.

The attempt to get rid of Manhigut Yehudit in the Likud by chopping off its head is ridiculous. It is based on the fundamental assumption of small-time politicians that the motive force behind Manhigut Yehudit is the same as theirs - personal political ambition. They are incapable of understanding what they are up against.

Study Day for Likud Members Regarding the Subject of Refusal to Obey Orders

As we have said, the right way to combat ideas is to convince people by means of an open, serious debate, free of threats. We are therefore pleased to announce that a study day will be held in the above subject. It will take the form of an evening in which all the views for and against refusal will be presented. Those who wish to hear serious opinions in the Likud, and not only threats voiced by Sharon's supporters, are invited to come. The following are details of the meeting:

Hametzuda Issue #9

We are currently completing the preparation of issue no. 9 of Hametzuda.

The hundreds of distributors, including members of Young Manhigut Yehudit, who every month bring copies of Hametzuda to the homes of Likud members, are the real front line troops in the belief-based revolution. The direct contact between the belief-based and national publics, and the development of direct channels of information as an alternative to the existing media, all create over the course of time a new awareness amongst Likud members. We call on all those who are prepared to take part in this fundamental strategic move to contact us now. (To join the ranks of the distributors email: mailto:jer-office@manhigut.org) We shall, with G-d's help, reap the fruits of this effort in the Primaries for the leadership of the Likud.

It is important to remember that the struggle is not about Gush Katif, that is one of the battles along the way. The real struggle is for leadership of the country.

In addition to the personal distribution we also mail the newspaper to all Likud Central Committee members, MKs, and ministers (and, of course, to the Prime Minister himself). To the copies of Hametzuda sent by mail we shall attach on this occasion the booklet Clarification of the obligation to refuse. We hope that our elected representatives will peruse the booklet objectively and take note of its contents.

Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 28, 2005.

This is called "Israel's former Deputy Atty. General, Prof. Nahum Rackover: One Must Not Obey an 'Illegal Order'" and was written by Michael Guttman, Staffer, Israel Resource News Agency. It appeared in IsraelBehindTheNews.com 21st January, 2005 (http://israelvisit.co.il/cgi-bin/friendly.pl?url=Jan-21-05!conscience)

Israel's former Deputy Attorney General, Professor Nahum Rackover, now head of the Jewish Legal Heritage Society most recently convened a brain trust of Israeli experts in Jewish and Israeli jurisprudence to discuss the legal ramifications of Prime Minister Sharon's current policies.

Specifically, Prof. Rackover's conference addressed the question what would define "illegal orders", as defined through both Israeli and Jewish law.

Meeting Prof. Rackover at his home in Jerusalem, I asked him about the dimensions of the Israeli law on the topic of what would constitute an "illegal order".

Prof. Rackover pointed to a 1977 law that deals with individual liability despite one's acting on the basis of superior orders.

That statute clearly states that one is in fact normally not responsible for actions committed on the basis of such an order.

However, an important exception is made for those orders that are "obviously illegal."

In such a case, the individual is responsible and liable to any resulting punishment.

According to Prof. Rackover, the individual then has a legal right and obligation to disobey an obviously illegal order.

Prof. Rackover also referred to a section of the Israeli Military Code (no.125, enacted in 1955) which provides similar guidelines on the issue: IDF Soldiers have no obligation to fulfill a command that is obviously illegal. Rackover notes that Israeli military courts have repeatedly placed individual responsibility on soldiers who failed to act accordingly (the 1957 case in which IDF troops were convicted of following an illegal order to fire on a busload of workers from Cfar Kassam during a curfew at the time of the Suez campaign was cited as the most well known example in this regard. Every IDF soldier who participated in the incident was convicted of following what constituted an illegal order).

Regarding the legality or illegality of Sharon's current policies, Rackover introduced the works of Law Professor Eliav Shochetman, and mentioned that Shochetman argues that there exists, based on historical and international agreement and law, a right for the Jewish people to settle the Land of Israel. Any actions devised to prevent or negate this right would therefore be considered illegal.

Shochetman derives this historic right from the decisions and guidelines set forth by the League of Nations and the United Nations, among other sources.

Rackover, drawing from Shochetman's work, has addressed the aspects of Jewish law involved. He cites the views of the former Chief Rabbis Shapira and Eliyahu, and the various positions and decisions of other authorities in Jewish law, to support the position that Sharon's current policies which require expulsion of Jews from their homes in the land of Israel as being an illegal act.

Prof. Rackover referred to sources which explain that the Jewish legal obligation to settle the Land of Israel, in all areas according to the Rambam, as a divine precept from the Torah, and that it would therefore be illegal to withdraw Jews from any areas of the land, and is forbidden for one to participate in such actions.

According to Prof. Rackover, citing Maimonides in "The Laws of Kings" (chapter 3), one in fact has an obligation to disobey a king who issues an illegal order.

Additionally, Rackover briefly dealt with the human rights aspect. He pointed to the basic law of the state of Israel, including a 1994 Knesset law, which accords every individual the right to his or her own body, dignity, and property. Rackover also noted the opinion of the late Deputy President of the Supreme Court, Judge Haim Cohen, that it is worse than killing to force someone out of his/her home.

One question that remains is what makes an order "obviously illegal": Is this to be determined by the individual or society at large? While Rackover personally believes Sharon's plan - which he labeled "undemocratic" - would fall under this category, and therefore necessitate disobedience, he noted that Israeli military courts at the present would not seem to support this view.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, January 28, 2005.

Who's Stoking the War?
Who's feeding the fire?
Who's paying for Jihad?
Who's getting paid?

Who's stoking another Jewish war?
Who's building walls while taking borders down?
Who's establishing tyranny while disestablishing democracy?
Who's disengaging with patriots while engaging with "hatriots"?

Who's playing with evil?
Who's making green peace bloody red leaving Jews dead?
Who's stoking the war and getting rich?
Who's feeding the fire and getting dhimmis burnt?

Who? Who? Who?
It's the wise owl's cry!
Why? Why? Why?
It's the innocents' sigh.

Again. Again. Again.
Risen from hell.
Reclaimed and Redeemed.
Hell is being raised.

Gan Eden is been sacked from within and hacked by the "hatriots".
And the courts are prosecuting right and giving wrong rein.
They're after the law abiders, patriots, gardeners
turning plowshares into swords, churning out peace for disaccord.

Who's gambling with good?
Who's gambling on bad when they're making it worse?

From intifada to armada turning rocks to stocks of rockets!
How much is divested and when will they stop it?

Who's letting loose war and attacking the lettuce?
Who's attacking the army and arming jihad?
Who's playing with "deathlords"
and denying the praying?

Who's unstalking the celery?
Who's walking Israel out of Israel against its will?
Who's denying the deeds and hiding the history?
Who's erasing and replacing the replaced?

Who's stoking the war?
Who's dividing the Jewish nation and pocketing Jew's gold?
Who's clashing with Hashem?
When will the silencing be abated? When will truth and justice be liberated?

Evelyn Hayes is the author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because hearts are softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes."

To Go To Top
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, January 27, 2005.

To hell with Auschwitz, and damn those people who invoke its memory, but ignore the injustices being done to the Jewish People today. A certain radical rabbi used to say, "I'd rather be a live Jew that everyone hates, then a dead Jew that everyone mourns over." Today, they mourn over Auschwitz, but are working hard to take away from the Jewish People its most basic national right, its homeland, Israel.

Though most countries (about 150 out of 191 member nations) voted in favor of holding the 60th anniversary commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz (Jan. 27th) at the UN, the General Assembly was less than half full, and Jordan was the only Arab country that remained during Holocaust memorial speeches by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Israeli Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom.

The UN Secretary-General spoke first, saying, "The evil which murdered 6,000,000 Jews in the death camps still threatens us today." He referred to more recent genocides, but then explained the "tragedy of the Jewish people was unique. Two thirds of all Europe's Jews, including one and a half million children, were murdered. An entire civilization, which had contributed far beyond its numbers to the cultural and intellectual riches of Europe and the world, was uprooted, destroyed, laid waste."

The only representative of an Arab country to speak, was Jordan's UN ambassador, Prince Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein. Yet, he took advantage of the occasion to attack Israel's alleged mistreatment of the "Palestinians," rather than to express solidarity with the sufferings of the Jewish People at the Holocaust commemoration. Referring to "one people dominat[ing] another, deny[ing] the latter many of its most basic rights, and so, with the passage of time, also degrade[ing] it as a people."

Where was Israel's peace partner, Egypt?

About the UN commemoration, the Egyptian government-owned newspaper, Al-Ahram Al-Messa'i, commented on what it called Israel's "investment" in "the so-called Holocaust." The newspaper criticized the UN for holding the event, writing in its editorial, "The UN adopted the Israeli standpoint, paying no heed to the sufferings of the Palestinians under the Israeli occupation." On the contrary, "commemorating the Holocaust requires opening the issue of the daily Israeli violations against the Palestinians...." There you have it; the Egyptians (and the rest of the Arab/Islamic world) compare the Holocaust to the "Palestinian" situation.

But what took the UN 60 years to discuss the Holocaust?

Why did a major UN anti-racism conference a couple years ago in Durban, South Africa, ignore Anti-Semitism?

Why did the UN declare, "Zionism is Racism" between 1975 and 1991, when the UN itself approved the creation of the State of Israel? Which was the culmination of the Zionist movement's efforts to liberate the Jewish People's homeland from foreign occupation.

Who cares what the UN, the Quartet (US, EU, UN, and Russia) and the rest of the world thinks...they're a bunch of liars, hypocrites, and accomplices to murder.

Has the past memorialization of the Holocaust prevented any mass murder in the last 60 years?

The same hypocrites, who cry today about Auschwitz, watched as Cambodia and Rwanda happened, and now stand on the sidelines, while Arabs in Darfur, Sudan, slaughter black Africans (see my article "There They Go Again, Those Arab Racists"). That includes Kofi Annan.

Jews too can get caught up in this duplicity. Recently, some Jewish Gazans adopted an orange Star of David, as a symbol of protest against Ariel Sharon's planned expulsion of Jews from Gaza. Well, you can't imagine how fast they got jumped on. It was a true media frenzy, leftists of all colors, Yad V'Shem (Israel's National Holocaust Museum), a few survivors of the Holocaust (although other survivors in Gaza put on the orange star), and even some assorted "right-wing" supporters of the "settlers" all complained that such a symbol (mimicking the Nazi's use of yellow stars to identify Jews) was too sacrosanct to be used for "political" purposes.

Before that, a "right-wing" activist got into trouble writing a public letter comparing the head of the Transfer Authority, Yonaton Bassi, who is in charge of organizing the "settlers" that the Israeli government wants to throw out of their communities, to the "Judenrat" (the Holocaust-era Jewish committees that helped the Nazis organize Jews). People across the Israeli political spectrum criticized her for the comparison, with the usual assortment of leftists calling for a police investigation, with which they obliged.

But an important point must be made here. The Holocaust, i.e. the mass murder of about six million Jewish men, women and children during World War II by the Nazis and their helpers, didn't happen overnight. It began by the demonization of Jews (for centuries throughout Europe) and in Nazi Germany in particular. It moved on to the deligitimization of fellow German citizens just because they were Jews, depriving them of home, study, occupation, and business. When the Nazis occupied other countries, mass expulsion of Jews from their homes began. They were moved to "Ghettos," then later deported to labor camps and murder camps. In other words, it was implemented in phases.

Those in Israel, who don't like the comparisons to the Holocaust or use of Holocaust-era symbols or language, should act very carefully not to encourage the comparison. Stop the late night surprise expulsions of "illegal" outposts. Stop the brutalizing of Jews by the police, who protest expulsion policies. Stop the demonizing of "settlers". Stop acting like that NOW!

The demonization of Jews has been taking place in the Ara/Islamic world for some time now, and the deligitimization of the Jewish People's national political rights (the State of Israel) has followed. Anti-Semitism (or better called Judeo-pathic behavior), masquerading as anti-Zionism is rife again today in Europe and among international leftist circles globally. I guess the "political capital" of the Holocaust has run out, even in Europe, today they barely mourn over dead Jews (except for our newly found friends at the UN). Some even plan the next massacre.

While much of the world supports the enemies of Israel (the "Palestinians" for example), "for the sake of peace" no less, Ariel Sharon and his helpers have demonized the "settlers," deligitimizing them and their communities in the process. The democratic exercise of free speech, to voice opposition to Sharon's expulsion plans, has been labeled "extreme right-wing" behavior, and gone beyond some imaginary "red line".

Plans to expel over 8,000 Jews from their homes are underway, and numerous "leaks" from high-ranking government officials (like Olmert and Peres) have stated that this is just phase one. Even the discredited former Prime Minister, Ehud Barak (who is planning his political comeback), is still bantying about the Clinton plan, that the late mass murderer Yasser Arafat rejected. That plan, would require the expulsion of about another 50,000 to 80,000 Jews from Judea and Samaria. So, expulsion of Jews from their homes and communities is high on the Israeli political agenda, as they maneuver to make nice with the "Palestinians".

How could this be? How could Israel's right to exist be being questioned internationally, while Jew-hatred is flourishing in all quarters, yet Jews are being persecuted in their own homeland?

The words of Shimon Peres, just after losing to Binyamin Netanyahu in 1996 (during an interview in the left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz) reveals a lot. When asked, "What happened in these elections?" Peres answered, "We lost." The interviewer then asked, "Who is we?" Peres replied, "We, that is the Israelis." The interviewer clarified, "And who won?" Peres said, "All those who do not have an Israeli mentality." Then, the interviewer asked, "And who are they?" Peres answered, "Call it the Jews."

So, back in 1996, Shimon Peres already differentiated between, the "religious," the "settlers," and the "nationalists," as "The Jews" who rejected his "Oslo Dreams," and those cosmopolitans willing to compromise on their identity and homeland, "The Israelis". Sharon is just taking it one step further. Peres could only dream his Oslo dreams of peace with the enemies of the Jewish People, and the forced expulsions of the Jews from their homes. But now, Sharon, through his Gaza Expulsion Plan, is working to implement Peres' dream.

While Jews as a whole and Israel in particular are under fierce attack globally (both politically and through terrorism), many Jews are also under attack locally in Israel (not only from Kassam rockets and suicidal-genocidal terrorists), but by "The Israelis". "The Israelis" (like Peres and Sharon) prefer to die and be memorialized by the world, rather than confront the world's ire while defending themselves against "Palestinian" terror. "The Israelis" are working hard to destroy "The Jews" lives in Gaza, Samaria and Judea, trying to please the world, rather than sticking to the eternal G-D given truth (that the Land of Israel belongs exclusively to the Jewish People). "The Israelis" are trying to uproot the Jewish People's millennia-old love for its homeland.

It seems not only has the rest of the world not learned the lessons of the Holocaust, but also "The Israelis" haven't either. "Never Again" as used by international do-gooders has become an empty slogan. It hasn't prevented new genocides, and it hasn't prevented the rise of virulent Judeopathy either. "The Israelis" are just a couple steps behind, hardly preventing attacks against Jews by "Palestinians," always worried what the world will say, and now, planning their own expulsion program.

To hell with Auschwitz...and the past, give me life, strength, the glorious future of the Jewish People, and my homeland, the Land of Israel.

Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko

To Go To Top
Posted by David Frankfurter, January 27, 2005.
Dear Friends,

Today, January 27th 2005, is the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camp Auschwitz. The world chose this as an international Holocaust memorial day, with activities and ceremonies throughout the month of January.

Remembering the systematic attempt to round up and kill the Jewish population of Europe is intended to prompt the world to prevent such tragedies from recurring. Sadly, the evidence is not too encouraging. One need not look to the past - for example in Cambodia, Rwanda, Iraq, Chechnya - to realize how ineffective the world has been in this endeavour. As world leaders were mumbling the platitudes of "never again" from the podium of the UN, the Sudanese air force took off to bomb black villagers in Darfur, consolidating the ongoing ethnic cleansing in Sudan.

Nevertheless, this is a time when countries around the world - including Arab nations who in the past declared explicit war against the Jews - have united to at least pay lip service to the lessons that the world has sadly not learned from the Holocaust. So how is the commemoration is received by the Palestinian Arabs? On a formal level, it would seem that the Palestinian Arabs have decided to join the family of nations. Newspaper reports noted that the PLO made a special application to attend the Holocaust memorial session of the General Assembly of the UN. The reports imply that they did not walk out when Kofi Annan severely breached protocol by arranging for the Israeli national anthem to be played and the Jewish mourner's prayer to be chanted in the UN plenum.

This is a huge compromise step, especially considering that the current Chairman of the Palestinian Authority's university thesis was dedicated to Holocaust denial.

Elsewhere, Palestinian Arabs and their supporters have been less unequivocal.

The Muslim Council of Britain boycotted commemorations of the liberation of Auschwitz, as being not "racially inclusive" - using the code words that the event should include the "holocaust" of the Palestinian intifada to thinly mask an exploitation of every opportunity to push a particular political agenda, and a refusal to recognize the murder of Jews as a crime.

Speaking on Israeli radio, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat explained away the Palestinian position very blithely. According to him, not a single Palestinian Arab supported the Nazis or their terrible holocaust of the Jews in Europe.

The interviewer was too polite (or ignorant) to probe Erakat about Arafat's uncle - the fanatic Nazi collaborator Haj Amin al-Husseini and his influence on Palestinian Arabs at the time. In his role as Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini he personally consulted with Hitler over the extermination of European Jewry. The Mufti's speeches of encouragement were broadcast in Arabic to Islamic troops fighting with the Nazis.

Erakat went on to claim that any association between Palestinians and anti-Semitism was a European attempt to shift the blame to Arabs for what they did to the Jews. Hatred of Jews is totally unacceptable in Palestinian Arab society, he explained. The only world evil to be addressed is Israeli occupation and violence.

The interviewer, again polite, and did not remind the forgetful Erakat of the terrorists and suicide bombers sent to murder Jewish women and children in cold blood. She did not challenge him to explain European funded Palestinian textbooks, which refuse to recognize any historic or political presence of Jews in the holy land. Nor did she mention the Jew-hatred broadcast on Palestinian Authority controlled television.

In fact, Itamar Marcus, director of Palestinian Media Watch, which maps current trends in Palestinian society as reflected in its own media, says that little has changed. "While the Israeli and foreign media are reporting moderation and a Palestinian desire to bring about an end to violent conflict, this message is not reflected in the Palestinian media. Official Palestinian Authority controlled television, even while the leadership speaks of hudna or 'tactical ceasefire', continues to cultivate an atmosphere of hatred and violence against Jews and Israel. Terrorist 'martyrs' are lauded as role models to be exemplified, and Jews are castigated as the embodiment of evil."

It seems that Darfur is not the only evidence that the world has not internalised the lessons of the Holocaust.

To subscribe to David Frankfurter's 'letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 27, 2005.

In the minds of US foreign policy experts, there is little connection between ethics and success. I disagree. I think unethical policies tend to fail. In the long run, regimes without legitimacy fall. Supporting them fails. Pres. Bush now admits this, at least in speeches.

Appeasement of fanatical dictators is unethical, because it sacrifices decent countries or groups to aggressors, weakening its own resistance to evil. Appeasement has failed with the Nazis, Communists, and Arabs, among others.

Thinking it pragmatic, a more civilized society may enlist unsavory groups against a common enemy. Such support may boost the unsavory groups into a first class enemy. That happened when our military aid to rebels against Soviet rule in Afghanistan went largely to Islamists, rather than to other Muslims. The experience that Arab volunteers got in Afghanistan, with our weapons, still is being utilized in a spreading jihad. The CIA and State Dept. should have been reformed, after that blunder. Unfortunately, there is little real reform in the US. We continue to let our defense agencies serve us poorly.

Although the PLO committed much terrorism and is anti-American, the US has made deals with the PLO, for crumbs of intelligence information. Now, the US wants to set up a PLO state on Israel's flank. A better policy would be a US-Israel alliance against the anti-Western Arabs, starting with the overthrow of the P.A. and a jointly effected regime change in Syria, which sends fighters against the US, drugs into the US, and counterfeits US currency.

The Arabs accuse the US of having this alliance with Israel, anyway. Already suffering the reputation for it, we may as well benefit from an actual one. Non-Arabs also think that the US is pro-Israel. They don't understand. The real story is like the following fable. The US wants Israel to jump out of a building to its death. If the US tried to dictate the whole effort at once - jump and die - Israel would balk, because its implications would be so obvious. Instead, the State Dept. tries to accomplish the same goal gradually.

Thus the State Dept. demands that Israel walk over to the window. Then it tells it, don't worry, we support you, but meanwhile open the window. Next, it suggests that Israel take risks for peace, and step out onto the fire escape. Israel complies, feeling it should not jeopardize US support, and, after all, it has not jumped off. Then Arabs throw sand in Israel's eyes. Israel steps back. The US gives Israel a washcloth to get the sand out, and rebukes the Arabs for throwing sand. A new Arab leader advises his people, withhold the sand, so Israel will jump. Naively feeling it has US support in the form of a safety net, below, Israel steps back out onto the fire escape and reconsiders jumping. Jump, jump, the Left urges, the building is burning and getting out of it is the solution. The Arabs prepare to move into the building and bar a Jewish return.

In the minds of many US foreign policy critics, the US can do no right. It dismays me to find my Democrat friends that unpatriotic. They weren't always that way. What happened to them? I think that they got so used to criticizing the government, that they lost awareness of America's great decency, and stopped loving their country. They are suspicious of every US policy initiative, except, unfortunately, its anti-Israel initiatives that they mistakenly think are favorable to Israel.

Conservatives try to explain the seemingly contradictory stand of such critics, who oppose some US interventions and propose others. Some conservatives think that the opposition is to interventions that promote US national interests, and the support is for interventions that are humanitarian without specifically helping the US. Other conservatives find that the critics, mostly Democrats, base their position according to whether the President involved is a Democrat or a Republican.

I think there is an element of truth to both explanations, but also that there are other explanations based on the issues, themselves. I think that even Democrats would have been more reconciled to the war on Saddam if we had a larger army, with overwhelming resources to have guarded against Iraqi looting, watched the border, smashed the insurgents, and not have to recall the same troops repeatedly. By keeping federal revenues low, Pres. Bush worries Democrats that there would not be enough for domestic needs, so Congress short-changes the military, on which liberals think we spend too much.


Last year, the world was awash in oil. Oil prices were moderate. Now they are high enough to dampen the US economic recovery, and volatile enough to dampen the US stock market.

In the past, a reduction in one country's oil output could be compensated for by an increase in another's. No longer. The US has stopped conserving; China consumes ever more. Iraqi oil extraction has not returned to normal levels, as insurgents destroy Iraqi facilities. Oil output often falls after regime-changes. Russia's oil industry stagnates while the politics of who will dominate it is sorted out (Amy Jaffe, NY Sun, 1/21, p.9).


"No matter how outrageous and factually untrue or unbalanced the statements of the anti-Israel professors at Columbia U., no matter how much they intimidate students who challenge this classroom propaganda, liberals frame the issue as one of freedom of speech and as an attack on academic freedom." The ACLU has taken this position (NY Sun, 1/21, letter).

The professors are anti-academic and anti-free speech. A wiser ACLU position would be to suggest how to get jihadists out of the universities while allowing professors with academic integrity freedom to teach and students freedom to express opinions and raise questions.


For years, the Israeli Left agitated among soldiers to refuse to serve in Yesha or even anywhere, until the Communist' policies were adopted for the Territories. The leftist media praised the agitators' motivation as high ethics and patriotism.

Now many Israelis are signing petitions to refuse to expel Jews from Yesha. Leftists in and out of the Army are demanding that those who organize and even sign the petitions be arrested.

The Left feels that only it has a right to defy authority, only it is ethical, and only it has a right to free speech (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/5, e-mail). In the US, the Left fears Pres. Bush will impose fascism, but it shouts down conservatives on campus and exhibits other fascist tendencies.


Europe is an axis of weakness. France is building the EU, with itself and Germany at the center (until they admit Turkey) to counter US influence. This Gallic rivalry is oblivious to the growing threat both to Europe and the US of Iranian nuclear and missile development.

The EU relies upon the UN, another weak sister. How firmly did the UN act towards Saddam? "Saddam Hussein got 17 resolutions and 12 years (to violate them), at the end of which America received angry calls from Berlin and Paris for still more time to coax the Iraqi dictator to behave." (Jewish Political chronicle, 11/2004, p.7 from Jeoffrey Gedmin, Weekly Standard, 10/18.)

Oddly, US liberals thought the patient Pres. Bush acted hastily in warring on Iraq. They seemed unaware of UNO resolutions and Iraqi violations. They focused narrowly on weapons of mass-destruction being ready and readily found.

Europe's appeasement is the instinct for self-preservation being distorted by panic.

Europe ought to sit back and ponder its earlier failures at appeasement and the need for the US to rescue it.


S. Arabia has pledged $10 million for tsunami relief. Last year, it spent $150 million subsidizing the families of human bombs (op. Cit.).


P.A. terrorists increasingly bombard Jewish communities in Yesha and in Israel. In a delayed attempt to root out the bombardiers, the IDF raided and patrolled P.A. areas of Gaza. In the course of those raids, some Arab children and alleged adult civilians in the line of fire were killed. Urging both sides to be more careful about civilians, Sec. General Annan expressed grave concern over the Arabs' deaths. He expressed no concern over the deaths of Israelis (IMRA, 1/5). Israeli soldiers are just as innocent as civilians murdered by Arab aggression.

Is Sec. Annan unable to puzzle out the solution - that the P.A. eradicate rocket squads, in accordance with Oslo, so there would be no Israeli casualties and no Israeli counter-attacks?

Why is there no world outcry against the increasing terrorist bombardment of Israeli towns, but there is a world outcry against Israel for the few Arab casualties, when terrorists allow children to stand around them during an Israeli counter-attack? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/5, e-mail).

That is the low ethical level of world public opinion that people think Israel cannot afford to alienate, as if it weren't already antisemitic or alienated and as if it hadn't let millions of Jews be murdered by the Nazis. I would put innocent Israeli lives over sinful foreign opinion.

How unbalanced was Sec. Annan's seemingly balanced statement! He treated identically the Arabs, who seek to harm Jewish civilians and use their own as human shields, and Israel, which seeks NOT to harm Arab civilians! His misleading statement aids terrorism.

What does Annan expect Israel to do, let itself be bombarded with impunity, lest Arabs who wholeheartedly support violence be hurt? Why does he not blame the terrorists, guilty under international law for endangering civilians among whom they conceal themselves?


"Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who brought his Likud party a landslide victory in an election campaign that focused on one issue - unilateral withdrawal - to suddenly embrace and implement the very position he explicitly and emphatically campaigned against without going back to the voters?

"Is it 'democratic' for Likud Party Chairman Ariel Sharon to commit to honor the outcome of a referendum of Likud Party members on unilateral withdrawal - and then ignore the vote when he lost the referendum by a landslide?

"Is it 'democratic' for Likud Party ministers Netanyahu, Livnat and others who openly say that they know that Sharon's disengagement plan is a terrible mistake that Israel will pay dearly for - but opt to vote for the plan out of personal interests?

"Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Sharon to fire ministers before the vote on the disengagement plan in order to insure the passage of the plan?

"Is it 'democratic' for Prime Minister Sharon to refuse to test the public support for his disengagement plan via a national referendum because, as his office put it, he might lose?" (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 1/5.)

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 27, 2005.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is no longer of any value to Israel and, in fact, has become its worst danger. Whoever has control over Sharon's thinking, mouth and policy - it is not Sharon. Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), is the Palestinian Authority's newly elected President. Nothing Hamas or Abbas demands is too offensive for Sharon to accept. Sharon has become a puppet for too many foreign and internal interests. Those strings must be cut if Israel is to survive as the world's only Jewish State. It would be a kindness to Sharon by removing him from office and the control exercised by numerous interests. It's now or never.

Sharon has completely caved in according to DEBKAfile article and the JERUSAELM POST articles (see below).

"Sharon Gambles on Abbas by Capitulating to Hamas' Terms," DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis January 26, 2005.

Sharon says: "Put the war on hold!"

Under the bewitching spell of a week-long temporary and partial lull in Palestinian terrorist attacks from the Gaza Strip, the Sharon-Peres government is capitulating to radical conditions for its continuation laid down by the extremist Hamas. Indeed, Israel is in effect negotiating with the Islamist terrorist group dedicated to the Jewish state's destruction. Handling the process through the newly-elected Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) provides a patina of respectability.

Hamas overseas leader Khaled Mashal said bluntly that a cease fire is not on the cards, only a temporary calm - and that too must be paid for by meeting tough conditions.

Abbas faithfully passed the conditions on to Jerusalem. Therefore, notwithstanding his failure to procure a cease fire from any terrorist group, Israel agreed Tuesday night, January 25, to suspend targeted assassinations of wanted terrorists. A few hours later, the Sharon government lifted the freeze imposed ten days ago on diplomatic contacts with the Palestinians after six Israeli civilians died in a multi-group terrorist bombing of the Karni goods crossing from the Gaza Strip to Israel at the peak of daily cross-border Qassam and mortar barrages.

Suspension of assassinations and raids in the territory was agreed at the Tuesday meeting between IDF Gaza Brigade commander Brig. Gen Aviv Kochavi and Palestinian security chief Maj. Gen Mussa Arafat. Hamas has lost its top leaders to these attacks and by forgoing their continuation Israel is helping Hamas recover.

Wednesday too, Israeli and Palestinian officers met at Khan Younes to coordinate the deployment of Palestinian troops in central and southern Gaza Strip after a similar deployment took place in the north. Israeli police broke up an Israeli protest against this meeting, putting two demonstrators in hospital.

The conditions the Sharon government has already met are just the beginning. Hamas aka Abbas has more demands.

1. Its full incorporation as a power-sharing partner in the new Palestinian leadership. The Hamas has thus acquired legitimacy as a political entity which will also run for election to the Palestinian legislature in July, forcing Israel's acceptance.

2. Going into politics will not deprive Hamas or its fraternal terrorist group Jihad Islami of any resources for the continued practice of terrorism, including its armed bands and their arsenals. They will also enjoy immunity from Palestinian Authority law enforcement and interference and complete independence of action. Both will therefore be free to resume terrorist attacks at will. With Abbas' connivance and Israel's sanction, Hamas wins a breather from the current lull to transform itself into the best organized paramilitary force in the Gaza Strip.

3. Egypt will provide guarantees for Israel's commitment to refrain from attacking Hamas' installations and members. Amos Gilead, senior aide of Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, flies to Cairo Wednesday with backup for the Egyptian guarantee.

4. The Israeli army will pull back to the pre-September 28, 2000 lines held before Yasser Arafat declared his terror war. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz bowed to this demand in Paris Tuesday when he informed his French counterpart Michele Alliot-Marie of his government's willingness to hand all parts of the Gaza Strip and all West Bank cities to the Palestinians by the end of 2005.

5. Abbas has made every effort to secure the Hamas demand for prisoner release. Both fully expect to hear soon of hundreds of Palestinians under sentence for violent attacks being bused out of Israeli jails waving the V-sign.

By surrendering to Abbas' (Hamas) terms, Ariel Sharon, deputy prime minister Shimon Peres and Shaul Mofaz are leapfrogging over their disengagement plan and even bypassing the first clauses of the Middle East Quartet's road map, which demand the actual dismantling of terrorist infrastructure, not a mere truce. They seem in fact to be hurtling forward to the roadmap's end-stage - final status discussions on a Palestinian state accompanied by an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank.

The focus of talks with the Palestinians - and contacts with the Americans and Europeans - has thus gravitated towards discussing the scale and tempo of Israel's concession of territory rather than the dismantling of terrorist groups, which is relegated to the status of "peacemaker's fantasy".

In the next few days, Sharon's political adviser Dov Weisglass will be reporting on this switch to Condoleezza Rice in Washington in her new capacity as secretary of state, assuming she is confirmed by the Senate by then.

It is a bold Israeli gesture, one the United States would not think of making toward Sunni insurgents in Iraq or Hezb'Allah terrorists in Lebanon. Indeed, Sharon, egged on by his new Labor partners, may be running ahead of himself. Responding to Abbas' first moves in Gaza, the state department this week commended his progress as an "encouraging" beginning to a process that must lead to the dismantling of terrorist bodies. President George W. Bush is not yet ready to receive Abbas at the White House. Yet Sharon, Peres and Mofaz are making an end run around a second-term administration that has yet to formulate its policies for the next four years and presenting it with a package of far-reaching gifts for the Palestinians already wrapped up and delivered.

Sharon's strategists believe that if this process fails and Palestinian terrorism resumes at full spate, no one - even in Europe - will be able to blame Israel for not going the extra mile for the sake of a peace accommodation.

This tactic bears Labor Party fingerprints, easily recognized as belonging to veteran peaceniks Peres, Haim Ramon and, indirectly, Geneva Accords purveyor, left-wing Yahad party leader Yossi Beilin. They are now reliving their 1993 escapade when they piled on the concessions and presented a clueless Clinton administration with the irresistible temptation of signing onto the ill-fated Oslo Peace Framework accords.

In no time, Israeli buses were being blown up, mainly in Jerusalem, in a campaign that led inexorably to the full-scale terror war Arafat declared in September 2000 and which ended thousands of lives.

Will the Bush White House be lured into the same trap? It is worth mentioning that Clinton has since described his handling of Arafat as one of the two biggest mistakes of his presidency, second only to his failure to kill or contain Osama bin Laden.

However the incumbent US president, after his experience in Iraq, should be a lot more savvy about handling terrorists than his predecessor. At the same time, Bush may well repeat his sink-or-swim comment to Sharon when he first heard about the Israeli leader's 'Disengagement' plan: If you want to implement it, do it on your own. Don't make us responsible and especially don't make it sound as though we are in charge.

Unfortunately, DEBKAfile is virtually the lone cautionary voice against the hazards entailed in the Sharon-Peres government's attitude toward Abbas, who was after all the senior Palestinian negotiating tactician behind Arafat at Oslo in 1993.

It is important to note that in stark contrast to the blind hopes Israeli leaders are pinning on Abu Mazen for ending the four-year war, Palestinian expectations of his durability are extremely low. Since his election, not a single prominent Palestinian has agreed to speak on Israeli media on Abbas' behalf, even the regulars who are usually ready to appear at the drop of a hat. Such power brokers as prime minister Ahmed Qureia, Gaza faction leader Mohammed Dahlan, national security adviser Jibril Rajoub and Gaza security chief Mussa Arafat are as silent as the lambs. DEBKAfile quotes a senior Israeli security official as reporting: "The entire Palestinian leadership is intently watching Abu Mazen performing his acrobatics on a high wire. They are keeping a safe distance, certain he will fall."

If he does, so too will the second Peres-orchestrated Palestinian peace initiative in a dozen years - this time dragging Sharon down too. The trouble with this sort of gamble is that its failure will provide sustenance and cheer to the terrorists. Hamas and Islamic Jihad will not miss their chance of establishing themselves triumphantly as the dominant terrorist forces of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The story is headlined as: "Israel Must 'pay' For Calm, Says Hamas, Islamic Jihad" and is by Khaled Abu Toameh, and appeared in the Jerusalem Post. This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?gename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid= 1106623165882&p=1101615860782

[And so Sharon caves. Please note the conditions Hamas & Islamic Jihad put on Israel to agree to a temporary truce (Hudna). - EAW]

Ending days of speculation about whether they had agreed to a cease-fire with Israel, Hamas and Islamic Jihad on Tuesday denied that they would halt terrorist attacks "without making Israel pay a price."

Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, the Syria-based head of the movement's political bureau, said there would be no discussion of a truce before the Palestinians test Israel's intentions and receive assurances from the international community that Israel would halt its attacks on the Palestinians.

He described the recent talks between Hamas officials in the Gaza Strip and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas as "positive."

"We agreed that the message that we should send to the international community is that the Palestinian resistance is not the problem, but it is Israel's aggression," he said. "We also agreed that our message to the Zionist enemy is that there would be no solution unless the occupation ends."

Asked if the two sides had discussed ways of calming the situation, Mashaal told the London-based daily Al-Hayat: "There is talk about calm, but a conditioned one. If the occupation meets our conditions, including ending the occupation and releasing all the prisoners, we will be prepared to consider a temporary truce."

Mashaal also denied reports about a split between the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip, which is reportedly prepared to accept a truce, and the movement's hard-line leadership in Syria and Lebanon.

Hassan Yousef, Hamas's prominent West Bank leader, warned that Israel's ongoing military raids in the West Bank jeopardize efforts to calm the situation. He was referring to the arrest over the past few days by the IDF of several Hamas suspects in the Nablus, Jenin and Tulkarm areas.

"We condemn these arrests and stress that Hamas can't remain idle in the face of Israel's continued aggression against our people," Yousef said, accusing Israel of seeking to thwart attempts to end the violence.

Hamas spokesman Mushir al-Masri said that, while progress had been made during the talks with Abbas on the need for major reforms, "there is no talk about calm without a price [from Israel] and as long as the Israeli aggression on our people continues."

Masri listed his movement's conditions for accepting a temporary truce: a release of all Palestinian prisoners, an end to Israeli military operations and a withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the return of bodies of Palestinians killed in attacks against Israel.

"If all these conditions are met, then we will respond positively to the issue of calm," he said. "Hamas is now following the events on the ground and we will determine our position once we see if Israel fulfills these conditions."

Nafez Azzam, a senior Islamic Jihad official in the Gaza Strip, also stated that his group would not accept a unilateral cease-fire that does not include Israeli concessions.

"Our position is clear - there won't be calm from one side without gaining something in return," he said. "We have always said that the problem lies with Israel, not the Palestinians. Israel is the aggressor and the Palestinians are only defending themselves. We want something in return [from Israel] that would convince not only Islamic Jihad, but the Palestinian people who must feel changes on the ground."

Meanwhile, sources in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Abbas is expected to visit Cairo next week for talks with Egyptian officials on the possibility of holding a meeting of all Palestinian factions in the Egyptian capital to discuss a truce with Israel.

According to the sources, most of the Palestinian factions have agreed in principle to Abbas's initiative to achieve a temporary truce with Israel. "We're closer than ever to achieving a hudna [temporary truce]," said a source close to Abbas, adding that a meeting would be held soon in Cairo between top PA officials and Hamas leaders.

Gazan legislator Ziad Abu Amr, who played a key role in the recent intra-Palestinian discussions, said Hamas and Islamic Jihad have agreed to participate in July's elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council.

He said that despite denials from Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders, all Palestinian factions have agreed to calm the situation to see if Israel is willing to accept their conditions.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Yrachmiel Elias, January 27, 2005.

Below you will find a detailed exposé of the truth behind the final Sharon doctrine of defeat and retreat - brought to life by Professor Ya'acov Golbert. So what? We living in Eretz ha'kodesh have had to put up with intrigue - lies, deceit, betrayal, planned assassination, government for profit and much more - since we gave up our direct protection program, designed to make this a safe homeland for all Jews! Now we find that those currently in power do not even care if you know how crooked and dirty are the tactics currently being readied for the expulsion of Jews from their G-D given land and the basic reason for the lie and expulsion plan is profit in the hands of those currently holding the reigns and gloves on the works of the government!

Read the inside story and then ask yourself how a man like Arik Sharon could change so drastically from the General Hero to general traitor in such a short time? Who has what information on him and why has he succumbed to the pressures of the left and labor? Or has He? Then visit our website and look at what needs to be done and how you can be part of the immediate repatriation of Eretz Yisrael and the rescuing of the Jewish People! Can we or can we not bring about a general strike in Israel to proclaim our freedom and our inherent native rights to self-determined democratic government before the advent of King Moshiach or do we stand silently by and chew our cuds like the sheep we appear to be? For more inside truth contact: info@netzahyisrael.org or action@netzahyisrael.org or Golbert@netzahyisrael.org

This article was written by Ya'akov-Perez Golbert, who was a full professor of law in Los Angeles until moving to Israel in 1984. He is a practicing lawyer in Jerusalem and is a co-founder/director of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishaqer, (http://www.netzahyisrael.org). Contact him by phone at (972) 50 7428100

What has happened in Israel in the last two weeks is a secret, bloodless coup d'etat. The stage was set a year or more ago, when the state prosecutors and the police were breathing hard down the neck of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his two sons on various charges of corruption, bribery and breach of public trust. Suddenly, all the investigations were cancelled because of "lack of evidence."

Over the next few months, Eliakim Rubenstein, the Attorney General who served the Labor establishment with faithfulness and competence, was elevated to the Supreme Court; the chief prosecutor, Menahem Mazuz, a dyed-in-the-wool leftist, was moved up to Attorney General, one of the most powerful positions in the government and Sharon committed the government to unilateral abandonment of all of the Gaza Strip with its 21 Israeli settlements and four strategically placed settlements in Samaria. That was the very policy proposed by Amram Mitzna and the Labor Party in the election in 2003, which Sharon roundly lambasted and denounced and, on the basis of which, the Likud crushed Labor in the elections. It certainly looks like Sharon sold out the country's defense and foreign policies to Labor in exchange for dismissal of all investigations against him and his sons.

The problem with submitting to blackmail is that, once blackmailed the victim is hostage to the blackmailer forever. So Sharon not only pursued unilateral retreat with ruthless determination, but he also brought Labor into the government, all "democratically," of course, by means of more breaches of public trust and suborning of breach of trust by the Likud Central Committee, blatantly above and beyond what is called in America "pork barrel." It looked more like bribery and extortion.

Labor is not only in, not only has nearly half the ministerial posts in the government, even though is has less than half as many Members of Knesset as the Likud. The leader of the Labor Party, Shimon Peres, is also the Deputy Prime Minister, with complete control of everything in the realm of foreign affairs. Silvan Shalom is still the Foreign Minister but in name only. It is also clear that Labor owns Ariel Sharon, who will do anything and everything demanded of him.

Peres and the Labor Party could demand that Sharon resign, for personal reasons, and leave the government formally in the hands of Peres as ranking Deputy Prime Minister but the left needs Sharon to front for them. Sharon has a reservoir of good will and personal faith that Peres and Labor do not have. Sharon saved the country, after all, and people have not forgotten. He can ram suicidal measures down the throat of the resisting public more and Labor cannot. People will accept from Sharon what would send hundreds of thousands out into the streets in protest if Peres did it.

How can Sharon's Labor Party masters be sure he will not betray them as he has betrayed everyone else who has trusted him in the past? Sharon, after all, is resourceful, ruthless, wily and determined. Not more than one week after entering into a political marriage with Sharon, the criminal justice system, another leftist fiefdom, issued a charge sheet against Omri Sharon. That was not to fire a shot across Sharon's bow. It was to put a collar and chain on his neck. He will serve Peres and the left faithfully and energetically. At the end of the line, after Sharon has brought about the full measure of surrender, Sharon will be allowed to resign for reasons of health and leave Peres in control. The charges will then be dropped or dismissed, no doubt for "lack of evidence," or the prosecution will take a dive in the fifth with the full complicity of the court.

If Sharon does not deliver, Omri will sit in prison and that is not all. "New" evidence against Ariel Sharon and both of his sons will certainly be "discovered" by the prosecution and they will all sit in prison after spending their entire fortune on legal defense.

Now that the election of 2003 has been overturned by blackmail, intimidation and bribery and the government taken over by the very party that was creamed in that election, the junta is moving quickly to consolidate its control and entrench its program, which is the de-Judeafication of Israel.

It was not announced but it became known that the Ministry of Education had decided not to recognize the undergraduate degree of anyone who received academic credit for post-high school yeshiva study. Furthermore, any graduate degrees earned by such a person would not be recognized because they are based on the "tainted" undergraduate degree. This is a regular practice of Yeshiva University, whose graduates are willingly accepted by the best graduate schools in the world.

This is a blatantly anti-Jewish measure. The real objection is that the immigrants who have received a year's academic credit for yeshiva study are religious Jews, too religious, the kind the secular unJews definitively do not want in Israel. This measure is consistent with the very frequent refusal of the Ministry of the Interior to recognize Orthodox conversions performed in Israel and approved by the Chief Rabbinate, for purposes of the Law of Return; the closure by the Ministry of the Interior of immigration from India and Peru on the ground that all the conversions in those countries are Orthodox; the systematic practice of the Jewish Agency to encourage immigration of non-Jews from the FSU, even those who have no connection with the Jewish people at all and the uniform willingness of the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption to accept their immigration under the law of return.

That is not the only measure being taken by the Ministry of Education to de-Judeafy the country. There are presently twenty six teachers' colleges and teachers' seminaries. Sixteen are to be closed, leaving only the ten operated by the kibbutz movement, the most anti-Jewish sector of the population, the ones who are being asked to volunteer to forcibly remove resisting "settlers" from their homes and farms, the ones who will make up the core of the psychopath squads who will do the brutal work. They will be the exclusive educators of the nations' educators.

The Ministry of Education is ostensibly under the control of Likud MK Limor Livnat, but that makes no difference. Peres knows all the dirt on everyone. Remember who created the Shabak, who hand picked its first agents and directors: Shimon Peres, when he was Director General of the Prime Minister's Office under Ben Gurion. He has never lost the loyalty and control of the Jewish Section, whose task is to infiltrate and undermine the right and the religious sectors of the Jewish population. Peres rules now in the tradition of Putin and Ceausescu, both of them heads of their respective secret police. Government by blackmail and intimidation, but we grace it with the name "democracy."

The same is happening in the military. Resistance among the religious, both soldiers and the general population, to unilateral abandonment of parts of the Land of Israel to implacable enemies has given the left the pretext they need to dismiss religious officer candidates from the courses and weed religious Jews out of the officer corps. Israeli television has already reported the news that the Hesder Yeshivot, a program in which religious Jews spend five years in the army, three and a half of them in a yeshiva on a military base, ready for immediate call. No more. Religious soldiers will be thrown into a secular army, run by secular officers who have proper contempt for the Jewish religion and religious Jews, the better to assimilate and de-Judeafy them.

Religious soldiers at every level will be replaced by less motivated but ideologically pliable secular Israelis and also by Ukrainians, Turks, Egyptians, Americans and British MI5 agents, all of whom are already in the country in large numbers, and by "Palestinians" presently undergoing "special training" with Israeli government approval. These and the ideological kibbutznikim who volunteer to brutalize the "settlers" will form the psychopath squads who will do the dirty work of expulsion.

Of course, they will all wear IDF uniforms so that no "settler" will open fire on them. But that is already taken care of. It has already been reported by Ha'aretz, the PLO's favorite Hebrew paper, that there are settlers who would open fire on other settlers to provoke them into firing on the army, which will force the army, yes force the army, to fire on the "settlers." (They will not be called "civilians," innocent or otherwise, as they call the "Palestinians" who willingly serve as human shields to protect the terrorist perpetrators of mass murder.) The modus operandi is clear: a Shabak agent provocateur, a latter day Avishai Raviv, disguised as a "settler," will fire the first shot in the direction of the IDF, justifying the ensuing massacre and civil war.

Religious Jews today comprise substantially half of the officer corps. To eliminate them would inevitably "dumb down" the officer corps. No matter. Once the Israelis eliminate the "settlers" and end the "occupation," the Israelis will finally have peace. Won't they?

Yrachmiel Elias is co-founder of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishaqer, (http://www.netzahyisrael.org).

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 27, 2005.

Considering that Israel is not a member of any of the regional blocs and is generally denounced by UN, it was the rare victory - Israel obtained the required majority approval for a special session in the United Nations to conduct Holocaust memorial.

The Arabs and their lackeys made it clear - they are not just against Israel. It's the Jews they hate. The UN General Assembly hall was half empty, and Jordan was the only Arab nation to remain during Holocaust memorial speeches. Kofi Anan did not reprimand the countries for deliberate boycott of Holocaust Memorial Ceremony. Even by doing something for Jews, "Useless Nothing" has done nothing!

Anan opened the session saying, "The evil which murdered 6,000,000 Jews in the death camps still threatens us today." But, he did not say why and who is responsible for facilitating modern genocides and the rise of anti-Semitism. He did not admit his personal and UN's complicity in the past and the present genocides, including Holocaust. No wonder that since WW2 the genocides have being tolerated in Cambodia, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the WW3 still is going on in Congo!

Honouring the memory of Holocaust victims is not about Jews only. It is about the moral advancement of Humanity!

Speaking to an audience including several Auschwitz survivors German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said "The evil of the Nazi ideology did not come out of nowhere. The brutalisation of thought and the lack of moral inhibitions had a history. One thing is clear: the Nazi ideology was willed by people and carried out by people." It does not mean that modern Germans, Austrians, Poles, Ukranians, French have to feel guilty for what their grandperents did or allowed to be done. They must not allow the return of the inhuman ugliness again. They will be judged by their own deeds and attitudes!

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 27, 2005.

Israel's Attorney General, Menachem "Manny" Mazuz, is a far leftist and a compatriot of Yossi Beilin, godmother of Olso. So naturally, when Ariel Sharon needed an Attorney General, Mazuz was the guy he picked. The Likud's main goal at the top of its agenda is to install leftist officials and implement the Left's agenda.

Yesterday Mazuz declared war on the Jewish National Fund. The Jewish National Fund is a NGO (non-governmental organization) whose origins go back to the early days of Zionism. It would collect kopeks and pennies from Jews all over the world in little "pishka" tin cans and use the money to buy lands that would then be leased out for Jewish enterprises and farms. The lands being purchased were intended for the benefit of Jews and the use by Jews in nation-building. JNF land is alloted for things like settling new immigrants to Israel.

Yesterday Mazuz declared that the JNF, even though it is not a state-agency but a NGO, cannot favor Jewish users and uses in allocation of its lands and has to give equal priority to Arab uses and users. That means that he wants to deny the right of all those little Jewish contributors putting their kopeks in the pishka to earmark their donations for other Jews. See http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/532493.html

Now just to put this into perspective, there is another NGO whose lands allocation Mazuz is NOT going to direct or interfere in. That is the Moslem WAKF, a NGO that holds lands for Moslem religious purposes and explicitly discrminates against Jews and Jewish users.

In other words, the JNF is "racist" in Mazuz' view when it uses its land for the benefit of Jews, but not the WAKF. There are other state-owned lands in Israel owned by the Israel Lands Authority, but that has long followed a policy of alloting these for general public uses (Jewish and Arab). It should be noted that much of the land in Israel is nationalized, something I as an economist oppose, but out of the privately-owned land Arabs own a far greater proportion than their percent in the population! For 1300 years Jews were discrimated against by Arabs in the Middle East and prevented from owning land. Hence one might legitmately regard the JNF's previous policy of favoring Jewish users as affirmative action.

Mazuz' latest is a symptom of the "Post-Zionist" syndrome and its increasing control over the Likud itself.

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by 150 PLUS BLOGS, January 27, 2005.

"This article is posted as part of the January 27, 2005 BlogBurst to remember the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, sixty years ago, on January 27, 1945.


On January 20th, we marked the anniversary of the 1942 Wannsee Conference. In the course of that Conference, the Nazi hierarchy formalized the plan to annihilate the Jewish people. Understanding the horrors of Auschwitz requires that one be aware of the premeditated mass-murder that was presented at Wannsee.

Highlighting these events now has become particularly important, even as the press reports that '45% of Britons have never heard of Auschwitz' (Jerusalem Post, December 2, 2004, www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid= 1101960938940).

The meeting at Wannsee established the mechanism for "the final solution" -- shipment of Jews to eastern labor and death camps -- as the official policy of the Third Reich. Ever efficient and unashamed, the Nazi kept a record of the meeting, which were discovered in 1947 in the files of the German Foreign Office.

The conference addressed every aspect of Nazi genocide in chillingly ordinary logic and language, e.g., " Europe will be combed through from West to East," "forcing the Jews out of the various spheres of life of the German people." Ever efficient, the participants foresaw that, "[i]n the course of the final solution and under appropriate direction, the Jews are to be utilized for work in the East in a suitable manner. In large labor columns and separated by sexes, Jews capable of working will be dispatched to these regions to build roads, and in the process a large number of them will undoubtedly drop out by way of natural attrition."

The minutes reflect an intention to dispose of "roughly eleven million Jews." This figure was derived after a horrifyingly detailed discussion of those with only partial Jewish ancestry, sparing some only a quarter Jewish, and magnanimously exempting others from evacuation only if "sterilized in order to prevent any progeny . . . Sterilization will be voluntary, but it is the precondition for remaining in the Reich."

Many conference participants survived the war to be convicted at Nuremberg. The conference, and the bureaucratic sounding murderous minutes, provide a prototypical example of Hannah Arendt's Banality of Evil.


The Holocaust, symbolized by Auschwitz, the worst of the death camps, occurred in the wake of consistent, systematic, unrelenting anti-Jewish propaganda campaign. As a result, the elimination of the Jews from German society was accepted as axiomatic, leaving open only two questions: when and how.

As Germany expanded its domination and occupation of Austria, Czechoslovakia, France, the Low Countries, Yugoslavia, Poland, parts of the USSR, Greece, Romania, Hungary, Italy and others countries, the way was open for Hitler to realize his well-publicized plan of destroying the Jewish people.

"Work Makes You Free" Sign

After experimentation, the use of Zyklon B on unsuspecting victim was adopted by the Nazis as the means of choice, and Auschwitz was selected as the main factory of death (more accurately, one should refer to the "Auschwitz-Birkenau complex"). The green light for mass annihilation was given at the Wannsee Conference, January 20, 1942, and the mass gassings took place in Auschwitz between 1942 and the end of 1944, when the Nazis retreated before the advancing Red Army. Jews were transported to Auschwitz from all over Nazi-occupied or Nazi-dominated Europe and most were slaughtered in Auschwitz upon arrival, sometimes as many as 12,000 in one day. Some victims were selected for slave labour or "medical" experimentation. All were subject to brutal treatment.

In all, between three and four million people, mostly Jews, but also Poles and Red Army POWs, were slaughtered in Auschwitz alone (though some authors put the number at 1.3 million). Other death camps were located at Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec (Belzek), Majdanek and Treblinka.

Nazi Experiments on Children

Auschwitz was liberated by the Red Army on 27 January 1945, sixty years ago, after most of the prisoners were forced into a Death March westwards. The Red Army found in Auschwitz about 7,600 survivors, but not all could be saved.

For a long time, the Allies were well aware of the mass murder, but deliberately refused to bomb the camp or the railways leading to it. Ironically, during the Polish uprising, the Allies had no hesitation in flying aid to Warsaw, sometimes flying right over Auschwitz.

There are troubling parallels between the systematic vilification of Jews before the Holocaust and the current vilification of the Jewish people and Israel. Suffice it to note the annual flood of anti-Israel resolutions at the UN; or the public opinion polls taken in Europe, which single out Israel as a danger to world peace; or the divestment campaigns being waged in the US against Israel; or the attempts to delegitimize Israel's very existence. The complicity of the Allies in WW II is mirrored by the support the PLO has been receiving from Europe, China and Russia to this very day.

If remembering Auschwitz should teach us anything, it is that we must all support Israel and the Jewish people against the vilification and the complicity we are witnessing, knowing where it inevitably leads.

Think-Israel would like to thank Joseph Alexander Norland, a modest man who saw we should memorialize the victims of the Holocaust and persuaded over 150 blogs to participate in this BlogBurst. Please go to his website, IsraPundit for a list of participants.

To Go To Top
Posted by Tamar Rush, January 26, 2005.
This was written by Anthony Browne, who is Europe correspondent for the Times. It is archived at http://www.spectator.co.uk/article_pfv.php?id=4835

A year ago I had lunch with an eminent figure who asked if I thought she was mad. "No,: I said politely, while thinking, "Yup." She had said she thought there was a secret plot by Muslims to take over the West. I have never been into conspiracy theories, and this one was definitely of the little-green-men variety. It is the sort of thing BNP thugs claim to justify their racial hatred.

Obviously, we all know about Osama bin Laden's ambitions. And we are all aware of the loons of al-Muhajiroun waving placards saying "Islam is the future of Britain". But these are all on the extremist fringe, representative of no one but themselves. Surely no one in Islam takes this sort of thing seriously? I started surfing the Islamic media.

Take Dr Al-Qaradawi, the controversial Egyptian imam who was recently fawned over by the Mayor of London even though he promotes the execution of homosexuals, the right of men to indulge in domestic violence, and the murder of innocent Jews. During the brouhaha it went unnoticed that he also wants to conquer Europe. Don't take my word for it, just listen to him on his popular al-Jazeera TV show, Sharia and Life.

"Islam will return to Europe. The conquest need not necessarily be by the sword. Perhaps we will conquer these lands without armies. We want an army of preachers and teachers who will present Islam in all languages and in all dialects," he broadcast in 1999, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, which translates his programmes. On another programme he declared, "Europe will see that it suffers from a materialist culture, and it will seek a way out, it will seek a lifeboat. It will seek no life-saver but the message of Islam."

Far from being on the fringe, his immensely popular programmes are watched by millions across the Middle East and Europe. The BBC cooed that he has "star" status among the world's Muslims.

Dr Al-Qaradawi, who is based in Qatar, is also the spiritual guide of the hardline Muslim Brotherhood, which is growing across Europe, and whose leader Muhammad Mahdi Othman 'Akef declared recently, "I have complete faith that Islam will invade Europe and America, because Islam has logic and a mission."

In the most sacred mosque in Islam, Sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudais of the Grand Mosque in Mecca uses his sermons to call for Jews to be "annihilated" and to urge the overthrow of Western civilisation. "The most noble civilisation ever known to mankind is our Islamic civilisation. Today, Western civilisation is nothing more than the product of its encounter with our Islamic civilisation in Andalusia [mediaeval Spain]. The reason for [Western civilisation's] bankruptcy is its reliance on the materialistic approach, and its detachment from religion and values. [This approach] has been one reason for the misery of the human race, for the proliferation of suicide, mental problems and for moral perversion. Only one nation is capable of resuscitating global civilisation, and that is the nation [of Islam]."

Al-Sudais is the highest imam appointed by our Saudi government ally, and his sermons are widely listened to across the Middle East. When he came to the UK in June to open the London Islamic Centre, thousands of British Muslims flocked to see him, our so-called race relations minister Fiona Mactaggart shared the platform, and Prince Charles sent a video message. He is probably the closest thing in Islam to the Pope, but I haven't recently heard the Pope call for the overthrow of all other faiths.

Saudi Arabia, whose flag shows a sword, seems unabashed about its desire for Islam to take over the world. Its embassy in Washington recommends the home page of its Islamic affairs department, where it declares, "The Muslims are required to raise the banner of jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world." Saudi Arabia has used billions of its petrodollars to export its particularly harsh form of Islam, Wahabism, paying for mosques and Islamic schools across the West. About 80 per cent of the US's mosques are thought to be under Wahabi control.

Saudi Arabia's education ministry encourages schoolchildren to despise Christianity and Judaism. A new schoolbook in the kingdom's curriculum tells six-year-olds: "All religions other than Islam are false." A note for teachers says they should "ensure to explain" this point. In Egypt, the schoolbook Studies in Theology: Traditions and Morals explains that a particularly "noble" bit of the Koran is "encouraging the faithful to perform jihad in God's cause, to behead the infidels, take them prisoner, break their power - all that in a style which contains the highest examples of urging to fight".

A popular topic for discussion on Arabic TV channels is the best strategy for conquering the West. It seems to be agreed that since the West has overwhelming economic, military and scientific power, it could take some time, and a full frontal assault could prove counterproductive. Muslim immigration and conversion are seen as the best path.

Saudi Professor Nasser bin Suleiman al-Omar declared on al-Majd TV last month, "Islam is advancing according to a steady plan, to the point that tens of thousands of Muslims have joined the American army and Islam is the second largest religion in America. America will be destroyed. But we must be patient."

Islam is now the second religion not just in the US but in Europe and Australia. Europe has 15 million Muslims, accounting for one in ten of the population in France, where the government now estimates 50,000 Christians are converting to Islam every year. In Brussels, Mohammed has been the most popular name for boy babies for the last four years. In Britain, attendance at mosques is now higher than it is in the Church of England.

Al-Qa'eda is criticised for being impatient, and waking the West up. Saudi preacher Sheikh Said al-Qahtani said on the Iqraa TV satellite channel, "We did not occupy the US, with eight million Muslims, using bombings. Had we been patient and let time take its course, instead of the eight million there could have been 80 million [Muslims], and 50 years later perhaps the US would have become Muslim."

It is difficult to brush this off as an aberration of Islam, which is normally just tickety-boo letting the rest of the world indulge in its false beliefs. Dr Zaki Badawi, the moderate former director of the Islamic Cultural Centre in London, admitted, "Islam endeavours to expand in Britain. Islam is a universal religion. It aims to bring its message to all corners of the earth. It hopes that one day the whole of humanity will be one Muslim community."

In Muslim tradition, the world is divided into Dar al-Islam, where Muslims rule, and Dar al-Harb, the "field of war" where the infidels live. "The presumption is that the duty of jihad will continue, interrupted only by truces, until all the world either adopts the Muslim faith or submits to Muslim rule," wrote Professor Bernard Lewis in his bestseller The Crisis of Islam.

The first jihad was in ad 630, when Mohammed led his army to conquer Mecca. He made a prediction that Islam would conquer the two most powerful Christian centres at the time, Constantinople and Rome. Within 100 years of his death, Muslim armies had conquered the previously Christian provinces of Syria, Palestine, Egypt and the rest of North Africa, as well as Spain, Portugal and southern Italy, until they were stopped at Poitiers in central France in ad 732. Muslim armies overthrew the ancient Zoroastrian empire of Persia, and conquered much of central Asia and Hindu India.

Ibn Warraq, a Pakistani who lost his Islamic faith, wrote in his book Why I am not a Muslim, "Although Europeans are constantly castigated for having imposed their insidious decadent values, culture and language on the Third World, no one cares to point out that Islam colonised lands that were the homes of advanced and ancient civilisations."

It took 700 years for the Spanish to get their country back in the prolonged Reconquista. In the meantime the Turks, a central Asian people, had been converted to Islam and had conquered the ancient Christian land of Anatolia (now called Turkey). In 1453 they captured Constantinople - fulfilling Mohammed's first prediction - which was the centre of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The glorious Hagia Sophia, which had been one of the most important churches in Christendom for nearly 1,000 years after it was built in ad 537, was turned into a mosque, and minarets were added. The Turks went on to occupy Greece and much of the Balkans for four centuries, turning the Parthenon into a mosque and besieging Vienna, before retreating as their power waned.

In the Middle East, there are regular calls for Mohammed's second prediction to come true. Sheikh Muhammad bin Abd al-Rahman al-'Arifi, imam of the mosque of the Saudi government's King Fahd Defence Academy, wrote recently, "We will control the land of the Vatican; we will control Rome and introduce Islam in it."

Not all conversion has been by the sword. Muslim traders peaceably converted Indonesia, now the most populous Islamic nation. But nor have the conquests stopped. Islam has continued spreading in sub-Saharan Africa, most notably in Nigeria and Sudan. Abyssinia - Ethiopia - is an ancient Christian land where Muslims have come to outnumber Christians only in the last 100 years. Just 50 years ago, Lebanon was still predominantly Christian; it is now predominantly Muslim.

Of course, Christianity has been just as much a conquering religion. Spanish armies ruthlessly destroyed ancient civilisations in Central and South America to spread the message of love. Christians colonised the Americas and Australia, committing genocide as they went, while missionaries such as Livingstone converted most of Africa.

But the difference is that Christendom has - by and large - stopped conquering and converting, and indeed in Europe simply stopped believing. Even President Bush's most trenchant critics don't believe he conquered Afghanistan and Iraq to spread the word of Jesus. It is ironic that by deposing Saddam, who ran the most secular of Arab regimes, the US actually transferred power to the imams.

I believe in a free market in religions, and it is inevitable that if you believe your religion is true, then you believe others are false. But this market is seriously rigged. In Saudi Arabia the government bans all churches, while in Europe governments pay to build Islamic cultural centres. While in many Islamic countries preaching Christianity is banned, in Western Christian countries the right to preach Islam is enshrined in law. Christians are free to convert to Islam, while Muslims who convert to Christianity can expect either death threats or a death sentence. The Pope keeps apologising for the Crusades (even though they were just attempts to get back former Christian lands) while his opposite numbers call for the overthrow of Christendom.

In Christian countries, those who warn about Islamification, such as the film star Brigitte Bardot, are prosecuted, while in Muslim countries those who call for the Islamification of the world are turned into TV celebrities. In the West, schools teach comparative religion, while in Muslim countries schools teach that Islam is the only true faith. David Blunkett in effect wants to ban criticism of Islam, a protection not enjoyed by Christianity in Muslim countries. Millions of Muslims move to Christian countries, but virtually no Christians move to Muslim ones.

In the last century some Christians justified the persecution and mass murder of Jews by claiming that Jews wanted to take over the world. But these fascist fantasies were based on deliberate lies, such as the notorious fake book The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Now, many in the Muslim world are open about their desire for Islam to conquer the West.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H, Shulman, January 26, 2005.


Black racists used to face down white liberals by calling them "racist." Now people who carry appeasement of the Arabs to an extreme, in terms of sacrifice by Israel for nothing, face down opponents by calling them "extremist."

They employ a vocabulary of euphemisms, such as "moderate" for themselves or even for a terrorist who realizes that diplomacy-under-truce can boost their fortunes in resumed warfare. This war via diplomacy they call "peace process." If one objects to this process as under-estimating the Muslims' fanatical devotion to jihad, one is told, "give peace a chance." One gave it a chance. It failed. Nevertheless, the appeasement-minded continue pursuing it, because they are rigid in their ideology, in other words, truly extremist.

They don't explain their case; they use adjectives either to laud it or lash you. Their presentation is entirely emotional, but they accuse opponents of being irrational. By contrast, they praise the current P.A. terrorist leader as being "pragmatic." Pragmatism is an ethically neutral term. It refers to efficacy. An evil pragmatist is all the more effective in his designs on the innocent. Thus Abu Mazen, reputedly a pragmatist, would be more dangerous than was Arafat, because he wields more strategies for imperialism.

It is a natural abuse by the ruling classes to employ vocabulary to cow opponents. Unfortunately, the ruled classes allow themselves to be manipulated this way. They do not realize it, though the appeasement-minded journalists and politicians all catch on to its usage. I think that the practice is spreading to other issues. The ruling classes tout democracy but avoid democratic debate. Note that on most American (and at least some Canadian) campuses, the ruling class is leftist, as it is in the government, media, arts, and non-science academia of Israel.


I had five guests, all Democrats whose hatred for Pres. Bush remains high on the Richter scale. They are cocooned in their little world, in which Sen. Kerry was the more capable candidate, whom the media credited with having won the debates. If only he had a cleverer little tactic, they think, he would have won. They do not realize that the Democrats are on a losing streak, that their platform has fallen behind the times, they no longer are ahead of the voters or with the voters, and that the media they cite is biased in the Democrats' favor. They have not heard of most of the good-natured suggestions for improvement offered by conservative columnists.

They thought that the swiftboat veterans took umbrage at Sen. Kerry only over his criticism of the war, but it also was over his slander of their patriotism while he was malingering and treasonous. When pinned down, the Dems had to admit that for raising that irrelevant issue, he blundered.

Not only don't they comprehend the basic futility of their Party, they don't comprehend the Achilles heel of the Republican Party. They suppose that partial privatization of Social Security would subject the pensions to greater risk. I am sure it would. What they need to do is to connect what Pres. Bush proposes with what he does. He proposes privatization as freeing funds for more lucrative investment, but risks that recession would deplete it and forfeit the insurance aspect of Social Security. The system would require a huge infusion of funds to compensate for the privatized funds no longer going to finance current retirees.

The Democrats fail to make a major case of Bush flip-flopping in proposing that no child be left behind, not funding the program, and then claiming credit as a beneficiary of education. As I've said before, they fail to criticize as a moral issue Bush's self-contradictory pollution plans he calls "Clear Skies" and "Clean Water," and his logging give-away and increased fire risk as "Healthy Forests."


It is the size of a shoebox and costs $200. Some companies are installing them so as to stop elevators and give people time to get out of harm's way. Other companies want to extend the technology to warn against future tsunamis (Arutz-7, 1/5).


After closing its stores in Israel, which lost money by not selling food with the coffee, Starbucks has set up shop in Jordan. Jordanian Islamist professional organizations, as usual flouting government policy in opposing normalization with Israel, proposed boycotting the Jordanian stores because the company chairman had stated his objection to antisemitism. "In 2002, at a synagogue in Seattle, Schultz called for action against antisemitism, but later issued a statement saying he regretted that his statement 'was misinterpreted as being anti-Palestinian'. IMRA remarked, "How revealing that a statement against antisemitism is categorized as anti-Palestinian." IMRA noted that the Jordanian government asks the professional organizations to stop breaching official policy, but it does not seek legislative penalties for their doing so.

Corporate management declared that Mr. Schultz's views are personal and not those of the company and its practices (IMRA, 12/5). The context of his remark was not given.

Does the company mean that in its practices, it does not share his opposition to antisemitism?

Isn't it tiresome and dismaying how many decent or innocent statements are disavowed or even apologized for? Most of those are over political correctness, but this one was over commercial opportunity.


If Israel cannot make peace with Abu Mazen, it cannot make peace with any other leader of the P.A., declares "Haaretz." The alternative to Abu Mazen is Mustapha Barghouti, Abu Mazen's rival candidate, who was endorsed by PFLP, a terrorist organization (IMRA, 1/5).

This is the old leftist ploy of suggesting that Israel must come to terms with one terrorist, because, it maintains, his likeliest successor is more extreme. No thank you. Let "Haaretz" keep its sense of panic to itself. The latest terrorist with whom Israel is urged to come to terms is extreme, too. He, too, wants to dominate Israel. Therefore, his demands would be unacceptable.

The object is to make peace while retaining national security and, in my Zionist opinion, the integrity of the Land of Israel. If Israel doesn't retain its national security, there wouldn't be peace. To enjoy national security, it must retain the Territories. In that case, it does not pay to come to the anticipated, concession-giving agreement with Abu Mazen. Besides, since the Arabs haven't kept their previous agreements and don't feel obliged to, it would be unwise to offer more concessions for the same agreements that they previously made and broke. IMRA reports that Abu Mazen would continue violating them, as by his pledge not to uproot Hamas (12/5).


Hamas was thought interested in competing in the election, for the first time. That could be the beginning of a moderation in its violence. IMRA noted there is no sign of this. (The "Times" just wants to make the terrorists seem potentially decent.") Hamas had battened on its opposition to the "corruption that's marked Arafat's last years." IMRA noted that all his years were corrupt. (IMRA, 12/5 from NY Times). The "Times" does not depict the terrorists as indecent as they are.


The IDF Chief of Staff praised as a P.A. proposal for its troops to intervene against the firing of rockets at Israelis, as "understanding that terrorism does not pay." (Lara Sukhtian, NY Sun, 1/21, p.7 from Associated Press.)

Does the P.A. intend to prevent that terrorism? We don't know - the P.A. rarely keeps its word. Suppose it does stop the rockets. What would that mean? Only that the P.A. finds that that kind of terrorism does not pay now. Other types it still supports. If the only P.A. objection to certain forms of terrorism is their current impracticality, then it thinks they may become practical later. Hence it does not disarm the terrorists. That attitude is not praiseworthy. It is cunning.


