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

Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, March 31, 2005.


Monday, April 11th, 2005, 1:00pm - 3:30pm
Crawford, Texas

Guests from Israel include:
Victims of terror, think-tank members, college professors, and other outstanding spokesmen who will be flying to Crawford direct from Israel

Join them in an effort to save the 8,500 Jewish residents who are being dispossessed in Gaza and Northern Samaria.

Rally busses are available from Colorado, Oklahoma, Tyler, Texas, the Dallas airport and several other locations.

For further information, call Pastor Vineyard at 405-943-3326 or email: whbc@windsorhills.org to RSVP

By following an inconsistent strategy against terror in Israel, the U.S faces military defeat at the very frontline of the global war on terrorism.


Download the "UCI Declaration of Concerns: Road Blocks to Arab/Israeli Peace" from http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/aboutUs/doc.pdf

The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

"Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

To Go To Top
Posted by AFSI, March 31, 2005.

Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI and the Zionist Organization of America/ZOA are pleased to announce that spaces are almost completely filled for their Spring mission to Israel which will be held from May 29-June 7, 2005.

We will depart from JFK & Newark airports at 2:30 PM on Sunday, May 29, arriving in Ben Gurion airport at 8 AM. Our armored bus will meet us, driven by our trusty driver, Ami, and Israel Danziger, leader of Mishmeret Yesha, who will be our guide. We will head directly to the northern Shomron, visiting the endangered communities of Sanur, Mevo Dotan, Kadim and Ganim. We;ll stay overnight at the beautiful Ashel HaShomron hotel in Ariel where we can enjoy a swim in the beautiful outdoor pool. The next day, Tuesday, May 31, Izzy Danziger will take us to sites in Itamar and Yitzhar where we can witness the training of the rapid response teams that serve the individual communities, in coordination with the IDF. We will try to include as many of the Shomron communities as possible in this visit. Overnight again at Ashel HaShomron, and then on Wednesday, June 1, we will travel to Gush Katif /Gaza for two nights at the Midreshet HaDarom. It is our intention to visit all the communities within the bloc, in order to show our strong opposition to the Sharon expulsion plans. If we discover that we absolutely cannot get into the Gush because of military closures, we will activate our back-up plan.

On Friday, June 3, we will visit the holy city of Hebron and its surrounding communities, pray in Kever Rachel in Bethlehem, and then head to Jerusalem, where we will enjoy a beautiful Shabbat. The Kings Hotel in Jerusalem will be our headquarters for Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights. During our time in Jerusalem we will have tours of east Jerusalem with Dan Luria of Ateret Cohanim, Chaim Silberstein of Uvneh Yerushalayim, and Arye King of Maaley Hazaytim. We will also arrange for early morning visits to the Temple Mount for those who are interested. The Yom Yerushalayim ceremonies begin on Sunday night, June 5, to commemorate the reunification of Jerusalem. We will participate in the parade and continue with the ceremonies and celebrations on June 6.

As always, a host of distinguished speakers will be included in the AFSI/ZOA program. On our November trip, some of the speakers we heard were: Itamar Marcus, Moshe Feiglin, David Wilder, Daniella Weiss, Ruth Matar, Dror Vanunu, Moshe Saperstein, MK Benny Elon, MK Dr. Arieh Eldad, and Josh Reinstein, spokesman for MK Yuri Shtern.

Once again, Rabbi Bruce Rudolph will be making the flight and hotel arrangements for the group, and also consulting on the itinerary plans with Helen Freedman, Glenn Richter, and Charlotte Wahle, the tour planners.

The cost of the trip, including flight and hotels, all breakfasts, most dinners and some lunches, is $2000 per person, double occupancy, plus airport taxes ($77). Single occupancy additional cost is $200. Non-AFSI members will be charged an additional $100, unless they prefer to join the organization for the annual cost of $50 per family. Those who wish to make their own travel arrangements, and simply join us for the land part of the trip, are welcome to do so. The cost for the land only is $1000. Israelis, too, are invited to meet us at the airport when we arrive at Ben Gurion and join us for this important solidarity mission. But we must, of course, know about their participation in advance, and they will be charged the land costs. Participants may also extend their trips, or meet us in Israel. It is very important that we know of any deviations from the group travel plans. Please notify Bruce of your specific travel needs, including your preference for JFK or Newark departures and arrivals. His email is: brudolph@health.nyc.gov. Also, let us remind you that passports must have a six month leeway in order to be accepted. If your passport will expire within the next six months, you must renew before departing with us. Please be sure to give us your exact name as it appears on your passport. Another request is that you keep your luggage to a minimum. One bag and one carry-on per person is most desirable, since the bullet-proof buses have less luggage room than regular touring buses.

Those interested in joining can learn more about our past missions by going to the AFSI website, www.afsi.org, and looking at the article and photos from the November, 2004 trip. Call AFSI at 212-828-2424 to make your reservation with a non-refundable $100 deposit no later than April 13, or email us at: afsi@rcn.com. Full payment will be required by May 2. Members may charge their costs on VISA or Mastercard. There are very few spaces left. We advise interested parties to sign up as soon as possible.

There are those who have also expressed an interest in going with us and remaining in Gush Katif through June and July. Arrangements can be made for this extended stay. Please let us know if you wish to be included in the group that remains.

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 Women in Green, March 31, 2005.

What happened on 9/11 is going to happen in the United States again, unless steps are taken by the present government to prevent such re-occurrence. Saudi Arabia is one of the main sources of monies to build Moslem mosques throughout America. It also exports into the Moslem congregations in the United States the Saudi philosophy of a gradual takeover of America. The Bush family has close oil ties with the Saudis and that is indeed worrisome. Moreover, the former Secretary of State James Baker's able law firm represents the Saudis in the United States, and serves as a protective shield for the plans and ideas of that wealthy Arab Country.

The Road Map Plan is essentially the Saudi Plan, and represents a threat to Israel's and the Holy Land's continued existence. Nevertheless, President George W. Bush has appointed James Baker to head a committee, without bothering to have Israel in any way consulted, in order to pressure Israel, not to obstruct Arafat's confidant Abu Mazen in any way. Abu Mazen, who is no different from Arafat except in appearance, is the co-founder of the PLO, whose Charter calls for the elimination of Israel.

That is why it is so very important that you drop everything and come to the Protest Rally in Crawford Texas, on April 11, 2005, led by Pastor Jim Vineyard. (Tel. 405 943 3326) (email: whbc@windsorhills.org). President Bush will be meeting with Israel's Prime Minister Arik Sharon at his Ranch near Crawford on that day, and it is vital that there be a massive turnout protesting the American supported Plan of Ethnic Cleansing of Jews from their Biblical Promised Land.

The Evangelical Christians were the decisive factor in electing George W. Bush to a second term. It is they, and only they, who can convince U.S President George W. Bush to change the State Department's and Baker's present policies with regard to Israel. The Holy Land should not, and must not, be taken over by the Moslems. The threat to the values of Western Civilization, nursed by anti-Bible Saudi Arabia, must be fought by anyone who wants the moral values of the Bible to survive. Arab terror and the anti-democratic values of Saudi Arabia must not be allowed to triumph.

By having a mass turnout in Crawford, Texas, you will insure that the religious values of the Holy Bible will survive, and that there will be no ethnic cleansing of Jews from their Promised Land.

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 Bryna Berch, March 31, 2005.

This was written by Ricki Hollander and Gilead Ini, Senior Research Analysts, www.CAMERA.org

After Israel approved building a new neighborhood in Ma'aleh Adumim, a few miles east of Jerusalem, many news reports indicated that such building is objectionable because it would prevent Palestinians from controlling "contiguous territory" in the West Bank, both cutting them off from Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem and bisecting the northern and southern areas of the West Bank. These charges -- an extension of the accusation that Israel is trying to separate the Palestinians into "cantons" or "bantustans" -- are false. Moreover, they demonstrate a double standard in that they advocate contiguity for Palestinians by cutting off contiguity for Israelis.

A striking double standard was demonstrated by a March 29, 2005 Ha'aretz editorial entitled "Provocation in Ma'aleh Adumim." The editorialist posited:

"...it is difficult to accept the revelation that the government plans to build another 3,500 housing units in the area known as E-1, between Jerusalem and Ma'aleh Adumim, and thus obstruct the territorial contiguity needed for a Palestinian state."

Acknowledging that "the chance that [Ma'aleh Adumim] will be evacuated is nil," he/she asserted that:

"Logic says the area [between Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem] should be preserved for Palestinian construction."

In other words, Ma'aleh Adumim should be "cantonized" to allow the Palestinians more convenient passage through the West Bank and Jerusalem. The Ha'aretz editorial is clearly spelling out what others in the media only imply -- that Palestinian contiguity (in fact, not contiguity but convenience) should be preserved at the expense of Israeli contiguity.

But even the question of contiguity for Palestinians is contrived. Palestinian contiguity in the West Bank would be no more cut off with the so-called E-1 corridor than would Israeli contiguity if Israel were to withdraw to its pre-1967 borders, even with slight modifications. As for Palestinian access to Jerusalem, it would not be precluded by Israel building in a corridor between Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem.

North-South Contiguity

Laura King of the Los Angeles Times wrote:

"The building project, [Palestinians] say, will not only cut East Jerusalem off from Palestinian communities in the West Bank, but will place a wide wedge of Jewish homes between the northern and southern West Bank.. That would be a blow to Palestinian hopes for controlling contiguous territory to form a nation." (3/22/05) [emphasis added]

The Boston Globe's Dan Ephron asserted:

"Critics of settlement expansion said the extension of Maaleh Adumim would nearly bisect the West Bank and seriously set back the Palestinian goal of establishing a contiguous independent state - an aim also articulated by President Bush." (3/22/05) [emphasis added]

Greg Myre also touched on the idea in the New York Times, writing that

"an expanded Maale Adumim would serve as a barrier between the northern and southern parts of the West Bank. Palestinians traveling between the two parts would face a lengthy detour..." (3/22/05) [emphasis added]

The American Heritage Dictionary defines contiguous as continuous without a break or a continuous connection. Regarding Israel and the West Bank, the concept and interpretation of contiguity can best be understood by examining the map of the area.

The black X marks the approximate location of the new neighborhood near Ma'aleh Adumim. To the west of the X is Jerusalem. The red line around the X is the planned route of the security barrier, which will include Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem on the Israeli side.

Those who charge that Israeli building in Ma'aleh Adumim, and the construction of the Israeli security barrier around the town, severs north-south contiguity disregard the fact that Palestinian-controlled areas would be connected by land east of Ma'aleh Adumim (marked on the map) that is at its narrowest point ~15 km wide. Again, the issue is convenience, not actual connection of the northern and southern areas, since the areas are not actually severed from each other. Moreover, Israel proposes to build tunnels or overpasses to obviate the need for Palestinians to detour to the east around Ma'aleh Adumim.

Ironically, many of those who argue for greater contiguity between Palestinian areas, at the same time promote Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 boundaries, which (even with minor modifications) would confine Israel to a far less contiguous territory than that of the West Bank. As shown on the map above, the route necessary to travel between northern and southern Israel (e.g. from Arad to Beit Shean) is even more circuitous and at its narrowest, there is also a roughly 15 km wide strip of land between the Green Line (and the Security Fence) and the Mediterranean Sea (near Herzliya).

Palestinians Are Not Cut Off From Eastern Jerusalem

The Washington Post's John Ward Anderson has reported that building around Ma'aleh Adumim is, according to anti-settlement activists, "the final step in sealing off north and east Jerusalem from Palestinians living in the West Bank." (Feb. 7, 2005)

This claim is also untrue. Access to Jerusalem through Abu Dis, Eizariya, Hizma and Anata is not prevented by the proposed neighborhood, nor would it be precluded even if there were a string of future neighborhoods that actually connected Ma'aleh Adumim to Jerusalem.

Lee Green is with The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), which monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. The website address is www.camera.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Arieh Zaritsky, March 31, 2005.

From the Free Pollard organization (www.FreePollard.org):
Tip to Sharon, who's about to visit Prez Bush: DO NOT RETURN WITHOUT POLLARD. Bring Pollard with you.

From Dror Vanunu, Gush Katif
(a)   Consider moving to Gush Katif:
MK Uri Ariel is joining Eitam and Eldad and is moving with his family to the Gush - http://www.a7.org/news.php?id=107660 (H)

(b)   Jewish Supporter all around the world - please follow suit.
To live in Gush Katif: Call (972) 08-6847.048 of fax 08-6845.128 (with your full name ID#, current address, children ages, preferred settlement, tel #).

(c)    PLEASE, make efforts to fly to Israel before (IF!) the evil "Jews' Expulsion Project" starts (around July 25) and join the crowds who would come to bodily block it.

(d)   If you are unable to come in person, PLEASE HELP otherwise:
* Use the English website for Katif - www.katifund.org - for news etc, and contribute online donations
* Tell us about any activities going on in your community for Gush Katif
* Forward this message to your friends and add a link to our website.

from tsvi november (tsvinovember@hotmail.com)
Please consider taking every red cent ear-marked as foreign aid to Israel, the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA and use these monies to create a fund for the humane re-settlement and rehabilitation (i.e. education and training) of Arab Palestinian refugees, especially those residing in Gaza refugee camps. In addition, link foreign aid to Arab countries to the absorption of these refugees in Arab League states. This program will (1) not cost a penny more to US taxpayers than is currently being expended, (2) courageously tackle the most difficult Palestinian-Israeli issue, (3) have a direct positive impact on Israel's security and (4) defuse the demographic time bomb that constitutes the terror groups' (i.e. Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hizbullah) primary source of strength. Obviously, the entire Arab political leadership from Morocco to the Arabian Peninsula will strongly object to this initiative but going over their royal heads so as to directly help the common people (i.e. the refugees) will do wonders to advance (by example) the concept of democracy in the Arab world at the grassroots level.

from Walter James O'Brien (w_obrien@earthlink.net):
...What is needed is an organized crime task force to root out all the "big fixes" and "easy money" deals in place between Arab terrorists and the Peresites which will kick in when the Frankenstinian state occurs. - Jimmy Hoffa did not die, his spirit of kickback and corruption lives on in the REAL Oslo Treaty.

From Eliezar Abrahms (abrams32@telus.net):
Read "Kick Your Victim Addiction. 12 Steps to Restoring Courage and Freedom" by Aaron Zelman & Claire Wolfe at http://jpfo.org/victimaddiction.htm

Arieh Zaritsky is a professor in the Life Sciences Department, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (http://www.bgu.ac.il/life/Faculty/Zaritsky/index.htm).

To Go To Top
Posted by Joe Marzal, March 31, 2005.

Too many see the U.S. as Israel's last hope, its sole guarantor of security and survival.

This is utterly foolishness and a deadly mistake. The warning signs are everywhere to see, that the unsinkable U.S. Superpower is slowly sinking.

Have faith in G-d, ALONE. America has hit the Iceberg called 'Dividing up the Land of Israel.'

This essay was written by Douglas Herman and appeared March 28, 2005 on the Strike The Root website. It is archived at http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/herman/herman8.html

History's Enduring Morality Tale

In 1912 the steamship Titanic was an enormous floating palace with many levels of society enclosed in a single vessel. The upper levels of the ship housed the wealthy and powerful. Below the richly furnished staterooms of the elite, the corresponding levels of society descended to the very bottom of the ship, where the lowest classes lived and worked.

"At her launching in May 1911, the British press hailed the White Star Line's 46,000-ton superliner Titanic as "the Wonder Ship," the most stupendous, the most luxurious, the safest ship afloat," wrote Sir James Bisset.

Despite the media rapture that heralded the Titanic as the most marvelous ship afloat, several of her crew deserted. "The rumor had started several days before the Titanic left Southampton," said then second mate Bisset. "Newspapers for months had been printing articles extolling her wonderful qualities, but on the morning when she was due to leave Southampton, twenty two men who had signed on in her crew were missing."

Despite the media rapture that presently heralds America as the sole remaining superpower, an unsinkable republic and an unassailable democracy, the country appears to be cruising as comfortably into unsafe waters laced with icebergs. The warnings have been forthcoming for a long time now. Similar to the enduring morality tale of the Titanic, where "not one, but many errors brought her to disaster," little hints of disaster indicating a larger tragedy to come have been sent - and ignored - by friendly ships of state all around.

Aboard the SS Titanic on her maiden voyage a helmsman firmly took the wheel. Behind him stood two powerful figures, the ship's Captain, Edward John Smith, and Bruce Ismay, the Chairman of the White Star Line. Behind them stood the prestige and power of the owner of the White Star Line, Ismay's father. "There is testimony that Ismay urged the captain to maintain maximum speed," said Bisset, one of the first men on the rescue scene after the sinking. Thus the helmsman aboard the Titanic actually wielded little power, exercised little judgment, aside from spinning the wheel. Those who stood behind him in the shadows set the course and determined the speed (and were wholly responsible for the ship). A New Atlantic Speed Record for her maiden voyage became an enviable goal. All that was required was an increase in power, and thus, speed for the entire voyage.

Aboard the SS America, nearly a hundred years later, the helmsman stands at the wheel, looking self-important, nominally in charge. Although the hands of the helmsman certainly grasp the wheel, the course and speed of SS America have been set by others. In the shadows, the power elite plot the new course, having increased power and speed, irregardless of the safety of the vessel. To the privileged class striding the upper decks of the most powerful vessel afloat, there is little cause for alarm, however. After all, capable men control this enormous ship of state and so the leisure class promenade proudly past the stout lifeboats of their diversified investment portfolios, and calmly tell themselves the vessel is unsinkable.

Ice warnings arrived throughout the entire voyage, 21 warnings altogether, including seven that Sunday. The Titanic continued steaming at top speed towards the pack ice - growlers and bergs - drifting down from Greenland. The two radiomen aboard the Titanic, Harold McBride and Jack Phillips, passed the warnings to the officers on the bridge throughout the day, but were mostly kept busy sending stock market messages from the wealthy businessmen on board and relaying stock quotes from New York.

Aboard the SS Carpathia, steaming east towards the Titanic, Captain Rostron remarked about the great ship on her maiden voyage. "She must be a wonderful ship, but all their newspaper bragging seems a kind of blasphemy, claiming that she's 'unsinkable' and all that kind of thing." The Carpathia would be the first ship on the scene after the disaster. Ironically, Captain Smith of the Titanic had remarked, on an earlier occasion, "I cannot imagine any condition which would cause a ship to founder. I cannot conceive of any vital disaster happening to this vessel. Modern shipbuilding has gone beyond that."

On Sunday evening aboard the Titanic, the upper classes continued to dine in opulent splendor before retiring. In the lower levels of the ship, particularly steerage, the common folk passed the time, reassured by the throb of the powerful engines and the stoutness of the steel hull, the swishing of seawater against the steel plates almost reassuring. The prospect of a bright new future, a new American century, appeared almost within their reach.

Unknown to anyone aboard the Titanic, whether passenger or crew, a critical design flaw had been built into the construction of the vessel. Inexplicably, Titanic's bulkheads and watertight compartments, did not reach all the way to the top of the overhead ceiling. Should the ship ever be flooded suddenly, her pumps might not keep the seawater from topping the bulkheads. The "unsinkable" Titanic would then quickly sink.