Israel long had maintained that the Territories were not occupied, because they were not part of a sovereign country whose territory could be occupied. Therefore, the Geneva Convention on occupation did not apply. (Also, the Geneva Convention provisions were meant to protect civilians from a hostile presence. Israel is not hostile and does not commit the abuses to be protected from. The hostile presence is the Arabs, from whom Israel needs protection. Under the Mandate, Israel has a right and duty to live and settle its people in Yesha.)

The rest of the world (unscrupulous and antagonistic towards Israel) pretends that the Territories are "occupied" and that Israel injures Arab rights there. The leftist Attorney General and Justice Ministries now share that view, as long has the Foreign Ministry. They mistakenly think that all the Arabs want, for peace, is the Territories. Those Ministries have been imposing their view about "occupation" on Israel. Thus, the Attorney General delayed Israeli construction of a railroad line between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, because part of it passed through the Territories. Finally he assented, with the rationale that it could benefit the Arabs, especially if part of the spur was in an area eventually turned over to the Arabs. Occupiers are allowed to build what may benefit residents.

The Attorney General and the Justice Ministry are urging PM Sharon to apply the anti-Israel interpretation of international law, and therefore the Geneva Convention, to the Territories, recognizing them as occupied. This would greatly restrict Israel's rights in the Territories, such as to erect a security fence (IMRA, 12/5) and Israel's claim to the territories.


Egypt signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. The Treaty commits it not to develop materials useful in nuclear weaponry, without at least informing the UNO's Intl. Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). IAEA has found evidence of Egyptian attempts over the decades to develop certain uranium compounds for military use. The last attempt for which there is evidence was only one year ago. The efforts appear to have been small-scale.

Egypt criticizes the IAEA for not getting Israel to eliminate its nuclear capability (IMRA, 1/5). Israel, however, did not sign the Treaty and is under no obligation to disarm in any way. As the victim of aggression by forces that repeatedly have been built up greater than its own, it would be foolish to do so.

It still is not fully known, or at least not fully revealed, how much Pakistan informed Arab states of the techniques for manufacturing nuclear weapons. It is known that S. Arabia financed much of Pakistan's program. How may Arab scientists were trained in the US?

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 26, 2005.

1. Oh how embarrassing. The anti-Israel crowd, the Jew baiters, and the tenured traitors were having a field day this morning. A 3 year old Palestinian girl had been killed this morning in the Gaza Strip and it looked like she was killed when Israeli troops returned fire at Palestinian terrorists firing at THEM. Now that, you might say, would mean the Palestinians are responsible for the girl's death, since they opened fire, and they must be held accountable for any collateral damage from Israel returning fire.

AH, but we know the real world does not work that way and the Jews are always to blame when they shoot back.

So here we were witnessing the anti-Semites of the world having a celebration without precedent of Israel being blamed for the 3 year old girl's death - when the truth comes out. It was even more embarrassing than when the truth came out that the PLO had killed the little boy Mohammed al-Dura and not Israeli troops!

It was revealed this afternoon that the girl was NOT killed by Israeli return fire. She was killed by a Kassam rocket. The Kassam rockets are PLO weapons fired into Jewish civilian areas, and the PLO has been continuing to fire tham at the Jews even during the current make-pretend ceasefire. Except that the one fired this morning had a structural default, and landed short, inside the Palestinian area of the Gaza Strip. It blew the girl to smithereens.

2. Regarding that film by an Israeli "producer" glorifyiong suicide bombers, which we discussed in yesterday's post, the evil Israeli in the film is played by a ... Palestinian actor. How Come? The Israeli producer Harel uses a "Palestinian" actor when he wants to portray an "edgy...Israeli" who looks like a thug. Is that racist typecasting - or what? Also, notice that this film was shown "in association with the Consulate General of Israel (SF)?" Is this sick, or what? An official sponsorship of this movie by the diplomatic services of Israel?

"Palestinian actor Salim Daw is striking as the edgy, underground Israeli businessman. The Holy Land they inhabit is less the dream of milk and honey than a reality of abuse and misfortune.

3. For the past few days, the Loony Left here has been whining about the arrest of a Danish citizen suspected of espionage. No doubt one of those "peace solidarity" people, Rachel Corrie wannabes. Well, now the details have come out: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1106710064981

It's called "Dane under arrest is Hizbullah spy," and it was written by Yaakov Katz and Margot Dudkevitch. It appeared today in the Jerusalem Post.

The Danish citizen of Lebanese origin currently the focus of a joint Police-Shin Bet investigation was identified Wednesday as a Hizbullah recruited agent by the name of Iyad al Ashwah, 39, after a gag order on the investigation was lifted.

Al Ashwah, originally born in Lebanon moved to Denmark in 1986 and received Danish citizenship six years later.

Al Ashwah was arrested on January 6 while he was on a train from Nahariya to Haifa after he raised a security officer's suspicions by videotaping the passing scenery through the train window.

He was arrested by police and confessed that in July 2004 he had been recruited into Hizbullah by relatives living in Lebanon. In his interrogation, al Ashwah told police that he was ordered to travel to Israel disguised as a tourist to collect security information and most importantly to recruit Israeli-Arabs into the terror organization.

Two Israeli-Arabs have also been arrested.

In exchange for his work, al Ashwah was paid $2,000 by his Hizbullah operators.

On December 29, al Ashwah arrived in Israel on a Turkish Airlines flight. He entered Israel with a brand new passport which had been issued right before his trip. During the six days leading up to his arrest, al Ashwah succeeded in recruiting two Israel-Arab suspects. He told police that he planned on renting a car and driving up north to locate security installations. He said he understood his mission to be a "test" which would be followed by a larger "more significant" mission.

The suspect further told police that he maintained close contacts with relatives living in the Middle East and would visit Syria and Lebanon on an annual basis. Over the past two years, al Ashwah was unemployed and lived off of a government stipend. He said that in Denmark he gave most of his money to the Al Bureij Islamic charity association that maintains close ties with the refugee camp of the same name in Lebanon.

"This suspect is just another example of the Hizbullah's growing interest in acting against Israel," the police said. "This time, the Hizbullah used an Arab with a Western passport to fool the Israeli security service."

Foreigners recruited by Hizbullah

This is not the first foreign national to be arrested by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) on suspicion of violating state security.

In October 2002, Fawzi Ayoub, 38, a senior Hizbullah official who entered Israel on a forged US passport to carry out attacks in Israel and assist terrorist organizations in the territories was arrested by the Shin Bet. Ayoub, of Lebanese Shi'ite descent, participated in numerous attacks in and outside Lebanon and operated in a special unit headed by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah's deputy on military affairs, Amed Muaneh.

After undergoing training, Ayoub was sent to Canada, where he lived for a number of years. He maintained contact with officials in Lebanon and carried out a number of missions on their behalf. On returning to Lebanon, Hizbullah recruited him to carry out a dangerous covert operation in Israel. He underwent intensive military preparation and was then dispatched to Europe where he received a forged US passport which he used to enter Israel.

In January 2001 security officials arrested Hizbullah agent Jihad Shuman who bore a British passport with the name Gerard Shuman, who had entered the country in December 2000. Shuman, who studied computers at the Beirut University, is a Lebanese Shi'ite by descent and was ordered by his operators to travel to London and leave his Lebanese passport in the country, where he was instructed to purchase a cellular phone and fictitiously rent a mailbox and apartment, which he was to give out as his address once he arrived in Israel. He was told to locate a spot in Wadi Joz where certain items had been hidden for him, and was arrested six days after arriving in Israel. When arrested by security forces in his hotel room, Shuman had in his possession a kippah, timers, large sums of money, and three cellular phones.

In November 1997, German citizen Stefan Josef Smyrek was arrested by the Shin Bet on his arrival at Ben Gurion airport. Smyrek, a convert to Islam, was recruited by the Hizbullah and sent to Israel to perpetrate a suicide bomb attack.

Tried and convicted in Israel, he was in the middle of serving a ten-year jail sentence when he was released last year in a swap for the return of the bodies of the three soldiers abducted and killed in Har Dov in 2000 and the release of Israeli businessmen Elhanan Tenenbaum.

In 1996, Hassin Makdad, who entered Israel on a British passport in April of the same year, was wounded when a bomb he was preparing exploded prematurely in his room at the Lawrence Hotel in east Jerusalem.

To Go To Top
Posted by Anita Tucker, January 26, 2005.

Similar discrepencies can be found in the JTA reporting over the last few weeks. I found it especially disturbing when the weapons used against Israel by PLO and associate terrorists land in the area where I live and then I read the JTA report leaving me with a feeling as if I was imagining things. I'm sure I wasn't!

This is the story in question and David Bedein's comments on it:

Anita Tucker
Gush Katif

The enclosed JTA story claims that there was one attempted Arab terrorist attack this past weekend in the south, when, in fact, there were 16 Arab terrorist attacks, all of which were duly recorded by civil defense officials in the south. That included eight kassam missiles and two anti aircraft missiles fired at civilians, and six machine gun attacks.

Such a discrepancy needs to be brought to the attention of the appropriate people.

While the current Israeli government may have its reasons to downplay the statistics on Arab terror attacks, it is the role of the media to report reality, not the wishful thinking of a government.

David Bedein
Bureau Chief
Israel Resource News Agency

Here is the story in question. Called "No news is good news: Unusual quiet reigns at border," it was written by Dan Baron. It appeared yesterday in http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead= Unusual+quiet+at+border+is+good+sign&intcategoryid= 1&SearchOptimize=Jewish+News

Normally, a botched Palestinian attack on Israeli troops would raise no eyebrows, and would be just another dry statistic recorded in more than four years of fighting.

But the mine that was detonated alongside an Israeli tank in the southern Gaza Strip on Sunday, causing no casualties, was noteworthy in that it happened at all. Otherwise, relative quiet reigned, a testimony to truce talks Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was leading with Palestinian terrorist groups. "The dialogue is making very good progress," Abbas told Palestine Television. "I can say we are bound to reach an agreement very soon."

Just over the border with Israel, there was another show of confidence. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon convened his Cabinet in Sderot in an act of solidarity with residents reeling from months of Palestinian rocket strikes.

"There is calm now," Sharon told fellow ministers, alluding to Abbas' efforts. "We don't know if this is a genuine change yet. We hope so. But one thing is clear - if terrorism resumes, we will act militarily."

On Tuesday, American officials said they were encouraged by Palestinian efforts to restore calm and by Israel's response, creating an opportunity for progress toward peace.

"This is the most promising moment for progress between Palestinians and Israelis that any of us have seen in several years," William Burns, U.S. assistant secretary of state, said Tuesday in Cairo on the first stop of a regional visit.

According to reports, Abbas was close to reaching an informal cease-fire agreement with terrorist groups that would remain in force for a month - the period independent analysts believe the newly elected Abbas needs to reform his security forces.

Hamas said a truce would be conditional on Israel suspending all military operations and on other unrealistic demands, such as the release of all Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

In a major step, Abbas deployed thousands of P.A. police around northern Gaza's border with Israel last week, providing a human buffer to ward off rocket launches.

More police were to be deployed this week in central and southern Gaza - though not on the perilous Philadelphia Route along the border with Egypt, under which Palestinians dig arms-smuggling tunnels. For a lasting truce, Abbas aides say, Israel will have to reciprocate by scaling back its military operations and releasing Palestinian security prisoners.

That may prove agreeable to Israel, which already has agreed to coordinate security with the Palestinian Authority before its planned withdrawal from Gaza later this year.

"Until Abbas proves himself serious about diplomacy, a strategy of coexistence, we are thinking in terms of tactics," a Sharon confidant said. "There is nothing wrong tactically with helping his truce along."

But the calm is fragile. Senior Israeli security sources said Jerusalem would ask for U.S. help in Abbas' efforts - not to apply more pressure on the Palestinian leader, but to look out for any intervention by Syria or Iran.

"The Syrians and Iranians do not want quiet," a source said. "We believe they are doing their utmost to orchestrate an attack by their Palestinian proxies."

Most attention is being paid to the northern West Bank, where the Al-Aksa Brigade takes orders and money from the Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

Anita Tucker lives in Kush Katif, Gaza. Contact her at atucker@isdn.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 25, 2005.


Democracy, explained an Israeli radio commentator, is the decision-making process by the Knesset. PM Sharon's breaking of his campaign promises and post-campaign promises about his withdrawal plan has nothing to do with democracy (IMRA, 1/4/05).

Yes it does. It affronts ands subverts democracy. The campaign is what voters base decisions on for electing the Knesset. If the campaign is largely false, the Knesset is based on false premises, and does not represent the will of the people. Knesset votes of no-confidence in the government and of funds, and parties' decisions to stay in the Cabinet depend on what the policy of the government is. When Sharon misleads and deliberately lies about that policy, he is subverting democracy.

He resorts to one undemocratic trick after another. The worst one was usurping the power to fire Cabinet members until getting the rest to vote his way. Such transparent prestidigitation! It destroys the collegiality in which parties form a coalition government. Sharon was not elected Prime Minister but the head of one, minority party that needs other parties to form a Cabinet.


"Most Palestinians (i.e., certain Arabs) are sick of violence." "Optimists are convinced that the election of Mahmoud Abbas will solidify this trend and result in a long-awaited peace deal."

On the other hand, Abbas embraced terrorists, advocates flooding Israel with Arabs, and is not "repressing" terrorist militias. His electoral victory by 40 percentage points hardly is democratic.

Until the P.A. straightens out, the West should switch donations from the P.A. to independent P.A. human rights groups and other NGOs (Max Boot, senior fellow in Council on Foreign Relations, NY Sun, 1/17, p.9).

Some of those statements were realistic, some unrealistic, and the rest reflect the Council's drive to take the Territories (and the Old City) away from Israel. Realistic is that Abbas was elected undemocratically, is keeping his fellow terrorists in power, and should not receive foreign aid.

The term, "repress militants" is too vague. It would cover his current efforts for a ceasefire long enough to get concessions from Israel under the pretense that he has ended terrorism. The P.A. had signed agreements to disarm and dissolve terrorist militias, if not arrest them.

To claim his Arabs oppose violence, when they favor murder, armed struggle, and the goal of conquest, is misleading. Violence is part of their culture. Far from eschewing violence, they merely seek ways of warfare that bring the least retribution from Israel.

A "peace deal" is to be dreaded, not "long-awaited." The reason is that the Arabs make deals not for peace but to position themselves better for the next war. A deal is likely to undermine Israel by giving the Arabs what they do not deserve, what is rightfully Israel's, and which Israel need for secure borders and water.

It is misleading to suggest donating to P.A. NGOs, as if they were independent of the P.A. or humanitarian. They use the language of human rights to advance the jihadist agenda.

Rather than give foreign aid to any group in the P.A., foreign countries should let Israel smash the terrorist militias, including the P.A. police forces, reclaim vacant areas in the Territories, and itself stop being a source of income for Arab jihadists. As the Arab warriors depart, peace would filter in.


Israeli Defense Min. Mofaz has returned to the former criteria of willingness to turn territory over to the P.A. if the P.A. makes a 100% effort against terrorism. IMRA rebukes that non-standard:

"Why 'effort' rather than 'results'? The problem with a 'results' requirement is that if DM Mofaz and PM Sharon want to hand over control of an area to the Palestinians (Arabs) even though the Palestinians haven't delivered on fighting terror, their critics at home can use performance data against them (for example, how many thousands of assault rifles were confiscated). On the other hand, "effort" is nice and amorphous - much harder to argue conclusively against a claim that 'enough effort' is being made. So instead of requiring a "results" standard, Mofaz talks about 'effort' with Israel only acting after it pulls out if there are 'no results' at all."

"And what of the Philadephi Corridor that ISS head Avi Dichter insisted Israel should hold, just yesterday"?

He said, "If Egypt and the Palestinians are willing and able to take responsibility for stopping the smuggling of weapons and explosives into Gaza from Egypt, then Israeli troops can pull out of Gaza altogether."

"How is this tested? Does this mean Israel retreats when PM Sharon and DM Mofaz estimate that 'Egypt and the Palestinians are willing and able to take responsibility' or only after Egypt and the Palestinians actually finally take action to effectively stop the smuggling? After all, the Egyptians are already on the Egyptian side of the border and the Palestinians are in the area beyond the Philadelphi Corridor where the tunnels surface." (IMRA, 1/5.)

The US has been certifying P.A. non-compliance with Oslo as compliance. Pres. Bush has been waiving penalties on the P.A. on the false grounds of their compliance or of US national interests. Is it in the US national interest to maintain a terrorist entity in the P.A.?


The leader of Yesha Jewry got protestors against the Sharon plan to sit in leaky tents opposite the Knesset, where nobody cares about them. >From experience, Barry Chamish proposes real civil disobedience. He explained the efficacy of the following suggestions: (1) Tie up the phone lines of government offices and radio talk shows; (2) Drive side-by-side at the minimum legal speed on highways; (3) Open safe deposit boxes and place a sizeable fish in each, to rot and drive out the bankers; (4) Don't buy Israeli products, sell all Israeli stocks and shekels for foreign ones, cancel Israeli vacations and buy foreign airline seats via internet rather than travel agencies; (5) Don't charge sales tax or pay income tax; (6) Buy tickets on El Al, and cancel at the last minute; (7) Let foreign visitors know what criminality has taken over the Israeli government, that the Left had PM Rabin assassinated, and that the cities are unsafe.

Those imaginative but drastic measures would enable the protestors to tie up the country and its funds, without clashing with the Army. The government couldn't prosecute everyone in a hundred years! Such means, however, must be done only for something as serious as this cause, the one of national survival against the Sharon plan (Chamish, 1/5, e-mail).


Considerate of Arab Muslims' religious needs, Israel opened an extra checkpoint to let pilgrims to Mecca pass through. A terrorist took advantage of it to open fire on Israeli troops. Fortunately, he swiftly was killed by the troops (IMRA, 1/5). It doesn't pay to be nice to the Muslim Arabs.


"NY Sun" reporters are objective, and its editorials uphold Israel against Arab aggression and terrorism. Unfortunately, its Associated Press (A.P.) news comes with a pro-Arab bias.

In "Israelis, Palestinians Resume Contact" (January 20, 2005), A.P. credits the Labor Party presence as moderating the Israeli Cabinet. It quotes Mr. Abbas' henchman that Israel should stop "aggression." Where is an Israeli retort about acting in self-defense? Why one-sided?

The Labor Party proposes extensive cessions of strategic and historically Jewish territory, during wartime, to a jihadist enemy sworn to destroy Israel. Sounds like treason, not moderation! A.P. editorializes its news about the Labor Party, to make Labor seem moderate in appeasement of the Arabs. Appeasement no more works with fanatical jihadists than it did with fanatical Nazis and Communists.

In "Abbas Commands Terrorists to Halt Attacks on Israel" (January 18, 2005), A.P. calls Abbas "an outspoken critic of violence" who will not use force against terrorists. No, he criticized attacks on Israel AT This Time, when Israel might make concessions. He admitted that the armed struggle would continue afterwards. Suspending terrorism would not meet his Oslo obligation to disarm and dissolve the illegal militias.

In "Israeli Jets Bomb Hezbollah Positions in Lebanon" (January 18, 2005), A.P. refers to a "disputed area." Hezbollah terrorists claim that Israeli area as Lebanese, but the UN certified that Israel withdrew from all of Lebanon. The terrorist claim is a fig leaf for continued aggression. Hezbollah fights Israel out of bigotry, but gives excuses that A.P. dignifies by taking seriously.

Also on January 18, an A.P. dispatch reports that the UNO banned its workers from Aceh province, where insurgents are fighting for independence. The article did not explain why they want independence. In Aceh, Muslim militias are attacking Christian villages and driving the inhabitants into the bush. Is the failure to explain the reason for the insurgency A.P.'s desire not to reveal anything embarrassing about Islam? It would be a piece of its failure to do so about the Muslims in the Israeli Territories.

As an agency for syndicated news presentation, the A.P., like Reuters and the Jewish Telegraphic Press, is well situated to spread its melange of distortion and omission. The control of such agencies is a serious problem for Western civilization. Some of these agencies, like television networks, have come under anti-democratic or Islamist influence.


"And while we read about Roth's Jews feeling increasingly alien in 1940 and cowering in their apartments, are we not reminded of ordinary Muslim Americans, who have grown fearful in the context of the Patriot Act and the war against a corrupted form of Islam?" (Gerald Sorin, American Jewish Congress Monthly, 12/2004, p.18, reviewing a work of fiction.)

Pres. Bush has made it plain that we are fighting against Islamism and not ordinary Islam. There is no justification for US Muslims to grow fearful. As soon as there was an initial outburst against Muslims, American society rushed to reassure ordinary Muslims that they had nothing to fear. Nor did anything fearsome against them ensue.

Many Muslims here are hostile to the US. They magnify real concerns in order to appear as the victims worthy of sympathy and concessions. They paint themselves as besieged, in order to demand privileges that put us under siege. It is one of their ruses of war. Our problem is one of misplaced sympathy. The Talmud recognized that pernicious problem hundreds of years ago.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by AFSI-Jerusalem-Based Newsletter, January 25, 2005.

New York (Jan.25th) - The first issue of OUT OF ZION, a national monthly internet newsletter emanating from Jerusalem, has been launched to a list of 16,000 individual Christian Zionist and Jewish subscribers and to church organizations across the U.S. with a combined membership in excess of 100,000.

A joint project of Global Israel Alliance (GIA) and New York-based Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI-www.afsi.org), OUT OF ZION is the follow-on to a national referendum posted on the internet in the months leading up to the 2004 U.S. presidential election inviting Christian Zionists and other Bible-oriented Americans to voice their feelings regarding the proposed creation of a PLO state within the borders of the Land of Israel. "The response was overwhelmingly negative," said OUT OF ZION co-editor William Mehlman, "so adamantly opposed to this as a negation of God's word and His covenant with Abraham, that we felt the issue deserved the widest possible national exposure. OUT OF ZION is the result."

Beyond its ideological commitment to the Land of Israel and its capital, Jerusalem, as an indivisible entity, the newsletter examines a wide spectrum of Israeli life and culture. The first issue includes sections on science and medicine in Israel, U.S.-Israel relations, Biblical history, Torah commentary and analysis, demographics, Christian Zionist activities in Israel, digests of selected articles from OUTPOST, AFSI's renowned monthly journal, as well as contributions by leading authorities on defense, economics, media and the American Christian Zionist Community.

An opening letter to subscribers is signed by Mehlman, a member of AFSI's Executive Committee and AFSI/GIA representative in Israel, and co-editor Kim Johnson, director of GIA. It warns of the threat to Western civilization posed by "blind men groping for magical solutions to radical Islam's assault on the West and its Judeo-Christian underpinnings, concluding that the sacrifice of both Israel and a 2,000 year-old redemptive promise will somehow appease the ravenous hunger of the tiger at the gate." While conceding that "moral absolutes are the province of angels," the letter attests that "in any contest between the adherents to God's word and its denigrators, we know where we stand. We feel confident you occupy the same ground..." OUT OF ZION can be accessed by going to the website: www.globalisraelalliance.com


"For out of Zion shall go forth the Torah, and the Word of the L-D from Jerusalem" Isaiah 2:3


A Letter to the Subscribers of Out of Zion

To Our Christian Zionist and Jewish National Zionist Friends:

Most of you, the recipients of this first issue of Out of Zion, Global Israel Alliance's new monthly Jerusalem-based newsletter, were respondents to GIA's 2004 pre-election internet referendum that invited you to voice your feelings about the proposed creation of a PLO state within the borders of Israel.

By an overwhelming majority, you rejected the proposal as a negation of the first Covenant - God's promise to Abraham of the Land of Israel as a legacy in perpetuity to his descendants. That promise is being challenged as never before - even within Israel. Blind men, groping for magical solutions to radical Islam's assault on the West and its Judeo-Christian underpinnings, have concluded that the sacrifice of both Israel and a 2000-year-old redemptive promise will somehow appease the ravenous hunger of the tiger at the gates. In the words of the Psalmist, "They hold crafty converse against Thy people and take counsel against Thy treasured ones. They have said 'Come, let us cut them off from being a nation, that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.'"

Europe has been sucked into a vortex of godlessness, disavowing all vows save that of material gratification at any price. The United Nations, the intended bright safe haven in a world grasping for justice, has mutated into a red-light front for every known form of corruption, vicious anti-semitism, unprecedented human rights violation, and the unabashed thuggery that characterizes half its member states.

The United States (and its President), denigrated and vilified by a world profoundly focused on its headlong retreat from moral clarity, is compelled - even as it sheds the blood of its youth in a struggle to bring light and humanity to the darkest region of the globe - to fight a rearguard action against self-appointed elitists panting to join the retreating mob.

Israel has not escaped the turmoil. We speak to you from a nation torn by the consequences of 56 years of unrelenting war and terrorism. The insatiable hatred of an enemy that believes it has found the keys to paradise in the murder of Jewish children has created mirages here as vivid as any the shimmering sands of Middle East have ever evoked. Half of a wearied Israel appears ready to lay any sacrifice before the altar of "peace," real or imagined. They are ready to abandon Judea, Samaria, Gaza, eastern Jerusalem, the Temple Mount - whatever is demanded - and retreat behind its deceptive "security fence." The other half, including 144 primarily Torah-based communities beyond the so-called Green Line, has declared it will hold fast against any attempt by any Israeli government to deliver its homes and land into the hands of an enemy sworn to the eradication of the Jewish national enterprise.

Moral absolutes are the province of angels and principled compromise would be no sin if compromise were possible. But in any contest between the adherents to God's word and its denigrators, we know where we stand. We feel confident you occupy the same ground, for without the continued support of fhe American Christian Zionist community and its allies, we would indeed be in despair.

We can assure you we are not. Beyond the seemingly impenetrable clouds, life - joyful life - goes on Israel. There are remarkable achievements being made here in science, medicine, high technology, the arts, Biblical archeology and research, and the study of Torah. It is a land of limitless spiritual and intellectual horizons. We hope to convey some semblance of that brimming energy through the aegis of this newsletter.

Out of Zion has been fashioned for you. It is a monologue that yearns to become a dialogue. Write to us at our website. Tell us what moves you and how we can strengthen the bonds between you and this beloved land. Send us the e-mail addresses of those you believe would welcome this new voice from Jerusalem into their homes. For as long as Israel stands in peril, we promise it is a voice that will not be stilled.

We thank you for your sponsorship to this newsletter and support for the land of Israel.

Bill Mehlman
AFSI/GIA Representaive, Jerusalem, Israel

Kim Johnson
Global Israel Alliance

Taming A Runaway State Department

When it comes to Middle East policy, Foggy Bottom all too often operates without, or in defiance of, congressional authorization and with the barest minimum of public awareness.

Here are some prime examples from a list provided by David Bedein, Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem:

  • State has ignored documents, records, minutes and recordings presented to it by Israeli intelligence demonstrating the direct involvement of Abu Mazen, Arafat's heir presumptive, in a five-year long PLO murder campaign that has resulted in the deaths of more than 1000 Israeli citizens.

  • State has demanded that Israel NOT publish the documents it has acquired that link the Palestine National Authority and Fatah in the premeditated campaign of murder in Israel over the last five years.

  • State has refused to demand that the PLO withdraw its sentence of death for any Jew who lives in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Gaza, or the Golan Heights.

  • State, while approving massive arms shipments and weapons upgrades for Egypt, has not used any leverage with Egypt to demand that it put a stop to the mass construction of weapons tunnels into Israel.

  • State, despite its protestations against those who aid and abet the terrorist structure, will issue no public call for Saudi Arabia to cease its funding of Arab terror organizations.

  • State, mandated by the U.S. Congress to monitor education under the Palestinian Authority, hired IPCRI, a leading PLO advocacy organization to do the job. This hire has resulted in a whitewash of the PA school curriculum as a "peace curriculum." Meanwhile, State continues to ignore sharply contrary evidence provided in an analysis of PA textbooks by CMIP, the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace (www. edume.org)

  • State, mandated by the Congress to provide a critical analysis of the status of religious freedom inside the Palestinian Authority, issued a report describing the "transformation" of Joseph's Tomb into a mosque as "an act of religious freedom."

  • State, mandated by the President to seek ways to facilitate a "two-state solution" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, allocated $70 million to UNWRA (the United Nations Relief & Works Agency). UNWRA advocates policies that promote the "right of return" for an alleged four million Arab refugees which enables them to claim land that is the site of Israeli towns, collective farms and woodlands.

  • State, mandated by the Congress to facilitate a system of human rights in the Palestinian Authority, has turned a blind eye to the PA's confinement of hundreds of dissidents on death row for the "crime" of criticizing the Authority. The PA calls them "collaborators" for media consumption.

  • State authorized the resumption of direct assistance to the PA despite its failure to disarm and disband the Arab terror groups operating within its domain. American assistance was supposed to be predicated on such a crackdown.

Memo to Condaleeza Rice: Are you sure you really want that job?

Defenders of the Covenant

Cementing the Christian Zionist Link

In the wake of a sect of the Presbyterian Church's (PCUSA) decision to employ economic sanctions against Israel and with the prospect of the Episcopal and other mainline Protestant churches following suit, Kimberly Troupe, director of the US office of Christian Friends of Israeli Communities (CFOIC), has put out a call for a "whirlwind of support for Israel" on the part of every Christian loyal to the Covenant between God and His people.

"Let's see if we can bring the number of Christian believers who support Israel to a level never before seen," she declares. "The time has come for Christians to act."

Challenging Christians to "stand with Israel and to bring as many people with you as you can," Kimberly has come up with a list of actions Bible-oriented Christians should be pursuing in their effort to "get involved and make a difference" in this critical battle. Here are some of them:

  • Write letters to the editors of the (unusually pro-Palestinian) Christian Science Monitor informing them that Christians do support Israel.

  • Community involvement. Start a local prayer group for Israel and set aside one day a week or month to meet regularly with other Christians to "Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem."

  • Get educated! Talk to Sunday school classes about Israel and provide them with facts they'll need to respond to those who raise false accusations against Israel.

  • Pray, Pray, Pray!!!

  • Write to US and Israeli leaders and remind them of God's promises to Israel as related in Scripture.

  • Find out when speakers from Israel are coming to your area and go listen and support them. CFOIC at 1-800-551-3207 can help.

  • Get your church or prayer group to adopt a community project. Nothing speaks louder than actions. Get involved in making a difference in the lives of Jews living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

  • Visit Israel and don't forget to include Biblical Israel (from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean) in your itinerary.

Zion Voices

"Christian Zionism is at a turning point. Up to now it has hovered below the radar screen. It must now emerge as a full fledged partner in discussions and decisions that are made regarding Israel. Christian Zionism must have its own organizational identity with a constituency that is genuinely pro-Israel. While it may not be granted a seat at the table by its Evangelical and liberal opposition or by government decision-makers, the prophetic voice of the Christian Zionist must be heard by speaking truth to power." -- Dr. James Hutchens, President, Christians For Israel. Editor, The Jerusalem Connection.

Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 25, 2005.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post. It is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1106537800595&p=1006953079897 Caroline Glick can be reached at caroline@jpost.com

In a recent poll, 62 percent of Germans said they were "sick of all the harping on about German crimes against the Jews." Two thirds of Germans said they believe Israel is waging "a war of extermination" against the Palestinians.

Jews often focus their attention on Holocaust sentiment among non-Jews to gauge anti-Semitic feelings. But while feelings about the Holocaust serve as an indicator of general sentiment about Jews, there are other indicators no less important or revealing.

Sensitivity about the Holocaust may tell us what a person feels about Jews, but it may also simply tell us what that person feels about dead Jews.

But let's say that most Germans did believe the Holocaust was a terrible crime. Would the German rejection of the Holocaust mean that the majority that believes Israel is today's Nazi Germany is less anti-Semitic? No, it would not.

Yesterday the UN General Assembly for the first time held a special session to commemorate the liberation of the Nazi death camps and the Holocaust. Does this mean that the UN, which devotes some one-third of its resolutions to condemning Israel, is no longer hostile to the Jewish people? No, it does not.

SINCE THE Holocaust, the rallying cry of Jews has been "Never Again!" But the enormity of the Holocaust must not blind us to its present-day mutation.

Today the vast majority of anti-Semites are not calling for Jews to be deported to death camps. They are calling for the destruction of the Jewish state and, as was the case in previous generations, they are seeking out and finding Jews like Karl Marx who share their hatred for the Jewish people and willingly advance their evil agenda.

This agenda is to again reduce Jews to a state of powerlessness where we will be at the mercy of the same world that either participated in or did nothing in the face of the extermination of European Jewry.

Today this is done by striking out at the main safeguard against such powerlessness - the State of Israel - criminalizing it as the modern-day incarnation of Nazi Germany. The role of Jewish anti-Semites in this campaign is to decouple the dead Jews murdered by the Nazis from the live Jews who live in, or support, the Jewish state.

Such a Jew was found by the British conservative magazine The Spectator in one Anthony Lippman. Lippman is actually an Anglican, not a Jew, but as the child of Jewish Holocaust survivors, he will do.

In a recent article, Lippman writes hypnotically about his mother's sufferings in Auschwitz only to explain that the job of Holocaust survivors and their children is to speak out against... Israel.

In his words, survivors have "a terrible responsibility - to live well in the name of those who did not live and to discourage the building of walls and bulldozing of villages. Even more than this, they - and all Jews - need to be the voice of conscience that will prevent Israel from adopting the mantle of oppressor, and to reject the label 'anti-Semite' for those who speak out against Israel's policies in the occupied territories."

ANOTHER such Jew is Tony Judt. Since the start of the Palestinian terror war, Judt, a historian at New York University, has been outspoken in his rejection of Israel's right to exist.

In a series of articles in The New York Review of Books, The Nation and The New Republic, Judt has led the charge in claiming that "the depressing truth is that Israel today is bad for the Jews," and that for Jews to feel good about themselves again Israel must cease to be a Jewish state - that is, Israel must cease to exist.

This perverse line of reasoning, whereby the only way for Jews to be happy is for us to again be powerless, has brought Judt under attack by prominent Jews who have exposed the anti-Semitism inherent in his argumentation.

In a new article in The Nation magazine, Judt takes a stab at responding to his many critics. The article is a ponderous attempt to argue that there is no relation between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

On the one hand, he says that it is anti-Semitic to say that Jews control the US. But on the other hand, Judt allows that "contemporary US foreign policy is in certain respects mortgaged to Israel," adding, "To say that Israel and its lobbyists have an excessive and disastrous influence on the policies of the world's superpower is a statement of fact."

Judt allows that there has been a rise in anti-Semitism in Europe in recent years, but he blames this on "the policies of Israeli government." Echoing Anglican Lippman, Judt writes that for anti-Semitism to be dealt with in Europe, "Jews and others must learn to shed inhibitions and criticize Israel's policies and actions."

In Judt's view, "once Germans, French and others can comfortably condemn Israel without an uneasy conscience, and can look their Muslim fellow citizens in the face, it will be possible to deal with the real problem [i.e., anti-Semitism]."

Since the September 11 attacks Muslims have been called upon to decry the preaching of hatred in their community. It is argued that until Muslims themselves delegitimize the voices of hatred in their communities the poisonous message of jihad will continue to attract thousands to its genocidal cause.

The 60th anniversary of Auschwitz's liberation is a good time to call for a similar Jewish condemnation of hate-filled Jews and those that use them to advance their anti-Semitic agenda.

These are not legitimate voices. These are not legitimate views. They are the views of deranged Jew-haters which, if listened to, will do nothing other than pave the way to the next calamity.

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, January 24, 2005.

This comes from Bruce.

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20016

Dear Concerned Citizen:

Thank you for your recent letter roundly criticizing our treatment of the Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees currently being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Our administration takes these matters seriously, and your opinion was heard loud and clear here in Washington. You'll be pleased to learn that, thanks to the concerns of citizens like you, we are creating a new division of the Terrorist Retraining Program, to be called the "Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers" program, or LARK for short

In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided to place one terrorist under your personal care.

Your personal detainee has been selected and scheduled for transportation under heavily armed guard to your residence next Monday. Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of admonishment.

It will likely be necessary for you to hire some assistant caretakers.

We will conduct weekly inspections, in conjunction with the Red Cross, to ensure that your care for Ahmed is commensurate with international standards and those you so strongly recommended in your letter.

Although Ahmed is sociopathic, extremely violent, and was trying to kill at least 20 women and children as we captured him, we hope that your sensitivity to what you described as his "attitudinal problem" will help him overcome these character flaws. I might add that he will bite you, or worse, given the chance.

However, perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere cultural differences.

We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home schooling. Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers. We do not suggest that you ask him to demonstrate these skills at your next yoga group. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless (in your opinion) this might offend him.

Ahmed will not wish to interact with your wife or daughters (except sexually) since he views females as a subhuman form of property. This is a particularly sensitive subject for him, and he has been known to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the new dress code that Ahmed will recommend a s more appropriate attire. I'm sure they will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the bhurka - over time. Just remind them that it is all part of "respecting his culture and his religious beliefs" - wasn't that how you put it?

Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like you, who know so much, keep us informed of the proper way to do our job. You take good care of Ahmed - and remember...we'll be watching.

Good Luck!

Pres. Geo. W. Bush
CC: Donald Rumsfeld

Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Batya Medad, January 24, 2005.

This morning I heard one of those offers on the news. It reminded me of the jokes I heard as a kid about gullible people buying the Brooklyn Bridge, or the children's story about the small animal who trusted the fox to give him a ride across the river and made it to the other side in the fox, rather than on him.

The offer I heard actually put the cart before the horse; it's a reversal, a perversion, of reality. The Israel-Arab "conflict" is not a philosophical problem, like eggs and chickens - which came first. And what's the offer? If you haven't already guessed, the Arabs offered to stop terrorism if we stop our military activities. Yeah, sure. http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=75775

It seems like they've conveniently "forgotten" something, ignoring a "minor" detail. They're the aggressors, the initiators, and we're just trying to defend ourselves. They bomb homes, schools, civilians, families and school children. We wipe up the blood, dig graves and on occasion try to carefully capture terrorists without harming anyone "who may be just an innocent civilian."

There wouldn't be any Israeli military activity if the Arabs weren't attacking and murdering us. There is no country more ambivalent, less enthusiastic, about its military than Israel. Catholics consider sex to be "the necessary evil," and Israelis treat its military that way. Without an army, we would never have achieved statehood and would never have had been able to defend ourselves in the wars the Arabs made against us.

People here bless newborn males with: "he should never need to be a soldier." After the Yom Kippur War in 1973, there was a top hit song, sung by Yoram Gaon, "Ani mavti'ach lach, yaldah sheli, k'tana, shezot t'hiyeh hamilchamah ha'achronah," "I promise you, my little girl, that this will be the very last war." Another favorite was "Shir Hashalom," "The Peace Song," based on the philosophy sung by John Lennon in "Imagine." Its theme is that there's nothing worth dying for, neither religion nor nationality. This philosophy is extremely dangerous for a country whose very existence is threatened daily. The songwriters have been brainwashing the Israeli public for years. Educators and anthropologists have always known for that the easiest way to learn something is to sing it. A pleasant tune can overcome almost anyone's inhibitions. You don't even know that there's a message; it's so singable. That's the danger. People will believe anything if you say it long enough.

The natural consequence of that philosophy is that if nothing's worth dying for, then nothing's worth living for either. Unfortunately we see that more and more as the escape to drugs, materialism and mystic searches are becoming more and more common. There is a terrible emptiness is sections of Israeli society, since they are "disengaged" from their heritage.

The schism in Israeli society can be seen in how the cart and horse are arranged. We, in YESHA and our supporters, have something to live for. We're building our country and we're not trying nor willing to pander to anyone. Our goals are clear. Our security and independence are paramount. Our cart is hitched behind the horse, and we're working hard. If we have to fight our enemies, we will. When they stop attacking us, and not for a few hours or a day, when they hand us their weapons and surrender, then we can cease our "military activities."  But we will always have to be on the alert to safeguard our country.

And for those who believe the Arab promises, I have this bridge?.

This is Musing #96. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Angela Bertz, January 24, 2005.

For days, it stood outside the courtroom, believing its burnt-out, hollow interior would speak louder than any Israeli delegation's words ever could.

On the 29th of January 2004, a Palestinian policeman boarded the number 19 bus in Jerusalem. He took a seat at the back. This representative of Palestinian law and order was about to commit a savage crime of mass murder. As the bus made its way up Gaza Street, he detonated an explosives belt, tearing the bus into a twisted wreck of metal, blowing out every window and killing 11 innocent people. Fifty more were wounded, ten of them seriously.

Rose Boneh, 39, took the 19 bus to work everyday. One of her best friends described her as a woman with a huge heart. Her boyfriend described meeting Rose as akin to winning the lottery. She had been more than a mother to his 14-year-old son, who, upon hearing the news of her death, collapsed.

Yechezkel Goldberg, 41, had immigrated to Israel eight years ago from Canada with his wife and was father to seven children. He worked as a social worker, devoting a lot of his time to troubled youth. He was also an active and respected writer.

Avraham Balashan, 28, originally from France, had immigrated to Israel six years ago. He had been married for four years. A few months previously, his mother had also immigrated. He felt a deep sense of belonging to Israel and would pray every morning.

Hannah Anya Bonder, originally from Russia, had immigrated to Israel 12 years ago. She had just turned 38. She was proud to be Jewish and embraced life. One of her work colleagues, upon hearing of the explosion, was alarmed, as she was always so punctual. She was mother to two teenage sons.

Anat Darom was a pretty, young student of 23. She had grown up in Tel Aviv and Netanya. She was studying statistics and sociology at the Hebrew University. She was planning to complete her BA and go into social research.

Octavian Viorel, 42, had immigrated with his wife and little daughter from Romania only three years ago. He was hard-working and described by his wife as a super person and good husband. That Thursday morning, he had just taken their five-year-old daughter to kindergarten.

Natalia Gamril, 53, was also an immigrant, originally from Russia. She had been in Israel for 10 years. Her daughter described her as a very sociable person and a wonderful mother. She was on her way to work to take care of an elderly lady.

Baruch Hodiashvili had lived in Israel most of his life and was an accomplished chef at Jerusalem's Great Synagogue. Every morning, he took his children to kindergarten. His wife said of her husband, "There never was, and never will be, a husband, father and son like Baruch."

Dana Itach was 24 and had dreams of raising a family with her husband, whom she had married only a year before. She had the choice of two buses from her home, tragically getting on the No. 19 that morning. She was only one stop away from her work when the bomb detonated. Those closest to Dana described her as a gentle and patient girl.

Manbara Valid Tzadik, 35, was an illegal foreign worker from Ethiopia. She had originally come to Israel as a tourist eight years ago and decided to stay and work. She was only identified by DNA samples taken from her apartment, after her husband reported her missing.

Eli Zfira, 48, worked at a school as a maintenance man. He had a strong bond with all the children. His wife said it had been Eli's dream to bring their 20-month-old son a little sister.

Five and a half months later, this blown-out bus was shipped to The Hague, standing outside the International Court of Justice, while judges deliberated on Israel's security barrier. It took with it its sad memories of those 11 innocent people who had once led full and useful lives.

For days, it stood outside the courtroom, believing its burnt-out, hollow interior would speak louder than any Israeli delegation's words ever could.

Unbelievably, the bus and its poignant message remained almost unheard above the din of Palestinian propaganda.

The United Nations' predominantly biased International (Kangaroo) Court of Justice voted 14:1 to condemn Israel's security barrier. These 14 judges, no doubt paid a combined salary that could wipe out the third world debt of many African countries, decided in their infinite wisdom to condemn the barrier, claiming it infringed on the rights of Palestinians. The court also said that Israel was obligated to return confiscated land and pay damages to people whose homes, farms or businesses had been affected. The news was met with jubilance by the Palestinians, showing yet again how excellent Palestinian propaganda can make perpetrators appear victims and innocent victims appear aggressors.

The judges were able to churn out dozens of pages of drivel, basically apologizing and endorsing terrorism, all the while, turning blind, ignorant eyes to the number 19 bus and what it represented. The burnt-out bus, when faced with such total one-sided bias, had tragically failed dismally, not only the 11 who had died that January, but the 1,000 more innocent Israelis who had been victims of Palestinian terrorism.

The United Nations, which for years had never once churned out a resolution about the more than 100 bus/restaurant bombings perpetrated by the Palestinians, had reached an all-time low.

The number 19 bus has since been purchased by a humanitarian group of Christians called the Jerusalem Connection. It was consequently shipped to the United States, where its empty, burnt-out shell was loaded onto the back of a trailer. In the last few months, this bus has spoken volumes at any number of anti-terror rallies across the US.

On January 16th, this much-traveled bus reached Berkley, California. It was brought there by a group called the Israel Action Committee of the East Bay, which would use it for a three-hour exhibit. At none of its previous appearances across the United States did the bus stir much controversy.

Word soon spread to the pro-Palestinian groups in the area. They arrived with the sole aim of disrupting the rally, bringing with them their own brand of contempt for anyone who failed to recognize the Palestinians' resistance as a just and noble cause, whatever the means.

The bus, yet again, took second stage to supporters of terrorism, and the number 19 bus' tragic tale could easily, but for police intervention, have been drowned out by angry roars of "Allahu Akbar!" Even more horrific than this much-abused rhetoric was the sight of kindergarten children walking around with signs depicting hideously disemboweled bodies below the words "Organ Thieves". This was a sad attempt to use innocent children to vent the ridiculously held farce that Jews actually steal body parts from dead Palestinians.

It is even more farcical that a burnt-out bus, not the truth alone, has to be Israel's most powerful message to a world hell-bent on looking the other way.

Angela Bertz made aliyah from England. She can be contacted at angela03@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Daniel Pipes, January 24, 2005.

This is a fascinating new piece by Dan Pipes.It appeared on FrontPageMagazine.com, January 25, 2005. It's archived at http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16754

Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and author of Miniatures (Transaction Publishers). (It should be emphasized that Dan is not himself religiously observant)

Until the eighteenth century, there was basically only one kind of Judaism, that which is now called Orthodox. It meant living by the religions 613 laws, and doing so suffused Jews lives with their faith. Then, starting with the thinker Baruch Spinoza (1632-77) and moving briskly during the Haskala (enlightenment) from the late eighteenth century, Jews developed a wide variety of alternate interpretations of their religion, most of which diminished the role of faith in their lives and led to a concomitant reduction in Jewish affiliation.

These alternatives and other developments, in particular the Holocaust, caused the ranks of the Orthodox to be reduced to a small minority. Their percentage of the world Jewish population reached a nadir in the post-World War II era, when it declined to about 5 percent.

The subsequent sixty years, however, witnessed a resurgence of the Orthodox element. This was, again, due to many factors, especially a tendency among the non-Orthodox to marry non-Jews and then to have fewer children. Recent figures for the United States published by the National Jewish Population Survey point in this direction. The Orthodox proportion of American synagogue members, for example, went from 11 percent in 1971 to 16 percent in 1990 to 21 percent in 2000-01. (In absolute numbers, it bears noting, the American Jewish population went steadily down during these decades.)

Should this trend continue, it is conceivable that the ratio will return to somewhat where it was two centuries ago, with the Orthodox again constituting the great majority of Jews. Were that to happen, the non-Orthodox phenomenon could seem in retrospect but an episode, an interesting, eventful, consequential, and yet doomed search for alternatives, suggesting that living by the law may be essential for maintaining a Jewish identity over the long term.

These demographic thoughts come to mind on reading a recent article in the Jerusalem Post, US haredi leader urges activism, by Uriel Heilman, in which he reports on a landmark address in late November 2004 by Rabbi Shmuel Bloom, executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America. Agudath, an Orthodox organization with a stated mission to mobilize Torah-loyal Jews for the perpetuation of authentic Judaism, has a membership ranging from clean-shaven men to black-hatted ones (the haredi), from Jews educated in secular universities to full-time, Yiddish-speaking students of the Talmud.

Rabbi Bloom told an Agudath audience that Jewish demographic trends imply that American Orthodox can no longer, as in the past, bury themselves in their parochial interests and expect non-Orthodox Jewish institutions to shoulder the major burden of communal responsibilities. Rather, the Orthodox must now join in, or even take over from their non-Orthodox co-religionists such tasks as fighting antisemitism, sending funds to Israel, and lobbying the U.S. government. The things we rely on secular Jews for, he asked, whos going to do that if the secular community whittles down? We have to broaden our agenda to include things that up until now weve relied upon secular Jews to do.

He exaggerates, in that some Orthodox Jews in the United States have been prominently involved in both national (think of Senator Joseph Lieberman) and communal affairs (Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America comes to mind). But he is accurate in so far as Orthodox institutions have generally stayed out of the American fray except to pursue their narrow agenda.

Others in Agudath agree with the need for the Orthodox to broaden their ambitions. David Zwiebel, the organizations executive vice president for government and public affairs, notes that, With our growing numbers and the maturing of the community and the greater self-confidence that comes with that maturity and those numbers, theres no question that we need to at least recognize that there may be certain responsibilities that now have to shift to our shoulders.

Heilman understands this intent to assume a greater role in national and Jewish life as a sign both of the success of the American haredi community in sustaining its numbers and its failure to translate that success into greater influence in the community at large.

It also could portend a much deeper shift in Jewish life in the United States and beyond, being a leading indicator of Orthodoxys political coming of age and perhaps even its eventual replacement of non-Orthodox Judaism.

2. "Sharansky: PA promotes genocide," Hilary Leila Krieger, The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 25, 2005.

At a press conference timed to coincide with events marking the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, Diaspora Affairs Minister Natan Sharansky will on Tuesday assert that the Palestinian Authority, even under new chairman Mahmoud Abbas, is engaged in the "promotion of genocide" against the Jewish people.

The "Kill a Jew Go to Heaven" presentation, compiled by Palestinian Media Watch, an Israel-based organization that monitors incitement in Palestinian society, and distributed under Sharansky's auspices, accuses the Palestinian media of dehumanizing Jews similar to ways the Nazis did.

A fundamental message broadcast in sermons, academic discourse and even children's shows, according to report co-author Itamar Marcus, is that "the Jews are an evil force, and it's inherent to the Jews, and therefore they have to be killed."

In the run-up to the PA election on January 9, Abbas met with the head of the Palestinian Broadcasting Authority and asked him to check all programs aired on PA television to prevent the broadcast of inciting material. Since then, Marcus said that nationalistic programming calling for violence against Israel has decreased somewhat, but that anti-Semitic rhetoric has remained unabated.

He pointed to January 14, when he said an imam gave a sermon declaring, "The days of the pilgrimage to Mecca remind the Muslim of the connection to his history and remind him of his past glory and the lowliness of the Jews, who today rule the world; how Muhammad expelled them from Medina in retribution for their actions and their hostility and their corruption, and not on false charges, not unjustly. No, it was retribution for their hostility toward Islam."

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 24, 2005.


Israeli news services have been pouring out briefs about Israeli inventions. These affect not only military and economic survival, but also political survival by enabling Israel to project an aura of power and usefulness to others. Although its population is tiny, and its government hampers private initiative, Israel accounts for a surprisingly high proportion of the world's medical and technical research. The innovative Israeli military industry has spared American lives and funds.

Research is expensive. However worth while its costs, often it does not necessarily pay for itself. New medical approaches reduce hospital costs, but may not bring revenue to the laboratories. New weapons may be required, but unless Israel can recoup its costs from exports, they are a net financial drain. A high-tech invention may face stiff competition or heavy tariff.

When money must be saved, research often is thought expendable. For lack of funds, Israel has slowed some military development and reduced military training. It is like a desperate farmer, eating his own seed corn. Facing invasion and terrorism, Israel cannot afford such economies. Something has to give.

It behooves Israel to focus more on boosting its economy and stop hampering companies, so that more funds for research would become available.


Pres. Bush lost much credibility for the same reason that PM Sharon should have but didn't. They failed to explain certain foreign policy consistently. Instead of stating the half-dozen reasons for launching the war on Iraq, Pres. Bush sometimes stated one, sometimes another, and then, a third. He seemed to be floundering and rationalizing. Each reason was good and sufficient, but all should have been presented jointly, not as if one gainsaid the other.

PM Sharon has presented a series of reasons for his policy of territorial abandonment, as if the reason he gave the week before were insufficient. All his reasons are unsubstantiated; all objections are uncontested. Instead, his opponents are denigrated as "extremist." In supposedly democratic Israel he rules beyond his authority, but there is no independent power center to either depose him or check him by using the media to mobilize public opinion.

There was a time when the media generally acted as the public's watchdog against demagoguery by such leaders. Now most of the media pursues advocacy journalism. If the daily or station agrees with the leader, it cuts him much slack. If it disagrees with him, it just plain cuts him.

The media does not analyze much of what happens. It reports what the leaders say. The impression is given that what they say they mean and what they mean they will do. How often do politicians say what they mean and do it?

When Bush declared a war on terrorism, he was given credit for warring on terrorism. So far, however, he has attacked only a couple of centers of terrorism. He has a mixed record of trying to deny terrorists funding from the US but lying about the nature of Islam lest citizens be roused into a war fever. He has a poor record of continuing to aid the Palestinian terrorists and to seek to wrest from Israel historically Jewish territories that would give Israel secure borders and maintain its water supply. Nevertheless, conservatives find no weakness in his war on terrorism and liberals find him too aggressive. Neither school of thought (what thought?) realizes how little he is doing against terrorism, with his small military and limited action but great spending to build up Iraq at US expense. He is living on an undeserved reputation.

Likewise, Sharon having at one time built settlements, still is called a right-winger as he restricts and destroys them. Lifelong terrorist Abu Mazen makes a vague statement against terrorism and is given undeserved credit from then on for opposing violence, even as he calls for a form of it.


The head of Israel's intelligence agency warned that abandoning the Philadelphi Route in Gaza, through which small arms are smuggled into Gaza, would make that area like southern Lebanon (and let heavy weapons in). He had forewarned that the abandonment of southern Lebanon would endanger Israeli security. It did. (From there Hizbullah aims 13,000 missiles at Israel, deterring powerful Israeli counter-attacks against Hizbullah-sponsored terrorism).

He further warned that abandoning northern Samaria, as per the Sharon plan, would enable P.A. Arabs to position rockets within range of Israel's cities. From northern Samaria, terrorism would radiate forth, as it does from Gaza, now.

"The only way to protect cities within Israel's pre-1967 borders is to maintain an Israeli presence throughout Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza), Dichter said, adding that the firing of mortar shells and rockets can be stopped only by forces on the spot. He said, "however ... that he sees no security necessity in having a Jewish civilian presence in Gaza." (An email source, 1/4/05.) That presence gives the Army eyes and cover. Conclusion: Israel should take over all the vacant parts of Yesha, and get the Arabs out of the rest. Then there would be no terrorism. This is so obvious and just, that almost nobody sees it.


The P.A. produced a film depicting ancient Jews bribing Romans to let them stone crucified Christians (IMRA, 1/4/05 from Palestinian Media Watch).

There is no historical record of this. The Jews did not fight with Christians. The P.A. is not satisfied with distorting current events to foist Arab crimes upon Israel's reputation. It fabricates historical events so as to turn Christians against Jews. Actually, Muslims historically persecute Christians. Christians should be against Islam.


"Al-Ahram" is a daily owned by Egypt. It depicts the limited Israeli self-defense as ethnic cleansing. It condemned Chechnya terrorism against Russia but not P.A. terrorism against Israel. It complained that the "international community" (whatever that is) did not work to stop the mass-murder in Sudan. IMRA: neither did Egypt or the Arab League (IMRA, 12/31).

Rather hysterical of Egypt, to call casualties of a couple of dozen a week out of millions "ethnic cleansing." As for the P.A. Arabs, they try to kill as many Jews as they can. Fence and checkpoints are in the way. Conveniently for the Arab attempt at genocide, organizations from Human Rights Watch to the World Bank agitate against the fence and checkpoints.


International law was created to protect human rights. Israel's enemies are seeking to reinterpret those laws in order to protect aggressors from Israel and undermine Israeli self-defense. They abuse the UNO General Assembly and, in turn, the Intl. Court of Justice (having judges from totalitarian societies), to suggest that Israel has no right to stop infiltration of terrorists by erecting a security barrier (Congress Monthly by American Jewish Congress, 11/2004, p.3).

International law took centuries to build, and only a few years to neutralize. This problem is serious. It is like the Islamist use of US democratic procedures and rights to subvert the US.

Democracies have a right to defend themselves from totalitarians. The task now is to stop these abuses without curbing legitimate rights.


Citizen lobbying is not a French practice. French Jews were afraid of foreign Jewish complaints about antisemitism in France upsetting the rulers of France (who already were condoning antisemitism). No longer. American Jewish Congress activists have helped French Jewry organize and lobby. The French Jews have taken to it, and the government did not resent it. To the contrary, it asked the American Jewish Congress to help improve US-French relations (Congress Monthly, 11/2004, p.3 from AJC). Can't. French foreign policy is anti-American, based on envy, greed, and domestic Muslim sentiment.


The P.A. was thought to have the highest rate of population growth in the world. Perhaps it once did. Demographers had forecast that the Arab population increase in the territories and Israel would swamp the Jewish population. They concluded that Israel had better separate itself from the Arabs in the territories by giving up the territories. (I would have concluded that Israel had better get the Arabs to give up residency in the territories AND in Israel.) This fear of being overwhelmed is one of the motivations for those who support PM Sharon's policy of abandoning Gaza and at least parts of Samaria. Deputy PM Olmert said so. (Doesn't mean it is so.)

It turns out that the population statistics came from the P.A. and were falsified, probably to give the effect they did. A new study by Israelis found large errors in the P.A. figures: (1) The 230,000 Arab residents of Jerusalem were counted both as part of Israel's population and as part of the P.A. population. (2) P.A. natural population increase was counted as 4-5% a year, but P.A. Health records show the rate was about 3%. The birth rate has been falling steadily, so that the increase by 2003 was 2.6%! (3) The P.A. projected a further increase of 1.5% a year from immigration, but emigration is greater than immigration. (4) P.A. figurers count 200,000 Arabs who lived abroad. The 200,000 are adults. If their children were counted, the real figure would exceed 400,000. (This depends on whether their children were counted as not loving broad or not counted; (5) Another 150,000 Arabs who moved legally from the P.A. to Israel, remain counted in P.A. population figures. If all those Arabs were removed from the supposed annual growth among Israeli Arabs, that growth rate is 2.1%, or less than the Israeli Jewish growth rate! The Jewish majority has remained stable since 1967 (Caroline Glick, NY Sun, 1/17, p.1).

Wow! This is as significant as Joan Peters' book showing that most Arab families came into Israel to be near job opportunities created by Zionism, and were not age-old residents.

This finding validates my proposal that Israel stop letting Arabs in, and start getting them out, by means of equal enforcement of the law, beginning with the illegal ones.


Columbia advertises itself a providing a liberal arts education, with its "diversity of thought and dispassionate scholarly approach." Actually, it provides a "narrow, one-sided, and politically correct" education. "If Columbia chooses to have a Middle E. Department that focuses on the Jewish state as the cause of ills in the Arab-Islamic world, and to that end treats it as it would no other nation-state, and in addition purposely excludes or downplays the histories, cultures, and plights of ethnic, racial, and gender minorities in the Arab Middle east - the black jihad slaves today in Sudan, the Christians oppressed in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, the African Muslims enslaved and/or dispossessed in Mauritania, Arab women, Arab labor, and gays - fine. But let it not falsely sell this Arabist tall tale -- at high prices - as 'scholarship.'" (NY Sun, 1/17, letter.)

The watering down of higher education in Western civilization is a major problem that the mutliculturalists have wreaked on American universities. The regimentation in totalitarian values by the Middle Eastern studies departments is another. The two problems hobble American resistance to jihad. We need reform.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, January 23, 2005.

Dear Jewish friends,

Please read this article and consider whether what's written in it is true. It was written by Naomi Chazan and appeared in The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 20, 2005. It is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellitepagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1106191075823&p=1006953079897

To us Jews, this article, if true, should be extremely disconcerting. Yuval.

Israel is a diminishing item on the agenda of world Jewry. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the US, where the interests of committed Jews obviously lie elsewhere. A history of passionate engagement with Israel is fast being replaced by manifestations of remote curiosity and cackles of polite concern. The long-held truism regarding the centrality of Israel for contemporary Jewish life is now in danger of dissipating entirely.

If Israel does not respond vigorously and sensitively to this belated wake-up call, its relationship with American Jewry and Jews elsewhere will be irreparably damaged.

Instances of the dwindling role of Israel in American Jewish life abound. Lectures on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict attract shrinking audiences, while talks on Jewish revival are packed. Social and economic issues in Israel are virtually ignored, just as the demand for more instruction on biblical and rabbinical sources is growing. Israeli matters are acknowledged, but rarely wholeheartedly embraced.

A cursory glance at the program of a recent three-day festival of Jewish learning organized by Limmud is more instructive than 1,000 words. Of the more than 200 sessions offered, only 18 had anything directly to do with Israel.

The richness of the options in Jewish philosophy, culture, spirituality and history made this event a truly celebratory experience of voluntary Jewish study; its Israeli component was a mere footnote. Confronted with these and other examples, apologists hasten to counter with evidence of the growing number of Jewish missions to Israel, and the steady stream of birthright israel participants. Some take pride in the strong Israel-orientation of the organized American Jewish leadership, in the activities of AIPAC, and in the growth of Israel advocacy groups among college students.

Others point, in contrast, to the astounding record of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom (The Progressive Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace), whose circle has expanded to more than 20,000 sympathizers in less than three years. But none would honestly deny the uncomfortable fact that the relationship between Israel and strong Jewish communities elsewhere is in severe distress.

THE MAIN reason for this growing separation lies in the diverging needs and aspirations of Jews in Israel and abroad. In the US, questions of community, religion, spirituality and civic norms predominate. These preoccupations have little to do with the existential concerns of most Israelis.

But behind the obvious lies a growing rift between the Israel-focused stance of the Jewish establishment and the vast majority of American Jews. Uneasy with Israeli policies in recent years and unwilling to embarrass Israel, they have chosen to opt out of the Israeli scene. The burgeoning Israel advocacy industry (Project David, for one) is a very poor, and frequently counterproductive, substitute indeed. The call for unwavering loyalty is gradually quashing the deep-felt commitment to Israel.

A growing number of American Jews are attempting to reconcile the clash between their consistently liberal values and their reliance on Israel as the source of their identity by bolstering their autonomous communal foundations and injecting them with familiar humanistic contents. Knowledge of Israeli affairs may fit into this rubric; the unquestioning defense of Israel clearly does not.

Israel is far from blameless in this process. Policies are formulated and carried out with scarcely a thought to their impact on world Jewry. Israeli leaders and intellectuals systematically turn down invitations to serious Jewish gatherings if they don't deal directly with matters Israeli. Their contempt is matched only by their rising ignorance of the Jewish communities they claim to hold dear.

To stem this deleterious dynamic, it is necessary to drastically alter the prevailing rules of the game and find new avenues for constructive Jewish reengagement with Israel. This can be accomplished only if Israelis stop seeing Jews abroad merely as sources of financial and political support, and begin to treat them as substantive partners. Such an approach requires transparency, along with the encouragement of debate. Most importantly, it entails an explicit commitment to strengthening the linkage between democratic and Jewish values that provides the declared normative compass of the State of Israel and of the Jewish world today.

Articulation of these joint conceptual, ethical and practical guidelines involves both recognition of their diverse expressions around the globe and a healthy respect for these differences.

It also means that Israelis must understand that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict touches not only on the core of the Jewish and democratic character of Israel but also of Jewish communities elsewhere. Similarly, Jews outside Israel can no longer overlook the implications of Israel's peace and security policies for their own Jewish cohesion and democratic coherence.

What is needed now is not a second house of the Knesset for the Jewish people but a mature two-way interchange. Israel and the Diaspora can no longer avoid the challenge of redesigning their ties. This article can also be read at

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Yocheved Golani, January 23, 2005.

In one of the Star Wars movies, accidental hero and native of the city called Gunga, Jar Jar Binks reacts to a soldier's alert about "... the sound of a thousand terrible things heading this way." Jar Jar sucks in his breath as his commander remarks, "And if they find us, they will CRUSH us, GRIND us into bits and then BLAST us into oblivion!" Jar Jar shares his thought that it would be wise to retreat, saying in his native dialect, "Eh...yousa point is well seen. Dis way, hurry!" Jar Jar is an intellectual lightweight, but his instincts make sense.

Jar Jar's approach to the reality of an imminent threat that worsened over time provides food for thought to Jews in the Middle East. This essay is going to consider Jar Jar's worldview along with the adage that "The Jewish People are above Nature," a thought which rabbis have repeated for thousands of years, to reassure the beleaguered Jewish nation.

Some days, the threats against us seem beyond all versions of reality; even Hollywood's suspended one. But what if Jar Jar, separated by several levels of wisdom from the intellectually superior rabbis, was on to something correct, kosher, and more profound a little later in the film?

As Jewish citizens of Israel wonder when we'll reach the flash-point of civil war, the religious residents know that it has not happened because halachically observant Jews are loathe to raise a violent hand to their own people, religious or not. It seems that this religious reluctance to rumble has some secularly inclined Knesset members in a daring mood. Professor Gail Winston has alerted readers of his syndicated writings to provocation from the Oslo camp. The mass media is also informing the public at large of similar goings on. Here is a brief and far from inclusive recap of current events:

* From Professor Winston's January 19 2005 update: "How do we know the Terrorists will enter the Gaza when Israeli Jews are ethnically cleansed from the homes? The Head of the General Security Service (Shabak) Avi Dicter says so. He spoke out unambiguously against aspects of PM Sharon's withdrawal plan. Leaving northern Samaria and removing the IDF presence there will 'turn the region into Gaza' in terms of terror activity, while leaving the Philadelphi Route (border between Egypt and Israel at Gaza) will 'bring southern Lebanon to southern Israel.' He also warned that the number of arms smuggled through the corridor to Gaza is liable to increase dramatically and turn into a 'river.'"

In other news:

* Israel's Supreme Court partially accepted the appeal by Sgt. Yossi Pilant, the IDF paratrooper imprisoned for encouraging his comrades to refuse orders to destroy two Jewish homes on January 4. [Filant's parents have posted a website in support of their beleaguered Zionist son at http://www.aboutyossi.org]

* Jerusalem Newswire's January 18 2005 update Israel to Lower the Boom if Abbas Doesn't Act informed readers that:

As the bombardment of Jewish towns continues unabated, Israel Tuesday reached into its seemingly bottomless reservoir of tolerance for PA leader Mahmoud Abbas and decided to give the longtime terror boss yet another opportunity to fulfill his peace obligations. Should Abbas fail to use his power to curb rocket and mortar attacks on Jewish civilians in the coming week, however, senior Israeli officials said the IDF would launch a massive raid on Gaza-based "Palestinian" terrorist forces. But Abbas, sticking to his policy of protecting rather than combating the terror groups, traveled to Gaza Tuesday to persuade the killers to temporarily halt their artillery attacks in order to enable him to extract further Israeli concessions. The besieged residents of Sderot, meanwhile, marched on the nearby northern Gaza PA-controlled town of Bet Hanoun to protest their government's failure to protect their lives. More than 600 Kassam rockets have been fired from Bet Hanoun at Sderot over the past four years.

Jar Jar summed up his precarious plight in war, and made a case for Israel's, by saying "Monsters out there, leaking in here. Weesa all sinking and no power. Whena yousa thinking we are in trouble?"

Tiny Israel, threatened every minute by who-knows-what falling from the sky, is riddled with citizens agitating for adequate and unified military response. Global consumers of media outlets have been noting Abbas' request for quiet without necessarily learning about and understanding Israel's plight under his "presidency." Jews around the world have been clamoring the media for fair reporting. Some are warning that if Israel were to fall, the rest of the world would lose its best barrier against encroaching terrorism.

The situation is not unlike our celluloid hero's realization that if his companions get slaughtered by their enemies, then "Gungans get perched toosa?"

The fictional warring factions become more embroiled as the Star Wars saga continues. Jar Jar Binks' observation to an enemy combatant that "Gungans have grand army. That's why you no liking us meesa thinks" sums up Israel's real-life situation in a moment. Like the underdog he is, Jar Jar leads his rag-tag colleagues to military victory by accidentally unloading a mighty weapon on the battlefield. Audiences laugh as Jar Jar runs from the scene, alarmed at the destruction he's unleashed. Can it be that much-maligned Israel will be forced to succeed this way, too? Israelis wonder, especially in the wake of Prime Minister Sharon's announcement that the IDF has a "free hand" to deal with terror. PMO spokesman Ranaan Gissin declared that "The real test will be the test of performance [of how well PA security services implement the decision to curb their violence]. So far we haven't seen any real steps. Mortar shells continued to be fired at the Jews of Gaza."

References to Sharon's insistence that there would be no "grace period" for the cessation of violence, at http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php?articleid=407, boggle the average mind. Like Gissin's thoughts about increasingly closer persecution from Palestinians, Jar Jar's reflections on the chances of imminent demise by nuclear reactor are so upsetting: "Better dead here than deader in the Core. Ye gods, whatta meesa sayin'?"

Meanwhile, Israelis of various religious identification prepared saplings while snacking on produce native to the Holy Land, in preparation for the holiday of Tu B'Shvat, the new year for trees. As Jews ponder the parsha of the week, we recall the Toraitic passage "Not by bread alone does a man live," (Devarim 8:3). The essential is the bread; it's the package that delivers holy nutrients. Rashi (Sanhedrin, ibid.) explains: "When the Land of Israel will generously give her fruit, then the End will approach." And soon will be established "for they will soon be coming." Jews are able to come, since there is food to eat. Try not to think of Jar Jar getting his tongue stuck when he licks a recently used machine.

Reality on that level seems to check out, somewhat. We're gobbling goodies for the holiday before it even arrives. But there's more to the Biblical thought than superficial reality. "The Jewish People are above Nature," our rabbis assure the beleaguered Jewish nation. Some days, it seems beyond reality. Or perhaps it is merely beyond earthly reality, as the rabbis teach.

News outlets reported a mind-boggling development on January 19th, 2005:

Saturday's Kassam rocket attack left ten-year-old Tamir Abukasis of Sderot moderately wounded. Tamir then asked what so many Israelis in and outside Sderot want to know: "When is Prime Minister Ariel Sharon going to finally defend his town against incessant Palestinian aggression? Tamir's 17-year-old sister, Ella, critically wounded in her brain stem by that attack, was pronounced brain dead on Tuesday.

Sharon's schedule called for convening his security cabinet that day, to consider new IDF options for curbing ongoing rocket and mortar attacks on Jewish civilians both in and around the Gaza Strip. The IDF has long warned Sharon that withdrawal from Gaza is suicidal. The grace period that Sharon had not extended continues unabated to this day.

Like Jar Jar in his accidental journey to the battlefield, Israeli Jews continue to walk around very confused by the situation surrounding us. Abbas is not confused, however. He's appealed to Israel via world media, to halt the reprisals on the militants he's been inciting before and after his "election." Meanwhile, reports indicate that Abbas considers Jews outside 1967 borders to be fair targets. Hamas is doing its personal best to support him.

Back to Star Wars. As the military leader of the group he is supporting asks, "How did you end up here with us?" the increasingly wiser Jar Jar responds "I don't know. Mesa day startin pretty okee-day with a brisky morning munchy, then BOOM! Gettin very scared and grabbin that Jedi and POW! Mesa here! Mesa gettin' very very scared!"

Mentally collected Israelis gathered at the Western Wall on Wednesday January 18 to pray for Ella Abukasis to experience a miraculous recovery. Wounded while trying to protect her brother during Saturday's Palestinian rocket attack on Sderot, Ella died of her injuries before the next Shabbat. Sderot's Mayor Eli Moyal declared "a local day of mourning for the victims of the rocket attacks... more than 600 Kassams and other rockets have slammed into his town since the start of the Arab-initiated Oslo War in September 2000." The occasion and sentiments are no Hollywood fantasy. They long ago became frequent Israeli reality.

United Press International quoted Moyal's accusation that the Sharon government has been "playing games" by repeatedly sending troops into Gaza for limited raids following rocket attacks, but withdrawing before the job is done. "A government that cannot defend its citizens cannot stay in power," he insisted. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz eventually informed Channel Two News that Israel would launch such a raid soon if Abbas failed to act.

If? The situation begs for a reality check. Perhaps some frustrated Israelis should pay heed when Jar Jar's juvenile companions remark that "All slaves have a transmitter placed somewhere in their body. Any attempt to escape... And they blow you up! BOOM!" and Jar Jar replies, "How wude!"

According to Channel Two's Ehud Ya'ari, Abbas convinced members of his own Fatah organization to temporarily halt attacks on Negev towns adjacent to the Gaza. Jews living in the Strip would remain fair game, however. Abbas added that he'd persuade Hamas and Islamic Jihad to accept similar terms. Senior PA security official Bashir Nafe said the Abbas regime also planned to eventually collect all illegal weapons currently in the hands of recognized terror groups. Hamas has repeatedly stated it will not willingly lay down its arms until the Jewish State is annihilated.

Think about this when you consider that, in order to help ensure the end of rocket attacks on Sderot, Abbas won concessions from his compatriots. The PA said it would deploy a special force along the Gaza-Negev border. Then think of this foxes guarding the hen house quip by Jar Jar Binks: "If me be returnin, the Bosses will do terrible things to me! Tewwwwible things!"

Colonel Uzi Buchbinder, head of the Home Front Command's civil defense department, recently announced that if Sharon's plan is implemented, 46 Negev and coastal towns would be under direct threat of "Palestinian" artillery attacks. General Security Services chief Avi Dichter has already warned that without an Israeli presence Gaza would resemble southern Lebanon, which has become a virtual terrorist state under Hizballah control following Israel's May 2000 withdrawal. Israel can't engage in pinpoint retaliation due to diplomatic considerations to eliminate the threat of Hizballah attacks on the Galilee region, according to news reports.

Jar Jar would mock that diplomacy with a quick "Wesa dyin' here!" Yoda, the Jedi Master and superb diplomat of Star Wars, would understand that the politicians differ vastly from military leaders. He'd dryly say about them, "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you."

Some Israelis would be inclined to agree with both of them. Rabbis would. Protesters at the Knesset and throughout the GUSH and Shomron have. But, the world at large and Israel's society itself, are having difficulty facing the issues. Something must be done to overcome the globally muffled screams of "Looki, Looki!! Wesa all in big doodoo over here. Wakea up!!!"

Thank G'D the rabbis are correct that the Jewish Nation is above nature. Otherwise, we'd have been wiped off the map long ago. Nevertheless, we remain endangered by violent realities and dangerous politicking. Living in the natural world as we do, something must give to ensure our survival. Too bad Israel lacks Jar Jar's political colleague with a sense of moral urgency. Queen Amidala emphatically stated in the same Star Wars movie, "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee!"

Jar Jar, without a duplicitous cell in his simple but sincere brain, would respond to the dilemma by rallying the troops and the stay-at-home citizens by saying, "Gungans no giben up witout a fight. Wesa warriors!"

The Jewish nation isn't thriving under political pressures and by appeasing those who impose them. Jar Jar's simple logic just might save Israel's day. And every day to come.

Yocheved Golani provides a journalist and writing service; she does author reviews and book reviews. She can be reached at her websites: www.ygolani.com, www.yochevedgolani.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 23, 2005.

When is it legal and proper to indict politicians who knowledgeably risk the lives of their citizens as if they were guinea pigs to experiment on. I am now speaking of Israel. Like all others, I am aware that politicians are only human and can make bad decisions. However, if the mistakes were glaring, they should merely be voted out of power as untrustworthy or simply stupid. Your "Disengagement Plan" has confirmed to the Arab Muslim Palestinians that we Jews can be driven out of Gaza as we were driven out of Lebanon.

But, suppose that first judgment (as in Oslo) resulted in making your citizenry vulnerable to the point where many people were killed (murdered, blown up, burned up, shot in ambush) by their very well-known enemy. Suppose those same people (politicians) and other followers who are subsequently elected, choose to make the very same mistake, resulting in more deaths?

Now, these politicians have had their chance, resulting in grievous mistakes and it is all on the record. Suppose they again deliberately choose the same previously failed tactics using the people as simply another experiment, resulting in more deaths? We cannot expect the highly politically warped Israeli High Court system to intercede as a fair and objective Judicial body - given their clear record of leaning toward the Left and Dovish rulings. In brief, the biased High Court of Israel cannot be relied upon to rule against a government and her individual politicians who are perpetrators of crimes against the Jewish nation.

Is it not right to indict and try those politicians who, for reasons benefitting themselves or ignoring their past mistakes, have sacrificed their own people in more failed experiments dedicated to unremitting enemies of the nation?

Are they not de facto co-conspirators with those enemies, denials and explanations notwithstanding?

Are not the victims of their repeated bad decisions - made despite prima facie evidence that more murders will occur, are they not entitled to Justice, even satisfaction, even vengeance? Why not make such decisions a capital crime, warranting long term prison or even execution?

Why not have the legal system recognize that some things like pre-meditated murder through political decisions, mandate justice for the victims when it can be shown that those decisions were made frivolously and without a care for the risk?

Today we observe Israeli politicians agree to allow 2,500 PLO Terrorists called "policemen", to be armed and to scatter across the area which is separating Kassem-firing rockets from the Jews. All the while they are restraining IDF troops from attacking. Early reports indicate PLO "police" are being greeted by those fellow Terrorists as old friends, ready to operate together as they did under Oslo.

Sharon's first grievous mistake was to encourage the ramping of attacks on the Jews of Gaza/Gush Katif. His next mistake was to allow more than 5000 Kassam Rocket strikes on Gush Katif and S'derot without massive retaliation. His coming mistake is to put Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists near Ashkelon and other Israeli towns and cities, after having been told that Rockets with more than a 12 mile range have been smuggled into Gaza. Finally, you, Mr. Sharon would shame all Jews by having Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists occupy the homes of the Jews you forced out as a signal of your betrayal.

If the people are put at death's door through so-called "legal" means, why cannot those who sentence the citizenry to risk, vulnerability and death be themselves sentenced to equal results?


Why should a politician who conspires with the enemy, with foreign governments and puts at risk the citizenry not share the pain of the results of those decisions. I am not referring merely to the expected usual sleaze of politicians who are well known for their willingness to plunder the public treasury, hire only relatives and friends with little or no competence and general corruption. (Note! There are competent and responsible public servants, although few in number, who are working for the people.)

I speak of high level thievery where they use the power of office to enrich themselves which is an ordinary crime, compared to putting whole segments of the people at high risk of death - which is treason to the Jewish state and the Jewish people.

Let the politicians know that they have not signed on for a free ride with excellent salaries, excessive months of vacation, perks of cars with drivers and other privileges - without consequences for their decisions which cause deaths of their own people.

Let the politicians know that, like the soldiers who honorably risk their lives, they too must take the risk of making rash decisions and experimenting with the safety of the nation and the people. If prison and execution is there as a persuader, perhaps they will think long and hard in coming to decisions critical to the nation's safety. Making bad decisions would not in itself warrant a legal judgement but, decisions that put the people at mortal risk in the face of prior failed decisions of the same order, should face severe punishment.

Let them share the results of their rash and dangerous decisions.

The people are absolutely not caged guinea pigs upon whom the politicians can experiment with impunity. Apparently, when lab animals are 'experimented on' and they die, this process is called a "Sacrifice". Politicians are theoretically allowed their share of mistakes but, not when lives have already been 'experimented on' and died due to their first misjudgement.

We watched in horror when a group of politicians met in secret, using amateur advisors to evolve the Oslo Accords in concert with a foreign government. During its 12 years of implementation, many Jews were made vulnerable and were murdered. Since Oslo was signed, more than 1700 Jews were murdered by Arab Muslim Terrorists and tens of thousands more were wounded, many maimed for life.

The Oslo developers made little or no effort to revise their errors of judgement but, even as Oslo failed, they went further in making it easier for Yassir Arafat's Terrorists to get near or into the Israeli populations to blow up buses, caf's, outdoor markets and much more. These planners walk the street as free men, not even willing to apologize for their gross misjudgments which killed their fellow Jews.

The Military was restrained by the Osloids to prove their Oslo Accords were correct - even as they failed repeatedly - further enhancing the abilities of the Arab Muslim Terrorists to plan, move freely and develop their organizations and plant their bombs. In the meantime, the Osloids increased their efforts to protect their plans, evolved in secret and protect themselves. Regrettably, they continue to do so with impunity, while encouraging the Arab Muslim Terrorists to greater feats of horror.

In the Oslo years their repeated efforts to pretend their work didn't cause one long intifada was ongoing while the dead Israelis piled up. Later they (especially Peres and Beilin) evolved Institutes paid for by European nations allied to Arab nations and Terrorist organizations in order to continue their moribund Oslo Accords - that repeated or extended itself under the Sharon government - now called "Disengagement". No investigations, no indictments, no jail terms.

Are we more horrified when Josef Mengele (called the Angel of death at Auschwitz) experimented on Jews as one does to laboratory animals? Why aren't we similarly horrified when venal politicians treat the people as merely one big laboratory where they can experiment on them as guinea pigs certain, that Justice and retribution will not arrive at their door?

It's not just corruption, greed, criminal planning but, it is casual murder of the people whom they pledged to defend and protect when they took office. Granted, they can simply lie and tell us that bringing self-declared Terrorists closer to Israel's population centers is just a "Plan to bring Peace and Trust". Now, we watch in horror as Sharon provides a unilateral Hudna (cease-fire) as the Terrorists re-organize and replenish their explosives and ammunition.

Let no Jew raise his hand against such political figures but, let us bring new laws into play where those who play with our lives no longer have immunity from crimes against the Jewish people. If we cannot include execution for such crimes where citizens are murdered then, at least have mandatory prison terms of no less than 25 years and up to life. Jews are a people of Law but, laws must be made to fit the crime. Such a message to politicians would tell them that political jobs are not a free ride at the public's expense.

Only serious and competent people will want the job. Party hacks who feed off the public treasury like parasites with no responsibility will jump ship if responsibility is connected to the job. At the moment, high ranking criminals from the Prime Minister's office on down to corrupt Army Generals, hoping for political appointments or crooked Bankers rarely, if ever, go to jail. This would change if there was a price to be paid for corrupt and/or frivolous decisions, where they can steal, plunder, even arrange murder without consequences - knowing that somehow they can bribe their way out of a conviction.

IF Israel is to be "the Light Unto the Nations", that light bulb cannot be red.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Marion Dreyfus, January 23, 2005.


Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amazing that when it comes to mad cow disease, the United States government can track a cow born nearly three years ago in Canada, right to the stall where she sleeps in the state of Washington. And then track her calves right to their current stalls. But, they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering around our country. Maybe we should give each one a cow.


They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it's worked for over 200 years and we're not using it anymore.


The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a Courthouse:

You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building! full of lawyers, judges and politicians! It creates a hostile work environment.

Marion Dreyfus can be reached at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top
Posted by TheRaphi, January 23, 2005.

This article was written by Prof. Eidelberg, a political scientist, author and lecturer. He is co-founder and president of The Foundation For Constitutional Democracy and is the President of the Yamin Israel movement.

Consider today's Sharon government. Those who gave the Likud an stunning victory over Labor in the January 2003 election never expected they would be ruled by a government, almost half of whose ministers come from a party responsible for Oslo and rejected by overwhelmingly majority of the electorate. They never expected a government whose parliamentary approval would eventually depend on the support of Arab MKs and Meretz, a far-left party that wants to transform the Jewish state into "a state of its citizens." The 2003 election was an affirmation of Zionism.

Ariel Sharon nullified that election!

The central issue of that election was "disengagement" - a euphemism for the expulsion of Jews from Gaza and other parts of Israel. The only reason why the Likud trashed Labor in that election is because Mr. Sharon campaigned against Labor's disengagement/expulsion policy. Whereas Labor won only 19 seats, the Likud won 38 - a disparity unprecedented in Israel's history. Yet the new Sharon government, with Labor chairman Shimon Peres as Sharon's viceroy, is hell-bent on the expulsion of Jews from Jewish land!

To appreciate the extent of Sharon's betrayal of the nation, let us tally the number of seats won by parties that opposed disengagement/expulsion on security and Zionist or religious grounds:

Likud - 38 seats
Israel B'Aliya - 2 seats (which subsequently joined the Likud)
National Union - 7 seats
National Religious Party - 6 seats
Shas - 11 seats
United Torah Judaism - 5 seats

The above electoral results produced a Knesset with 69 of its 120 members opposed to disengagement/expulsion! But there is more to be said about Sharon's betrayal of the nation. In the 2003 election, Shinui, which won 15 seats, spoke against unilateral disengagement (but subsequently yielded to Israel's Machiavellian prime minister).

And so, thanks to Sharon, Israel has an ostensibly democratically elected government committed to a policy that was decisively rejected by the electorate! But how can one rightly attribute this undemocratic state of affairs to the treachery of one man?

Such treachery could only occur in a country lacking institutional checks and balances, a country whose system of government is intrinsically susceptible to dictatorship. Yet there is not a single party or faction in the Knesset - not even Manhigut Yehudit - that exposes this despotic state of affairs and insists that systemic reform is an urgent and necessary precondition for reversing the disastrous course of this nation. Why not? Because all have a vested interest in preserving the existing system. No less than the illustrious Alexis de Tocqueville defines this system as "democratic despotism" - a system that enables a democratically government? hence based on public opinion, to ignore public opinion with IMPUNITY.

What perpetuates this system is this simple fact: In Israel the entire country constitutes a single electoral district in which fixed party lists compete on the basis of proportional representation. The result is party dictatorship on the hand, and, on the other hand, a Knesset whose members are not individually accountable to the voters in constituency elections. This renders a Knesset subservient to the government, above all its prime minister. And now, the prime minister, instead of being primus inter pares, can dismiss cabinet ministers as if he were a President of the United States. (In America, however, Mr. Sharon would have been impeached long ago for malfeasance of office.)

Therefore, those who oppose the expulsion of Jews from their homes in Gaza and elsewhere, but who remain silent about the grotesque structure of a government that has made Ariel Sharon the Labor's Party's surrogate prime minister, are not innocent. Unless they have the courage to reveal - contrary to six decades of disinformation - that Israel is not a genuine democracy, hence that Israel too is in need of "regime change," they will perpetuate democratic despotism and thereby facilitate "disengagement," a policy they rightly call evil.

TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/archives/oldindex.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays.

To Go To Top
Posted by TheRaphi, January 21, 2005.
This article is by Shmuel Neumann, Ph.D., who is actively involved in creating communities for English-speaking olim, and in an emigration program for Palestinians. He currently resides in the Shomron. He can be reached at http://www.shomron.homestead.com

It is illegal to advocate ejecting Arabs from their homes and forcibly removing them from Israel. How can it be legal to advocate forcibly removing Jews from their homes?

Racism is not a laughing matter. Especially after the Holocaust, racism against Jews, even by Jews, is intolerable. During the Holocaust, Jews, called kapos, were forced by the Nazis to implement racial genocide. It is also a horrible tragedy and a pathetic sight to see certain Israeli government officials compelled by "their good friend" the United States to implement ethnic cleansing, not by genocide, but by expulsion. This expulsion of Jews, not necessarily Israelis, is racist.

It is illegal to advocate ejecting Arabs from their homes and forcibly removing them from Israel. How can it be legal to advocate forcibly removing Jews from their homes? While the government may elect to dismantle Israeli army bases and outposts, they have no legal right to remove only Israeli Jews and not remove Israeli Arabs or Christians. It has no right to remove Jews of other nationalities who purchase a farm in Judea or Samaria and wish to farm their private property and live on their farm. If it has such a right, then it must remove any non-Israeli Muslim or Christian farmers from their independent farms, as well.

If certain Jewish settlements are deemed illegal and therefore slated for demolition, then illegal Arab settlements must be demolished as well. The Israeli government is in possession of aerial photographs of each village and town from 1917 until the present, and is well aware that many villages and towns existing today were built by squatters who grabbed land and illegally built houses. Often the houses were built on other people's land, even land purchased decades before by individual Jews or by the Jewish National Fund. All of these communities must be demolished if any Jewish communities are to be evacuated and demolished. If the government refuses to demolish illegal Arab houses, then their policy of evacuating Jewish houses, farms and communities is racism against Jews and must not be tolerated. One might speculate if there were, hypothetically, 10 Christians living in a Jewish settlement that was slated for evacuation, and 10 Israeli Jews living in Jenin, then wouldn't the Christians be evacuated with the rest of the community and wouldn't the Jews be permitted to remain in Jenin? Certainly, the Christians would be evacuated together with the Jews from a Jewish settlement. However, if they had a monastery in Bethlehem or anywhere else in Palestinian-controlled Judea, Samaria or Gaza, then they certainly would not be evacuated, nor would their church or monastery be demolished. The 10 Jews in Jenin, however, would not be evacuated, but imprisoned, because Israel makes it illegal for Jews to enter Area "A". That is, unless the Palestinians got to them first, in which case they would torture and mutilate the Jews as they did to those Jews who made a wrong turn and found themselves in Ramallah.

The central point is that Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice would never tolerate removing blacks from any neighborhood, not just in the United States, but anywhere in the world. They do, however, insist that Jews, not just Israelis, be forcibly removed from all areas of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. When they speak of pre-1967 borders, they are talking about removing Jews from Ramat Eshkol, the Old City, Mamilla and many neighborhoods of Jerusalem.

This reverse discrimination is not only in relation to settlements, but to land registration. If an Arab registers a land sale in Beit El's land office, the land registration is recorded seamlessly. If a Jew records a sale from an Arab, the land office notifies the Palestinian Authority of the land sale and the land registration can take 15-20 years. In the interim, the Arab seller and real estate agents are killed by the so-called Palestinians, eliminating all witnesses to the sale. As a result, often the land sale is never recorded. This is racism, pure and simple.

This racism against Jews goes beyond the issue of settlements or land registration. The Israeli government interprets its own laws against racism to protect Arabs, but not Jews. For example, in Israel it is illegal to hire only Jews, but it appears to not be illegal to hire only Arabs. For instance, there is one chain of gas stations that I frequented throughout Israel, and every single one of them had only Arab employees at the gas pumps. While it is their prerogative to employ Arabs, it is not their prerogative to hire only Arabs. This is a violation of racism laws and should be prosecuted not just in a civil action, but in a criminal action, as well.

While ironically, blatant racism against Jews is rampant in Israel, it is the United States that initiated and perpetuated racist policies against Jews. Their dogged insistence that Jews must be forcibly removed from their farms, even those that were bona fide purchases, is unconscionable. Their insistence that all Jews be removed from Gaza, from Judea and from Samaria, is not only repugnant, but violates America's own constitutional laws. While the Constitution is not extraterritorial and applies only within the United States, employees of the United States government are barred from violating the civil rights of other Americans overseas. The attorney-general of the United States has the jurisdiction to examine any illegal, racist action by an employee of the federal government. While the public entity enjoys immunity from suit, as do federal employees, there are exceptions - including civil rights violations.

Furthermore, the United States offering financial aid to the Palestinians is also illegal. In order to compel South Africa to end apartheid, the United States passed laws to prevent trade with racist regimes. As such, the United States is barred from contributing to racist activities and from providing aid to racist regimes. The laws are on the books, but it takes precedent-making legal actions to compel adherence to these laws.

There are moments in history that a status quo was reevaluated. For centuries, there were certain conventions regarding Jews in Europe: they were categorically forbidden to own land and to participate in certain professions. As a people, they were expelled from country to country or restricted to a certain region. They certainly were not equal citizens.

During the French Revolution, everything was at a standstill for three days. In the transition from monarchy to republic, the French revolutionaries couldn't make up their mind whether or not to allow Jews to be citizens. After three days of heated debate, they finally felt compelled to permit Jews to be full citizens, to be consistent with their stated ideals of equality, fraternity and liberty.

The new state of Palestine that the free world is eager to create must similarly decide whether they will continue with their racist policies or permit Jews to purchase land in Palestine, to do business there, to live there and to be equal voting citizens. Currently, an Arab that sells land or houses to Jews is executed. This is not an extra-judicial, terrorist act, but the direct implementation of the PA's racist laws. There is a trial and the land dealer is killed, either by firing squad or by execution by their security force, after being tortured and mutilated. The property sale need not be in Judea, Samaria or Gaza, but any Arab selling property to Jews in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, the Galilee, or anywhere else within the Green Line, is also subject to the death penalty.

The Abus (Ala and Mazen) are making a big show of the single national election since Yasser Arafat was elected to illustrate that Palestine is a democracy. However, before a Republic of Palestine is established, even if it is restricted to portions of Gaza, they will have to determine the future role of non-Muslims in their country, just as the French had to put the Dark Ages behind them in the French revolution.

In a real democracy, people would not have to be forcibly removed from their homes because of religion. If the government changed, the residents would have the option of becoming citizens of the new regime. There is absolutely no justification to remove one Jew, not from his farm and certainly not his entire Jewish community. In a democracy, there is no reason that the current residents could not become dual citizens of Israel and Palestine. After all, all Jews that lived in Israel before 1948 were Palestinians. Non-Israeli Jews, for example, American Jews, should be permitted to remain and be awarded Palestinian citizenship in addition to their American one. Conversely, if all Israelis must be removed, then Israeli Arabs and Christians must be also forcibly removed.

There is no alternative but to challenge the patently illegal racist activities of the United States State Department, the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government.

Professor Jack Golbert is heading a team of attorneys that will research and initiate legal actions both in the United States and Israel. Lawyers who wish to join the class action civil rights suit, American citizens living in Gaza and Samaria regions that are slated for expulsion, and those who can contribute to legal costs (not legal fees) are asked to email us at yeshahomestead@hotpop.com

TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/archives/oldindex.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays.

To Go To Top
Posted by Joseph Doriel, January 21, 2005.

Based On Our Paid-In-Blood Experience In Defense Of Israel

We are of the handful of warriors who stood up to defend the State of Israel when Arab states invaded this country - in criminal violation of the November 1947 UN decision of independence for Israel. It was not a war for borders or territories, but a genocidal war - to exterminate the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. A war backed by leaders of the (old) British Labor Party, who initiated an arms embargo on us, while the Arab armies were supplied with plenty of arms, instructors and even experienced British commanders. Under these conditions we lost one quarter the best of our comrades before succeeding in overcoming the invaders. We see it as our moral duty to contribute from our experience - in enlightening the political leaders defending the Free World from the Militant fanatic-Islam bloodthirsty terror, which has escalated since 1947 into its present monstrous shape.

1. The inciters, planners and leaders of that genocidal war resided then, as now, in the capitals of Arab states. Amin al-Husseini, formerly Hitler's main agent in the Muslim world, as well as Yassir Arafat, the Egyptian "Palestinian", with his PLO chieftains, who succeeded him, used Cairo as their main base. Arab leaders used the Moslem population of the Land of Israel only as cannon fodder for the armies and gangs they sent to exterminate Israel, which they viewed as an outpost of Western Civilization. Their war created a flood of about a million of Jewish refugees - Jews who fled from hostile Arab countries and about half a million of Arabs who fled from the battlefields in Israel. But, in contrast to the Israelis, who absorbed their refugees, Arab leaders decided to perpetuate and inflate their refugee camps, to continue and sacrifice them as cannon fodder in their political war, after they had lost the war on the battlefield. About 100 million refugees, of various nationalities, were forced to leave their homes in the wake of the 20th century wars. Almost all of them were rehabilitated in their new places of residence, while only 500 thousand Arabs who fled from the Land of Israel were cynically manipulated by Arab dictators and their UN friends, becoming an entity of "4 million refugees" in order to serve as a tool in perpetuating the Arab-Israeli conflict (and using UN money - mostly donated by the US - for this purpose).

2. September 11, 2001 tore off the mask from the "Palestinian liberation" seekers, and revealed the true nature of the bloodthirsty Islamic hatred towards the Free World. It was not "desperate Palestinians" who blew themselves up in New-York and Washington but well-off Saudis and Egyptians, brain-washed by Saudi-paid Ideology imams. The Saudi Osama Bin Laden succeeded in uniting the animosity-filled civilization of the Koran, on a world-wide scale, for the "Holy War" against the civilization of the Bible, regarding Israel as its outpost in the Middle East, In the "holy war" that civilization of the Koran is waging against the civilization of the Bible. Israel is considered the eastern outpost of that civilization, which must be annihilated. But the Militant Islam is looking for an additional advantage by attacking Israel and the Jewish People: They learned from the way Hitler manipulated the European anti-Semites in assisting him in swallowing up their own lands - by the criminal incentive of free murder of Jews. It is not accidental that the descendants of those Europeans developed into today's European turned out to be the "axis of hypocrisy" that defends the axis of evil, which have been promoting and promotes by every means their preferred replacement for the defeated Sadam Hussein, namely - Yassir Arafat and his PLO chieftains, as leaders of a reduced-scale terror-state called "Palestine" in the middle of the Holy Land. To be reminded: the UN was never asked and never decided to approve the establishment of a state called "Palestine", but will be asked now by the Axis of Hypocrisy to protect a new center of international terror - from the fate of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This is the same Axis of Hypocrisy who supplied Iraq with 70,600 tons of forbidden materials and 300 units of equipment - to turn them into WMD - as was admitted by Saddam's government itself.

3. Throughout History, a "Palestinian" nation or state has never existed. The majority of Arab inhabitants of the Land of Israel arrived to this land from neighboring countries after Jewish repatriation to the Jewish Biblical Homeland led to the development of the deserted land and its economy. The Arabs in this land never behaved as a distinct nation eligible for sovereign statehood. When offered the establishment of an independent state, they violently rejected the proposal, time and again. The only common goal, incited by the surrounding Arab dictators, was the destruction of the State of Israel. These dictators, if they occupied the whole Land of Israel, would annex its territory to their states, as they actually had done with the territories of Judea, Samaria and Gaza which they occupied in 1948. The "Palestine Liberation Organization" was established long before the Arab-Israeli 1967 war brought about the Israeli "occupliberation" of Samaria, Judea and Gaza (the so called "Territories") these territories from foreign occupation. This PLO was a Soviet-Egyptian project to destabilize the Middle East with a "legitimate" pretext of "liberation of oppressed people". This is how the descendants of NAZI Germany Arab agents became devoted agents of the Evil Empire and its murderous KGB. We were not surprised that when granted autonomy, after the Oslo accords, their society disintegrated into gangs of thieves, robbers and murderers, led by a multitude of war-lords, most of them connected to foreign hate-mongers and directed by Saudi or Iranian Militant-Islam ideology. This is the ideology which disseminates the propaganda demanding from each "good Moslem" to take part in "Jihad", knowing that the main goal of Jihad is to kill or enslave the Judeo-Christian "infidel" communities. The murderers of 9/11 as well as the Gaza and Baghdad suicide bombers came from the same ideological origin. Arab gangs call themselves "Palestinians", religious brainwashers. They believe in the same ideology, and cannot be partners to any international agreement, or demand the status of an independent nation. They must be treated like the Taliban criminals: extinction or unconditional surrender.

4. The first step to achieve peace in the Middle East and eliminate the infrastructure of incitement, and terror and development of WMD against the Free World is - by demanding that all Moslem dictators assume responsibility for stopping these activities within their jurisdiction, as well as financial or political support to such activities anywhere. If not - their oilfields, which finance these activities, will be confiscated by an appropriate Free World trusteeship. (In the case of Iran, a US-Russian agreement can be reached - to control the Northern oilfields of Iran by Russia, and the Southern - by the USA).

5. The Arab states responsible for the 1948 criminal war they waged against Israel have to be charged with proper reparations for the damage, casualties and suffering they have caused the Jewish and Arab populations of the country. The first step in fulfilling this demand should be to the Arabs - aiding their absorption, granting citizenship and rehabilitation upon request to every person (at the person's request) who had to leave and left the Land of Israel due to the war or who is still in the country but is not ready or is unwilling to be a faithful citizen of the Jewish State. The Arab dictators possess vast uninhabited territories, which they received from irresponsible colonial powers and which are hundreds of times the size of small and densely populated Israel . These territories are suitable for the immediate rehabilitation of all Middle-Eastern refugees.

6. The government of Israel will carry out the resolution of the League of Nations, which was adopted and ratified by the UN, to allot all the unpopulated land which was registered in Palestine as property of the Ottoman Empire till the end of WW1, for the purpose of repatriation of Jewish communities from countries expressing hatred towards them, beginning with Europe's "Hypocritical States Axis."

7. The present American Leadership of the Free World will organize and support and back-up an axis of stability between Iran and the Mediterranean Sea, to secure Middle-Eastern oil resources from exploitation by terrorist-supporting regimes. In this axis, American-ruled Iraq, the Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel will provide strategic bases for American forces which will act independently of the "Hypocritical States' Axis". The Port of Haifa can serve the US Navy, underground storage depots - built as an extension to the Mount of Carmel Tunnel project - to secure strategic supplies; the (existing) Kirkuk-Haifa Pipel-Line can serve as main export outlet of ME oil to the West, and a Haifa-Baghdad business-enterprise railway can provide efficient transportation along the Stability Axis, as well as an essential means for the economic rehabilitation of Iraq. And no less important: The ME Axis of Stability will liberate the US from exaggerated dependence on Saudi air bases and the Egyptian Suez Canal, thus limiting their extortionary capabilities.

8. America's actions in its war against terrorists are rightful and commendable. It must be remembered, however, that the first major battles in this war in Afghanistan and Iraq represent only the beginning of a campaign that will last many years. (Israel has, from its very beginning to the present day, been forced to defend itself in this very same war.) We believe that the war being waged by Islamic "holy" warriors (as they perceive themselves) can be successfully fought. The alternatives, defeat or perpetual war, are unacceptable. Not less than targeting the terrorists, the issue of incitement must be dealt with severely and continuously. Incitement must be criminalized as an international "act of war", and persons and countries participating, encouraging or allowing this heinous act must be dealt with appropriately and forcefully. We must bear in mind that a war was never won when it stopped half-way (as happened with the 1991 Gulf War). The entire Axis of Evil has to be neutralized without paying attention to the united chorus of Third World kleptocracies and European hypocritical democracies. Capturing Baghdad can not be the last step in this war.

On behalf of the Forum of Veterans of the Israel War of Independence (listed in order of their military ID numbers):


For comments and support: email Doriel@012.net.il or write to P.O.Box 21131, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, January 21, 2005.
This appeared in http://chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=12511

In removing the Jewish residents from their legitimate homes in Gaza, Samaria, and Judea (a.k.a. West Bank), the Sharon government of Israel is guilty of egregious human rights violations against its own Jewish citizens who are also the innocent targets of Arab terrorism. The Bush Administration is guilty of complicity in this human rights crime. The effect of this is to weaken both Israel and America ideologically and morally in their efforts to combat Islamo-fascism and the global terrorism that it spawns. As such this undermines the security interests of the American people.

At the core of our strength in the current struggle is a set of moral values that are under enemy assault. We cannot prevail over a philosophy that promotes and rationalizes hatred, bigotry and even mass murder unless we adhere firmly and without compromise to civilized norms. For example, our response to revelations of human rights abuses of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison is our attempt to correct an injustice once it became known and to show the world that we reject such conduct and will punish the guilty prison guards.

We Americans have adopted the symbol of justice depicting a blindfolded woman holding a set of scales. That is meant to indicate an objective and consistent approach to justice, to be applied without fear or favor. In the present situation the human rights crime of the Sharon government is ethnic cleansing pure and simple, against innocent people who happen to be Jewish.

In theory American policy is to oppose ethnic cleansing. In practice our actions are inconsistent. In Bosnia and Kosovo there were allegations of ethnic cleansing by Serbs against Albanian Muslims. The American response was to use military force to halt the crimes and to punish the alleged violators. But when the victims are Christians and Jews, our response ranges from passivity to complicity.

Christians are victims of bigotry, violence and ethnic cleansing occurring mostly inside Arab/Muslim countries. In newly liberated Iraq, Christians are being brutalized and driven out by Muslims with no response from the American Army. In Bethlehem the former Christian majority has been largely driven out under PLO/PA rule. In Lebanon, in Egypt, in Sudan and elsewhere in the Arab world Christians suffer persecution and even death while the U.S. administration fails to respond adequately.

Arab countries have robbed and expelled some 900,000 Jews during the decades from the 1930's through the 1950's. The Christian and Jewish presence in the Middle East pre-dates the Arab invasion and conquest of lands outside of Arabia. The spirit of militant Islam is conquest, conversion, expulsion and, if the victims resist, death. Our struggle should be against this evil, to halt it and to reverse it, as part of the announced American effort to spread freedom and democracy to the Arab peoples. But now we see the Sharon government of Israel preparing to expel Jews from their homes in its cowardly response to Arab intolerance and terrorism.

Instead of Israel's being a partner in spreading freedom and democracy, we see the Sharon government itself now becoming a proxy for Arab extremism and for ethnic cleansing. Civilized people of mixed ethnic and religious backgrounds should be able to live together peacefully anywhere and everywhere, as they do inside America and inside Israel. That is a basic human right. But we now see the submission to ethnic cleansing in places where Arabs dominate. Ethnic cleansing is a high crime regardless of who is the perpetrator and regardless of any other name or deceptive euphemism that is applied. It is the same crime regardless of the identity of the victims and of the perpetrators.

The heroes in this tragic episode include the brave Jewish residents who refuse to be intimidated by Sharon's threats. Other heroes are the thousands of Israeli soldiers who announced their refusal to carry out orders that are both illegal and immoral. American soldiers at the recent Abu Ghraib trial were told that "just following orders" is no excuse for clearly immoral conduct and they will be punished. There must be a line where conscience of civilized people trumps blind obedience to following orders.

The Sharon government deserves to be condemned for this crime and also for the high handed and undemocratic means used to pursue this action. The Bush Administration also deserves condemnation for supporting Sharon in his illegal actions. >From now on the Islamo-fascists will be able to gleefully mock us as hypocrites when we criticize their actions and thus weaken our moral claim to oppose their hateful ideology.

Please see the following links for more intormation on this subject:



An item by Emanuel Winston on this topic is of particular interest: http://www.think-israel.org/winston.hatesettlers.html

Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, January 21, 2005.
This article was written by Zak Lieberberg. I translated it.

The first Soviet constitution was adopted in 1936, soon after Stalin asserted his uncontested power over the country. It was officially called Stalin's Constitution. In 1953, after Stalin was posthumously denounced, his name was dropped from the title of the document, but the document itself remained unchanged. If I am not mistaken, it was cosmetically and meaninglessly amended under Brezhnev. Those familiar with both the Constitution of the United States and Stalin's Constitution could not have possibly missed some striking similarities in the structure of the government and the rights of citizens. Freedom of speech, religion, peaceful assembly - you name it, it was there. To be sure, it was not all there; the entire Bill of Rights, with the exception of the crudely adapted First Amendment, was dropped. But even that would have been much better than nothing, because nothing was exactly what the Soviet citizens got.

What's especially interesting to us in the context of recent international developments is that the Soviet Union, in compliance with its constitution, held regular elections. Each political party nominated one candidate. On election day, a voter reported to her precinct and was issued a voting bulletin, which was a sheet of paper containing the list of all candidates for a particular office and simple instructions printed at the bottom: "Cross out all candidates except the one you are voting for." The precinct provided booths where voters could do their crossing out, allegedly, without the KGB watching over their shoulder. Such a procedure guaranteed anonymity of the voter, unless, of course, she wanted to write in her own candidate, which was allowed but happened very rarely.

Despite all these similarities, the Soviet Union was not a democracy. Its citizens never experienced any of the freedoms promised by their constitution, because the mechanism of oppression was codified in that very same constitution. It allowed only one political party - the Communist Party. Accordingly, the number of candidates in each election was also one, which made Soviet elections a bit less meaningful than a rain dance performed by a Cro-Magnon medicine man. The single-party system made the Soviet Union similar to modern-day Iran. Iran, as you probably know, is not a democracy either, even though it also has a constitution and holds elections. However, the real power there belongs not to the government, but to the clergy. In the Soviet Union, the real power belonged to the Communist Party. In both cases, the power of the real rulers was absolute and included the right to act contrary to the laws of the state.

The Soviet Union is no more. There are a multitude of political parties in today's Russia; elections are held regularly; and electoral aberrations there, unlike in the neighboring Ukraine, are reasonably rare. But is Russia a democratic country today? I don't think so; actually, I don't even believe there is any hope for democracy there in the foreseeable future. My pessimism is not only based on my strong gut feeling about the country where I grew up, but also on a number of solid facts, and I will share one of them with you. A couple of years ago, the Duma (Russian Knesset) adopted a law demanding all ethnicities within its jurisdiction (and there are almost two hundred of them) to use the Russian alphabet with their own non-Russian languages. At first glance, the law sounds perfectly senseless; I believe, however, that it constitutes an attempt to legislate the hegemony of ethnic Russians over everyone else in the country. I hope you will agree with me that such an attempt is utterly anti-democratic.

Therefore, elections do not democracy make. After all, elections are regularly held in Egypt and were conducted in Saddam's Iraq, where their sole purpose was to convey an appearance of legitimacy to a perfectly illegitimate (but only from the Westerner's perspective) tyranny.

Why is this important to us? Let's see. In response to 9/11, President Bush declared his War on Terror, only to stumble over the fact that our overwhelming military victories in Afghanistan and Iraq have failed to affect the global threat of Islamic terrorism or even to render the United States any safer than it was on the eve of the attack. Today, it is perfectly clear that no matter how many American soldiers lose their lives or limbs there, no matter how many Iraqis are killed in the process, no possible outcome of that war can benefit the United States. If I had been the Commander-in-Chief, I would've been tempted to order our soldiers to pack and go home, leaving Iraqis and Afghanis to sort out their differences with their respective countrymen without any further sacrifices from American soldiers or American taxpayers. I would have also been tempted to announce that my original opinion that Islam is not the enemy had been convincingly proven wrong, and ban the practice of Islam in this country for all eternity. President Bush, of course, is not so simpleminded. He decided to redefine victory instead. Now, instead of fighting for the safety of our own country, we are fighting for democracy in the Middle East.

The folly of this is overwhelming. Even if democracy in the Muslim world is possible, it is highly questionable whether it will make Muslims any less hostile towards the West. After all, the only difference between democracy and tyranny is the procedure that is used to arrive at decisions. There is no guarantee that democratically adopted decisions will necessarily be benign. An impeccably democratic Great Britain, in the recent past, attacked a more or less democratic Argentina. A proudly democratic France is anti-Semitic to its rotten core and hates the US with a passion it is unable to contain. President Chirac recently urged the international community to resist American cultural influence; the French, meanwhile, are not even trying to resist the catastrophic influence of their Muslim community, which is growing like a cancerous tumor, gradually and irreversibly turning France, along with the rest of Europe, into a Third World country.

That's why, even if democracy could coexist with Sharia, I don't see how it can help us.

Imagine, for example, a referendum among the population of Arab countries with just one question on the ballot: Should every Jew in the world be slaughtered? I don't need to tell you what the overwhelming majority would respond. Jimmy Carter would be happy to ascertain that the votes are counted according to lawfully established procedures; preventing the next Holocaust would not be his concern. He has proven this convincingly by endorsing the outcome of the recent "Palestinian" elections. After doing his bit, he went home; but, even before he had time to unpack, news reached the world that the elections he endorsed were shamelessly rigged. But don't worry. Our venerable ex-president won't commit seppuku, because only decent people can feel shame. Besides, even the most decent person can lose face no more than once, since such a loss is inherently irreversible. Even if Jimmy Carter ever had a face, he probably doesn't remember where it is now.

There is no question that Saddam Hussein is an Arab Hitler and deserves to hang. But how is he different from Muammar Kaddafi? Hosni Mubarak? Bashar Assad? Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia? King Abdullah of Jordan? Arafat? Abu Mazen? Any other Arab ruler? And yet, I don't see how the United States of America has benefited from Saddam's removal from power. If the Iraqis were so unhappy under Saddam's rule, they should have removed him from power themselves instead of waiting until we did it for them. Judging from what's going on in Iraq today, Arabs are perfectly capable of opposing a superior force. They daily risk their lives fiercely resisting our occupation and the establishment of a pro-US government. If they had been unhappy with Saddam's cruel rule, they would've kicked him out themselves. I don't remember them doing anything for us to deserve such a generous gift.

I know that many of my readers believe that, having saved Iraq from a brutal dictator, the United States have done a deed so noble that it constitutes its own reward. I remain skeptical about that. I test the situation with a single, simple question: Who will the liberated Iraq support, Israel in its struggle to survive the Arab onslaught or all other Arab countries in their effort to destroy Israel? I find it difficult to believe the former; and if the latter is true, then I say let them rot in hell. Why do I think Israel is central for the assessment of the situation? Because ours is a Judeo-Christian civilization. It cannot survive without Israel, just like it cannot survive without its Christian component.

When, a few months ago, President Bush made the implementation of his road map conditional upon democracy among the "Palestinians", I thought he understood the murderous fallacy of his plan and had found a way out. Even if you believe that democracy is possible in a Muslim society, you don't think it is possible within a terrorist organization, do you? And even if you believe that "Palestinians" are really a people rather than the biggest criminal gang ever assembled, you should also know that one of the cornerstones of democracy is the concept of universal equality of all human beings. - All men are born equal? - you must've heard that somewhere. How is the equality of all men compatible with the incessant propaganda of murderous anti-Semitism in all "Palestinian" educational institution, from kindergartens to universities? Unless, of course, you believe that all men are born equal except Jews. Well, on today's earth, this is an increasingly popular opinion?

Unfortunately, I was wrong. President Bush never considered abandoning his idiotic brainchild. He simply announced democracy a universal panacea and, at the same time, redefined it as the outcome of the elections endorsed by Jimmy Carter. How simple and yet, how elegant. He is not risking much: four more years, and he is going to be reviled by his successor's groupies for everything he has done, no matter what he does or abstains from doing. The rest of us will have to live with the consequences. Thanks to his efforts to resume the "peace process", many Israelis will die with them.

A horde of pundits wrote countless articles expressing their brightest hopes for the new "Palestinian" leader. Here's something they forgot: no leader can lead his followers where they do not want to go. This is equally true whether the leader's ascent to power was approved by Jimmy Carter or not. As of today, the "Palestinian people" has been extant for approximately 36 years and 6 months. In all this time, they have done absolutely nothing that could be possibly interpreted as an expression of nation-building aspirations. An anti-Semite will tell you that they are fighting for their independence. As everything an anti-Semite says, this is a blatant lie. They could have their state by lunchtime tomorrow if they stopped killing Jews by the close of business today. That would have been grossly unfair, because they have no claim to even a square inch of Israel's land; but Israel, with the cowardly stupidity that has since become its trademark, has agreed to exchange land for peace more than a decade ago.

Very few people remember today the argument in favor of the "land for peace" scam offered by peacemongers at the time when Oslo wasn't yet a done deal. If it doesn't work, they kept saying, if Israel gives the "Palestinians" the land, and they do not deliver peace in return, Israel can always take the land back. Considering the disastrous consequences of the Oslo accords, this is exactly what Israel should have done a long time ago. A hopelessly naïve optimist, I thought that the entire reason for Israel to agree to the scam was the intention to use the first opportunity provided by Arafat's gang to throw them out of the country once and for all. More than a thousand Israelis have been murdered by Arabs during this intifada alone, the intifada that was the Arafat's response to the offer of a state. How hard is it to understand that Arabs occupying Gaza, Judea, and Samaria are not interested in creating a new state, that they only want to destroy the old (thousands of years old) one? Isn't it too bad that taking the land back from the deadly enemy does not seem to be such an obvious option today as the peacemongers promised a decade ago?

Meanwhile, the Arab Meine Kampf keeps unfolding. The new Arab fuehrer continues the struggle of his predecessor, using the same methods and even the same rhetoric. Why not? It worked for Yasser I; surely, it will work for Yasser II.

Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi, January 21, 2005.

Dear friends,

No words about this shame: Jonathan Pollard is denied the official status of Prisoner of Zion. After two decades in prison, he is denied this honor. Who deserves it more than he does?

I am asking you to send Arutz Sheva [mailto:feedback@israelnationalnews.com] an email of protest against the decision of the official Prisoners of Zion Authority and to send Jonathan Pollard [mailto:Justice4JP@aol.com] an email of solidarity.

Whoever believes is also asked to pray for his liberation. The article below appeared in Arutz-7 News, Friday, January 7, 2005.

Shabbat Shalom from Rome,

Jonathan Pollard has been dealt yet another blow. This time, a request to recognize him as an official Prisoner of Zion has been rejected, once again, by the official Prisoners of Zion Authority.

The stated reason for the rejection astonished many of those who have been following the Pollard case. "How can we know that he will want to live in Israel upon his release from prison?" the members of the decision-making committee wrote. Pollard, in his frequent letters and messages from prison, has often stated his deep desire to live in Israel.

Pollard is serving his 20th year of a prison sentence in the U.S., for passing classified information to Israel. The information in question was critical to Israel's security, and Israel was entitled to it in accordance with agreements it made with the U.S.

The decision to reject the Prisoner of Zion request was made by an appeals committee of the Prisoners of Zion Authority in the Absorption Ministry. The appeal of a previous rejection was submitted by Israeli inventor Dr. Felix-Azriel Kochubievsky (inventor of a trans-cranial electro-stimulation apparatus).

The committee noted that one of the criteria for recognition as a Prisoner of Zion is that the candidate must be an Israeli citizen and resident. "No one disputes the fact that Pollard is not an Israeli resident", the committee member states. "It may be claimed that it is only his incarceration that prevents him from being a resident... But this claim, in our opinion, is artificial. Furthermore, how can we know that upon his release he will want to live in Israel, against which his bitterness in light of the above is fairly understandable".

Adi Ginzberg, a leading activist for Pollard's release, told I.N.N.'s Ruti Avraham in response: "I can't think of a better example than this to depict 'Have you murdered and also inherited?' What the committee is saying is that the fact that Israeli governments betrayed Pollard and their obligations towards him -- that's the reason to take away his deserved rights. Furthermore, questioning his desire to live in Israel is totally ridiculous; there is no letter or interview he gives in which he does not express his exclusive desire to move to Israel".

Yosef Mendlevitch, one of the most famous Soviet "Prisoners of Zion", has long promoted Pollard's case, calling for American and Israeli Jewish leaders to work for his release. He recently wrote that Israel has nothing to "lose" by granting Pollard the status of Prisoner of Zion: "Prisoners of Zion don't receive special payments, and Ariel Sharon won't be forced to wrangle with his good friend George W. Bush over his release".

Mendlevitch wrote, "The U.S. Administration sinned against Israel by concealing important information from it, in violation of agreements. Granting Pollard the status of 'Prisoner of Zion' would be an important statement on the part of Israel, declaring that Jonathan acted correctly and properly when he bravely went against the American establishment's hiding of the truth from Israel. He set a new standard of Jewish and human responsibility for all of us. He should be considered a Prisoner of Zion, as 'from Zion will come forth' the light of truth and justice for all the nations".

Yosef Mendelovitch Letter Protesting Denial of PoZ Status, 14 Jan 2005

J4JP Release - January 14, 2005 [Translated from Hebrew by J4JP]

To The Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon

Shalom rav!

I have learned that the government committee which awards certificates to Prisoners of Zion has rejected the request to grant Prisoner of Zion status to Israeli national hero, Jonathan Pollard, G-d bless his soul!

The committee claims that it is not authorized to rule on such governmental issues. What administrative committee is authorized to decide that Mr. Pollard is a national hero?! Fortunately, it is not up to government functionaries to determine something which the People of Israel determined long ago.

It is without a doubt, utterly ridiculous [that the committee has] determined that according to some administrative norms, a national hero who sacrificed himself to save Jewish lives, and who was arrested for his self sacrifice on behalf of Israel, is not a Prisoner of Zion!

I, and the rest of the Prisoners of Zion, strongly demand that you personally intervene to correct this slap-in-the-face and use your governmental authority to extend this honor to Mr. Pollard.

Moreover, it is certainly time for the Government to end its shameful behavior regarding the endless calls to secure the immediate release of Mr. Pollard.

If, from your point of view, Mr. Pollard is not deserving of this honor, then I, a holder of this certificate, prefer to be what I am without any certificate. So shall many, many other prisoners of Zion.

Yosef Mendelevitch
Former Prisoner of Zion, 11 years in prison on behalf of the Zionist struggle.

See Also:

Hebrew Text: Yosef Mendelovitch Letter Protesting Denial of PoZ Status http://www.jonathanpollard.org/

Is Espionage a Zionist Activity? -- by Esther Pollard -- Special to I.M.R.A. http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010905.htm

Israel Won't Recognize Pollard as a Prisoner of Zion http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010705a.htm

Esther Pollard: Refusal of Prisoner of Zion Status "Petty and Mean-spirited" http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010705.htm

"Israel's Debt of Gratitude to Jonathan Pollard," by HaRav Shlomo Aviner, B'Ahava U B'Emunah, January 15, 2005. HaRav Shlomo Aviner is the Rosh Yeshiva of Ateret Cohanim and the Rav of Beit El.

[JP Note: Originally published in Hebrew in two parts, (B'Ahava U B'Emunah, Machon Meir, 20 Tevet and 27 Tevet 5765), the following speech by HaRav Shlomo Aviner was first presented at a recent demonstration for Jonathan Pollard. It was translated to English by J4JP].

We have been standing here in the rain for a long time, getting drenched. It is good that we are doing this for Jonathan's sake; he got soaked for us with every fiber of his being. Jonathan Pollard is a man who never thought of himself, only of others. He nullified himself for the sake of others.

One might suppose that a man like this, who never thinks of himself, only of others, would be someone easily destroyed by his enemies, quickly wiped off the face of the earth. After all, in this world -- at least according to Darwin -- only the strong survive. Kindly people disappear.

In G-d's world, however, that is not so. The huge and mighty dinosaur which neglected and abandoned its own offspring became extinct; but the small, fragile bird which carefully nurtures its young is still in existence today. Similarly, historically, what became of all of the mighty Kingdoms that persecuted the Jewish People? Egypt, Babylonia, Persia and Medes, Greece and Rome? They disappeared! But we, the Jewish People, are still here!

What nation represented the height of self interest in ancient times? Sodom! The people of Sodom refused to give a cent to the poor, for fear of being deprived themselves. A girl in Sodom who took pity on a poor person was burnt to death. Another was smeared with honey and left to be stung to death by bees.

Who, at that time, represented the polar opposite of self interest, nullifying himself and thinking only of others? Avraham Avinu! Avraham ran to receive guests, to take them in and care for them with all his might, even when he was in great pain, still suffering from his circumcision. Avraham put his nephew Lot first, nullifying his own desires by allowing Lot to choose first whatever territory he preferred. When Avraham learned that Lot had been taken captive, he did not think twice. He immediately enlisted all of his disciples to save him. Avraham prayed for Sodom.

One would think that a man like Avraham, so self-sacrificing and not concerned for his own welfare, would be poor. Not so! Avraham was very wealthy! So much so that our sages said, "Better the fertilizer from Avraham's orchard than the wealth of Avimelech".

Avraham had a good heart. He thought of others, not of himself. Under his direction, Eliezer, Avraham's bondsman, sought a bride for Yitzhak (Avraham's son), with the same qualities, who did not think about herself, only of others. When Eliezer first encountered Rebecca, she ran from the well to the drinking trough to bring water for all who were thirsty. Eliezer concluded that she was the one that G-d had designated as a bride for Yitzhak (Genesis 24:14). Rashi expands on this: "As a doer of kind deeds she was worthy of Yitzhak, and she deserved to become a part of Avraham's family".

The same is true of Moses. Moses was a Prince of Egypt, but he chose to go forth to be with his brothers (Exodus 2:11). He was consumed by concern for his brothers. Pharaoh offered him numerous positions, but he preferred to work in the Jewish concentration camps so that he might assist his People. When he saw an Egyptian smiting a Hebrew, he did not think twice; he killed the Egyptian. He knew that from now on the entire Egyptian security forces would be after him, and indeed that is what occurred. But G-d performed a miracle for him and "saved him from Pharaoh's sword" (Exodus 18:4). He didn't think about himself; only about others.

When Moses arrived in Midian, he saw the shepherds harassing Jethro's daughters and he immediately intervened. It was his first day as a stranger in a foreign land. As such, it might have been wiser to keep a low profile and not stand out by intervening; but he did not think for a second about what was best for him, only for others.

There are those who have no self interest, who think only of others; and there are those who think only of themselves. Jonathan Pollard is in the former category. Did he not know that he was taking a risk? Did he not know that the Americans are chauvinist, cruel and harsh in this matter? (Ed: America is proud of its vast covert spy operations spanning the globe and penetrating deep into the heartland of friend and foe alike, Israel included. Yet America is outraged by any effort on the part of Israel to defend its own national security interests in a similar fashion).

The truth is Jonathan risked himself, not just one time, but for every piece of critical information he attained. This is like the Sea of Reeds in Epypt. It did not part from end to end when Nachshom jumped in (Rabbenu Bachaye). Rather, the more he advanced, the more it parted: "The sea saw and fled" (Psalm 114:3).

Every piece of information was a piece of self-sacrifice. Even when Jonathan was arrested, he delayed his interrogators as much as possible to enable the rest of the Israeli team to escape.

Jonathan is a man whose whole life is devoted to the good of others. Even now in prison, he is concerned about others. He writes; he speaks out; he does good deeds; he sends his wife to comfort mourners in Israel, and does every thing he can do from afar.

Jonathan epitomizes the essence of the Jewish People. The entire essence of the Jewish People is a People with no self-interest who care only for others.

Regarding choosing a mate, the Shulchan Aruch counsels that one should investigate well to ensure that the person one chooses is not self-centered, lest he or she turn out to be not a Jew, but a Gibeonite (Even HaEzer 2:2). The Gibeonites are not Jews. They are a hard-hearted people.

Jews, by contrast, are known by 3 traits. They are humble, merciful and doers of kind deeds (Yevamot 79a).

We, the Jewish People, who are concerned for others, and who stand here on behalf of a man who thought a great deal about others, must show gratitude. Gratitude precedes good-heartedness. Even people without a good heart are grateful to those who have done them favors. The book "Chovot HaLevavot" makes clear that the foundation of all morality and all good traits is gratitude.

Gratitude is of supreme importance to the Jewish People. The Torah demands it even regarding Egypt: "Do not despise the Egyptian, since you were an immigrant in his land" (Deuteronomy 23:8). This is in reference to the terrible "hospitality" of backbreaking labor and harsh edicts which mandated throwing infants into the river or slaughtering children for their blood! Even so, at the time we had nowhere else to be but Egypt, so we are required to show gratitude.

We are similarly required to show gratitude to dogs, because as we exited Egypt, "not a dog barked" (Exodus 11:7). We left at midnight with the Angel of Death in the city, and the dogs wept (Bava Kamma 60b). Had the dogs barked when millions were leaving, it would have caused a terrible panic, causing people to be trampled and crushed. Therefore as a reward to the dogs, animal carcasses (judged to be unfit for Kosher consumption) are given to dogs (Exodus 22:30).

Are these the same dogs that helped us in Egypt? Of course not. Does a dog have free will? The answer is: Nevertheless, in expressing gratitude we Jews always go to the extreme, because gratitude is the foundation of everything!

Another example: Prior to the Exodus, the plague of blood in the Nile was not unleashed by Moses, since the water had saved him as an infant. Does water have free will? Nevertheless, Moshe shows gratitude to the water! Likewise, with the plague of boils, it was Aaron who threw the furnace soot into the air, causing the plague. Moses did not, since he had a debt of gratitude to the earth, because the sand had saved him when he "buried the Egyptian in the sand" (Exodus 2:12).

According to the Torah, gratitude was required to be shown to Egypt, to dogs, to water and to soil! That is how far we go in teaching the importance of showing gratitude. Shall we then show no gratitude to Jonathan Pollard? Impossible! All of Israel owes a debt of gratitude to Jonathan Pollard. The entire Jewish People ought to enlist to save him. That is how a righteous people acts, and all the more so a country. "One for all and all for one". These words by Alexander Dumas ought to ring true for us as well.

Unfortunately, we live in a world of falsehood; we do not see the truth. We don't see who has a good heart. How do we fight in a world of falsehood? With the help of the truth! Truth contradicts and eradicates falsehood! The world is full of lies. Lies about Jonathan, lies as though Eretz Yisrael is not ours, lies about the Torah. You can't fight falsehood with physical weapons, but only by stating the truth again and again.

Falsehood, the Evil Impulse, wickedness, disgracefulness -- all fear the truth more than anything. We must constantly pursue the truth. With the help of a single truth, mountains of falsehood can be toppled. The truth of Torah, kindness, and humanity repels evil and falsehood. We are therefore called upon to cry out the truth all the time. It is all one war: The battle for truth and the battle for Jonathan. Truth was given to Yaacov (Michah 7:20), and truth is G-d's seal.

Whoever does kind deeds without ulterior motives is emulating the traits of G-d. The Master-of-the-Universe has many traits, but first and foremost, the root and foundation of all else, is kindness: "The universe is built from kindness" (Psalm 89:3). G-d performs kind deeds every day, constantly, every hour and every moment. This is a supreme spirit that stirs in man from On High. Rabbi Avraham HaKohen Kook wrote, "The longing to be good to all stems from a heavenly source" (Orot HaKodesh 3:316). This refers to being good not for an ulterior motive, but because goodness itself is good.

This is the supreme trait of G-d and it precedes all else, all science and all philosophy, all Torah and all holiness. It comes before all else -- Kindness! This is the trait that characterizes Jonathan, who took upon himself such an enormous mission. There is an American saying that sometimes events are greater than the men who shape them.

Divine Providence chose Jonathan to perform this great kindness and to bring great salvation to the Jewish People. We must proclaim the truth all the time! It will banish the darkness, the materialism, the selfishness, the lust, the man preoccupied with nothing but himself. A person concerned with others is a happy person.

We have assembled here in the rain for this great mitzvah of freeing Jonathan. Everyone here is an emissary of truth, and he should proclaim it everywhere. Others will hear, and they too will repeat it. By such means truth will spread throughout the entire Nation.

We look forward to the day when Jonathan will go free and will stand here, expounding words of Torah. We will hear them, and we will be able to crowd around together in the shadow of a man of whom we will be able to say: "He has no self-interest, but only the interest of others at heart". We will continue to follow in his path, working for his cause and praying for complete salvation and his swift return to our midst.

Speedily in our day! Amen!

See Other Articles by HaRav Aviner:

Putting Fellow Man First: Jonathan Pollard http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2005/010605.htm

The Nation is with Jonathan! http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2003/121803.htm

Fighting for Our Brother Jonathan; Saving Ourselves http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/051204.htm

Over There is A Man Who Loves Israel http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2003/061503b.htm

Where is Jonathan? http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/043004.htm

Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi is Muslim Co-Chair, R&B Islam-Israel Fellowship. He is Secretary General, Italian Muslim Assembly. Contact him at islam.inst@flashnet.it or on his website: www.amislam.com

To Go To Top
Posted by David Ha'Ivri, January 21, 2005.

A civil war is one of the biggest nightmares of the Jewish people, but it is not something unheard of. On the contrary, fighting between Jews has followed us throughout history, and often for good reason. In Israel a civil war is called mechemet achim, which means "a war of brothers" and the Tanach tells us of many such wars.

For instance, at the end of Shoftim (the Book of Judges) we learn that all the tribes of Israel went to war against the tribe of Binyamin at Givah. At that time, the tribe of Binyamin was almost totally annihilated because they adopted the atrocious ways of the Canaanite nations. In Melachim (the Book of Kings) we learn of other wars between the tribes. The Israelite tribes were eventually exiled from the land as punishment for following the ways of other nations. At the time of the second Temple, the Maccabim fought the Hellenists Israelites who wanted to corrupt the Jewish people with Greek culture and idolatry.

In modern history there were Jews who assisted our enemies. For instance, the Kapos, in the Shoah, to save their own skin, assisted the Nazis. During the foreign rule by the British there were Jews who enlisted in the ranks of the British Police. The Haganah actively took part in what was called "the season" - short for "hunting season" - in which Jews were sent out to hunt other Jews and give them over to the British. A boy from Haifa named Yedidiyah Segal, who was a member of the Irgun, was abducted by the Haganah and tortured to death at their hands.

During the War of Independence there was the shameful incident of the Altalena in which Yitzhak Rabin commanded the bombing of an Irgun ship that was bringing soldiers and weapons in order to liberate Jerusalem. 18 Jewish soldiers were shot dead while swimming to shore from the burning and sinking ship. No inquiry was held for the violation of international law forbidding shooting soldiers in the water. The next day, David Ben Gurion, speaking on the podium of the new Knesset, praised "the holy cannon" that sunk the Altalena.

Menachem Begin, who was head of the Irgun at that time, and was on the Altalena while it was being bombed by the Haganah, ordered his men to refrain from returning fire, thus avoiding a civil war. In tears, Begin called on his men to enlist in Ben Gurion's army, thereby surrendering to Ben Gurion's demand to control the fate of the nation.

The arms that the Altalena brought in to liberate Jerusalem went down in the shallows of the Sea of Tel Aviv, along with the dream to unite Jerusalem at that time. Menachem Begin's unrealistic sentimental notions of brotherhood caused him to choose a questionable unity with Jews who were not loyal to our values. This resulted in a divided Jerusalem and set the precedent for choosing a false political unity rather than achieving our national goals.

Again and again, civil war in Israel is forced upon us by those who are not loyal to Jewish values and sovereignty and who are not afraid to lift their hand against their fellow Jews. At the same time they point a finger at loyal Jews whom they claim are a threat to the unity of the nation and manipulatively take advantage of sentiments that they themselves do not possess. And so Jerusalem fell to the hands of the Jordanians, the Sinai was given over to the Egyptians, pork is sold in the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, and our land is being given over to our enemies - all in the name of "Jewish unity".

Unity of the Jewish people is important as long as we are united by our loyalty to HaShem and His Torah. Unity in treason to HaShem can only bring tragedy to our people. There will be no war of brothers, but only because those loyal to HaShem to His land, and to His Torah stand strong and do not give in to the weakness and emptiness of those Jews who are willing to give up our national heritage. In the end, they will join us or they will disappear into history like all those before them who took the path of assimilation.

We are determined to have a proud Jewish country in Israel based on Jewish values. The land is ours, as set down in the Bible, as God's gift to the Jews. We will not give our heritage over to our enemies in the name of a false unity with those whose goal is to erase the holiness of our nation and land. We will stand strong with our convictions and they will be forced to acknowledge that we are here to stay.

David Ha'ivri, chairman of Revava, is also editor of Darka Shel Torah and Ideas in Action newsletters, and the publisher of books teaching Jewish pride and faith in HaShem. He has set a goal to put the Jewish people back on the footpath of our fathers, and build a proud and strong nation whose national policy is based on Jewish values. He can be reached by email at haivri@hameir.org or at his website: http://www.hameir.org/

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 21, 2005.


Don't expect to hear this information on CBS. This is from http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004740.php.

A close friend of the Coptic Christian brutally murdered in New Jersey along with his family, Hossam Armanious, is the source of this information, which comes to you exclusively from Jihad Watch:

The Armanious family had inspired several Muslims to convert to Christianity - or thought they had. These converts were actually practicing taqiyya, or religious deception, pretending to be friends of these Christians in order to strengthen themselves against them, as in Qur'an 3:28: "Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful -- he that does this has nothing to hope for from Allah -- except in self-defense."

It was these "converts" who knocked on the door of the Armanious home. Of course, the family, not suspecting the deception, was happy to see the "converted" men and willingly let them in to their home. That's why there was no sign of forced entry. Then the "converted" Muslims did their grisly work.

Many Copts are regarding the murders as a warning to the Coptic community as a whole, related to the increasing strife between Copts and Muslims in Egypt and the Copts' energetic efforts in America to get the truth out about the differences between Middle Eastern Christians and Muslims -- differences that the Islamic lobby, with its disingenuous talk of "Arab Americans," routinely glosses over and hopes you don't notice. The Copts, to their immense credit, have been particularly outspoken among Middle Eastern Christians about Muslim oppression. And yes, many are active on Pal Talk debating Muslims.

The nature of the warning? The murders send a signal from the Muslims to the Copts: we are going to behave here the same way we behaved in Egypt, and the First Amendment and American law enforcement will not protect you. Don't expect America to keep you safe from us. The oppression and harassment you thought you had left behind in Egypt has now come to you.

This means, if Armanious's friend is correct, that this is indeed America's Theo van Gogh murder: indication that all Muslims in the nation do not, as we are supposed to believe, unanimously accept the parameters of American pluralism. That at least some are willing to enforce Sharia penalties right here, right now.

But there are so many nominees for the Walter Duranty prize this time that most Americans have no clue of what's going on. Duranty, of course, was the New York Times reporter who knowingly covered up information about the genocidal famine Stalin caused and fueled in Ukraine, and won a Pulitzer Prize for his efforts. The Pinch Sulzberger Times of these dark days should dedicate the whole paper to Duranty's honor, and put his picture on the front page right next to "All the News That's Fit to Print."

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter.

To Go To Top
Posted by Penelope Knight, January 20, 2005.

There is something definitely wrong going on over at the U.N.

Oil for Food programs rife with corruption. The UN funding of terrorists through well-known terrorist aiding organizations filling our noses with obscene rot. (See below article) And I am 100% sure there are hundreds more debacles awaiting investigation in that crumbling body called the U.N.

Most Americans do not wish to have our tax monies sent to aiding terrorists - past, present or "Future Terrorists of the World".

Can the UN be rebuilt and can its reputation redeemed?

I say NOT. It is time to dissolve the UN or at least withdraw from it, and send it from our shores.

I protest any support of the UN. And I want action now.

This article is called "The U.N. At Work." It's by Dore Gold, and appeared in the Wall Street Journal, January 19, 2005; Page A12. Mr. Gold, Israel's ambassador to the U.N. from 1997-99, is author of "Tower of Babble: How the U.N. Has Fueled Global Chaos" (Crown, 2004).

In 2003 and 2004, the Israel Defense Forces captured documentation showing how the U.N. Development Program was regularly funding two Hamas front organizations: the Tulkarm Charity Committee and the Jenin District Committee for Charitable Funds. The donations varied -- sometimes $4,000 and sometimes $10,000. Receipts and even copies of thank-you notes to UNDP were discovered. The U.N. should have exercised considerable caution with transfers of this sort, considering that in 2002, Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement described Jenin as "the capital of the suicide bombers." Nonetheless, one might ask, how was the U.N. to know that these were actually Hamas front groups?

Here's how: In June 2003, the Office of the Coordinator of the Activities of the Israel Defense Forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip asked UNDP to stop all assistance to the Jenin District Committee because of its Hamas connection. Israel knew that Hamas operatives ran the charity; its deputy director had been a member of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the elite terrorist unit of Hamas. Timothy Rothermel, UNDP's special representative in Jerusalem, turned down the Israeli request.

Another disturbing revelation from captured documents is the support provided by the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for the "Koran and Sunna Society" of Kalkilya. UNRWA has been heavily penetrated by Hamas for years; Hamas members dominate many of its unions, including the teachers union. But this new link represented a further deterioration in the U.N.'s connections, for the "Koran and Sunna Society" defines itself as salafi -- it adopts doctrines from militant Islam. Indeed, the "Koran and Sunna Society," which has six branches in the West Bank, distributes pamphlets published in Saudi Arabia that are often written by radical Wahhabi clerics. References to the value of martyrdom and jihad are not uncommon in these materials. One of the Society's schools, called "The Martyrs of the Al-Aqsa Intifada," received payments from UNRWA for educating children of Palestinian refugees in March and June of 2004.

This glaringly bad judgment by U.N. agencies is not confined to the West Bank and Gaza. In October 2004, the "Arab International Forum for Rehabilitation and Development in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" held a conference in Beirut under the auspices of the U.N.'s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). The conference announced a joint initiative between ESCWA and the "Coalition of Goodness," an organization led by a spiritual head of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradhawi. This U.N. partner, a year earlier, appeared in Sweden and spoke in favor of suicide operations against Israeli civilians. And two months before the Beirut conference, he signed a communiqué calling on Muslims to support the forces fighting the U.S. in Iraq.

Besides getting to the bottom of the Oil-for-Food scandal, it is equally vital to get the U.N. to halt its backing of recognized international terrorist groups. The Bush administration gave the U.N. a special status in the Arab-Israeli peace process by making it part of the multilateral "Quartet" -- along with the U.S., the EU and Russia. But because of this behavior on the part of its agencies, the U.N. should not be granted this diplomatic standing by any of the parties to Middle Eastern negotiations. Since the U.N. presents itself as the source of international legitimacy, Hamas fronts can now argue in domestic courts that they are legitimate humanitarian agencies that benefit from U.N. recognition. True, the U.N. is a huge complex of many sub-organizations -- and it may be difficult to monitor everyone. But the U.N. has a duty today to clean up its act before it asks for the trust of Israel or any law-abiding member of the international community again.

To Go To Top
Posted by Carrie Devorah, January 20, 2005.

Most people know New Jersey as Frank Sinatra's home state or a place one drives through on the Interstate. Long linked to Tony Soprano types and the big "M," the Garden State was overcoming their Family reputation. Then Saturday happened, Sylvia's birthday.

Police interrupted a private party at 4:00am, not for too much noise but lack of it. A "religious family with no enemies" appears to have had few close friends. They lay in their own blood for days before being found hog tied, slaughtered ritualistically, their necks slashed top to bottom. Father. Mother. Two daughters. Emad Fahmy, a relative, said "They have no enemies." The sweet 16 birthday girl's great-uncle Milad Garas identified Sylvia by a tattoo on her wrist, her face battered beyond recognition. Burglary wasn't the motive for the 1997 emigrees' murder, relatives said. The blue collar family's gold was stolen last year.

50 mourners, maybe, attended their funeral.

Outwardly, they were regular people. Their life style wasn't lavish. You read about their daughters in community bulletins not headlines. 8 year old Monica, the youngest, a third grader at PS 6, sang in the church choir. The mother, 36 year old Amal, a letter carrier for the United States Post office, provided their family's income stability with government benefits and promise of pensions. Hossam the dad, a catering hall server, achieved America's dream. Four years ago, November 2000, he bought a house for $96,500, according to one newspaper. 16 year old Sylvia, cast regularly in Dickenson High School's plays shared her father's platform on the world stage of Islamic politics. They were outspoken.