Aboard the SS America, the bulkheads and watertight doors likewise did not go all the way to the top. An intentional yet critical design flaw, ignored by passengers and crew alike, revealed that, in an emergency, nothing stood behind the US dollar but mere paper, empty promises, and the weight of massive debt. Still the ship of state sped onward, into uncharted waters incurring mountainous debt while the helmsman swung the wheel according to the dictates of the rich and powerful men behind him. Despite ample and repeated warnings of hazards ahead, from writers and radiomen with foresight, another foolhardy speed record beckoned those in control. Called the Project for New American Century, all that was required was an irrational increase in power and speed to achieve their goal. That and considerable luck.

AT 11 PM, the Titanic steamed west at her maximum speed of 22.5 knots, her radioman still sending and receiving stock market directives. A message arrived from the steamship Californian, ten miles to the northwest, that she was stopped for the night by ice blocking her way. Aboard the Titanic, the harried radioman, Jack Phillips, cut him short with the terse reply in code, "Shut up old man I'm busy."

The SS Titanic, the largest ship afloat, where "not one but many errors brought her to disaster," was only minutes away from her doom. Aboard the opulent luxury liner, however, neither the passengers nor the crew realized their immediate danger. Indeed, most slept soundly even when the Titanic struck the iceberg at 11:40 PM and had to be aroused thirty minutes later. By then, at 12:15 AM, the frantic radioman Phillips tapped out his first distress signal - CQD - to be followed ten minutes later by this desperate message to the reply of the Carpathia: "CQD CQD SOS SOS CQD SOS. Come at once. We have struck a berg..." The score of ice warning repeatedly ignored by those who set the speed and course aboard the Titanic had finally caught up to the "unsinkable" liner.

"The fact that the Titanic had struck a berg in calm weather on a clear night meant one of three things," observed second mate, James Bisset, of the Carpathia: "insufficient lookout; responses too slow from her bridge; or that the big vessel at her full speed had not quickly enough answered her helm to avoid collision."Full view picture of an iceberg

Within two hours the largest ship afloat would be foundering, her engine rooms flooded, her radios failing. Untrained crewmen struggled to launch lifeboats and board hundreds of stunned, reluctant or disbelieving passengers. If the ship was so unsinkable, they wondered, why were they being forced into lifeboats? Many wealthy passengers - and almost all of those in steerage - would drown when the ship sank; there simply were not enough lifeboats. By 1:45 AM, when Phillips tapped his last message, "Come as quickly as possible. Engine room filling up to the boilers," the last lifeboat pulled away from the sinking ship.

Bruce Ismay, however, would survive the sinking of the Titanic. "According to evidence," remarked Bisset, "he had jumped into a boat that was being lowered." Like many of those now in command of this ship of state, the SS America, the Ismays of the world always survive. Indeed they thrive, even prosper, whether in disaster or success. Whether Neocon, Bilderberger, Wall Street insider or architect of the New World Order, they're the first ones into the lifeboats with a money belt firmly around their waist.

When the collision of the SS America occurs, with a mountainous iceberg of foreign debt amid an ice pack of foolhardy foreign adventures, the ablest survivors will be those least clinging to the notion that the vessel is unsinkable. Indeed, many of the foremost survivors will resemble the 22 crewmen who abandoned the Titanic before she sailed, aware that those who command our beautiful vessel are woefully incompetent or criminally insane.

Postscript: Then as now, New York newspapers were pretty unreliable for accuracy: "ALL Saved From Titanic After Collision," blared the New York Evening Sun, of April 15, 1912. The Carpathia arrived at 4 AM, Monday, April 15, almost two hours after the Titanic had sunk. "The increasing daylight revealed dozens of icebergs within our horizon," observed Bisset. "Among them were four or five big bergs, towering up to two hundred feet above water level. One of these was the one that the Titanic had struck." The Carpathia's crew spent the morning rescuing 703 survivors and hoisted 13 lifeboats aboard. Neither the Titanic's captain or her first officer were among the survivors. Captain Smith, aware of the enormity of his error in judgment, had gone down with his ship. One final irony: sometime this spring the vessel USS America will be sunk, somewhere in the Atlantic.

Joe Marzal can be reached by email at marzal@myway.com

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, March 31, 2005.

This essay was written by Leslie White.

I'm a Jew, I don't live in Israel, I'm not Israeli, do I have the right to criticize Israel's government or defend it? After all, I'm not affected by what Israel's government does - or am I?

We Jews were without Israel for nearly 2000 years. Sometimes things went well, other times not, and lately not well at all. After doing not much to keep us from being wiped out, the nations let us have Israel back - part of it anyway.

For the two millennia before that, we couldn't point to a real country of origin. Yes, we hailed from most, if not all, countries around the globe, but those weren't really our countries. At any time, we could be told to leave.

With the return of our land, there were now two kinds of Jews: Israelis and the rest of us. Before that, we all lived in foreign lands. The Jews that lived in what the Romans had renamed "Palestine" were not living in their own country either, but under foreign rule.

Some Jews think as Jews, others as citizens of the country where they happen to live. These latter can of a sudden face reality. The yellow hate can be as subtle as a non-Jew mocking us with a put-on Yiddish accent.

Not all Israelis think as Jews. I'm talking of Israeli Jews when I refer to Israelis. Arabs that were handed Israeli citizenship cannot be considered as Israelis. Some might be loyal to Israel, others consider themselves "Palestinian" and side with the PLO and its malignant outgrowths.

There are Israelis who have forgotten the lessons learned by their forbears. They no longer believe in Israel as a Jewish State, a Jewish homeland, a refuge for all persecuted Jews, They want an Israel that is the state of its citizens, be they Israeli-hating Arabs, non-Jewish hooligans - some outspoken anti-Semites from the former Soviet Union - as well as Israelis (Jews) who see nothing wrong in giving more and more of Eretz Yisroel to the Muslim Arabs who want to kill all Jews and turn Israel into an Arab Islamic "Palestine".

These anti-Israel Israelis want to see Israel not as a Jewish state, because they dream of a peace where Arab Muslims and Jews embrace as they celebrate their common humanity. Chances of that? As good as that of Muslims expurgating all anti-Jewish rhetoric from their Koran.

The Jews who already lived in the reborn Israel, or streamed back there, faced challenges and hardships different from those the rest of us had encountered. From agricultural achievements through Arab massacres, British persecution, to constant Arab murderous harassment, the experience and history of the Jews that built, held, and today defend Israel is unique.

The rest of us were on the outside, looking in. Sure, we visited Israel, sent our children to stay in a kibbutz, bought Israel bonds, and otherwise financially supported our land. But most of us weren't on the frontlines, defending the land.

All Jews living outside of Israel do not share a history. We have one thing in common though: our ancestors were exiled from what is now Israel. Many of us prayed and hoped for a return of the land and its capital Jerusalem. Not all approve of what the government of Israel does, some even do not want an Israel at all, others see Israel as the only solution to the nations' "Jewish problem."

To the Jews in Israel, those of us, who live outside, are "away from home". I want a strong Israel and am exasperated at the contortions for "Peace" at any cost from successive Israeli governments. Some Israeli Jews say, "Come to Israel, make aliyah, only then can you tell us what to do".

There are Jews in Israel who feel as I do. On the other hand, there are Jews both outside and inside Israel who "feel the pain of the 'Palestinians'". The Israelis who feel compassion only for the "Palestinians" and not for their own people also want more Jews to come to Israel - to help them hold what they believe to be the moral high ground - giving the "Palestinian" Arabs everything they want (which, in the end, is all of Israel).

When we "outside" Jews start to see blood in the eyes of the inhabitants of the nations among whom we live, coming to Israel appears as our only out. That's why we have a stake in the land and what becomes of it.

How can we have a right to the land of Israel, if we don't live there? Before and since its rebirth, we have supported Israel with money, words, and by political action among the nations. Doesn't that give us at least some right to have a say about Israel?

I know, I know, you Israelis want us all to go there now, to fill the land with Jews, bring our expertise, etc. I don't think that having all Jews in the world in one place is such a good idea. There are those around eager for an opportunity to take out all the world's Jews at one time.

Also, if all of us Jews were to leave the United States, who do you think would jump in and with lobbies and voting blocks to pressure the government to squeeze Israel out of existence?

Here in America I can say and publish what's on my mind: how Israel should be a Jewish state, not a state of its citizens - many of whom side with the enemies of Israel - and what should be done with these external and internal enemies. If I were to say or publish that in Israel, I could be charged with racism and incitement(1).

We Jews outside of Israel do not all feel the same about Israel. There are those of us, and I am one of them, who support Israel, but do not always agree with the actions of the Israeli government.

Then, there are Jews on the outside who do not want an Israel at all. There are those who criticize any of Israel's acts unless it is on the road to turning it over to the Arabs. Do they think that Jews will be allowed to live in an Islamic state as fellow citizens of Muslim Arabs? If they look at how many Jews live in the "territories" occupied by the "Palestinians" and how many live in such Islamic Arab countries as Jordan and Saudi Arabia, they can see the chance of that.

The acts of the government of Israel do affect Jews living outside of Israel. The Jew wearing a kippa on the way from or to shul is beaten up by Muslims for the sake of "Palestine". Synagogues are defaced with graffiti and firebombed because Israel exists(2).

If you are the type of Jew - male or female - who puts on an Arab headdress to march in an anti-Israel demonstration, carrying a sign with the words "Free Palestine!" among a throng shouting "Death to the Zionists!" you probably believe you are fighting for "human rights". As the rally heats up, you pretend not to hear the shouts of "Itbach al Yahud!" (slaughter the Jews) as emotions reach the boiling point, but shout "End the occupation!" hoping that the louder you protest against Israel, the more you show these enemies of Israel with whom you are marching that you're on their side. You don't worry whether you have the right to criticize Israel, you feel it your duty.

But say now you have returned the Arab head-dress to your "Palestinian" friends and you're alone, walking home from the demonstration, not carrying your sign. You look - well - Jewish. A bunch of Jew-hating hoodlums spot you. To them you're a Jew, and they blame you for what Israel does. What happens next, I leave to your imagination.

That brings us back to the question: Is it proper for you, who do not live in Israel, to speak out for or against the government of Israel?

A while back, I said, "the return of our land to us" - to us, not to them, not only to the Israeli Jews. Israel belongs to all of us.

You don't want it? Or you feel it isn't yours because you're not Israeli, or you don't agree with how the Arabs are being treated? Think of it, Israel is the only land that will let us in, when there is no other country that will have us.

There are Israeli Jews who would disagree that Israel belongs to all Jews. To us they say: "You haven't fought for Israel, you haven't bled for Israel. You do not live there as an Israeli."

But we do have a right to it. Our ancestors were dispersed from there, scattered among the nations by the world power of the day. For millennia many of us have prayed for a return of the land to us, the descendants of these ancient Jews that stood up to the world power and paid a terrible price for it. The land is ours - it is the land of all Jews: The Israeli Jews that hold it today and defend it from its enemies and we on the outside who back them up with financial, moral, and political support to keep Israel a Jewish land.

I'd say we have every right to voice our opinion. As Israel goes so go the Jews. Without Israel, we are a people without a land again, a people living at the sufferance and mercy of the nations.

So when some Israeli Jews say, "Either come home to Israel or keep your mouth shut," I say, "No, not until we have a safe and secure Israel, independent, able to determine its own destiny." The way things are going, looks like I'll be making lots of noise for some time.


1. "Section 144B of the anti-racism law states that 'one who publishes a matter for the purpose of incitement to racism, may be incarcerated for five years'; and that 'it does not matter if the publication led to racism or not, and if it contained truth or not.' This means that one may be imprisoned for five years for publishing words which, whether true or not, hurts no one! This is a remarkable infringement on freedom of expression." Professor Paul Eidelberg, "The David Haivri Case," http://foundation1.org/papers-articles/democracy/haivri-freedom-speech.htm

2. "The key issue which divides the British Jewish and Muslim communities is the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. 'Jews are confronted with a rigid Islamist standpoint which concedes no legitimacy to the State of Israel and which justifies terrorist violence against Jews in the name of Palestine, regardless of whether the victims carry Israeli passports. Ben Cohen, "Evaluating Muslim-Jewish Relations in Britain" Jerusalem Viewpoints, No. 527, 22 Shevat - 6 Adar I 5765 / 1-15 February 2005, http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp527.htm

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 Dr. Ron Breiman, March 31, 2005.

The plan to use the IDF for political ends, to expel Jewish residents from their homes in their homeland, will do severe damage to the morale of officers and soldiers. It will rend the fabric of the army and of society and endanger the future of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.

Professors for a Strong Israel cautions against using the army and the security apparatus for purposes that have nothing to do with Israel's defense.

The transfer will not pass!!!

Dr. Ron Breiman, is Chairman of Professors for A Strong Israel (PSI). He can be reached by telephone at 050-5-518 940 in Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, March 31, 2005.

Dear Jewish friends,

Here is an extreme example of people and organization without shame. Many would call them traitors if not worst.

In stark contrast, you will never read about a conference convened in support of Israel and its policies, in which Palestinians participate. What a very sad state of affairs.

If instead of maligning and discrediting the brave Zionist citizens and builders of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, PM Sharon and his government spent 5% of the time to curb the activities of this fifth column inside Israel, things would look a lot better. In times of war, should Peace Now (Gush Shalom) be banned? Boycotted? I wonder...

This article was written by Herb Keinon and appeared in today's Jerusalem Post and is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1112152826237

A three-day "Peace in Palestine" conference in Malaysia concluded Wednesday with a call for a boycott of Israeli products.

More than 300 people from 34 countries attended the conference, including five representatives from Israel's extreme-left Gush Shalom and representatives from the extreme anti-Zionist haredi Neturei Karta group.

An action plan was released at the end of the conference calling for a center to be established in Malaysia to coordinate the proposed boycott.

The Israelis who attended reportedly had to receive special permission from the Malyasian government to enter the country.

The center will study how to "organize a selective boycott of Israeli goods and divestment from that country in order to pressure Tel Aviv to withdraw completely from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip," the joint action plan said.

Other proposals by the activists included urging governments to end military dealings with Israel and encouraging direct aid to the Palestinians and the import of Palestinian products.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said, "These sort of one-sided extreme and anachronistic resolutions do no one any good, neither do they serve the cause of peace. Those who are truly interested in peace should not be conducting boycotts, rather they should be encouraging dialogue."

Regev, who would not comment on the participation of Israelis in the conference, said: "If people in Malaysia want to play a positive role in support of peace and reconciliation, it would be effective that instead of just speaking to one side, they chose to speak to both sides."

Malaysia has no diplomatic ties with Israel.

In 2003, then Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad told a summit of Islamic leaders that "Jews rule the world by proxy" and the world's 1.3 billion Muslims should unite, using nonviolent means for a "final victory."

"The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy, they get others to fight and die for them," he said at the time.

On Wednesday, Chandra Muzafar, president of the Malaysian-based International Movement for a Just World, said groups in the United States and Europe were also attempting a boycott of Israeli products.

He did not say when the boycott would be launched and what kind of goods might be affected.

"We will not rush into such an action," Chandra told a news conference. "We want to study the various dimensions of this issue before making a move."

The conference was organized by the People's Alliance for Peace Malaysia, a coalition of 1,100 nongovernmental associations, religious groups and political parties.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Sliwa News, March 31, 2005.

For more information, contact: Dr. Charles Jacobs of the David Project, 617-835-3584 or cj@davidproject.org

Biased Committee Ignores Facts, Protects Its Own

NEW YORK, March 31 - Responding to the just-released report of Columbia University's Grievance Committee headed by Vice President of Arts and Sciences Nicholas Dirks, Charles Jacobs, President of the David Project in Boston, issued the following statement:

This is a biased report by a biased committee, which ignored the facts to protect its own.

We expected an unfair report from a committee composed of friends and colleagues - and even a thesis advisor - of the professors it was supposed to investigate. But the report is disgraceful, beyond our expectation. The Dirks Committee failed President Bollinger, who only a few days ago told the press that Columbia professors cannot "use the podium as an ideological platform to indoctrinate a captive audience."

The Committee considered only three incidents of professors harassing students worthy of investigation. We know there were many more. It projected blame for the problems on outside forces.

While the Committee judged the testimony of Professor Joseph Massad not truthful - he was charged with shouting at a student, "If you're going to deny the atrocities being committed against Palestinians, then you can get out of my classroom!" - the report so gently chided him ("...his rhetorical response to her query exceeded commonly accepted bounds...") that his wrist may not register the slap.

The Dirks Committee report tries to silence dissenting professors, upbraiding whistleblowers on the faculty who help students report abuse by other professors.

The report admits the University Administration was insensitive, inconsiderate, and even antagonistic to students who complained that anti-Israel professors harassed them. And it admits that students had no effective means to register complaints. But it reduced a major academic scandal to only these narrow bureaucratic foul-ups.

Most importantly, the Dirks Committee evades the main issue: the teaching of lies and propaganda by Arabist professors who so demonize Israel that defenders of the Jewish state find themselves in a hostile environment in their classes.

The report evades this issue by referring to incidents of biased, dishonest teaching in pedagogical and psychological terms. It classes them as "rhetorically combative" methods or as expressions of "uncongenial views" that - and the issue is reduced to this - make some students "uncomfortable."

But the committee never considers the possibility that these "teachings" are lies and propaganda. When Professor Massad teaches that the word "Zion" means "penis" and therefore Zionism is a macho movement, this is not an uncongenial view, but a lie. When at Columbia it is taught that the Jews are Nazis and the Palestinians are the new Jews, and that the Jews slaughtered Arabs in Jenin, these are not "rhetorically combative" modes of teaching; they are blood libels, anti-Semitic provocations, deceptions, and Arabist propaganda.

These issues will only fester if "investigated" by friends of the offending professors, many themselves anti-Israel activists, circling the wagons. The only question is: What will Lee Bollinger do to restore academic integrity?

The David Project, which promotes a fair and honest discussion of the Middle East Conflict, produced the film, "Columbia Unbecoming."

To Go To Top
Posted by Michael Freund, March 31, 2005.

This is a news item from today's Arutz 7 (www.Israel National News) and is entitled "Rabbinate Recognizes Bnei Menashe as 'Descendants of Israel'" (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=79370).

In a historic decision yesterday, Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar decided to formally recognize the Bnei Menashe of northeastern India as "descendants of Israel."

The Chief Rabbinate has also agreed to send a beit din (rabbinical court) from the Chief Rabbinate to the region to convert them.

The Bnei Menashe claim descent from the tribe of Manasseh, one of the ten tribes exiled from the Land of Israel by the Assyrian empire over 2,700 years ago. They reside primarily in the two Indian states of Mizoram and Manipur, along the border with Burma and Bangladesh. In recent years, over 800 members of the community have made aliyah thanks largely to the efforts of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), a Jerusalem-based group that reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people.

Shavei Israel Chairman Michael Freund, who took part in yesterday's meeting with the Chief Rabbi, praised the decision. "This is a momentous day, and we are very grateful to the Chief Rabbinate for the openness and sensitivity that they have demonstrated in addressing the issue of the Bnei Menashe. This is the breakthrough that we have all been waiting for, and thank G-d, the remaining 6,000 members of the community still in India will at last be able to come home to Zion."

In June 2003, then-Interior Minister Avraham Poraz of the Shinui Party decided to halt the Bnei Menashe aliyah, reportedly because he objected to the fact that they were all religiously-observant and many chose to live in Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. After Poraz' decision was announced, Freund turned to the Chief Rabbinate, and began lobbying to receive official rabbinical recognition of the Bnei Menashe as a means of circumventing the Interior Minister's decision. Yesterday's meeting with the Chief Rabbi marked the culmination of those efforts.

Rabbi Eliyahu Birnbaum, a dayan (rabbinical court judge) and spokesman for Rabbi Amar, said that the decision had come after careful consideration and study of the issue. "The Chief Rabbi sent a delegation of two dayanim to India last year to conduct a thorough investigation of the community and its origins. After a thorough review of their findings, it was decided that the Bnei Menashe are in fact descendants of Israel and should be drawn closer to the Jewish people."

Rabbi Birnbaum added that once various conditions laid down by the Chief Rabbi are fulfilled, such as the construction of mikvaot (ritual baths) in India, and the dispatch of additional teachers, then the Chief Rabbinate would send a beit din of its own to the area to convert members of the community to Judaism, thereby allowing them to make aliyah to Israel.

Michael Freund served as an aide in the Prime Minister's Office to former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. He is Chairman of Shavei Israel, an organization that assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to Judaism.

To Go To Top
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 31, 2005.

The most sagacious testament of the Jews is the Torah. Its important commandments are: Thou Shalt Not Kill, Steal or Bear False Witness. Using these measures of wisdom for civilization would denounce dubious handshakes, peace frauds and unilateral disengagements for the compensation of jihad suicide killers and rocket smugglers and shooters, stealing and the Big Lie.

As it was a custom to scapegoat and blood libel the innocent Jew rather than the terrorist, some Jews who want to be like the masses are bullying their own Jewish brethren, sacrificing them to appease the beast that reformed terrorists also acknowledge as beastly. Would King Solomon give the Land to pan-Jihad a la Iraq and Taliban which destroys Jews who love, plant and have the longest legitimate lease?

There are no excuses for eliminating Torah truths and divesting from all that is the Land of Israel, the Commandments for Civilization, the Jewish midos that makes deserts bloom. Muzzling the message fails G-d, goodness, the Jews and their inherited estate of Israel. Compromising with disengagers is not to stand upright for truth, justice and life itself, but to bow and surrender to false idols and death. It is to reward Jihad instead of demanding Torah truth and standards. It is to accomodate evil and sacrifice all that is highly civilized for destructive "anti-dhimmism" and to put the whole world at risk.

Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com.

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


P.A. television's most quoted Quranic phrase about the Jews is, "come let us kill them."

Would Jews who derive their views about Israel from the liberal press favor P.A. statehood, if the press publicized the fact that incitement to pogroms is P.A. policy? Or would they seek a new source of news?


The P.A. and its sympathizers constantly claim that the security fence imposes hardships on them. They don't say how many Arabs are involved per month or what financial burden the fence poses for them. To make their case, they should have to. Mountain out of a molehill?

Israel's sympathizers reply that the complainers fail to acknowledge that the fence is intended to prevent terrorism and save lives. By reducing raids and counter-attacks, it spares the Arab population much trouble, so that it actually is good for many of the Arabs. Also, since terrorism is illegal and heinous, the Arabs bear responsibility for the fence's cost to them in money and convenience. They should address their complaints to the P.A.. This argument is unanswerable. It should be put with more self-assurance than it is, so as to prevail. I find it put weakly. Nor am I satisfied with it.

Why don't Israel's sympathizers assess how much difficulty the fence does make and for what proportion of the Arab population? Without apologizing, why don't they discuss what steps were taken to reduce the hardships from it? Such a discussion would put the problem in perspective. It might turn out not to be extensive.

I don't see how Arab hardship could be extensive. The fence is close to the Green Line. It leaves 93% of Judea-Samaria in the P.A., along with most Jewish communities of that province. What about those now isolated Jewish communities? Have they no hardship, being less protected from Arab terrorism? Where is the sympathy for them?


We've already explained that: (1) Israel is the legitimate heir to the Territories, under the Mandate; (2) Israel is not an occupier because the Territories were not part of a sovereign state; (3) if they were, Israel would have a right to occupy them after having taken them in self-defense; and (4) Israel would have a right to annex them for security against further aggression from them.

The more one thinks about the subject, the more one realizes the malicious falsity of the charge that Israel occupies Judea-Samaria and Gaza. Not having been sovereign, the Territories' are the unallocated portion of the Mandate. The biased world acts as if the Arabs are entitled to them. Part of this act is sincere, being confused by the UN's 1947 recommendation that they be given to the Arabs and the Jews' foolish perceiving in that partition plan validity for Israel's existence. The Mandate already had recognized the Jews' pre-existing entitlement. The UN has little legitimacy to confer or withhold, it being a place of corruption and evil, whose own legitimacy is being challenged.

To falsely call Israel an "occupier" implies that Israel has no business there. Do the users of that false term not know that Judea-Samaria and Gaza are key parts of the Jewish homeland? Do they not know that the Mandate's provisions envisioned and mandated Jewish settlement there? What we are seeing is antisemites misusing terms in order to overturn legitimate Jewish claims.

Joint report: by Medecins Du Monde, Physicians for Human Rights - Israel, and the Palestine Red Crescent Society, against Israel's security fence.

One-sided: The report fails to acknowledge the barrier's purpose and evidence of its success, to reduce Arab terrorist attacks. The report referred to the barrier as "the Wall," although little of it is a wall. Since the image of a wall is starker, the Arabs and their supporters conjure it for propaganda. Essentially the report is an unscrupulous anti-Zionist propaganda piece against Israel, as one has come to expect from NGOs.

Testimony: From several dozen complainants, but anonymous. What credibility has it? The report also relies on certain Arab and Israeli organizations, such as Palestinian Environmental NGO Network and "the highly ideological Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions," known for demonizing Israel, not for factual objectivity.

Complaint: "The Wall deprives Palestinians (i.e., Arabs in the P.A.) of adequate access to basic services such as water and education, as well as sources of income such as agriculture and other forms of employment. The Wall has steadily added another layer of obstacles isolating, fragmenting and therefore weakening the already fragile Palestinian healthcare system."

Denunciation of: "... all other factors and tactics of occupation which restrict the Palestinians' right to live and move freely in the Palestinian territories. It violates both international human rights and ... humanitarian law." "Relying on the biased advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the security barrier, the criticism of Israeli measures to restrict Palestinian freedom of movement again ignores Palestinian terrorism." It "... criticizes IDF searches of ambulances, ignoring the documented abuse of medical facilities and vehicles in Palestinian terror attacks.

Assertions: "By annexing the West Bank's water resources and most fertile land and separating the Palestinians from their work in Israel, the Wall also reinforces unemployment and poverty". NGO Monitor explains, "These claims are not backed by reliable evidence and are outside the claimed purview of the NGOs." (IMRA, 2/15.)

The assertions are false. Israel did not annex land in Judea-Samaria except for the normal municipal expansion of Jerusalem, but is entitled to annex the whole province. It didn't annex water resources, but is entitled to share them under riparian rights to joint aquifers. It boosted Arab access to water.

Note that the biased group takes reinforcement from another, the Intl. Court of Justice. What a lack of humanitarian concern for the Jewish victims of Arab terrorism! One never hears those "humanitarian organizations" condemn Arab terrorism, supported y the Palestinian Arabs as a whole, for hampering Jewish travel and even for mass-murder.


Exhorted by the US, the P.A. had frozen Hamas bank accounts. This brought Hamas to a financial crisis, according to Abbas. To induce them to agree to a ceasefire, he unfroze their funds (IMRA, 2/15).

So much for the Great White Hope, Abu Mazen who still is financing terrorism! During the ceasefire, Hamas would spend some of the funds to purchase arms, so that afterwards, it would be ready to fight. The rest would be spent on building up popular support for the war.

Freezing of funds is an over-rated, almost phony measure. It has but temporary effect, for its hold usually relaxes. Then the culprits get their money back, to do mischief with. Confiscate, instead!


Daniel Pipes challenges the Administration's invitation to Hizbullah and Hamas to eschew terrorism for politics. The Bush-Rice operative theory hopes that domestic concerns for constituents would mellow the terrorists. Mr. Pipes asks rhetorically whether a Nazi renunciation of violence would have rendered Hitler acceptable; no, because Nazi goals were more important than their tactics. Same for Hizbullah, which seeks global totalitarian domination for Islamism.

Bush's hope naively overlooks the record. Totalitarians can meet constituents' needs, along the way to consolidating power over them. Totalitarians use democratic methods, when that is the path to power, but once entrenched, they destroy rival political parties and influences. Totalitarians would not be legitimate participants in democracy, but would exploit it to destroy democracy. Democrats must ban totalitarian parties (NY Sun, 3/22, p.6).

Let us clarify this. Fanatics lie about their intentions. Their job is to promise, ours is to disbelieve. So of course Pres. Bush and Sec. Rice are ridiculous in their hopes for goodwill from fanatics.

Fixing potholes, what Bush said would preoccupy them, does not disabuse them of their ideology. It certainly did not in Iran, Germany, or the USSR.

Let us be careful of our wording and our prohibitions. Totalitarians fail the test of decency and acceptability regardless of some compromises on means and promises on ends. Nevertheless, we should beware of a loose prohibition of totalitarians and "racists," such as Israel's unjustified banning of political rival Rabbi Meir Kahane's political party. They called him a racist as the excuse to ban. What he warned about has occurred. His persecutors now are picking on fellow Jews.

Why doesn't Mr. Pipes apply the same criticism, that fanatical terrorists such as Hizbullah, who cannot be trusted with a militia certainly cannot be trusted to rule a state, to the Administration's invitation to the PLO, who are fanatical jihadists with equal determination to destroy Israel and equal hatred of the West? Because Pipes takes the Council on Foreign Relations position of pretending that there are no security and ethical problems in turning Jewish territory over to the Arab common enemies of Israel and the US.


"The Jerusalem Post writes: '"On Wednesday, the EU is expected to consider whether to add Hizbullah to its list of terrorist organizations. If it does not, it will plainly be a slap in the face to Israel. It will also be a slap in the face to newly-elected P.A. Chairman Mahmoud Abbas... In any case, a policy of support for Israeli-Palestinian peace and for the new PA government cannot be taken seriously when there is a refusal to even recognize, let alone confront, a terrorist group that is openly committed to destroying both." (Foreign Ministry, 2/15).

The "Jerusalem Post" misunderstands what the P.A. is about and what it is for. It is about terrorist jihad and it is supported by the EU to destroy Israel. Yes, the EU would be condoning terrorism. However, EU support for the P.A. condones terrorism, whose leader is Abbas. He does not seek peace but conquest, partly by diplomacy and partly by war, just as Hitler once did to many countries now in the EU. Why doesn't the "Jerusalem Post" confront that truth? Hint: Its new editor is a leftist. Leftists don't confront truth anymore, they misunderstand it or they distort it.

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 Menachem Kovacs, March 31, 2005.

Even before the government voted to destroy the communities of the Gaza Region, most people were feeling helpless - clueless about how they could personally help change the terrible decree facing the Jewish people. As the Jerusalem protest tent was folding last month, Voices Editor (moi) and Publisher had the opportunity to chat with the respected Yeshiva University rosh yeshiva and Jewish leader Rabbi Moshe David Tendler, shlita. Here are some excerpts of our talk:

Many years ago, a talmid of mine married and lived on a kibbutz. After nine years of married life, which included visits to the biggest fertility specialists in Israel, G-d did not strengthen with them with children.

He was appointed as a shaliach to America, where the couple consulted with experts in fertility management. None of the doctors they met had the key that the Ribono Shel Olam keeps in His pocket. After almost two years, and no children, they prepared to return to Eretz Yisrael. He asked me if he could see my father-in-law [the great sage of the previous generation HaRav Moshe Feinstein] ztz'l. Like a good Litvak, my father-in-law said to him, 'Did you try everything? The best in Israel? The best in America? You gave up? There's nothing else? Well, now the Ribono Shel Olam will help.' As long as you think you have a better idea, one that the Ribono Shel Olam didn't think of, He waits until you finish. Once you make up your mind that there's nothing to do, then you come to the conclusion, Ein lanu al mi le'hisha'en elah al Aveinu She'BaShamayim.(We have no one to rely on, except our Father in Heaven.)

On the way home, they took a side trip to France and to Italy, and by the time they landed home in Israel, she was expecting. They have nine children today, bli ayin hara.

I use this story for myself and for others. The trick is to give up. We haven't given up enough.

Surely, we have to do everything. Lemaan yevarechecha H' Elokecha bechol ma'asecha asher ta'aseh... (So that Hashem will bless you in everything you do. If you do, Hashem will bless you, and if you don't, He won't bless you.)

So you did everything you could possibly do, and you have to have confidence that it will work out fine. The question is, 'Did we do all we could possibly do?' That's the whole shayala (question). Give up when there are some obvious important things to do yet, and then HaKadosh Baruch Hu is not yet involved.

Did we do everything possible? I think there is more to do:

We must contact the American money men, who support Sharon and the city of Jerusalem. Money talks and money men talk. They should be told that we cannot have confidence in Sharon when military men, Shabak and the secret service all say we're increasing the danger to the lives of Israelis with this act [the Sharon Plan]."

We must get the cooperation of the OU (Orthodox Union), the RCA (Rabbinical Council of America) and the Young Israel to organize a march on Washington with very simple signs, 'Bush, would you let this happen in America?' 'Bush, where is your biblical integrity?' We must bring out 50,000 people, as we did for the march on Washington a few years ago. If we do, I am convinced that the Senate will become stronger in its support of Israel.

Pikuach Nefesh

"There's a klal gadol baTorah. In the gemora, sometimes discussions or controversies end up with the word teiku. What's teiku? Tishbi yetaretz kushiyot ubaayot (Eliyahu HaTishbi will answer the questions we have when he comes).

But in halacha, there's no such thing as no answer. When there's no specific answer in halacha for this case, you fall back on principles. Safeik de'oreita le chumra. Safeik derabanan lekulah. (If you have something you're not sure of, if it's from the Torah, you take the stringent approach. If the question is from the rabbis, you take the more lenient option.)

There's no specific answer to the problems facing Am Yisrael today. There's no quick answer to the Kassam rockets. But we have a base halacha which says, when in doubt, pasken the halacha as it is written. And what's written, Pikuach nefesh is docheh kol mitzvah she baTorah. (Where there's a life at stake, you can transgress the mitzvoth in the Torah [note: except three]). Therefore, analyze the situation.

Am I endangering the life of a Jew by the 'disengagement'? Am I improving their security by doing that? That will be my decision. Pikuach nefesh is docheh kol mitzvah she baTorah. So I ask myself a question, 'Is pikuach nefesh involved here?' The generals say it is. The Shabak says it is. The rabbanim in the hitnachluyot say it is. The people are yelling, 'You're killing me.' So, the 'disengagement' is forbidden.

Not because of ahavat haaretz (love of the land), Eretz Shelaimah (wholeness of the land). That confuses the situation. It causes the opposition to demean the machloket (disagreement) into whether we want more territory or less territory. That's not the issue. We want our children not to be killed. Period.

On the big issue of what's good for the Jews or bad for the Jews, we've reached an impasse - teiku. When you have a teiku, you go back to principles. The key principle here is pikuach nefesh.

That's the big error that's being made now in this whole battle. They [the organizations fighting the dismantling of Gush Katif] are putting too much Zionism into the picture. When in doubt, go with the halacha.

And the halacha says clearly, 'This act is endangering the life of Jews.' Oslo was isur me'doreita (forbidden from the Torah) for one reason - not because you felt it was going to fail, but because the signing of Oslo and the reincarnation of Arafat that followed, led to more Jews being killed.

That was foreseen by the little rabbanim in the hitnachlayut (Yesha communities). It wasn't seen by the big rabbanim who had trouble deciding whether they do or do not vote with the government. A shayala was asked, Is Oslo good for the Jews or bad for the Jews al pi halacha? They didn't know, so they decided to support the government. That wasn't the issue. If they didn't know, they should have gone back to principles. The first principle, 'pikuach nefesh.'

The Infinite Jew

What do the proponents say? Will [disengagement] increase or decrease security? 'Well...it will decrease security now. But in the future, it will be good.' There's no such halacha that you kill somebody now because in the future you'll save more lives. That's against the halacha. We don't have that concept of sacrificing a few Jews so you can save a lot more Jews, because to wax mathematical and poetic, a Jew is of infinite worth, and ten infinities are no more than one infinity. Infinity is infinity.

What should regular people do?

Push this one point. Don't talk about anything else.

Don't talk about how much effort [people of Gush Katif] put into building their hot houses, and what a terrible thing it is to uproot someone, or that it is reminiscent of the Shoah. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about one simple thing, 'You're killing our children.' Period. Not here. Not in Gush Katif. You're killing our children in Tel Aviv.

The Kassam rockets are getting better. Israel is so small. Add a few more grains of powder to a kassam rocket. If you're not interested in accuracy, and just want blind terror, it will hit Tel Aviv also. If it hits Tel Aviv, then you'll get a reaction.

If the first rocket landed in Tel Aviv, they would have wiped out swaths of enemy territory in order to prevent it.

Endangering Ourselves

I have big investments in Eretz Yisrael - 43 grandchildren and great-grandchildren living here, bli ayin hara. So I'm not exactly an outsider. It cannot be that while I was not looking Israel became a fascist dictatorship country with one man calling all the shots.

The fact that Sharon is so resistant to a Mishaal Am (referendum), indicates that he knows he is not presenting a popular plan. If he could have a mandate and a decent majority voting with him, he'd have it his way.

We are surrounded by enemies. They're killing our children. Which nation has ever suffered this thing of arbitrary missiles - 'I'll just send out a missile and see whom I can kill' - and it doesn't lead to a declaration of war!

It boils down to: we have to do what we have to do. And no one's asking me.

[Speaking after the deadly Kassam missiles hit Sderot, Rav Tendler said] Right now, Sharon doesn't understand that he can do whatever he pleases against the Arab terrorists with full support of the people of America. Bush will yell that it wasn't a measured response, and so on. But the majority of Americans today, as anti-Semitic as they are, are pro-Israel, because they hate the Arabs more. It's not from Ahavat Mordechai, but from Sinat Haman.

If I were Sharon, I'd make an announcement on the radio today, 'If one more Kassam rocket lands, this geographic area consisting of ten blocks will be destroyed in the morning by bombers. You have 24 hours to take your belongings and leave. Next Kassam rocket, 20 blocks get destroyed. Next, 30 blocks get destroyed.' They'll stop.

This is like what Yehoshua did when he came into Eretz Yisrael. 'I will leave you an escape hatch, and you can go out.'

The halacha is clear. Pekuach nefesh must be the motivating factor."

Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland.

To Go To Top
Posted by Eric Rozenman, March 31, 2005.

We think in words, especially regarding abstract concepts like those related to law, diplomacy, and politics. So the words we use reveal much about what we think. That being so, "Budget Vote Clears Way for Israeli Pullout," (Washington Post, March 30), by correspondent John Ward Anderson, is revealing.