New Jersey, promoting itself as "the getaway state" with sandy beaches and lighthouses decorating postcards sold at truck stops, had been discovered as a hideaway for runaways from religious persecution in Muslim countries. Like the Hossam Armanious family. Now, the whole world was discovering, through the Armanious massacre, Coptics' political quest for religious salvation from Muslim hatred. Hossam and his family, active members of the St. George & St. Shenouda Coptic Orthodox Christian congregation Church, were Egyptian Coptics. Months earlier, Elizabeth Goldhirsh a New York writer described neighboring New York's community of Coptics, Egyptian Christians, as vibrant "truly one of its hidden cultural treasures." Few people knew about the Armanious', off line that is. Church deacon Fred Ayed knew Hossam thirty years back from Egypt. In the virtual world of the Internet, Hossam was as open with his Coptic Christian beliefs as he was in Egypt before moving to America. "A most outspoken Christian" reputed for fiery dialogue with Muslims on paltalk.com, a Muslim website, Hossam regularly debated religion in the Middle Eastern chat room, espousing his Coptic beliefs. While zipcodes change, rarely do people's politics. Rumor has it a fatwa, edict for death, was ordered on Hossam before he moved to America. The New York Post reported Hossam "was threatened for making anti-Muslim remarks online." Another Middle Easterner reported one online exchange. Hossam was told, "You'd better stop this bull---- or we are going to track you down like a chicken and kill you." Hossam wrongly interpreted America's Freedom of Religion guaranteed his Freedom of Expression and offline anonymity.

On the record, Jersey City Mayor Jeremiah Healy told reporters." Whoever is responsible for this horror will be brought to justice." Jersey City Police Chief Robert Troy acknowledged "They probably knew their killers." A "former disgruntled tenant is being sought." Off the record, the FBI was called in. Immediately.

Coptic Reverend Makarious wants Coptic youth growing up American "to know where they came from." Sylvia's friend at Dickenson HS, Jessica Cimino, said Sylvia knew. "She was very religious and very opinionated." Sylvia tattooed a Coptic Cross on her wrist. It, too, was viciously slashed. Coptology began after the Arab conquest of Egypt, 641 AD. Coptologists, descended from Egyptians, refused to convert to Islam when it first arrived 7th Century, in their country. They were named "Gypt," after an Egyptian God, from the Greek word Egyptos, Egypt. Coptic was Egypt's native language before Arabic prevailed. Copts and Muslim compatriots banded together in the 19th and 20th century to revolt against British rule, post WWI, to defeat Islam's Ottoman Empire. Coptics were subject to a Hamayouni decree forbidding Coptology.

The Muslim Brothers, a militant fundamentalist Islamic group, was started in the 1920's, along with other societies for Muslim Youth, resisting Western influence, and supporting violence against Copts. By the '50's, Egypt's President Nasser promoted the Muslim Brothers teachings. Copts immigrated out of the Middle East to countries such as the USA, Canada, and Australia. So did Coptic hatred.

In the 1980's, Islamic militants increased violent attacks on Egyptian Coptics, western tourists, sacking and burning Coptic churches and businesses. They demanded civil laws be changed to Islam's Sharia code Coptics say deprive non-Muslims of equal rights. In the '90's, attacks on Copts further escalated along with forced Islamization. By 2000, more Coptic homes, businesses were destroyed. When Islamics demolished a Church in Southern Egypt's village of Al Kosheh, 21 Copts were murdered and martyred.

Dr. Daniel Pipes, at the first International Coptic conference, said Islam "the new global enemy of civilization" must be fought by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Pipes says Islamics want it made very clear Christians in countries with a Muslim majority are unwelcome. He says Copts outside Egypt speak up because Copts inside Egypt, a minority with "dwindling rights, trapped in poverty, uncertainty, despised and distrusted as second class citizens, often victims of brutality, facing discrimination in education, jobs, from police and the courts," do not have that freedom. Pipes says Christian exodus for a better life in the West will continue to places like New Jersey. As did the Hossam Armanious family. And their enemy who slaughtered them like cows.

The US Senate and State Department surveys of worldwide religious and Christians persecutions reveal Copt communities are demanding abolishment of the 19th century Hamayouni decree requiring Copts to seek permission from the President of Egypt to repair even toilets in Churches. Mosques are built in Egypt without restriction. Copts protest government control over their radio and TV broadcasts, Egypt's Ministry of Islamic affairs refusal to return their Church trust lands, religious affiliation on their national ID cards, denigrating references to Christians in school curriculums, Government controlled media labeling Christians infidels and propagating attacks against Copts.

Author Oriana Fallaci wrote "Christianity's ancient stronghold is giving away rapidly to Islam." Today, Bethlehem and Nazareth, once Christian majority populations, are now majority Muslim towns. The Christian population in Jerusalem is 2%. Barely. Muslims are targeting Iraqi Copts with terrorist bombing murders similar terrorists attacks targeting Israeli citizens. Pipes' projects a dangerous decline in Middle East's Christian population point "their cultural vitality and political significance" disappearing, raising curiosity over legitimacy of America's war in Iraq being a war against terrorism or a war to preserve Christianity. "Die Welt," Islamic scholar Bernhard Lewis said "Europe will be Islamic by the end of this century, Europa wird am Ende des Jahrhunderts islamisch sein."

There are 10.5 million global Copts, 9 million in Egypt, 500,000 concentrated in New Jersey and California, with 10,000 living in New York City.

A 56-year-old doctor who emigrated from Egypt 25 years ago says Coptics bond because they were a small Christian group in Egypt fearing walking down streets risking attack by Muslims for wearing a cross. Coptic Reverend Makarious agrees the bond keeps Copts close. 18-year-old New York college senior Chris Roufaeil says Coptics are discriminated against by their name or when Muslims "come right out and ask whether you're Christian." Roufaeil doesn't like that people lump everyone from the Middle East together." He says there are differences between Arabs. Copts support Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State, their own homeland." Another Copt said, "The only place with any freedom in the Middle East is Israel."

Grassroot unity organizers for Copt communities regularly exchange ideas on "organizing presence at national and local levels of government" by fundraising to hire lobbyists to promote Coptic issues with US policy makers so they are not "ignored by US policy makers." Coptic activists encourage holding seminars, publishing materials and starting Coptic sections inside libraries of universities and colleges, the hotbed for pro-Palestinian sentiment in Canada, Europe and the USA. Their goal is to nurture future Coptic communities political leaders and assist new Copts in America. One Copt website said, "we in DC are considered a friendly city, since we offer free housing for new comers and help them get a bank account, drivers license, rent them an apartment and help them get a job, etc."

It was early spring when a Middle Eastern Christian Arab drove the sedan taking me to Dulles Airport, enroute to Denver to speak against terrorism. He shared that his fiancée, a Christian, was killed by Muslims. In Egypt. A car bombing. Reading about the Armanious family fate, I realized the price of the Armanious family bloodbath is a Coptical illusion things aren't always what they seem to be. Even in Jersey.

Carrie Devorah is an award winning investigative photojournalist based in Washington DC. Her family are the first Canadians to lose a member to a terrorist bus bombing in Jerusalem. Devorah is a certified crime information analyst and profiler. January 16, 2005 is the Hebrew first anniversary date of her brother's murder on Azza Street in Jerusalem.

To Go To Top
Posted by Tamar Rush, January 20, 2005.

For Immediate Release - Office of the Press Secretary - January 20, 2005 - 11:13 A.M. (EST)


Statement by the President

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Today, with the countdown for America's just and moral crusade against Islamia reaching its final stage, I have been advised to send greetings to Muslamoids around the world as you people celebrate that annual Christmas-wannabe terrorist convention of yours in Saudi bin Labia. It is my sincere hope that none of you boys get coal in your stockings, nor that the chilly desert breezes blowing up your Hare Krishna togas make your sacks get so prickly they chafe that Caramello thigh meat of yours raw before me and Rummy get a chance to bomb it into the Godless dust the good Lord intends for it to be.

You know, the Bible teaches us that mid-January is a time of love. It's a time when God's true chosen people identify themselves by pigging out on cinnamon red hots, and exchanging $3.50 heart-shaped cards filled with girlish little poems that only a homo would ever be caught dead saying out loud. Truly, it is a time of profound meaningfulness and a reaffirmation of the superiority of American chocolate. And that's why it's all the more puzzling to Laura and me how you people can thumb your nose at a good thing in favor of going to Mecca and line dancing in open sewers around a big ugly cubist Christmas tree almost five weeks after anyone in their right mind has already disassembled theirs and put it back in the attic.

I was recently intrigued to learn that those of you who embark upon the pilgrimmage to the holy land are called "hadjis." Now I know a thing or two about hadjis. I used to dish them out - along with purple nurples - to scrawny weasel fellas in the locker room after baseball practice. Now, why you'd want to call yourself the same thing as a musty Fruit of the Loom buttcrack tourniquet is beyond me, but hey, I know you need something to keep you occupied during your life-long drag race down the highway to hell.

To be honest with you though, if the Secret Service weren't convinced I'd be subjected to mob dismemberment immediately upon arrival, I'd truly like to join you people in Mecca. As a former DEKE social committee chairman, I've got a damned solid record when it comes to throwing sweet toga ragers. And while that whole beer prohibition thing would no doubt be a significant downer, I'm more than confident that we can compensate for it with plenty of demon stonings, mass tramplings, and chopping the hands off any poor or homeless folks dumb enough to show their faces in broad daylight. Oh well. Maybe next year.

In closing, I wanted to say that this year's Hajithon comes at a time when I will be attending at least 10 parties in my honour. Men and women will be sitting together, dancing real close, and dining on some of the sweetest, juciest, pork-roasts that American can provide! Wish you were here!

Thank you.

To Go To Top
Posted by Rachel Saperstein, January 20, 2005.
For more information on Gush Katif, go to http://English.katif.net

"I'm so tired... so tired." C looks at me across her dining room table. "We try everything. We talk to people. We talk to groups. We go to meetings. We go out and strike. We write letters, wear orange t-shirts, knock on doors, speak to the media, plead with Knesset members. Our daughters worked through the night sewing orange hats and now they are on a three day walk to Jerusalem. Yet nothing seems to stop the Prime Minister. It's as if a wall has come down in front of him and he can neither see nor hear our pain. We must be expelled! Why? It's good for the country?

"Our lives are on hold. We can't plan for next year. Where do I send my child to school? What job will I have? Where will my husband work? We'll have no home. Our married children and grandchildren live nearby. Will they be able to come with us? How do I say goodbye to my neighbors? I've lived with them for twenty-five years."

At that moment we hear an explosion close to her house. We tense up. No sound of damage. The rocket must have fallen in an open space. We exhale... We hadn't realized we had been holding our breath.

Her son runs to her. "He's still traumatized by this morning's rocket attack near his school," she says. "My daughter was hurt in a mortar attack. Yesterday she went to the Knesset to speak with Rabbi Melchior of Labor."

"Why?" I ask.

"Oh, don't you know? He's heading a legal committee. They're writing a law that will let soldiers beat us. They need to make it legal. Imagine, it will be legal to break our hands and legs. What's happened to our country? Where is my beautiful country? Why has it turned against me and my family? We grew up with the songs and the history and love of the land. We take our children on trips. Our kids don't go to Thailand to find their roots. They find it here, walking through the wadis, climbing the hills, planting another tree.

"Look at my home. How we struggled to build it" We lived in a tiny pre-fab on the sand dunes when we came here then we built this house. Years of struggle and love. My husband was in the army. My son-in-law is in the army. My son was just drafted. His wife lives nearby with our two granddaughters. I must call her. Mortars often fall near their house. But she's strong...

"Can I make you a cup of coffee" "A few weeks ago we spoke to a group of teenagers from leftist

kibbutzim. We talked about the purpose of Gush Katif. They came to visit us near the Knesset where we were striking. They said they were with us. Then their leader gave a statement to the newspapers that he would use these same teenagers to evict us if the army couldn't do it.

"Our kids are not violent. One of the Gush kids was interviewed on television during the peaceful three-day march. Instead of showing pictures of the march they showed the violence when soldiers tried to evict teenagers from the Yitzhar outpost. Funny thing is, you only saw soldiers beating and pushing the kids. And the boy said, "I'm talking to you about our march. Why are you showing pictures of violence?" I was so proud of the boy and so upset by what the media tried to show."

The family sits around the large kitchen table eating supper. I tell C to go and eat. But she, a woman of enduring strength, needs to talk.

The meal is over. Her daughter goes to the piano to practice her pieces, music of Israel. We hum quietly as she plays those familiar songs that pierce our soul. C smiles. "It's a bad day" she says, "but they won't break me."

Rachel and Moshe Saperstein live in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 20, 2005.

Ariel (Arik) Sharon, Israel's Prime Minister, has always needed a war in his life.

It really never mattered who the enemy was as long as the skills of battle could be used.

Regrettably, Sharon has gone to war against the very Jews he encouraged to settle the Land. When he was with them, he was at war with the Leftist establishment who wanted the settlers vacated. Any war was a good war for Arik and now he is at war with former friends, supporters and admirers. In addition to using military tactics, Sharon has also attempted to use quasi-legal draconian measures against Civil Disobedience, reminiscent of the attack by China's military on the protestors in Tianneman Square.

Now he is actually dividing the nation of Israel by using all his military skills against all those who would defy his idea and dare to go against him. This includes both the settlers he wishes to remove, those in his Cabinet whom he has fired for opposing him and his own Military Intelligence who has advised against the "Disengagement". I must add, the growing number of soldiers who believe the orders to vacate Jews from their Land is illegal and unethical. So far, as of January 18th at least 10,000 have signed the petition NOT to obey orders to uproot Jews from their homes.

In the meantime, as if to put a stamp of approval on his treachery, Shimon Peres of Labor and Yossi Beilin of Yahad, both of the Oslo gang, voted approval of Sharon's "Disengagement".

Every day more is exposed of his intended war tactics against settlers. Every phase of battle is being employed as Sharon displays his knowledge of battle.

We are hearing about 'agents provocateurs' being deployed amongst the settlers to fake or for real to shoot at Israeli soldiers from crowds of protesting settlers. Then, Sharon can unleash his special units to fire into crowds with live ammo. Hopefully, Sharon will back away from this tactic. We saw the misuse of Shabak by then PM Yitzhak Rabin when he employed Avishai Raviv as an 'agent provocateur' among others whose job it was to be a rabble rouser with the blame falling on the Right and the Settlers. Shabak has unfortunately lost much of its credibility as an honest and non-political Intelligence organization. Hopefully, confidence in this important area of government can be restored.

We recall the special army/police units, called "Yatam", selected to attack the Settlers at the instructions of Rabin. The men selected were not to be religious, not related to any settler and have a certain amoral psychological profile that had no pity. Breaking heads and bones would be no problem for these selected aberrant personalities.

Now Sharon seems to be ready to follow the same plan - only more so. Arik was a far better planning General than Rabin ever could be or was. Arik was a brilliant tactician and, like an attack dog, it never really mattered to him who the victim was.


Sharon's ego cannot tolerate failure or admit to a mistake. Once a mistake has been made and it becomes clear to associates and/or the people, Sharon's inflated ego will speed into overdrive to suppress, deny, blame someone else, and - always - artful avoidance in accepting blame for a bad decision.

To further prove that he was right, he will expand the mistake - even when it has already resulted in deaths from excessive vulnerability - as we see in Sderot. Sharon is not the only outstanding denier of fallibility.

One need not say much about the failed Oslo Accords and its perpetrators which resulted in so much death Since Oslo was signed September 13, 1993, more than 1700 Israelis killed, including some 48 Americans, with tens of thousands wounded many maimed for life. If you would multiply that by 55 you would approximate what that would if it was a casualty count in America. That would be 93,500 killed by Terrorism.

But, please note that Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin continue to try reviving the corpse of that ill-fated policy as they assist Sharon to adopt their deadly plans.

For Generals overstating the threat level is SOP (Standard Operating Procedure). However, when used against your own people, it has the marks of a dictator-in-development.


Sharon is planning to use an additional division, his largest IDF (Israel Defense Force) division, the Golan Division, which has armor brigades, artillery units and other units. The Force for Disengagement will be headed by a 'controversial' General Gershon Hacohen (who according to Amir Oren in Ha'aretz, Jan. 14, 2005) "Every decade he does his best to be involved in a scandal." While Deputy Battalion Commander he protested (anonymously in Letter from the Front to his Wife) the 1982 Peace for Galilee War against Arafat's Terror mini-state. He was fired by Rafael (Raful) Eitan. He has said "Voices in our society are being sounded that call into question the very need for democracy, with brazen settlers, openly threatening that they will soon take the law into their hands." (1)

Sharon is lining up combat units, armor and trucks to haul off Jews - men, women and children - from their homes into camps or prisons now being planned. Double agents are being planted among the 'enemy', which Sharon, like Rabin and Peres demonized so that 'Dirty Tricks' against them became acceptable. He has created his current 'enemy' as the Jewish settlers. These are typical tactics used to confuse the 'enemy'.

After all, this is Sharon's War Against the Jews whom he has declare are merely just another 'enemy'.

Sharon has opened up full psychological warfare where the 'enemy' is demonized so no matter how you destroy them, the people will accept the destruction and its inevitable cruelty. The process is called "Demoralization". Of course, seeing their friend, ally, leader, builder of the settlements, Arik Sharon, turn on them is demoralizing in itself.

All the money spent by the Israeli military on weapons, methods to meet and beat the 'enemy' will be used on Jews if Sharon has his way.

When Sharon's Army attacks and tries to gather up the Jews for transfer and imprisonment, what if they resist? What if the settlers pull 2x4s across the road with big spikes to puncture the tires of the police trucks hauling Jews away? Will Sharon order those resisters (peacefully) dragging boards across the road shot?

I wonder if Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will order the city of Sderot abandoned, as it has been bombarded with Kassam Rockets on almost a daily basis. There are other Israeli cities that can easily be hit by Kassam Rockets fired from Gaza - which includes Sharon's farm.

As improved missiles make their way to Gaza from Egypt or by sea, Israeli cities along the sea coast will come into range. Clearly, according to Sharon's cut and retreat policy, those cities will have to be abandoned also.

This would be the step-by-step advancement by Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists. As Israel gives up more and more territory, the Palestinian and other Mujahadin will move into Sharon's vacuum - much as they did when then PM Ehud Barak retreated from the Lebanese defense line - leaving a vacuum filled by Hezb'Allah, Terrorists from Syria who were backed by Iran.

How do we know the Terrorists will enter the Gaza when Israeli Jews are ethnically cleansed from the homes? The Head of the General Security Service (Shabak) Avi Dicter says so. He spoke out unambiguously against aspects of PM Sharon's withdrawal plan. Leaving northern Samaria and removing the IDF presence there will "turn the region into Gaza" in terms of terror activity, while leaving the Philadelphi Route (border between Egypt and Israel at Gaza) will "bring southern Lebanon to southern Israel." He also warned that the number o f arms smuggled through the corridor to Gaza is liable to increase dramatically and turn into a "river".

Other security and political leaders have warned of the dangers of Israel leaving the Jewish section of Gaza (where 9000 Jews and 2000 Arabs live). They include: Chief of the IDF, General Moshe Ya'alon; former Chief of Israeli Military Intelligence, General Shlomo Gazit; Head of IDF Intelligence; Deputy Chairman of the National Security Council Lt.-Co. Itamar Ya'ar; General Aharon Ze'evi-Farkash; former Defense Minister Moshe Arens; ex-Deputy Chief of IDF Intelligence, General Ya'akov Amidror; Minister of Knesset Natan Sharansky; head of the Likud Faction, Gideon Sa'ar; former General Ehud Yatom - and many, many others. They also are concerned with the vulnerability of Israel's main power stations in Ashkelon and Hadera, as well as the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline - and other industrial facilities. (2)

Arik, you may win this battle but, the losses you incur will exceed the value to your ego or your legacy. The nation may continue to split from the tear you have started.


1. "Controversial Leftist Officer to Command Evacuation of Communities" by Amir Oren " Inside Track/ 'Expeller' of the settlers" Ha'aretz January 14, 2005

2. "Israeli Security Officials Warn: Leaving Gaza & the Northern West Bank Will Increase Terror" ZOA (Zionist Organization of America) Press Release Jan. 17, 2005 http://www.zoa.org/pressrel2005/20050117a.htm

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Mike Levine, January 20, 2005.

In case you haven't noticed, or if you have been living in an underground mine shaft the last few years, the next World War has begun.

In the last World War, it was the totalitarian Nazis who were out to conquer the world and subjugate it's people, beginning with the despised Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals. Had they not been stopped by a massive, concerted effort by the Allies, they might well have taken over half the world, with the other half dominated by their partners, the Japanese and Italians.

In this World War, which most of the West does not want to admit is happening, the totalitarians who want to conquer the world are Muslims, followers of the Islamic faith. In this, they are simply following the instructions, sacred ones, they believe, in the Koran, their Bible, which calls for the conversion or elimination of all "infidels". That means Jews, Christians, Buddhists and anyone else not a Muslim.

After 3,000 humans were incinerated and blown to smithereens in the Twin Towers on 9/11, all the Western leftists, do-gooders, appeasers, molly-coddlers and politicians fishing for votes began a campaign to convince us that Islam was a religion of peace. Untrue. It is a violent, hateful, and duplicitous collection of teachings and beliefs. Perhaps a small percentage of practitioners want to live in peace with the rest of us, but collectively, the great majority support murder, rape, pillage, suicide/homicide bombings, beheadings and other vile means to achieve their goals.

Israel has known the truth of this reality for 56 years and Jews have known this far longer.

Now, slowly but surely, the doubters are in for a rude awakening, and not just in Iraq, where Americans and Brits are being slaughtered daily. I'm talking also about signs of this war beginning to show up in America. Yes, in the United States of America.

In New Jersey, USA, four people - a married couple and their two teenage daughters - were tied up and had their throats cut, so they would bleed to death slowly. It was done because the father had said something unflattering about Islam; the murderers were out to defend their "peaceful" religion and wreak revenge on these Christian "infidels". Unbelievable? Read the news story for yourself at http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004690.php .

The police and the politicians, afraid for their own lives and those of their families, are trying to make it look like a robbery. Balderdash. This was a slaughter right out of the Koran, which calls for the conversion or execution of all "infidels". The motto - you are either a Muslim, or you are dead.

Look around the world; see who is waging terror against humanity. Wake up to reality. We either fight them to the finish now or our kids will have to; your kids and mine.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 20, 2005.


Americans distrust politicians. Americans take Presidents at their word. Contradictory, isn't it!

The word has gone out that Pres. Bush actively promotes democracy abroad. He has shepherded Afghanistan, Iraq, and the P.A. to having elections. Are those elections democratic? At present, there isn't much to be enthusiastic about. In Afghanistan, the elected central government has little power. In Iraq, a government was not yet elected, so whether it simply determines who are the next dictators remains to be seen. The P.A. election was not democratic and chose a terrorist, so that even if it were democratic, it would not change the Arab culture of jihad.

Nevertheless, the elections are called democratic? Why? Just taking the President at his word. Just watching the elections superficially. Partisans of the President and appeasers of the Arabs just don't want to admit that the P.A. leader chose himself, just as Arafat did, with a fake election. Abu Mazen has no more intention of cracking down on terrorism than did Arafat. Some conservatives are so committed to Pres. Bush, and so averse to admitting that Democrats' criticism of his foreign policies have some basis, that they follow what they hope rather than what they might analyze.


The big question is not who will win the election in Iraq. The big question is whether the winners would treat the losers as enemies or as minorities with equal rights. Traditionally, the ruling ethnic group hogs the treasury and harasses the losers. That may not happen this time, thanks to the Ayatollah Al-Sistani.

That Shiite holy man, revered by his well-organized masses, has been urging restraint in the face of insurgent efforts to pit Shiites against Sunnis. He may be biding his time: anticipating control over the government, defeat of the insurgency, withdrawal of US forces, and then returning to the old ways of ethnic domination in behalf of his religious sect. He does not act that way, however, seeming to keep Iraq from becoming a clerical state like his fellow-Shiite Iran.

Rivals have made attempts of Al-Sistani's life. Pray for that good Muslim.


For some centuries, Jews have been caught by surprise and dispossessed or murdered. Sometimes they are warned, but their leaders deride the warnings and sometimes collaborate with the enemy warned against.

The murder of 1,600 Israelis, as a result of the much touted "peace process" is a recent example of this. Those who warned against the Oslo part of the process were more than derided. They were accused of not wanting to give peace a chance and of being extremists. After hundreds of Israelis had been murdered by Arab terrorists armed by the government of Israel, as opponents of Oslo had predicted, proponents of Oslo continued to wield the major media to ridicule the right-wing protestors as "extremist." Hundreds more have been murdered, but the government of Israel is proposing Oslo-like withdrawals and calling opponents "extremist."

Obviously it is the government that is extremist. Plainly the media is ridiculous. When will the Jewish people realize that their leadership for decades and for centuries has misled them and failed to understand their enemies? It seeks to protect itself and its place in gentile society, not them.

A people constantly betrayed should seek new leadership. Will it realize that? Can it rise up?


Two Hamas members the IDF killed when discovered crawling towards the Green Line fence. ""Haaretz" calls them "activists." "Activists" connotes civil protestors such as labor leaders or demonstrators for women's rights. Would "Haaretz" call the equally Jew-hating Nazi storm troopers "militants?" In using this politically correct term for murderers of its own people, "Haaretz" reveals not ignorance, not just bias, but neurosis (Prof. Steven Plaut, e-mail, 12/30 from P. David Hornik).

"Haaretz" is facilitating the Arabs' first step towards the conquest of Israel. Ignoring the evidence, "Haaretz" supposes that if the Arabs got Yesha, they would make peace. On what is that supposition based? On wishful thinking, not on Arab ideology. The P.A. doesn't instruct its people that their goal is just the Territories. No, it indoctrinates its people in a murderous drive to conquer Israel as rightfully the Arabs'. Then the P.A. claims it hasn't the troops and power to stop terrorism. "Haaretz" won't tip readers off how evil the Arabs are, lest readers object to making counter-productive concessions to them.


Iran just spent $1.5 billion developing a warhead for its recently developed and tested intermediate range missile (IMRA, 12/30) to contain guess what.


Impatient over much delayed US funding, Israel developed its own laser radar detection of the launching of mortars and rockets. It already has pinpointed the source of some such attacks from Gaza. Israeli forces were enabled to counter-attack immediately, without having first to conduct a search that gives the terrorists time to escape. Needed is a means of shooting down the shells and rockets (IMRA, 12/30).


Deputy PM Olmert predicted more unilateral withdrawals after PM Sharon's unilateral one. He says the P.A. may not negotiate or be fit to negotiate with. Why withdraw? He says it is "in Israel's best interests" (IMRA, 12/31).

It is in Israel's best interests? Why? He doesn't say. Nobody has answered the objections to the withdrawal. But the establishment derides objectors to the indefensible retreat to indefensible borders as "extremists."

After having switched from one rationale to another, to justify the policy of abandonment of some undetermined amount of territory, and having switched from one promise to another about safeguards against foisting it upon the country, PM Sharon has forfeited credibility.


Perceiving China as the main threat to it, the US demands that Israel not upgrade some Chinese weapons and not even return China's weapons. But the US arms Egypt, which is the main threat to Israel. This forces Israel to develop its own weaponry, paid for by arms sales, as to China (IMRA, 12/31 from Caroline Glick). Israel has not objected to the US double standard.


While Abu Mazen says his people should not use arms now, his Prime Minister Quria said that they should continue fighting until Israel offers a peace plan or negotiations leading to P.A. statehood. This difference in view was attributed to the two officials' not having sufficient standing to oppose the terrorist war (IMRA, 1/1).

They used to make the same excuse for Arafat, who furnished terrorists with the money for their missions. As fellow terrorists, Arafat's successors would not oppose terrorism either; terrorism is their way.

The West claimed to perceive Quria as moderate when he seemed to be Arafat's heir. He never was moderate.


They have since then been replaced with better-constructed ones (IMRA, 1/2/05).


"The official ideology of Hamas does not recognize a place for a Jewish state in an Islamic Middle east." (Ibrahim Barzak, NY Sun, 1/14, p.7 from Associated Press.)

This is both true and a deception. The deception is in not also stating that neither do the Fatah and PLO Covenants officially recognize a place for a Jewish state. All three organizations are trying to destroy that state, regardless of what peace agreements the PLO signed. The Arab culture and Islamic ideology authorize deception, such as signing peace agreements in bad faith.

The purpose of this deceit is as it long has been, to draw an artificial distinction between Hamas and the PLO. This false distinction allows for appeasement-minded leaders to suggest that Israel deal with the PLO, as moderates, rather than with Hamas, as extremists. Actually, they all are extremist. Therefore, they should be dealt with militarily.


A Shiite Cabinet Minister in Kuwait resigned under pressure from Islamist Sunni Members of Parliament. He is the third, in several years (IMRA, 1/3).


In December, P.A. Arabs were both shelling Jewish communities more than ever, and complaining, as usually without evidence, that Israeli pursuit of the rocket launchers was interfering with the free elections. In response, PM Sharon ordered the IDF out of Gaza. As they left, they blustered that if the attacks continue, they would return (Arutz-7, 1/3).

Their bluster makes them appear more helpless. PM Sharon should answer the complaint that he did not care about their phony election rigged in behalf of the current head man, while they are killing his people. His duty is to protect his people. That means pursuing the terrorists. The P.A. duty, according to the peace agreements it signed, is to eradicate P.A. Arab terrorism. He should have called it outrageous that they allow terrorism and complain about counter-terrorism interfering with their election. It is up to them not to allow terrorism, and then there would be no need for counter-terrorism.

Unfortunately, the leadership of my fellow Jews has the neurosis of striving to please gentiles above all. Sharon's worry about criticism over interfering in the P.A. election is contemptible.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ruth Matar, January 20, 2005.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for the many replies you sent me, agreeing with the Letters Pastor Vineyard and Ken and Mary Krueger wrote to President George W. Bush.

One of the messages I received came from George K. Bernstein, President of the Brandeis District of the Zionist Organization of America. I am reproducing this message here in full below:

Amazing how relevant the Prophet Jeremiah's words are, even today!

It is vitally important that each one of you contact President George W. Bush to inform him that Sharon's Gaza and Samaria Disengagement Plan - (Deportation of Jews Plan) - is an abomination. Also, remind him that "Those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed."

Contact information for President Bush:
Fax: 202-456-2461
Mailing Address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20500
Tel.: 202-456-1414

In every generation they arise to destroy us...

We were deported and slaughtered by the Persians.
We were deported and slaughtered by the Romans.
We were deported and slaughtered by the Inquisition.
We were deported and slaughtered by the Tzars.
We were deported and slaughtered by the Nazis and their collaborators.
And then we were deported and slaughtered by the Arabs.

Through all this, Jews lived and died hoping to reestablish a nation
in Eretz Yisrael. We finally did and we prevailed against our foreign
enemies. Now, incredibly, it is Jews who would deport their
own, imprison them in concentration camps and abandon the
land to those who would destroy it.

Such betrayers of Israel once earned the wrath of Jeremiah:


That Jews would deport Jews, that the cowardly would
imprison the brave, is truly an abomination.

Yet the voice of our people is muted, as it was during the Holocaust.
We have leaned nothing from history.
When our leaders do speak, they deny our heritage.

Jeremiah's rebuke of Israel and those Jews who acquiesce in its
betrayal is, all too timely today:
"an everlasting shame, which shall not be forgotten."

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 20, 2005.

1. The Cult of Shlimazen

It did not take very long and the media are already morphed into full-time sycophants for the new Palestinian "President", Mahmoud Abu-Mazen. I think he should really be called Shlimazen, from the Yiddish shlim = evil, as in "Shlimazel = having bad luck".

Shlimazen is suddenly everyone's favorite "moderate", and the media are just peachy sure he is going to stop the terror attacks on the Jews. And if you believe he will, perhaps I can sell you a nice bridge in Brooklyn?

Abu-Mazen is a fascist terrorist, who began his career by writing a "dissertation" at a Soviet college proving there had never been any Holocaust and it was all a Zionist fabrication. He was involved in the Munich massacre of Israeli athletes. He has been calling for a "Large Jihad" to replace the small one of Arafat. He endorses terror.

Here is an interesting take on Shlimazen from Haaretz' token non-leftist: "Saving Abu Mazen" by Israel Harel.

Important people in Israel contend that we should not be pushing Abu Mazen to fight the terror organizations. Anyone who does push him to do so, they say, is simply thirsty for Palestinian blood. Civil wars, they argue, cause historic rifts from which many nations never recover. Interesting. Because a few of those who are fervently ruling out a civil war between the Palestinian factions have been calling of late for a civil war in Israel. It would have the potential, they have explained, to be a "positive formative event." That was the end-result of the American civil war, they know.

In the euphoric days, when they deemed Arafat a "man of peace," the newspapers used to run double spreads with the flags of Israel and Palestine. When the buses began to blow up, Arafat was not, in their opinion, to blame. It was the "terror organizations."

Then, too, members of the Israeli left would visit the rais (president), amid heavy media coverage, and ask that Arafat be given some time. While the euphoria has now gone, the request is once more being sounded to "give him some time" - and terror will end of its own accord.

Yet logic says the opposite: Arafat had control - when he wanted - over the height of the flames. And if his successor, even according to his own supporters, is not graced with the charisma and leadership of his predecessor, what are the grounds of their assessment that the results this time will be different than in the 12 years of violence that we have faced ever since approximately 40,000 terrorists and their leaders and their weapons were brought here by the Oslo government, to sow death, destruction and despair?

And since the death, destruction and despair are not ending with the "weak" Abu Mazen either, we will sooner or later be compelled to capture Gaza and Rafah, as we captured the Palestinian cities in Judea and Samaria two years ago, when, the reader may recall, Sharon was forced, under public pressure, to retract his "restraint is strength" slogan. It's a shame that in the meantime, until the temporary capture of Gaza takes place, more civilians and soldiers will be harmed, as in the Judea and Samaria precedent.

One more thing will become clear, it too from the lessons of Judea and Samaria: One of the biggest reasons that it took several months - during which some 140 Israelis were killed - between the time of the Dolphinarium bombing and the time that the Israel Defense Forces went into the cities and refugee camps of Judea and Samaria, was the fear sown by the various "experts" - in uniform and not - that hundreds of soldiers would be killed in a large-scale military campaign. And then, when public opinion would not let Sharon continue to exercise self-restraint, it turned out that these fears were unwarranted.

True, there was the exception: Jenin. But it was a moral lapse there that brought about the operational bungle: Due to unnecessary limitations that it imposed upon itself, the IDF avoided use of essential munitions.

The outcome: 13 killed in one ambush, whereas the kasbah of Nablus, which the "experts" had warned would be conquered at the cost of dozens of lives, was captured without a single soldier killed. And in places where the army did not dare enter with anything less than a full brigade, all that is needed now to capture terrorists or seize armaments is a few jeeps.

The same can happen in the Gaza Strip - on condition that the lessons of Jenin are learned. The IDF can easily capture those places that are destined for trouble, and destroy the factories where the rockets and other armaments are produced. And the IDF should remain in the Gaza Strip long enough to be able to collect the weapons that Abu Mazen is duty-bound - but is unable or unwilling - to confiscate, and to arrest the main players in Hamas and Jihad, as it did in Judea and Samaria, as well as a few of the righteous members of Fatah, whose hands are soaked with blood.

Patrons of the Palestinian president should have been the first to demand that the IDF do in Beit Hanun and Khan Yunis what it did in Operation Defensive Shield in Nablus, Tul Karm, Qalqilyah, Ramallah and Hebron. And they should be demanding this not for Sderot, heaven forbid, but in order to save the presidency of Abu Mazen, because after the IDF crushes his opponents and withdraws - and no one in Israel wants the army to remain there - the Palestinian president will be able to stabilize his rule and, in keeping with the dreams of those who continue to believe in the honorable intentions of him and the rest of the Palestinians, become Israel's "partner for peace." ****

By the way, I would like to request that everyone henceforth stop referring to the savages as "Palestinians" and instead call them " False-estinians".

2. MYTH #164

Israel must help Mahmoud Abbas improve his standing among Palestinians to facilitate the peace process.


The death of Yasser Arafat, who remained unwilling to make peace with Israel until the end of his life, has stimulated hope that a new Palestinian leader will emerge with the courage and vision of Anwar Sadat and King Hussein, who is prepared to negotiate the establishment of a Palestinian state that will live in peace beside Israel.

The Palestinians have chosen Mahmoud Abbas to lead them, and now the Israelis are waiting to see if he is prepared to take the necessary steps to advance the peace process. Abbas is someone who is well-known to the Israelis, because he was involved in past negotiations. They have welcomed his election and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon immediately announced his desire to meet with Abbas.

No one should have any illusions about Abbas. He was the number two person in the PLO and a founder of the Fatah terrorist organization. It is possible to find many irredentist statements made in the past by the new President, some of which were uttered during his recent campaign. His uncompromising position on the right of return of Palestinian refugees, for example, bodes ill for negotiations. On the other hand, he also demonstrated the courage to publicly criticize the intifada, has said that violence has not helped the Palestinian cause, and declared a readiness to make peace with Israel.

Some suggestions are being made that Israel must make gestures to Abbas to help him consolidate his power; however, Israel owes him nothing. It is Abbas who must show that he has both the will and ability to reform the Palestinian Authority (PA), to dismantle the terrorist networks, and to end the violence. Words are insufficient; he must take action. The agreements signed by the Palestinians are unequivocal about what is required of them; they cannot evade their responsibilities with conciliatory statements to the press in English or cease-fires with groups such as Hamas that remain committed to Israels destruction.

The terrorists identities and locations are known. The PA has an estimated 40,000 policemen and multiple security services. Abbas must use the resources at his command to disarm and arrest anyone who illegally possesses weapons and threatens or engages in violence.

Though it has no obligation to do so, Israel has taken steps to show its goodwill, including facilitating the Palestinian elections (which international observers reported were unfettered by Israel [Jerusalem Post, January 11, 2005]), releasing prisoners, and withdrawing troops from parts of the territories. Israel has also said it is prepared to negotiate the disengagement rather than act unilaterally. A unity government was formed in January 2005 that now includes the Labor Party, which increases the flexibility Sharon will have to negotiate in the future.

The immediate hope for a negotiated settlement of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians now rests on the shoulders of Abbas. The early days of his regime were not encouraging, as two terrorist attacks were perpetrated (one of which killed six Israeli civilians, two of whom were Arabs) in what either were direct challenges to his leadership or an indication that he has not abandoned the two-track policy of Arafat; namely, to talk about peace with the Western media while calling for jihad in Arabic and orchestrating a terror campaign against Israel.

Coexistence is impossible unless Palestinian violence stops. There can be no attacks on Jews anywhere, no mortars or rockets fired into Israel, and no incitement to violence. This is not a case of giving extremists a veto over negotiations; Israel has not said that Abbas must stop 100 percent of the incidents before it will talk, but Israel does insist that he demonstrate a 100 percent effort to stop them.

3. "Why animals have no 'rights': Animals Have No `Rights`" http://www.jewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=4611, by Beverly Barton. Barton is an assistant professor in the Department of Surgery, Division of Urology at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in Newark. She has been involved in biomedical research for more than 20 years.

The suit filed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) against AgriProcessors Incorporated led me to reflect upon the nature of the suit, and indeed upon the relation of Orthodox Judaism to the notion of animal rights in general.

The essence of animal rights is the contention that all species are equal. Ingrid Newkirk, founder of PETA and major spokes-specimen (can I rightfully call her a person?) for the animal rights movement, has stated, "A pig is a boy is a rat is a dog."

This statement obviously cannot be construed as an acceptable tenet of Torah Judaism, since Torah Judaism does not hold that all animals are equal: the description of the creation of animals in Bereshis, the list of clean versus non-clean in Noach even which animals are kosher and which are not given in the laws of kashrut tell us that as Jews, we make distinctions between species of animals. Certainly if we distinguish between hooved animals, such as pigs and cows, or ruminant animals, such as camel and sheep, we make distinctions between humans and livestock.

The Torah clearly tells us that humans and animals are different. The Torah distinguishes man from the animals, explicitly stating that only man was created in the Divine image, and that man was given dominion over the animals (Bereshis 1:26.). The very construction of tefillin and Torah and mezuzah scrolls requires parchment, which must be made from hides, not paper. Moreover, the korbanos given at the Temple are described in detail, including the number and kinds of animals and birds that compose acceptable offerings for the varied occasions. And what would a vegan shofar be made of?

Though we may comfort someone over the loss of a beloved animal, we do not observe the same rituals in this circumstance that we do with the loss (God forbid) of a person. Nor do we bury our dead with their pets, no matter how deeply the pets were loved by the deceased.

With respect to Shabbos and the Yom Tovim, we have come to include meat and fish at meals during the course of the day or days. A minhag observed enough over time becomes like halacha, and eating meat and fish on Shabbos and Yom Tov certainly has that status.

Many Orthodox vegetarians I have met quote Rav Kook, zt"l, who held that in a perfect world we would not eat meat. But Rav Kook acknowledged that don`t live in a perfect world. The rav was referring to the anticipated state of affairs after techeis hameissim, at which time most poskim opine we will not eat at all, having been resurrected as spiritual beings.

Coming back to PETA, the lust of this assemblage for sensationalism knows no bounds. In a recent campaign the organization advised, "If you wouldn`t eat your cocker spaniel, don`t eat a grouper" (quoted by Lee Raynor, editor of The Kinston Free Press, on November 17, 2004 at http://www.kinston.com.) Want another example? How about PETA infiltrating schools (yeshivas, too) to tell young students that their mothers kill animals? You can read about it at the Center for Consumer Freedom`s website (http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/2616).

This sort of rhetoric should offend everyone across all levels of observance. By the way, if you are toying with a vegan way of life because you read something from a group called the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), Ive got a news flash for you actual physicians comprise a vast minority of PCRM members. According to ActivistCash.com, a project of the Center for Consumer Freedom, While PCRM presents itself as a doctor-supported, unbiased source of health guidance, the groups own literature admits that 95 percent of its members have no medical degrees.

A central tenet of animal rights philosophy is that all species are equal; humans are not superior to any species, including the cold-blooded and the non-blooded. I don`t know about you, but all the goldfish (a type of carp, by the way) I`ve had never seemed to be as fond of me as my collie, Rocky, or even my husband`s lovebird Chester (though Chester loves my husband more, I have to admit). Certainly, Rocky will go off his food and mope when separated from the family (he has the uncanny ability to count us; I guess we are his sheep as well as his masters), something that never happened with the goldfish. So how can any thinking person call these species, dog and goldfish, equal?

As observant Jews, our obligations to animals is to look out for their welfare and not to cause gratuitous harm to them lo tza`ar ba`alei chayim. This is a strong obligation, starting with the injunction about resting animals on Shabbos and extending to when one feeds animals (one is not permitted to eat before he has placed food before his animals. But animal welfare is by no means the same as animal rights. Let me give you an example:

Thanksgiving before last, I reminded my husband to take the turkey carcass out from the house, since Rocky has an absolute love for roasted poultry. Dear Spouse said yes, then went to take his post-prandial nap. I went to our library, children went to the family room. Suddenly, I heard a loud "crunch!" emanate from the kitchen. Running upstairs, what did I see but my collie happily lying next to the garbage, eating turkey bones to his heart`s content. Reprimanding Rocky, I roused Dear Spouse to take out the remainder of the carcass. Poor Rocky developed a bit of illness from his unexpected feast, which culminated in his expelling the unchewed turkey spine. At this, my older daughter (the pre-veterinary college student and neighborhood dog trainer/ dog sitter/ dog expert) said the turkey spine could have caused Rocky quite severe internal injury, had he not expelled it.

The point of the anecdote is that Rocky, being a dog an animal if you will could not help himself: the instinct to eat the poultry carcass overcame his training to keep away from the kitchen garbage pail. Despite his illness and our displeasure (collies, by the way, are the perfect Jewish dog they feel guilt when they do something wrong, unlike most other breeds), he`d do it again if we neglected to take out all poultry carcasses and bones after dinner. This is because an animal cannot overcome its desire to do what it perceives will give it immediate pleasure.

A human, even a fairly young child, would be able to overcome instinct or curiosity and stay away from an object that is off-limits. A child as young as two years of age will already have learned to refrain from doing many things through an association with pain or with parents` displeasure, but an animal, even an intelligent species like a dog and an intelligent breed like a collie, will not associate the later pain or discomfort with what it did earlier. Thus it is up to us to keep him from inadvertently harming himself.

We are the caretakers of our darling collie: we look out for him because he cannot look out for himself. We love him, but he is not our equal. This is why animals cannot be said to have rights.

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 20, 2005.

Israel has officially severed contact with Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), following last Thursday's Gaza-district terrorist attack and Abu Mazen's stated refusal to fight terrorism. Six Israelis were killed in a Gaza Strip bomb attack.

Sharon said that PA security forces have not "lifted a finger" to combat terrorism. The bombers and gunmen who carried out the attack were let through several levels of PA security to reach the targeted area, according to the officials.

Raanan Gissin, said that Israeli army had its hands free to launch operations because PA, although it has 30,000 armed men in the Gaza, has not lifted a finger to stop the terrorists from acting and killing Israelis. "Under no circumstances can we allow Israelis to continue to be killed or the pullout from the Gaza Strip to be executed under fire," he said.

Just empty words and charade, including the game played with military response. No real actions are taken. Business as usual: "Cops and Robbers". Talks had been tried and failed many times before. They do not work! It took one week, one empty promise from Arabs and Israel is reversing a total ban on contacts with PA. No wonder, Arabs still believe in and do not reject terrorism!

The "Wishful Thinkers" refuse to face the truth and admit reality - nothing will change Arab's attitude! It is time for original Jewish solution for the conflict!

To Go To Top
Posted by Sergio Tezza (Hadar), January 20, 2005.

A FEW things you might not know...

THIS STUPIDITY is the result of years of brainwashing that has confused all of our values, that has clouded the view of our soldiers who already don't know who is the enemy. It has been years of brainwashing that allowed the ENEMY to be called "partner for peace", the VICTIMS OF TERROR "sacrifices for peace", and WAR is called "peace process".


After years in which the media have gone crazy attacking our soldiers for being soldiers and have tried over and over to show the "poor arabs" as victims of brutality, which has transformed our soldiers in eunuchs who are afraid of being soldiers, yesterday they reached the TOP LEVEL OF STUPIDITY!

An arab, IMMEDIATELY identified as a WANTED terrorist, was stopped at 7 pm at a roadblock in the Gaza strip.

Instead of stripping him naked all the way to his underwear, and having him lay down on his belly on the concrete, his arms and legs spread, at a safe distance, our poor idiots stop him, identify him, put him in a jeep, take him inside a base, and in a room with seven Shabbak guys (not INTELLIGENCE, since only idiots can do such a thing!) and three soldiers, our arab blows himself up, bringing with him to kingdom come one of the idiots, and injuring another six. They did not check him for explosive belts, nor blown him up with it!


We arrived at a level in which our soldiers do not know any longer who is the real enemy, and we have a government who says that "we cannot defend Sderot from the Kassam missiles" and that the citizens of Sderot should "reinforce the roofs!!!!"

A government and an army who cannot guarantee the physical integrity of their citizens from external attacks because they do not want to make too many victims among the population of the other side, hav NO RIGHT to continue existing, they have NO LEGITIMACY!

I felt like vomiting when I heard on TV and radio from SO-CALLED generals that "we cannot do what the Americans did in Faluggia"!!!!

OBVIOUSLY the blood of the Jews of Israel is less precious for our army and our government than the blood of Americans for the US Government and Army!!!

Around here they have been discussing for days about what and if Abu Mazen has any responsibility to stop terror.


I am not at all interested in what these guys do. I am interested in that which the idiots in our own home DO NOT DO, after years of brainwashing from the extreme left, who for years yelled "Peace, Peace", but there is NOTHING BUT WAR, AND DEAD JEWS, ASSASSINATED IN A MUCH LARGER QUANTITY IN THE LAST TEN YEARS OF "PEACE PROCESS" THAN IN THE FOURTY FIVE PRECEDING YEARS!!!!

We live in a place where the spokesman for the yeshoo council becomes a day after resigning the spokesman for a minister in the government of the deportation!!!!


"Suicide bombing kills Shin Bet agent," by Margot Dudkevitch.

A Shin Bet agent, Oded Sharon, was killed and seven other security personnel were wounded when a suicide bomber blew up at the IDF's Orhan outpost at the Gush Katif junction shortly before 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday night.

IDF officials assessed that the suicide bomber was headed for Gush Katif to perpetrate an attack there when he was detained at a checkpoint by security staff.

Shortly before the attack, security forces received a tip that the suspect was headed for the checkpoint, and upon his arrival, soldiers recognized him and ordered him out of his car.

At this point he was searched by Shin Bet agents, but they failed to find the explosives, which were hidden in his underwear.

The bomber detonated his explosives as he was being led by soldiers to a trailer for a second round of searches, according to procedure, three meters from the building's entrance.

The premature explosion likely prevented a possible large-scale attack, but fatally wounded Sharon, 36, a field coordinator from Gan Yavne, who left behind a wife and three children. This is the first time a Shin Bet agent has been killed in Gaza during the past four years of violence.

One officer suffered severe wounds, a soldier was moderately wounded and two other soldiers and three Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) personnel were lightly wounded. All were brought by helicopter to Soroka Hospital in Beersheba for treatment.

In the aftermath of the fatal attack, the IDF and Shin Bet Wednesday were investigating the circumstances under which the terrorist succeeded in detonating his explosives if he had undergone procedural security searches.

Regarding the failure of security forces to discover the detainee's bomb before it was fatally detonated, Menahem Landau, former head of the Shin Bet's Jewish Department, told Army Radio, "In this test, the result does not look good."

"The procedures will likely have to be scrutinized - first of all whether they answer the problem, and if they do - then we must look into what went wrong," Landau said.

Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack and identified the suicide bomber as Omar Tabash, 21, a fugitive from Absan in central Gaza. Orhan is where security forces check the identities of Palestinian motorists traveling on the Gaza' Strips main north-south artery.

The site of the attack is near the IDF Orhan outpost where Palestinians traveling between Rafah and Gaza undergo securtiy checks on the road.

Hours before the attack, security forces arrested a suspected terrorist at the same checkpoint.

In June, St.-Sgt. Ro'i Nissim was killed and five soldiers wounded when a tunnel rigged with explosives blew up underneath the outpost.

Speaking on Channel 2, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz declared, "Israel will respond to the suicide bombing - of course. We will seek out those who were responsible and track down the dispatchers."

A Southern Command officer told The Jerusalem Post that the army will certainly respond, although there are no immediate plans to retaliate.

To Go To Top
Posted by Sergio Tezza (Hadar), January 19, 2005.

I communicated to some friends that the JNF, or KKL, REFUSES to plant trees in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. I personally had to face their refusal to sell me a few hundreds of saplings in 1996 when they heard that I wanted to plant them in Itamar for Tu-Bishvat.

This took a life of its own.

PLEASE, spread the voice, and ask to write in protest and say that you'll stop financing such leftist policy, and an organization that helps Jews only where Kofi Annan does not mind; an organization that OWNS the land of many SO-CALLED "palestinian" villages in Judea, Smaraia and Gaza since the thirties, and DOES NOT OPEN ITS MOUTH ABOUT IT!!!

MANY really JEWISH organizations are planting trees. HELP THEM. I heard for instance of http://www.revava.org/ organizing tree planting.

I copied for you the messages in sequence.

From: Debbie [mailto:compugraphd@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 11:40 PM
To: Customer Service
Subject: I heard something very disturbing......


I heard something very disturbing. If it is true, I will have to rethink some of my tzedaka gifts.

I have been told that you don't supply trees to be planted in Qiryat Arba or any Yesha communities. Why is that? Please don't tell me you have fallen for the myth of the Arab world that this land is "occupied Palestine". This land never belonged to the Palestinians. Israel won it in defensive wars with Jordan, Syria and Egypt. How can you consider land that is part of Eretz Yisrael as "occupied territory"? I don't understand how a Jewish organization can consider the opinions of haters (aka the Palestinians and Europeans) over that of our own brothers and sisters in Israel. These communities are not illegal. They were started with the full support of the Israeli government. And now these peoples (called "settlers" as though they've pitched a tent and are squatters on their own land) are being told they can't get tree saplings to grow in their neighborhoods? Why am I donating money for trees when you won't send them to the very places that need them most?

I hope that what I heard is wrong.

"Fiction is the Rorschach test of life."

From: Denise Mast
To: Cc: Nikia Charles Date: 1/17/2005 12:34:51 PM
Subject: RE: I heard something very disturbing......

Dear Debbie,

As you might imagine, there are many different definitions for "the territories", so I will assume you mean the areas taken during the 6 day war in June 1967 that were not part of the original partition plan of 1948 and not the areas "retaken" then.

The answer is no. We do not plant in areas that were not originally part of the UN Mandated partition plan of 1948, even though much of this area is claimed as in "dispute" by certain parties.

JNF though, is non-partisan, and apolitical. We are provided direction based on the master land plan created every 3 to 5 years by the Israel Lands Authority, a quasi-governmental agency made up of members of the Knesset and KKL management and advisors. The plan is developed with the greater good of the State in mind, and is careful to balance the needs of the environment as a whole.

I hope this helps.

Thank you,

Denise R. Mast
Director, National Donor Relations Center
Jewish National Fund
516-678-6805 Ext. 111 (Voice)
516-678-1673 (Fax)

To: "Denise Mast" From: "Debbie" Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:33:06 -0500
Subject: RE: I heard something very disturbing......


No, it doesn't help. I think this is not only not good for Israel, it is not good for the entire world. To allow terrorists to think that their terror campaign is "working" is to invite more terror.

By not sending trees to these areas, you ARE making a political decision, and that political decision is that Israel and the Jewish people aren't important to you. I will no longer send money to JNF, b"n, because of this policy unless you decide that it is ill advised.

"Fiction is the Rorschach test of life."

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 19, 2005.


Presidents Carter and Clinton were believed to be particularly "intelligent." It is not my belief.

Intelligence has many facets. Memory is the obvious one. Tactical cleverness is another, often found among politicians. It was pronounced in Clinton, who took planks out of the GOP platform and therefore the wind out of GOP sails. Carter had a sensible conservationist energy policy, but could not persuade the conservatives to allow it.

Strategic understanding is too profound for those politicians, judging by their behavior. Perhaps they were intelligent about long-term international conflicts, but their lack of ethics and selfish interest in photo-opportunities kept them from doing what their country needed. I think their political selfishness crowded out wisdom.

Carter trusted and still trusts dictators, who violated his trust. He fouled up relations with Iran, setting the stage for Iran's generation of jihad, but boasts that he avoided combat. Clinton put his eggs in Arafat's basket, having him as his most frequent guest and offering him a state at Israel's expense. This supposedly intelligent President primarily criticized Israeli self-defense and not Arab terrorist aggression. It got so bad that finally Clinton had to blame Arafat for cracking the eggs of the phony peace efforts that Clinton stupidly thought would earn him a place as man of the year if not in the history books. Clinton must have supposed that he would get credit for a peace pact, and his successor would get blamed when the pact inevitably failed because the Arabs have vowed, to continue the jihad against Israel. Maybe that tactic is clever for boosting immediate popularity. How intelligent is it for the US to set up a state for anti-American terrorists (the CIA trained P.A. sharpshooters - for what?) and not letting Israel enforce peace?


PM Sharon never has given a plausible reason to remove the Jewish presence from Gaza. He asserts it is necessary for some motherhood-and-apple-pie reason, without showing how. The Arabs suppose he thinks it would reduce terrorism from Gaza. They know it would not, because terrorism is their chief weapon until withdrawal and/or statehood would enable them to import heavy weapons, and their goal remains first the removal of the Jews from the rest of Yesha and then their removal from Israel if not also from the planet. Many Israelis know this, but the Prime Minister acts unable to grasp that simple point. So do other world leaders act unaware of it, but probably grasp it only too well.

The Arabs are ramping up their terrorism, so as to appear victorious in forcing Israeli withdrawal.

As they shell Jewish communities both in Yesha and in Israel, Abu Mazen, encourages them with talk about holy martyrs, but gains applause from the West for being a moderate when he deplores the terrorism AT THIS STAGE. With him as with his former boss, Arafat, it is a question of how many casualties can the Arabs inflict without Israel at last deciding to fight back strongly.

Like many Israeli leaders, Ariel Sharon is stubborn. He becomes indignant and all the more insistent, when his mistakes are pointed out. His mistake (if it be a mistake and not the result of being blackmailed by leftist prosecutors) is that withdrawal of IDF troops would lead to an increase in terrorism, as it always has, and worse, which Israeli leaders haven't the imagination to foresee even though the Opposition warns them. Now that his mistake is pointed out, he will not give up on his withdrawal plan.

Sharon could get the Arabs to cease their attacks, if he had the character. He publicly could suspend the withdrawal until there are six consecutive months without a terrorist attempt. If, after a month, the Arabs see he would persist, either they would desist or, still controlling Yesha, Israel could stop most of it and wipe out most of the terrorists. Stubborn Israeli leaders, however, will not put their Jewish loyalty to a test by putting Arab promises to a test. Israel also could start annexing parts of it, to build up the Jewish state and narrow down the Arabs' potential for mischief.

Of course, ending terrorism should not be Israel's goal but Jewish national and religious development of its homeland and repulsion of the Arabs in it. Then there would be peace in it and a stronger, deterring defense against war from outside it.


"In this (HRW) framework, human rights are filtered through the subjective distinction between "victims" - say Palestinians (i.e., Arabs) or Irish Republicans - and "colonialist oppressors" - Zionists, Irish Unionists, and Americans." As a result, in the past four years, despite terror attacks that clearly violate any common-sense concept of basic human rights, HRW's reports and press releases have focused - by a ratio of over six to one - on allegations against Israel."

HRW head "Roth has claimed a "two-to-one" ratio - which, even if true, would be morally unjustified." (It is the Arabs who abuse human rights.)

"Reflecting the lack of a political agenda in Africa, HRW issued far fewer reports these past four years on the mass killing in the Sudan than on the Arab-Israel conflict. Anne Bayefsy and other witnesses have described how HRW officials refused to act when members of the Jewish caucus were evicted (from a UNO conference). And three years later, HRW joined the movement to boycott Israel - another step in the "South Africa strategy." In contrast, the murder of over 1,000 Israelis did not lead Roth and HRW to call for corporate sanctions against the Palestinian leadership."

To avoid serious debate and criticism of these dubious practices, Roth chooses his platforms carefully, steering clear of confrontations with well-informed critics able to refute his claims.

"And in the interview with the Post, Roth emphasized how he "grew up on his father's stories of life in Nazi Germany until he fled in summer 1938" - his standard response when confronted with the evidence of anti-Israel political bias. But such assertions do not address the substance or the evidence" (IMRA, 12/28 from NGO Monitor).


A lesson in democracy from Abraham Lincoln was commemorated by syndicated columnist George Jonas, who declares that Pres. Bush is following in Lincoln's path. Pres. Bush has been godfathering elections in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the P.A.. Mr. Jonas contends that democracy always leads to peace and prosperity (NY sun, 1/13, p.9).

History has a mixed result. Pinochet dictated prosperity in Chile, then allowed democracy back. Democracies may be benign domestically and imperialist abroad. The examples that Jonas might cite are drawn from non-Islamic cultures. Islamic cultures are different. We cannot presume they will come out as we did, for they do not think the same as we.

Lincoln proved himself; Bush has not yet. Afghanistan has not consolidated democratic rule, but still has warlords. Iraqi elections may empower the Shiites to lord it over the others. The P.A. election, as of Arafat's, was not democratic but a show. Foreign countries have their reasons for approving of that election, but it is not because it was a genuine contest whose winner is dedicated to democracy, or because the Arabs want peace.

The observation is not original with me that elections do not, by themselves create democracy. There must be other institutions and mores, such as the rule of law and a democratic spirit. The P.A. is dominated by terrorists. It just elected one. He probably does represent the will of the people - a murderous people.

Let us imagine that the P.A. went democratic. Jonas supposes that its government would seek to fulfill what he supposes is a wish for peace. But the Muslims don't want peace. They want war and conquest. Their religious ideology does not compromise. Suppose less, study more.


Finance Min. Netanyahu said he disapproves of PM Sharon's unilateral withdrawal plan, but voted approval of it, because, he says, PM Sharon met his conditions about it. Nevertheless, he calls the plan a national tragedy.

Actually, some of Netanyahu's conditions were not met. (1) That a separate vote be taken on each group of communities to be removed shortly beforehand and after a previous group was removed; (2) All the settlement blocs be protected by the separation fence before any communities would be dissolved.

The question is whether anything would get Netanyahu to disapprove and risk his Cabinet post, if a "national tragedy" does not (IMRA, 12/31). He pretends that Sharon is acting in good faith, rather than seeking withdrawal by hook or by crook.


The Vatican newspaper had criticized Israel for not sending tsunami aid to Sri Lanka. The criticism was in error. Israel did send aid. At first, Sri Lanka rejected the aid.

"L'Osservatore" issued a correction acknowledging that Israel sent the aid and criticizing Sri Lanka for having rejected it. The newspaper did not retract its earlier, gratuitous insult of Israel as being a country "preoccupied with making war." (IMRA, 12/31.)

It would have been an opportunity for the Vatican to make up for its unfair criticism by praising Israel as the first to offer aid and to do so regardless of religious differences.


A terrorist rocket went astray, striking an Arab's house in Gaza. It killed an 11-year-old girl. So reported the Saudi Press Agency.

The P.A. website reported that an Israeli tank fired at the house, and killed the girl (IMRA, 1/1).

Israeli tanks do not fire at houses, if not fired upon. If fired upon, Israelis are entitled to fire back. In this case (and others), it seems that the P.A. wanted to make anti-Israel propaganda and deflect anger from the consequences of its terrorism. How many deaths of children by the P.A. are attributed to Israeli forces?


(1) Full Israeli withdrawal from its Yesha communities; (2) No compromise on turning the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (and Judaism's holiest site) over to the Arabs; (3) Define Arab means as resistance and not terrorism (meaning that terrorism is to be permitted); (4) Integrate all the militias into the official P.A. forces. (Under P.A.-Israel agreements, those illegal militias are supposed to be disarmed and dissolved. Otherwise, they will be better armed and trained for terrorism.); (5) Let Arab descendants of those who fled from Israel move into Israel (and swamp the Jewish state if not slit the Jews' throats); (6) Halt Israeli "aggression" (i.e., Israeli self-defense, such as pursuit of terrorist leaders; (7) Israel must grant the P.A. a corridor between Gaza and Judea-Samaria; (8) End Israeli occupation of Muslim and Christian holy sites (i.e., end the Jews' right to any sites they claim as holy to them); (9) End Israeli campaigns of economic strangulation and excess taxation of Arabs of Jerusalem and their depopulation (but their population is growing and these Israeli campaigns are non-existent, just slight enforcement of the law; (10) Release terrorist prisoners, so there is no deterrent to their criminal activity; (11) Commend slain terrorists as martyrs; and (12) Democratize, reform, and reconstruct (IMRA, 1/1).

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, January 19, 2005.

It's New Years again, and Jews are celebrating. This past Tishrei, in the Hebrew calendar (usually around Sept.-Oct.), Jews the world over celebrated the anniversary of the creation of the world culminating in the creation of humanity, commonly known as Rosh HaShannah, the Day of Judgment and coronation of the G-D of Israel as "King of the kings of kings". Now, Jews are celebrating another New Year, Tu B'Shvat (the 15th of the Hebrew month of Shvat), which marks the New Year for trees.

Tu B'Shvat falls in the winter (this year January 25th, 2005), when most of the winter rains have fallen and the fruits are just beginning to ripen. There's a famous Israeli song that begins "HaShekaydia porachat...The Almond trees are blossoming..." and they really do this time of year, I've checked before in the Jerusalem forest.

Judaism as described in the Torah and further explained through millennia of rabbinical discussion, is highly land centered, there are numerous agricultural laws relating to the Land of Israel.

By the way, Rosh HaShannah in Tishrei also relates to agriculture and the Land of Israel, for example it establishes the Sabbatical year. Plowing and planting (as described in Leviticus 25:2-5), are forbidden beginning from the first of Tishrei, in the seventh year of the Sabbatical cycle. On the first of Tishrei, in the fiftieth year (the Jubilee year), following seven cycles of Sabbatical years, all tenured land is returned to its original owners. It starts the financial year for the purpose of figuring tithes of vegetables and grains. One tenth of a farmer's produce from that particular year, which begins and ends with the first of Tishrei, had to be given to the Levites and priests in Jerusalem, at the Holy Temple when it stood.

Tu B'Shvat is significant in that it establishes the age of trees for the purpose of "orlah," (the biblical prohibition against eating fruit that is grown during the first three years after a tree is planted) and defines the agricultural year for the purpose of tithing fruit, something that was of great significance in Temple times and will be again when the Jewish People rebuild their Holy Temple in Jerusalem.

Tu B'Shvat is a mini-holiday on the Jewish calendar when it is customary to plant trees in Israel (the Zionist-Green Revolution has repopulated the land with millions of acres of trees since the late 19th century), to stress environmental awareness, and to eat fruits that are specific to the Land of Israel, like dates, figs, grapes, olives, and pomegranates.

I occasionally get feedback letters or comments posted to my articles, arguing that the "Palestinians" have as much right to the land as the Jews. Well obviously from a biblical perspective that is utter nonsense. Arabs come from the Arabian Peninsula, and invaded the Middle East and North Africa long after the world "knew" that the place of the Jewish People was the Land of Israel. G-D gave it to them, and forever (check your bible).

The story of the Jewish People (Judaism) unfolds through history; the promise of the land to the Patriarchs, Egyptian slavery, the Exodus, the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai, and the return of the Jewish People to the "Promised Land". Many know the Jews are called the "Chosen" people, but do you realize that the Land of Israel is the "Chosen" land.

Jewish history is unique. Go ahead and rant at me if you want, but it's true, go check it out. "Our religion is uni-national and our nation is uni-religious," to quote the former prime minister of Israel, Menachem Begin.

And the Jewish People's relationship to its homeland is also unique...

Sometimes, when attacked by leftists or Arabs, or Muslims, or atheists, I've been told, "but you Jews haven't lived there for hundreds of years, what gives you the right to..." There are lots of refutations of this; that Jews were forcibly exiled from their land, that some Jews always lived on the land, that Jews always claimed it was theirs throughout their bitter exile, that Jews several times attempted military re-conquests; and that Jews for nearly 2,000 years dreamed of the day that they would return en mass and resettle it, rebuild it, and liberate it from foreign occupation.

But, I can only truly answer that; the Jewish People have a unique and unbreakable relationship to the Land of Israel, that wasn't established by us, but by G-D himself, only Jews can really feel it (it's on a soul level). Others connection to their homeland isn't the same.

As the first Chief Rabbi of the renewed Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel in the early 20th century, Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, wrote in the beginning of his book, Orot (Lights):

"The Land of Israel is not something peripheral [to Judaism], it is not an external acquisition or national asset, it is not a means to collective solidarity [national unity], nor even to strengthen the nation's physical or spiritual existence. The Land of Israel is an independent unit [with it's own value], bound by the bond-of-life and a living attachment to the Jewish People, connected to them through a deep inner uniqueness, with the nation's existence."

He then explains, "Therefore, it is impossible to comprehend, understand or appreciate the essence of this inner unique sanctity and holiness of the Land of Israel, and to reveal and actualize the depth of love for her [by the Jewish People] through any form of human conceptualization, or rational human understanding, but only by the "Spirit of G-D" that is in the soul of the Jewish People and acts on the nation as a whole."

Rabbi Kook continues, "The view, that the Land of Israel is only an external, peripheral value serving as a cohesive force, even when it comes to reinforce the Jewish idea in the Diaspora...The Judaism [Jews] in the Diaspora will only be strengthened through a deep involvement with the Land of Israel. Only through their longing for the Land of Israel, will exilic Judaism receive its inherent qualities and essential characteristics. Yearning for Salvation, is the force that preserves Exilic Judaism, it gives the Jews of the Diaspora the power to continue, whereas the Judaism of the Land of Israel, is the very Salvation itself."

Living in the Land of Israel and keeping G-D's Torah is the very redemption, for the individual Jew. National salvation awaits the Messiah's coming...

It doesn't matter if a Jew was born in Russia, Poland, Morocco, France, Argentina, or America, the Land of Israel is his "inheritance" through his fathers, from G-D. Christians and Muslims know that. Honest Muslims, like Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, the secretary-general of the Italian Muslim Association will tell you so.

The Jewish People's love for the Land of Israel knows no bounds of time or space, it is implanted in their souls, and the stronger a Jews' Jewish identity is, his practice of Judaism and adherence to G-D's Torah and Mitzvot (commandments), that love will burn like a raging inferno able to purify everything.

I direct your attention to the valiant Jewish "settlers" in Judea, Samaria (the West Bank) and especially Gaza, where they are being rocketed and motor attacked daily (over 5250 times at last count). Those brave pioneers have withstood for several years, the most hideous outrages, that a sick suicidal society (the "Palestinians") could throw at them. Their love for the land of Israel, their connection to her, is eternal and unbreakable.

So, when I sit down to my Tu B'Shvat Seder (a meal with Land of Israel fruits, and a ritual order), like a Passover Seder, I'll be connecting to my "roots". As it says, "For man is [like] the tree of the field" (Deut. 20:19), i.e. people need trees. And, wishing the Land of Israel, a Happy New Year!

Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko

To Go To Top
Posted by Ken Heller, January 18, 2005.




* IF YOU believe a unilateral withdraw from Gaza or any part of Israel is illegal, immoral and against the Torah and would be considered a retreat from and victory for terror and....

* IF YOU further believe this would be just the beginning of dismantling Israel in stages.....

then please stand tall and proud with the people of Gush Katif and donate as freely as you can so that we can hopefully stop the madness!

There is no pressure. BUT if we keep Gaza, Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem, you can sit back an kvell knowing you participated in defeating the "transfer of land for terror" deal!



and mail to





Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and a member of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel. He can be reached by email at kjhnha@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Honest Reporting, January 18, 2005.

One of the cardinal rules of responsible journalism is the independent status of the journalist - while journalists may belong to political parties, they cannot actively work for a party relevant to the sphere they cover, lest their independence and neutrality be jeopardized.

But today, the Jerusalem Post reported that two of the largest wire services - Agence France-Presse (AFP) and Associated Press (AP) - have employed journalists with inappropriately close ties to the Palestinian Authority. Majida al-Batsh was a Palestinian affairs correspondent for AFP for many years, while simultaneously being on the payroll of the Palestinian Authority as a reporter for the PA's official organ, Al-Ayyam.

If this is not evidence enough of impropriety at AFP, last year Batsh announced she would actually run for the presidency of the Palestinian Authority. The Post reports:

Her colleagues claim that shortly before she joined the race [for PA president], Batsh resigned from the news agency, saying she wanted to devote her time to the election campaign. However, they add, this did not prevent her from seeking the agency's help in her campaign.