Tilted, in one direction

Reporting on Knesset (parliament) approval of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's proposed budget - which keeps the government in power and withdrawal of Israeli residents from the Gaza Strip on schedule - Anderson writes:

" ... Sharon has made what senior aides describe as a strategic trade-off, winning broad international support for the Gaza withdrawal while consolidating Israel's control over the West Bank and expanding settlements there [emphasis added]."

The "settlement blocks" that Sharon insists will become part of Israel in any eventual agreement with the Palestinian Authority comprise no more than eight percent of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). The anti-terrorism security barrier Israel is constructing in the West Bank takes in roughly six percent of the area. Six to eight percent is unlikely to be what a reasonable reader understands by "consolidating Israel's control over the West Bank."

Likewise, "expanding settlements there" in The Post's context implies expanding them in all the West Bank, rather than in six to eight percent of it. At best, such writing is unacceptably sloppy. The existence of "unauthorized settlement outposts" is noted, but not Israel's promise to remove them. Israel's commitment under the U.S., E.U., U.N., and Russian "road map" to freeze new settlement growth goes unmentioned.

Editorializing by adjectives

The Post's Anderson writes that "Israeli security officials have warned of a backlash and reported death threats against the prime minister from conservative religious and ultranationalist groups [emphasis added]." Neither the groups nor their threats are identified, so "conservative religious" and "ultranationalist" groups become synonymous, on the basis of no specifically attributed information, with extremists and potential terrorists.

The New York Times' March 30 article on approval of the budget was much more specific:
"The Yesha council, which represents most settlers, has been torn between obeying the law and resisting it, with some advocating violent resistance but most urging nonviolent opposition to the evacuation ... Israeli security agencies are also concerned about the Palestinians firing on troops evacuating settlers or the settlers themselves, which could bring down a harsh Israeli response and a reinvasion of Gaza to provide a cordon sanitaire for the operation ... Israeli officials are also deeply concerned about what they call 'Jewish terrorism' - specific threats, officials say, aimed at Mr. Sharon and other ministers. Mindful of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by an angry Jew who hoped to stop the peace effort, security around Mr. Sharon is suffocatingly tight, even when he walks through Parliament."

The Times provided readers with more specific, relevant information, including a potential Palestinian Arab threat of violence absent in The Post's account.

The Post's use of "ultranationalist," without further detail, is useless - especially when not long ago it was Sharon and his government who were described, without specificity, as "right-wing," "far-right," "hard-line" and "nationalist." Its description of Israeli "conservative religious" groups as potentially deadly resembles the newspaper's references to the Muslim clerics dominating Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Republic as "conservative," rather than extremist, reactionary, or even medieval. But in Israel, Sharon's own Likud is a center-right, populist-conservative party. The Masorti religious group - the Israeli arm of Conservative Judaism - is, in religious-cultural terms, relatively liberal. Some Israeli Orthodox Jewish movements are relatively moderate, others "fervently" or "ultra-"Orthodox. But Anderson does not specify to whom or what he is referring, instead tarring all.

Unequal time

The Post quotes an Israeli political analyst as saying that the Gaza withdrawal is "the first time in 35 years that the right wing has lost ..." The mainstream right, and the separate "right wing" have lost many times since 1970, including over complete evacuation of the Sinai, Yitzhak Rabin's 1992 election, Knesset approval of the Oslo I and II agreements, and Ehud Barak's election in 1999. Yet, Anderson includes this erroneous quote without qualification.


Anderson writes "opponents of the pullout argue that it rewards Palestinian terrorism because it was planned as a unilateral initiative and gives Israel nothing in return. Palestinian militant groups have hailed the withdrawal [from Gaza] as a major achievement of their 4 1/2-year uprising against Israel [emphasis added]."

By proximity, The Post equates "Palestinian terrorism" with "Palestinian militant groups." That is, it tacitly acknowledges that "Palestinian militant groups" commit "Palestinian terrorism." Readers deserve specificity. Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade of Fatah, etc. ought to be directly named and described as terrorist groups, but here at least The Post does not ignore Palestinian terrorism.

Anderson correctly describes the Palestinian anti-Israel violence of the past 4 1/2-years as "against Israel" - not, as Post revisionism often has it - an "uprising against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip." As CAMERA often has pointed out to The Post, the "second intifada" began after the Palestinians rejected a West Bank and Gaza Strip state, so the violence could not been a response to "continued Israeli occupation" of those areas.

Sloppy writing - in this case broad labels unsupported by specific details - easily becomes misleading writing.

Anderson's article is below.

"Budget Vote Clears Way for Israeli Pullout" by John Ward Anderson (http://tinyurl.com/4q7vj).

JERUSALEM, March 29 - Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to pull troops and settlers out of the Gaza Strip this year cleared its final legislative hurdle Tuesday when Israel's parliament approved the government's 2005 budget, which opponents had hoped would block the withdrawal or, alternatively, bring down the government.

The lawmakers voted 58 to 36 to approve the budget one day after they rejected a proposal to submit the Gaza pullout to a national referendum. Sharon has said he hopes to begin evacuation of the 21 Jewish settlements in Gaza in mid-July and finish in about four weeks.

Under Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan, first proposed in December 2003, about 8,250 Jewish settlers would leave Gaza, along with the thousands of Israeli soldiers who protect them. The plan also calls for the evacuation of four isolated settlements in the northern West Bank with about 500 settlers.

The withdrawal, if it proceeds as planned, would mark the first time Israel has relinquished territory seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war since 1989, when the handover of the resort town of Taba to Egypt completed Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula under the Camp David peace agreement.

"Sharon had this vision, for whatever reason, and he managed to maneuver it through every stage, even in spite of setbacks in his own party. It's really an amazing feat," said Asher Arian, a senior fellow with the Israel Democracy Institute in Jerusalem. "It's the first time in the last 35 years that the right wing has lost, and they're not used to it, and that's why there's so much anguish and hand-wringing in the country."

Opponents of the disengagement plan said they would move their fight from parliament to the streets, and the Yesha Council, an umbrella organization of Jewish settlements, warned that settlers might fight what it termed the "expulsion of Jews" from Gaza.

Opponents of the pullout argue that it rewards Palestinian terrorism because it was planned as a unilateral initiative and gives Israel nothing in return. Palestinian militant groups have hailed the withdrawal as a major achievement of their 4 1/2-year uprising against Israel.

Sharon argues that Israel has wasted too much money and too many lives protecting settlers in Gaza, who are surrounded by about 1.3 million Palestinians. Public opinion polls show that most Israelis agree, with about two-thirds favoring the pullout.

In addition, Sharon has made what senior aides describe as a strategic trade-off, winning broad international support for the Gaza withdrawal while consolidating Israel's control over the West Bank and expanding settlements there. In the four years since Sharon took office, the number of settlers in the West Bank has increased by more than 25 percent, from about 193,000 in early 2001 to more than 243,000, according to Interior Ministry statistics. They live in about 120 settlements and 100 unauthorized settlement outposts, amid about 2.2 million Palestinians.

Sharon has long been one of the architects of Israel's settlement expansion, and many settlers consider his dogged pursuit of a Gaza pullout to be a betrayal. Israeli security officials have warned of a backlash and reported death threats against the prime minister from conservative religious and ultranationalist groups.

The plan cost Sharon his parliamentary majority last year, forcing him to form a new government. In the process, his pro-settlement Likud Party - with 40 members, the largest group in parliament - has effectively split in half. At the same time, some of Sharon's oldest political enemies have lent him their support in recent months, voting in parliament to avert dozens of no-confidence motions and other key votes to keep the government - and with it, the disengagement plan - from falling.

Such was the case in Tuesday's budget vote, and the victory did not come cheap. Unable to win a majority in December to pass Sharon's $62 billion spending plan for 2005, the government has been running at 2004 spending levels. If a budget had not been passed by Thursday, the government would have automatically fallen.

In the end, Sharon won by luring pro-disengagement parties into his camp, even though some did not like his budget proposal, by agreeing to fund their pet projects and threatening to blame them for killing the Gaza withdrawal if the government collapsed.

The United Torah Judaism Party received about $67 million for religious schools in exchange for its five votes; the Labor Party got about $140 million for 19 of its 21 votes; and the secular Shinui Party, the final holdout, agreed over the weekend that its 14 members would vote for the budget in exchange for $163 million in additional funding for universities, reserve soldiers and other projects.

The budget sets aside about $510 million to pay for disengagement, including compensation packages of up to $750,000 for each family evacuated. The plan is expected to cost about another $1 billion to complete.

Eric Rozenman is the Camera's Washington Director. His essay on the two-state proposal is a classic; see "Anatomy of an Illusion: The Israeli-Palestinian Two-State Solution," http://www.think-israel.org/rozenmanillusion.html

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.

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

The military has yet to look into the physiological status of the Combat Brain of soldiers. (1) & (2) The brain of the Combat Soldier is molded in training to be aggressive, ready to kill, to react swiftly - very swiftly. The Trigger mechanism is instilled by the military during training because this is the necessary role of an aggressive/defensive army. Cool in combat does not mean your adrenal glands hasn't shifted into high gear and your brain has not transferred into its highest state of aggression. Those physiological changes are necessary to fight efficiently and not get killed.

In the pre-combat training phase soldiers are taught to "think:kill" and react instinctively as a matter of survival and completion of the assigned mission. Granted, not everyone is alike nor suited for combat roles. Those with passive personalities are generally weeded out or put in positions where their buddies do not have to rely upon them for backup. A weak soldier becomes as great a threat as his adversary.

For those in frequent combat, there is a brain change. Certain parts of their brain becomes more functional, even enlarged. Other parts of their brain, not needed for combat, become more recessive, even disappearing as functional sections. They appear as if they are dissolving when seen during Thermal Imaging of the brain. This research is first coming on stream as Thermal Imaging is used on mind-impaired soldiers, coming back from combat. Aggressive bursts make some returning vets susceptible to unpredictable surges of anger in civilian life.

The soldier in actual combat becomes a killing machine because that is what the army bought, taught and expects. Sweet, passive soldiers end up as dead soldiers or compromising the lives of fellow soldiers.

The Army cannot expect Combat Soldiers to at one moment be a spontaneous killer of the enemy and, in the next moment turn to being a quasi-civilian with all the characteristics of compassion and civility. A schizophrenic soldier (made to order) produces a confused soldier not one thing or the other. Such a soldier is designed to please non-combat lawyers who wish to preserve the image of the military and please politicians. Such officers in military tribunals sit in judgement, quoting from text called "Rules of Engagement" which does not match the adrenalin loaded facts of the moment in battle.

Granted, an un-motivated, passive soldier may give the media desired sound bytes and photo ops, but it only extends the length of wars and increase combat fatalities. When soldiers go to war more concerned with being court martialed or complying with a book of rules as thick as the tax code, his instinctive reactions are dumbed down.

Restraint first means he shoots last and comes home to honors in a body bag. The heat of battle does not stop in the mind of a combat soldier just because the shooting has stopped for the moment. The level of being alert is still high. The man machine which the Army has designed and built continue to run, day and night.

The average soldier/officer probably cannot explain his mind-set in terms of brain function and what controls his actions. The combat directives developed out of wars past do not prepare for the Unconventional wars of the present.

We no longer face great armies but rather Terrorists who fade into the civilian population. Everyone becomes the "possible enemy" and often they are. Often the so-called civilians drift in and out of combat mode which, to the trained soldiers makes everyone suspect.

American soldiers are being asked to live up to media and political standards which do not match up with fighting UN-conventional wars against Terrorists who fade into the civilian population. In unconventional warfare the book or rules or "rules of engagement" no longer apply - even when a court-martial court does not factor the Combat Brain syndrome into its deliberations.

If we don't want them to fight full out as taught, then don't send them into battle. The weight of battle is sufficient pressure without action out scenarios that will be pleasing to the media or politicians back home.

The Present Court Martial Hearing for Captain Roger Maynulet in Weisbaden, Germany for what was clearly a mercy killing of an Iraqi is a case in point. While there is testimony of extenuating circumstances, the factor of the "Combat Brain" will likely not be examined as an overriding factor. While Captain Magnulet was known to be a disciplined soldier with an enviable reputation among his men and fellow officers, that admiration came from the fact that he was a good to excellent soldier, trusted by his men to take care of them. That translates into being a forceful, quick-acting combat soldier.

Combat is killing when on a mission and cannot, in the leisure of a court room, be quantified - unless you were there from the beginning to end of the mission.

A photo or video is not sufficient evidence because it captures only moments of a mission and does not absorb the hours before, the minutes of compressed thinking with a full rush of adrenalin and the Combat Brain in full charge.

Nations such as Syria, Iran, Egypt, North Korea and others do not overload their soldiers with unworkable rules of engagement. Only America and Israel has their soldiers hesitating in combat lest they end up in front of a court martial because they couldn't recall all the variables in a book of the rules of engagement which keep changing.

Regrettably, the Free West has not come to grips with unconventional warfare which plays by its own rules of engagement - meaning there are no rules.


1. "IRAQ SOLDIER A ROGUE OR MERCY KILLER? Court Martial will decide captain's fate" by Carlos Sadovi CHICAGO TRIBUNE March 28, 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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 30, 2005.

When the responsible U.S. Defense News begins to sound like the New York Times on matters dealing with Israel, it's worth a deeper look.

When U.S. Defense News reports on military matters, it's excellent, accurate and dispassionate. When it slips over to political matters, one perceives chatty cocktail discussions with a considerable amount of lubricant lathered on.

For example, in its March 7th issue, the article "Palestine" To Israel: Send Money: $300 Million Requested For Security Forces, Gear" (1) by Barbara Opall-Rome, she quotes the well-known and notorious Terrorist, Mohammed Dahlan, making the case that the Palestinian Authority (he) needs $300 million over three years for equipment, gasoline, salaries, cars, food and insurance for the Soldier/Police (Terrorists) when they fall in the line of duty. Noteworthy, it is expected that a large percentage of these funds will end up in Dahlan's pocket (secret bank accounts) because Baksheesh is the way business is done in the Arab Muslim Middle East.

What Ms. Opall-Rome's story omits is that Dahlan has a well-established record of being a major Terrorist, a planner and organizer of Terror attacks and on-off sidekick of Yassir Arafat. Also absent from Ms. Opall-Rome's story is that Arafat's well-developed conduit for distributing donor money to all sorts of Terrorist organizations remains in place.

Should the money stop coming, the new head of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) would be history.

Dahlan says he wants to establish law and order, dismantle and stop the export of Terror attacks into Israel and foster the disheveled economy (gimme a break!). Abbas has already declared that he will NOT confront Terrorists or disarm them but, rather 'talk' them into peace. He sent PLO troops into Gaza but, they refuse to stop the Terrorists and spend a lot of time drinking sweetened tea and coffee with them.

Dahlan complains he must communicate through open phone lines (meaning he wants secure cell phones) and doesn't have tear gas against demonstrators (his or others). He complains that he is forced to release criminals (cum) Terrorists, due to lack of forensic evidence. Terrorists, whether theatrically held by one organization or another, are not really locked up but, rather enjoy the privilege of home until they opt to leave. This is called the "Revolving Door".

Note! He has received lists of wanted Terrorists and charges by Israeli Intelligence which has NOT been acted upon. The few who are caught by Palestinians receive the "revolving door" treatment and are out on the street within a few days. Dahlan cannot risk really arresting them because his Terrorist friends would assassinate Dahlah in a heart beat. Dahlan has himself done the same.

This report speaks of the PA trying to quell violence and destroying smuggling tunnels from a compliant Egypt. Strangely, they were able to locate these tunnels within days of the deployment of the PA troops to Gaza - which served not only as a media demo but demonstrated that they knew exactly where the tunnels were all along.

The report says "unnamed" Israeli officers believe that Abu Mazen sincerely desires to put an end to Terror and violence. This disregards the fact that a suicide bomber from Tulkarem killed 5 young people in Tel Aviv on February 25th. Few Israeli sources believe in Abu Mazen other than Shimon Peres, Sharon's spokesman and a few Left-wing apparachniks.

Dahlan is quoted as saying that Israel has to ease restrictions and the International Community has to support a re-building of the Palestinian Security Forces and the Palestinian economy which may take unending years of funding. Some may recall that CIA Director George Tenet did indeed train the PA Security Forces at Camp America and Langley in sniper shooting and electronic interception both of which were then used against Israelis from the Oslo take-over of the 7 cities through today. That, of course is being done again where Arafat's 9 to 12 separate Security Services are to be combined by America's Gen. Ward into two or three more efficiently organized forces. Didn't we do that before when we trained Osama Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen to fight the Soviets, who then attacked America in 9/11 and in Iraq and that is called "Blow-back".

Opall-Rome correctly reports that the PA has 62,000 security forces, paid monthly from foreign donors the E.U. (European Union) and tax monies collected by Israel and paid over to this well-oiled distributing system. Unknown to many the reason why donor money keeps pouring in is because the Europeans fear that if they stop then Terror will start. Regrettably, the U.S. shares this attitude.

Opell-Rome quotes Ephraim Sneh, a former Israeli Defense Minister, who now chairs Israel's Knesset Committee of Foreign Affairs and Defense who said Israel should be more accommodating to the PA needs. (Yawn) Who really listens to political party hacks who are not regarded as experts in anything, let alone how to deal with Terrorists. Sneh is merely an apologist for the PA, Abbas and Dahlan - and certainly not worth quoting.

He goes on to say that PM Sharon must be more understanding and patient - and that the process is political, cultural, economic and then military. He tells the reporter that Abu Mazen and Dahlan needs to gain more popularity, thereby requiring more Israeli support. (Better get the really high boots on because the B.S. is rising higher.) So much for that report.

Let's turn to Pg. 34 and the Defense News Editorial of March 7th: "Treat The Disease". (2)

Here is the worst cut of all as the Editor weighs in to tell us" "Nowhere is economic renewal a more pressing need than in the Middle East. Whoever, tells us about the poverty in the Gaza Strip and thus reasoning that this is the engine of seething rage may be eating hallucinogenic mushrooms. (The Editor forgets that the Arab Muslim Palestinians' poverty came as a result of unremitting Terror and in so doing, cut themselves off from employment in Israel to include the farms and factories developed by the Jews of Gaza.)

Here one sees the pressure by the Bush Administration to force Israel to open her borders to Palestinian workers who, in the past, either sabotaged the work or killed their Jewish employers. (Bush wishes another State of Palestine but, doesn't want to pay for his legacy - He wants Israel the permanent employer of the Arab Muslim Palestinians.) The Editor is accurate in reporting that pledged Arab donor money has yet to arrive. The Editor perhaps doesn't know that the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, and the Gulf State Arabs hate the Palestinians and consider them dangerous to their governments and highly untrustworthy.

Some will recall that it was Arafat and the PA working with Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait resulting in 350,000 Palestinians being evicted to Jordan while Saudi Arabia booted out another 325,000 as untrustworthy and all were deported to Jordan.

The Editor goes on to speak about Israel investing money in the territories only to have it disappear into official pockets and thus Tel Aviv (Jerusalem) is wary of investing more. Whose pockets is the Editor referring to? Does he/she mean the settlers or the money flowing into Arafat's old conduits? Who in the hell told this Editor that decisions are made in Tel Aviv rather than Jerusalem where the Israeli government offices and Knesset (Parliament) sit - unless he/she is referring to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv? This would mean that Israel's decisions are being made by the U.S. pro-Arab State Department. Very likely!