"One day she showed up and asked to use the fax machine to send some documents," reports one coworker. "The agency did not object."

Batsh isn't the only AFP reporter receiving a PA salary on the side:

One of the agency's correspondents in the Gaza Strip is Adel Zanoun, who also happens to be the chief reporter in the area for the PA's Voice of Palestine radio station.

The AFP bureau chief in Jerusalem, Patrick Anidjar, refuses to discuss the issue, saying, "I don't understand why you have to have the name of our correspondents." Pressed to give a specific answer, he says: "I don't want our correspondents' names to go into print. I don't want to answer the question. What is this, a police investigation?"

Meanwhile, Muhammad Daraghmeh - who turns out near-daily reports from Ramallah or Jerusalem for the Associated Press - also works for the PA's Al-Ayyam, according to the Jerusalem Post (and a pro-Palestinian site).

This is the equivalent of a network's Washington correspondent getting paid on the side by the Democrats or Republicans. Imagine the scandal that would produce. Yet with their coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, AFP and AP don't seem to have a problem with it.

HonestReporting has repeatedly demonstrated that the local staff employed by western news outlets contributes in no small way to the problem of anti-Israel media bias. The major media outlets rely on Palestinian cameramen and stringers to tell the tale from the West Bank and Gaza, as the Jerusalem Post reports:

AFP is not the only member of the international news media to employ "journalists" who see themselves as "foot soldiers" serving the Palestinian cause. Other parts of the foreign media frequently allow their stories to be filtered through such fixers-consultants...

"I will never work on a story that defames my people or leadership," boasts a Palestinian "fixer" (mediator/guide/translator) who works on a regular basis with many foreign journalists. "It is my duty to protect my people against Israeli propaganda."

All this calls to mind the declaration by Fayad Abu Shamala, the BBC correspondent in Gaza for the past 10 years, at a Hamas rally in May 2001:

"Journalists and media organizations [are] waging the campaign shoulder-to-shoulder together with the Palestinian people."

HonestReporting subscribers are encouraged to write to Agence France-Presse, requesting clarification of its policy regarding AFP reporters working simultaneously for institutions within the Palestinian Authority. HonestReporting subscribers are encouraged to write to Agence France-Presse, requesting clarification of its policy regarding AFP reporters working simultaneously for institutions within the Palestinian Authority.

Comments to AFP's Jerusalem bureau: afp.jerusalem@afp.com
Comments to AFP news: contact@afp.com

Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167.

To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, January 18, 2005.
This was written by Cal Thomas and appeared in Jewish World Review (www.JewishWorldReview.com).

Those Palestinians who truly wish to live in peace with Israel and have something they can call a state of their own are about to be disappointed again

Four elections, spanning just three months in three regions of the world, will shape events in this new year and probably for many years to come.

The American election in November returned George W. Bush to the presidency for another four years, ensuring his policy of liberating Iraq will continue.

The Ukrainian "re-election," necessitated by massive fraud during the first one, produced a majority for Viktor Yushchenko as Ukraine's next president. Eleven years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine can now look forward to real freedom. As Yushchenko said during his campaign, Ukraine was "independent, but not free."

The Iraq election, scheduled for Jan. 30, is part of a Middle East double feature with significant implications, not only for Iraqis, but the entire region. If the election can be held with the assurance that most who want to vote are able to do so and whoever wins the presidency can survive political intrigues and assassination attempts, the effect will be profound and possibly transforming for Iraq and her neighbors. Millions will be given hope only freedom brings.

That leaves the election for a new Palestinian leader to replace Yasser Arafat. Unlike the other three elections, which have been, or will be, based on a principle that people should be free to select the leaders of their choice, the Palestinian election will be something quite different.

Yoram Ettinger, a consultant on Middle East and U.S. affairs to Israeli Cabinet ministers, writes, "Elections do not become free through rhetoric, even when the rhetoric is uttered by leaders of respectable nations and by media and academia stars."

What does he mean? He elaborates: "Free elections are the byproduct of a society where citizens accord certain rights to their government. Free elections cannot be a byproduct of societies where regimes accord certain rights to their subjects, eliminate their opponents and brainwash their population with hate education."

Those Palestinians who truly wish to live in peace with Israel and have something they can call a state of their own are about to be disappointed again. That's because no matter who is elected to replace Arafat, the Palestinian objective of eliminating Israel and exterminating the Jewish people will not change.

During his recent visit to Iraq, British Prime Minister Tony Blair linked progress toward a Palestinian state to the renunciation of terror by the PLO leadership. President Bush has said the same thing. That is not going to happen as long as the current regime remains in power, no matter who is elected.

Much of the "free world" is likely to pronounce the Palestinian election legitimate, because the world wants a "peace partner" it can use to badger Israel into making further concessions. The world has ignored all of Israel's previous concessions, including Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's new pledge to pull "settlers" out of Gaza by February, instead of later this summer as he had previously promised.

A preview of the coming Palestinian election can be found by flashing back to a previous one in 1996. That election was supervised by international and Israeli observers. It was labeled "free and democratic" by such global figures as then-President Bill Clinton, former President Jimmy Carter, and then-Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, as well as the United Nations, European leaders, The New York Times, CNN and the three American broadcast networks.

Thus, the terrorists received not only an extreme makeover in much of the world's eyes, but an upgrade in their diplomatic status. That election changed nothing. The 11-year-old terror campaign continues.

As Ettinger writes, a prerequisite to free elections and peaceful coexistence "is the uprooting of the regime, which has been responsible for the deterioration of the Palestinian society."

None of those running for Palestinian leader, indeed, none of those in the Palestinian leadership, have given any indication of repudiating Arafat's strategy of terror until the singular goal of eliminating Israel is achieved.

Freedom is celebrated in U.S. elections and it appears to be on the march in Ukraine and possibly Iraq, but the Palestinian election will produce more of the same. Three out of four good elections would still be a good thing, but the world should not deceive itself that what happens in the Palestinian election will produce a change in policy or direction.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by David Ha'ivri, January 18, 2005.

The question of IDF soldiers refusing to obey orders is a very difficult issue to address, especially among those of us who believe in a strong Jewish State.

Soldiers in the Jewish army are putting their lives at stake for the well-being of the people of Israel. For over 50 years, they've had to deal with real life and death situations every day, fighting Arab armies and terrorists who never cease to try to put an end to the Jewish state and to kill Jews. Within the army, there are no people more dedicated, nor more willing to sacrifice their own lives for the continuation of the State of Israel, than Torah-observant Jewish nationalists.

In the present situation, where the government threatens to send in soldiers to demolish Jewish towns, to uproot Jews from their homes, and to lift their hand against Jewish sovereignty in the land of Israel, the dilemma is very severe. Jewish nationalists who, by belief and by nature, want to abide by the law and to support the government have been backed into a corner. They've been forced to speak out against the government's plans and to call on soldiers to disobey orders. Because of this, some Jewish nationalists are now being threatened with legal action by the state.

The issue centers on calling for soldiers to disobey their orders, but this is also a matter of hypocrisy in a supposedly democratic country. We see and hear the hypocritical left-wing speakers and activists of the "peace" camp saying it's wrong for soldiers to disobey orders. But anyone with a memory longer than 8 or 9 months can look back into newspaper clippings and see all of these same leaders, many of them in government positions, supporting soldiers who said they would disobey orders to go out, fight for and protect the people of Israel against terrorism.

For example, some Israeli air force pilots sent a letter saying that they, themselves, would determine whether to go out on missions to bomb terrorist camps and hiding places in Gaza. Almost immediately after leaving his government position, Michael Ben-Yair, the former attorney general of Israel, came out as a major spokesman for soldiers who refused to obey orders to fight for Israel. Ami Ayalon, head of the General Security Services (Shabak), also supported soldiers who refused to follow orders. When questions were raised about government officials such as Ben-Yair and Ayalon calling on soldiers to disobey orders, the present attorney general, speaking for the government, said there was no need to hound them and that they have the democratic right to voice their opinion. They have now completely reversed their position, but only when it comes to patriotic Jewish nationalists.

Now that thousands of soldiers have declared they won't take part in the immoral and illegal act of uprooting Jews from the Land of Israel, these same government officials want to bring charges against activists like Nadia Matar, Noam Livnat and Daniella Weiss, who call for soldiers to refuse orders to lift a hand against their brothers.

It is morally correct, and a settled matter of international law, for soldiers to disobey illegal orders, especially when directed against civilian populations. But even without the precedents of international law, ordering Jewish soldiers to lift their hands against Jewish settlers, the pioneers of Israel, is against the fundamental Zionist principles that brought Israel into existence, against the basic laws of the State of Israel and against the basic laws of the Torah. From many different perspectives, such orders are illegal. But more than that, it is politically corrupt and nationally wrong to send soldiers out on such a dirty task.

As a rule, soldiers must carry out orders. However, in the surreal circumstances in which Israeli soldiers are sent out to lift a hand against the core of our faith, it is immoral and illegal to carry out these orders. Soldiers must refuse these orders. By signing up thousands of soldiers who agree to refuse, a clear message is being relayed to the government of Ariel Sharon - he won't be able to enlist the manpower to destroy the dream of the people of Israel.

David Ha'ivri, chairman of Revava, is also editor of Darka Shel Torah and Ideas in Action newsletters, and the publisher of books teaching Jewish pride and faith in HaShem. He has set a goal to put the Jewish people back on the footpath of our fathers, and build a proud and strong nation whose national policy is based on Jewish values. He can be reached by email at haivri@hameir.org or at his website: http://www.hameir.org/

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 17, 2005.


Isn't Abu Mazen moderate, exclaim Western executives, legislators, and journalists. Actually, he both denounced the shelling of Jewish communities and insisted that jihad must go on.

None of those admiring leaders ask why he does not arrest those who fire rockets. Abu Mazen and his Prime Minister had an excuse when Prime Ministers under Arafat. Arafat kept control over most of the P.A. police and the Fatah militia. Arafat is gone. Now this pair controls all those armed men. They have no excuse for not cracking down on them. Obviously they don't want to stop the rocketing, not when they can get credit for moderation while having Jews murdered.

Not one Western leader asks what Abu Mazen means, that jihad must go on. Does that mean more killing? Does it mean he is struggling to take over just the Territories or also Israel? They do not ask. Do such questions not occur to the media?

Perhaps they do not occur to it. Journalists think in packs. Their minds are clouded with biases and their feet are mired in ruts. They no longer put difficult questions to difficult people (who have assassins on the payroll). They let Arabs report for them, under duress, and quote whatever people say. They call such speculation and propaganda "news."


Oh to be young and idealistic! A P.A. youth persuaded his 16-year-old fianc?e to become a human bomb with him. They were motivated by what among the Arabs are considered ideals. The ideal of murder. Murder the enemy. The attackers don't have to know one Jew from another, any will do. Do you know of any other contemporary faith or ethnic group that so values crimes against humanity?

The youth contacted a member of Hamas with whom he is acquainted, to learn how to become a human bomb. It seems that many Arabs know an Islamist. Fortunately, the young couple decided to postpone the attack until their wedding. In the interim, their plot was discovered.

Supposed they had carried out their plot. Hamas would take responsibility, and "moderate" Abu Mazen would deny responsibility. Actually, he had double responsibility. In the first place, the P.A. that he heads and in which as Arafat's assistant he held a high position, pledged at Oslo and at subsequent agreements with Israel to crack down on terrorist organizations, such as Hamas. The P.A. never did.

In the second place, the P.A. indoctrinates the populace but especially the youth in jihad. The engaged couple that volunteered for terrorism was primed by the P.A.. Abu Mazen would be disingenuous if he denied his role in their crimes and hypocritical if he denounced them.


Although my articles treat the Arab-Israel conflict, the subject really is ethics. I seek to expose deception and protect people from being taken advantage of. Since our media has forsaken the role of watchdog when by advancing its own policy preferences at the expense of full disclosure and even truth, our leaders can get away with much deception. Jewish leaders betray their own people. My fellow Jews are willing to deceive themselves into believing that the worst rogues suddenly converted into trustworthy peacemakers. Much of world politics revolves around such pretense. I illustrate deceit in the Arab-Israel conflict by examples from other issues. Much of the deceit is conspiratorial. Aware of the conspiracy's goals, many people informally join the deception. Influential people mock accusations of conspiracy as from "conspiracy nuts." Naturally, for although there are conspiracy nuts, many people in power are serious conspirators. What do they think WWII and the Soviets' Cold War were?


Gaza Arabs have acquired shoulder-held ground-to-air missiles. Israeli farmers fear to deploy crop dusters near the Gaza border because of the new threat. PM Sharon warned the P.A. that Israel would respond "very harshly" to ground-to-air attacks.

"[IMRA: In line with the apparent policy of the Sharon team that security concerns after the retreat are beyond the planning horizon, it does not appear that Mr. Sharon addressed how the introduction of shoulder-held ground-to-air missiles to the Gaza Strip impacts on Israel's post-retreat response capabilities that were to rely almost exclusively on air-based responses."

"PM Sharon's warning that "Israel's response to such rocket attacks would be "very harsh" is, of course, also based on the assumption that Israel will enjoy a free hand to act after the retreat rather than be subject to tremendous pressure to show "restraint" so as not to plunge the fragile PA into chaos - not to mention pressure not to damage facilities built with donor money, or pressure to avoid action that might lead to wounding the international human shields [AKA "observers"] that are expected to be deployed.]" (IMRA, 12/28.)

Israel does not fulfill its threats. Empty threats would not deter the Arabs from using the missiles. Sharon I afraid to annex enough land around the airport to prevent attacks on its planes.


"In the attack on the American consulate in Jedda on December 6, for the first time, al-Qaeda mounted an assault on a "fortified" American facility rather than attacking soft targets. When it turned out that nearly all the victims were Muslims, many Saudis, who were at first pleased by the U.S. humiliation, strongly condemned al-Qaeda. Even the families of the four terrorists killed in the consulate's courtyard were denounced by their kin" (IMRA, 12/28).


Reduce Western economies by disrupting their oil supplies. Disrupt the supplies by damaging the oil industry in the Persian Gulf (IMRA, 12/28). Pres. Bush rejects fuel conservation.


B'Tselem, a so-called human rights organization that usually takes the Arab side, issued statistics on the P.A. war on Israel. The organization asserts that it disapproves of the use of human shields, but its figures on those killed "who did not participate in hostilities" include those killed while acting as human shields. The statistics makes the deceased seem to have been innocent civilians, whereas they assisted the terrorists. The same misleading statistics are used for "non-combatant minors" who may be acting as human shields for terrorists firing rockets (IMRA, 12/29). Amnesty Intl. used to count dead terrorists as civilians, as if Israel were killing civilians.


The Israeli Army often has declined to fire upon terrorists protected by human shields. As a result, Israeli soldiers and civilians have been killed by the terrorists. That is an immoral position by the Army, attempting to take a moral position or what it thinks would be better public relations for Israel. Israel should not put public relations over the lives of its innocent people.

The human shields we are talking about are not hostages. They choose to accompany the terrorists, in order to deter firing back at the terrorists. That is not innocent. They have given up the right to life by siding with murderers and assisting their attacks (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 12/30). Yes, the human shields cynically take advantage of the human impulses of the Israeli Army, the same Army that they falsely accuse of committing war crimes. Arab terrorism is a war crime. Let neither terrorists nor human shields escape justice!


"The fact, long established by media pollsters, is that the major media is as dominated by the so-called liberal point of view as are our universities. I say "so-called liberal point of view" because the modern liberal is not very liberal after all. Neither tolerance nor love of liberty characterizes the point of view of the contemporary liberal, merely conformity. The liberal point of view is a conformist point of view. What it conforms to changes year in and year out, but one thing it always stands by is the demand for rank-and-file conformity. Oh yes, and it demands one more thing: deceit." (R. Emmet Tyrrell Jr, NY Sun, 1/13, p.9.) Actually, "liberal" is an undefined catchword embracing a range of views.

That little essay on liberals indicates that those who call themselves liberal today have different views and ethics from those who were liberal in the past. But the same is true of conservatives. As for deceit, no one school of thought monopolizes it. There is a certain deceit in the tendentiousness of those conservatives who, catching liberals in some deception, pretend that only liberals indulge in it. Pres. Bush's environmental policies were promoted deceptively. Apparently, today's conservatives are not so conservative.


It would have made a dramatic story. Within hours of the tsunami, Israel had medical staff and relief supplies airborne and winging towards stricken Muslim countries. Israel often is the first to offer help. The doctors were not allowed off the plane, just the supplies. The Muslims were too intolerant to accept Jewish rescuers.

Instead, almost all of the major media ignored the story. They reported other stories about Israel, ones with a negative slant. The "NY Times" reported about Israeli forgers of antiquities. Another media outlet focused on the Israeli military near Jenin. The media blackout is a major story, too. It shows that the media is almost as biased against the Jewish state as are the Muslims.

The consequence of this media blackout is that people all over do not hear much positive about Israel, but do hear much that is negative (Winston Mid East Analysis, 12/30). That's deadly.

A side issue in Mr. Winston's piece is that since the disaster befell mostly Muslim areas, God is warning the Muslims not to reject Israeli peace overtures. What great skill, to detect the will of God in the application of the laws of nature! Winston's opinion is a mirror-image of Saudi opinion, that perceives the tsunami as having afflicted mostly infidels, punishment for resistance to Islam.


If Israel withdraws from parts of the Territories, the world is likely to ask it at that point, when negotiations begin, what are you offering for peace (Arutz-7, 12/30 from Dr. Aaron Lerner).

It is a good point, although Israel should refer to what it already sacrificed. Israel also ought to demand to know what the Arab aggressors are offering. It won't call the Arabs aggressors.


An Arab who started the tunneling between the Egyptian and Gaza sides of Rafia did so for ordinary contraband. Contraband fetched higher prices in Gaza. He explained that the arms smugglers rented or bought houses to use as concealed entrances and exits. The smugglers often piled the unearthed sand in unused rooms (IMRA, 12/30).

When Israel bulldozed the houses, human rights groups complained instead of complimented Israel. They confused smugglers' rights with human rights against being murdered by means of those smuggled arms. Maybe the so-called human rights groups share the Muslim view, which they don't criticize, of a right to slay Jews.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Beth Goodtree, January 17, 2005.

With all the praise and kudos being heaped upon Mahmoud Abbas, the terrorist who won the election in the Israeli territory now occupied by Arabs, you'd think that a leopard could change its spots. Or a camel it's hump. For those fantasy-driven Pollyannas who think that now the Middle East will see peace and lovingkindness, here's a dash of cold Wadi-waste in your faces. It ain't gonna happen.

Mahmoud Abbas has recently proven that he is merely another unrepentant terrorist, no different than Arafat, except that he shaves and wears a suit (maybe even uses deodorant). He even does the same Arafat deceptions; he says one thing for the Western world and a totally different one for the Arab/Muslim world.

Recently, Abbas called for an end to terror because he said "it was not in the interests of the Palestinian people." Not one mention of the fact that murdering innocent civilians is wrong. No mention of the utter evil of committing genocide upon Jews. No mention of the barbarity, malevolence and utter lack of morality it takes to kill women, children and families going about their daily routines. Merely absolute self-centeredness: "It is not in the interests of the Palestinian people."

And then there was Abbas' recent statement to protect and honor terrorists.

Therefore, I was underwhelmed when I saw the news about the most recent genocidal murders by various means committed by the Arabs occupying Jewish Palestine. Saddened, yes. Surprised, hardly.

What I did find surprising was the embrace and support given Abbas by Ariel Sharon and George Bush. Were they born politically stupid or did they have to study at it?

Did they think that someone who based his doctoral thesis on denying that the Holocaust took place would suddenly turn nice? And did they really suppose that so many of us would buy into their spin on him?

Or did they hope that by building up this terrorist and trying to give him an air of legitimacy, it would turn aside 60-some odd years of hatred and genocidal intent on his part?

A camel don't change its hump, and Abbas can't and/or won't change his deep-seated hatred of Jews and Israel.

So what can Israel expect from this widely hailed 'new partner for peace'? I'll give you tomorrow's headlines today.

"Abbas Demands Prisoner Release Before Talk of Peace."

"Israel Agrees To Prisoner Release As Goodwill Gesture."

"Homicide Bomber Causes Many Fatalities."

"Abbas Blames Violence On Israeli Closings."

"Abbas Says Reigning In Terrorists Will Cause Civil War."

"Palestinian TV Continues Incitement."

"Israel Delays Prisoner Release For A Week."

"Israel Destroys Isolated Abandoned Building In Response Homicide Bombing."

"Israel Releases 150 Palestinian Prisoners."

"Abbas Ready For Peace Talks."

"Family Killed By Rocket During Preparations For Peace Talks."

"Abbas Blames Peace Talk Cancellation On Israeli Security Operations Following Rocket Attack."

And on and on and on.

You've read these same headlines for how many years during Arafat's dictatorship of terror? It ain't gonna change; all we got here is a better-dressed camel with the same hump.

But there is one headline that will be new, despite the pipedreams of George Bush and the Roadmap tyrants of forced ethnic cleansing of Jews:

"No Palestinian State In 2005."

This is a guarantee if those who have been pushing the Roadmap stick to their stated requirements of an end to terror and incitement. Because the camel that is the Arab people occupying Jewish Palestine ain't gonna change its hump any time soon either. Their unspoken motto: "Better hateful, murderous and living in self-imposed squalor than peaceful and prosperous and responsible for our behavior."

But then, if they became peaceful and prosperous, they might no longer be the world-record recipient of international welfare and misplaced sympathy. They might have to be productive. And they might be held responsible for Crimes Against Humanity.

It looks like this camel is not only not going to change its hump, it's going to be bleeding the civilized world's good will, hopes and dreams for a very long time.

On a different note, there has been a quadruple homicide in Jersey City, NJ (United States) and the police would like your help.

Several days ago, an entire family was found slain in their apartment. The dead were Coptic Christians originally from Egypt and included a father, a mother, a daughter just a day short of her 16th birthday, and another daughter just 8 years old.

Their throats had been slit and the older daughter's wrists had been slashed where she had had a tattoo of a cross. She also had been stabbed in the chest.

My interest in this case comes from the fact that members of the Coptic community from Jersey City had approached me back in September to ask for my help. They had told me they were under threat of death from the Muslims and wanted me to write a series of articles about their plight both in Egypt and America.

At the time, I told them that I did not have the venues for placing such a series, but that I would certainly mention Muslim atrocities and threats against Christians, as I have in the past. I also thought that they were exaggerating about the threat to those Copts living in America, although I did not underestimate their peril in Egypt.

It is known that the father and elder daughter in the family were frequent users of Paltalk chat rooms, frequently engaging in heated discussions with Muslims. There is also some evidence that at one point someone from one of the chat rooms threatened to "cut their heads off like chickens." This may or may not be important. Also, many in the Jersey City Coptic community were becoming activists for the rights of the Copts in Egypt.

If anyone has any information, they may contact the Jersey City Homicide Department directly at 201-915-1345, or KKolich@HCPO.org. If you would rather not be directly involved, you may pass your information along to me and I will make sure it gets to the investigators without your involvement.

Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer who lives in the NYC metro area. She writes political commentary/analysis, and the occasional science and humor articles. Or visit her website: http://hometown.aol.com/bgoodtree/

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 17, 2005.

Malcolm Hoenlein is executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. This piece was circulated by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. (www.jewishledger.com/articles/2005/01/13/editorial/edit03.prt). A shorter version of this article appeared in Ha'aretz.

It is excellent BUT, only half the story.

I have often written that the department of State linked to multi-national oil companies who, in turn were slaved to oil nations - like Saudi Arabia - were dedicated to eliminating Israel. As you see movement from the corner of your eye, I could always see a cabal of anti-Israel collaborators, working diligently in Washington to subvert Israel.

It was no secret that the U.S. State Department was anti-Semitic from its earliest days and grew more so when oil became pricey and connections to the Saudis tightened.

The Jonathan Pollard case offered us a glimpse into a cohesive group who defied the sense and specifics of the M.O.U. (Memorandum of Understanding) that was signed by a series of Presidents and approved by Congress to exchange vital information with Israel.

But, this loosely-knit cabal of hostiles thwarted the M.O.U. by cutting off the vital information about Saddam Hussein's chemical and gas program which was supposed to be shared with Israel under the M.O.U.s - in effect, disobeying their Commander-in-Chief - the United States President. This cabal seemed primarily driven by the pro-Arab U.S. State Department, particularly the Middle East desk.

There the links radiated out to the Pentagon, Naval Intelligence, CIA, FBI, NSA. NIS, etc., where apparently, there were small units of 'friendlies' in these Agencies who joined the Cabal. Caspar Weinberger was Secretary of Defense at this time, having come from Bechtel with close connections to the Saudis.

This 'informal' group still seems to be operational...

I've written extensively in the past that there were weekly meetings at the offices of the FBI in a place euphemistically called "The Jew Room" where Israel, Israelis and American Jews in all walks of life, were tracked. Apparently, Israel was considered 'a hostile' to these people and Saudi Arabia was 'an ally' - which gives us an idea of who and why.

There was a brief moment of insight when Jonathan Pollard blew the cover on an operation that gave Saddam chemical and biological weapons which Caspar Weinberger, who controlled the Pentagon, decided was to be kept secret from Israel, despite the Presidential M.O.U.s.

In essence, we have a breakaway rogue operation which conducted itself as a Shadow Government and may still be operational..

So, let's dig a little deeper.

We already know that 9/11 occurred because of slip-shod work of the FBI and the CIA. The following are questions that the 9/11 Commission avoided asking:

Was it slip-shod or did the U.S. State Department develop a mind-set within our American Intel Agencies not to question, investigate or track Arab Muslims in America? It was not surprising to hear former Senator Lee Hamilton, chairman of the 9/11 Commission, state after the their Report was issued, that we should make a greater effort to show friendliness to the Islamic world.

Recall that most federal agents knew that investigating suspicious Arab Muslims was not a good career move, despite the fact that 15 of the 9/11 hijacker/suicide bombers were Saudi Muslims and the other 4 were Egyptian Muslims. The 9/11 Commission deliberately fell short of tracking Intel failures to their source...the pro-Arab State Department. In effect, our own Intelligence Services took a dive when relations with Arab Muslim oil nations became more important than the security of the American people.

You do understand that Saudi Arabia has been protected overtly and covertly, despite the knowledge that it was subverting the U.S. by funding Terrorists globally. Many former U.S. State Department diplomats became representatives of the Saudis, among other Arab Muslim nations, when they left the State Department. They have worked diligently to influence Washington to subvert Israel and to compromise Israeli and American Jewish influence in Washington today. This slant is even more dangerously egregious when one notes that the FBI and CIA are lacking Arabic speaking translators because of their bias against Israelis, many of whom came from Arabic countries and spoke native Arabic.

Therefore, it follows that the FBI was tasked to take down AIPAC and remove their influence on Capital Hill (Congress).

I recall that Caspar Weinberger similar effort to remove Jews from government service and research projects, using the lever of Jonathan Pollard's exposé on U.S. involvement in not only suppressing information on Iraq's WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) experiments but, the fact that a U.S. President and VP enabled the transfer of these materials to Saddam Hussein. (1) IF you thought that the Iran-Contra was a dirty Black Op, the transfer of WMD to Iraq was much dirtier. Recall how Saddam used enhanced mustard gas and Sarin gas on his own Kurds in Halabja in March 1988. Where do you think he got the stuff? (2)

As an aside, I would guess that Saddam Hussein will never be brought to trial. He will likely die in prison from some malady. He cannot be allowed to testify lest a President and his men are indicted and make it to a Federal prison. That would include American corporations who were suppliers of technology and chemical precursors for weapons' grade substances. America transferred West Nile Virus samples out of the Atlanta Disease Control Center - twice. (3) The request was before 1990, however, it seems that they weaponized the virus and seeded in on the East Coast, from where it has spread across America. (Note! For reasons yet to be investigated, this line of thought never made it out of Washington and into the general Media.)

Similarly but sadly, I do not think Pollard will ever leave prison alive lest he expose what he learned about a high level Shadow U.S. Government, tied to Arab Muslim interests, managed through multi-national corporations that control oil and arms.

By all means, let the FBI investigation go further, only this time let the investigation cut both ways.

Perhaps those best able to shed more light on this inner circle and their motives would be such individuals as Caspar Weinberger, James Baker III, Brent Scowcrowft, George Tenet, Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, et al. and a small fry but knowledgeable in the FBI David Szady - who is now in charge of the controversial FBI probe of AIPAC.

Of course, it would take a Special Investigating Committee of Congress with subpoena powers and a Grand Jury where no one could invoke the infamous dodge that they cannot testify because these are matters of National Security.

Just think! How many high ranking political crooks in Washington who have escaped Federal Prison by invoking the secrecy of National Security?

AIPAC and the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations would do better if, in addition to explaining the falsity of the FBI sting and the set-up raids, they pressed for an investigation to expose this Shadow Government so closely allied to Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria, et al.


1. "West Abetted Iraq Power Grab: U.S. Oil Interests, Fear of Iran fueled Saddam's Ambition" by Emanuel Winston, U.S. DEFENSE NEWS August 27, 1990

2. "Saddam's Rescuers Out In Force" by Emanuel Winston GAMLA Org. www.org.il/english/article/2002/aug/win1.htm

3. "Al Qaeda's House of Horrors" by Emanuel Winston ourjerusalem.com/opinion/story/opinion20020821.html

This is "Whatever Is Behind Aipac Probe, Investigation Raises Specters Of Past," by Malcolm Hoenlein.

Jan 14, 2005 - There have been hundreds, even thousands, of articles in the American press regarding an FBI investigation involving the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

While the reports imply various charges, none in fact has been lodged, despite an investigation that has lasted more than a year. It's still hard to discern exactly what wrong allegedly has been committed that would justify such a highly publicized case.

When there are doubts about the motivation behind such actions, it raises specters that have dark roots in our past. In recent months there have been repeated stories about the "neocons" - often a code word for Jews - or widespread canards placing the onus on Jews for everything from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to the war in Iraq.

The implicit references to "dual loyalty" cannot be overlooked, especially when reliable studies show that a significant percentage of Americans still believe this baseless and bigoted idea.

American Jews care about Israel and advocate proudly in support of the special U.S.-Israel relationship. So do many other Americans with historical or ethnic ties to other homelands overseas.

The effectiveness of that Jewish advocacy has raised resentment, jealousy and wild mythologies. These are among the factors that set the context for the reaction to the AIPAC investigation.

There are many questions as to why, after such a long period, there have only been selected leaks, and why - after AIPAC cooperated fully - it was necessary for seven FBI agents to stage a raid for information that was voluntarily offered.

In fact, the root of the concern harks back to Leslie Stahl's report on CBS' nationwide broadcast on Aug. 27, 2004.

That initial account asserted that espionage was involved and that a Pentagon "mole" was working with AIPAC.

In the following days the story kept changing - to the alleged transfer of secret documents, to the mishandling of classified information, to ever lesser charges.

Jewish organizations, confident of AIPAC's assurances that there was no substance to the charges, rallied to its support. So did members of AIPAC.

They were bolstered by the appearances of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice at a major AIPAC event in October, as well as the revelation that President Bush chose to address AIPAC's annual conference a few months earlier.

But damage was done, and the Pat Buchanans of the world rushed to take advantage of it. Buchanan said, "We need to investigate whether there is a nest of Pollardites in the Pentagon who have been transmitting American secrets through AIPAC, the Israel lobby, over to the Israel Embassy, to be transferred to" Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

While speculation continues about the true motivations behind the investigation, it clearly has crossed the line of the acceptable.

The latest revelations by investigative journalist Edwin Black and others suggest that agents took advantage of a scared, lower-level, non-Jewish Defense Department employee to set up AIPAC and others, including former Pentagon official Richard Perle and CBS News producer Adam Ciralsky.

We do not want to cover up; if there was wrongdoing, let it be exposed. We are confident that there was none, and that the allegations will prove false.

Neither AIPAC nor the Jewish community will be cowed into silence or in any way lessen our commitment to working on behalf of the interests of the United States and its democratic ally, Israel.

The American people identify with Israel based on common values and world views, and no fabricated charges or allegations can undermine these fundamental bonds or commitments. I hope that the vindication - and perhaps the apology - will be as visible as the charges. But past experience shows that's unlikely.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 17, 2005.

You may remember the ruckus over the Goebbels-like propaganda film "Jenin Jenin", produced by Israeli Arab film producer Mohammed Bakri, whose cousins carried out a terrorist atrocity on an Israeli civilian bus, cheered on by Mohammed Bakri. The Jenin Jenin film was such a tissue of libelous lies, including against Israeli soldiers who had died in the battle, that their families petitioned the court to order the film not to be screened. The court at first complied, during which the Israeli Jews for a Second Holocaust from the Far Left made a point of screening it illegally, on campuses and in some Cinemateks. Later the court reversed itself, and it is now legal to screen the filthy anti-Semitic propaganda film in Israel as protected free expression, unlike Tee-shirts that read "Where there are no Arabs there is no Terror", which will get you arrested and jailed.

Anyways, while we have all known for a long time that the film is a tissue of lies, the news now is that the producer ADMITS it is a tissue of lies. No doubt this will not stop those Far Leftists and Tenured Traitors who insist that telling lies should not matter when it comes to promoting the "Palestinian narrative".

Here is the latest. It was written by Aaron Klein and comes from today's World Net Daily (www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42404). It is entitled "Palestinian producer: False film funded by PA." The documentary claimed Israeli army committed war crimes.

A Palestinian filmmaker who produced a documentary alleging Israeli troops committed war crimes in a refugee camp admitted in a deposition last week to falsifying scenes, using inaccurate information and obtaining financing for the project from the Palestinian Authority, WorldNetDaily has learned.

Muhammad Bakri, producer of "Jenin, Jenin," a documentary that claims Israel committed genocide in the Jenin refugee camp in April 2002, admitted in a deposition to inaccuracies throughout his film. The filmmaker is being sued by five Israeli soldiers visible in still footage in the film, which alleges IDF troops killed a "large number" of civilians, mutilated Palestinian bodies, randomly executed and bombed women, children and the mentally and physically impaired, and leveled the entire refugee camp, including a wing of the local hospital.

The documentary doesn't show footage of the alleged atrocities, but in some scenes, faces of the soldiers now suing Bakri were superimposed over "eyewitness testimony," and it was indicated they had committed "war crimes."

But Bakri, in a deposition obtained by WND, admitted he "believed" selected witnesses but didn't check the information they provided.

"I believed the things that I've been told. What I did not believe was not included in the film," said Bakri.

When asked about a scene in which it is implied Israeli troops ran over civilians, Bakri admitted to constructing the footage himself as an "artistic choice." He also answered "no" when asked if he believed "that during the operation in Jenin, the Israeli soldiers killed people indiscriminately."

In perhaps the most explosive element of the deposition, Bakri admitted his documentary, which was screened in theaters around the world, was financed in part by the Palestinian Authority. He said Yasser Abed Rabu, Palestinian minister of culture and information and a member of former PLO leader Yasser Arafat's executive committee, "covered a part of the film expenses."

Israel entered Jenin, which was considered a center for terrorist recruitment and operations, as part of its Operation Defensive Shield to crack down on increased suicide bombings by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Israel sent infantry units to fight house-to-house and lost nearly two dozen soldiers to ambushes, Palestinian snipers and booby-trapped houses.

Claims of a massacre were immediately made following the operation by the Palestinian leadership, which spoke of upwards of 500 civilians killed and thousands wounded, but it was later determined 56 Palestinians, mostly gunmen, were killed, and 23 Israeli soldiers died in the battle.

Media accounts, documentary evidence and investigations by several international humanitarian organizations quickly proved there was no massacre.

Bakri's film features several "witnesses" describing "brutality" by the IDF, claiming Israel attacked and killed "many, many" Palestinians with tanks, planes and snipers, although Bakri never lists the exact number of Palestinians killed.

But a film by Pierre Rehov, "The Road To Jenin," seems to disprove many of Bakri's claims, and has been cited in the lawsuit against the Palestinian filmmaker.

One charge by Bakri is that Israel fired 11 missiles at a Jenin hospital, leveling the facility while patients were inside, and later wouldn't allow emergency personnel to access the area. Hospital manager Dr. Mustafa Abo Gali tells Bakri's audience, "The whole of the west wing was destroyed. Fighter planes launched their missiles every three minutes."

But in "The Road to Jenin," Rehov also interviews Gali, who shows the filmmaker the extent of the damage a small hole on the outside of a building, with the entire west wing intact. Rehov also provides aerial images of the hospital on the last day of the Jenin incursion showing all sections of the hospital standing normally.

With regard to Bakri's claim that ambulances weren't able to reach the area, Dr. David Zangen, the IDF chief medical officer in Jenin during the incursion, describes to Rehov how Israeli soldiers treated many wounded Palestinian fighters, including members of Hamas. Rehov even cuts to a scene of an Israeli soldier authorizing Gali in person to receive any medical supplies he needs for the Jenin hospital.

Writes Tamar Sternthal of the Committee for Accuracy in Reporting in the Middle East, "Even casual observers will notice apparent inconsistencies in the 'witness testimony' on which Bakri relies. For example, an older interviewee charges that the Israelis made Palestinian prisoners fully undress: 'Some people were completely undressed in front of their brothers, sisters and children, who were used as human shields.' Yet, the accompanying image does not support this claim; it shows a group of Palestinians, some of them without shirts. All wore pants."

Bakri also claims the IDF shot in the hands an unarmed Palestinian villager, Ali Youssef, and when he couldn't stand up, they shot his feet. But Rehov found Youssef for his documentary and reveals Youssef was standing in a housing complex with Hamas gunmen when he was shot once in the hand. Israeli medics treated Youssef's wound, found a congenital heart problem, no foot injury and brought him to Israel for treatment at a hospital in Afula. Hospital papers disclose Youssef was not shot in the leg at all.

Zangen says Bakri uses deceptive filmography techniques to create the myth of a massacre, a charge now supported by Bakri's deposition. Zangen cites one scene of a tank heading toward a crowd. The scene then blacks out, falsely suggesting the people were all killed, says Zangen. Also, Bakri, who Zangen says was not on scene at any time during the battle to get footage, deceptively juxtaposes images of Israeli tanks and snipers taking aim with pictures of Palestinian children, another charge Bakri has admitted to.

Some of the juxtaposed soldiers include the five who filed suit against Bakri in Tel Aviv court seeking more than $500,000 in damages. The lawsuit, filed in Hebrew and obtained by WorldNetDaily, charges Bakri falsely claims the soldiers committed war crimes.

The five plaintiffs are current reserve soldiers and say their professional lives require constant contact with Palestinians who may recognize their faces from Bakri's documentary and seek to attack them.

"Bakri's blatant use of lies and deception to build his one-sided case about Palestinians suffering at the hands of brutal Israel disqualifies it from having contributed to any 'big truth.' Rather, 'Jenin, Jenin' amounts to incitement fueling vicious propaganda that claims Jews 'are not even human.'" writes Sternthal. She credits Rehov with exposing the "inflammatory and defamatory falsehoods spread by works like 'Jenin, Jenin.'"

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, January 17, 2005.

Until Arafat's recent demise, Israel's feckless leader Ariel Sharon was wont to call Yasser Arafat "irrelevant". Sharon did it at every opportunity. Yet, Arafat was anything but irrelevant. He called all the shots in "Palestine," he held the purse strings, he turned on and off the terror tap at will, and everyone listened to him. So much, can't be said for Ariel Sharon today.

After the recent Karni terminal bombing, Ariel Sharon has done an about face, (Is that a retreat? Or, a disengagement?), freezing all diplomatic relations with the newly elected Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, whom he just weeks ago praised as a man who Israel can do business with, and a moderate.

Now Sharon has put him in "Cherem" (isolation), just one step down from "irrelevant".

True, the terror gangs aren't listening to Abbas any better than they did when he was PA Prime Minister in 2003 and called for an end to terror attacks (he calls it ending the "militarization" of the Intifada). True, Abbas is still the same Holocaust-denying liar, intellectually dishonest and Arafat's fellow traveler for almost 50 years (he even campaigned on Arafat's celebrity and how he would continue in Arafat's path). True, most Palestinians still want to wipe out Israel and Abbas feeds their blood lust with the codeword "right of return," which he campaigned on preserving for them.

And true, many analysts and observers of the Middle East assume that Abbas won't get real control of the situation in the PA and Abbas himself has stated that to avoid a civil war in "Palestine," he doesn't intend to honor his commitments in the Roadmap, which states, "...undertake visible efforts on the ground to arrest, disrupt, and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning violent attacks on Israelis anywhere...Palestinian Authority security apparatus begins sustained, targeted, and effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. This includes commencing confiscation of illegal weapons and consolidation of security authority, free of association with terror and corruption."

So, irrelevant might just be a good word to describe Abbas...

Except that much of the international community has been working very hard to "Kasher" this pig (i.e. praise Abbas as a moderate and peacemaker). He's relevant, because they (the world) want him to be. Bush, who went along with Sharon's "Cherem" on Arafat, has already invited Abbas to the Whitehouse. EU leaders have rejoiced that they now have a "moderate terrorist," clean-shaven and in a suit. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, can breath a sigh of relief that if Abbas comes to UN headquarters, he won't be "packing" as his predecessor was. Everyone is happy.

Which brings us to Arik (Sharon's nickname).

Sharon has gone against the Likud Central Committee a few times recently to pursue his Gaza Expulsion Plan, and in the process torn Likud apart. He's brought the "loser" Peres and his losing party, Labor, into a new government coalition, after having adopted the losing party's policies from the last elections.

While terrorism, rocket attacks, and the general attempt on the part of "Palestinians" (read Amalek) to annihilate as many Jews as possible continues unabated, Sharon has insisted that he will carry out his "disengagement" plan this summer. Or, is that retreat under fire (something Sharon promised he wouldn't do)? Sharon still insists he plans to implement the left's (and Arafat's) "ethnic cleansing campaign" against the Jews in Gaza and Northern Samaria.

But, while Sharon continues to try to curry favor with world leaders by expelling Jews from Gaza, he's shooting himself in the foot, with his expanded military retaliations against "Palestinian" terror.

Sharon recently said, "The army and the security forces have been instructed to increase operational activity to stop terrorism and they will continue to do so without restrictions - I emphasize without restrictions - so long as the Palestinians don't lift a finger. The operational level has been instructed to take any step necessary to stop the terrorism."

But increased military activity against terror targets (rightly justified), and putting Abbas on the spot (he should be hung like Eichmann), won't do much for Sharon's image in western capitals.

And contradictory positions (called flip-flops in Israel), "Abbas is good," then "Abbas is bad," within weeks, (when we all heard Abbas' campaign rants against Israel "the Zionist enemy" as he called it), won't help Sharon's image in Israel either.

Can Arik pull it off?

Can Sharon claim to be for "peace," and to want to get back to the "diplomatic process," yet hold Abbas' hand over the fire, and start a major new military offensive in Gaza, on the one hand, and at the same time continue to prepare to expel thousands of Jews from their homes, in spite of the growing opposition to his plan from Israelis?

Public calls to disobey expulsion orders in the Israeli army are growing daily. According to reports, the "Defensive Shield" organization has now signed up over 10,000 "refusniks," soldiers who will refuse to comply with the army's expulsion orders if called on to carry them out. "Right-Wing Extremists," "Hill Top Youth," even leaders from the Yesha Settlers Council (considered moderates among the "Jewish settlers"), are preparing for massive civil disobedience in the coming months to stop the expulsions. The recent events at Yitzhar, when the evacuation authorities tried to visit the town, only to be met by massive civil resistance, blocking their way, are being held up as a model for things to come.

Threats of "civil war" are ringing in the air...

Not long ago, in a meeting with Avi Dichter, the head of Israel's FBI (the Shin Bet or Shabak, meaning the General Security Service), the Yesha Council people told Dichter they no longer could control the "street," things had gone too far. So who knows where things will lead to?

Recently, top security officials have simultaneously expressed their concerns that given aggressive resistance from the "settlers," (volunteers will come from around Israel and even the Diaspora to resist), they might not be able to carry out the expulsions, and that an Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza would immediately endanger over 40 towns in the Negev area, from Kassam rockets, with Ashdod and Ashkelon coming under fire in the near future.

So what's the point of the expulsions and withdrawals?

Events are moving quickly, and they seem to be taking on a life of their own. The Quartet (US, EU, UN and Russia) i.e. the world, want a Palestinian state, no matter what. The Jews are divided, but a strong anti-expulsion resistance movement is growing rapidly. With almost a third of Likud MKs voting against the proposed coalition, the new Israeli government coalition of Likud, Labor, and two small religious parties, was dependent on the votes of the far-left Yahad party and two Arab MKs to come to power. Sharon is loosing control.

My prognosis, it's going to be a long hot summer!

It's debatable if Arafat was ever irrelevant, but Abbas seems to be. To this list, I think we can add Ariel Sharon.

Today, Ariel Sharon is irrelevant!

Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko

To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, January 17, 2005.
This was written by Nadav Shragai and appeared in Haaretz. Women in Green is sending out this article to its email list, even though it does not agree with the author that a referendum is the solution. True, it will show that a majority of the public are opposed to Sharon's Disengagement Plan. But no one, even the majority of Israel has the right to give away and portion of the Promised Land, by vote or otherwise. It is the G-d of Israel and the Torah that is our sole and only guide. No one has the right to amend G-d's Covenant with the Jewish People.

Civil war is no longer a theoretical possibility. The subject is not a matter of hollow threats or baseless horror scenarios. True, there have been an abundance of these, up until a few weeks ago, whose sole purpose was to deter the prime minister from uprooting the settlements of Gush Katif. But now it is a genuine alarm. Some of the nightmare scenarios are now based on reality, even if it may be masking tactics of intimidation and deterrence.

Thousands of Israelis are signing petitions in which they proclaim their refusal to abet the disengagement. Thousands more are declining to sign, but make it clear that they will not cooperate when the day of disengagement comes. They represent not only the religious public, which defers to rabbinic halakhic authority, but also many others - religious and secular Jews - who wish to remain loyal to the dictates of their conscience. Immediate danger is posed by a handful of Yitzhar-type zealots, who are liable to strike at evacuating forces. Former head of the Central Command Yitzhak Eitan speaks of the possible use of live ammunition.

But the real rupture that is developing is the chasm between a significant group in the Israeli public and a regime that is perceived as illegitimate, as deceiving its voting public, as carrying out an expulsion and "transfer" of its citizens, without having received any mandate from the public.

The prime minister makes life easy for himself by throwing responsibility for the great conflagration that is arising before his eyes solely on the opponents of disengagement. He bears supreme responsibility for what is unfolding. It is he who wrought a situation that has brought us to the brink of the abyss, where refusal to follow orders in the army has ceased to be a marginal phenomenon and is gradually becoming the mainstream view among opponents of disengagement.

This process occurred because Sharon has for months stubbornly refused to let the people make the historic decision, as is only right. Sharon could have neutralized this dangerous wave many months ago, and he can still cut it short simply by giving the people the right to decide.

This would not only be moral and right; it is also the smart move. The mainstream among opponents of disengagement - the Yesha Council of settlers and the majority of extra-parliamentary rightist organizations, including most of the rabbis - have already announced their readiness to accept whatever decision is made. They believe that they will be able to persuade the public that Sharon is making an awful mistake. They have to be granted the opportunity to prove it, not only because Sharon's style of governance - firing ministers, threatening MKs and ignoring decisions reached by the institutions of his own party and its members - is undemocratic, but mainly because he has deceived his voters.

Sharon - who declared prior to the elections that "so long as Palestinian terror continues, there will be no progress on even the beginning of an agreement," who promised "not to evacuate settlements when I am in office," who said that "any such withdrawal would only encourage terror," who spoke of "painful concessions only in exchange for true peace"; Sharon who showed Amram Mitzna the door, when the latter spoke of a unilateral evacuation of settlements - refuses to put his plan to the broad public test, for one simple reason: He is afraid of losing.

Somebody has to tell the prime minister - and the president of Israel would be a suitable candidate - that at a time when civil war threatens to break out among us, he should put aside his political accounts and do all he can to prevent it. If he loses, it means that there truly was no legitimization for the unilateral uprooting of individuals from their homes. If he wins, he can carry out his plan, without the danger of a civil war. It is so simple. In fact, the knights of democracy from the left should have subdued their burning passion to evacuate settlements and said this to Sharon.

Instead, supporters of Peace Now and the kibbutz movement, whose eyes are sometimes blinded by hatred, are now pouring oil on the burning campfire and enlisting battalions of volunteers for the evacuation. This draft, which Yoel Maharshak, one of the leaders of the kibbutz movement, says is being done with the blessing of the Prime Minister's Office, is a surefire recipe for civil war.

However, most worrisome of all, the prime minister who bears the supreme responsibility to prevent a civil war promises he will not let the opponents of disengagement "win" and does not understand that in the internal dispute between Jews, there are only losers. The past few days show that Sharon and his close aides are panicking when it comes to the opponents of disengagement. Evidence is provided by recent statements about "breaking hands and legs."

Logic also dictates that Sharon now maintain open channels of dialogue with the public that opposes the course he has taken, but Sharon, in his fervor to "disengage," has also been blinded by the light and has instructed the chief of staff and the defense minister to cease meeting with Jewish settlement leaders in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip.

The prime minister, it turns out, has not plumbed the depths of the rupture taking place among broad sections of the public, who feel more insulted and bitter with every passing day. This large public is only a step away from the Yitzhar-type extremists, but Sharon the Disengager is widening the circles of fanaticism instead of narrowing them. The president of Israel, who has in the past expressed his support for turning the decision over to the people, is well aware of the danger of internal conflict, but awareness is inadequate. If he wishes to prevent bloodshed between brothers, he must immediately throw his full weight behind an attempt to refer the decision to the public.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Yisrael Medad, January 17, 2005.

This was written by Yisrael Medad, who is Educational Programming Director at the Menachem Begin Heritage Centre in Jerusalem and a member of the Executive Board of Israel's Media Watch. He lives with his family in Shiloh.

There are those who claim that a civil disobedience campaign is illegitimate because it can be used only in oppressive, non-democratic regimes. Israel, they continue, is not such an entity.

The statement that follows reflects what many social and political activists have believed over the decades in coming to terms with their consciences even, and especially, at the risk of punishment.

"I believe that in matters intrinsically linked to the rights of man and citizen that cannot be negated, a free man is permitted, and at times, even obligated, to disobey formalistic instructions, if the essence of those matters impairs those rights, on the condition that he is prepared to take the consequences for his act."

The above could have been spoken by Mahatma Gandhi, Bertrand Russell or Martin Luther King. They were spoken by an Israeli, but I doubt if any members of the radical left groups promoting refusal, such as Yesh Gvul, Courage to Serve, etc., know who the author was.

Indeed, it would be a surprising for the pilots who last year refused to bomb targets near civilian areas they decided were irrelevant to Israel's defense, or for the soldiers in the elite sayeret matkal unit who last autumn expressed their unwillingness to serve across the Green Line, to discover that it was Menachem Begin who said those words. He made that statement in the Knesset on June 18, 1955.

Genuine refusal, as Begin makes clear, takes into consideration the very real probability that the government of the day will apply all legal and judicial instruments to force the conscientious objector to retreat. Such a person must know that there can be no promise of freedom. In fact, the real possibility is one of financial punishment and even jail.

The question is one of conscience. What justifies refusal?

There are those who claim that a civil disobedience campaign is illegitimate because it can be used only in oppressive, non-democratic regimes. Israel, they continue, is not such an entity.

This is arguable, since even some outstanding figures of the progressive camp say that several fine lines separating democracy from dictatorship have been crossed. The dismissal of ministers by Ariel Sharon prior to a vote so as to assure a majority in his favor during a government debate on disengagement was patently illegal. Worse, the High Court of Justice declined to review the petition of the ministers involved, thus weakening its independence and integrity. Academics such as Professor Mordechai Kremnitzer, no right-wing nationalist, are extremely uncomfortable with that decision. Prime Minister Sharon also reneged on his agreement to act in accordance with the Likud poll on his withdrawal plan, just as he reneged on the party's central committee decisions.

Potential military refusers have been supplied with the moral basis that aids their step towards refusal.

If basic human rights are affected, this also justifies a refusal campaign. Here is another Israeli's opinion on this matter:

"If I would be obligated to destroy a house in the territories, where women, children and the elderly live, due to the fact that one of its members engaged in terror against Israel, I would refuse. He who was brought up on the ethics of our Prophets must refuse to destroy homes."

Gush Katif residents are not associated with acts of terror and so these remarks apply even more to them. And their author?

Shulamit Aloni, former Knesset member and minister, spoke them as published in the Hadashot newspaper on February 25, 1990. One could assume that what cannot be done to an Arab should not be visited on a Jew.

Gush Katif and northern Samaria residents are living in areas recognized by international law, I maintain, as being part of the Jewish homeland. I am referring to the League of Nations decision to reconstitute in these areas, at the very least, the Jewish national home. The residents of Gush Katif and Samaria should not be turned out of their homes, farms and schools. One cannot violate the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, specifically Article 17 regarding property and Article 18 relating to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Are Jews - and only Jews, not Arabs - to be victims of discrimination?

Furthermore, civil disobedience is not some foreign idea. We read in the Bible, Exodus 1:17: "And the midwives did not do what they were commanded because they feared God." They considered what they were instructed by Pharoah to do to have been an immoral crime. Their refusal was later rewarded.

Would it be too much to ask the current Attorney-General, Menny Mazuz, to recall the words of his predecessor, Michael Ben-Yair, as they appeared in Haaretz, on March 3, 2002: "[T]heir refusal [of those opposing Israel's administration of Judea, Samaria and Gaza - YM] to serve is an act of conscience that is justified and recognized in every democratic regime. History's verdict will be that their refusal was the act that restored our moral backbone."

Another issue is that Sharon's withdrawal plan will expose 46 western Negev communities to Kassam rocket fire. Colonel Uzi Buchbinder, head of the Home Front Command's civil defense department, told a Knesset committee that communities located seven kilometers from the border with the Gaza Strip face threats of missiles and infiltration. The terrorism will not stop, as we witness improved firing systems, tunnels dug under the security fence and attacks at crossing points.

Quite simply put, Sharon is endangering the welfare of Israel's citizens. How can one, then, refuse to refuse?

TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/archives/oldindex.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays.

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, January 16, 2005.
This was written by Israel Zwick.

A frequent advertisement on the radio promotes a program for developing vocabulary skills. The advertisement claims that an individual's vocabulary conveys an impression about his competence and abilities. Regardless of the merits of the program, there is credence to the claims about the importance of word usage. Most standardized tests of ability and achievement that are used today have a vocabulary component. The renowned scholar and historian, Berel Wein, recently observed, "Speech can console, comfort, advise, persuade, and inform. It is the primary method for educating and communicating with others. Speech can be holy and it can lead to reconciliation, compromise, and understanding between humans, even amongst former enemies. ... The ability to speak wisely at the proper moment is still one of the greatest talents of human beings." When the late Abba Eban spoke at the UN, even the opposition marveled at his eloquence and wisdom. Martin Luther King's famous "I Have a Dream" speech, presented in 1963, is still widely distributed, studied, and heralded as a call for freedom, democracy, and ethnic harmony. In contrast, the daily tabloids are replete with stories of donnybrooks, "road rage," assaults, and even murder, that resulted from an inappropriate choice of words.

Similarly, the language used by Palestinian Arabs in their conflict with Israel conveys their true intentions and goals for ending the conflict in their terms. Statements and speeches from their leaders are permeated with words such as: "aggression ... intifada ... resistance ... occupation ... jihad ... holy war ... liberation ... martyrdom ...shahid." These are all words that have a connotation of violence, struggle, turbulence, conflict, battle, and death. When Israeli Defense Forces kill armed terrorists, the Palestinian Prime Minister condemns the action as "a criminal barbaric act." Yet when Palestinians intentionally target children and their mothers, he justifies that as "legitimate resistance against the illegal Israeli occupation." What we never hear from the Palestinian spokesmen are words such as: "acceptance ... tolerance ... coexistence ... harmony ... compromise ... cooperation ... accord." These are words that convey a desire for a harmonious relationship between people of different cultures and beliefs. Consequently, it shouldn't be a surprise when the pollsters tell us that most of the Palestinian Arabs are in favor of continuing the intifada in order to "liberate Palestinian lands and establish a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital." To accomplish this goal, the majority of the Arabs are in favor of continuing "martyrdom operations." Yet, despite the continued calls for violence, there is still reason for optimism. If the majority of the Palestinian Arabs are in favor of continued violence, then the data suggests that there are about a million Arabs living in the Israeli territories who want the same things we do. They just want a good job, a comfortable home, and a safe environment with access to health care, education, and recreational facilities. They want these amenities regardless of which flag is flying above, as evidenced by the many millions of Muslims who left the "land of their grandfathers" to live in France, England, Canada, and the USA.

Somewhere, amongst those million Palestinian Arabs, there must be a Muhammed Abu Sulam Alekhem, who will be brave and bold enough to stand up in front of his people and address them with a new vocabulary. His speech might sound something like this:

My Fellow Palestinians:

I come to you today with a heavy heart. Though it may cause us pain to hear these words, we must finally acknowledge that our leadership has failed us. For over 30 years they have been telling us that we will drive the Zionists from our lands and establish a new State of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital. Instead, they have brought us only poverty, misery, tragedy, death, and destruction. Did our leaders really believe that the Jews would abandon the tiny piece of land that they call their homeland? They have no where else to go. We have already expelled them from Yemen, Syria, Iran, and Iraq where they lived peacefully for hundreds of years. The Jews have only one little state to call their own, they will never abandon it. Did our leaders really believe that the Israeli military would keep their tanks and planes in their garages while we blow up their buses, hotels, and restaurants? The military has a duty and obligation to protect the citizens. Why wouldn't we expect them to fight back? Wouldn't we do the same? Did our leaders really believe that the Israelis would pay attention to those silly UN resolutions that told them to "withdraw their forces from Palestinian lands"? Why should they? What has the UN ever done for Israel? No my friends, our leaders have led us astray. They have taken billions of dollars in foreign aid money and used it to buy weapons and explosives instead of homes, schools, hospitals, and food for our people. They have taken some of our best boys and forced them to die in "martyrdom operations," offering them only the vulgar promise of an eternity surrounded by nubile women. The result of these vile, corrupt practices, and empty promises has been only death, destruction, and tragedy for both Arabs and Jews.

Now, my friends, it is time to try a new strategy. It is a strategy that may be novel and unique for us Arabs, but has been used successfully by other nations. It is time to accept the Jews as our neighbors and show tolerance for their religion, culture, and customs. It is time to sit down with the Zionist leaders and develop a negotiated compromise that will bring security, dignity, freedom, and democracy to our people. It is time to develop a harmonious relationship with our Jewish neighbors that will lead to peaceful coexistence and mutual cooperation. It is time to finally recognize that it is possible for Jews and Arabs to live together in the same land in a mutually beneficial relationship.

Harmonious coexistence doesn't mean separation by barbed wire, concrete, and electronic fences. It means Jews and Arabs going to the same shopping centers, museums, universities, and theaters. It means a kosher meat store next to a Halal meat store. It means a mosque on one side of the street and a synagogue on the other side of the street. It means Jewish and Arab policemen working together to provide safety and security for all. It means joint efforts to develop new sources for water and energy.

Last night I had a dream. In that dream, our father Abraham came to me and said, "I know that I had to drive my son, Ishmael, out of my house, but I always hoped that one day my grandchildren, the children of Ishmael, and the children of Isaac, will one day be able to live together in peace and trust. I pray that the land that God promised to me, the land flowing with milk and honey, with its beautiful rolling hills and verdant fields would bring peace and happiness to all my descendants and disciples."

My friends, this doesn't have to be a dream. Together we can make it happen. With faith in our common God, Jews and Muslims can make it a reality. In the words of the great American, Martin Luther King, Jr., "With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to stand up for freedom together."

Working together, Jews and Arabs can turn the sand and stones of the desert into gold and jewels. We can make this land the tourist capital of the world. Where else in the world can one find the ancient and modern in such close proximity? Where else are modern recreational facilities so close to ancient historical and religious sites? Where else is there guaranteed sunshine and warm weather for eight months of the year? In addition to tourism, peace will also encourage foreign investment, commerce, and technology. Instead of poverty and despair, there will be prosperity and hope. In time, every Arab and Jew can have a chicken in every pot and a Dodge in every garage. Instead of going to the funerals of our young men, we will go to their weddings.

My friends, I thank you for listening to me. But listening is not enough. It's time for action. One voice is not enough. We must all get up and say, "Enough of the hatred and violence. We want to live together in peace, and we want it now." We must speak out loud and strong so that our voices reverberate from the mountains, and the echoes will proclaim liberty throughout the land.

Such a speech today would seem as unlikely as the famous bar scene in the Star Wars movie. However, it doesn't have to be fantasy. There are positive signs that such conciliatory words may not be far away. In a recent interview, Prof. Khaleel Mohammed at San Diego University, listed the names of about a dozen Muslim leaders living in the West who are encouraging reformation in Islam. Zudi Jasser, Chairman of the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy, recently proclaimed, "We want to take back our faith from the radicals ... There needs to be a Muslim voice that speaks directly against that ideology." If Western civilization wants to win the battle against Islamic terror, then it must seek out the voices of moderate Islam, encourage them, support them, and protect them. In time, the voices of tolerance and moderation will prevail. Guns alone cannot defeat the ideology of hatred and violence. Speech and education can be more powerful weapons.

Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 16, 2005.

There has been a lot said by the Sharon camp about obeying the law. I began to think about all those nations whose leaders claim legitimacy using and abusing the law of the land and its original intent.

Pre-war Germany had an outstanding judiciary and code of ethics once. Along came Adolph Hitler and he supposedly adopted the laws of the land. But somehow, those laws seemed to change in Hitler's regime under his guidance. The Courts operated under the law, Hitler's law. Remember the Hitler's Nuremberg Laws especially designed against the Jews but, it was the law. Law is not Holy Writ - except when it is.

Even Josef Stalin had laws which were obeyed by all - or else. Stalin moved the people around like chess pieces. Some were moved into the prisons in the hinterlands called the Gulag. If you didn't like it, well there were always Stalin's soldiers, police and KGB to persuade you.

Of course, if you were Natan Sharansky, Ida Nudel, Yuri Edestein or Yosef Mendelevitch who demanded freedom as Jews, you could end up in the Lubyanka Prison or Siberia in a prison camp. Strangely, Sharansky, Nudel, Edelstein, Mendelevitch and other refuseniks are fighting the same battle in Jerusalem against the Israeli government's laws.

Most of the African nations have laws which enrich their tribal leaders. Most are on the payroll of foreign nations who only want their obedience or oil - if they have it.

In the neighborhood of the Middle East there are laws. Saudi laws, Syrian laws, Egyptian laws - all legal, all backed by their armies and secret services. Hands or heads chopped off, institutional torture, gathering protestors into prisons - all under "The Law".

Israel was supposed to be different. Israel was supposed to be a democracy of the people. Elected leaders were to be servants of the people, giving up their private lives at a considerable reduction of their income as a voluntary patriot for the people.

As protest to Sharon's "Disengagement" grows exponentially, Sharon convenes a 'special meeting' on enforcing "The Law" where in he plans to employ police, special units of the police and the army to force Jews off the Land. The Left-wing, dovish HA'ARETZ January 14th reports that Sharon said: "Manifestations of violence toward police and soldiers, refusal to obey orders and public figures' calls to disobey orders, constitute a real danger to the rule of law and create an intolerable situation that cannot be accepted. We must make every effort to prevent these dangerous acts." Sharon said soldiers must not be involved in politics. This should be explained to them and the Israel Defense Forces must take immediate and firm steps against anyone who signs petitions or calls for refusing orders. (1) But, slowly, slowly things got turned around. The leaders grabbed more power. The Knesset (Parliament) became weaker and, instead of representing the people, they became mostly 'yes' men and women for the Prime Minister.

Sharon, like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres before him, had an untested idea called "Disengagement". Following the Peres-Beilin creation of Oslo in secrecy with no expert advisors as to risk. Sharon forced the "Disengagement" idea upon the people and then started to Kasher it with intimidating laws and bludgeoning his Cabinet into submission by firing opponents. His 'idea' borrowed from Oslo, Avram Mitzna's 'Plan', Barak's 'Plan', Beilin's 'Geneva Plan' - none of which were presented to the people via a referendum. Sharon's ego knew he was infallible and could make no mistake.

HA'ARETZ reported: Sharon said, "Manifestations of violence toward police and soldiers, refusal to obey orders and public figures' calls to disobey orders, constitute a real danger to the rule of law and create an intolerable situation that cannot be accepted. We must make every effort to prevent these dangerous acts." Sharon said soldiers must not be involved in politics. This should be explained to them and the Israel Defense Forces must take immediate and firm steps against anyone who signs petitions or calls for refusing orders.

Mofaz urged setting up a system for quick indictment, noting the authorities must enforce effective legal measures against acts of incitement and mutiny, which undermine democracy and the rule of law. Sharon and Mofaz objected to a suggestion to try civilians in military tribunals.

Mofaz supported taking harsh measures against soldiers who refuse to obey orders, calling for a quick indictment process in the regular army and for expelling reserve soldiers from the IDF. He also suggested the indictment of reserve commanders who refuse orders before a special committee, which will consider stripping them of their ranks. (1)

Secret Services, like the Shin Bet, Mossad and Shabak who were supposed to work for the welfare of the people, soon became an instrument to control the people. Political leaders appointed politically correct directors of these Intelligence Agencies and expected them to use the powers of their agencies to intimidate the people when their policies were rejected by the electorate. Needless to say, the reputations of once admired Intelligence Agencies suffered and the people began to fear the Shabak - just as was common in the Arab nations.

Everything was reversed.

The people worked and paid taxes - lots of taxes - so the political parties could pay themselves larger salaries and greater perks. The judiciary, instead of interpreting the law became what are called activists judges who acted as a parliament which made the laws. They had a law which allowed them to appoint their own replacements, resulting in a Judiciary that tilts to the Left and became an unelected government who answered to noone but itself.

They no longer represented the Jews of Israel but shifted more and more to rule in favor of a dedicated enemy sworn to destroy Israel. Oslo was one such an example where a government gave away any Land to hostile Arabs, designed in secret and the Israeli Supreme Court remained silent in what was actually a political putsch (but that was all legal, of course).

But, they had the law and the law is what you make it, isn't it?

Presently, Arik Sharon has a choke-hold on the people, the Government, the Court and most of the Army. The elected servant of the people has become its master. Sharon issues orders and expects obedience and, like any other dictator, he has his own personal army to enforce his will. Granted, wherever he goes, he is surrounded by quite a few personal guards because, like dictators before him, he fears his people.

Officers, soldiers and the people are beginning to resent his dictatorial methods and are turning against him. Many expect that he has initiated a Civil War as Sharon uses the so-called new Law of Disengagement to have the Jewish Army attack the Jewish people.

Whatever Israel is, it is no longer a democracy. It seems to be a mixture between the culture and laws of its Arab Muslim neighbors, what's left over from the old British rule,, some laws from Turkey's 400 year Ottoman rule. The Jews brought European culture along with the shtetl mentality of the Ghetto. Some of the Jews came to build a new life, becoming settlers. Others brought with them the fear of being a Jew...even hating the Jewishness in themselves and those who settled the land but maintained their Jewishness.

Strangely, it was those Jewish pioneers who had the inner strength and courage who represent the best values of the Jewish people. Like American pioneers who traveled westward on wagon trains to settle the land, the Jewish settlers faced immense difficulties and privation which built on inner strength.

Such people built the core of the nation and everything that makes it great.

But, following them, after the truly hard work was done, came the soft city dwellers. Law and lawyers multiplied, parallel to the politicians who found a fertile breeding ground. The once strong Left was taken over by Pacifists as the older leaders like David Ben Gurion faded from the scene.

Here one is reminded of the time where Abraham gave Lot the choice of dividing their flocks where one would go down to the valleys which were well-watered and greener then as well as the cities of Sodom and the other would go to the hills. Lot chose Sodom and corruption while Abraham brought his people to a harder but cleaner life.

So too in the past 36 years, those who loved the Land moved further into the country and developed farms, kibbutzim, towns and soon cities.

They made the Land green.

The settlers chose the high ground, investing sweat equity and the barren Land became fertile and green.

They were the trip wire that stopped Terrorists at the outer fringes of Israel's tiny state.

They were the best and most willing fighters because they were fighting for their own homes and families.

Officers from the settlements had the highest casualty rates because they really believed that they should lead. Their motto in battle was: "Kadima" or "Follow me". The leaders in most armies stayed at the rear and sent the foot soldiers into the front lines. Not so the Israelis and particularly, the settlers.

But, soon the Political Left found that, because the citizens admired and voted for politicians who served in the army then the corruption began in earnest. Leftist officers with the correct political leanings were advanced quickly with the highest ranks going to those general who were groomed for higher office - all the way to Prime Minister. Officers who came from the settlements or were observant Jews hit the glass ceiling of promotion. Corruption crept into the vital Intelligence Services as politically correct (Read: Left) were appointed to the highest positions. They were expected to follow orders from the Prime Ministers office which often had an illegal and self-serving political agenda.

Here again, the Law was misused to cover over black operations against those of the Political Right, particularly the settlers.

I have little doubt that, if the books were opened on Israel's political leaders and the directors they appointed for Shabak (Intelligence), there might be a parade of crooks going to jail. (That's assuming that the political Supreme Court was first cleaned out of its biased judges).

Sharon, a man of little experience in world affairs jumped at an idea of "Disengagement" which likely came via the pro-Arab State Department. He was either convinced through personal pressures of past activities or simply didn't understand the long term ramifications of transferring Jews away from vital outer defensive perimeters.

Bringing extremely hostile Arab Muslims close to Israel's cities and population centers is simply a betrayal of his office and the citizens he has sworn to defend. Clearly, he should be deposed and charged with malfeasance of office. IF it can be shown that he actually acted on behalf of foreign nations to subvert Israel's security, he should be tried under the laws of treason. I would include the Oslo gang and all politicians who assisted and enabled him to use the law against the Jewish people.

As said earlier, laws of men are merely agreements recognizing that we humans have flaws. Thus we have traffic lights at intersections so we don't collide with each other. The laws of Holy Writ are called the 10 Commandments (not the 10 Suggestions). When tyrants or merely ambitious politicians have spontaneous, untested ideas their arrogance demands obedience without interference by the populace. Thus, they are a clear and present danger to the nation.

Oslo was one such display of supreme arrogance where the Knesset (Parliament) was by-passed along with any referendum by the people. We didn't learn from the catastrophe of Oslo so now we have Road Maps and Disengagements which is being bulled through with threats and coercion. New laws are passed to support the current mis-use of older laws that have been twisted to give new (and vicious) meaning.

It was said in Tanach (Torah, Prophets and Writings) the Bible that Jews should dwell alone lest they adopt the corruption and pagan customs of other tribes. Clearly, that has proven true as we observe a number of Israeli Prime Ministers adopt the dictatorial ways of the Arab nations - all legal, all under the law - warped though it may be.

Isn't it time to put Israel back on track and clean up a government that has been spiraling towards Sodom for a long time. Sharon, Peres and all the corruption they have created in the bowels of government must be cleansed if Israel is to return to her mission of being a "Light Unto the Nations".

As for laws, they are not an instrument handed to tyrants to lash the people into obedience to their ideas.




To Go To Top
Posted by Dr. Ron Breiman, January 15, 2005.

Even as the Prime Minister gallops on with his hallucinatory "disengagement" plan, and the minister of "defense" loses sight of whose side he's on, the enemy continues with his very logical program of killing Jews in order to chase the survivors out of their country. "Sacrifices for disengagement," the 2005 version of Oslo's "sacrifices for peace," are offered up every day in increasing numbers as a direct result of the encouragement given to terrorism by the government.

Professors for a Strong Israel calls on every loyal citizen, on every loyal Jew, and on every official in the government sector to stop this dangerous transfer program.

The threatened expulsion is illogical, inhumane, unethical, un-Jewish, and, ultimately, illegal. If it is carried out, it will constitute a catastrophe on all fronts: security, diplomatic, economic, social, ethical, and constitutional; the harm caused to the state will be irreversible.

Every citizen has the supreme duty of preventing the expulsion by all non-violent means that will deter the Prime Minister from continuing on the road to catastrophe.

We call on the Prime Minister to disengage from his hazardous course, to forget about giving the patently illegal order of expulsion - an order that must not be given and that must not be carried out.

Non-violent civil disobedience against the violent expulsion order will prevent a national rift and return unity to the nation!

For the sake of unity in the IDF, the IDF must not be involved in this dangerous political game, and must not be ordered to employ violence against the citizens!

The transfer will not pass!!!

Dr. Ron Breiman is Chairman, Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI). Contact him at eran_ron@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, January 15, 2005.

A number of young and ambitious Israelis have formed a non-governmental organization called the East-Oriented Alliance (EOA). The EOA sees that decadent Europe is succumbing to Islam, and that the United States, despite the resurgence of the Christian Right, is not far behind. Indeed, EOA sees (as do American classicists) that multiculturalism-cum-feminism dooms the last bastion of Western civilization. So EOA is looking to the East. Their game? The China card.

China now has a population of 1.3 billion. The Chinese are an intelligent, industrious, and tradition-oriented people. Communism has had no significant impact on their mentality, still permeated by the teachings of Confucius. Respect for wisdom, moderation, honor, family values, and intellectual curiosity modulate the Chinese mind. China is the wave of the future, and EOA wants to ride that wave.

EOA is staffed by scientists, economists, and generalists educated in the top American universities before the latter succumbed to nihilism or post-modernism. These generalists include students of Chinese culture. They know its literature, its history and foreign relations; and, unlike typical academicians and graduates of Israeli universities and yeshivas - who dwell in ignorance about war in a country surrounded by Arabs - they have studied Sun Tzu. Indeed, they relish the Chinese attitude toward Muslims expressed in the North China Herald in 1867: "If politeness and ceremony be observed toward Mohammedans, they imagine they are feared and become arrogant; but in showing severity and rudeness, they are impressed with fear and respect, and they are supple and manageable."

So the EOA is establishing links with China, meeting frequently with their Chinese counterparts in Tel Aviv and from time to time in Beijing. In fact, the EOA resembles a "shadow government" and is treated as such by the Chinese NGO, which sees very well that Israel's existing government is a cesspool of corruption and incompetence. The Chinese see that despite the wisdom and subtlety of the Jewish prophets and sages, Israel's ruling elites can neither finesse the United States, floundering in the Middle East, nor eliminate Arab thugs or Muslims wallowing barbarism.

Nevertheless, Israel has one thing the Chinese want: awesome but still secret scientific knowledge to which only a few members of EOA, versed in the esoteric wisdom of Kabala, have access. They know, therefore, that Israel must be preserved and thoroughly reconstructed in the interest of human progress.

To forge the strongest bonds with Israel and replace the United States as its leading ally, the Chinese want Jewish families to adopt Chinese babies, an idea shared by the EOA. EOA consists of ardent cultural and religious Zionists. The former no less than the latter recognize that Israel has no future unless it venerates, understands, and builds on its heritage. But this means that the EOA and its oriental colleagues agree that Chinese babies adopted by Jewish families must be converted and raised as faithful and learned Jews.

Given the traditional values of the Chinese and the various institutes of Jewish studies that have sprung up in China in the last two decades, the EOA feels more at home with their oriental counterparts than with most American neo-cons, both on global and Middle East issues. EOA scientists, with Chinese geo-strategic support, will make fossil fuel, hence oil, obsolete as an energy source, in consequence of which Mohammedanism will be relegated to the dust heap of history.

Most fascinating is the idea of Chinese Jewish children. Of course, those who have read that charming book, The Bamboo Cradle, know that Israel already has some Chinese Jews, whose love of Israel is a marvelous commentary on the Torah's power to unite people of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. One EOA Zionist, whose wife is a Chinese convert to Judaism, wants fifty thousand Jewish families in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria to adopt at least one Chinese baby. Some suspect that he wants to embarrass the government and thwart its grotesque plan to uproot Jewish communities in these areas! Actually, he believes that the adoption of Chinese babies and their being raised as observant Jews will prompt countless gentiles from Russia to convert, and that even non-observant Jews will return to the Torah!

Although this sounds pretty far-fetched, EOA is the most serious NGO in Israel. In collaboration with its Chinese counterparts, it has drafted a constitution for China based on Confucius principles. Religious members of EOA say that this constitution, with minor modifications, could also be used in Israel, but that its adoption requires a grassroots movement spearheaded by Chinese Jews committed to genuine democracy. Of course, these Chinese Jews would have the moral support of 1.3 billion philo-Semites in China. It will probably take a political tsunami of this magnitude to bring about regime change in Israel.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is a political scientist, author, lecturer, President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy and President of the Yamin Israel movement. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at Constitution@usa.net

To Go To Top
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, January 15, 2005.

Another random bus bombing. This one happened a day before Israel was to be "brought to court" to defend itself for building a fence designed to keep Arabs from disemboweling its kids.

More recently, now on Mahmoud Abbas' watch, a half dozen more Jews were slaughtered and others severely wounded for helping Arabs find a way to feed their families in Gaza.

More incinerated and maimed innocents, whose only crime was existence in a land where their ancestors have lived for over three thousand years. Another hollow condemnation by the alleged "good half" of the Arafatian / Hamas-Islamic Jihad good cop / bad cop team. Not that they really object, but it's "bad publicity" for their cause.

Even with the Egyptian ghoul out of the picture, his legacy still works the strings.

I believe it was Martin Niemoller, a German theologian, who wrote something like the following:

First they came for the Communists, and I did nothing. Then they came for the Jews, and I remained silent. And by the time they came for me, there was no one left to protest.

Coincidentally, a bit further back on August 19, 2003, another Arab bought his ticket to "paradise" and its seventy or so virgins by blowing Jews apart on yet another bus, while a colleague was doing likewise to United Nations workers in Iraq.

Now, what was the lesson from Reverend Niemoller's remarks again?

This is the same U.N. that, at best, has seen a "moral equivalence" between Jewish babes and grandmothers being deliberately and wantonly slaughtered, and Israeli steps taken to try to stop that slaughter. Some of the latest Arab suicide bombers claimed they did this to avenge Israel's killing of armed Hamas fighters in Gaza.

What I am writing is now admittedly being written in anger, but there is no doubt regarding the truth of the words: Israel has become too darned predictable.

The Old Warrior himself has been caving in to constant pressure coming at him from all over, and especially from his so-called friends-- the same ones who would have leveled the source of these repeated atrocities had it been done to their own peoples...or even to others. Among many examples, recent events in Fallujah come to mind.

Arabs, who refuse to dismantle their terrorist infrastructures and who still do not accept the permanency of a Jewish State, also demand that Israel stand by and do nothing while Jews get butchered. This is the "moderate" new Palestinian Arab leader's position. They can't seem to figure out why Israel must have such things as a security fence or real borders instead of armistice lines, which made it, among other things, a mere 9-miles wide-- a constant temptation to those aiming to destroy it. As if the answer wasn't obvious. How many other nations would continuously tolerate such horror without exacting just and devastating retribution? Think about the daisy cutter and bunker-buster bombs and such America used against our own enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq, as just a few more recent examples.

Despite all that the Arabs say, they know that the Jews will try their best to just kill the rats in their dens. They'll go house to house, endangering their own sons, and try to target the exact murderers and plotters as best as possible. That's what's been happening in Gaza and elsewhere, yet such operations become the Arabs' excuse for the next atrocities.

The Geneva Conventions make perfectly clear that militants are not permitted to use their own non-combatants as human shields, that those non-combatants do not prevent an army from pursuing terrorists, and that any harm occurring to the civilian population as a consequence falls on the heads of the cowards using their own people this way. But you'd never know this by listening to the accounts in the press or given too often even by our own State Department.

Given all of the above, there is, again, only one conclusion: Israel has indeed become too predictable.

Arabs know that their own wives and children will not be deliberately targeted on buses, in restaurants, shopping centers, or wherever. So what I will state next, I regret, but will say anyway.

It's time, given the Arab track record of barbarity, for them to reap what they have sown.

It's time for massive Israeli retaliation. It's time for Israel to do what is necessary to protect its citizens, regardless of how much aid the U.S. may decide to suspend. And many a U.S. citizen will convey the proper message to politicians if Foggy Bottom and other Arabists are allowed to have their way with Israel over this.

Poll after poll among Arabs have shown that even if Israel withdrew to the 9-mile wide armistice lines imposed upon it after the 1948 fighting (having been invaded by surrounding Arab countries immediately upon its rebirth)--something UN Resolution #242 expressly does not require it to do--Arabs would still reject its right to exist. So who's kidding whom here regarding such things as the fence? And Israel's "friends" know this as well.

It's time for Arabs to know that Israel will tell the hypocrites around the rest of the world (much of which has also had plenty of Jewish blood on its hands) that it doesn't care what they think and act to protect its own people--as any other nation would--as best as it can.

It's time for Israel to not worry about being too precise in its targeting ...for it's time that Arabs fully understand that if they harbor and support terrorists as heroes, they'll share in their fate. President George W. Bush said almost those exact words regarding America's own fight not long ago.

When dealing with their own "problems"--a la Assad's "Hama Solution" in Syria (in which ten times more people were killed in a month than Israel killed in two years of intifada), King Hussein's Black September in Jordan, Saddam's murder of Kurds in Iraq (5,000 in Halabja alone), the slaughter of millions of Black Africans in the Sudan, and so forth--Arabs have murdered literally millions by poison gas, bombs, and artillery from afar. All without a peep out of the United Nations. And no hearing before an international court of justice, either.

It's time for Israel to make it clear that it will use its own air force, tanks, and such--the way America and others have--to target the rats' dens instead of risking the lives of its own nineteen-year-old infantrymen by futilely trying to do the job as "morally correct" as possible. This has gained it nothing among the world's hypocrites and cost it the lives of more of its own soldiers instead.

Israel is fighting a war it didn't want. It repeatedly offered more than fair compromises to its enemies, certainly far more than Arabs have ever offered to any of their own national competitors. But nothing short of its own suicide will satisfy most Arabs.

Arabs don't worry about "ethical choices" when disemboweling Jews. On the contrary, the more innocent the victim, the more preferred he is for shock value as a target. It's time for Arabs to get massive doses of at least a modified version of their own medicine.

While I don't advocate blowing up Arab buses, restaurants, schools, and such, any building, town, or whatever harboring murderers and their collaborators must be recognized for what the Geneva Conventions say it is: A fair military target.

Listen to:

Article #51/7:

"The presence of the civilian population shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attack..."

Article #58b:

The parties to the conflict shall...avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas."

The rats' dens are typically set up in or adjacent to civilian apartment buildings, hospitals, schools, etc., as America has learned for itself in Iraq.

Article #51/2:

The civilian population...shall not be the object of attack. Acts of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited...Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited.

Arabs typically target Israeli civilians.

And those famous funeral processions showing hundreds of the dead butcher's colleagues firing weapons into the air? It's time that Israel sees them for what they are...one big, legitimate military target.

It's time for Israel to stop letting Arabs dictate how the game will be played. If mothers and infants are fair game for Arabs, then what are the murderers' collaborators for Israel? Keep in mind that Mahmoud Abbas himself was recently carried on the shoulders of the same folks who committed the latest atrocity...and promised them protection from Israeli retaliation to top it off.

It's time for Israel to send the press packing, tell the UN to drop dead, build the security fence as quickly and as strongly as possible with an adequate buffer (permitted by U.N. #242)--so it doesn't have its absurd suicidal 9-mile wide existence again--and ask its friends in the United States to stop having one set of standards for themselves and another one for Jews in their sole, microscopic state. When we thought we knew where Saddam was dining, we bombed the restaurant to smithereens, innocent diners present and all.

And the more unpredictable the Israeli response to Arab barbarity, the better.

I wish it had not come to this. I still wish that there will yet be another way. But if volumes of Arabs start dying relatively randomly (Arabs outnumber Jews 50 to one...they know this...so do the math), as Jews are doing, perhaps they'll be less likely to treat their own terrorists as heroes. Thousands of them paraded through the streets as soon as they heard of their latest "victory."

While this may also not be the solution, Israel has tried everything else (including insanely offering up 97% of the disputed territories, half of Jerusalem, and the like) except consenting to its own demise, and nothing else worked either. Arabs simply replaced a pre-'67 "one fell swoop" strategy for Israel's destruction with a destruction in stages strategy instead. Indeed, Abbas repeated this plan while he was campaigning.

It's time for Israel to lose its predictability and for Arabs to get a mega-taste of what they've been dishing out. And it's time for Israel to draw its own lines in the sand and let all know--including and especially its alleged friends--that justice demands that it accept no less.

Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites.

To Go To Top
Posted by Scott Neuman, January 14, 2005.
I am against any withdrawal from Gush Katif and Shomron. However, I do recognize the government's right to decide and withdraw from these areas because the government now deems these areas too difficult to secure. On the other hand, I do not believe the government of Israel has any right to remove a citizen from a house that the government gave that citizen permission and futher encouraged that person to live in.

Therefore, the only solution is to have a military withdrawal without the removal of any citizens that desire to remain. The government of Israel will safely escort back to Israel any citizen that wishes to leave, otherwise, those remaining will have to defend themselves if the "Palestinians" choose violence instead of accomodation.

Further, no political leader should order any soldier to do anything that they would not do. Therefore, if Sharon insists on his idea to remove citizens forcefully from their homes, Sharon should be in the forefront, as he forcefully removes pregnant crying women and crying children from the homes that they cherish!

Scott Neuman lives in Okemos, MI and can be reached at xscottmarshallx@aol.com

This letter appeared in the Jerusalem Post

To Go To Top
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, January 14, 2005.

Israel is a strange place, a democracy in form, but weak in content. Of course, a statement like that is made comparing Israel to the US, Europe, and a handful of other countries. In comparison to much of the world, Israel shines as a paradigm of democratic self-rule, notice that Israel has a new government today.

The "Palestinians" aren't the only ones who can play "Democracy".

The idea of representative government is firmly rooted in Israel. In fact, so much so, that the "people's representatives" don't want the people, to decide for themselves a question of historic magnitude. Rather than go to new elections or hold a referendum about his Gaza expulsion plan, Prime Minister Sharon has formed a coalition with the party that lost the last election, Labor, adopting it's policies in the process. Those are the policies that most Israelis rejected at the polls a couple years ago, I might add.

Many of the "people's representatives" have come out against the idea of holding a referendum over the Gaza transfer proposal of Sharon, some claiming it to be "anti-democratic," others for "practical" reasons.

When one takes into account that Members of the Knesset - Israel's Parliament - are not elected in constituent elections to districts, responsible to a certain group of voters, but through national party lists, one can ask, whom do they represent beyond the party or themselves?

When Sharon first announced his expulsion plan last year, the then Minister of National Infrastructure, Yosef Paritzky (then of the Shinui Party) spoke out against a national referendum on the removal of the Jews from Gaza and it's transfer of land to the Palestinians, claiming it contravenes the democratic principles of the country.

It's legitimate to ask, whom did he represent?

Paritzky stated that the cabinet or Knesset must not unload the responsibility of making pivotal decisions; decisions that parliamentarians were elected to make. Paritzky's democratic idea, quite common in Israel, is that one elects someone to be in charge, and then they do as they please. With no feedback loops, no responsibility to constituents, little accountability beyond toward the party, the "people" have to wait four years to decide if they were happy or not with their elected officials performance. There is no recall vote, like was held in California last year; and no personal election of parliamentarians to represent a particular group of voters in a given district, who can later "dump the bum."

Paritzky's then colleague in Shinui, the then Justice Minister and now leader of the opposition, Yosef Lapid, also expressed his opposition to the referendum idea, stating such a move is not part of our democratic process. And both politicians have a point; modern Israel never has held a referendum.

Yet others, Uzi Landau and the Likud loyalists who have been opposing Sharon's Gaza/Northern Samaria plan for quite some time now, have been calling on Sharon to hold a referendum. Even Netanyahu - who voted for "Disengagement" - raised his voice for a referendum. Recently, the leaders of the Yesha Settlers Council (the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza) began calling for a referendum, when all "political" means (within Likud's Central Committee) seemed to fail to stop Sharon's plans. Many argue that the democratic legitimization of a referendum outcome would help to minimize the likelihood of civil war breaking out in Israel.

But Sharon has stonewalled them all, refusing to give in. Now he's put together his "Expulsion Government" of Labor, United Torah Judaism (how could they do this?) and part of Likud. Sharon needed the far-left Yahad party and the vote of two Arab MKs to pass his coalition, 58-56, in the Knesset.

About referenda in Israel...

Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin - then a Knesset member - in the early 1950's opposed the deal that then Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion worked out with West Germany, to accept reparations after the Holocaust. Begin suggested a national referendum to allow the people to decide whether to accept them or not, but Ben-Gurion refused. In February 1958, Menachem Begin again suggested using referenda to decide on various issues in the young Israeli democracy. Ben-Gurion's ruling party, Mapai, responded, calling the proposal "Bonapartist, fascist and totalitarian."

Certainly, referenda are neither fascist nor totalitarian. They are used in many democratic states around the world to allow the citizens to directly decide important issues. For example, referenda have been used by European countries to decide on whether to join the European Union, or once in, to adopt the European Monetary System and replace their national currency with the Euro. Many states in the US use referenda for a whole host of issues, and the constitutional process of adopting a new state constitution itself can include a referendum from voters.

Is there a more important issue today, pressing the people of Israel, than the issue of territorial integrity or withdrawal from parts of it's historic homeland, the biblically promised, Land of Israel?

But in all truth, Israel has in fact held a referendum already on this issue.

In the Torah, after the story describing the giving of the 10 commandments comes the portion of Mishpatim-Laws (Exodus 21:1-24:18). In it, Moses conveys a long list of further rules and regulations - G-D's commands - for the Children of Israel to live by, including torts and damages, criminal law, marital law and ritual law, the proscription against idolatry and the proper observance of Jewish holidays. Then comes the promise - by G-D - of military victory in the upcoming war; to bring the people into the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give it to Israel.

"Do not make a treaty with these nations..." (Exodus 23:32)

"Do not allow them to reside in your land..." (Exodus 23:33)

It continues, "Moses wrote down all G-D's words" (Exodus 24:4), then "He took the Book of the Covenant and read it aloud to the people. They replied, 'Everything G-D declared, - Naaseh V'Nishmah - we will do and obey'" (Exodus 24:7).

There you have it, the description of the covenantal process between G-D and the Jewish People, with the Jews adopting the Torah as their constitution, by national referendum.

So, it's not true that Israel has "never" held a referendum. But when the Jews voted to accept the Torah-Constitution for their nation, and implemented the "promise to inherit the land" in the times of Joshua, they set down rules for the nation for "all time".

Everyone in the world knows that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish People. Christianity and Islam are built on Judaism and both recognize this fact. The nations of the world, through the League of Nations and later the United Nations gave its stamp of approval - after the fact - also.

The use of referenda to generally resolve issues in Israel is perfectly democratic, it builds social solidarity and wide consensus, contrary to the views of the "people's representatives". But on the issue of territorial compromise and expulsion of Jews from their homes - such as the Gaza/Northern Samaria question - something that gets to the heart of Israel's national existence, even democracy has it's limits.

How many Americans would honor the outcome of a referendum in the US, to return the "Occupied Territories" to Native American Indians, along with the concomitant expulsion of millions of black, white, and Hispanic "settlers"?

There is no legitimacy to such a referendum, the nation of Israel voted on it long ago, at Mt. Sinai.

Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations and Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko

To Go To Top
Posted by Jeff Dunetz, January 14, 2005.

This past weekend was the electronics industry's most important time of the year ... where the "WOW" products of tomorrow are unveiled ... like the machine that helps Mahmoud Abbas appear like a moderate even when he is acting inflammatory.

Each year, beginning with the Thursday after New Year's, manufacturers and retailers in the electronics industry make a four-day pilgrimage to Las Vegas for CES, the International Consumer Electronics Show.

CES is the industry's most important time of the year. This show is where the "WOW" products of tomorrow are un-veiled. For the business participants, the show is serious business. It is the venue where manufacturers show off their best wares and unleash their best sales people upon key retailers to entice them to place huge orders for their establishments. For the consumers in atten-dance, the show is an incredible experience where you can touch, try, and be totally awed by the latest and most revolutionary technology products.

Take for example the new electronic moderation simulator. Originally prepared for Palestinian Leader Mahmoud Abbas, this device allows a politician to appear moderate while using war-mongering phrases like "Zionist Enemy" in speeches (a phrase even mentor PLO leadership has refrained from using in the years after Oslo). This product allows the user to embrace terrorist leaders and at the same time announce, "The day will come when the refugees return home," it allows him to promise protection for armed terrorists while still giving a warm and comfy impression of being a peacemaker to much of the world.

Another device to be previewed at CES is already quite popular with the United Nations. Called the MoneyWalks-Man, early reviewers have designated it as a wonder of modern technology. It works like the transporter machine from Star Trek... but only has an effect on money. To date this incredible machine has been used to transport UNRWA funds into the hands of Hamas terrorists and Iraqi oil for food dollars into the pocket of Kofi Annon's son A recent modification of this product has allowed both the UN and Reuters News to completely wipe out any record of Israel's contribution to the Tsunami relief efforts.

The most impressive response at the show came at the BBC Optics booth. The company unveiled a product created for those who share the BBC's taste for fantasy. Hundreds of consumers waited for hours to try their image shifting sun-glasses. Advanced shipments of this product are already in use by the editorial boards of the NY and LA Times, and very popular with pundants such as Juan Cole noted History Professor at the University of Michigan. What is so special about the BBC's product? They are rose-colored glasses that obstruct any image of terrorism perpetuated by Palestinians on Israeli civilians. Instead this miraculous device is able to substitute a video image of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon beating President Bush's knuckles with a baby blue yard stick, forcing the leader of the free world to fall in line with the Likud point of view. (You know, come to think of it, you rarely see pictures of the president's hands). For an extra fifty dollars the glasses come equipped with headphones which play a recording of NY Times Columnist Tom Friedman singing his favorite song, "Sharon is a Bully". Tom sings in a brilliant falsetto, reminiscent of Tiny Tim's "Tiptoe Through the Tulips."

Not wanting to be outdone by other areas of the world, a branch of European Union known as the Network of Joint Engineering Workers (also known by its initials NOJEW) displayed some of its cutting edge technology at the show. Perhaps the most commercial of its featured items is something calledDimension One. This amazing creation has an advanced understanding of language. It senses whenever a speaker is about to present both sides of an issue and gives the orator a small electric shock as a warning that they are about to give a fair presentation (something EU governments work very hard to avoid, especially when discussing the Middle East). It has been reported that the EU has already received orders for this valuable product from many of the Middle Eastern Studies departments of American Universities, including Stanford and Columbia.

Along with the distribution at American Universities, this product is very popular amongst European Governments themselves. As a matter of fact it is so popular that many countries are developing their own Joint Engineering products. It seems that as a matter of public policy most European nations want NOJEWs of their own.

Jeff Dunetz can be contacted by email at jeff@jeffdunetz.com or go to his website: http://www.jeffdunetz.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, January 14, 2005.

Sharon will be meeting with Mahmoud Abbas in the near future. The latter just won his election running on promises to make the same demands on Jews that his former, now deceased fellow murderer and puppeteer had made.

Stressing that blown up buses brings bad press, Abbas assured all that by demanding a return of millions of refugees, they would destroy Israel "democratically" instead. And, of course, Israel would have to return to its pre-'67, nine-mile wide, armistice line existence for such a great (in the Arabs' own words) Trojan Horse deal!

I day dreamed the Sharon part of the coming dialogue.

After they smiled and shook hands, Arik closed the door with only the two of them and their key lieutenants in the room.Let's listen to what Arik had to say to begin the negotiations...

Good morning, Mahmoud.

I am glad that you are here today, and hope with all of my heart that we can at long last bring peace for both of our peoples as a result of recent developments. Your positions, however, are not promising, so I must be hopeful-- but candid --with you today.

You have five months to get your act together, and we expect tangible progress long before then.

Forget about a withdrawal to the '49 Auschwitz lines...

The final border, as we are permitted via UN Resolution 242, will be significantly different, regardless of what even our friends will threaten us with. Your alleged worries about water supplies and such are unfounded. Good neighbors will find ways to share...assuming that you want to be our good neighbor and not destroy us "by other means" as you've been telling everyone repeatedly.

Forget about flooding us with millions of mostly phony Arab refugees. Hundreds of millions of other refugees over the last few centuries resettled elsewhere. Half of our refugees fled "Arab" lands, but without two dozen other states to potentially call their own. You're getting yet another state--after you got most of the original 1920 mandate in the first place when Transjordan was lopped off in 1922. That makes almost two dozen for you and your Arab brothers while some thirty million truly stateless Kurds are still told that they are unworthy of even one.

We will not commit suicide to accommodate your desires.

We know you don't feel we have any rights at all in this land, to which we've been tied for thousands of years before you were even a thought here. So don't expect that we will put up with you being another Arafat, but in a coat and tie instead.

We will not play the game by the rules that you set. Think long and hard about American bombers, not helicopters, over Fallujah, for example.

We, the most persecuted people on Earth, waited two thousand years for the resurrection of our sole, microscopic state. We are here to stay.

We will be the best of all possible neighbors if you give us a chance. A bright future for all of us awaits your decision to focus on building your own state instead of destroying ours.

But we will regard you as we did Sheikh Yassin or Rantisi if you have other plans in mind.

We will not be slowly bled in another Arafatian war of attrition. Your former leader proclaimed that the Arab mother was his best weapon. Sick...

And if you do not silence the mortars and rockets and suicide bombers, we will unleash pure hell as you've never seen it before...not a threat, but a promise...and we will tell the hypocrites elsewhere that this is a matter of basic survival for us.

And then it was Abu Mazen's turn to respond...

Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 14, 2005.

The only assassins Sharon has to fear are his own business partners if he does not deliver them Gaza for their casino project as he has promised. Furthermore, no "settlers" have "infiltrated" the IDF. "Settlers" are not an alien element from some hostile galaxy but Israeli citizens who are serving in the IDF along with all the others. The "intelligence" they are gathering is the same as any other citizen soldier would gather as part of his service in the Army.

Israeli Internal Security Minister Tzahi Hanegbi is know as a political opportunist and is not beyond inventing (or creating) event that will advance his career. The Jerusalem Post (of which Sharon though various "friend" owns a large chunk) is hardly a reliable source as well. In short, we are being feed the usual self serving propaganda that has characterized all of Israel's political issues.

If any group in Israel needs worry about assassins it is the opponents to the Sharon extermination plan. Over the past five years a dozen or so settlement leaders have been murdered by Arabs. Correctly or incorrectly there are many who do not find that accidental nor do they believe only Arabs were involved. In fact when Benjamin Kahane, his wife and children were ambushed and murdered, the head of the SHABBAK made a special point of telling the family that they were not involved. Rather strange behavior at the very least that only served to reinforce those who believe that the SABBAK was behind the murders and that of other activists as well.

This article was written by Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's special Middle East correspondent, whose past interview subjects have included Yasser Arafat, Ehud Barak, Shlomo Ben Ami and leaders of the Taliban. The article appeared today and is archived at www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42375

Aircraft to monitor 'possible assassins' while prime minister travels

Israel has started using a pilotless drone to protect Prime Minister Ariel Sharon against possible assassination attempts when he travels, security sources confirmed to the media.

The sources were confirming a report broadcast earlier on Israel's Channel 2 that Sharon is the first Israeli prime minister to be protected by a drone aircraft. The report said Sharon faces heightened threats by "settler extremists" who oppose his planned withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank this summer.

Such drones are usually used by Israel to monitor the movements of terrorists in Syria and the Palestinian territories.

In July, Israeli Internal Security Minister Tzahi Hanegbi warned the next assassin of an Israeli prime minister is ready and looking for the opportunity to strike.

"There are people who have already taken the decision that, come the day they are going to 'save Israel,' that they are going to kill the prime minister. - I have no doubt that they are out there," said Hanegbi.

A settler leader who asked that his name be withheld told the Jerusalem Post yesterday anti-withdrawal elements have infiltrated Israel's military and will provide settlers with advanced intelligence on any plans to vacate settlements.

The leader told the Post: "The army is training and we are also training. We have a big surprise in store for the IDF. We have our people embedded within their ranks, and when it comes down to the [evacuation] operations we know every single detail. ... They are not the only ones with intelligence."

Some settler leaders have accused Sharon of contriving reports of settler violence and extremism and quoting extremist statements to discredit the settlement movement and foment domestic and international opposition to the settlers ahead of the prime minister's Gaza withdrawal vote.

"We have said continually that any protests we are planning will be entirely peaceful," Jewish Legion head Mike Guzofsky told WorldNetDaily.

Leaders of the Yesha Council of Jewish Communities in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, the largest settlers group, recently signed a document, the "Covenant of Brothers," that pledged to avert violence in the face of settler contention over Sharon's disengagement plan and its implementation.

"It may be that an extremely small sector of settlers are thinking crazy thoughts, but this is not even a tangible minority," a Yesha leader told WorldNetDaily.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, January 14, 2005.

The Left and Sharon are deliberately pushing Israel into a civil war. We shall defend Gush Katif and the State valiantly. We shall not permit the Left that desires Jewish blood to be shed, to create provocative acts of mutual firing. We shall never bring weapons to the regions of the confrontation. Anyone who does so will be regarded as an agent provocateur and removed from the area. For further details, see: http://www.manhigut.org/english/update.html#_Civil_War

The analysis appearing below is based on an introduction by Motti Karpel to a pamphlet about disobedience, currently being published by Manhigut Yehudit, and which will be distributed to the belief-based public. The publication and distribution of the pamphlet involve great costs. The pamphlet's influence depends mainly on its broad circulation, and we call on the public to aid in financing the creation of consciousness of freedom that is required in order to save Gush Katif and the State. (Please send your donations to: Manhigut Yehudit - PO Box 241 - Cedarhurst, NY 11516-0241)

Returning the State to the Jewish People

The struggle is not for Gush Katif. The heroes of the Gush have found themselves in the front line of a far greater battle. The real struggle is to return the State to the Jewish people.

Ariel Sharon continues to lead the disengagement plan, crushing underfoot anyone standing in his path. He is opposed by the settlers in Yesha and their supporters throughout the rest of the country, who are unable to halt the process. This situation is due to numerous factors, the most important of which is the inability of the opponents of disengagement to correctly define the nature of the struggle and thus define its aim, and consequently the means to be used to achieve this aim. The struggle is not for the settler's homes nor about Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip, nor even about the settlement movement in Yesha. The struggle is for the character of the State of Israel.

Jewish Democracy or Anti-Semitic Despotism

The question facing us now is whether we shall live in a Jewish democracy or anti-Semitic despotism.

For the last thirty years the Israeli Left, that has gained control of all the sources of power in the country, has conducted a campaign of incitement, slander, and demonization against the belief-based public. The forces of the Left are well aware well that the sole force that may endanger their total hegemony in the State of Israel is the belief-based public. Their awareness of their decline and that of the secular Zionism from which they came, causes them to hold on more tightly to positions of strength, and to attempt to eliminate any ideological, sociel, or political alternative liable to replace them when the time comes.

This is the background to the protracted campaign aimed at destroying the settlements in Yesha. The disengagement plan, led for them (to their great surprise) by Ariel Sharon, reveals that they have no need to receive anything in return for expelling the settlers in Yesha. Even the Oslo Agreement, it seems, was also for this purpose. In fact, even after the results of Oslo became evident, the Left did not change its way. It can therefore be seen that their major objective is the elimination of the sole alternative to their control of the country.

Consequently the struggle is not about Jewish settlements in the Gaza region. Even if the disengagement plan is halted on this occasion, it will reappear in countless additional variations in the future. The struggle is about hegemony and control of the State of Israel, and about the State's character.

The Aim of the Struggle - Transferring Control of the State of Israel to the Jewish People

The belief-based public has to fully comprehend the nature of the struggle in order to correctly specify its aim. As far as we are concerned, the aim of the struggle cannot be the cancellation of the "disengagement decree". The aim must be clearly defined as the leadership of Israel. The struggle for Gush Katif is only the first battle in the campaign to return the State to the Jewish people.

Gush Katif is the first, but not necessarily the decisive battle. In order to achieve victory in the war at least one necessary condition must be met: The belief-based public must begin wake up and liberate itself. It must begin to rise up against the Bolshevism of the Left and the governing elitists, free itself from the mental subservience to which it has been educated, and understand that it must independently determine the set of values and morals in the foundations of its struggle and, even more important, "The rules of the game". For thirty years the Left has not permitted us to deviate from the rules of the struggle that they dictated, by means of the judicial and law enforcement systems and (mainly) by the media. Their victory lies in our acceptance of the rules. Our chance of success in the struggle will begin when we become the ones who fix the rules.

Consequently the struggle is about hegemony in the State of Israel. The essential condition is mental liberation from the despotism of the Left, and the method is to disregard the rules imposed on us by the Left and its centers of power. Without accepting these assumptions we shall simply waste energy over illusions.

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience and Refusal

What tactical method can be employed to implement this new orientation? Non-violent civil disobedience, and refusal to carry out the order to expel Jews. This method has numerous advantages, the most important of which is disregarding the rules dictated by the Left. Although this is neither a physical or violent struggle, it emphasizes and raises for discussion the values involved.

We all have to understand that the energy devoted to opposition to the disengagement plan must be utilized and expressed. Since all the conventional methods have been totally blocked by the "enlightened dictatorship", this energy will find its own method of expression. It is preferable that this should take the non-violent form proposed here. If this path is also blocked, it is frightening to think what forms the energy of opposition are liable to assume.

The Operational Aim

The overall aim of the campaign is the form of the regime in the State - to return the State to the Jewish people. Our immediate, operational, aim is to block the disengagement plan. The public in general, and the Left in particular, as well as all future Israeli politicians, must realize that the belief-based public has red lines, and it is not a flock of sheep that can be driven as they like regardless of democratic processes.

When Amos Oz explained that in order to prevent the transfer of Arabs he would be prepared to blow up bridges, when Moshe Negbi (the proponent of the rule of law) explained that he preferred to see a civil war and the destruction of the State rather than to agree to transfer of Arabs, this issue was removed from the list of legitimate subjects for debate in Israel. Liberation from the slave mentality of the belief-based public, and readiness to disregard the rules regarding the transfer of Jews, forms the sole means of saving Gush Katif. It will also form the opening for creating Jewish democracy instead of the current anti-Semitic despotism.

The civil war being encouraged by the Left and Sharon is a red line, that will destroy the army and the Police. The belief-based public must make it quite clear that it will not obey orders regarding the expulsion of Jews from their homes, and will not participate in any action that will aid such a terrible thing to take place.

The greater the number of soldiers and policemen who explain to their commanders in advance that they will not obey orders bearing a black flag, and that they are prepared to pay the price of their actions by being imprisoned, the less will be the chance that such an order will be given.

The greater the number of civilians who will declare today that they will not allow the expulsion order to be executed, and that they will block with their bodies anyone who raises his hands against the settlers of Gush Katif and the Shomron, the less will be the chance that such an order will be given.

Zo Artzeinu

Activists throughout the country have recently contacted us and requested to use the name Zo Artzeinu. We welcome such initiatives whole-heartedly. There is no copyright on the name Zo Artzeinu and as long as the principles are observed of non-violent civil disobedience we are happy to place the brand-name at the disposal of those who wish to save the State. We hope that initiatives of this kind will become widespread until they become a spontaneous popular struggle throughout the country, a determined but non-violent one.

Political Update

The great political farce that we watched this week exceeded all the bounds of imagination. The establishment of the Unity Government is fundamentally an undemocratic act, reserved for war-time. In such a situation this means broad national agreement to the creation of a political cartel that neutralizes the strength of the voters, because of a threat to national survival. In the anti-Semitic despotism prevailing in Israel, the Unity Government has become an accepted means of destroying the democratic nature of the State in order to impose on it the values of the Left. Despite this, it was usual for Unity governments to have the support of at least 80 MKs. However, a minority Unity Government is something new.

In fact the political system has clearly indicated the relative forces in Israeli society. The Left, that is in a minority, imposes its rule on the Right by all possible means. It again becomes evident that the sole means of getting off this slippery slope lies in the Likud. The loyal MKs who opposed Sharon inside his party may give in the next time round, and the opposite may also happen. Without doubt many of them were motivated by short-term political considerations. However, in the final analysis, if a "rebel" reaches the conclusion that it's to his benefit to oppose Sharon, this proves clearly that the loyal forces in the Likud, those that the MKs need in order to be re-elected, are numerous and dominant. The struggle in the field is reflected in the political arena, and the more it warms up it is to be expected that additional MKs will join the ranks of the loyal ones.

The results of the vote in the recent Likud Conference

Last Thursday voting was held in the Likud Conference. From the morning we watched what was happening: Our proposals regarding the election of the World Likud are no longer of interest, and will probably be approved. (This struggle began more than a year ago.) Members of Israel Ba'aliya stand in the entrance and are tense, but obviously they will be accepted. Central Committee members who were left out by error will probably also be accepted. So what's all the commotion about?

There is one important proposal on the voting form - the minimum period of membership in the Likud in order to vote. The Constitution Committee's proposal, formulated under pressure by MK Omri Sharon, who participated in the meetings of the committee, requires no minimum period. You only have to join, vote, and then cancel your subscription. The opposing proposal by the chairman of Efal branch, Mr. Yitzhak Nimrodi, called for a minimum period of membership of 16 months. This proposal appeared on the voting form as a reservation, even though it was supported by the signatures of more than 700 Central Committee members. The voting form was deliberately complicated and confusing. The message of Omri and the ministers was to vote in favor of everything, and by doing so this reservation would be ignored.

With the joint efforts of loyal Central Committee members we ensured that an example of the form, indicating how to vote, would be handed out at the entrance to the voting booths. The struggle began, with loyal members making efforts to persuade undecided voters. Fortunately no MK or minister dared to openly voice his recommendations. However, considerable pressure was applied to the Central Committee members.

At the end of the voting, four observers entered in order to supervise the counting of the votes. After a lot of arguments, and after Judge Zvi Cohen had given a ruling, the votes for Nimrodi's proposal were counted separately. In the end it transpired that we had won on this issue.

Some moves take place quietly but are more important than those accompanied by great publicity. This was one of them. The decision to require a minimum period of membership of 16 months significantly changes the face of the Likud. The Prime Minister was elected at a time when there were more than 300,000 Likud members, but now there are only 152,000 members. Obviously those who cancelled their subscriptions were not authentic Likud members, but only signed on in order to vote, most of them (according to reports) recruited by Omri Sharon. For example, in Ashdod, the branch that elected Omri, more than 56% subsequently cancelled their membership. During the next Primaries, that will probably be held within the next 16 months, Likud members who voted against the disengagement plan in the Likud referendum will participate. The same thing will happen in the next elections for the Likud Central Committee, to be held in another four years (as decided by the Central Committee), or in another two years (as decided by the Likud's legal advisor). Although Sharon has at this stage succeeded in blocking the entry of several thousand Manhigut Yehudit members, this obstacle will eventually be removed, and these people will be allowed to join and to influence things. Our plans are long-term ones.

The new method is a victory for those loyal to the values of the Likud, and a defeat for the manipulators.

The Debate on the Subject "Religious and Secular Jews"

On Saturday night, Jan 8, '05, a debate was held in Jerusalem on the issue "Jewish identity as a future joint basis for Israeli society".

The evening was opened by Shai Malka, of Manhigut Yehudit Youth, and was followed by a lecture by Yoav Cohen who spoke about "What is a secular person doing in Manhigut Yehudit?".

The debate was fascinating and the main conclusion was that the discussion about Jewish identity and a joint future in the Land of the Jews represents a victory in the struggle for the identity of the State.


*Congratulations to the loyal MKs - a list of the loyal Likudniks who voted against Sharon (prepared by Susie Dym): Yuly Edelstein, Gilad Erdan, Naomi Blumenthal, Michael Gorolovsky, Ehud Yatom, Moshe Kahalon, Haim Katz, David Levy, Uzi Landau, Leah Ness, Ayub Kara, Michael Ratzon, Yehiel Hazan. (Rubi Rivlin abstained.)

*We are in the process of building a site in French. We are looking for volunteers to help translate articles to French. If you can help, please send a message to: mailto:french@manhigut.org

Our goal: To perfect the world in the kingdom of the Almighty Manhigut Yehudit

Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 13, 2005.

There is something pathologically weird or just sick about the news media when it comes to ennobling Dictators, Terrorists, Drug Lords, Politicians who are out and out crooks. Somehow these characters are romanticized as star personalities instead of the seedy, cruel, terrorist tyrants they are or where they came from.

Presently, the Grand Make-Over by the Media and high ranking politicians is focused on making over Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen). It is as if he has been shunted through one of those glamour establishments - like Elizabeth Arden where you go in looking frumpy and you exit as a glamourous movie star or - a peace-loving statesman.

So, fellow Journalists, let us for once go through that painful tunnel of truth and speak plainly about Abu Mazen.

In his early years as a student, Mahmoud Abbas was vetted by the Soviets as a likely prospect to penetrate the Arab Muslim network of Terrorists but, also their Cold War against America and the West. The Soviets were infamous for recruiting and training sleeper agents and deadly assassins - like Carlos, the Jackel - now in a French prison.

Abbas was selected to attend the Patrice Lumumba School in Moscow where he was taught the trade-craft of spies and Terror. It is not that he would be called up to use these skills necessarily but, if needed, he would know what to do. To become a mole or Terrorist, one must have the pre-disposition and a psychological profile to warrant such training. Abbas had these qualifications for the Soviets. Abbas also studied in Damascus, Syria - a nation dedicated to Terror.

Mahmoud's thesis (which was reminiscent of the Soviet forgery called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion") was dedicated to proving that the Holocaust was a fake. To the Soviets such an enormous manipulation of history was irrelevant - even when there were miles of film showing Soviet troops entering the death camps which Abu Mazen denied existed.

Abu Mazen was a close confidante of Yassir Arafat and assisted him in the establishment of the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) which they inaugurated as an Egyptian enterprise in 1964. The PLO, as you may recall, was initiated as a Terror organization meant to harass Israel and to fill the vacuum between lost wars. Abbas was voted into the PLO Executive Committee in 1980.

Successful PLO attributes were to show off to the populations of Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya whose leaders had not necessarily "lost" their wars against the Jews but, were merely regrouping. Atrocities of Terror would fill the Arab newspapers as compensation for the humiliation of their defeats.

Let us not forget the PLO Charter which specifies the destruction of Israel. The PLO Charter to destroy Israel was NEVER CANCELLED, although the Media and the U.S. State Department were anxious to accept Arafat at his word. Moreover, Mahmoud Abbas played a key role in drafting the language in the Charter that specified "Genocide for the Jewish people - especially in Israel" in this insidious Charter.

During his time Mahmoud Abbas was a constant companion and advisor to Yassir Arafat. His most important job was as the treasurer for the PLO. That meant that every pre-paid atrocity was known and passed through the hands of Mahmoud Abbas.

The Soviets used Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) as a double agent to pump in ideas for Terror operations against Israel and also Americans when they got the chance. The Soviets would supply weapons, select some targets and use the PLO to intimidate regional Arab powers like the Saudis. This involved considerable blackmail so large payments would go to the PLO to insure the lives of Saudi Kings and Princes against assassination.

Blackmail was only one conduit of PLO financing into Arafat's personal accounts. Keep in mind that the PLO Treasurer, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) was close to Arafat in all these operations. The court advisors, so to speak, of Yassir Arafat had to meet the criteria of Terrorist planning. While the media and world leaders speak now about Abu Mazen as a "quiet moderate", in fact he was equal to Arafat in every respect except charisma. He was deep into all of Arafat's bloodiest planning.

Whatever Arafat ordered done by way of atrocities, Abu Mazen would be either one of the planners or would soon be advised of the operation. There were thousands of these operations such as the attack at the Munich Olympics which murdered eleven Israeli athletes. During their bloody years, Abu Mazen, was the radical Left (Peres and Beilin) close contact to advance Oslo and other plans.

Arafat was tape recorded ordering his Force 17 to execute American Ambassador to Sudan, Cleo Noél, his aide George Moore and the French Charges des Affaires. The CIA has that tape. Despite this intercepted phone conversation, giving this order, the U.S. State Department continued to support Arafat's PLO virtually ignoring the execution of our Ambassador.

Abu Mazen was a permanent part of Arafat's inner circle which planned and gave orders funding all Terrorist operations. For Abu Mazen that included the massacre of the Israeli children at a school in Ma'alot, northern Israel.

Today (January 12th) we heard President George W. Bush congratulate Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) on winning the election to become President of the PLO. (NO, despite the enthusiasm of the media, he has NOT become President of Palestine unless one refers to that territory controlled by the Jews themselves called Palestinians by the British from 1917 to 1948).

Although Abu Mazen was seemingly a quiet, well-dressed, well-spoken Muslim, he was no different that Hitler's disciples: Heydrich, Goebbels, Eichmann...etc. or Saddam's military board of sadists.

Abu Mazen is directly and indirectly responsible for the murder of thousands of Jews. There is little doubt that he might be assassinated at the earliest possible moment - given that in his quiet, statesman-like way, he will kill more Jews. He has already proclaimed that he will follow Arafat's policies, including flooding Israel with 3 to 5 million so-called Arab refugees and taking Jerusalem as his capital.

Arafat was protected by American interests against assassination for reasons never explained to the American people. No doubt, the same will hold true for Abu Mazen on orders from the Bush Administration. We are, at this moment, trying to apologize to the Arab Muslim world for taking down the Jihadist Taliban in Afghanistan, followed by the regime change which brought down Saddam Hussein. Reports are coming in that the U.S. plans increased attacks against Syria because of their assistance to Muslim Mujahhadin to kill Americans in Iraq.

No doubt, Sharon has been enlisted to assist giving up the Golan Heights to Syria but, of course only after Syria has been made to compromise. This dangerous withdrawal from the high ground of the Golan and one third of Israel's fresh water resource would be packaged as an apology to Islam for humiliating the Muslims of Taliban, Iraq and Syria.

Before the Media starts screaming about trial by juries, instead of eliminating Terrorists, keep in mind that there are special Terrorists that deserve attention - such as Osama Bin Laden, Abu Musab Zarkawi and a few dozen other well-known Terrorists whose exploits put them on line to be assassinated on sight.

Had Arafat been assassinated much earlier in his career, thousands of Jews, Americans, Christians and Muslims would have been saved. We are told that the Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon has congratulated Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) on his election and speculation of when he will be invited the White House. I recall how Shimon Peres shook the hand of Arafat with warmth and enthusiasm while Yitzhak Rabin did so with reluctance. This also took place at the White House accompanied by the "Promise of Peace" in English but, with a different message in Arabic by Arafat which the Media ignored.

Sharon could have had Arafat shot when Israel chased Arafat and his Terror organization out of Lebanon in 1982 (after Arafat had caused a 12 year Civil War that killed 100,000 Christians and Muslims). It was reported that an Israeli sniper had Arafat in his sights but that (under U.S. pressure) Sharon gave the order NOT to shoot.

Clearly, Arafat had to be preserved so later Rabin and Peres could bring Arafat and his Terrorists back from Tunis so he could be a partner in Oslo and what was called the Peace Process followed by a pre-arranged Intifada.


This leads us into another aspect of what Arafat and Abu Mazen added as part of their war against the Jews. They developed and elevated the employment of children as Terrorist soldiers. This was embodied during the time that Arafat tried to make a mini-state in Lebanon where he and his cohorts managed to kill 100,000 Lebanese, both Christians and Muslims. After dozens of attacks by Arafat's Terrorists, Israel counter-attacked in June of 1982. They were astonished to meet Arafat's child soldiers, dubbed by the Israelis as "the RPG kids". The children, aged 10 to 12 carried and fired shoulder-fired Rocket Propelled Grenade launchers. Many Israeli soldiers were killed when they held back from firing on 10 year olds carrying these lethal weapons.

As I was drafting this article, I heard an NPR (National Public Radio) interview of an author, P.W. Singer who had published a book  Children At War about child soldiers. He spoke about American soldiers in Iraq being killed and maimed by children carrying RPGs and AK47s. He commented that, you were just as dead if the triggers were pulled by an adult or a child. He said that the Pentagon had not yet developed a policy on killing kids using lethal weapons.

It was Arafat and Abu Mazen who introduced children as fighters against Israel in the name of Allah. The children were also enlisted as fully fledged fighters in the war being fought between Iraq and Iran. I would add that these teachings came straight from Arafat and Mazen as a best choice of human weapons. Much of this warped curriculum was being taught in the Arab Muslim schools of the Palestinian Authority since they gained control with the Oslo Accords in 1993. The schools' curriculum teaching of children to hate and kill Jews is funded by UNRWA (United Nations Relief Works Administration).

The Media, knowing much of this, has not spoken of Abu Mazen as he was and is and will be, with deliberation. Instead, they either glorify him as a soft-spoken moderate on his way to Muslim sainthood or cast him as a statesman. Abu Mazen is a killer in a suit with lots of Jewish scalps attached to his belt under his suit jacket.

In my estimation this makes the Media co-conspirators by knowingly covering up Mazen's past and, therefore, clears his way to commit more atrocities through the many Terrorist groups he has worked with before and which he will direct now that he is in power.

Perhaps it is time for the Media and our President to leave what Bill Reilly of FOX NEWS calls "The Spin Zone". Speaking of Abu Mazen as the "coming of the Peace Messiah" is not exactly straight reporting. Moreover, faking a persona of the "peaceful man" so the Israelis can be moved out with all those expected mandatory gestures before there is a scintilla of cessation of Terror is merely a replay of the Sudetenland betrayal at Munich.

I expect the same cover-up from the pro-Arab State Department as they hope to mold Abu Mazen's image into that of a statesman to whom Israel can give up more Land to make peace. With that image the State Department, along with President Bush, can evacuate the Jews and create what most Intelligence Analysts know will be a powerful Terrorist State, the new center of Global Terror.

Terrorists will pour into whatever Lands the Jews give up - from Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Germany, Europe... Leading nations, including the United States, have often propped up dictators like Pinochet, Noriega, et al, as long as they obey their financial and military benefactors. Presumably, they expect payback from Abu Mazen IF he lasts out the year. The U.S. funded Arafat in the hundreds of millions but, he never paid back. Now Mazen is supposed to assemble Arafat's 10+ Secret Service groups into 3 effective operations to be trained by the American CIA which is supposed to control Terror.

The U.S. State Department wanted Israel gone since 1948 and tried, through Arafat, to accomplish that feat. Arafat proved too ugly and uncontrollable so now they have the seemingly moderate face and manners of Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen). All the talk from the Bush Administration that Abu Mazen must now prove himself is all hogwash. It really will not matter if Abu Mazen can effect a few months of quiet or not. The story being floated by the Bush Administration and the Media, is that Israel must make all the "peace" gestures - despite the on-going Arab Muslim Terror.

Sharon fits the profile of "Rent-a-Dictator" to carry forward such gestures to abandon the Land, defendable borders and the transferring of Jews from their homes, farms, factories, schools, synagogues, businesses and even their cemeteries. Even as the terrorists began to murder Jews after Mazen's election, Sharon (like Rabin) immediately began to babble that he would meet Abu Mazen anyway and the Peace Process must limp on.

So dear compatriots of the News Media and investigative reporters. GO TO WORK!. There are search engines everywhere, including your own files which will give you the pedigree of Abu Mazen. If you choose not to look or, once having looked, ignore the information, then you have made a personal decision to both distort the facts or have allied yourselves knowingly with a Terrorist who was a close advisor to Yassir Arafat. Subsequent killings, denials notwithstanding, will make you a collaborator in those killings. Changing the persona of a killer means that you are duping the intended victims and exposing them to future murders. In the long (or short run) that endangers you all too.

Calling a murderer a "militant" or an "insurgent" or even a "patriotic freedom fighter" is masking a deadly truth. If the news experts we rely upon to alert us to danger but who minimize that danger with deliberation, then they have made themselves partners with Terrorists.

Suppose you brought your child to his or her doctor with a fever and a cough. The Doctor says, "No problem, it's merely the flu" (knowing its symptoms are pneumonia). If your child dies because of misinformation, will you calmly accept a deliberate mis-diagnosis? You now have been told that Abu Mazen is a quiet killer with a well-documented history so don't look for a "Dan Rather-style" denial.

Terrorists kill people. They are not militants, nor insurgents nor, as is too often said, "one man's Terrorist is another's freedom fighter."

Gents and Ladies of the Media: "You are killing us with your words!"

Oh, Yes. Abu Mazen just said openly: "The Little Jihad is over and now we begin the Big Jihad!" Please, let us listen for a change!

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, January 13, 2005.

This is a sermon delivered at South Highland Presbyterian Church by Rabbi Jonathan Miller, Temple Emanu-El, Birmingham, Alabama, Nov. 14, 2004. It is archived at www.ourtemple.org/keep_current/membership_news.php?page=2798

I am honored to be here at the South Highland's Presbyterian Church and to be with Rev. Ed Hurley, Rev. Noelle Read and Rev. Denney Read. They are my dear friends and teachers and colleagues, and you here are my friends too. I will never forget how when we walked back with our Torah Scrolls from the Southside Baptist Church to our new building, you were assembled with signs that read "welcome home" and joined in our march. And during that joyful and soul filled day, you added to the joy of our community. You understood the meaning of home for us. That is something that friends do for friends. They understand the meaning of home for their friends.

I want to share a story I first heard from Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate. I am sure this story preceded Mr. Wiesel. He shared the story of two peasants drinking together at a tavern. Maybe they were in Russia, or maybe in Poland, or maybe in the Ukraine or maybe in Romania, it doesn't really matter. Maybe they were Jewish, maybe they were Catholic, maybe they were Orthodox, it doesn't really matter. (But it is safe to assume that they were not Presbyterian!) As the evening wore on, they become less inhibited. The first peasant asked, "My friend, do you love me." "Of course I love you," his comrade replied with a smile. Another round of vodka. "Really, do you love me?" "Yes, I love you," responded his friend. Another round of vodka, "I need to know now, do you love me?" as he repeated his question a third time. His friend looked at him and responded, "I love you, I love you, I love you, what else do you want?" Forlorn, his friend waited a moment, looked at his buddy and said, "If you love me, if you truly love me, you would know what hurts me."

I am here today to speak to you as a Jew to tell you what hurts me. I can do that because I trust you, and you trust me. You are my friends. I don't expect that you will agree with me about everything I share with you. That is not the point of being in a relationship with friends we love. The goal of lovers is not to agree, but to understand, to appreciate, to celebrate and to console.

Make no mistake about it, we are lovers. Together we are lovers of the same things. We love God. We love our country. We love our community. We love our corner of Highland Avenue. We love our traditions. We love justice. We love mercy. As religious communities, we love the sometimes unlovable. We love the good. We love God's commandments. We love our families and we love our people. We are lovers of the same things.

I want to share with you today about what it is like to live as a Jew in today's world. You don't have to fix it for me or mend me my wounds, just understand me. I was born in 1954. My grandparents were born in Poland. There was not a day that passed that they didn't experience some kind of anti-Jewish bigotry in Europe. They spoke Yiddish and Polish and Russian. They came to this country with nothing after World War I, and eventually settled in the Bronx. They were hard working. My grandfather was a platinum smith. My other grandfather was a dressmaker. My grandmother worked in a sweatshop. They always rented their apartments. Their children, my parents, went to college and bought their own home. The seminal events for my grandparents was leaving the anti-Semitism of Poland and coming to America. The seminal events for my parents were learning about the Holocaust and the creation of the Jewish state of Israel. My father, of blessed memory, was planning to move to Israel in the early 1950's, but he was run over by a taxicab in New York and had to convalesce for six months. He literally missed the boat. He became a rabbi instead of an Israeli farmer. The seminal event for me as a child was the Six Day War, during my Bar Mitzvah year, and the Yom Kippur War. I left college to spend five months in Israel working on a kibbutz after the Yom Kippur War. I was nineteen, and I couldn't concentrate on my studies when my people were in peril. That was the coldest and most lonely winter of my life. The seminal events for my children are the terror bombings in Israel, which prevented them from going there to travel and study, and of course September 11, 2001.

My friends, I want you to know what hurts me just so that you can understand what it is like to be a Jew. It hurts me to live in a world where my existence and the existence of my people are not assured. It hurts me to live in a world were the nations of the world question the value of my being. It hurts me to live in a world where the battle lines in the war on terror, or the battle lines of the Cold War, or the battle lines of World War II, or the battle lines of modernization, all the battle lines of civilization - all seem to fall upon the doorpost of my people wherever and whenever we live. It hurts me to live in a world where the bad people, the evil people still target my people and me first. It hurts to live in a world where we still remain God's suffering servants. Christians read the same passage from Isaiah that we Jews do from our Bibles. For Christians, God's suffering servant is foretold to be Jesus. For us as Jews, we know who was God's suffering servant in his day and in our own, it is the body of Am Yisrael, the people of Israel.

From the book of Isaiah:
53:"Who can believe what we have heard?
Upon whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2: For he has grown, by His favor, like a tree crown,
Like a tree trunk out of arid ground.
He had no form or beauty, that we should look at him:
No charm, that we should find him pleasing.
3: He was despised, shunned by men,
A man of suffering, familiar with disease.
As one who hid his face from us,
He was despised, we held him of no account.
4: Yet it was our sickness that he was bearing,
Our suffering that he endured.
We accounted him plagued,
Smitten and afflicted by God;
5: But he was wounded because of our sins,
Crushed because of our iniquities.
He bore the chastisement that made us whole,
And by his bruises we were healed.
6: We all went astray like sheep,
Each going his own way;
And the LORD visited upon him
The guilt of all of us."

I would like for the Jewish people to relinquish our historic role as God's suffering servant. We have filled that role for a very long time. I would like to live in peace without persecution, without wondering how it is we are going to survive into the next generation. I would love to sit under my vine and under my fig tree, unafraid. I would love to live without having to pray that there will be a Jewish world for my grandchildren. I would like not to have to worry about those who cheerfully send their children to death for the pleasure of doing me and my people harm.

This past summer, the Presbyterian Church USA General Assembly voted 431-62 to begin to divest its funds of companies that do business with Israel. They cited the "evil" of Israel's ongoing occupation. They decried the establishment of the security barrier now being erected in Israel to stop the waves of suicide bombings and destruction. I don't want, nor do I intend to go through a point/counterpoint discussion of the General Assembly Overtures. Is Israel the only country in the world worthy of divestment and delegitimization from the Presbyterian Church USA? Not Iran, not Saudi Arabia, not Serbia, not Russia, not Liberia, not China, not Pakistan, not Myanmar, not Zimbabwe, not Haiti, not Indonesia, not Cambodia, not Sudan, not Syria -- is only Israel worthy of such attention?! And consider, is the only evil in the Middle East that of the Israeli occupation? Israel had tried to end that occupation in 1993 under Yitzhak Rabin, and then in 2000 under negotiations with Prime Minister Barak and President Clinton. These attempts were answered with terror, destruction and death. Even today, Israel is preparing to un-occupy most of the territories captured during 1967. While these attempts at reconciliation and peace were taking place between the leaders, the Palestinians were smuggling in explosives by ship and tunnel, and preparing their young people to become shaheed, suicide "martyrs" as they terrorize Israel's population. Now, they are firing rockets into Israeli cities. Which is evil, the cult of terror, death and destruction, or the innate desire of a civilization to protect itself from those whose greatest hope is its destruction? On 9/11, America suffered approximately 3000 casualties. Through this second intifada alone, Israel has suffered the proportional equivalent of 50,000 deaths, and many many injured as well.

Or course, I mourn too for another lost generation of Palestinian youth to this cult of death. It all didn't have to be. It didn't have to be. Arab violence preceded the State of Israel in the 1920s and 1930s. It didn't have to be in 1948, in 1956, in 1967, in 1973, during the first intifada and during the latest wave of murderous violence. After 1967 Six Days War, Moshe Dayan, Yitzhak Rabin, Golda Meir, and Levi Eshkol waited in vain for the phone to ring. To whom could they return the territories? Who would come forward to make peace with Israel? Instead, Israel heard loud and clear the three "Nos" from the Arab world after their victory: no peace, no negotiation, no recognition. We have experienced violence and not acceptance; terror and not peace; violence and not co-existence. Violence, terror, violence. We Americans battle the same violence all over the world, but at the end of the day, we get to go home, and Israel stays as the first defense in our war against radical Islam. And if, God forbid, Israel would cease to exist, they would still come at us, Presbyterians and Jews alike outside of Israel, and attack us all over the world with their insatiable appetite to destroy yet more of our western civilization of love, respect, democracy, human rights, and decency.

I know that most of you disagree with this Overture of divestment from your national organization. I am not here to holler at you or scream or carry on. Most of you agree with me anyway. Instead, I am here for you to hear what it is like to be me, to be a member of my people. I want you to understand the pain I feel when my homeland, which has never known a single day of peace or acceptance in the world of nations, which has had to defend itself against the hatred of fanatical enemies, is declared as a legitimate target by the people who are my friends, my co-lovers, and my colleagues in making the world better and more just and more Godly. I want you to understand my abandonment and my loneliness. That's all. Just understand what it feels like to be me and my people, to lose our friends, to have to fight alone.

Every Rosh Hashanah, we Jews read the Binding of Isaac as our Torah reading. You know and love the Bible, and you know and love this puzzling story. Yehuda Amichai, the famous Israeli poet wrote this remarkable poem in Hebrew. I will read its translation to you. The Hero of the Binding
Yehuda Amichai

The true hero of the binding was the ram
Who did not know about the conspiracy between the others.
He practically volunteered to die in place of Isaac.
I would like to sing about him a song of remembrance,
about the curly wool and about his human eyes
about the horns which were so silent in his live head
and after being slaughtered they made from them shofarot
to sound the alarm of their war
or to sound the alarm of their vulgar happiness.

I would like to remember the final picture
like a beautiful photograph from a timely fashion newspaper;
The tanned and spoiled youth in his dandy clothes
and next to him the angel who wears a long silk dress
for a festive reception.
And the two of them in empty eyes
stare to two empty places

And behind them, as a colorful background, the ram
seized in the thicket before slaughter.
And the thicket his last friend.

The angel went home
Isaac went home
and Abraham and God went long ago.

But the true hero of the binding
Is the ram.

My friends, everyone else can go home. The angels can go home and shut their doors. The Christians can go home and shut their doors. The Presbyterians can go home and shut their doors. The Moslems can go home and shut their doors. The Democrats can go home and shut their doors. The Republicans can go home and shut their doors. The French, and the Germans, and the British, and the Italians, and the Spanish, and the Swiss, and the Swedes, and the Finns, and the Norwegians can go home and shut their doors. Actually, they went home and shut their doors a long time ago. And who is left outside in the wild to face the devouring beast?

The ram. The ram who is caught by his horns in the thicket. The ram who is sacrificed on the altar so Isaac and Abraham might live. The ram is left out in the wild, caught by his horns in the thicket. The ram is exposed and everyone else went to hide in the safety of their doorways from the butcher's knives. But the thickets won't let go. Oh sure, in the end everyone will thank the ram, Abraham and Isaac and God and the Republicans and the Democrats and the French and the Presbyterians. Everyone will thank the ram and hold the ram up as a fine model of sacrifice and suffering. And they will remove his horns to trumpet their respect. But even then, the knives will still be flashing, searching for their next victim.

But the ram was the first to be slaughtered.

I don't want to be that ram. Not now and not ever again. I have had enough of being the ram.

This is what it is like to be me. Thank you for your love and understanding.


Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Moshe and Rachel Saperstein, January 13, 2005.

Please pass this on to friends. Note new emails.

We are at an historic crossroads in Jewish history. Every Jewish community in YESHA is now a potential target for the Sharon/Peres government. And you can help.

Every Jewish community and synagogue in North America should "adopt" at least one (preferably more) Jewish community ("settlement") in Yesha, especially those immediately threatened in Gaza and the Shomron. This should be done formally, in writing, with a clear statement:

An attack on your community will be considered an attack on our community. We will be there for you as you are there for us. No unilateral withdrawal. No "disengagement." No terrorist Palestinian state.

You can co-ordinate this with the Gush Katif Regional Council, (gkatif@netvision.net.il) and The Yesha Council (Moetzet Yesha) (pinchas@binyamin.org.il), Arutz 7, and the Zionist Organization of America (www.zoa.org).

Moshe and Rachel Saperstein live in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza strip, Israel. Moshe is a one of the Jerusalem Diarists, who are recording the immediacy of living in Israel in "these interesting times."

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 13, 2005.

The IDF, like Stalin's Red Army, has always been a political tool. In the early days of the State of Israel it was the most power agent to break religious youth and convert them into "Israelis." (This, by the way, is the real root of the hostility most Torah people have towards the IDF.) When Rabbi Kahane and his political party were legal and he was a MK, the IDF taught its soldiers that they were dangerous to democracy and needed to be suppressed. Even today the IDF is used to teach "democracy" to inductees and it's "hello stockade or good-by promotions" to any soldier who disagrees on any point with the official form of DeMockracy propagated by the IDF on behalf of the Government.

The IDF is able to function as an Army despite all this because most of the officers and soldiers ignore the propaganda and focus on being excellent soldiers and defending the nation.

In light of all this, it is absolute hypocrisy for IDF Commander of Ground Forces Major-General Yiftach Ron-Tal to say; "Involving the IDF in the political arena could have a dramatic impact on the security of the nation, and one must never lend a hand to such a reality." It is, however, to be expected because Leftist do not see their opinions as political but as unquestionable truth. As a result, anything that challenges their concepts is political, an affront to DeMockracy and must be suppressed. This is entitled "Senior Officer Warns Against Refusal" and appeared in today's Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). It is archived at http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=75240

(IsraelNN.com) IDF Commander of Ground Forces Major-General Yiftach Ron-Tal spoke out this morning on the increasingly audible cries heard from soldiers and officers alike, to refuse orders pertaining to the Gaza Disengagement Plan.

"We are dealing with a most serious matter," he stated. "I understand there is a political argument. It is acceptable to attempt to change a political decision in a democratic society, but within the framework of the law," he added.

"What is important as I see it is to refrain from involving the IDF in the argument. Involving the IDF in the political arena could have a dramatic impact on the security of the nation, and one must never lend a hand to such a reality."

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ruth Matar, January 13, 2005.

Dear Friends,

Last week I was fortunate to meet a remarkable person, a real friend of Israel, James A. Vineyard, a Christian Pastor from Oklahoma City in the United States.

Pastor Vineyard is a firm believer in G-d's Word as set forth in the Bible, and is therefore diametrically opposed to G-d's Covenant Land being traded for promises of peace and security, and "this planned illegal and immoral deportation of Jews from their homes in Gush Katif and the Shomron." I have cancelled all plans for this week's Letter from Jerusalem, and I am instead publishing Pastor Vineyard's letter to President George W. Bush of January 12, 2005, which I believe highlights the current dangerous situation in Israel.

JANUARY 12, 2005


















* * *

In addition, I am bringing to your attention a letter from an Evangelical Christian couple, Ken and Mary Ann Krueger, also addressed to President George W. Bush, which Women in Green are publishing as a paid ad in the local Jerusalem Post and also in the International Jerusalem Post.

An Open Letter to President George W. Bush

Dear Mr. President:

Have you gotten the message yet? We pray always for you to have wisdom from God. But we must admit you really get us worried at times. We know God honors our prayers, so the only thing we can think when we read how you are still pushing Israel into a land-for-peace deal is that you are not hearing God. Please stop and hear God on this.

Palestine wants to push Israel into the ocean. They do not want peace, they want the Land of Israel!! This tiny piece of land that God gave to Israel. Even though they are surrounded by Arab nations big enough to house them all. Have you ever gone to the Arab towns and seen how they have turned them into slums, with graffiti everywhere? How dry and barren it is? Then you cross the border to Israel and it is lush and green. The Israeli people till and work the soil and they are blessed by God through Abraham. The Arabs (sons of Ishmael) are jealous and covet the Israeli land. Just as Ishmael hated Isaac, the Arabs hate Israelis.

We Christians are getting very concerned about all of this. We voted for you and have not seen you do one thing to help our good friend, Israel. This is what Christians care about and this is why we voted for you. You said in a statement on National News that you think you earned political capital in this election and you are going to spend it. Well, we Christians also think we have earned some political capital as well, since we are the ones who put you in the White House.

Mr. President we are now calling in our markers, and we want to spend them on helping Israel!! Please let your voters know what is going on here. We deserve to know, Mr. President.


Ken & Mary Ann Krueger (Evangelical Christians) Springfield, IL. 62704, USA

* * *

The situation in Israel is worsening daily. In today's Jerusalem Post, January 13, 2005, on the front page, there is an article discussing the powers given to Shimon Peres, the new Vice Premier of today's Israeli government. The following is a quote from this article:

"Peres has already been given responsibility for the Negev and Galilee development authorities. He will also be in charge of the implementation of the Disengagement Plan AND RAISING FUNDS FOR THE PLAN INTERNATIONALLY. [R. M.: emphasis is mine.]"

Just imagine that the man who brought us the disastrous Oslo Accords, who is responsible for the death of more than a thousand Jews, and tens of thousands maimed for life, is now a powerful number II in the Sharon government, and is going to our enemies worldwide, to collect funds for the transfer of Jews from their homes in their own Homeland.

Dear Friends: I have the strong feeling that this is the endgame, and that it is essential that we unite and act together, before it is too late. If you want to express your support for Pastor Vineyard, his email address is .

It is very important, dear readers, that you express your feelings to President Bush. Send him a fax at 202-456-2461, or a letter by snail mail at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20500. In addition, call his office at 202-456-1414. Emails are not as effective, as they're not printed out, and therefore your opinion may not be fully brought to the President's attention.

With Blessings and Love for Israel,
Ruth Matar

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 13, 2005.