Why is Defense News departing from its area of expertise in weapons and front for Washington's political PR? It's really a shame on the American government.

Barbara Opall-Rome is excellent when she reports on military matters but, she leaves a lot to be desired when she is used by Israeli political hacks or Terrorists like Dahlan or Abu Mazen (Arafat's co-hort for 40 years in the T business).

One can only be reminded of the international journalists parked at the Commodore Hotel in Beirut, Lebanon, being handed news releases by Arafat's brother which they had better print as is. They were terrified to go out on the street because they would either be kidnaped or assassinated. As I recall, some ten journalists were killed during that 12 year Civil War Arafat created in Lebanon where 100,000 Christians and Muslims were killed.

Getting the news from Arab Muslim sources is merely a trip to LaLa Land. What the professional journalists in the Middle East don't know, they make up and then they believe their own tales.


1. "Palestine To Israel: Send Money - $300 Million Requested For Security Forces, Gear" by Barbara Opall-Rome, Gaza City, Gaza US Defense News March 7, 2005

2. "International Aid: Treat The Disease" Editorial Us Defense News March 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 Yoram Shifftan, March 30, 2005.

Israel Academia Monitor (http://www.israel-academia-monitor.com/) provides us with a typical example of how Marxist Jews in Academia ignore that 78% of Palestine was illegally split off from Palestine and became Jordan. They define the 22% of Palestine that remained for the Jews as ALL of "Palestine." They then talk of Gaza and Samaria and Judea as 22% of Palestine - when, actually, it is 22% of 22% of the land intended under the British Mandate as a Jewish State. In this, they follow Peres, the writer Eli Amir and the Palestinians themselves.

Note that Schwartz says that Israel military forces overran the bulk of Palestine. What a way to describe the unsuccessful Arab invasion of the brand-new State of Israel!

"Is Israel a Democracy? An Interview with Yossi Schwartz"

Israel is a racist state that came into being as a colonial project through an alliance of the European Jewish Zionists and the Western imperialist powers. The Zionists sought European support in settling Palestine, and in return the state to be established there would be a regional base for Western imperialism. The US supported the creation of a Zionist state. In 1948, Israeli military forces overran the bulk (78%) of Palestine. The remainder came under occupation in the course of the war of 1967.

Dr. Yoram Shifftan has published many articles on Israeli hasbara, in publications such as Ha'aretz, Ma'ariv, Hatzofeh, Hamodia and Ha'Uma, Think-Israel and Jewish Internet Association.

To Go To Top
Posted by Women in Green, March 30, 2005.

Christian-Zionist greetings to you, sir, from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Normally, sir, even as a Christian, I don't cry much. But, today, as I read from Israel, Arutz Sheva, the following, I could not help weeping: "A senior official in Israeli intelligence estimates that at least 100 Jewish residents will be killed in the expulsion process, since these residents have no intention of leaving their homes and farms voluntarily, and since the IDF has every intention of using live ammunition to facilitate the expulsion of Jews from Katif and Northern Samaria, while razing their homes, farms, and synagogues."

Why does a fellow Texan, and a fellow Christian weep, sir? Last week, our President MOVED A MOUNTAIN to get legislation passed in an effort to try to save the life of a POOR LITTLE VEGETATIVE LADY IN FLORIDA [WHICH, LET ME BE CLEAR, I'M VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF SAVING HER LIFE], but now, we are 'complicit' in the plan to forcefully expel JEWS FROM THEIR HOMES, SYNAGOGUES, AND CEMETERIES, in which the Israeli Government plans on "killing" at least 100 Jews.

Sir, cannot someone of your advisors see the inconsistency of these two different positions and remind you that you, sir, profess to be a born-again Christian? Or, Sir, is the ARAB OIL so important to us that we give up ALL OUR CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES? HOW, SIR, DOES THE MESSIAH, WHOM YOU AND I BOTH PROFESS TO BELIEVE IN, LOOK AT THIS SORT OF "DOUBLE DEALING?"

In the last few days, sir, at a demonstration of "pro-disengagement LEFTISTS" in Israel, THOSE IN FAVOR OF WHAT THE USA GOV'T IS PUSHING], they sang two anthems. First, they sang "Hatikva", the Israeli National Anthem. Fine, that's good. But, second, sir, they sang John Lennon's song "Imagine" WHICH speaks of if only 'THERE WERE NO RELIGION, NO HEAVEN, NO GOD, ETC."

DR. ANITA TUCKER, WHO IS AN AMERICAN-ISRAEL DUAL CITIZEN, LIVING IN THE GUSH, wrote me: "This statement that the Pro Disengagement people made in Tel Aviv tells clearly what this is all about. For this goal of no Religion, no heaven, and NO GOD, they are willing to sacrifice freedom, democracy, and allow the terrorists to re-arm themselves to take over the world against Christians and Jews." Now, sir, Dr. Tucker is one of those Jews who will be deported from her MAGNIFICENT FARM there in the Gush Katif. And, sir, I have no idea what her position might be as far as wanting to stay on her farm, but God forbid, maybe this dear friend of many Christian Zionists like you and I are, sir she might, God forbid, be one of the 100 Jews the Israeli government is planning to bump off.

Mr. President [my Israeli friend Colonel (ret.) Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto will dump ice water on me at my boldness], HOW DOES THIS 'DEPORTATION SCHEME - PLANNED MURDER OF 100 JEWS' SQUARE, SIR, WITH THE "MOUNTAIN MOVING" PLAN TO SAVE THE LIFE OF "JUST ONE FLORIDA WOMAN?" Sir, does Terri Shaivo, living in the state your brother governs, have more value than the life of 100 [unfortunate] Jews living in the land that the Arabs (who have the oil we must have) want?

Sir, "LAND FOR PEACE" with the Arabs has never worked. God gave that land to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God did not give it to Ishmael, Arafat and Abu Mazen! Sir, in Disengaging from so-called "Palestine," we will be 'DISEMBOWELING ISRAEL." WHOSE SIDE ARE WE ON? Sir, the Palestinians have a Great P.R. machine. But, what they lack is the TRUTH. Let's not fall for the often repeated lie, but let us stand up for what is right and what is Scriptural!

Sir, the Palestinians have great P.R., but it is really B.S. (Pardon my poor boy from the panhandle of your Texas' French.) Let's not be PC and incur God Almighty's wrath upon US.

Sir, the sanctity of Israel and God's continued blessing on America are more important than the favor of the Arabs with their oil. Sir, I would rather walk with GOD'S BLESSINGS than drive IN A LAND GOD HAS FORSAKEN.

Your friend and servant,

Jim Vineyard, Baptist Pastor,
Oklahoma City, OK,
March 29, 2005

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 Randy Tate, March 30, 2005.

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has just released a plan to enhance his organization's credibility and influence. Before assessing the specifics of that proposal, it makes sense to reflect on what the U.N. has become and what mission the U.N. now serves.

It is obviously true that the U.N. is an embattled and broken institution. From the Iraq "oil-for-food" program to unspeakable acts of abuse perpetrated by U.N. employees, the global body finds itself in serious difficulty.

But the flaws of the U.N. that are most troubling are not the weaknesses of a particular Secretary General or the inadequacy of certain oversight procedures.

The U.N.'s real problem flows directly from this simple fact: a large number of the countries that compose the membership of the U.N. General Assembly have little interest in encouraging and expanding freedom. To the contrary, many of the nations of the General Assembly are actively thwarting the cause of liberty.

Even the U.N. Security Council, which possesses the most influence within the U.N. system, includes Russia and China - hardly allies of democracy and the rule of law.

Consequently, the composition and operating rules of the U.N. have made the institution incapable of embracing even the most basic human rights. For example, the U.N. has yet to accept a universal definition of terrorism that includes the targeting of innocent civilians.

That's absurd and shameful. And it makes the U.N. nearly worthless in a world confronting the likes of al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad.

So, the U.N.'s problems are about much more than any given scandal or misstep. The true crisis at the U.N. resides in the very nature of the U.N. itself. And that means the U.N. must not be allowed to supercede the authority of free nations committed to representative government.

Kofi Annan can propose all of the reforms he wants. But right now the U.N.'s problems are much bigger than anything he or any of his supporters have even begun to address in a serious and meaningful way.

Former Congressman Randy Tate is President of Free Nations United. Contact the group by email at info@freenationsunited.com or go to the website: http://www.freenationsunited.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, March 30, 2005.
This poem was first published in 1815. It can be found on the web at www.underthesun.cc/Classics/Byron/PoemsOfGeorgeGordonLordByron/ PoemsOfGeorgeGordonLordByron2.html

The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.

Like the leaves of the forest when Summer is green,
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow lay withered and strown.

For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed;
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!

And there lay the steed with his nostril all wide,
But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride;
And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf,
And cold as the spray of the rock - beating surf.

And there lay the rider distorted and pale,
With the dew on his brow, and the rust on his mail:
And the tents were all silent, the banners alone,
The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown.

And the widows of Ashur are loud in their wail,
And the idols are broke in the temple of Baal;
And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord!

Rahel 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 Richard H. Shulman, March 30, 2005.


Foreign countries may think that some Arab faction is working with them, when that faction is working more against them. Arafat's balancing act included simultaneous ties with the KGB, CIA, radical Egyptians, and conservative Saudis. (Saudi "conservatism" means conservative about creed, not about its export of radical Islamic ideology.)

Based on an agreement of mutual non-aggression, the CIA felt that the PLO was providing security for its agents in Beirut, but terrorism killed its main agent there. (It is believed that Syria played a role in that Syrian-backed truck-bombing.) Officially, the US maintained that it was above negotiating with terrorists. Unofficially, it had ties with the world's leading terrorist, as Arafat then was (MEPF, 11/25 from Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman, 11/25).


A Muslim from Kenya was observed video-filming a subway station and a tower in a suspicious manner. The police interrogated him about possible ties to terrorism. He is suing the federal government for $1 million (Op. Cit.). The brief does not state whether he is a citizen.

I think that the lawsuit is frivolous. The suspect was acting the same way as terrorists staking out targets (and may even have been doing that). The police took a reasonable precaution. It would adversely affect public safety if police were inhibited from intervening. We Americans wish that people had been more suspicious about the 9/11 perpetrators.


The Dutch government has decided that the Dutch flag provokes its Muslim immigrants. Accordingly, students wearing the national flag will be suspended. Muslims call Dutch whose cars have the flag on bumper-stickers "racist." "Most schools also ban certain clothing like the Lonsdale brand and combat boots with white or red laces. This is also considered a sign of racism." Immigrants may wear what they wish (MEPF, 3/1 from Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman,2/18). Is it because the flag contains a cross?

If the immigrants don't like the national flag, they should be invited to go elsewhere. The majority has a peculiar sense of tolerance to cater so profoundly to minority tastes, and let the minority insist on changing the culture of the majority. The majority should ask the minority to defer to it on such fundamentals.

It is doubly perverted that the non-Muslim majority kowtows to Muslims who hate them and intend to dominate them in oppressive ways. Muslims claim "sensitivity" as a means of gradually displacing the existing culture. W. Europeans are oversensitive to others' "sensitivity," when they should have some of their own. That would be called self-preservation.


Al Jazeera often features beheadings. In Islamic cultures, such publicity is considered favorable mention. Thus the TV station is making propaganda in favor of beheadings.

The news dispatches are anti-American and anti-Israel. "American troops are portrayed by al-Jazeera as wantonly attacking Iraqi civilians and holy sites." US troops don't, but the insurgents fire from holy sites and therefore draw fire. Their complaint is hypocritical.

The station is investing $7 million in facilities in Washington, DC., and anticipates opening others in Canada. Instead of declaring the station a component of the Islamist war on the US, American officials are worried about being accused of cramping freedom of the press.

Enemy propaganda should not be allowed in wartime. (Op. Cit.)


An Iranian TV series claims that "the Zionists" keep on a ship unwanted children whom they raise in good health and harvest their organs when needed (IMRA, 2/12 from MEMRI). Why doesn't Iran name the ship?

Did the Nazis have worse slander? The Iranians are the ones with whom the EU has "constructive dialogue!" Why doesn't the EU evaluate "constructive dialogue?"


The insurgents take refuge in Syria and patronage from S. Arabia. This war is not a local one reinforced by foreign volunteers. The war was planned by Iran, Iraq, Syria, and S. Arabia. They admit it. The US still does not realize how much cooperation diverse enemies of the US are capable of.

If the US is finally to win this war, it must get to the source of it in those several countries. One way is to encourage movements for democracy in them. Our hope would be that they would undermine the regimes and abandon the war (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.23 from Paul Richter, L.A. Times, 1/21).

The risk is that the Islamists would win elections and impose harsher regimes dedicated more fully to constant war.

Mr. Richter makes other points that time will judge. He predicts that the Iraqi Shiites would neither cooperate with the Iranian Shiites nor emulate them. He thinks that insurgent attacks on holy places result from desperation rather than strength. He contendss that the people of those countries seek American support for internal freedom. In Iran, one supposes they do. In the other countries?


The Vice-President of the Israeli Bar informed the Knesset that the abandonment law seriously violates civil liberties. Referring "to Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz: "I told him that he's been applying a double-standard when, on the one hand, he determines that the redemption of land by the Jewish National Fund violates the right to property and civil rights, because you have to allow Arabs to purchase such property; and also preserves the rights of absentee land holders [regarding Arabs who have abandoned their property in Jerusalem]. But in relation to the rights of other citizens, the residents of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, suddenly there are no property rights, no human rights, no civil rights, no nothing." (Arutz-7, 2/14.)

Mazuz also ruled against Jewish owners whose property was usurped by the Arabs. That is a double standard. He always bases his decision on assertion of some righteous principle, but the result always turns out to be anti-Zionist


Hizbullah has increased the compensation to families of human bombs from $20,000 to $100,000. It has recruited dozens of cells in the Territories. It finances their activities, too (Op. Cit.).

This is serious money. It gets results. But Israel sits on its side of the border letting Hizbullah get away with it and on its side of the Green Line, letting the recruits operate. Oh how the withdrawal from Lebanon was a mistake! On the other hand, if Israel had withdrawn its force as soon as the Lebanon war was over and it lost the chance to remake the country when its ally, the President of Lebanon, was assassinated, it is possible that the Shiites might not have been roused to terrorism. At least Israel's losses would have been reduced.


The UNO says Syrian military "movement" confirmed that Syria is complying with the Security Council Resolution to evacuate from Lebanon (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 3/18, p.7).

Why doesn't the UNO wait for proof? Movement is not necessarily evacuation. Syria has moved its troops around before, hoping that observers would think that it is evacuating. But it doesn't.


Syria has committed much terrorism, some against the US. The US never took action against it. It didn't react when Syria helped Hizbullah murder hundreds of Marines. It didn't react when Syria let Iraqi insurgents take refuge in its territory and when ready pass back in to strike at US troops. Neither did it do anything about the truckloads of contraband, probably weapons of mass-destruction, that came from Iraq and Syria buried in the Bekaa Valley. It committed other crimes against the US.

In 2003, Congress passed the Syria Accountability Act. It never was enforced. Apparently it just was or show, to silence Jewish (and other American popular) objections to Syria. US officials who are protecting Syrian during wartime are committing high treason. They protect S. Arabia, too. The US seems to have a secret government directing its foreign policy, a policy that lets its citizens get killed with impunity (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/14).

I thought the US would reveal Iraq's weapons of mass destruction under Syrian control, to justify the are and Rush's re-election. Apparently, the secret junta running US foreign policy has more important goals. What they are is not known.


The P.A. reported that an Israeli soldier shot a P.A. youth for nothing. Arab News reported that Israeli soldiers shot that Arab, who had attacked one of them (IMRA, 2/14).


"Haaretz" complains that Israel's Foreign Ministry does not tout PM Sharon's abandonment plan. It suggests that Foreign Minister Shalom resign, so that PM Sharon can replace him with someone who would support that policy (Foreign Ministry, 2/14).

What would the Ministry's touting the plan add to the proponents' lack of explanation, analysis, and truth-telling? What "Haaretz" wants is uniformity within the government. That is appropriate for a presidential government, not for a coalition government elected on a platform not to abandon territory. Sharon should resign before he wrecks the country.


The "Jerusalem Post" complains about a high level of violence committed and threatened against government officials and incitement against such officials, as by calling PM Sharon a dictator. The "Post" suggests shunning the inciters (Foreign Ministry, 2/14).

Min. of Internal Security Ezra wants administrative detention for Israelis who yell at government Ministers and he wants to free Arabs convicted of murdering Israelis (IMRA, 2/14). Hypocrisy.

Sharon acts like a dictator. Then he must expect to be accused of being dictatorial.

I recognize some of the examples cited by the "Post" as stories already exposed as phony. Therefore, the most incitement is by the Left against the right. Let us shun or shame the Left.

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 Michael Freund, March 30, 2005.

Following is an article of mine from today's Jerusalem Post regarding the Knesset's rejection of a national referendum on the proposed withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria, and why this was a missed opportunity to heal the divisions within Israel.

He has stared down Israel's most implacable foes, stormed tenacious enemy strongholds and commanded some of the country's most audacious military maneuvers.

But when it comes to consulting with the Israeli public, Ariel Sharon is suddenly running scared.

While Monday's vote in the Knesset rejecting a bill for a national referendum may have been an important victory for the Prime Minister, it was in fact a dreadful blow to the cause of Israel's national unity.

It is hard to recall a situation as politically volatile or socially precarious as the current ideological divide gripping the country. After months of bitter rancor and debate, after all the heated arguments on television and in the media, Israeli society finds itself on the cusp of an excruciatingly painful and wrenching act: the expulsion of thousands of innocent civilians from their homes.

This isn't just another political issue, such as privatization of government firms, tuition hikes at national universities or the public sector's level of fiscal responsibility. It is something that goes to the very core of Israel's being, impacting upon its identity as a Jewish and Zionist state.

And that is why, as problematic and imperfect as referendums might be, the Prime Minister's opposition to holding one is so unfortunate. It would have been costly and no doubt inconvenient, but there is no question that a national referendum would have served to calm the agitation and still the troubled waters that are rising all around us.

I'm not talking about the childish and inane graffiti one sees scrawled on buildings or placards, or even the pungent slogans that are occasionally heard on the radio. The venom being hurled is reaching new lows, fueling the danger of an ongoing and deepening split within the nation.

Take, for example, veteran Israeli journalist Yaron London, who wrote last week in Yediot Aharonot: "the kippa is no longer an innocent head covering, but a warning sign, presumably because it identifies the wearer as a potential danger."

A Jew wearing a traditional head-covering out of respect for his Maker or as a symbol of national pride or religious commitment is now viewed as a "potential danger" by one of Israel's more prominent commentators? Had the same sentence appeared in a French, a Russian or an American newspaper, it would have been labeled anti-Semitic, and rightly so.

But London didn't stop there. "What would I do," he asked rhetorically, "if I saw a group of young kippa-wearers, tzizit flying, grouped together at the side of the freeway on a day when right-wing leaders have promised to bring the country to a standstill?"

Take a look at what his answer was: "If my grandson were in the car with me, I'd turn around and find an alternate way home. If I'm alone, I'll prepare to trade blows."

"Prepare to trade blows"? Is this what Israel's civic debate has deteriorated to? Sadly, the answer appears to be yes.

The hot-headed rhetoric is taking on an increasingly menacing tone, and it should be of concern to us all.

Worse yet, because of the manner in which the Gaza withdrawal plan has been pushed forward, huge portions of the public feel disenfranchised and ignored, as though they and their opinions have not been taken into account at all.

Many are left to wonder: if the Prime Minister is so sure that the country backs his plan, then why is he afraid to put it to the test of public opinion? And if a majority actually opposes the withdrawal, then how legitimate would it be?

These questions and concerns could have been laid to rest. They could so easily have been swept aside, one way or the other, by giving the people a voice through a national referendum.

The growing split within the country could have been forestalled because the outcome of the balloting would necessarily have resulted in the bulk of the Israeli public accepting whatever the majority would have decided.

But this precious opportunity, like so many before it, has now been wasted. Instead, we face the possibility of a withdrawal that will leave an open wound on the Israeli psyche, one that will fester and rankle for decades to come.

The originators of modern democratic thought foresaw the perils inherent in such an approach. Take out your De Tocqueville or your Federalist papers, and see the extent to which the great political theorists of democracy sought to tackle the tricky questions raised by the necessity to balance differing and competing lines of thought in a free society.

They bent over backwards to caution against trampling on the feelings and interests of various sectors, noting that to do so would inevitably lead to a tear in the very fabric of the social order. For a country as diverse as Israel, that challenge is even more pronounced, making it all the more regrettable that the government is unwilling to give the people a say.

Deep down, I think that Prime Minister Sharon knows this, but he is so insistent on moving ahead with the disengagement, that he does not wish to risk an embarrassing defeat at the polls.

In doing so, however, he has chosen to take an even more perilous gamble, the results of which could divide the nation as never before. Let's just hope that does not come to pass.

Michael Freund served as an aide in the Prime Minister's Office to former premier Binyamin Netanyahu.

To Go To Top
Posted by Celia Xin, March 29, 2005.

Hi. I seem to remember someone replied back to me (from Think-Israel) when I asked for help on my Model UN project. Thank you, it was helpful.

Model UN was great. It was.... so stressful it was fun. I must honestly say I never had such a good time yelling at various countries. I made friends with many other "countries", and even drafted a resolution with my school's mortal enemies: East Brunswick (China, I think). Unluckily, my committee (WIPO) was not able to vote on it before the deadline, though we (a temporary alliance of Venezuela, Sweden, Italy, etc.) did manage to vote down a resolution that disallowed pharmaceuticals to use generic medicines. Sound stupid? Yes. But it was the most interesting of all the resolutions because it also wanted the creation of the FOC, the Farmer's Ordinance Council. It was very popular and hard to vote down.

I am proud to say my little town of Highland Park did fairly well. We clapped for a full 5 minutes when one of our delegate won Best Delegate for some random committee. He (the delegate), if I remember correctly, talks extremely fast and stuffs so many facts and figures into his speeches that by the time you realized what he was REALLY talking about, you've already voted for whatever he was saying.

Unfortunately, I made no contributions to the awards given to Highland Park. DPRK and Germany, as I remember, won the Best Delegate and Outstanding Delegate for the WIPO committee. My position paper (though it was the best I had ever written) did not get the Best Position Paper. I did enjoy myself however. I have never eaten so much Burger King, (drunken so much) Starbucks coffee, and ramen in one weekend before. Did you know you can cook ramen with a coffee maker? It astounds me how much I learned in that one weekend.

Many thanks for reading (or skimming) my babbling,

Celia Xin, a Delegate of Israel for Model UN

PS. I managed to keep Israel's placard. My partner wanted it, but I managed to trade for it with some well chosen words and a few illustrations I made of various other countries.

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

Those who voted for the displacement of other Jews and those Israelis of the Left who cheered this ruling have regrettably signed their own displacement. While these people may not believe in retribution delivered by a superior Higher Authority, nevertheless, there will be payback.

Never was it the right of even a million Jews to displace even one Jew. We believe that the life of one Jew is the whole world and others cannot make us expendable to serve a so-called majority.

You never had the right - even through selfish motivation to dismember the Jewish State nor to displace settled Jews. You have gifted land that was never yours to a pagan people who irrevocably hate the Jewish people - by their own words. Your right to the Land was as only a small share but, even that fragment was not yours to abandon.

This is a sin so monstrous that you will pay by having yourself or your loved ones thrown into the garbage heap of history. There will always be a remnant of proud Jews who remain and who remember but, you and yours will not be part of those who survive - unless you change your ways.

Whether it is the enemy Islamists who will set cities on fire or whether it comes as rolling earthquakes, it will come.

You who hate your brother Jews and wish them gone will be dealt with in the same way you wished for displacement upon your brothers. Why must you repeat the crime of Cain killing Abel - time and again?!

I have been reminded that we must always end up on an encouraging note.

Therefore, I hope and pray that you who wish ill upon your brothers and sisters will come to your senses and beg forgiveness (Tzvuvah) of all those whom you have already hurt and all those whom you will hurt.

I hope and pray that, before the crime of deporting Jews and the dismemberment of the Land of Israel takes place, a sign will jar you into thinking and re-thinking what you are trying to do.

I can only hope and pray that you throw those twisted characters, called "leaders" out of office and select people who are not thieves and corrupters. Those who hated and sold out the Jewish People, not for principles but for money - even if some of them wear a Kippah - should be abandoned as hopelessly corrupt.

Having worked so diligently at the evil task of condemning Jews to deportation, you have, by your own hand, assigned yourself and your loved ones your own punishment. (Unless, of course, you reverse yourself.)

You never had the Right!!

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 Evelyn Hayes, March 29, 2005.

All of Oslo is a stage, waging another war against the Jews,
and many of the Jews are actors in this folly,
planning uncivil war against their fellow Jews,
using German horses,
being jihad's mules,
bulldozing settlements for those who would destroy them,
quoting Plato for one world order,
no religion,
all the same,
no heaven,
totally disengaged,
voting against themselves,
while suffering disorder
and hating those who believe in Gd,
settlement and the land,
fighting against their ancestors, portraits on their walls,
hating who they are,
working for those who hate them
who are using a diplomacy of stages and a toppling by jihad.

All of Oslo is a stage to suffer the Jews to solve the Jewish problem,
and Hamas and Fatah, Tanzeem militia and the "Aqsa Martyrs Brigades,"
all Hizb'allah, suicide bombers are united in a "strategic choice",
"khayar istrateeji",
the strategy of the late Yasser Arafat al Husseini the Egyptian and his partner,
successor Dr. Mahmoud Abbas, Holocaust Denier.
United, using Mohammed's Big Lie
to defy the Jewish dhimmi, so stoned to reality,
so confused by what's happening again,
numb to the pain,
paining patriots who will win,
but at what cost,
if Stage One and Two have undone land and security
and Stage Three is blackmailing democracy.

All of Oslo is a stage:
Jews are crying, threatened; misleaders disunited, retreating.
PLO are laughing, uniting, spreading Gaza to Jenin,
smuggling SAM-7 "Strella" anti-aircraft missiles
into Palestinian-ruled areas.

Watch out, Tel Aviv.
All of Oslo is a stage and
major Jewish leaders are playing against themselves,
so political as they call theirs citizens the same.
All of Oslo is a stage and minor Jihad is planning a major
preying against the Jews.

Bless those Jews who are not actors;
keep protesting the real threat;
maintaining the eternal chain.
Let truth's strength gain a victory.

I never saw a human chain like that from Gush Katif
to Jerusalem;
Strange, the losers are still on the stage when Klal Yisrael won.
Why a staged peace between identity deniers and identity snatchers?
Will Jihad play with Jews, with infidels?

All of Oslo is a stage; let's stop the playing.
The danger is real, spreading, getting worse.

Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ruth Matar, March 29, 2005.

Dear Friends,

In today's Jerusalem Post, Tuesday March 29, 2005, there was an article entitled, "PM's OFFICE WORRIES ABOUT PROTESTS DURING U.S. VISIT."

"Officials in the Prime Minister's office said they have received intelligence information that Disengagement opponents here would try to disrupt Sharon's visit, in order to move the camera lens from what is expected to be a friendly Bush-Sharon meeting to the very unfriendly strife the plan is causing in Israel. "

It is essential that you not only give Prime Minister Ariel Sharon a reason to worry, but that you also give President George W. Bush a cause to re-examine United States' policy toward Israel.

It is a matter of life or death, not only for tiny Israel, but also for the mighty United States. And I speak here as a concerned American citizen, as well as someone who enjoys her spiritual home in Jerusalem.

Ariel Sharon's plan of Disengagement from Biblical Gaza and Biblical northern Samaria may seem unstoppable. To many people, it may seem as if this is just a minor blip on the radar screen of history. "Israel may surely survive without Gush Katif and northern Samaria," they say. "After all, we are only talking about approximately 9,000 people. If it's for the common good, it behooves them to give up their homes."

Prime Minister Sharon has never even attempted to show that his Disengagement-Deportation of Jews by Jews is for the common good. It is, of course, simply giving in to Arab Islamic terror and pressure from the United States.

Ever since Israel regained its Biblical heartland - Judea, Samaria and Gaza - in a defensive war in 1967, the United States' policy has been not to allow Jews to re-establish communities in the Land promised to them by G-d as an everlasting inheritance. Even though the League of Nations and the Balfour Declaration declared the whole area of Mandate Palestine - including what is now Jordan - as a Jewish Homeland, Winston Churchill, with great "generosity" toward the Arabs, chopped off a piece to placate one of the feuding sheiks (the other sheik got Iraq as his prize!).

All this happened not too long ago, just at the beginning of the twentieth century. But now the United Nations, the European Union, Russia and the United States have decided that the Holy Land needs to have some more parts amputated. They call this the Road Map to Peace!

Why is this amputation not only dangerous to Israel, but also to the United States and the rest of Western civilization, which are all based on the Judeo-Christian heritage? Isn't this an incredible victory for Arab Islamic terror? The unmistakable message which radical Islam understands perfectly is that TERROR PAYS, AND INCREASING TERROR WILL BRING EVEN GREATER DIVIDENDS!

I may be severely criticized for what I am going to say. 9/11 may well have happened because the United States for years ignored the terror directed toward Israel, as well as toward itself, by the Father of Modern Terrorism, Yasser Arafat.

It probably seemed to the United States and to the European countries that Arafat's terror was directed only at Israel and, hence, was only a local problem. "The obstacle to peace" between Jews and Arabs was perceived by the World to be the Jews building communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Even when the United States Ambassador Cleo Noel and his assistant, G. Curtis Moore, were machine-gunned on Arafat's orders in Khartoum, Sudan, in February of 1973, the United States did not find it politically expedient to react as it should have. (The dirty little secret of the U.S. State Department is that they have for many years hidden a recording where Arafat's voice has been clearly identified as ordering the torture and murder of U.S. diplomats.)

Yasser Arafat supplied the weapons used by the terrorists who killed 241 American Marines in Beirut in 1983. A National Security Agency phone-tap recorded a September 24, 1983 call from the Iranian ambassador to Abu-Haidr to "undertake an extraordinary operation against the U.S. Marines in Beirut." The attack on the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut took place shortly thereafter. Two hundred forty one Americans were killed! (This information was revealed by Newsweek Magazine in its November 1999 issue.)

Yasser Arafat was also involved in the planning of the first World Trade Center bombing in New York in February, 1993, where six people died and thousands were injured. (Moshe Peled, Israel's Deputy Minister of Education in the Netanyahu government, told CIA representatives in early 1997 that Israeli intelligence had complete evidence about Yasser Arafat's involvement. The official Iranian government newspaper, E-Kirhan, as well, accused Arafat of responsibility for the first World Trade Center bombing.)

And what was the reaction of the U.S. State Department? To hide the evidence of Arafat's continual perfidy.

These are just a few examples of terror perpetrated by Arafat and his henchmen against the United States. The rest of the world has likewise not been immune from Arafat-sponsored terrorism.

And what was the reaction of the United States' government and the World at large? A year after the first World Trade Center bombing in February 1993, Arafat was rewarded in 1994 with the Nobel Prize for Peace.

Arafat must have found this very humorous indeed. However, the "joke" is on all of us.

9/11 and the train bombing in Spain, etc., was a direct result of giving radical Islam the feeling that they can literally get away with murder.

For U.S. President George W. Bush to stand by, no, even encourage the dictator of Israel, Ariel Sharon, to give parts of the Holy Land to Arafat's political successor, Abu-Mazen, the terrorist who planned and funded the Munich Olympic Massacre, is to say the least, misguided, and not in the interest of the security of the United States. Islamic terror is continually promising the World another 9/11.

For Ariel Sharon to violently drag Jews out of their homes, people who have lived there for three generations, and to order the disinterment of their beloved Jewish relatives, is downright evil. Sharon's Disengagement-Deportation of Jews by Jews Plan is tearing the Jewish State of Israel apart!

Dear Friends, it is a privilege for all of us to make our voices heard in America, which is the bastion of world democracy. The Jewish People in Israel, however, no longer have that privilege under Sharon's undemocratic regime.

I am sure that President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will appreciate learning how the American people really feel about the future of the Holy Land.

I, myself, hope, G-d willing, to be in Crawford, Texas on April 11, 2005.

I implore you, dear friends, to come.

If it is difficult for some of you to take this trip, contact Pastor Vineyard, who is a passionate defender of Israel's Biblical inheritance, and he might find a way to help you with logistic arrangements, so that you can attend this important protest rally.

Now - for practical information:


We pray to have 500 buses with at least 30 people in each bus, which will give us 15,000 protestors. (Of course, double or triple that amount will be even more effective!)

Will you come?
Will you get a car-load to come?
Will you get a van-load to come?
Will you get a bus-load to come?
Will you get a plane-load to come?

Make up signs on orange poster board, the color of Gush Katif resistance, such as: "SHARON IS ASKING PRESIDENT BUSH TO FINANCE THE DEPORTATION OF JEWS WITH MY TAXPAYER'S MONEY!"

Let Pastor Jim Vineyard know how many of you are coming. Write him at: whbc@windsorhills.org or call him at 405 943 3326.


I am looking forward to meeting you there.

With Blessings and Love for Israel,
Ruth Matar

P.S. Please pass this article on to as many people as you can think of.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 29, 2005.

The following article was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post, March 24, 2005 (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1111634309167&p=1006953079897).

As I read Glick's analysis, it reinforced my prior conclusion that Sharon's Disengagement will follow the failed Oslo Accords with almost identical results. I use the proviso almost because the failure this time will bring a much broader and deeper attack on Israel's inner cities. The shock to those who thought they could sacrifice the settlers for what they hoped would be their own safety will be considerable. The Oslo Accords gifted such cities as Jenin, Tulkarem Ramallah, Gaza and Kalkilya, etc. which turned the cities into unconnected terrorist cities.

Now the Sharon and Bush Disengagement will connect these cities from Gaza to the Golan Heights into one contiguous Terrorist State which, when it becomes fully operational, will destroy Israel.

Then it will reach out for Saudi Arabia, Jordan and link up with the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt and Syria.

The shock waves will make those who accepted the Road Map and Phase One (called the "Disengagement") feel terrified as to what they have done. I imagine that those who brought this catastrophe upon the Israeli people will have reason to be terrified.

Last June, during a NATO summit in Istanbul, US President George W. Bush blamed the dictatorial rulers of the Arab world and their supporters for the culture of extremism that engenders terrorism and hatred of the West.

Bush said, "In the last 60 years, many in the West have added to this [state of affairs] by excusing tyranny in the region, hoping to purchase stability at the price of liberty. But it did not serve the people of the Middle East to betray their hope of freedom and it has not made Western nations more secure to ignore the cycle of dictatorship and extremism."

The fact that, in the midst of a reelection campaign in which he was being pilloried for alienating Europe and Turkey by invading Iraq, Bush stood in front of his erstwhile NATO allies and essentially told them they were advancing the cause of terror, speaks volumes for the president's seriousness in pursuing his strategy of victory through the democratization of the Arab world.

The European reactions to Bush's speech were highly suggestive. French President Jacques Chirac sent his new foreign minister, Michel Barnier, to pay his first visit to PLO chieftain Yasser Arafat and spend the night in his Ramallah compound. British Prime Minister Tony Blair stood next to Bush at a news conference and conflated Bush's Greater Middle East Initiative of spreading democracy regionally with establishing a Palestinian state.

The question of how Palestinian statehood fits into the Bush Doctrine of democratization has always been a nagging one. The president's central premise is that the endemic wars and terrorism in the region are the consequence of repressive regimes that prefer their people be raised on a diet of extremism and hatred under tyrannical governments than be educated in moderation and modernity under free governments. Rejection of Israel's right to exist by the Arabs who need Israel (and America) as their external enemy in order to justify the failure of their own leaders to advance their peoples is, by the reasoning of the Bush Doctrine, the central cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

On the other hand, the idea that there must be a "two-state solution" in which a Palestinian state - empty of Jews at its inception - is created in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Jerusalem comes in response to a completely different set of operating assumptions. These assumptions are not American, but European. According to them, the cause of wars and Arab terrorism is not Arab tyranny and religious extremism but a lack of Palestinian sovereignty. The Arab conflict with Israel, according to this view, will be resolved when a "viable and contiguous Palestinian state" is founded in a Jew-free Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Jerusalem.

Today the Bush Administration, together with the Sharon-Peres government, is pushing the view that Sharon's withdrawal and expulsion plan for Gaza and northern Samaria is aligned with the Bush Doctrine. Among the Palestinians and the Israelis, however, it is becoming increasingly clear with each passing day that not only is there no connection between the two, but that there is a glaring contradiction.

This week, MK Azmi Bishara's Web site, www.Arabs1948.com, published an interview with Hamas spokesman Ahmed al-Bahar in which he discussed the significance of Sharon's plan. Bahar claimed, "The painful and qualitative blows which the Palestinian resistance dealt to the Jews and their soldiers over the past four and a half years led to the decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip."

"All indications show that since its establishment, Israel has never been in such a state of retreat and weakness as it is today, following more than four years of the intifada," he continued. "Hamas's heroic attacks exposed the weakness and volatility of the impotent Zionist security establishment. The withdrawal marks the end of the Zionist dream and is a sign of the moral and psychological decline of the Jewish state. We believe that the resistance is the only way to pressure the Jews."

There can be no clearer exposition of the Palestinian view that Israel's plan to hand over strategic assets to its enemy in the midst of war and receive nothing in return is a victory for terror than Bahar's statement.

From the political developments of the past couple of weeks inside of Israel it is clear that the overwhelming majority of Israelis also view Sharon's plan as a victory for terrorism. So it is that without exception, the entire left wing of the political spectrum, with the support of the anti-Zionist Arab MKs and the post-Zionist Yahad faction, supports Sharon's plan.

And almost without exception, every member of the right wing of the Israeli political spectrum - which does not include Sharon loyalists like Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni - either opposes Sharon's plan or demands that a national referendum on the plan be held before any withdrawal of forces or expulsion of Israeli citizens is carried out in Gaza and northern Samaria.