So let us see if we have this straight. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial are crimes in many democracies and they are not protected speech. This week a court in Berlin convicted and jailed a German lawyer for 9 months for writing that hatred of Jews is solidly mentally healthy. Really. Meanwhile Le Pen, the head of the French neonazi party, is about to be indicted for his comments that the Holocaust was little more than a frat prank, or words to that moral effect.

There is of course one country where open hatred of Jews, support for Holocaust Deniers, and endorsement of genocide of Jews are all protected free speech and no one is ever indicted for those things - that country is Israel. Israeli leftists are increasingly candid about their endorsement of mass murder of Jews, and openly call for Israel to be annihilated. At least one academic, lecturer Neve Gordon from Ben Gurion University, openly endorses Holocaust-Denier Norman Finkelstein and even compares him ethically to the Prophets of the Bible. Crackpot leftists like Israel Shamir openly proliferate anti-Jewish blood libels and endorse nazism. Arab politicians openly endorse terrorist atrocities against Jews. Far leftist professors promote mutiny and insurrection by leftist soldiers, engage in law breaking and sometimes participate in violence against Israeli police and soldiers. Tali Fahima is proclaimed the Mother Teresa of the Israeli Left for her collaboration with terrorists in planning atrocities against Jews.

And all THIS is protected speech.

What is NOT protected speech in Israel? Expressing any political opinion with which Yossi Beilin might disagree.

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by TheRaphi, January 13, 2005.

This was written by Esther Pollard, who is married to Jonathan Pollard, serving a life sentence in Butner, North Carolina on charges of espionage on behalf of Israel. She is working passionately for his release and repatriation to Israel. The Pollard website address is http://www.jonathanpollard.org/

Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Israel's history knows that espionage has been a vital factor in the survival of the State and in defending its national security. Indeed, if espionage is not a Zionist activity, then how are all of Israel's intelligence operatives down through the ages to be considered?

Israel's Ministry of Immigration recently concluded that "it is doubtful" that espionage is a Zionist activity. The Ministry made this statement in a recent ruling rejecting my husband Jonathan Pollard's request for recognition as a Prisoner of Zion. The ruling said, "the law states that a Prisoner of Zion is a person who carried out Zionist activities and it is doubtful that espionage is considered such an activity."

This statement demonstrates a shameful ignorance of Jewish history. Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Israel's history knows that espionage has been a vital factor in the survival of the State and in defending its national security. Indeed, if espionage is not a Zionist activity, then how are all of Israel's intelligence operatives down through the ages to be considered?

For example, what about those operatives who gave their lives for the Jewish State? Were their actions also "doubtful" as Zionist activities? The names Eli Cohen, Moshe Marzouk and Shmuel Azar come to mind. They were all spies who were caught and hanged for their espionage activities on behalf of Israel.

Eli Cohen, known as "Our Man in Damascus" was caught and hanged by Syria. Cohen provided a vast amount of valuable intelligence data to the Israeli army over a period of three years. In 1967, the Israelis were able to conquer the Golan Heights in two days in large part due to the intelligence he provided. As Intelligence Chief Meir Amit said, Eli "succeeded far beyond the capabilities of most other men."

Marzouk and Azar were Jewish Egyptian nationals recruited by Israel's secret service. They were part of the 1950s Lavon spy ring. Marzouk and Azar were caught, sentenced to death for their espionage activities and summarily hanged by Egypt.

What about Marcelle Ninio, Victor Levy, Robert Dassa and Meir Meyuhas? They, too, were part of the Lavon group along with Marzouk and Azar. Ninio, Levy, Dassa and Meyuhas did hard time in prison, enduring repeated torture sessions for their espionage activities on behalf of Israel. They were completely abandoned by Israel and left to languish for more than a decade in prison. Their release finally came about only as a result of the heroism of the Israeli pilots who were captured by Egypt during the Six Day War. Israel negotiated the release of the pilots and prepared to leave the Lavon spies behind, but the pilots refused to leave without them. Are these betrayed operatives and their activities in doubt as well? Were they Zionist heroes; or, to follow the current logic of the Israeli government, are they to be considered just criminals and nothing more?

What about the Nili Group of pre-State days? Nili leader Aaron Aaronsohn and his sister Sarah Aaronsohn gave vital intelligence information to the British in defense of the fledging Jewish settlement in the Holy Land. Sarah was captured by the Turks and tortured for four days in attempt to make her give up information. On the fourth day, she shot and killed herself to ensure that she would never give up any secrets. Her Nili comrades, Lishansky and Belkind, were also captured and then incarcerated in Damascus. Both were sentenced to death.

What about Wolfgang Lotz? As Eli Cohen was called "Our man in Damascus", Lotz was called "The Eye of Tel Aviv in Cairo". Code-named "Champagne", Lotz posed as a former German officer in Egypt, and relayed vital information to Israel. He is remembered for the tremendous contribution he made to Israeli security prior to the Six Day War, and for having the presence of mind to fool his interrogators and jailers about his true identity not only as an Israeli spy, but as a citizen of Israel.

What about Caleb Ben-Yefuna, Yehoshua Bin-Nun and the spies of Biblical record? They were, in fact, Israel's first spies. Were they, too, nothing more than infiltrators and felons? Will the government of Israel also defame them by doubting the Zionist nature of their activities?

Does the government of Israel also doubt that the espionage activities of the Mossad are Zionist activities? What about the Israeli Ministry of Defense intelligence operations? Does the government consider Israeli military espionage to be Zionist?

Are all who risk their lives for the State of Israel to be treated with the same disdain and disposability with which Israel treated Alfred Frauenknecht? In the late 1960s, Frauenknecht, a Jewish Swiss engineer, stole the blueprints and the specifications for the precise machine tools used in the French-Swiss Mirage jet fighter plane, and gave them to Israel. The Jewish State used the blueprints to build the Kfir fighter plane. When Frauenknecht was caught, Israel disowned him and abandoned him to his fate. The Swiss judge who sentenced Frauenknecht in 1971 was so appalled by the way that Israel had treated him that he was moved to reduce Frauenknecht's sentence as a gesture of consolation.

The government of Israel did not invite Frauenknecht to the grand unveiling of the Kfir aircraft, which took place after his release from prison. Some Israeli pilots took pity on Frauenknecht, who was left destitute after his incarceration. They chipped in to send him a plane ticket to attend the event, which they knew would never have taken place were it not for him. Frauenknecht attended, but was not allowed to view the unveiling of the plane from the VIP grandstand. He had to stand with the common folk on the ground. When top Israel officials discovered that Frauenknecht was in attendance, he was immediately asked to leave. Security staff quickly and quietly escorted him out.

Years later, when Jonathan Pollard was arrested, Frauenknecht's widow wrote to him and warned him of the treachery that awaited him at the hands of the Israeli government. How right she was!

Jonathan Pollard worked for LAKAM under the auspices of Israel's Ministry of Defense. The information he gave to Israel saved hundreds of thousands of lives - perhaps even more. The operation that he was involved in stripped naked the true nature of the US-Israel special relationship. Jonathan's grossly disproportionate sentence and the harsh treatment he received, continues to reveal, to this very day, the uneven state of relations between the two countries.

In attempt to bury the truth about American duplicity and the on-going war-in-the-shadows against the Jewish State, the government of Israel betrayed and abandoned her agent, Pollard, and even participated vigorously in his prosecution. To this day, Israel continues to sabotage and undermine Jonathan, and does nothing to secure his release, even denying him symbolic recognition as a Prisoner of Zion. Israel tried to deny him citizenship, but he fought in court and won. Israel tried also to deny him recognition as an agent, but Jonathan won that round in court, as well. No doubt he also will win the next round for his Prisoner of Zion status.

Only in the case of Jonathan Pollard does the government of Israel have the unmitigated gall to publicly state that it "doubt(s) that espionage may be considered a Zionist activity." In so stating, Israel effectively denigrates the great service and sacrifice that all of the above heroes have rendered to the state through their espionage. Jonathan's activities are in the same noble tradition as those of Eli Cohen, Wolfgang Lotz and Alfred Frauenknecht. To imply, even by inference, that the actions of these heroes were not "Zionist" is an affront to the living and defames the memory of the dead.

Israel owes a debt of gratitude to all those who risk their lives performing this dangerous and most excellent of Zionist activities on behalf of the Jewish State. At the top of the list, my husband, Jonathan Pollard.

TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/archives/oldindex.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 13, 2005.


Initiated as a tool of US foreign policy but touted as a humanitarian and peacekeeping organization, the UNO has slipped out of American stewardship. Now it is run by an "immoral majority." That phrase was coined by Israel's Ambassador to the UNO (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 1/12, p.7).

Americans may be so bemused by the laudatory concept of majority rule that they don't realize that in a mob, majority rules and in the UN, the majority is not of the people but of their overlords.


The government acknowledged that it is considering more favorably a proposal it has always opposed, letting a third party play a security role for it. It may be willing to relinquish its own veto and control over any P.A. ports to a third party that "both sides trust."

IMRA remarks that such notions indicate that the government still fails to role-play scenarios for post-Israeli supervision of the P.A.. It just plans how to pull out, not what to do when various predictable problems arise from the withdrawal (IMRA, 12/24).

The Jewish people should have learned not to trust third parties. Third parties, including the US whom Israel trusted, have let the Jews down often enough for that lesson to have sunk in.


The Druse on the Golan Heights appealed to the Red Cross for help in getting permission to sell their apples to Syria. Approval was given. What does it mean?

From the usual quarters come expressions of the deal giving hope for peacemaking. From other quarters comes skepticism, since Syria considers this not a deal with Israel but with people it considers fellow Syrians. In that view, the concession was Israel's.

The Red Cross official, too, talked about the Golan being "occupied territory" of Syria, although it was incorporated into Israel (IMRA, 12/24) legally under international law.


In one day, terrorists fired 50 mortar shells at Jewish communities, but the Israeli Army did not respond with an effort to root out the culprits. Doing so would require a reserve call-up. The call-up is being saved for evacuation of Jews from Gaza and parts of Samaria.


"Maariv" had reported that Irineos I, when nominee for Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church in Israel, had written two letters expressing antisemitism and support for Arafat. Irineos sued "Maariv" for libel. The police found the letters authentic. "Maariv" produced witnesses that Irineos had written them. Now Patriarch, Irineos has avoided a trial by withdrawing the libel suit and paying the newspaper's legal expenses, he says out of forgiveness (Arutz-7, 12/24).


The story that the IDF made an Arab play the violin for them was disproved. Nevertheless, "Haaretz" continues airing the libel, this time as "The Palestinian Violinist who had Been Coerced into Playing for Israeli Soldiers at a Checkpoint is to appear on Stage". (IMRA, 12/24.)


Reaping its harvest of terrorism on its own soil, the government of S. Arabia is exercised about terrorism. It will host an international conference on it. Some of the guests at the conference will represent regimes, such as Iran, that support terrorism. Meanwhile, S. Arabia continues promoting the ideology that brought terrorism domestically.

For example, in a privately-circulating videotape, a Saudi prince touted Osama bin Laden as a role model for children, though he is the arch-enemy not only of the West but of the Saudi regime.

Saudi telethons for tsunami victims attributed the death of the "infidels" to their celebration of Christmas and New Year. An advisor to the Justice Minister asserted that those countries were being punished for lying, sinning, and being infidels. It was a theme of the season, but not of peace on earth and goodwill towards all mankind.

Another theme is war on Jews, Christians, and atheists. A professor told Saudi TV it is permitted to pray for the annihilation of Christians and Jews. Some put it graphically, as to slit the throats of Christians and Jews and shatter their skulls. Unless they convert to Islam, they should be slaughtered, asserted a Saudi cleric. No wonder bin Laden spent his money homicidally!

The government claims that it is fighting hatred. It is lying (Steven Stalinsky of MEMRI, NY Sun, 1/12, p.7). Shouldn't the US help Israel against the terrorists, instead of the reverse?


The average sentence served by Arab terrorists whom Israel has released for goodwill was just over three years for placing a bomb or for shooting at people (IMRA, 12/26).

Seems too slight to serve as a deterrence. Israel should have more deterrence and less "goodwill." "Goodwill" gestures undermine deterrence. It isn't benign for Israelis.


The worst fascist in Israel is Labor MK Ophir Pines (pronounced as Offer Penis). He constantly introduces bills or lawsuits that demand censorship and prosecution of people who disagree with his extreme leftist views.

PM Sharon has just invited MK Pines into the Cabinet, as Min. of the Interior, a powerful post.


An Israeli military class was discussing some pilots' refusal to fight the Arabs in Yesha. The commander said he would not refuse an order to expel the Jews in Yesha. A student disagreed. He said that the disengagement plan "stands in opposition to the spirit of the Declaration of Independence." The commander removed him from the course for "unsuitability" and "unbecoming behavior." The student's proud father explained, the "refusal of the pilots, who in the middle of a war announced that they would not fight, is not the same as ideological refusal to expel citizens from their homes and destroy Jewish communities in the Land of Israel." "He said that the evacuation of communities is a badge of shame for the country, and that the comparison to the pilots who refused is inflammatory." The father calls an order to expel Jews illegal.

Another student had been expelled for criticizing the Chief of Staff for letting a soldier bleed to death (Arutz-7, 12/26). It may not have been the Chief's fault but it was some higher-up's fault.


Although it was last December 28 that Daniel Pipes wrote "The Japanese Internment's Effects Today," nobody rebutted it and it still is relevant and rankles. Mr. Pipes is one of the great trumpets sounding the alarm about the Islamist threat to our country. He proposes interning the Islamists here. His proposal is being derailed by an analogy with the Japanese-Americans during WWII. They were interned. That internment has been deemed a mistake and an injustice. People are discouraged from taking similar measures against radical Muslims.

Instead of pointing out that the Japanese-American threat largely was imaginary, and therefore is not analogous to the Islamist threat, Mr. Pipes declared that the Japanese menace was real and justifies similar treatment of Islamists now. By making his position dependent upon acceptance of this new interpretation of history and upon an analogy, he has jeopardized his position in jeopardy. I think his analogy specious, and it will ruin his case.

Arab Muslim immigration into the US differs from other migrations. The other groups came to join America and its traditions of democracy and tolerance, whereas the Muslims come to maintain their opposing traditions. The Muslims come to envelop us, whereas the others come to fold into us. The others seek to contribute to what makes America great, whereas the Muslims come to take it away. Now, of course, that is somewhat oversimplified, as some individual Muslims find they like it here, and some in the other groups retain their originally exclusive national pride for a generation or two. I generalize, because these phenomena are true in general.

Islamists hate America and its best values as well as its worst ones. They control 80% of the mosques here, preaching the usual hatred, as do their schools. Their organizations are practically the only Muslim ones to comment publicly on current events. Islamist influence spreads among Muslims and non-Muslims.

Most Muslims in the US did not want to draw attention to themselves over 9/11, but by and large thought America, i.e., the innocent people in the World Trade Center and on the airplanes, got what they deserved. Most Muslims donate to terrorist fronts in the name of charity, I believe, knowingly. Muslims are notoriously easy to radicalize, because their faith has a jaundiced view of others. We are finding turncoats in the US Army. Muslims plot terrorism here and commit it abroad faster than we can convict them. Europe experiences more of the same.

The situation justifies stern measures of self-defense, including internment, though I would prefer de-naturalization and deportation, to remove the threat permanently. This justification is independent of the experience with the Japanese.

What was that experience? The prevailing view, Mr. Pipes reminds us, is that internment resulted from wartime hysteria and racial prejudice. Not stated is that internment also was motivated by economic rivalry with Japanese-American farmers. I remember that all this was generally understood during or shortly after the war. Mr. Pipes denies that view by quoting a book that alleges this evidence: (1) Hours after Pearl Harbor, two Japanese-Americans collaborated with a Japanese soldier; (2) Japan established spy rings in the US, "believed" to include hundreds of agents; (3) A federal panel that reviewed the issues in the 1980s was stacked with leftists and bereft of intelligence experts; and (4) Pres. Reagan did not know, when he apologized and paid reparations that Japan planned to exploit Japanese-Americans.

It does not matter how unfair the panel was, it did not influence our already formed views. Japan's hopes about Japanese-Americans does not prove disloyalty. The spy rings were not caught, just believed to exist. We are left with two collaborators out of a large population. Weak evidence. Omitted was the outstanding record of the Nisei US Army units during WWII. Their loyalty was sterling. They risked their lives to prove their loyalty, while their parents were taken from their homes. It is not a justified example for how to treat Islamists, whose society despises American society and seeks its downfall by population pressures and terrorism.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 13, 2005.

I was watching BBC this morning. In horrified tones, the news people reported the incident of Prince Harry choosing to wear a Nazi officer's uniform, complete with swastika armband, to a fancy dress ball. How could such a thing happen? How stupid! huffed the BBC.

Well, well. After four years of sympathetic interviews with Hamas terrorists; one-sided reports on Israeli "atrocities" like the Jenin "massacre"; widespread and unrelenting coverage of demonstrations against Israel; Oxford dons who refuse the applications of Israeli scientists because they did their compulsory army service; boycotts of Israeli universities begun by British academics; demonstrations against Marks and Spencers for carrying Israeli products, the BBC is shocked.

A new, comprehensive poll of British opinion on foreign nations was just released by The Telegraph. The results: Israel is considered by Britons the #1 'least deserving of international respect,' the 'least beautiful country,' the country Britons would 'least like to take a holiday in,' and would 'least like to live in.'

I think we should excuse the confusion of Prince Harry. He's simply been watching too many BBC programs. So spare us the hypocrisy and the crocodile tears, will you?

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter.

To Go To Top
Posted by MEMRI, January 13, 2005.
This is a Special Dispatch Series - No. 846

In an article in Egyptian government weekly Akhbar Al-Yawm, editor Ibrahim Sa'dah criticized the double standard of the Arab Doctors' Association, which is aiding Jihad warriors in Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Bosnia, but refrains from helping victims of the recent tsunami in Asia because the tsunami is "punishment from Allah." The following are excerpts from the article: [1]

The Arab Doctors' Association Urges Doctors to Participate in Jihad and Blow Up 'Infidels,' Not Help the Wounded

"The Emergency Relief Committee of the Arab Doctors' Association published, in one of the Egyptian papers, a communiqué showing a picture of an infant. Underneath, it said: 'Iraq will never surrender. The occupation is destroying homes and hospitals. The bodies of the martyrs [lie] in the streets, and there is no one to bury them. The world observes these crimes in complete silence. Iraq's citizens say that they [will attain] one of two good things: victory or martyrdom. [And you:] What is your contribution? What will you say to your sovereign? Solidarity alone is not enough!'

"The communiqué did not, of course, neglect to mention a bank account number for donations, at the Islamic Faysal Bank at its central branch in Cairo.

"This communiqué is not new to us. It has been published many times in the past, whether by the Arab Doctors' Association or the Egyptian Doctors' Union. I still recall these communiqués published in our Egyptian papers or in the Arab papers calling on Muslims to help their brothers in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Bosnia, and other places?

"At the time, we welcomed the initiative of the Arab Doctors' Association, on the understanding that its aim was to support the Jihad warriors and those struggling for the sake of liberating their homeland from the hands of the occupiers who hold many [different] citizenships. [We understood that this support was to have been provided] through capabilities that only doctors have - that is, caring for the sick and saving the lives of the injured.

"But we were surprised later by the fact that the enthusiasm of the Arab Doctors' Association in sending 'volunteer' doctors to those blood-drenched regions was not for carrying out this sublime mission that only doctors [could carry out], but rather, to urge [those volunteer doctors] to fight, [to participate] in the Jihad war, and to manufacture explosives and to blow up places in which there were a number of 'infidels' and scores of innocent civilians?

"They could not care less that hundreds and thousands of innocent people were killed [in these operations], as long as one or two soldiers from among the invaders and occupiers were killed or injured.

"It suffices to mention in this respect the Egyptian doctor [and bin Laden's deputy] Ayman Al-Zawahiri, who, it must be assumed, took an oath to care for the sick and to save the injured, [but] became the No. 2 terrorist after the No. 1 terrorist Osama bin Laden?"

'I Don't Oppose the Iraqis' Resistance - but It Does Not Need Non-Iraqis'

"I do not oppose the resistance that the Iraqis are waging against the continued occupation of their land? It is clear that the resistance there does not need the participation of those who are not Iraqis?

"I understand that the Egyptian Doctors' Union and the Arab Doctors' Association are calling to establish convoys of doctors and brothers to go to the ruins of Iraq and to work in so-called hospitals - but what I do not understand at all is how the Arab Doctors' Association, which is controlled by the two Egyptian doctors Dr. Abd Al-Mun'im Abu Al-Futuh, the association's director-general, and Dr. Ahmad Omar, the chairman of the Emergency Relief Committee, have published a communiqué similar to the declarations of Jihad, emphasizing that there is no solution but 'victory or martyrdom'..."

'How I Hoped that the Egyptian and Arab Doctors Would Act Like Doctors Throughout the World, Helping Victims of the Asian Earthquake'

"Several days ago, a destructive earthquake struck a great many countries in Asia. The number of killed was about 100,000, and the number of injured was double that, and many times more was the number of those who became refugees, losing their homes and property and most of their relatives and acquaintances in this most terrifying of disasters, which we are following from moment to moment.

"How I hoped that the Egyptian Doctors' Union, which belongs to the Arab Doctors' Association, would act like the doctors' associations in most of the countries of the world, particularly like the [French] Medicins Sans Frontières. Everyone rushed to organize humanitarian medical convoys that hastened, one after the other, to the regions of the terrifying earthquake, in order to provide aid, as best they could, to treat the injured and to save those at death's door, without distinguishing between Muslim, Christian, Jew, Buddhist, and those not belonging to any religion or ethnic group?

"The television channels worldwide constantly showed us the donations from the angels of mercy from all countries of the world, who had volunteered to participate in taking care of the victims of the destructive earthquake in many countries in Asia despite the harsh living conditions there?"

Arab Doctors' Sec.-Gen.: This Was a Divine Punishment For the Muslims' Oppression by Infidels and the U.S.

"[Yet] there was no mention of any role played by the Egyptian Doctors' Union, or by the Arab Doctors' Association, in collecting donations, gathering the doctors waging the Jihad war and transferring them to the regions hit by the disaster and by epidemic, in order to participate in treating the injured and sick, as they did and are still doing in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Bosnia, and Iraq.

"The Arab Doctors' Association secretary-general, Dr. Abd Al-Mun'im Abu Al-Futuh, justified this by saying that this earthquake was divine punishment because of the Muslims' oppression by the infidels, invaders and occupiers, headed by the U.S., and that therefore we have no interest in what had happened! Chairman of the Emergency Relief Committee of the Arab Doctors' Association Dr. Ahmad Omar emphasized that aid to the Asia earthquake victims did not top the agenda of the committee - which was currently engaged in resisting the American invaders and occupiers in Iraq.

"Although I do not respect the reasoning of the Jihad warriors Dr. Abd Al-Mun'im Abu Al-Futuh and his colleague, the 'warrior' Dr. Ahmad Omar, I would like to draw their attention to the fact that the number of victims of the destructive earthquake in the state of Indonesia is no less than 80,000 killed, and that the number of injured is double that - and Indonesia is considered the largest Islamic country on the world's five continents!"

[1] Akhbar Al-Yawm (Egypt), January 1, 2005.

MEMRI bridges "the language gap between the Middle East and the West." To contact them, send an email to memri@memri.org or visit their website: http://www.memri.org/

To Go To Top
Posted by Angela Bertz, January 12, 2005.

I wonder if Abu Mazen has ever heard the well-known ominous expression: The darkest hour is just before the dawn?

He should, in fact, be rather well acquainted with it. On September 5th 1972 just after 4 a.m. eight heavily armed Palestinian terrorists were making their way around the perimeter of the Olympic Village in Munich. These games, heralded as the "Carefree Games" in glaring contrast to 1936, associated as they were with all its Nazi spectacles, was in for a tragic awakening.

These eight figures, silhouetted against the walls, moved stealthily towards gate 25A. The gate was locked but unguarded. They spanned the six-foot high perimeter fence with sports bags heavily laden with Kalashnikov assault rifles and grenades.

Abu Mazen was no doubt sleeping peacefully as this nightmare was unfolding.

Once inside the village the assassins knew exactly where they were heading: 31 Connolly Strasse, the building that housed the Israeli Olympic team. Like Abu Mazen they would have been sleeping soundly. The only person that stirred was Joseph Gottfreund, who was awakened by the sound of scratching coming from the door. He crept cautiously into the communal lounge to investigate. He watched with sleepy eyes as the door opened a few inches revealing the barrel of a Kalashnikov rifle. Within seconds the dreamlike state of this wrestling referee turned to horror as he pounced towards the door with his massive 6'3" 295 pound frame in an attempt to block the intruders.

It was too late.

Within seconds the terrorists had pushed their way in and at gunpoint Joseph was forced to the floor. They moved towards the other rooms and rounded up the rest of the team. The new day had barely dawned before Moshe Weinberg lay dead, killed by a bullet as he tried to knife one of the assailants. Once all the hostages had been taken, their wrists and ankles were tightly bound.

The terrorists were from Black September, an extremist group from within the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Ali Hassan Salameh and Abu Daoud who had orchestrated the siege answered directly to Yasser Arafat. Abu Mazen, long time treasurer of the PLO provided not only the financing for the attack, but his good wishes to go along with it.

By 6:00 a.m. the terrorists made their demands known - the release of 236 prisoners in Israeli jails. Golda Meir, Israel's prime minister at the time, refused to negotiate with terrorists fearing this would mark a precedent for future attacks. By late that afternoon the games were suspended. Abu Mazen and millions around the world watched as yet again Jewish blood was spilled on German soil.

By late afternoon plans to storm the building were called off and the terrorists had requested a jet. At 10:00 p.m. helicopters arrived to transfer the hostages, together with their captors and at 11:30 p.m. they landed close to a decoy plane. A German police crew was on board the plane. For over an hour shots between the terrorists and police snipers were exchanged. At 1:00 a.m., hours before the dawn of a new day, a grenade was thrown into one of the helicopters instantly killing all on board. The second helicopter was sprayed with bullets.

In less than 24 hours 11 Israelis had been murdered and ABC announcer Jim McKay uttered his fateful words, "They're all gone."

Less than two years later, on May 15, 1974, terrorists later identified as members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a faction of the PLO, broke into a school in the Northern Israeli town of Ma'alot. One hundred children from a Safed school were asleep on the floor, tired but cheerful after a long day hiking. They ranged in age from 14-16. Within minutes the terrorists had killed a security guard and some of the children. Some of the terrified students managed to escape by jumping out a window. The rest were held hostage while the terrorists again tried to negotiate for the release of prisoners.

The following day the Israeli Parliament met in an emergency session. Golda Meir said during the incident that one does not make politics on the backs of one's children.

By late that afternoon an elite Israeli army unit stormed the building. All the hostage-takers were killed. It is believed that the terrorists had detonated grenades and fired shots, killing many more of the children and some of the teachers.

The total number of people killed, including those killed at random the night before as the terrorists made their way to the school was 26. Twenty-one of the dead were children. Nearly 70 more had been wounded.

Abu Mazen who was born in Safed had tried to visit the city in the 1990's. While he was on his way many of the cities residents campaigned strongly against the visit and at the last minute the trip was diverted to Haifa where he was met with a rather more sympathetic ear in the shape of Amram Mitzna.

One of the survivors of the massacre is Safed Mayor, Yishai Maimon. He had been an 11th grade student at the time. To this day he can still vividly recall the screams of the hapless children and the gunshots. The mayor asserts that the person responsible for sending the murderers to Ma'alot was Abu Mazen. He went on to say that "The man is a murderer with Jewish blood on his hands and hides under the guise of a peddler of peace - he is worse than Arafat." Abu Mazen has yet again expressed a desire to visit the town of his birth. The Mayor, still with bitter memories of that brutal day 31 years ago, swears he will physically prevent that from ever happening.

Abu Mazen, the stylishly dressed successor, and for 40 years lackey to Yasser Arafat, has the world spellbound.

If anyone in their right mind thinks this is the dawning of a new era then let them look back to that Munich dawn of September 1972. Angela Bertz made aliyah from England. She can be contacted at angela03@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Elan Journo, January 12, 2005.

Fighting a compassionate war is immoral; it is costing the lives of American soldiers in Iraq and emboldening our enemies throughout the Islamic world.

The horrific suicide bombing in December of a U.S. mess tent near Mosul and the assassination on Jan. 10 of the deputy chief of Baghdad police--the second Iraqi official murdered in five days--are further indications that the war in Iraq is worsening. Things are going badly not because, as some claim, the United States is arrogant and lacking in humility--but because it is self-effacing and compassionate.

The Bush Administration's war in Iraq embraces compassion instead of the rational goal of victory. Such an immoral approach to war wantonly sacrifices the lives of soldiers and emboldens our enemies throughout the Middle East to mount further attacks against us.

Regardless of whether the Iraqi dictatorship should have been our initial target in the war against totalitarian Islam, when in the nation's defense a President sends troops to war, morally he must resolve to soundly defeat the enemy while safeguarding our forces and citizens. But America's attention has been diverted to rebuilding Iraqi hospitals, schools, roads and sewers, and on currying favor with the locals (some U.S. soldiers were even ordered to grow moustaches in token of their respect for Iraqi culture, others are now given cultural sensitivity courses before arriving in Iraq). Since the war began, Islamic militants and Saddam loyalists have carried out random abductions, devastating ambushes, and catastrophic bombings throughout the country. That attacks on U.S. forces (including those engaged in reconstruction efforts) have gone unpunished has emboldened the enemy.

Early and stark evidence of the enemy's growing audacity came in March 2004 with the grisly murder and mutilation of four American contractors. Following the attack, U.S. forces entered the city of Fallujah vowing to capture the murderers and punish the town that supports them. But such resolve was supplanted by compassion.

In the midst of the fighting the United States called a unilateral ceasefire to allow humanitarian aid in and to enable the other side to collect and bury its dead. The so-called truce benefited only the enemy. The Iraqis, as one soldier told the Associated Press, were "absolutely taking advantage" of the situation, regrouping and mounting sporadic attacks: as another soldier aptly noted, "It is hard to have a cease-fire when they maneuver against us, they fire at us." As the siege wore on, the goal of capturing the murderers quietly faded--and the enemy's confidence swelled.

Neither the later offensive on Fallujah in November nor any of the subsequent incursions have quelled the insurgents: witness the unending string of car bombings and (road-side) ambushes. Why?

Because in Fallujah and throughout this war the military (under orders from Washington) has been purposely treading lightly. Soldiers have strict orders to avoid the risk of killing civilians--many of whom aid or are themselves militants--even at the cost of imperiling their own lives. Mosques, which have served as hideouts for terrorists, are kept off the list of allowed targets. Military operations have been timed to avoid alienating Muslim pilgrims on holy days.

There is no shortage of aggressors lusting for American blood, and they grow bolder with each display of American compassion.

Consider the shameful tenderness shown toward the Islamic cleric Moktadr al-Sadr, who aspires to be the dictator of an Iranian-style theocracy in Iraq. An admirer of the 9/11 hijackers, Sadr has amassed an armed militia of 10,000 men (right under the noses of our military), and demanded that Coalition forces leave Iraq. On the run for the murder of another cleric, he took refuge with his militia in the holy city of Najaf, which has been surrounded by U.S. troops. Rather than attacking, however, the United States agreed to negotiate. It is as absurd to negotiate with and trust the word of a villain such as Sadr as it would have been to negotiate with Nazis bent on wiping out Allied forces in World War II. It is shockingly dangerous that the United States allowed a mediator from Iran--part of the "Axis of Evil" and Sadr's ideological ally--to assist in the negotiations.

In the end Sadr was allowed to walk away along with his armed militia; his agreement to disarm them has--predictably--gone unfulfilled.

For the enemies of America, Iraq is like a laboratory where they are testing our mettle, with mounting ferocity. The negotiations with Sadr; the half-hearted raids on Fallujah; our timid response to daily insurrections throughout Iraq; America's outrageously deferential treatment of its enemies--all of these instances of moral weakness reinforce the view of bin Laden and his ilk that America will appease those who seek its destruction.

If we continue to confess doubts about our moral right to defend ourselves, it will only be a matter of time before Islamic militants bring suicide-bombings and mass murder (again) to the streets of the United States.

Though Washington may be blinded by the longing to buy the love of Iraqis, our servicemen know all too well that (as one put it): "When you go to fight, it's time to shoot--not to make friends with people." In its might and courage our military is unequaled; it is the moral responsibility of Washington to issue battle plans that will properly "shock and awe" the enemy. Eschewing self-interest in the name of compassion is immoral. The result is self-destruction.

Elan Journo is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (www.aynrand.org), in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead." Send reactions to reaction@aynrand.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 12, 2005.

1. Just when you think that the Sharon government could not possibly get any more Orwellian, along comes the alliance of convenience this week between the Likud, Jewish Marxists, and Arab fascists.


Sharon presented his new coalition, based on the two large parties of Oslo appeasement, the Labor Party and the Likud, plus a small ultra-Orthodox religious party, United Torah Judaism. UTJ's spiritual guru is a Rabbi who is famous for his cynicism about Israeli politics. He made a point of getting a man selected for Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi that almost no one thought was qualified, who has been involved in scandal, and it is commonly believed that the head of UTJ pushed this candidate to show his own contempt for the whole institution of the "Chief Rabbi". Similarly, this week he showed his contempt for Israeli politics by ordering his minions to join the appeasers in exchange for a pot of porridge - filled with cash. Interestingly, his own party may be splitting because many members are opposed to the sell-out.

But the more important twist was the rebellion by a large segment of the Likud against Sharon's impression of the other Mitznah. Led by Uzi Landau and a few other politicians of conscience and principles, people who put national survival ahead of kissing Sharon's posterior, Sharon did not have enough voted from his Likud rank and file to save his Labor-Likud-UTJ coalition from a vote of no confidence.

So Sharon struck a last minute deal with the semi-Marxist Yachad party and with one of the Arab fascist parties with representation in the parliament. Now Yachad is the new name for the merger of Meretz with Yossi Beilin and a few of his ex-Labor sandbox playmates. It is an extremist Far Leftist party. It granted Sharon's people backup in the parliament because Sharon is currently attempting to implement Beilin's agenda. Those who laughed when I said a few weeks ago that Defense Minister Beilin in the Sharon government is not far off may not be laughing this week.

Officially, Sharon claimed he "paid" nothing at all for the parliamentary rescue of his unstable collapsing government coalition, and the Yachad Marxies and the Arab fascists voting to save his tussik did so out of sympathy for his "peace plan". Except that 24 hours later we learn that - entirely by coincidence of course - the group of Israeli Arab Islamist fundamentalists on trial for treason will be released with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. These are heads of the "Islamic Movement", which has ties to Hamas, and is based largely in the Israeli Arab town of Umm al-Fahm. It must be a matter of incredible coincidence that this wrist-slap deal was revealed hours after Sharon's Rescue", and now the only real question is, to whom was this the payoff in exchange for their parliamentary support? To the Marxists or to the Islamofascists?

2. Meanwhile, the headline in Haaretz on the first page of the news section is "Ethiopian Jews in Israel Dream about Harlem". The front page piece tries to paint the Ethiopian Jews as disgruntled black power radicals seeking to imitate US black militants and Harlem culture. Except this is yet another gross fabrication by the bimbo extremists at Haaretz. I doubt that a single Ethiopian Jew has left Israel to live in Harlem and every indication is that they are militant Zionists, not militant Afrocentrists. Should anyone still suffer from the delusion that Haaretz is a newspaper, rather than an anti-Israel propaganda organ and the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew, self-delude no longer!

3. I would like to ask for your assistance. As you know, a leftist extremist Israeli woman named Tali Fahima is being indicted for treason and for assisting terrorists and "aiding the enemy in time of war". She assisted her terrorist "lover" from Jenin to prepare terrorist atrocities.

Now, on the books in Israel is an interesting little clause. It turns out that Israeli law says that assisting the enemy in time of war is a capital offense. Naturally, no traitors assisting the enemy in time of war have ever been given capital punishment in Israel. If traitors assisting the enemy in time of war were executed in Israel, who would be left to teach in the universities?

But the absence of application of this law has not eliminated the clause from the law books. The Attorney General has indicated he does not plan to seek the death penalty for Sistuh Tali Fahima, but that is not a reason for us to give up hope.

We should urge him and the Minister of Justice to seek the death penalty! Especially now that Tommy Lapid is not Justice Minister and longer, since his party quit the government coalition. The new Minsiter of Justice is from the Likud.

Write to Ms. Tzipi Livni, Minister of Justice (she is from the Likud) and also to Mr. Mani Mazuz, Legal Advisor to the Government, and DEMAND that the death penalty be sought for Tali Fahima.

Ministry of Justice
29 Salah a-Din St. Jerusalem 91490 Israel
Fax: 972-2-6466357
Website: http://www.justice.gov.il/MOJHeb/PniyotHazibor/DafKesher.htm
The Ministry's home page is at http://www.justice.gov.il/mojHeb/

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Hebron Community, January 12, 2005.

On Tu Bishvat We Shall All Plant and Deepen Our Roots in Gush Katif.

Just enter GKOS, Gush Katif's online shopping site at: TU B'SHVAT PLANTING

Our shop stocks a broad selection of seedlings from the Gush Katif nurseries, for planting in houses, yards, kindergartens, schools and IDF bases in Gush Katif.

You Buy Gush Katif seedlings!
And we Plant them in Gush Katif!

The seedlings you buy will be planted in your name by the children of Gush Katif, their families and soldiers of the IDF in honor of Tu Bishvat.

Every buyer will receive a certificate thanking him or her for their contribution to katif.net and for purchasing seedlings and strengthening the settlements of Gush Katif.

Moti Sender, Katif.net
Tel.: 08-6847262 Fax: 08-6846397

Leading personalities call on the public to participate in the planting:
Reuven Rivlin,
Speaker of the Knesset
Rabbi Gabi Kadosh, Rabbi of Ganei-Tal
Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, Rabbi of Beth-El and head of the
Ateret Kohanim Yeshiva

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 12, 2005.

Essentially what is being discussed is massive repression of opponent to the Sharon dictatorship. The very fact that we have gotten to this point is a measure of how desperate the gangsters have become. Those fighting them must both increase the pressure yet keep in mind Sharon's desperation. Desperate gangsters can be very dangerous.

This article was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Direct of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) and it is called "IDF: Administrative Detention of Disengagement Opponents Impossible Due Lack of Evidence." It comes from today's IMRA and is archived at http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=23638 Dr.Lerner can be contacted by email at imra@netvision.net.il and at the IMRA website: http://www.imra.org.il

Israel Radio reports this morning that according to a "senior IDF officer" none of the disengagement opponents can be detained under administrative detention because of lack of evidence.

Though under administrative detention it is possible to keep people imprisoned indefinitely without ever advising them why they are being incarcerated (on the grounds that the information is classified), security authorities do have to show information to a judge. And while, traditionally, the information provided to the judges has been known to be fairly shallow (intelligence reports based on hearsay), even this information is apparently not available and thus their detention would not stand up in court.

The operative meaning of the report, thus, is that all of the various remarks about various possible threats posed by disengagement opponents are based on speculation on the part of Israeli security authorities as to what they think opponents will do - rather than what any of these opponents actually said to anyone. /font>

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, January 12, 2005.

This comes from Alyson Taylor.

What if AP wrote the story like this? Would anyone say anything? "Canadian Militants Attack American Towns"

Montreal, Quebec - Canadian militants in Montreal launced a barrage of homemade rockets and mortar rounds at American towns and homes Tuesday hours after a newly elected Prime Minister Paul Martin extended his hand in Peace to America.

The Militants fired five mortar rounds at homes, shattering the windows of a crowded church during prayers nearby an american spokesman said. No one was injured.

A homemade rocket also landed in the town of Buffalo. No one was injured in the attack but recue services reported that several vehicles and buildings were damaged.

The United States has demanded that the Canadians halt the mortar and rocket fire, and Paul Martin has critized the tactic as inneffective and damaging to the Canadians.

The militants have stept up the rocket fire in recent weeks, although there were no attacks during Sunday's Prime Minister's elections.

Late Monday, Martin made a public call for renewing peace negotiations which radical Islamic militants and anti American radicals have opposed.

This is the actual story from the Associated Press:
"Palestinian Militants Attack Jewish Towns," AP, January 11, 2005.

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip (news - web sites) launched a barrage of homemade rockets and mortar rounds at Jewish towns and settlements Tuesday, hours after newly elected Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas extended his hand in peace to Israel.

The militants fired five mortar bombs at Jewish settlements, shattering the windows of a crowded synagogue during morning prayers, a settler spokesman said. No one was injured. A homemade rocket also landed in the Israeli town of Sderot. No one was injured in the attack, but rescue services reported that several buildings and cars were damaged. Israel has long demanded that the Palestinians halt the mortar and rocket fire, and Abbas has criticized the tactic as ineffective and damaging to the Palestinians. The militants have stepped up the rocket fire in recent weeks, although there were no attacks during Sunday's presidential election. Late Monday, Abbas made a public call for renewing peace negotiations, which Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants oppose.

Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 12, 2005.


The suspense is over. Abu Mazen won the P.A. election. It was very democratically run. The Arabs did the Americans, whose motto is, "One man, one vote," one better. In the Arab election, they had one man, two votes. Yes, twice as democratic!

You see, the P.A. employed the same method as in Afghanistan's election, after the Afghanis discovered that the indelible ink, used to prevent someone from voting twice, can be washed off after a couple of hours. According to some P.A. Arabs, members of Fatah, whose candidate was Abu Mazen, and who had voted for him in the afternoon, returned to vote again in the evening, probably for him, again. Thus emerged Abu Mazen's "mandate."

The P.A. Legislative Council felt that the enrollment by 1.1 million voters would not afford sufficient legitimacy to the election. It decided to add 650,000 names. Arabs in the P.A. and abroad claim that the supplementary list includes thousands of foreigners and deceased. (Electioneering among the deceased was a waste of money, because those voters long ago had made up their minds.) The augmented numbers of ballots in an otherwise lightly attended election was the basis for a statement by Pres. Bush about being "heartened by today's strong turnout." He was pleased with this indication of a democratic start to a "legitimate" election. (Uh oh, is that same kind of judgment involved in his re-election, in Ohio, and his first election, in Florida?)

Although Abu Mazen has long experience at terrorism, apparently he is not skilled in running an Arab dictatorship. He got only 60-70% of the vote, even after those special election features we described. As one local Arab explained, there is no reason to believe that the corruption will end.

Gauge how earnest Abu Mazen's is to fulfill erstwhile Western hopes that he would fight terrorism by his victory speech. In it, he pledged to work for the release of all P.A. terrorists in Israeli jails and to protect those whom Israel still is seeking (Caroline Glick, NY Sun, 1/10, p.1). Note, he said that after he no longer needed their votes. He is the terrorists' candidate. But then, weren't they all? Who thinks he will crack down on terrorism and make peace? As for his legitimacy, it doesn't depend on the number of voters but on the world's wish to anoint any Arab who comes forth, to get concessions from Israel.

I hope he proves more corrupt than Arafat. Let him steal EU and US aid and endow his supporters for generations! It would be worse for Israel and for ultimate justice and peace if he builds a strong P.A. economy and a popular regime. Imagine if he actually combined the power of democracy with the viciousness of jihad.


Did the US or Israel intend to attack Iranian nuclear facilities? Instead of acting, the US and Israel waited and reporters talked. Iran listened. As a result, Iran has suspended much of its regular air force activity, to focus on defending the nuclear facilities. As Iran remarked, attacking them won't be easy (IMRA, 1223).


The US has traced a number of Chinese military contracts to Israel. It demands that Israel cancel those contracts (IMRA, 12/23).

The US has interfered in the Israeli military industry before, primarily to reduce competition from it. This time, I do not sympathize with Israel. Israel should not be assisting an anti-Western bidder for world domination. Apparently Israel thought it could conduct business clandestinely. It thought wrong. It should have realized it could not conceal its arms business from a superpower. Since it usually gives in to US demands, it would be better advised not to sign such contracts in the first place.


As the controversy over Columbia U. treatment of Jews by Arabist professors heated up, and investigations began, NYCLU warned people not to accept allegations against the University at "face value." There have been calls both for investigating and for firing professors who mistreat Jewish students and who abuse their academic podiums to demand regimentation in views. NYCLU director Donna Lieberman urged Columbia not to allow outside critics to "interfere with academic freedom." The complaints were taken too seriously, according to NYCLU, because the Arab-Israel conflict was involved.

Complainants retorted that involvement of the Arab-Israel conflict does not make complaints frivolous, and antisemitism is not educational (Jacob Gershman, NY Sun, 12/28, p.3).

NYCLU's admonition seems premature and prejudicial. The problem does involve academic freedom, but its starting point is the freedom of students to express opinions free from professorial coercion, as by lowering of grades over opinions, and abuse, as by the alleged screaming at students for being an IDF veteran or a Jew. It also is one of antisemitism. Those ways have no place on campus.

Yes, reaction to the apparent abuses at Columbia U. could chill professors' academic freedom. The corrective measures needed should not be a test of professors' views so as to require approval of Israeli policies. That is what the professors claim is happening, but Arabs pretend that they merely disapprove of some Israeli policies, when what they really are doing is practicing jihad to destroy Israel altogether, by supporting the war on it. The correctives are: (1) Enforce an end to coercing and abusing students; (2) Require academic integrity by professors, not the use of their positions to pursue jihad by false propaganda; and (3) Hire and promote based on academic credentials and on performance.

Teachers and TV networks criticized for censorship often claim to be the victims when criticized for abuse of power. In this issue, the Arab professors do not have a viewpoint, they lie in support of their war on our freedom. We should not let them cite our notions of democratic debate as cover for their subversion of our democracy. This is war, not legitimate pluralism, which is among democrats. The war is one of Islamist totalitarians against the West. The enemy does not belong at American universities.


The third annual UNO report by the Arab Human Development Center is about to come out. This report by Arab intellectuals blames Arab extremism and anti-Americanism on the policies of the US, Israel, and Arab states. The US has been cutting funding for the Center. It claims that its policies promote democracy now. The Arabs counter-claim that the US rejects any criticism and that it is wrong to call PM Sharon a man of peace, as the US would.

IMRA suggests that the US cease funding such efforts altogether (IMRA, 12/23).

IMRA is right. Why not go further, and switch US funding from the UNO to a league of democracies?

Arab culture has a phobia about criticism of it. It prefers to blame outsiders for most of its problems. Arab extremism arises from Islam, not from US abuses. The US has supported some dictatorships, and may be think-skinned about admitting its wrongdoing, but is faults are minor compared with the Muslim Arabs. Most of the lattre are avid aggressors and rabid bigots.

Sharon did not start the war, the Arabs did. Like all Israelis, he would prefer peace.


Peace Now has urged Israeli soldiers not to serve in Yesha in defense against Arab terrorists seeking to attack Jewish civilians. Peace Now called such service a wrongdoing.

Having heard that some Israeli soldiers are refusing to serve in Gaza to pull Jewish residents out of their homes, to make way for Arab terrorists, Peace Now is urging Israelis to volunteer to serve in their place. In other words, defense against terrorists is wrong, but ethnic cleansing of Jews is right. Such is the standard of Peace Now. What does it really want? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/23, e-mail.


This week and last week, Israeli troops at a checkpoint discovered some bombs that Arabs were attempting to smuggle past. The World Bank urges Israel to abandon its checkpoints (Arutz-7, 12/23). What does the Bank really want?


An Israeli military commander with extensive security experience in the territories drew some lessons from his tour. He said that the security fence must be kept operational. Rules of engagement should allow Israeli troops to fire upon people approaching the fence, where terrorists try to cross into Israel dozens of times a month. In Judea-Samaria, there is a one-kilometer buffer zone enabling the troops a clear line of fire. Arab farmers must not be allowed to cultivate land right up to the fence, or (because of their largely collective guilt) many would conceal attempts to sabotage it and let terrorists cross past it or fire over it. Trees blocking a clear view must be pruned or removed. (Then human rights groups accuse Israel of wantonly uprooting trees, but accuse the terrorists of nothing.)

Gaza is rather small to afford a buffer zone. It was Sadat who demanded that the Town of Rafiah be divided between Egypt and Israel, leaving absolutely no buffer zone. Now that town is the focus of tunnels dug from the Egyptian side into the Israeli side (IMRA, 12/23). Israel should turn its side into a buffer zone or trade land with Egypt.


The Koran makes both positive and negative statements about the Jewish people. The P.A. indoctrinates youngsters in only the negative statements (IMRA, 12/23) that are false stereotyping and have no bearing at all on present-day Jewry but for Islamic racism that asserts inheritable propensity for evil.

Iranian TV dramatizes for its children Israelis kidnapping Palestinian Arabs and stealing their eyes and other organs (IMRA, 12/23).

Recently we reported a Saudi claim that in Iraq, the US steals the internal organs of captured Iraqi prisoners. The P.A. media claims that Israel poisons the Arabs. Is no slander too low for the Muslims to indulge in, and, in contemporary times, only Muslims?


The government of Iraq has confronted Syria with evidence that it is directing or assisting the insurgency in Iraq. "The evidence includes photographs of Syrian officials taken from Iraqi fighters captured during the offensive against Fallujah last month. US Marines in Fallujah also found a hand-held global-positioning system receiver with waypoints originating in western Syria and the names of four Syrians in a list of 27 foreign fighters contained in a ledger."

The Iraq exiles living in luxury in Syria think the conclusion unfair to Syria. They assert that more Iraqi exiles live in Jordan (IMRA, 12/23). Implication: they are guilty but their comrades a few miles away are capable of directing more violence.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 12, 2005.

Abu Mazin is now the elected head of the Palestinian movement but he is far from being its leader.

What is indeed striking, behind all the international hoopla, is how little power he actually possesses. The focus has been mainly on Abu Mazin's personal views and style, a welcome contrast to those of his predecessor, Yasir Arafat.

The irony, however, is that while Arafat had tremendous power to pursue a radical program, Abu Mazin has so little leverage in pursuing a somewhat less extreme set of goals.

What is the difference between Arafat and Abu Mazin in terms of their political stances? Abu Mazin is more pragmatic in the sense that he takes the existing balance of forces and the costs of militancy far more seriously than did Arafat. In this sense, Abu Mazin knows that the war launched by Arafat in 2000 has been disastrous for the Palestinians. It is easier for Abu Mazin to envision a ceasefire with Israel and even an ultimate peace agreement.

But even on his own terms, Abu Mazin is an ideologue. The demand that any acceptable peace agreement permit all Palestinian refugees to live in Israel is very close to his heart. Such an outcome, of course, would bring even more massive violence and is designed to destroy Israel. It is a sign that the Palestinian leadership is not ready for real peace with Israel, whatever the rhetoric directed to the West. Thus, there are serious problems even with Abu Mazin's views, though they also represent some progress.

Yet the structural factor is even more important in understanding Abu Mazin's direction. He has little or no power over his own movement, Fatah, which is the dominant force in Palestinian politics. It is no accident that Faruq Qaddumi, a hardliner who openly says that Fatah does not accept Israel's existence and opposed even the Oslo peace process, heads the organization. Abu Mazin has no charisma, no organized base of support, and little backing among the group's leadership.

There is probably a consensus among Palestinians to say they will stop incitement, accept a ceasefire, and negotiate for a smooth turnover of Gaza, but there are important reasons to believe that they cannot or will not implement such promises.

As for incitement, for example, there are no longer -- for how long? -- programs urging Palestinians to kill Israelis and young people to become martyrs right now. But there continue to be many messages declaring Israel as an illegitimate state which the Palestinians will destroy in the future. After one moderate sermon--in which the cleric read from a script in Abu Mazin's presence--the texts have gone back to the extremist ones, including anti-American incitement.

Regarding a ceasefire and a stop to terrorism, Abu Mazin's statements, widely reported in the West, calling for an end to violence do not appear in the Palestinian media that he controls. Both Hamas and the al-Aqsa Arafat Brigades, part of his own Fatah group, say they will continue terrorism. Abu Mazin is not going to use violence to make them stop. What will he do if they ignore his commands?

The same type of problem applies in the Gaza Strip. Abu Mazin might negotiate a deal with Israel for a turnover, but will he be able to govern afterward? If Hamas and other extremist groups take over whole areas is he going to confront them? Will he use force to stop cross-border attacks? Presumably, he will do nothing to stop arms' smuggling from Egypt. This could mean the continued firing of rockets against Israeli towns and inevitable Israeli retaliatory raids.

There will have to be some movement on these three issues--incitement, terrorism, Gaza--before there is any likelihood of serious comprehensive negotiations.

Unfortunately, what is most likely to happen is that Abu Mazin will be a moderate front man for the hardliners in Fatah. He will say the right things and then demand Western help and Israeli concessions.

This does not mean the situation will not improve. A lower level of violence will benefit everyone and a turnover of the Gaza Strip would give the Palestinians a chance to show their intentions. But this would constitute a return to the better days of the 1990s more than any dramatic progress toward a comprehensive peace.

At the same time, the election should not obscure the fact that the Palestinian movement is in serious trouble. The splits can be papered over but only as long as policy and ideology remain unchanged. In other words, as long as Abu Mazin does little or nothing, Hamas, the al-Aqsa Brigades, the security forces, and the Fatah hierarchy will do whatever they want while insisting they support his leadership. Yet if he does not make big changes how will Palestinians, or Israelis for that matter, be much better off?

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" (Oxford University Press, 2003). and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2004).

To Go To Top
Posted by Yisrael and Batya Medad, January 11, 2005.

This is entitled "IDF official: Pullout to expose 46 Negev towns to rocket fire," and was written by Gideon Alon, Haaretz Correspondent. It is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/525908.html

[Editor's note: Another reader, Yoran Shifftan, commented that the Negev plan was quintessential Chelm. When people fell through the hole in the bridge, the Chelm folk didn't repair the bridge, they built a hospital under the bridge. Contrast the problems a bad solution - the Gaza withdrawal - generates to 1967, when, in one stroke all the problems of the infiltrators, strategic depth, space for aircraft to fly and much more were solved.]

The implementation of the disengagement plan - which involves an Israeli pullout from the entire Gaza Strip - will leave 46 western Negev communities exposed to Qassam rocket fire, a Home Front Command official told the Knesset Interior Committee on Tuesday.

The committee decided to ask the government to provide NIS 340 million immediately to fund a Home Front Command plan to protect communities in the Negev that are located seven kilometers from the border with the Gaza Strip.

Colonel Uzi Buchbinder, head of the Home Front Command's civil defense department, told the committee that those communities face the threats of both rocket fire and infiltration.

The plan would protect schools and kindergartens and establish an early-warning system to alert residents to an impending Qassam rocket attack. Such a system has recently been set up in the western Negev town of Sderot, which has been the main target of Qassam attacks so far.

The committee also called on the government to prepare to provide funding and defend communities located up to 20 kilometers from Gaza and the West Bank city of Jenin.

Yisrael and Batya Medad live in Shiloh.

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 11, 2005.

At first I thought Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres were merely non-Jewish Jews who simply wanted to turn Israel into a secular nation. Now I see something more malevolent. We are informed that Sharon is considering the elimination of observant-Orthodox Jews from all units in the military. In brief, any soldier who believes in G-d is to be viewed as a danger to the Sharon-Peres regime.

The planned withdrawal of 10,000 Jewish residents from Gaza and Samaria is faced with massive resistance within the IDF (Israel Defense Force), especially from Orthodox Jewish officers and soldiers. Over 5000 people have so far signed a petition that they will not participate in any military operation to expel Israelis from their homes. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz is expected to present a series of recommendations in 2 weeks by which time the decision-making process will have been formulated.(1)

A high percentage of soldiers in the IDF are observant but, it is known that there is a glass ceiling that keeps the number of observant officers from the very highest commands very low.

Keep in mind that some of the best officers and fighting soldiers in the elite combat units have been Orthodox Jews. Published results after years of war showed that soldiers who believe in G-d performed with greater heroism on the battlefield than others. They were less likely to retreat and more likely to move forward in the face of overwhelming opposition. Sharon is threatening to cease funding and/or to close the hesder yeshivas where students study Torah and serve in the IDF over a 5 year period. (1)

These are the people who Sharon wants to eliminate from Israel's fighting forces. Sharon and Peres wish to evacuate observant Jews from the territories and, therefore, needs their absence from the military. We are talking about a coup de government to take over all control of the country.

This is not just Herod inviting in the Romans to keep his throne. This was a Jew who was committed to capturing the nation by subduing its Jews. We all thought that the Arabs in linkage with nations who were tied to Arab oil were the greatest danger Israel faced.

We were wrong.

We have been warned that the greatest danger to the nation and to Jews would come from within -and so it has. Sharon, like all dictators, wants his own army, loyal to him and not to the greater interests of the nation. Everything that Sharon has done to run the government has followed the guidelines of a perfidious dictator. Like any tyrant, he has bludgeoned anyone who dare to disagree with him. He has linked up with other foreign powers which means he does not represent Israel but foreign interests.

Sharon has recognized that the Army is turning against him. It is not only observant/Orthodox soldiers but, all other soldiers, including officers. All the officers to almost the highest rank do not believe in his 'Disengagement' plans. I say 'almost' because Defense Minister Gen. (Ret.) Shaul Mofaz is immersed in his political future and has decided to go along with Sharon's plans - even though he does not agree with them.

As mentioned earlier, it is common knowledge that the higher echelon of Generals, in synch with the government, has implemented a glass ceiling to prevent observant Jewish soldiers from becoming officers or generals. They are allowed to rise so far and no farther. They do recognize that the most motivated officers and the best leaders of the men are the observant Jewish officers that have been promoted. Thus, they are needed for the fighting battalions.

But, something else is filtering into the general army, both among the officers and the soldiers. It may have started with the Orthodox soldiers refusing to eject fellow Jews from their homes and their Land. They are slowly becoming aware that Sharon's eviction plans for Gaza first with the rest of Judea and Samaria next, will put well-armed Arab Muslim Terrorists very close to their own cities and homes.

The officers and men have noticed the increased launching of Kassem Rockets and mortars into Israeli cities. The improved Kassem Rocket, called the "Arafat" can fly 11 milies * 18 KM) which means that when (or if) Sharon succeeds in emptying the West Bank and Gaza (YESHA) of Jews, the rockets can reach Tel Aviv, Beer Sheba, Jerusalem, Ben Gurion Airport and all the small towns in between.

Most of Israel's cities and population will be within easy range of Arab Muslim Palestinian rockets, mortars and missiles. While Israel's non-military civilians can be misled, soldiers are more aware and cannot be so tricked by Sharon's vague promises of "peace in his time".

The men in the IDF (Israel Defense Force), whether religious or not, now understand that Sharon is bringing the Terrorists close to their own homes. It may have started with the religiously aware soldiers but, now the entire Army knows that they too are at risk in their homes and cities.

So, Mr. Sharon, what else will you plan for the Orthodox settlers? Will you (or have you already) create Special Units to deal with the Jews as did Hitler? Will they be like the SS/Gestapo to guard those observant Jews? Where will you lock them up? Will you have a special propaganda unit, like Goebbels, to ensure that your government is not challenged as illegitimate..

Sharon, you have fired anyone in your Cabinet who disagrees with your policy. You have threatened or bribed anyone in your Likud Party who disagrees with you. Now you are planning to remove all observant Jews from the Army because they disagree with your plans to bring the enemy close up to all of Israel's borders.

For those, like myself, who remember Sharon as a great hero and warrior and could not believe that he would turn against us - just forget the past. Sharon has morphed into a different creature, something we do not know or understand. He keeps that same ruthless ego-driven personality that made him the effective warrior he once was. But, now he has turned this drive against his own Jewish people and the Jewish nation.

Perhaps this aberrant behavior was always there but, now something has snapped. If it is a form of dementia, mixed with the warrior personality then we have a Golem gone wild.

But, there are more dots to connect...so help me out:

1. We have a Prime Minister ready to divide the nation, turn vital territory over to a group of irredentist Terrorists. Why?

2. Just published in the Washington Times: A Pentagon official was fired for releasing information about U.S. satellite photos, showing Russian trucks and Special Forces transporting weapons from Iraq before the American invasion in March. Those weapons went to Syria. If they had been conventional weapons, there would have been no need to sneak them out. Therefore, they were likely WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) - perhaps of Russian origin.

3. Questions: Why did not President Bush challenge Russia's President Putin? Why aren't we in Syria digging out the WMD? Why is Bush pressuring Sharon into a suicide mission and what does Bush get from the Saudis for Sharon's participation.

Perhaps these parts do not fit together or they do and we don't have it right.

4. Where does getting rid of Jews in the Army fit in? Would they be the first to recognize betrayal and fight it?

5. Sharon has been told by his own military numerous times that evacuating Jews and the military would produce a grave danger to cities inside of Israel which has already happened with the non-ceasing suicide bombings of buses, restaurants, road ambushes with guns and fire-bombs, etc. More recently, Avi Dicter of the Shin Bet has publicly stated that Gaza will produce the same danger as Barak's retreat from Lebanon, leaving a vacuum which was quickly filled with Terrorists.

Sharon has literally told these experts to "Shut Up!" and only he will make the decisions.

Here again, why is Sharon going against all advise from his own Military and Intelligence? What has he been promised by President Bush? Doesn't he know that America has often left their Allies because of greater interests - mostly economic?

C'mon Jews, use that intuitive brilliance the world always blames us for.

6. There seems to be a bigger plan for which Israel has been recruited as a small player...probably an expendable player but, Sharon doesn't know it or he has consciously decided to sacrifice Israel anyway.

7. I would guess that there are other players in this "New World Order" first announced by President George Herbert Walker Bush. Clearly, the European Union, Russia and China have a vital interest. All are game-planning on available energy resources at least 500 years into the future. This requires cooperation by Arab oil nations. Here again, Israel is seen as a spoiler of these interests simply because Islamists swear on their Koran to keep attacking the Jews.

8. Ariel Sharon seems to be the reincarnation of the tyrant Herod and, among others, allowed the pagan Arabs to despoil the Jewish Temple of Solomon to insure that Jews had no rallying center. Sharon, Peres and those called "The Left" never understood that the Temple was inscribed in the soul of every Jew. The bricks and mortar of the Temple were important but, when they were destroyed by the Romans, the Jews carried on with their Judaism no matter where they were. We are still here, speaking our ancient language, praying our ancient prayers, longing for our ancient homeland, long after the Hitlers, Romans, Islamists are (or will be) gone. And we will be here long after those attacking us are rotting in the dust of the nation they hate.

There is more. I haven't listed it all - yet, because it doesn't make sense - yet. So, my dear Jewish Chevra, let those imaginative genes loose and let us find out who is behind this "New World Order" B.S. and exactly what they expect to get out of this planet and Israel..


1. "Israeli Gov't Mulls Curtailing Orthodox Participation In IDF," by Jewish Press Israel correspondent Avraham Shmuel Lewin & MENL (Mid East News Line) Editor Steve Rodan in the Jewish Press, January 7, 2005.

Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 11, 2005.
This was written by Rael Jean Isaac, editor of MidEast Outpost (www.mideastoutpost.com/). This article is from the December 31, 2004 issue.

On December 10, the Jewish Community Relations Council, the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League jointly sponsored a luncheon whose guest speaker was Sari Nusseibeh, the Arafat-appointed head of Al Quds University and a prominent defamer of Israel.

They did this despite the pleas of Yitzhak and Rivka Markus, who had sent a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council describing how Nusseibah on June 29, 2002 had appeared on Al Jazeera with the mother of the suicide bomber who had murdered their son Asher and four of his friends, students at Atzmonah Yeshivah. On the program Nusseibeh had said: "What comes to mind when I hear my sister Uhm Nidal speak is the verse in the Koran which proclaims that 'The Garden of Eden has been designed for these mothers.' All the more honor goes to every Palestinian mother, to every fighter and to all those women who fight for the Palestinian Jihad in our land." They conclude their letter: "I don't understand how our Jewish brothers and our Jewish sisters in Boston can honor a person who endorses and praises those who murder our children."

Disgracefully, the Jewish organizations went right ahead, with one of the organizers dismissing what the Marcuses wrote concerning Nusseibeh's statements on Al Jazeera as "disinformation." Apparently she was content with Nusseibeh's assurances and did not want to be bothered with the awkward reality that the Al Jazeera broadcast had been documented in transcripts and translated from the Arabic.

Here are some additional facts about Nusseibeh which mainstream Jewish organizations would prefer not to hear. The following comes from an article in the Israeli daily Yediot Achronot on August 20, 2002 by Yoram Ettinger (formerly Israeli consul in Texas).

"In a January 21, 2001 letter to Saddam Hussein, Nusseibeh wrote: 'In the name of Al-Quds University...allow me to express the admiration of the Palestinians for your honorable position...You represent the vanguard of steadfastness...We, in Jerusalem, are inspired by you...We are proud to belong to a nation which considers you a symbol of resistance and a symbol of its greatness...

"Ten years earlier, during the 1991 Gulf War, Nusseibeh was arrested by Israel's police for collaborating with Saddam in an attempt to improve the accuracy of Saddam's Scud missiles fired at Israel. Acccording to the February 8, 1991 issue of the Ha'aretz (dovish) daily, Yossi Sarid, a leader of Israel's Left, told supporters that he would not attend any rally on behalf of Nusseibeh, 'since the arrest was not politically motivated.'

"Roni Milo, another dovish politican, then the Minister of Police, stated on February 7, 1991 (Ha'aretz) that 'Nusseibeh performed severe acts of treachery and collaboration with the enemy.' Judge Vardi Zeiler, President of the Jerusalem County Court, confirmed (Ha'aretz, February 4, 1991) that 'Nusseibeh's arrest was on national and personal security grounds.' On January 31, 1991 Ha'aretz reported that Nusseibeh transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars to Palestinian terrorist cells during the Gulf War.

"It was Arafat who appointed Nusseibeh to the post of Presidency of Al Quds University in Jerusalem... An August 2001 document submitted to Arafat by Nusseibeh confirms that Al-Quds University has become -- under the leadership of Sari Nusseibeh--the Jerusalem headquarters for the PLO/Palestinian Authority, preoccupying itself with the organization of anti-Israel rallies, anti-Israel propaganda, illegal construction in order to 'stop the Judaization of Jerusalem,' support of families of Palestinian terrorists, the repartitioning of Jerusalem and other illegal activities."

Also writing in Yediot Achronot in 2002, then cabinet secretary Gideon Saar noted that Nusseibeh, again on Al Jazeera, this time appearing with Majd A-Zir from the Palestinian Return Organization said of the "right to return" (code name for Israel's destruction): "There is no argument or disagreement between brother Majd and myself, and the PLO leadership holds fast by all decisions on this issue."

Saar observes that Nusseibeh, who had been appointed by Arafat to "the Jerusalem portfolio" after the death of Faisal Husseini filled the shoes of his predecessor in more ways than one. "In one of his last interviews, to the Egyptian weekly Al Arabi, Husseini likened the Oslo agreement to a 'Trojan Horse' that the PLO infiltrated into the Land of Israel and the current intifada to the 'pouring out from the belly of the horse' ... Nusseibeh, exactly like Husseini is among the most prominent standard-bearers of the PLO's 'stages doctrine.' He is now the Trojan Horse that the PLO is cleverly attempting to infiltrate into the heart of Israel's capital. Are there still Israelis who want to open the walls of Jerusalem to him?"

Alas, the answer is yes. And there are Jewish organizations eager to place this Trojan Horse into the center of the American Jewish community, willing dupes who arrogantly and blindly pander to Israel's enemies.

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Benny Elon, January 11, 2005.

Your sincere support gives all of us - Israelis who believe in our right and commitment to maintain a Jewish state in our ancient homeland - more strength to continue our struggle.

Furthermore, I believe there is no way to achieve peace in the middle east withput maintaining Israeli sovereignity over Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and without solving in a decisive and generous way the Palestinian refugee problem, which is a humanitarian tragedy intentionally kept unsolved by the PLO and UNRWA for decades.

You are invited to read my peace plan at our site, http://www.theRightRoadtoPeace.com and to subscribe to our newsletter by sending your email address to contact@therightroadtopeace, joining hundreds of Zion-lovers from the whole world.

Thank you again for your support,

Benny Elon, MK
National Union Chairman

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 11, 2005.


"At the end of an official 40-day mourning period, Abbas has reconfirmed loyalty to Yaser Arafat's legacy and described the late founder of Palestinian nationalism as the "founder, the mentor and symbol of our Palestinian people." (IMRA, 12/22.)

A bigoted, lying, mass-murdering terrorist is the mentor of his supposedly moderate successor and the symbol of his sub-set of the Arab nationality? Shame on them!

Arafat, a 20th century man, is called the founder of a people whom he had claimed existed for thousands of years and never had been entered into the historical record. What a fraud!


For 10 years, the P.A. has been teaching its people that Israel has no right to exist. For 4 1/2 years, it has been indoctrinating its people in their duty to murder Jews, via religious lessons, media, schools, summer camps, poetry. So thorough an effort is no mere attempt to foment a particular riot, but a deep-rooted belief. The alleged current reduction in media hate-speech should be distrusted as a temporary tactic in the goal of destroying Israel. Palestinian Media Watch proves with examples that the hate indoctrination continues. Just one example is the recent award of first prize to a school essay urging death and destruction (IMRA, 12/22).


Mahmoud Abbas "Softens Tone Before Election, Calls for Peace Talk," "Sharp Contrast to recent Labeling of Israel a 'Zionist Enemy.'" That was the headline. The article explained that during the campaign, he tried to attract younger Arabs with terrorist ties, by taking a hard line towards Israel. Even then, however, he criticized them for firing rockets at Israeli towns. Israeli officials welcomed the new tone (Mohammed Daraghmeh, NY Sun, 1/7 p.6 from Associated Press).

Are Israeli officials dumb or playing dumb? A change in tone is not a change in policy. Obviously, Abu Mazen is playing politics and engaging in war via diplomacy, which is the traditional Islamic way. In his society that promotes hatred and violence, he easily could switch his tone back. Where would Israel leave itself if, based on his change in tone, it negotiated away tangible assets? It is to seek such assets, that Abu Mazen changed his tone and criticized the firing of rockets at Israel (without disarming the rocket launchers). He does not want a hostile tone to alert Israel to his being an enemy, when he negotiates. If alert, Israel would make fewer concessions. As for Israel, it should get out of the business of making concessions. Concessions to an enemy-to-the-death eventually means death from the enemy.


"Religious and nationalist extremists among the settlers reject any handover of territory, citing Biblical references and security arguments." (Op. Cit..)

It is unseemly of Arabs and pro-Arabs to call Jewish religious grounds for retaining territory in the traditional Jewish homeland "extremist," when the Arabs seek that territory on religious grounds and are not called extremist. One-way epithets are biased.

As for the security arguments, they are not extreme but sensible. They never have been refuted. They are that the Territories offer water, secure borders, strategic depth, early warning, and that the Arabs who have ample territory in the Mideast want those territories to deny those strategic strengths to Israel? Why? Because their plan is to gain those territories in order the more easily to conquer Israel. They are engaged in jihad, holy war. Are holy warriors not fanatics? There are Jewish extremists. They are not the "settlers," however, but the leftwingers, who would give territory, money, arms, and military training to antisemitic genocidists and cal it peacemaking.