It took a while for the significance of Sharon's plan to become clarified for Israelis. As recently as last month, many voices on the Left were still questioning whether Sharon had something up his sleeve that they didn't know about. Yet as time passed, and Sharon became increasingly shrill in his defense of his policies - while demonizing and firing anyone who voiced opposition to or doubt about the wisdom of his plans - its significance sunk in for everyone. As a result, today it is well nigh impossible to find an Israeli or a Palestinian who will argue that Sharon's withdrawal plan can in any way be linked to, or made to agree with, the Bush Doctrine.

Given the total disconnect between the Bush Doctrine, which places the onus for change on the Arabs by calling for their democratization and eschewal of terrorism, and the Sharon plan, which makes no demands whatsoever on the Palestinians, it was interesting to see an attempt to conflate the two undertaken by as remarkable an intellectual and as heroic a figure as Norman Podhoretz.

In the April issue of Commentary magazine, Podhoretz, who has been a towering intellectual model for me throughout my career, argues that there is a way to view the Sharon plan as part of the Bush Doctrine. He claims that after Israel removes the Jewish communities from Gaza and northern Samaria, the Palestinians will be held to the Bush Doctrine's policy of democratization - and that Israel won't be forced to make any additional concessions until the Palestinians reform. He argues that if the Palestinians continue to attack Israel after the IDF evacuates the Jewish communities and withdraws from the areas, Israel will be free to take any action it deems necessary to secure itself. He claims that because of Bush's commitment to the Bush Doctrine, the Arab world will now be forced to enact reforms that will transform the Palestinians' operating environment in a manner that will force them to give up terror.

While it is possible to debate the merits of each of the points he made in favor of the plan, what is most interesting about Podhoretz's analysis of Sharon's plan is the point he does not address. Podhoretz never discusses what Israel is actually accomplishing - for itself - by going forward with Sharon's withdrawal and expulsion plan. Again, as is now clear to all Israelis and Palestinians, the reason it is impossible to discuss what Israel is actually gaining from Sharon's plan is because Israel is gaining nothing from it.

MK Uzi Landau, who leads Sharon's opposition in Likud, flew to the US last week to speak to American Jewish audiences. He spoke mainly to local groups, as he explains that the main Jewish organizations - the United Jewish Communities and AIPAC - have refused to allow any opponents of Sharon's plan to address their audiences. This, he says, is the result of pressure on the groups by Sharon's office.

"What I found every time that I spoke," Landau relates, "is that the American Jews had absolutely no knowledge of the problems with Sharon's plan. No one has ever discussed them. No one has ever been afforded the opportunity to discuss what will happen the day after Israeli forces pull out of Gaza. No one has ever been able to talk to them about the financial and security and political costs of the plan. No one has ever been allowed to discuss with them the ecological consequences of the plan."

Given the fact that in Israel it took time before the significance of Sharon's plan was fully understood, it makes sense that in the US it could take a bit longer for the strategic logic - or irrationality - of Sharon's plan to become clear.

When the Rabin-Peres government announced the Oslo process 12 years ago, giving the PLO land, legitimacy and arms in exchange for intangible promises of peace, American supporters of Israel - both Jewish and non-Jewish - were quick to declare either their support for or opposition to Oslo. The vast majority supported it. Once they had publicly declared their support for the policy, even when it literally began blowing up in Israel's face, they refused to countenance that they were wrong to have done so.

The fact that the current policy of expulsion and retreat is being enacted by Sharon - the great general and right-wing tactician - is a source of confusion for many who are looking for a catch that will explain and justify his adoption of a radical, left-wing plan. Hopefully, once the supporters of Israel - who, like Podhoretz, were brave enough to ignore the conformist pressures and oppose Oslo - come to accept the fact that Sharon's policy involves many risks but provides no opportunities, they will not hesitate to disavow it. And again, hopefully, at that point they will demand that the US policy toward the Palestinians be brought into line with the Bush Doctrine.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 29, 2005.

Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has turned some of the Israeli Police into the same type of storm troopers and Cossacks as Jews have been escaping from for decades. Sharon has managed to dredge up the darkest and most ugly feelings in the Police which normal people try to suppress.

Clearly, the Police have been given orders to build up to an acceptable level of "police riots" where beating and possibly even shooting the people will seem normal as part of their assignment.

Did anyone ever believe that Israel would become a Police State run by Jews?

This news item is from yesterday's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) is entitled "Police Brutality at Women's Walk Inside Israel." The accompanying pictures are from Sunday, Day 1 of the march.

An eyewitness said that police last night assaulted an ambulance doctor and his three daughters at a solidarity march from Netanya to northern Samaria. Police stopped the marchers again today.

The two-day march began Sunday morning when some dozen women set off from the center of Netanya to two northern Samarian communities slated to be dismantled this summer under the disengagement plan. The march was to be a successor to last week's two-day peaceful walk from Sderot in the Negev to Gush Katif.

The organizers said the marches are not political demonstrations. "We didn't ask for a permit because we simply were hiking," explained Penina Moati, a resident of the established Shomron community Elkanah, east of Tel Aviv. But she reacted with shock at what she said was unjustified police brutality against people who had not committed any offense.

At one point, police met the women and told them they could not walk together without a permit. The women began to disperse. At that point, Haifa resident Dr. Shai Gross, an MDA doctor, arrived on the scene, and heard a policeman insult one of the women. Dr. Gross criticized the policemen, and was promptly assaulted and arrested by four policemen, Moati said. In addition, she said, the police threw his three teenage daughters to the ground.

Another woman, Esther Eliezer of Netanya, said that when she went to the police station to testify in the doctor's behalf, a policeman threatened to arrest her if she didn't leave immediately. The police also said they would arrest all of the women if they continue their walk this morning - which the women said they would do.

At the a police officer immediately stopped them and took the organizer, Ruthie Ben Chaim, to the police station for investigation and possibly to receive a permit. Moati said he insisted everything would be OK. By now, the number of women had grown to about 30.

"We continued walking," Moati said, "but we kept a distance between each group so it would not look like a demonstration. We got to the Kfar HaRoeh intersection around 3:30 PM and stopped at the intersection so drivers would see us. We were on the island and did not block traffic."

"After an hour or an hour and a half," she continued, "a police vehicle came. The officer who had told us that everything would be OK now said we had to disperse. By that time, we were only about 12 women - and then Dr. Gross arrived. The police told us to disperse, and he asked the police for identification as we walked away."

"Suddenly a policeman called one of the woman 'stupid.' Dr. Gross criticized the policeman for using such language. The police then claimed several women had crossed the street against a red light and had no permit. As they threatened to arrest one of the women, Dr. Gross shouted at them. Four policemen jumped on him and beat him terribly. The more he resisted, the more they beat him. He had not done anything wrong, but they forced him into a paddywagon while his three teen age girls were shouting and crying. The police threw them mercilessly on the ground and took him away."

Moati said the women stayed at residents' houses at Kfar HaRoeh, where the teenagers' grandparents also live.

"The police said if we set foot on the road tomorrow, they will arrest us. We intend to continue to walk," she stated. At 6 PM today (Monday), the police halted the women as they reached the Arab-populated town of Baka Al-Sharkiya, which is essentially the Palestinian Authority half of the Israeli-Arab Baka Al-Gharbiya. The police demanded that the marchers board an armored bus to take them a roundabout way to northern Samaria, rather than directly through Baka Al-Sharkiya. The police stated "concern for Arab sensitivities" by way of explanation. As of this report, the marchers have refused to board the buses.


Netanya Marchers Arrive in Endangered Shomron Communities Inside Israel

Among the marchers were people from Hevron, south of Jerusalem, as well as from Alonei HaBashan in the Golan; religious and secular residents of the Shomron and elsewhere in Israel; grandmothers, five nursing babies and their mothers - and more.

[Note: The marchers did make it to their destination Sa-Nur and Homesh today, Tuesday March 29th - despite further arrest threats. Apparently, the publicity and inquiries by Knesset members made another attack against them too hot to handle. -- E. Winston] ###

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, March 29, 2005.

Two years ago I penned a sarcastic article about what Amram Mitzna's inaugural speech would be if he won the election trhat was soon to take place in Israel.

The article originally appeared in http://www.acpr.org.il/NATIV/2003-1/2003-plaut-xs.htm

In light of this week's vote by the Knesset to implement Sharon's Disengagement Plan for the Gaza Strip, we thought it timely to repost it now:

Amram Mitzna's Inauguration Address

Ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank you for electing me as Prime Minister of Israel. As you know, I ran on a platform of peace and it is now my intention of keeping my promises to you and my backers and financiers from around the world and I shall be fulfilling what I have pledged to do.

In my election campaign, I ran on a platform that you voted for through me. I promised that I would conduct negotiations with Arafat and the PLO no matter how many Jews the PLO was murdering during the talks, with the intention of reaching an agreement for a complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip within six months. I also promised that if the PLO refused to strike a deal with me in that time, then I would withdraw from the Gaza Strip unilaterally and without any agreement on the part of the Palestinian Authority for anything. I confirm tonight that this is my solemn intention.

In addition, within a year, I will reach an agreement with the Palestinian Authority for a complete withdrawal by Israel from the entire West Bank and the eviction of all Jewish settlers living there. And if the PLO refuses to reach a deal or agree to my terms, then Israel will simply pick up and withdraw from the West Bank anyway, whether or not the PLO agrees to it. Any settlers who refuse to cooperate with the withdrawal will simply be left for the PLO and the Hamas to deal with.

So as you see, I refuse to abandon my principles and my struggle for a just and lasting peace. And just as I intend to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, whether or not the PLO agrees to my terms or agrees to any compromise, so I intend to resolve the Palestinian refugee question. I intend to turn the Negev into a large resettlement district for all those people around the world claiming to be Palestinian refugees. They will be settled in the Northern Negev and in the area around Beer Sheba, and Israel will withdraw from these areas of Palestinian resettlement whether Arafat and the PLO like it or not. We will negotiate with the PLO in good faith for 18 months, but if the PLO refuses to agree to our terms, we will withdraw from Beersheba unilaterally.

The next stage in my peace program will consist of settling Israel's conflict with the Hizbullah and Syria once and for all. I pledge that Israel will enter into serious full-hearted negotiations with the Hizbullah and Syria and I hope they will produce a peace accord. I am willing to wait for 24 months for these talks to yield results. If at the end of this two year period there is as yet no accord, then Israel will solve the problem unilaterally, whether the Syrians like it or not. I will order a complete withdrawal from the Golan Heights, whether Bashar Asad has agreed to my terms or not, and I will order a 20 mile zone created along the Lebanese border within Israeli territory in which no Jews will be permitted to live and in which Lebanese Shi`ites may exercise their own sovereign self-rule.

As the next step in my problem, I hereby pledge that I will allow no longer than 30 months for talks with Israeli Galilee Arabs to produce a peace accord. As you know, my party and I are committed to granting equal national rights to Israel.s Palestinian nationals, which is what we now call the Israeli Arabs. So, if by the end of these 30 months no peace accord has been reached in the talks, then I intend to solve the matter unilaterally by withdrawing Israel from all of the Galilee, whether the Galilee Arabs like it or not, and will order all Israeli troops and civilians to withdraw behind the new secure borders stretching along the Kishon Creek next to Haifa. Yes, I am aware of the fact that I will have to order my own parents to abandon their homes in the Haifa suburb of Kiryat Haim, but I am sure they are willing to make sacrifices for peace.

Next, I intend to resolve once and for all the conflict between the Jews and the Arabs in the central parts of Israel, in Nazareth and the Wadi Ara district. I will conduct good faith negotiations with their representatives from the communist parties and the Islamic fundamentalist movement. I will give these talks no longer than 36 months. If by that time there is no accord reached, then I will order Israel to withdraw from all areas outside of the greater Tel Aviv-Gush Dan district. Israel will have peace, while maintaining its heritage and historic control of both banks of the Yarkon River. Naturally, I expect the Jews of Jerusalem to relocate there. I will try to obtain permission from the President of Palestine for them to visit their old homes in Jerusalem al-Quds every once in a while, but if he refuses, then we will take the matter into our own hands and not allow any Jews to go to Jerusalem any more, whether the PLO likes it or not.

Finally, as my fallback plan, I intend to conduct serious round-the-clock negotiations with all of our neighbors, including the President of Palestine in al-Quds. I will allot a maximum of 48 months for the talks to succeed, that is, the period before the next elections in Israel will be called and voting conducted at the Yarkon voting booth. But if those negotiations do not succeed, I intend to take things into my own hands and end the conflict once and for all. The Yarkon colonists will be ordered onto the nearby American cruise ships, and Israel will be converted into a website, whether or not the Arabs approve, and peace shall reign in the Middle East once and for all, for ever and ever and ever.

You have my solemn oath!

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, March 29, 2005.

The detailed explanation of the Road Map that Sec. Rice took to the Mideast with her, written by James Baker and "... senior policy makers from the US, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt, Canada and the World Bank. The US was represented by current Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs William Burns as well as by Norman Olsen, the political counselor at the US embassy in Israel. The PA was represented by security strongman Jibril Rajoub and by senior aides to Mahmoud Abbas, Yasser Arafat and Ahmed Qurei. Egypt was represented by Dictator Hosni Mubarak's senior adviser Osama El Baz and by General Hossam Khair Allah."

"Israel had no official representation. Rather, the Jewish state was represented by none other than Yossi Beilin's Geneva Accord crowd. Amnon Lipkin Shahak and Shlomo Brom, signatories to that subversive agreement where private citizens tried to abscond with the government's sovereign power to determine foreign policy by negotiating the scandalously anti-Israel "accord," participated. They were joined by members of Beilin's EU-financed think tank, the Economic Cooperation Foundation."

"Not surprisingly, the product this team produced and delivered to Rice is soft on Palestinian (i.e., Arab) terrorism, soft on Palestinian democratization, and relentlessly harsh toward Israel - its sovereignty, its right to defend itself, and its ability to claim any right to retain any of the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria."

"The document makes no clear statement on the need for the Palestinians to dismantle terrorist organizations. Indeed, the term "terror organizations" is absent from the report. Instead, the Palestinian requirement to combat terrorism is reduced to demands on Israel to facilitate the training, arming and operation of the "reformed" Palestinian security services while not interfering with them in any way."

"While the report pays lip service to the need for the PA to reform its governing institutions, its only clear statement on the end-product of reform is unabashedly authoritarian. The aim of all the reforms must be the 'consolidat[ion of] Fatah as the main political player in Palestinian society.'"

"While the report makes no call for the destruction of Palestinian terror organizations and bucks up the authoritarian, corrupt PA, it calls for Israel to be treated with hostility and suspicion."

"The paper calls for the establishment of a multinational force that will implement the agreements. Implicit in this statement is the assumption that Israel will be prevented by the presence of this force from taking any measures to defend itself against attacks. International border crossings in Gaza and Judea and Samaria, including the weapons smuggling hub at the Philadephi Corridor which separates Gaza from Egypt, are to be controlled by the Palestinians. The report gives Egyptian forces a more prominent role in implementing the agreements than the IDF."

"WHERE THE report's anti-Israel bias is most blatant is in its discussion of the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria. The authors refer to their desire to see 'The Palestinian people establish a viable state in the W. Bank and Gaza" and make it clear that a precondition for the state's viability is that it be racially pure - entirely cleansed of Jewish communities. At the same time, they express their desire to 'assure that Israel will continue to exist as the democratic homeland of the Jewish people and its other citizens." So in the authors' view, Israel is to be a state of all of its citizens while "Palestine" is to be Judenrein."

"The report calls for the institution of a draconian regime in the Defense Ministry and the Justice Ministry to effectively prevent any building activities whatsoever from being conducted in the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria. This regime, "The Special Office on SettlementActivities," will be obliged not simply to act as the enforcer of the attrition of these communities. The report determines that this body will be subordinate to the US embassy in Israel - effectively ceding Israeli sovereignty to the US."

"The study even dares to dictate what propaganda moves must be made by the Israeli government to force the Israeli public to accept this policy. A close reading makes it clear that the result of this policy will be the expulsion of more than 400,000 Israeli Jews from their homes. This is so because the destruction of Israeli neighborhoods in Jerusalem is implicit in the section's opening paragraph, which mendaciously claims: "The US government policy has been based on the principle that there can be no acquisition of territory by war." (What about Puerto Rico, Guam, and parts of Mexico, acquired by the US via war?"

"Not only does this sweeping and totally false statement necessarily include Jerusalem; it can easily be interpreted as saying that the only borders Israel can legitimately claim are the UN partition borders from 1947 since much of the land that makes up the 1949 armistice lines was acquired in war."

"Perhaps it is reasonable that officials pushing a plan that would cause Israel to effectively become the ward of the international community should not feel limited by the positions of the Israeli government as it makes its plans - sufficing instead to have Israel 'represented' by radical free agents with Israeli citizenship."

"But two questions still arise: Why is the US government sending its officials to participate in a "working group" which works to undermine the sovereignty of a US ally; and why is the Israeli government not taking legal action against private citizens who travel the world 'negotiating' away the sovereign rights of the state while undermining the prerogatives of the Israeli government?" (IMRA, 2/13 from Carolyn Glick, Jer. Post, 213/.)

The plan is a blueprint for the triumph of Palestinian terrorism and for the destruction of Israel. It makes plain the traditional State Dept. hostility to Israel. Obviously Pres. Bush agrees with it, or he wouldn't have let his Sec. of State work with it. The plan also would fulfill the recommendations of the Council on Foreign Relations, which Barry Chamish long has warned guides US foreign policy towards Israel.

Israel needs a patriotic government to deal with this development. Its Quisling government cannot.


China and India account for 80% of Russian arms sale. In order to diversify its customer-base, Russia has signed arms contracts with Morocco, UAE, Kuwait, Yemen, Iran (Syria), and Algeria. It hopes to do so with S. Arabia, and thereby gain entr?e to still more Mideastern clients.


The US is disappointed that despite its warnings to China, China continues to furnish nuclear materials and technology to rogue states (IMRA, 2/13).

What does the US think China is?


What upset Al-Qaeda about the US? It is that American society has broken down the religious, gender, and ethnic dominances that the Islamists like. The Islamists hate our modernism (which, I admit, has its faults). The US also is catching on to the evil of Islamism. Therefore, their objection to the US is not wrong actions against them, but resistance to their way of life and to conquest and temptations to their people to adopt the American way. The Islamists cite grievances against the US, so as to blame it for their aggressions and in the hope that leftists will take the bait and offer them concessions. The list of grievances constantly changes, because it is propagandistic and political warfare, not genuine.

Al Qaeda distorts history. It excuses mass slaughter among its own people. It gives the US no credit for saving Kuwaitis and Bosnians, aiding Egypt, and feeding Somalis. They don't hate it because its incumbent President has particularly alienated them. They have been murdering Americans for decades. They cite reasons as pretexts. Thus they blamed the US for the "loss of Jerusalem (with which the US had nothing to do and agrees with them on); for US troops in their holy land, S. Arabia (but hate the US even after it withdrew the troops); and for the UNO embargo of Iraq, since which the US has spent billions on infrastructure Saddam neglected.