The US has sent $23.5 million directly to the P.A., to finance the current election. The State Dept. explained that the gift reflects "our confidence in the direction of the P.A.'s reform program, and or expectation that reform will continue to be implemented energetically." Pres. Bush signed a waiver so the funds could be transferred without Congressional approval.

The P.A. now is controlled by Abu Mazen, himself a candidate. P.A. leaders have given out word that if they vote for an independent candidate, they would lose P.A. jobs and be blacklisted by the P.A? The P.A. is the main employer there. The P.A. has given almost no coverage to rival campaigns, which are as anti-Israel as Mazen's, but stress reform. One of the reformers represents the International Solidarity Movement, which obstructs Israeli military movements (Caroline Glick, NY Sun, 12/31, p.7).

Arabs have been urging political reform for more than a hundred years. It sounds nice to Westerners, but never is implemented. The P.A. ha made no significant reforms. Nevertheless, for the Arabs, the Presidents always sign the waivers, falsely certifying that the Arabs have met Congressional requirements for civilized or democratic behavior. In passing those laws, Congress pretends to be setting tough conditions, but lets the Presidents circumvent them with deceitful waivers. The people think that Congress is pro-Israel.

Do you suppose that the State Dept. does not realize that its funding solidifies Abu Mazen's candidacy and makes this election as much a fraud as Arafat's was? I think that the State Dept. does realize it. True, the State Dept., like the UNO, blunders so much that it is difficult to tell where its incompetence ends and its malignity begins. However, the State Dept. is scheming to get Abu Mazen installed as a supposed moderate, though any informed person knows he is not. The US financing of an unfair election aims to get Mazen positioned to negotiate the Israeli concessions for which the State Dept. has been hankering for years. The US poses as the champion of democracy, but supports the P.A. dictatorship and interferes with Israel.


In the style of jihadists, antisemitic hackers condemned Jonathan Pollard on his website, in vulgar terms for saving Israel from Saddam by alerting it to his imminent attack. A Site spokesman remarked on the irony of the jihadists recognizing Pollard's great service to Israel, whereas US Jewish leaders do not mention it if they even are aware of it. They let him suffer far beyond the normal punishment for his violation of US law (IMRA 12/22).

They let him suffer because they are embarrassed to speak up for a fellow Jew and be criticized by his enemies. They may talk about this being a free country, about themselves having influence in it, and about their not being so easily intimidated as their predecessors during WWII, but they reveal their fear that the country is not so free that their own position in it is secure. It's the hoary neurosis of my fellow Jews.


Under Egypt's plan for what it calls stabilizing Gaza and leading to peace, all the terrorist militias would be folded into the P.A. army, without being punished, disarmed, and de-Nazified. Their leaders would enter the P.A. forces as commanders. Their indoctrinated followers would influence the few, professional, non-terrorist elements in the P.A. forces. This plan would finance the terrorist militias in their terrorism, rather than in civilian jobs that could give them an opportunity to go straight. Obviously it is a plan to prevent internal strife from distracting from the war against Israel and to concentrate all available forces on that war. Nevertheless, such is the world's wishful thinking, that the plan is taken seriously and endorsed. (It is wishful thinking by Israeli leaders yearning for peace, by the State Dept. yearning for war, and by the President, yearning for pretended statesmanship.)

The Quartet favors the Egyptian plan. The pretense is that formally ending the terrorist militias by enrolling them into the P.A. military ends terrorist forces and therefore complies with the Road Map. Thus the Arabs never do have to comply. Peace never will be made.


The Left has come to despise nationalism as backward-facing and to admire internationalism as forward-looking. This view has ideology triumph over reality.

Reality is that both nationalism and internationalism can be either benign or malign, depending upon circumstances. The Left remembers nationalism as fascistic or imperialistic, but forgets that international Communism was fascistic and imperialistic. What does it think Islamism is, but an international force for war and oppression? Nationalism often has been the seed of democracy (Hillel Halkin, NY Sun, 12/28, p.,9).


In return for Israel allowing the EU greater involvement in Arab-Israel diplomacy, the EU promises to improve its economic, scientific, and cultural relations with Israel, combat antisemitism, and help Israel improve relations with international organizations, including the UNO. Any EU diplomatic initiatives would be coordinated with the rest of the Quartet.

The Dutch Ambassador said it was time to reduce the ridiculous numbers of anti-Israel resolutions, now about 20 a year, that tie up the UNO. (Just "reduce" their number?)

The same agreement was concluded with the P.A. and non-EU European and Arab states. The EU already is trying to coax the P.A. into free elections and financial reform (IMRA, 12/23).

The P.A. just had an election, and it was not free. The P.A. has minimal financial reform, and still steals most of the EU subsidy. The agreement with the P.A. is just another futile attempt at appeasement of the Arabs.

The agreement with Israel is another means of doing what the EU has been slavering over, the prospect of gaining influence over Arab-Israel diplomacy. The EU would exercise that influence in behalf of the Arabs, as it always has. The tip-off is its pledge to coordinate with the rest of the Quartet, also anti-Israel. Did the government of Israel sell out its people, again?


The head of the P.A. asserted that democracy in the P.A. requires an end to what he called Israeli occupation, giving that priority over reform (IMRA, 12/23).

In other words, pursue the war on Israel and make Israel the excuse of not democratizing. It is a poor excuse not only logically, but also factually. There is little Israeli military presence in Arab towns and only that is for self-defense. There never was an occupation - the Territories were not some part of an Arab country but of the Jewish homeland. It's the usual Arab way of committing aggression and complaining about the nerve of their victims for defending themselves.


US medical teams follow the troops close behind, to be on hand when wounded Iraqis are captured. The doctors harvest the Arabs' organs, before killing the captives. There is a big market in this. The military pretends inability to explain the dozens of cadavers missing internal organs. So states an official Saudi newspaper (IMRA, 12/23). Santa Claus is more plausible.

Mutilation and murder of captives is common among Islamists and uncommon among Americans. The occasional exception notwithstanding, American doctors would not do that for love or for money. Arabs would do it for pleasure, for money, or as a warning.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Dr. Ron Breiman, January 11, 2005.
As chairman of the Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI), I call on Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon to take off his uniform and lay his insignia on the prime minister's table. The order to evacuate settlements is patently illegal. There is no other way to define the approaching evacuation.

The left wing's refusal is to fight the enemy, while the right wing refuses to fight their own brethren.

If the government ordered the chief of staff to deport 8,000 Arabs from 22 villages, he would choose to resign. Therefore, he should do so when he is ordered to do the same with Jews.

Dr. Ron Breiman is Chairman, Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI). Contact him at eran_ron@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 11, 2005.

Isn't it amazing how tough these guy get when dealing with unarmed, peaceful Jews but run and hide behind the Geneva Conventions as soon as an Armed Arab show up. Maybe if the protesters start chanting slogans in Arabic they will become confused and leave them alone. This is a news item from today's Arutz Sheva (IsraelNationalNews.com) and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=75096 It is called "Swift Justice Against Those Who Attack Security Troops or Damage Property."

(IsraelNN.com) Following a meeting between the two on Monday, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz and Police Chief Moshe Karadi agreed that persons arrested for striking a member of any security force or intentionally damaging property during protests against the government's Gaza Disengagement Plan will be dealt with harshly and expeditiously, to the fullest extent of the law.

The two decided to step-up law enforcement efforts, announcing there is no reason to exhibit restraint against those persons who resort to violence.

Regarding verbal opposition to government policies, Mazuz has indicated he will continue his policy of restraint.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Eliezar Edwards, January 11, 2005.
This was written by Etgar Lefkovits, January 9, 2005, in The Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/). It is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename= JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1105240990454&p=1077423454793

In a stunning vote of no-confidence in the corruption-riddled Palestinian Authority, the vast majority of Arab residents of east Jerusalem stayed away from city polling stations Sunday, choosing not to cast a ballot in the landmark post-Arafat Palestinian elections.

Besides the low-turnout, the Jerusalem vote was further marred in the first half of the day by confusion over voter-registration lists at the six city polling stations, a problem which was later worked out in the course of the day with the mediation of former US President Jimmy Carter, the head of a group of international observers monitoring the poll.

According to an arrangement with the Palestinian election committee ahead of the elections, only 6,000 of the estimated 120,000 eligible Arab residents of east Jerusalem were permitted to cast ballots at one of six post offices in the city, with the vast majority of Jerusalem Arabs slated to vote at special polling centers just outside the city, prompting confusion and disarray at city polling places Sunday among residents who could not find their names on the voter registration lists.

Jerusalem police chief Ilan Franco said Sunday that it was the Palestinian Elections Committee who decided that only 6,000 Jerusalem Arab residents would vote in the city, and not police.

In fact, despite the campaign efforts of the seven Palestinian candidates to bring out the vote in the city, by mid-afternoon, only several hundred Arab residents of Jerusalem had cast a ballot in Jerusalem, Palestinian election officials said, with the number expected to reach several thousand by day's end.

Indeed, at several balloting locations in the city, there were more foreign election observers, journalists and police forces out than voters.

At the makeshift post office set up just inside the Jaffa Gate not one person had voted by noon, a Palestinian election official stationed there said.

He noted that several dozen Arab residents had tried to vote in the five hours since the polling station opened at 7 a.m. but their names were not on the list of registered voters slated to cast their ballots at the site, and so were turned away without voting.

"The result is known, Abu Mazen is going to win, so why bother to vote?" asked one Arab resident, who declined to give his name, as he took in the scene near the Jaffa Gate polling station under a warming winter sun.

Another resident, who also requested anonymity, said that he wanted to vote for Abu Mazen but was told that his name was not on the list of voters, and could only cast a ballot outside the city.

"Who has time for this? We have to make a living," the resident said.

Later in the day, in an attempt to curb the confusion, former US President Jimmy Carter, who heads a team of foreign election observers, reached a deal with the Palestinian Central Election Commission and Israeli officials allowing voters registered in East Jerusalem to cast their ballot at any one of the six Israeli post offices in the city.

But, confusion aside, the vast majority of Jerusalem Arab residents clearly wanted no part in the Palestinian elections, eager to maintain their status as 'neutral' Jerusalem residents, and determined not to lose the economic benefits that living in the city afforded them.

Caught in the middle between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Jerusalem's 230,000 Arab residents have largely stayed on the sidelines of the violence that have rocked the city over the last four years, preferring instead to focus on their jobs, and the social benefits Israel offers them as city residents, such as health care, unemployment pay, and social security.

While all of Jerusalem's Arabs are eligible for Israeli citizenship, only about 10,000 are citizens. The rest have chosen to retain the Jordanian passports they used before 1967, but carry permanent resident ID cards.

In the one and only previous Palestinian legislative election, held in 1996, about 10 percent of Jerusalem's Arab residents actually turned out to vote.

In a gesture to the new Palestinian leadership and in accordance with the will of the international community, Israel permitted Arab residents of the city to participate in the Palestinian election by voting by absentee ballot, as was the case in the previous PA election in 1996. The decision to let Arab residents of the city vote in the Palestinian elections -- overshadowed by the stark indifference and apathy of the Jerusalem Arab street -- was opposed by some Israelis who were concerned that it would only serve to undermine Israeli sovereignty over the capital.

Throughout the day, Jerusalem police prevented several dozen right-wing Jewish demonstrators, including MK Uri Ariel (National Union) and Jerusalem city councilman David Hadari (NRP) from getting anywhere near the Jerusalem polling stations, prompting several makeshift protests a few blocks away from the balloting.

"In what other country do you see balloting for another state taking place on your own sovereign territory?" asked protester Meital Beiton, 28, who, together with a group of Jerusalem students, was holding a poster, which read 'Sharon will disengage from Jerusalem' near Jaffa Gate.

In the morning, three Arab residents of Jerusalem were detained for questioning for passing out fliers calling on fellow Arabs not to vote, police said.

In the commercial heart of east Jerusalem, a coterie of Abu-Mazen posters and PLO fliers hung on Saladin Street, the site of another city polling station. Seven postal windows were set up to receive voters, who cast their ballots into red postal boxes, though throughout the morning hours no more than three or four people were seen voting at any time. In contrast, two windows opened for regular postal business had long lines.

One placard posted on the street, which could just as well have been placed there by either Arabs or Jews, read: Israel: A banana republic."

"Are you kidding?" an Arab taxi driver in the city responded when asked if he was going to vote. "To bring a corrupt [Palestinian] authority here. "This is just what we are missing."

To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, January 11, 2005.
This was written by Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for The Boston Globe. He can be reached at jacoby@globe.com

THE OUTCOME of today's election for president of the Palestinian Authority was never in doubt. Mahmoud Abbas, Yasser Arafat's longtime accomplice -- the two men co-founded Fatah, the largest terrorist faction within the PLO, in 1965 -- was always going to win in a landslide. The three other candidates were never going to get more than a sliver of the vote. That they got any votes at all was impressive, given the virtual news blackout on their campaigns by the Fatah-controlled Palestinian media and the bullying of anyone tempted to support them. The New York Sun described some of the arm-twisting on Dec. 31:

"One of the reasons none of the three candidates has received much support is intimidation by the PA. `People are afraid to be seen even reading their campaign literature,' says one Palestinian. ... The message that the people have received from various leaders of the PA is that if they vote for a candidate other than Mr. Abbas, they will either lose jobs they already have in the PA or will not be hired by the PA in the future. Since the PA is the largest employer in the West Bank and Gaza, the threat carries a great deal of weight.

"Physical intimidation has also played a role. ... On Wednesday, shots were fired at [candidate Bassam el] Salhi's offices in Ramallah."

Surely this isn't what President Bush had in mind when he said, in his seminal June 2002 address on the Arab-Israeli war, that the United States would support the creation of a Palestinian state if the Palestinians would first "build a practicing democracy, based on tolerance and liberty." Nor can Abbas, who spent decades at Arafat's side and who has been unyielding in his refusal to crack down on Palestinian gunmen and bombers, be what Bush meant when he insisted that Palestinians "elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror." So why has the administration bent over backward to support the election and given its blessing to Abbas?

On Dec. 29, the State Department transferred $23.5 million to the Palestinian Authority -- a mark, said Assistant Secretary of State William Burns, of American "confidence in the direction of the PA's reform program." The absurdity of such confidence was made clear one day later, when Abbas brazenly campaigned with members of the al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade in Jenin. A picture of Abbas riding on the shoulders of Zakaria Zubeidi -- a notorious terrorist and one of Israel's most wanted men -- was published around the globe.

Yet when Colin Powell was asked about it, he shrugged. The photo is "disturbing," he conceded, but "I don't think it reflects Mr. Abbas's overall approach to governing."

Please. The embrace of Zubeidi was no anomaly. Abbas is sometimes described as a "moderate" opposed to terrorism, but his opposition is purely tactical. He has no moral problem with blowing up buses and cafes, he simply thinks such methods are, for now, counterproductive. Last week, Abbas hailed Palestinian gunmen in Gaza, but urged them to stop firing rockets at Israeli towns. Because deliberately targeting civilians is wrong? No. "Because this is not the proper time for such actions." Hardly the words of a moderate.

Again and again, Abbas has expressed his solidarity with violent extremists. Last month he traveled to Damascus to meet with some of the region's most implacable terror groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front For the Liberation of Palestine-General Command. Afterward, Abbas's "foreign minister," Nabil Sha'ath, declared that between the Palestinian Authority and the other groups, "there are no differences over the objectives."

And what are those objectives? About that, Abbas has been explicit. In recent weeks he has promised to shelter terrorists from Israeli arrest and vowed that there will be no PA crackdown on Palestinian terrorism. He hews unswervingly to Yasser Arafat's hardline positions -- an Israeli retreat to the 1949 borders, Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, the elimination of every Jewish settlement, the dismantling of Israel's security fence, and no limit on the "right of return" -- code for the abolition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Abbas is no moderate. His election is not a step toward peace. What was true in Afghanistan and Iraq is true in the Palestinian Authority as well: Without regime change, freedom and democracy are impossible. Just as the defeat of the Taliban and Ba'athists were a prerequisite to elections, so the dismantling of the corrupt Fatah autocracy is essential to Palestinian reform. President Bush got it right in 2002: The Palestinians need "new leaders ... not compromised by terror." They still do.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Lee Green, January 10, 2005.
"Israel-Palestine Conflict Won't End While Sharon, Bush Allow Injustices" was the title of a recent column by Edmund R. Hanauer. He wrote:
After refusing to deal with Yasser Arafat for the past four years, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, backed by President Bush, appears willing to open peace talks with new Palestinian leadership. But it is unlikely that Sharon will negotiate seriously with Palestinian leaders, even pacifists, if they insist, as did Arafat, that Israel respect the human and national rights of Palestinians. Instead, Sharon will seek to seize as much land and water resources as possible from Palestinians on the Israeli-occupied West Bank, land and water for 200,000 Jewish settlers whose settlements are illegal under international law and preclude a viable Palestinian state. Washington's talk of creating a Palestinian state alongside Israel will remain lip service until the Bush administration forces Israel to stop colonizing the West Bank.

Israel's occupation policies have been deplored by Israeli human-rights groups, such as B'Tselem, which found Israel violates 29 of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in its treatment of Palestinians under Israeli occupation. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch repeatedly criticize Israel for violations of international law, including torture, destruction of homes and crops, expulsion, imprisonment without trial, killing of civilians and denial of access to schools and medical facilities.

A Palestinian state is long overdue. During World War I, Palestinian Muslims and Christians, 95 percent of the population of Palestine, were promised, then denied, independence. In 1947, although Palestinians made up more than 60 percent of the population, they were allotted only 45 percent of their homeland by the U.N. Partition Plan. In the 1948 and 1967 Arab-Israeli wars, Israel seized the areas intended for the Palestinian state. Since the 1980s, Palestinian leaders, including Arafat, have sought only the rump 22 percent of Palestine occupied by Israel in 1967 (the West Bank, Gaza and Arab East Jerusalem). Under the 1993 Oslo Accords, Palestinians recognized Israel in 78 percent of the historical Palestinian homeland and, along with the international community, naively assumed Israel would return all of the lands occupied in 1967.

A two-state solution based on international law, including treaties signed by Israel and scores of U.N. resolutions, would entail:

* A sharing of Jerusalem and its holy sites. Palestine would be sovereign over Arab East Jerusalem and its 200,000 Palestinian Muslims and Christians. West Jerusalem would be Israel's capital.

* All or almost all Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza would be dismantled. Israel would withdraw to the Green Line, the 1967 internationally recognized boundary. Israel might keep the 2 percent to 3 percent of the West Bank, which includes major settlements along the Green Line, provided the Palestinian state received an equivalent amount, in quantity and quality, of Israeli land. Palestinians would regain their West Bank water resources, now siphoned off by Israel.

* Israel would recognize in principle the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees, many expelled in 1948 by Israeli state terrorism. The right of return is upheld by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and dozens of U.N. resolutions. In fact, Israel was admitted to the United Nations on the condition that refugees would be allowed home.

Under the 1947 partition plan, Israel barely had a 51 percent Jewish majority. Even if Israel now took in 1 million refugees, Jews would still be close to 70 percent of the population. Refugees should also be given options to settle in Western countries, Arab states or the Palestinian state. In addition, refugees should be compensated for property losses.

Although the United States and Israel did their utmost to blame Arafat for the failure of peace talks, he supported a settlement along these lines at Camp David in 2000 and afterward. On each issue -- Jerusalem, settlements, borders, refugees, security, water -- Arafat sought peace based on international law, whereas Israel, backed by the United States, tried to impose a settlement based on Israel's superior power, a settlement rejected by almost all Palestinians.

Placing the blame on Arafat has, according to Robert Malley, President Clinton's adviser for Arab-Israeli Affairs, "spared Israel and the United States from the necessity of critical self-analysis." The Rev. Raymond Helmick, Boston College professor of conflict resolution, believes the basic requirement for peace is for Israelis to "submit themselves to the rule of law" and faults U.S. and Israeli policies as based on "total renunciation of the rule of law."

Bush and Sharon likely will seek a Palestinian puppet willing to compromise the rights of Palestinians. This would prevent a just and lasting settlement, weaken moderates in both communities and lead to more Israeli and Palestinian deaths. It would betray the purported U.S. ideals of democracy, justice and self-determination and delight anti-American terrorists who will gain recruits convinced that the United States is an enemy of Arabs and Muslims.

If Bush is serious, he would be wise to heed Pope Paul VI: "If you want peace, work for justice."

The tagline accompanying op-eds written by Edmund R. Hanauer reads: Edmund R. Hanauer, an American Jewish human rights activist, is director of Search for Justice and Equality in Palestine/Israel, a Boston-based human rights/peace group.

Though Hanauer routinely speaks of "justice" and "peace," the word "misinformation" more accurately describes his attacks against Israel, and his most recent column is no exception.

Here are just a few of the problems with the column:

  • Hanauer implies that Israel prevented a Palestinian state from forming in 1948. "In the 1948 and 1967 Arab-Israeli wars," he states, "Israel seized the areas intended for the Palestinian state."

    Contrary to this claim, it was Egypt and Jordan - not Israel - that seized the land meant for a Palestinian state in 1948. This was after the Palestinians rejected the international plan which would have given them an independent state. These areas remained in Arab hands for the next 19 years, during which time no Palestinian state was formed. When Israel's preemptive strike on Egypt in 1967 left Israel in control of those territories, Israeli leaders immediately signaled readiness to cede land in exchange for peace. The Arab countries and the Palestinians responded at the notorious Arab League Summit in Khartoum with the infamous "3 No's": no to peace, no to negotiations, and no to recognizing Israel.

  • He claims that the international community "naively assumed Israel would return all of the land occupied in 1967," and that international law calls for Israel to withdraw to the Green Line, calling it "the 1967 internationally recognized boundary."

    The international community, however, has made clear that Israel was not expected to "return all of the land occupied in 1967." U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 calls for Israel to withdraw "from territories" occupied in the war to secure and recognized boundaries, and intentionally did not call on Israel to withdraw from all of the territories. Britain's Ambassador to the U.N. at the time, Lord Caradon, explained why:

    "It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were undesirable and artificial. After all, they were just the places where the soldiers of each side happened to be on the day the fighting stopped in 1948. They were just armistice lines. That's why we didn't demand that the Israelis return to them."

    Similarly, the Oslo Accords intentionally did not call for Israel to "return all of the land," but instead left borders (and settlements) to be determined by the parties in future final status negotiations.

  • Hanauer also argues that a two-state solution requires recognition of the so-called "right of return" of Palestinian refugees. He claims that "Israel was admitted to the U.N. on the condition that refugees would be allowed home."

    This argument is disingenuous and fallacious.

    It is disingenuous to say that a two-state solution should be predicated on the opening of Israel's borders to any Palestinian who wants to live there, when it is widely understood that the influx of the refugees and their children would destroy the two state solution endorsed by international law by eroding the Jewish majority in the only Jewish state in the world.

    The claim that "Israel was admitted to the U.N. on the condition that refugees would be allowed home" is fallacious. Inis L. Claude Jr., a renowned expert in international relations, has explained that though the General Assembly referred to prior resolutions about refugees, "these references ... did not constitute a declaration that Israel had assumed definite obligations to permit repatriation" of refugees. Indeed, the main complaint of the Arab states at the time was precisely that Israel's admission to the UN did not involve definite assurances concerning the refugees. It is remarkable that at the hands of propagandists like Hanauer the lack of such definite assurances at the time has morphed into definite assurances now.

  • Hanauer's charge that Israel has appropriated Palestinian water is also baseless. Israel's coastal plain is at sea level, and underground water from the higher elevations of the West Bank naturally flow, under gravity, downhill to Israel. Most of the water in the aquifer in question - the so-called Mountain Aquifer - is stored under Israel, and it is most readily accessible in Israel, where it is close to the surface, rather than in the West Bank.

    Despite this, since Israel gained control of the West Bank, Palestinian use of water from aquifers shared with Israel has increased, while the percentage of water used by Israel has decreased.

    In addition, most of the Arab countries get their water in exactly the same way - the waters of the Nile, for example, don't originate - at all - in Egypt, but flow downhill from other countries into Egypt. Would Hanauer say that Egypt is stealing, say, Ethiopian water?

  • Hanauer offers a list of demands which he says should be part of a two state solution, including: sharing Jerusalem, dismantling settlements, Israeli withdrawal. He ignores the fact that Ehud Barak offered such concessions at Camp David and that Palestinian Yasir Arafat (and fellow negotiator Mahmoud Abbas) rejected them. Instead, Hanauer suggests that it was Arafat who was flexible at the talks.
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. The website address is www.camera.org. Lee Green is Director, National Letter-Writing Group, CAMERA.
To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 10, 2005.
These truly loyal and patriotic Army officers have made a great sacrifice for the Jewish people. They have, however, proceeded in the wrong order. It should have been clear to them that they would be summarily discharged from the Army and that no legal, moral or logical argument would influence the top brass. Anticipating this they should have taken the initiative and resigned under protest and thereby have set a powerful example to others. Even so their courage is an inspiration to all of us. Let us hope that the time when they will all be reinstated with honor will come soon. This is a news item from today's Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) and is archived at http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=75049. It is titled "IDF Dismisses 34 Reserve Officers for Implying Refusal"

"I don't retract one word," said Lt.-Col. (res.) Yoel Tzur, one of 34 reserve officers dismissed from the army today for calling the disengagement order "blatantly illegal... forbidden to fulfill."

"I refuse to be a party to [the disengagement]," Tzur said. "We will go down in history as courageous Jews, men who stood at the front of the fray and were not willing to take part in this crime."

Tzur and 33 other reserve officers from the Binyamin District Command wrote a letter last week stating that they view the orders to uproot Jews from their homes in the Land of Israel as a "blatantly illegal order with a black flag waving over it, one that is forbidden to fulfill." They asked that the army not give its soldiers such an order, so as to avoid a situation in which soldiers might disobey it en-masse.

After a series of weekend meetings between the 34 and their superior officers in the Binyamin District Command and the Central Region Command, during which the 34 explained their intentions, Central Region Commander Maj.-Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky dismissed each of them. Several of the signing officers said that they should not be dismissed for their opinion about orders that have not been given.

National Union MK Aryeh Eldad responded to the decision by saying, "The dismissal of officers who have not refused an order, but have rather expressed their opinion about the morality of an order that may never even be given, is a stifling of free speech. It will lead people not to talk, but to act."

MK Sha'ul Yahalom (National Religious Party) said that he is against the tone of the officers' letter, but feels that they did not have to be dismissed from the army.

Lt.-Col. Tzur, whose wife and son were murdered in a terror attack just over eight years ago, said, "We discussed it amongst ourselves, and though there were some who thought that we could accept some of the changes that the army demanded in our letter, we decided at the end not to change a thing. We stand with both legs behind the letter, and we'll continue in this path. We won't kneel and we won't bow down."

Tzur admitted that it "could be understood from the letter that we are refusing. It doesn't bother me. I'm perfectly at peace with what I wrote."

Asked whether he and his fellow signatories had taken into account the fact that with their dismissal, the entire rank of command of reserve officers in the Binyamin Region disappears, Tzur said, "Yes, and I don't take this lightly. But the responsibility for this is on the Prime Minister, the Defense Minister, the Chief of Staff, and the Central Regional Commander. They made the decision, and I assume that they took this into account and will find a solution."

Yoel Tzur said that each of the 34 officers had a short private meeting with Gen. Kaplinsky: "In my three-minute meeting, I told him that whoever has a part in this crime of uprooting Jews will be remembered in infamy, and therefore I have nothing to retract in this letter... Furthermore, nobody would ever carry out an order to evacuate [the Israeli-Arab cities] Um el-Fahm or Taibe - but it seems that we're little Jewboys who are still not free of our not-so-distant past..."

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Judah Tzoref, January 10, 2005.

Saul Singer wrote an article entitled "Risking Peace." It appeared in The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 6, 2005. Singer's article (see below) betrays the blood-curdling profile of Israel as a "peace"-impaled chimera. Peace cannot rest on crimes against Jews. Peace does not warrant the uprooting of a single Jew. The only Right of Return relevant to peace is the return of Jews to their entire ancient promised land. As long as we continue disgracing ourselves as pore-dwelling maggots grovelling for peace, we shall be treated as such.

I received this note from Jack and Helene De Lowe - it's a comment on Singer's article.

Dear Saul,

I enjoyed your most recent column very much (see below).

As we are talking about resolving the problem of an area disputed between 2 parties, I see only one way for us to come to a final resolution that not only is acceptable to both sides, but also will show the willingness of both sides to do what is necessary for peace. That way is land for land. Israel has already shown its willingness to trade land for peace. When I see the Arabs doing the same, then I will feel more confident that they 1) accept our existence in this area and 2) they understand that there is a value to peace, but that there is also a price. That price is not simply their 'tolerance' of our existence. If we are to give up Jewish Gaza, then they must be prepared to evacuate Tulkarim and Kalkilya. Until we see that the Arabs will even consider such moves, I remain strongly opposed to any further unilateral 'gestures' on Israel's part.

Jack de Lowe

Everyone knows that to promote Arab-Israeli peace in our new post-Arafat era, the world must help one embattled leader. Problem is, they've got the wrong one. Ariel Sharon needs the world's help; Abu Mazen needs its discipline.

The conventional international instinct is exactly the opposite. For decades, the quest for peace has been premised on land for peace, so that peace depended on pressing Israel to give up land. Few seem to have noticed that the situation has reversed: An Israeli prime minister is pushing land away, while what is missing is a recipient who will deliver peace.

Philosophy aside, let's look at raw politics. Sharon is in a serious pickle. Even "moderate" settler leaders are openly backing civil disobedience, and winking at organizers of a mass refusal by soldiers to carry out evacuation orders. Disengagement opponents are demanding a referendum, giving the impression that they are less afraid of losing one than Sharon, undermining the premise that the plan has majority support.

Israel is steeling itself for a scenario, predicted this week by Shin Bet head Avi Dichter, in which radical settlers provoke soldiers to shoot at them, either giving them the excuse to shoot back or creating settler martyrs. And this when Palestinian missiles continue to fall on the settlements to be evacuated, and president-elect Abu Mazen is calling Israel the "Zionist enemy" and promising his people that they will "return" to Israel.

At some point, Israelis are liable to stop and ask themselves, "Why are we putting ourselves through this?" How will it increase our security or bring peace?

Sharon never says this in so many words, but there seem to be two fundamental drivers behind disengagement. The first is an attempt to force a state on the Palestinians, even though they won't be ready to make peace for a generation, thereby short-circuiting the Palestinian flood-Israel-with-refugees strategy. The second, related, goal is to take the most dramatic step in a long Israeli quest to prove that it is not blocking a two-state solution, so the international community will call off its dogs and direct them toward the other side.

It is as if Israel were taking seriously the international plea that it take "risks for peace," in the hope that we might be recognized for it. But what evidence is there that the burden of proof will shift from Israel's shoulders? Judging from the past four years, we have every reason to believe the opposite: The more Israel was beset by terror, even after the world recognized the generosity of its peace offer at Camp David, the more we have been vilified, and even our fundamental legitimacy questioned.

THE US and Europe support disengagement. But why should we believe that the result of disengagement will be the opposite of our last great "risk for peace," the Camp David summit? If America and Europe want disengagement to happen, they should show now that this time Israeli risks for peace will pay off - not in money but in diplomatic coin. Saying nice things about Sharon is not enough. Israelis should be shown that disengagement will shift the diplomatic landscape fundamentally in their favor.

The international community can do this simply. First, it could state that the Palestinian claim of a "right of return" to Israel conflicts with Israel's right to exist, with the road map, and with the two-state solution, and is therefore unacceptable. Second, it could withhold funding from the Palestinian Authority, on which it is wholly dependent, until it has ended all violence against Israel. As a bonus, the US could demand that Egypt shut down Palestinian smuggling operations from its territory, or risk harming its relations with the US.

These are basic steps that should have been taken four years ago, and would have saved countless Israeli and Palestinian lives by ending the current terror war before it started. They are still the key to the beginnings of peace.

Now that we are in window-of-opportunity mode, these steps have become imperative. Otherwise, disengagement will fall apart, as will the dream of Palestinian reform.

These steps are not hard to take. They do not require international conferences, shuttle diplomacy or vast financial commitments. All they require is the courage and foresight to think differently and to break unnoticed taboos.

The current international deference to the "right of return" as a legitimate final-status issue, coupled with the refusal to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, are read by the Arab world as leaving the door open a crack to its campaign to destroy Israel.

There are no greater catalysts for peace than international steps that reinforce Israel's permanence and legitimacy, since the root cause of the conflict is the Arab rejection of Israel.

Israel is risking tearing itself apart for peace. Is it too much to ask that its friends who support peace take much lesser risks? Indeed, the risk lies not in debunking old taboos, but in repeating past mistakes and - surprise, surprise - obtaining the same result.

Dr. Judah (Yehuda) Tzoref is a scientist, trained at the Technion in Haifa and Oxford University in England. His expertise is in physics and energy engineering. He is a grass-roots activist on behalf of Israel. He lives in Rehovot.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 10, 2005.


Israel has much experience rescuing people from collapsed buildings. It offers its expertise to countries experiencing earthquakes and the like. Israeli equipment, supplies, and experts are ready to depart at a moment's notice, usually on military transport. Not all needy countries, however, accept Israeli aid graciously or at all. Sri Lanka refused entry to the 80 tons of Israeli tsunami aid until it was made entirely a civilian effort. All that the world initially noticed was that Israel pulled back its aid.

Without checking, the official Vatican paper scolded Israel for not helping out. It revealed hostility towards Israel by condemning Israelis gratuitously as "too often preoccupied with making war." Why did the official Vatican paper fail to research before condemning? Why did it automatically blame the Jews? Was this policy? Isn't the Vatican taking the side of terrorists against the one place in the Mideast that tolerates Christians? (Edward Morrisey, NY Sun, 12/30, p.9).

I find it frequent practice by the world media to accept anti-Israel claims without checking sources. It is wishful thinking. The media wishes to think ill of the Jewish state.

If Israel is offering aid because it thinks that is the right thing to do, let it continue doing so. If Israel is offering aid because it thinks that would win friendship for it, let it stop doing so. Friendship cannot buy out ideology; antisemitism is impervious to Israeli goodwill.

A "preoccupation with making war" is the Arabs'. Israel is preoccupied with defending itself against the Arabs' decades-old attempts to conquer it by invasion, terrorism, boycott (and diplomacy).


The President of the World Bank recommending adding $500 million in subsidy to the existing $930 million in foreign aid to the P.A., on condition that Israel remove its checkpoints and closures. In other words, if Israel promises to let terrorists in, then the World Bank would further finance that terrorism. (Israel would have to be crazy to agree to that. Will it agree?)

The World Bank is supposed to help countries develop, but it spends on smothering the development of Israel. Two questions: (1) Why doesn't the Bank condition its aid on eradication of terrorism; and (2) Why doesn't Israel condition its membership in that Bank on its financing not terrorism but something worthwhile in Israel? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/21, e-mail.)

World Bank President Wolfenson contended that an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza would not accomplish much unless hope were given to its Arabs for an economic future. Hence he opposes Israeli plans to disengage not only from Gaza but from the economy of the Palestinian Arabs. He proposes rebuilding their economy, because, he said, most young Arabs want peace. But he opposes Israel's suggestion that additional aid be used to rebuild run-down refugee camps.

Commenting on that "Haaretz" report, IMRA wonders what Wolfenson's contention is based on. Does he think that a generation of indoctrination in jihad prepared the minds of the younger Arabs for peace? Polls show they overwhelmingly consider Israel illegitimate, and want to flood into Israel and take it over, with or without violence (IMRA, 12/21).

Israel has been making a grave mistake in passing excise taxes over to the P.A. and enabling tens of thousands of P.A. Arabs to bring money into the P.A. by working in Israel and possibly bringing in terrorism. That, too finances terrorism.

Israel has a case of misconceived humanitarianism and a pretense that the Arab people are not supportive of terrorism and can be weaned away from it by goodwill and constructive endeavors. The head of the World Bank may be living in a dream world, too, as if economics trumps jihad. Jihad trumps economics. What is in people's minds counts more than what is in their wallets. Muslims Arabs carry a lot of pride; they don't sell their principles, however antisocial those principles are. On the other hand, the World Bank may be aware it is undermining Israel, money being its way of promoting Israel's demise.


"More than 100 years after its invention, bicycles are still the most efficient vehicles on our roads. Think about it. No noise. No pollution. And the ability to travel at more than 20 miles an hour via human power. Yet as a society, we continue to move in the wrong direction and promote automobile use in our city."

"It is not unrelated that we are fighting a war against terrorism in a region that contains most of the world's oil reserves. So what do we do? Do we redesign our cities or invest in intercity rail transit or promote cycling or Segways, which get the equivalent of 450 miles per gallon? No. We build Hummers that get 8 mpg. We give business tax breaks to purchase them. And then we subsidize oil to the tune of about $1 billion a day, making it easier to drive in our city instead of more difficult."

"Then there's the environment?But we have made cycling so difficult that only the most idealistic and desperate use a bicycle regularly in our city" (New York). Now some City Council Members propose licensing bicycles, in response to traffic violations by some cyclists. Police say they don't need licensing to enforce the law (Harris Silver, NY Sun, 12/30, p.9).

Mr. Silver would have helped his cause by identifying that $1 billion a day subsidy of oil. It amounts to a significant portion of the budget deficit.

Why don't conservative think tanks add up the subsidies of big business and inform us of their total? Are the conservatives against needless government spending and subsidy or are they against only spending and subsidy of lower classes?


During the Holocaust, the US did not officially threaten punishment of the Nazis for their genocide. (Neither did it try to stop it, except for some rescue towards the end.)

The US has given Egypt $60 billion, mostly to build a large, modern military. That is in addition to getting Israel to give Egypt the Sinai, into which Israel had invested $17 billion. US, UNRWA, and other funds indirectly pay for P.A. terrorism. Next is coming another diplomatic effort to roll back Israeli borders, for the benefit of jihad. The West continues its drive against the Jewish people (Winston Mid East Analysis, 12/22). The full article makes a comprehensive case.


Taking up the jihadist line, the Gulf Cooperation Council reiterated a (false) distinction between terrorism as illegitimate and "resistance to occupation" as legitimate. That means it sees no limits on what may be done to US troops (IMRA, 12/22) who liberated Iraqis and just want to help them rebuild their country and live in security. The US failed to object when the Arabs applied that rationale to Israel. Now it is applied to the US.


A US submarine sneaked into Israeli territorial waters to spy on Israel's naval facilities in Haifa, home to Israeli subs that constitute Israel's second nuclear strike deterrence against a preemptive nuclear attack. Israeli leaders reportedly were angered. Israel surmises that the US placed sensors in the port. The US is concerned that Israel might attack Syria (IMRA, 12/22).

Israel was not angered enough to demand that Pollard be released or to publicly demand that the US stop this, but it warned the US that next time it might take out the sub.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Bryna Berch, January 10, 2005.

While Sharon the magician has us focused on the mere-smear small number of Jews - the Jews of Gaza - who are going to be expelled from their homes and homeland, he's making plans to expel the quarter of a million Jews from Samaria and Judea. Imagine! In a few years there will be over a half a million Jewish refugees made homeless by their own Government.

For information about helping and encouraging new families to move to Gush Katif, or helping the families who are building with guarantees for mortgages, contact Dror Vanunu, Director, Katif Region Development Fund, at gkatif@netvision.net.il or by telephone at 972-8-6840846.

Or call Friends of Gush Katif at 201-895-1323. Their address is: 588 South Forest Drive, Teaneck NJ 07666

This is from today's arutz-sheva (www.IsraelNN.com).

Israelis voted with their feet over the past six months and boosted the population in areas that the government has proposed to destroy and leave to Arab control, government statistics indicate. Netzarim, Gush Katif, one of the most embattled Jewish communities in Gaza, enjoyed a 12 per cent growth in the past six months, the Interior Ministry reported Sunday. The overall growth in the Jewish communities in Gaza was 4.8 per cent.

Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) now numbers more than 250,000 Jews. This does not include nearly the same number who live in parts of Jerusalem, such as French Hill and Gilo, that were liberated in 1967.

Sa-Nur, one of the northern Samarian communities included in the government's disengagement/expulsion plan, grew by more than 50%. Several young families, including newlyweds, planted roots there in the past several months, increasing the number of residents to more than 100.

Kfar Darom, where Jews have legal title to property from before the 1948 War of Independence, showed an 11 per cent growth.

To Go To Top
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, January 10, 2005.

JERUSALEM -- Yesterday's elections in the Palestinian territories closed the book on the Arafat era. The end of four decades of terror and corruption rightly generates great optimism about the Israeli-Palestinian relationship. Mahmoud Abbas, the new leader, can now move to end the chaos in Palestinian society and channel the massive aid flows away from off-shore bank accounts and illegal arms to economic development.

Even with the best of intentions, however, a much wider effort will be needed to reverse decades of hatred and terrorism. Third parties can help in this immense task--in particular the wide network of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) active in human rights and humanitarian issues. Yet, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the track record of these NGOs has been abysmal. Like the United Nations, today they're part of the problem, not the solution.

With their multi-million-dollar (and euro) budgets, superpowers such as Human Rights Watch (HRW), Amnesty International, Christian Aid, Oxfam, and dozens of smaller allied groups in the region have contributed to incitement to terrorism--when they should support reconciliation. Their activities amplify Palestinian rhetoric that labels Israel as an "apartheid regime", and Jews as "imperialists" and "colonialists", while whitewashing terror and condemning the Israel defensive actions.

In contrast to their PR images as peace-makers, the one-sided approach boosts the most radical Palestinians and undermines moderate voices. The double standards by which HRW and Amnesty excuse non-state terrorism as being outside the framework of international law, while using terms such as "war crimes" to condemn Israeli defensive actions, help to fuel violence. When human rights groups repeat the language used by the rejectionists from Hamas, Fatah's al Aksa brigades, and elsewhere, Palestinian opposed to terrorism are silenced. And by ignoring the vast corruption of the Palestinian leadership, the international NGOs have helped to keep this elite in power, and blunted support for reform.

Some groups, such as Denmark's Rebellion, have gone further by directly supporting terror organizations such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine--which sent the 16 year old suicide bomber who killed three Israelis in Tel Aviv last October. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, the NGO community has lost direction, making a mockery of the human right ideals that it claims to uphold.

The contribution of NGOs to incitement in the Palestinian territories was highlighted in September 2001 at the UN-sponsored Durban conference against "racism and xenophobia". The conference equated Zionism with racism, justified terror as "resistance against occupation", and denounced Israeli defense as a "violation of international law". Later, groups such as Christian Aid, Oxfam, War on Want, etc. promoted the extremist Palestinian position in condemning Israel's separation barrier as an "apartheid wall", while referring to the anti-terror actions in Jenin and elsewhere as "war crimes". Some of these NGOs are also active in promoting the proposed economic boycott on Israel in order to further delegitimize defensive actions against terrorism.

The NGO political agenda also resulted in the relative neglect of mass killings in areas such as Central Africa or Sudan, where there is less media coverage and political mileage. Since 2000, attacks by HRW and Amnesty on the actions of democratic Israel amounted to double the number devoted to the murderous regime in Sudan. HRW only put Sudan on the top of their agenda after media and U.S. government reports of the mass brutality. Before then, the human rights NGOs were asleep at the wheel.

But despite these failures, the "halo effect" protects the NGOs them from the same type of accountability that they demand from others. When Kenneth Roth, the head of New York-based HRW, alleges Israeli abuses, or Irene Khan of Amnesty repeats Palestinian myths in Jenin, few question their motives or credibility. Mr. Roth recently used part of his $22 million annual budget to hold a press conference at Jerusalem's American Colony Hotel (the main Palestinian public relations hub) to publicize a glossy 135-page report purporting to document Israeli military excesses in Gaza, based on unverified claims of Palestinian "eyewitnesses".

A few days later, Christian Aid (a major London-based "charitable organization"), issued its own report ("Facts on the Ground") alleging that Israeli "land grab policy" is making peace impossible. As in previous activities by this group (such as the film, "Peace under Siege"), Palestinian corruption and incitement were essentially ignored. These conflict-enhancing activities are facilitated by allocations from European governments, powerful philanthropies such as the Ford Foundation, and church groups all claiming to promote peace.

Recently, however, these excesses have begun to erode the "halo effect": the NGOs and their funding agencies have become the subjects of reports by monitoring groups. The NGO role in the Durban conference led to strong protests from the U.S. government, critical press reports, and hearings by a Congressional committee on the role of powerful charitable organizations, such as the Ford Foundation, in this activity.

In response, Susan Berresford, president of the Ford Foundation, declared a ban on funding for groups that advocate "bigotry or violence" or denial of "very existence of legitimate, sovereign states like Israel." But implementation is spotty. While advocating transparency for others, Ford fails to provide updates on the groups it still supports. Some individual donors have gone further, attempting to press HRW and other groups to shift the counter-productive emphasis on Israel.

If these initial efforts gather steam, the NGO community might be able to provide a positive contribution to ending the violence and promoting understanding. In the post-Arafat era, they can also help to reverse decades of incitement and promote reform within Palestinian society, thereby also restoring some credibility among Israelis.

Mr. Steinberg is the editor of www.ngo-monitor.org, and directs the program on conflict management at Bar Ilan University in Israel. This article appeared in the Wall Street Journal today.

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 10, 2005.

With the media all over the world falling all over themselves to bless Arafat's heir, a few things a getting glossed over. For example, the Israeli news media reported that Abu Mazen said that the jihad is now over. But Abu Mazen really said something rather different, and in doing so provided Shimon Peres with yet another opportunity to say something stupid. Note the apologetics of the Israel Radio correspondent. This news itemcomes from http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=75030.

Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) received just over 62% of the vote, and will take Arafat's place as Palestinian Authority chief - with a practically identical platform. Appearing before cheering crowds last night, Abu Mazen did little to allay Israeli fears that he is no different than Arafat. He said he dedicates his victory to "brother shahid [martyr] Yasser Arafat," to the "shahids and prisoners," and to the "Palestinian people from Rafiach to Jenin." The crowd responded, "A Million Shahids Marching to Jerusalem!"

Abu Mazen also said that the period of the "little Jihad [holy war] had ended, and now the big Jihad is beginning." This quote led to a quaint exchange on Israel Radio's morning newsmagazine. Arabic-speaking correspondent Avi Yisacharov played the tapes of Abu Mazen's quotes, and then quickly said, "Regarding the future..." He was immediately interrupted by anchorman Aryeh Golan, who said, "Whoa, wait a second. What's this 'big Jihad' stuff?" Yisacharov gave a nervous chuckle and said, "I don't think he means a real Jihad, he just means the challenges ahead of reforms in the PA and the release of Palestinian prisoners by Israel..." Yisacharov similarly played a recording of a leading Abu Mazen supporter singing in joy at the results of the election, and explained that it was simply "an old PLO war song."

MK Shimon Peres, who is expected to be named Associate Prime Minister this afternoon if the Knesset approves the new composition of the government, said that Abu Mazen will have to apologize for this statement, "just like he apologized for his 'Zionist enemy' statement." Peres added that Abu Mazen was a "moderate, smart and experienced, and we have to give him a chance."

Peres is famous for his lukewarm reactions to militant statements by Arafat as well. For instance, after Arafat's Johannesburg speech explaining that his agreement to make peace with Israel was merely temporary, and calling for Jihad against Israel, then-Foreign Minister Peres insisted the recording was a fraud and right-wing propaganda.

Though Abu Mazen has said that the intifada was a mistake, and that now is "not the proper time" for violence, he campaigned with armed terrorists and was even photographed atop the shoulders of wanted terrorist Zakaria Zubeidi of Jenin. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell responded, Peres-like, by saying that this was "disturbing, but I don't think it reflects his overall approach to governing."

Abu Mazen continues to adhere to the traditionally maximalist demands of full Israeli withdrawal from all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, eastern Jerusalem as the capital of a PLO state, and "right of return."

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, January 10, 2005.

Decisions are based on priorities. What is more important and what is less so? The more important an item is in a person's moral hierarchy, the more it influences the decision. So what will it be with these MKs?

Are the Likud loyalist really loyal to the traditional values of the Likud, the Jewish people or just normal human behavior? Are those values truly important to them or is this just a clever and convenient tactic for a few politicians on the outside of power to maneuver themselves to the inside? Will they really risk their political careers for the sake of principle and the greater interests of the nation?

Considering the bluff and bluster we have seen from previously "loyal" Likud Ministers and MKs who when they finally got what they wanted, rediscovered their long, lost love for Sharon can we expect better from these? I guess we will all be wiser in a few days. This is a news item from Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=75027 "Likud Loyalists to Decide How to Vote on New Coalition", Monday, January 10, 2005 / 29 Tevet 5765

(IsraelNN.com) The Likud party Knesset members who oppose Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's decision to bring the Labor party into the coalition or who oppose Sharon's "disengagement/retreat" plan will be meeting today to decide how to vote on the proposed government.

When Mr. Sharon presents the new government, including Labor, the Likud loyalists may abstain or vote against the coalition - possibly bringing down the prime minister and their own party. However, if the far-left Meretz/Yahad party votes for the new government, the Sharon government may be politically saved, even without the support of his own party's MKs.

The Likud loyalists in Knesset will be meeting this afternoon and they hope to draft a decision that will be acceptable to all of them. The political fear of the loyalists is the reaction of the Likud Central Committee, whose members may "punish" the loyalists for bringing down a Likud-run government - even when that government carries out policies the Committee itself officially rejected.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by David Wilder, January 10, 2005.

Wow aren't you excited? Everyone seems to be jumping up and down. Some, really happy. Others - not so much.

After all, it looks like we have two innovative, democratically elected governments, new horizons, fresh out of the bag. Who could ask for more? I mean, who could be upset?

Well, why don't you ask Yishai Maimon? Presently mayor of Tzfat in the hills of the western Galil, Maimon is not overjoyed with the newly elected Arab chieftain. Thirty years ago Abu Mazen initiated one of the deadliest massacres in Israeli history. Mazen-terrorists attacked a school in Ma'alot, in northern Israel. Sleeping in the school, at the time, were dozens of schoolchildren from Tzfat. Twenty-two children were murdered, after having been taken hostage by the blood-thirsty savages. Yishai Maimon was there, in the school, and will never forget the cries of pain and anguish. Speaking of Abu Mazen, Maimon said, "I will never forget his part in the attack. The man is a murderer with the blood of Jews on his hands disguised as a peace merchant... It is important for the People of Israel to know with whom we are seeking to make peace. He is worse than Arafat." [http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=74895]

The facts about Abu Mazen are widely known. He is a holocaust denier. Last week he called Israel 'the Zionist enemy.' He hugged and kissed armed Hamas terrorists in front of the cameras and declared never to disarm them. Last night he announced that 'the little Jihad has ended and the big Jihad has begun.' The facts speak for themselves: Abu Mazen is a terrorist, was a terrorist and always will be a terrorist. He might not adorn his head with a kafiya, preferring a suit and tie. But his dress and bright-white smile shouldn't confuse the facts.

But, unfortunately, in Israel, facts are irrelevant. It makes no difference what was. Only pertinent is what will be. Nothing can be, or is to be, learned from the past.

Every once in a while I'm asked why I keep writing. In truth, sometimes I ask myself the same question. At times, looking back at articles written weeks, months and years ago, it seems that nothing has changed and the messages remain the same. So why keep writing them, albeit using different themes and words, again and again?

For instance, I found the following in an article called 'Question Mark' written in July, 1995, almost ten years ago. I think it quite appropriate to reprint the story, narrated numerous times by Adir Zik on his Arutz 7 radio program, "Zikukim shel Adir" (Sparks from Adir):

During the days of the Roman Emperor Caesar Caliguila, in 32CE, before the destruction of the 2nd Temple, Jews lived together with Greeks in the small city of Yavneh. The Greeks wanted to construct a large statue to be placed in a public place and used for idol worship in honor of the Emperor.

The Jews of Yavneh strenuously objected, causing the foreigners to complain to Caliguila, stating that the Jews didn't accept his supreme rule. Caliguila reacted by ordering construction of a large statue, to be stationed in the Temple in Jerusalem. Knowing that the Jews would resist, he ordered his general Petronus to go to Israel with half of the Roman army, to take charge of the operation and to enforce the decree. Eight years later the statue was ready and Petronus arrived, with his army, at Acre, in Israel.

The Israel's, aware of the impending crisis, were upset beyond description. A statue, for idol worship, in the holy Temple, was unthinkable. All the people of Israel, tens of thousands of citizens, men, women, children, and babies, arrived in Acre. They stationed themselves before Petronus' camp, and refused to leave. When Petronus appeared before them, the entire crowd fell on the ground before him. He ordered them to rise, and when they did, they covered their heads with dust from the ground, a sign of mourning. He asked, "Do you rebel against the Emperor?" They replied that they would not fight the Emperor's army, but they would die before they would allow a statue to be placed in the Temple. Petronus was overwhelmed with the demonstration and was unable to reply. Instead, he moved his camp to the city of Tiberia.

The Jews wouldn't give up. They came in droves, from all over the country. It was planting season - they should all have been in the fields. But instead they gathered in Tiberia, thousands upon thousands. The stood by Petronus' camp for 40 days, without moving, paying no attention to weather, hunger, or the economic devastation they were bringing on themselves, by not planting in their fields. After 40 days, Petronus, overcome, asked them again, if they were rebelling against the Emperor. They replied in the negative, repeating that if he planned to fulfill the Emperor's orders they would first commit mass suicide.

Petronus, a general who had mercy on no soul, was dumbfounded. He sent a message to Caliguila in Rome, asking him to rescind the order. Caliguila responded by ordering Petronus to commit suicide. However, this order was delayed in arriving because of weather conditions. In the meantime, Caliguila was murdered in Rome and his orders were canceled.

Of course, you're aware of the difference between then and today. Petronus and Caliguila were Romans. The Petronus and Caliguila of today are Israeli Jews.

We might expect that Arik and Shimon would have learned, but no, the past no longer exists. Arafat is gone, and the great Arab hope has surfaced. History starts today.

So why write: Simply to make sure that people never forget, and they shouldn't have any excuses. We have to keep saying it, time and time again, like a mantra: Eretz Yisrael belongs to Am Yisrael, only to Am Yisrael!

This afternoon, as this commentary is being aired, tens of thousands of people will be lining the streets of Jerusalem, outside the Knesset, across from the Prime Minister's office. The scene won't differ much from the above-told story. Thousands and thousands, beseeching the L-rd our G-d to bring about an end to the nightmare plaguing His people.

In January of 1996, on the eve of the signing of the Hebron Accords, I wrote, "Tonight not only is Hebron on the chopping block. Tonight almost all of the land area of Judea, Samaria and Gaza is up for grabs? Netanyahu is not only beheading The Jewish Community of Hebron. He is castrating the Land of Israel... abandonment of land in Israel is contrary to our very existence. We came back to Eretz Yisrael to settle the land, to live on the land - not to divide it and hand it over to our enemies, to terrorists. The direction of the present `moment of truth' is clearly negative. But eventually, this will change and the crossroads we are turning down now will reach a dead-end, and we won't have any choice but to turn around, come back, and turn the other way. Whatever the cost, we must know this, and live accordingly."

The same thing, then and today. You may ask, how are we 'living accordingly?' In a couple of the days Hebron's Yahalom family with celebrate the Brit Milah of their fifth child. Their oldest child, a girl, is almost five years old. The Yahalom family lives in a two bedroom caravan, next to Yeshivat Shavei Hevron, where Moshe Yahalom studies. Moshe and his wife Tehilla decided that at present, 'living accordingly' does not mean performing the Brit ceremony at Ma'arat HaMachpela, the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, as is traditional here in Hebron. Rather, they decided to conduct the ceremony elsewhere, specifically, at Netzarim, in Gush Katif.

This community, which is, according to media reports, slated to be the first to be deleted from the map, G-d forbid, was, in the past, highly praised by Ariel Sharon, being of major security importance to the state of Israel. Arik may have changed, but Netzarim hasn't. Neither have the people of Israel, people like Moshe and Tehilla Yahalom, who understand the value of our land. Their singular act of courage should be a lesson to all those who have decided to change history, to rewrite the books, to obliterate fifteen hundred dead, to forget Ma'alot, to start from today. The Yahaloms, together with multitudes on the streets of Jerusalem, will proclaim: You cannot erase history, we will not forgive your abandonment of our land, we will not forget our land, we will not surrender our essence. Abu-Mazens, Shimons and Ariks will come and go, but Eretz Yisrael will remain ours forever.

With blessings from Hebron.

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 10, 2005.

A hospital spokesman 'said there would be no details (released) about the cause of Arafat death because of French privacy laws'. Why would Arabs, with cooperation of Arafat family, need to invoke French privacy laws? Dr. Arafat (half brother) said that he met French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier on the day of his brother's death and discussed the issue with him: "He told me it is not in the interest of France or our (PA) interest to disclose the cause of his death. Holding any party criminally responsible for his death will create political trouble". Who will be in political trouble? Surely, if the trouble was meant for Israel the documents would be revealed immediately!

"The full medical report of President Arafat is a historical document for the Palestinian people," said Hassan Abu Libdeh, the PA cabinet secretary. "We will get the report and the Palestinian Authority will take the necessary decisions including informing the Palestinian people about the full details of the report". Yasser Arafat's nephew, Nasser al-Kidwa, obtained the medical records many weeks ago. The PA can't blame the 'evil widow' for being silent any more! How much do they pay her for silence?

Why Arafat's nephew, who was so eager to tell the truth about Arafat's death, suddenly became mute and evasive? He had plenty of time to study official French report of his uncle's death. The only statement he has made, so far, is that his uncle had died of "unnatural" causes, implying Israel had poisoned Arafat. AIDS is "unnatural" cause of death too!

The toxicology tests were conducted during Arafat's two-week stay in Franch hospital but "no poisons known to doctors were found." PA Foreign Minister Nabil Shaath has said: "We know what it is not. It is not malignancy or cancer anywhere in his body." But, uncharacteristically for modern medical practice, no autopsy was even conducted.

Years ago, Oriana Fallaci, an Arab sympathizer at the time, reported that Arafat's headquarters in Tunis had a number of blonde German young men running around. She found that not only Arafat was homosexual, but that it was well known fact in his intimate circle. Later, as the rumors gathered force, Arafat arranged his pseudo marriage to his gold digging 'wife'. The CIA had known about the AIDS for some time and encouraged Israel not to assassinate him.

This saga reminds me the rumors about the death of another legend - the Great Communist leader, V.I.Lenin. When I was living in the Soviet Union, I heard whispers about the real cause of his death. Only recently, the team of German doctors reviewed the notes of Lenin's doctors and they officially conformed the rumors - "the great leader of the Socialist revolution" died indeed from syphilis. For political reasons, this information, as well as, the possible cause of Arafat's death have not been covered by international press!

I deliberately did not put a question mark at the end of the title of this article. It is not about Arafat's homosexuality, it is about lack of political integrity! Only the release of the official French doctors' report will stop to the rumors about Arafat death! Why this information is still concealed?

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict - independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@mail2world.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 10, 2005.

1. I think it is always nice when every once in a while the Left stops its doubletalk and newspeak and states quite openly what its REAL agenda is. This seems to have happened in today's Haaretz, the Palestinian newspaper published in Hebrew. In today's paper, on the front page of the "Gallery" features section of the paper, is an item entitled "Palestine 2020", accompanied by a map of Palestine. Please take a look at the map and the headline for yourself at http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/pages/ShArtPE.jhtml?itemNo= 525127&contrassID=2&subContrassID=7&sbSubContrassID=0 because otherwise you will think I am just joshing with you. There you will see Palestine 2020 stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea and encompassing all of Israel.

3. Where else but Berkeley? Berkeley contains a hippy-dippy Tikkunesque "synagogue" of leftists known as Netivot Shalom, and it features as its Rabbi one Stuart Kelman. I do not know where he has his alleged ordination from or even if he has any at all. In any case "Rabbi" Kelman has issued a fatwa urging Berkeley Jews to boycott a local rally to protest against Palestinian Islamofascist terror. He does not think Jews should protest PLO atrocities since the PLO is being so moderate and democratic by electing a new terrorist leader. He writes: Message From Rabbi Kelman


January 7, 2005
27 Tevet 5765 THE BUS

Dear congregant:

Many of you have recently read about the Rally Against Global Terrorism (see the San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 6), which is to be held on Sunday, January 16 here in Berkeley. All the advertisements point to it being a rally against terrorism in the world - but it is important to note that it is being organized specifically by a coalition of Christian Evangelicals and Jews who hold political opinions on the extreme right. They are bringing the remnants of a bombed out bus from Jerusalem (#19) and plan to display it publicly in front of Berkeley city hall. Their message is: "it could happen here".

None of us can possibly disagree with that message - and I am quite sure that the organizers of this event had good intentions in mind when they planned it.

However, for a variety of reasons, I personally, will not attend and want to ask you to stay away as well. My reasons are:

1. Given the recent death of Arafat, there seems to be a window for a change of climate. Israel is currently in t! he process of trying desperately to reach some sort of agreement with the Palestinians; I believe this is not a moment to remind local Palestinian supporters of terrorism against us. Frankly, there seems to be every likelihood that they will take the opportunity to remind of some of our missteps as well. (No, I am not equating terrorist acts with some of the things Israel has done. I am simply suggesting that THEY will do so - and escalate the argument).

2. I am not alone in my feelings. Neither our Jewish Community Relations Council nor our Jewish Community Federation (nor the majority of mainstream Jewish organizations and synagogues) are sp! onsors of the event as they feel it will not lead to constructive dialogue on issues facing Israel.

3. I learned quite recently, that some Arab student groups were actually excited that this event was being planned - and that they plan to take advantage of the opportunity to argue their point of view.

4. I am frightened that arguments will turn into violence. I pray that I am wrong; but I fear that I am right.

5. I feel uncomfortable displaying a bus in which people died. It just does not seem to be in keeping with the value of kavod, respect, due to those who died there.

6. Finally, ! there are many, many ways we can express our desire to see peace, to see the State of Israel prosper and to encourage an end to terrorism. Each day brings a new opportunity. Choose well and often.

In conclusion, I want to state clearly that I believe this event to be both wrong at this time and potentially dangerous. I will not attend and I want to encourage you to stay away as well.

Rabbi Stuart Kelman

Congregation Netivot Shalom
1841 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94703
Voice: 510 549-9447
FAX: 510 549-9448

A message from local ZIonists in Berkeley outraged by the "Rabbi's" gestures of solidarity with terrorism.

Dear Readers:

Rabbi Stuart Kelmans email address is: Stuart Kelman

Please write to him if you find his directive to his congregation, Netivot Shalom, offensive. He directed the congregation to boycott the Rally Against Global Terrorism saying that it was being organized by Christian Evangelicals. This is a falsehood. It is organized by a grass roots group composed of many organizations which are dedicated to ending terrorism.

Sanne DeWitte
(Sanne is a Holocaust survivor from Holland)

For more information on the protest, see: http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/ story_id/24578/format/html/displaystory.html

Here is another letter:

Dear Rabbi Kelman,

Your letter of protest to your congregation just came across my email. I am dismayed that a Rabbi would try to dissuade his congregation from attending a rally to protest Arab terrorism. That you lack the wisdom and courage to raise your voice for fear of retribution makes you unqualified to be a leader within Judaism. Your cowardly stance emboldens our enemies and discourages our fellow brethren in Israel. You had an opportunity to stand on the side of righteousness which at times requires risk, and you failed miserably. You should resign your post in shame for you have disgraced yourself and your community.

Shari Seaman Goodman
Los Angeles, Ca.

3. A major prop for the Gaza Disengagement was a 1997 Report that the Arabs were becoming a majority West of the Jordan River. A recent reexamination of the data indicates that Jews remain in the majority. This is Haaretz' writeup. The article is called "Report claims to debunk 'demographic bomb'" and it was written by Yair Ettinger, Haaretz Correspondent.

An extra-academic document that debunks one of the foundations of the disengagement plan, "the demographic bomb," will be presented in Washington on Monday to a prestigious academic institution with substantial influence on the Bush administration. The document, which Haaretz has obtained, argues that 2.4 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today, and not the 3.8 million claimed by the Palestinian Authority.

In sharp contrast to population studies conducted in Israel by professors Arnon Sofer and Sergio della Pergola, the document argues that Jews continue to maintain a solid 60 percent majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

An Israeli-American group whose members are clearly identified with the right authored the ABC Demographic Project. The group undercuts a prevailing assumption in Israel's public debate - that Jews have ceased, or will soon cease to be, a majority in that territory. The demographic danger is not "all it's made out to be," the writers state.

Della Pergola called the document "groundless," politically slanted and baseless from a research perspective. None of the signatories to the document is a professional in demographic research. Among its authors are former Israeli consul in Texas Yoram Ettinger (no relation to this reporter), former West Bank Civil Administration head Brigadier General (res.) David Shahaf and former Israeli health official Prof. Ezra Zohar.

The research was initiated and funded by Los Angeles Jewish businessman Ben Zimmerman and U.S.-based partners, historian Dr. Roberta Seid of the University of South Carolina and businessman Michael Wise.

A great deal of the interest in the document stems from the seal of approval it received from U.S. demographers which paved the way for the invitation to its authors to present their findings to influential conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

Later this week, the document will be presented in New York to the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations.

The document claims the updated 2004 statistic presented by the Central Bureau of Statistics on the Palestinian population in the territories - 3.8 million people - is unreliable. It doesn't incorporate emigration from PA territory, which they estimate at hundreds of thousands, a drop in fertility, or tens of thousands of deaths, and it includes about 200,000 residents of East Jerusalem, who are also counted in the Israeli census.

According to the document, Palestinian population growth was 2.4 percent in 2003, not the 4.5 percent reported by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.

In 2003, the population in Israel grew 1.7 percent.

PCBS data is based on a 1997 census. The figures are controversial, a controversy revived in recent days prior to the Palestinian elections, when the Palestinian legislature decided to update the voter registration list, adopting statistics from the population registry, which added 600,000 eligible voters to the rolls.

Various Palestinian and foreign sources claim the population registry includes data on many who are dead or living abroad.

The ABC document claims data from Israeli Border Police indicates consistent negative emigration from the territories of about 10,000 departures annually. Its authors allege that 300,000 Palestinian expatriates living in the U.S., Arab countries, Europe and Latin America appear in the population registry. They support the claim by quoting Norwegian research institute Fafo, situated in Ramallah, that found negative Palestinian immigration of 100,000 in 2001-2002.

Yoram Ettinger said, "The demographic issue has great importance in shaping the approach of the administration, the press and the public on a critical matter to the future of Israeli society. These positions should be determined based on facts and not distortions."

Works by Sofer and della Pergola, based largely on data from the PCBS, find the Jewish population between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is currently about 50 percent. Della Pergola deducted the population of East Jerusalem and found there were 3.53 million Palestinians in PA territory at the beginning of 2004. Sofer estimates Jews will be a minority of 40 percent in 2020, while della Pergola maintains the figure will be 46.7 percent (including foreign workers and non-Jews).

But della Pergola rejects the new document entirely. He refers to a figure that has no basis in the Israeli population registry, a claim in the document that 300,000 Palestinians have become Israeli citizens since 1967, noting the lack of segmentation of the statistics according to age, "critical in any Israeli-Palestinian demographic study."

He added, "The authors seek to prove the political theory that the status quo is good for us and time is on our side. They are trying to attach some demographic claims to that thesis."

The demographer claims there are distorted figures in the document, in addition to a lack of familiarity with professional literature and accepted research methods." Sofer's response was unavailable.

[Editor's note: To see Caroline Glick's article, "The Demographic Bomb is a Dud," click here.]

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, January 10, 2005.

Gush Katif is not just another outpost that can be evacuated one day and returned to the next. The battle for Gush Katif is a strategic one. If, G-d forbid, Gush Katif were to fall this would be liable to cause weakening in other parts of Yesha. Jonathan Bassi's job would be far easier when he comes to the Yesha settlers with proof of the destruction of Gush Katif. No-one has illusions that Sharon's tsunami will halt in the Gush. In fact this is a battle for the entire settlement enterprise in Yesha.

But even this definition is not exact. If, G-d forbid, the settlements in Yesha are destroyed, nothing will continue to hold the remaining narrow coastal strip. The end of settlements in Yesha will destroy the Jewish hold over Eretz Israel from the moral aspect, and as a direct result also from the security, social, and economic aspects. This is therefore a struggle for a Jewish State that we can pass on to the coming generations.

Have we in fact begun to wage this struggle? More and more groups and organizations are joining in the struggle for Gush Katif. The sit-down demonstration that began this week opposite the Knesset represents an important catalyst and we congratulate the Yesha Council for organizing it. However, it is important to remember that in the end the fate of Gush Katif will be decided by thousands of responsible citizens who will be prepared to violate the law in a non-violent manner and pay the full price of a jail sentence.

A good example of this was provided by residents of Gush Katif who for two hours blocked Kaplan St. in Tel Aviv, the major traffic route leading to the Kirya. Non-violent civil disobedience is a recognized and accepted method in real democracies, and we shouldn't pay too much attention to the declarations of interested parties and Leftists.

The destruction of Yamit was a fatal mistake, but the struggle against it assumed a different character since unfortunately at that time the nation supported Begin. Begin did at least act in a democratic manner. Rabin at his time, and Sharon now, created a pattern of dictatorial and militant behavior in a superficially democratic guise. The public doesn't understand the deep meaning of what is happening, but it smells the odor of despotism and senses very well how its basic human rights are being nullified.

Sharon seeks manipulation disguised as democracy in order to continue on his militant path. We hereby clearly declare that the expulsion of Jews from Eretz Israel is obviously immoral, and is therefore obviously illegal, regardless of the forum deciding it. We are convinced that the faithful public will never obey the expulsion order.

It seems that the public atmosphere is ready for non-violent civil disobedience, and many initiatives are emerging and forming into one great step. We are talking about soldiers signing declarations that they will refuse to obey orders (see the Defensive Wall website: http://www.hmagen.com/); preparations being made by layers to aid the numerous political prisoners, preparations by action teams throughout the country; unequivocal declarations by important rabbis, etc.

The Creator was merciful to us when he enabled Sharon to chalk up a victory in the last Likud Conference. Now that Peres is in the picture, all the settlers have finally realized that love alone will not win, and the struggle for Gush Katif has taken the path leading to victory.

Civil War

Those who read the articles in Ha'aretz, and listen to the Left in the media, can sense how the atmosphere is being prepared for a civil war. It is important to remember that from the Left's point of view the struggle for Gush Katif is one of to be or not be. They represent a negligible percentage of the population, who are convinced that they were born to rule, and this is their last battle before they leave the stage. If, after they have recruited (apparently by coercion) the Cossack who robbed the Likud for them, and despite being supported by all the media, the judicial system, the internal and external security establishment, the political and economic systems - if after all this Gush Katif remains standing, this means that the Left can pack its bags. Remember that when their regime is at stake, they have no inhibitions.

A civil war is the last thing to frighten the Left. They have already initiated such battles in the past (the "open season", the Altalena) and they long for such a war with all their hearts. This