The Islamists are hypocritical about complaints. One complaint is of US "petrol imperialism." But China is ruthless about securing foreign oil supplies and is militarily imperialistic. It calls Israel an occupier of Arab territory, but accepted Syrian occupation of another Arab country.

They hate the West for recovering Spain from Islamic conquest centuries ago. They hate W. Europe despite its being appeasement-minded towards them and censorious of the US. Spain withdrew troops from Iraq, but still is subject to Islamist plots. There is no logic or fact to those liars' complaints (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.25 from Victor Davis Hanson, Mercury News, 1/13).

Mr. Hanson caught on. Of course, he is knowledgeable and perceptive about it. The question is why the American people do not reach more of the same conclusions. Why, if our government represents us, does it not draw those conclusions for us? (Unofficially, it represents Big Oil.) Can the Left overcome its doctrinal blinders and fight Islamism instead of Zionism?


An Egyptian who wants to run for the Presidency told an Israeli Arab newspaper that Egypt is afraid that peace and stability would lead to democracy. To thwart this, it heightens tensions (IMRA, 2/14).

Egypt also favors jihad, and wants the lead role in the Mideast, and is jealous of Israel.


Playwright Tony Kushner accused the N.Y. City Schools Chancellor of acceding to "right-wing smear artists," in barring Columbia U. Middle Eastern Studies Prof. Khalidi from a program to inform teachers about the Mideast. Mr. Kushner called Prof. Khalidi a scholar whose views should be included but were misrepresented by the press. He implied that since Chancellor Klein did not explain much about his decision, then it must have been due to bigotry. This action, said Kusher, is McCarthyism: "censoriousness, fear-mongering, bigotry, and irrationality." The ACLU agreed with him, as did Arab-American groups. They claim the firing violates freedom of speech and academic freedom. The American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee accused the Chancellor of trying to "silence criticism of Israel."

Prof. Khalidi had accused Israel of being racist. He contends that the Palestinian Arabs may fight against Israeli soldiers in Judea-Samaria. He claimed that the media portrays Arab human bombing hysterically. He defended professors at Columbia who were accused of intimidating Jewish students.

The Chancellor's office denies that academic freedom or freedom of speech is involved. It considers this a matter of professional development for teachers (Jacob Gershman, NY Sun, 3/22).

A former Provost of Columbia asserted that the University, which set up a committee (largely of anti-Zionists) to investigate the complaints against the professors, was not doing enough to defend professors from accusations of bullying Jewish students. It must defend professors whose views are impugned, he said. These dissenting professors are the victims of anti-intellectualism, intolerance, and repression.

The University claims it is trying to distinguish between teaching and political activism. Students have complained that the accused professors cross that line and suppress pro-Israel opinions (Op. Cit., 3/24).

This controversy, like many, is misrepresented by both sides. Kushner did not take up the key issue here. The issue is whether Khalidi is an objective scholar or a deceitful propagandist. I find that the Arabs tend to ignore the issues, lest they be bested, and instead pretend to be persecuted.

What smear of Prof. Khalidi? Which of his views were misrepresented by the media, and how? No examples cited; no evidence given. To accuse people of bigotry, as Kushner did, without evidence, may itself be a smear. Now that is McCarthyism, since Sen. Mc Carthy was notorious for accusing people, without evidence. Leftists routinely accuse critics of McCarthyism, either to intimidate them or as a reflex. Does Kushner know what McCarthyism is?

Trying to "silence criticism of Israel?" The City isn't trying to do that, and couldn't stop the crescendo. It is trying not to inflict a one-sided and distorted version of history and current events, concocted by the enemy. What Khalidi says about Israel is not opinion but slander. A test of one-sidedness may be to survey how many members of university Middle Eastern institutes who defend Israel are hired or promoted? Precious few. That is an attempt to mould public opinion.

The Arabists, however, call their critics one-sided. The Arabists fail to criticize the Arab side for bigotry, incitement to murder, risking children's lives, terrorism, other war crimes, and breaking all their peace agreements. If they can't condemn that terrorism, then they favor terrorism, are our enemies, and don't belong on an American campus, especially while their fellow Islamists are ambushing American troops in Iraq. By the way, the Oslo agreements forbid the P.A. from fighting any Israeli troops, contrary to Khalidi's assertion that the Arabs have a right to fight them in Judea-Samaria. The professor is lying about the rights of P.A. gunmen. Should a liar instruct City teachers about the Arab-Israel conflict?

Further defamation is in calling Israel "racist." A million Arabs are Israeli citizens, but Jews may not be P.A. citizens. Sell Jews land, and a P.A. Arab is subject to capital punishment. The Arab world depicts the Jews as inherently evil "sons of pigs." Who, then, is racist? (There is a difference in land sales between the two groups. The Jews present no threat to the Arabs. The Arabs, however, plan to take over Israel and dispossess or murder the Jews. Therefore, Israel would be wise to forbid the sale of land to Arabs. That would be in self-defense, not bigotry. Besides, Israel has a right to keep itself a Jewish state, and its small population is insufficient to do that under pressure of a rapidly growing Arab population.)

The firing of Khalidi violates "academic freedom?" When a school system finds out the program it contracted out for is biased, it has the right to cancel. Otherwise, it would not have academic freedom.

The Arab side is wrong. It is championed by the usual far leftists. They make a mockery both of education, when they indoctrinate contrary to the facts, and of free speech, which they strive to deny their critics. They are intolerant in faculty hiring, and make classrooms ideological rather than scholarly. The Far Left calls any criticism of it McCarthyist, as if other people do not have a right to criticize them.

The Arab side is championed by Arab-American groups that always uphold their fellow Arabs, as those Arabs pursue jihad in America. Being Islamist, those groups should be treated as terrorist organizations, not consulted. The Islamist way they defend does not believe in academic freedom or freedom of speech, which they hypocritically claim to be upholding here. They use the freedom we have here to subvert our freedom.

The question is not one of disliking the Arabist professors' views. It is one of the professors not being scholars but enemy propagandists. They distort the facts or lie about them. This is proved. Unfortunately, the Chancellor failed to make that claim. The City did put its objections in terms of Khalidi's opinions, without stating what is wrong with them. What is wrong is that he is unfair and unjustified. He would use his position to indoctrinate, rather than to enlighten, and to indoctrinate against Israel and the West.

What has not been proved and remains to be seen is whether the students' complaint are valid. They do not complain about the professors' views, but that the professors stifle their own, are insulting about it, and use the classroom to make war on this country. Let a fair investigation ascertain the situation. Is Columbia like numerous American colleges that suffer from serious subversion and intimidation of students to conform to their professors' opinions? It may not be appreciated that Arab professors are intemperate towards dissent. That attitude is not appropriate for our culture, if for theirs.

In conclusion, there are two key points here: (1) If the student complaints are valid, then it would be the Arabist professors who stifle dissent; and (2) The Arabists try to turn everything into a matter of opinion, just as the moral relativists try to turn every ethical question into a matter of opinion. The Arabists ignore, distort, and contradict the facts. That lack of academic integrity should disqualify them. under.

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, March 29, 2005.

Syria is in trouble, or is it? Just recounting the difficulties currently faced by the Damascus regime makes the situation sound desperate:

--An inexperienced dictator of questionable judgment.

--Long-term economic stagnation due to statist Soviet-style policies.

--Clear military inferiority to its neighbors with no reliable source of high-quality arms or superpower strategic backing.

--An adventurous policy of backing a terrorist war against two neighbors, Israel and Iraq.

--Further incurring American wrath by concealing wanted Iraqi officials, Weapons of Mass Destruction materials, and sponsoring terrorist attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq.

--Pressure from both the Lebanese themselves and a U.S.-European alliance to end Syria's highly profitable domination of Lebanon, starting with a withdrawal of its troops promised 16 years ago.

--Facing a growing domestic Islamist challenge seeking to take the leadership of the some 70 percent of Syria's population who are Sunni Muslims. In demographic terms, the situation of Syria's ruling Alawite minority is far worse than that of the Sunni Muslims who used to rule in neighboring Iraq.

--Only Iran, itself internationally isolated, can be considered a reliable ally by Syria.

And the list goes on. If this weren't the Middle East, one might give the Syrian regime only six more months in power. Of course, even the Middle East is not quite what it used to be. While the trends should not be over-estimated, the old appeals to Arab nationalism, supporting one's local dictatorship, and blaming all problems on the United States and Israel are not as effective as they used to be. There is more talk of reform and democracy in the air. The USSR, Syria's reliable ally for so many decades, has been out of business for 15 years. While a visit from President Vladimir Putin shows that Moscow still takes an interest in Damascus, that connection is of limited usefulness. And Bashar al-Asad is only a pale shadow of his old man, the late dictator Hafiz al-Asad.

What we don't know is whether the older-generation elite of generals and Ba'th party bosses feel that Bashar has gotten them into a mess and they should get rid of him. The regime, though, still has plenty of assets. It controls the military and just about every other aspect of society. Other Arab states are showing solidarity in general, though both Iraq and Jordan are both angry at Syrian-backed subversion.

In the 1990s, Syria faced some - though fewer - of these same problems. But Hafiz al-Asad escaped from the trap by pretending to be moderate, supporting the international coalition against Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, and negotiating with Israel. Bashar, however, has maneuvered himself into a corner by acting openly radical. He now opposes the international coalition over Iraq, supports the Lebanese Hizballah in its militant and terrorist activities. As for Israel, he hints that he wants to talk again but he is not trying very hard and no one believes he seriously intends to make peace.

Bashar's strategy mainly boils down to toughing it out, though the chances for this unsophisticated approach to succeed should not be underestimated. As long as no one attacks him directly, in the way the United States overthrew Saddam (which is extremely unlikely), his odds for survival are good. After all, in financial terms, a withdrawal from Lebanon does hurt many Syrians and he can use the age-old excuse of rallying Syrian patriotism by claiming the country is under assault by the United States and Israel. He can easily suppress liberal critics while finding new allies in the Islamists - with whom he cooperates on subverting Iraq - though this is a dangerous precedent for the future.

From Israel's standpoint and in terms of the prospects for Israel-Palestinian peace, a weaker Syria is a positive development. After all, Syria is the only Arab state that can actively aid Palestinian radicals and press the new leadership toward more radical policies. This shift also further reduces the conventional military threat to Israel and makes it harder for Syria to veto steps by other Arab states to develop relations with Israel.

The same basic point applies to Lebanon. While electoral politics may strengthen Hizballah, which has a lot of popularity among Shia Muslims, the largest group in the country, the new movement hardly wants a confrontation with Israel. Most Lebanese politicians understand that tension, much less violence, on the Lebanon-Israel border will undermine attempts at economic development or obtaining foreign investment.

They are not bold enough to make peace with Israel or suppress Hizballah's control in the south, but they do not want their country used for aggression by other Arab states or forces. This is why Walid Jumblatt, the Druze warlord considered the most important single leader of the opposition, has now stated that the Shaba Farms area - used by Hizballah as a pretext to attack Israel - actually belongs to Syria, as Israel claims. Any cross-border attacks are going to make Hizballah more unpopular, reinforcing the criticism that it supports continuing Syrian presence in Lebanon.

There is not much for Israel to do directly regarding these issues other than to avoid involvement. In future, though, the blame for terrorist attacks should be put squarely on Syria or Iran when appropriate, even if they are operating through Lebanese territory. Reprisals against Lebanese targets should be avoided except for those focused on any attacking Hizballah forces. Nor should Israel help Syria escape from its current problems by letting Damascus pretend to talk peace when it has no intention of reaching an agreement.

Even if there is not much to do, it is welcome that, for once, the news from the north is good.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya (IDC), and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography and Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2004). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, March 29, 2005.

"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy." - Tom Waits

I'm a little reluctant to let go of Purim. I think it's a combination of the excessive wine and sugar stuck to my guts and the disastrous decrees still hanging over our heads.

There was no closure for us this Purim, at least not in a revealed sense. Under the circumstances it's essential that we Jews maintain our sense of humor, so while we're waiting for and working towards a positive outcome to this megilla, let's poke some fun at a sobering reality.

The government continued with their psychological terror campaign against those citizens opposed to national suicide. It seems that the 5000-6000 strong, specially trained expulsion forces will be adding 50-60 German-bred horses to their ranks. http://www.arutzsheva.com/news.php3?id=78844

Forgive my ignorance, but outside of Mr. Ed, I had always thought that " a horse is a horse, of course, of course...". For all I know a German-bred horse is one raised on barrels of fermented hay. But I guess like sauerkraut and the last can of that Purim six pack, German shepherds, German horses and Prince Harry have a tendency to bring up some bad memories for some of us.

According to Asst.-Cmdr. Amos Carmeli of the police's Technological and Logistics Department, each horse is "the equivalent of 100 policemen."

This is not much of a compliment to those German-bred steeds especially when you take into account the overall intelligence quotient and mentality of certain Israeli policemen.

But what the police department should take into account is that 100 YESHA-bred youth are the equivalent to 10,000 of their Tel Aviv-bred counterparts and to about 1000 policemen (and if we include the Hebron-bred youth, then the statistics are far more staggering).

The report also mentioned that new 4x4 Israeli-made Tomcar vehicles that can climb stairs will be deployed. Sounds like Sharon is preparing a full-scale invasion just a few tanks shy of Rommel's Panzer Division (but remember, they were eventually stopped too). I must interject here with a good word for Israeli-bred horses. Those animals can climb steps far better than I can (actually considering the kind of shape I'm in, that's not saying much either).

Eleven years ago I was participating in an anti-Oslo demonstration outside of then President Ezer Weizman's residence. When I arrived at the protest, all of my posters were abruptly confiscated by the police. I don't know why. All that was written on them was, 'President Weizman, We Want To Live!' At the end of the demo, I found them strewn on the ground in front of an apartment building. I proceeded to collect the placards, as why waste good poster board, when a mounted policeman yells "Don't touch those" and his mare from hell (that would make her a nightmare) starts galloping after me. This was surely a Bat Yam-bred horse.

Posters in hand, I quickly entered the building, ran up two short flights of steps and started frantically banging my fists on the door to the first apartment. As the horse charged through the entrance way and took the first flight with ease, a rather shocked, young couple opened the door and quickly let me in (yes, by that time it occurred to me that I should let go of the posters).

I waited ten minutes for the dreaded knock at the door, but it never came. I thanked my gracious but startled hosts, and headed home. "Some with chariots and some with horses; but we - in the name of Hashem, our G-d - call out."

That being said, allow me to hold your hand as we descend several flights down to the subterranean corridors of the Knesset, where a different breed of terrifying creature resides. But be careful,as you don't want to step in any...horsefeathers - and there were plenty flying yesterday.

It seems that the former Justice Minister and present head of the Shinui faction of the Knesset, Yosef (Tommy) Lapid, had a bit of a budgetary tiff with Yahad MK Zahava Gal-On over what some say was a 700 million shekel bribe used to buy the votes which would save the government from possible collapse. (Note: Any resemblance to the case where the price of a Mitsubishi van was allegedly used to buy former Knesset Member and recently convicted drug trafficker Gonen Segev's Oslo 2 vote is purely coincidental.) But all's well that ends well as Lapid, the self -professed European-bred gentleman, told Israel Radio: "If she didn't mean we are sons of whores, then neither did I mean to call her a whore. And if she did mean it, so did I."

That, my friends, is known as a Knesset apology, and Gal On took it in stride. She called Tommy a "sexist, chauvinist, racist woman-hater."

I dunno about that label for Lapid, but a portion of it could certainly apply to the Knesset's veteran horse trader ( try saying that term three times fast and I promise you that you'll pronounce it horse traitor), Shimon Peres. If you want to know how that man truly feels about this nation and his people, just look at how he treats his wife. But first some background...

Last October Shimon Peres was responsible for causing international headlines from ABC to Al Jazeera which screamed: "Israel's Peres: Very Fearful Extremists Could Try to Assassinate Sharon Due to Gaza Plan."

A few months later the Jerusalem Post reported that Shimon Peres was accusing Knesset members of "getting hysterical" unnecessarily. "No one in this country has gotten more death threats than me," Peres said. "People have thrown sticks at me, they have thrown stones at me and they even put a bomb under my wife Sonia's car and I never made a big deal out of it."

One short, revealing paragraph about the man, his ego, priorities and intentions. He must love his wife a lot (for what it's worth, Sonia, I would have made a big deal about it).

But did anyone every hear about such an incident? Who is the "they" that purportedly placed a bomb? Is this loaded, subliminal incitement or an outright lie? If "they" implies opponents to Oslo and all that it wrought (including the current Disengagement Plan and Roadmap), then I would ask Mr. Peres or the Israeli Police to produce some documentation on the incident.

So much for our home-grown horses, Knesset whores and horse traders.

As for the foreign elements among us, well, German-bred horses are the least of my worries. I'm more concerned about the Trojan kind. I'm not referring to the big wooden one of ancient days nor of the little unseen cyber viruses that can wreak havoc on your personal computer. No, I'm talking about the ones that enter Israel via America in an official US government capacity.

I call them boychiks from the White house. They have Jewish last names and feign pro-Zionism, but their agenda is hardly in Israel's best interests, as they pledge allegiance to a different flag. Go ask U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Daniel Kurtzer. He oughta know. Or else you can review a pre-election article I once wrote, which made a few waves at the time. It's called John, George or Judah and can be viewed at http://israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=3995

There is another breed of horse that's neither here nor there and in danger of real extinction. You've heard of horses that jump the fence, well this type ride the fence. AIPAC and their dual loyalty strategy should have been put out to pasture long ago, but now it looks like they could be headed for the glue factory. And it's ironic because they tried so long and so hard to avoid the sticky issues.

It seems that one lesson derived from this Purim is that The Jews in the Diaspora and Israel share a common destiny, whether we like it or not.

"Do not imagine that you will be able to escape in the King's palace any more than the rest of the Jews." (Megillat Esther 4:13)

Ellen Horowitz and her family live on the Golan Heights. She is a painter, columnist and author of the upcoming book, "The Oslo Years - a mother's journal."

To Go To Top
Posted by Marlene Young, March 28, 2005.

The silence of the Jewish community to the Disengagement Plan has brought the following Shocking developments:

The Israeli Navy held an exercise on Monday in broad daylight in which they practiced the forced evacuation of Jewish Settlers by Sea from Gush Katif.

What happens when the Radical Left seizes control of the government, courts, and police? They can be sold down the River with World Bank bribes to carry out the will of the EU, UN, and Quartet, but most of all the PA, to literally push the Jews, not the terrorist murderers, into the sea.


How is it possible that the same Left Peres controlled government that outlawed the "Extreme Right" Kahane Movement for suggesting the paid transfer of non-peaceful Arab terrorists, is the very same government bribing and manipulating and planning the forced transfer of innocent Jewish citizens property owners from Israel, and increased police brutality and detainment without trial of those who oppose them.



This article is entitled "Navy holds Gaza Strip seaward evacuation exercise" and was written by the Haaretz Staff, and appeared in today's Haaretz. It is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/558010.html

The navy on Monday held an exercise to examine the possibility of evacuating settlers via the sea. This would be an option to evacuation by bus in case the roads are blocked by settlers, or for security reasons. The exercise took place in broad daylight, opposite the Gaza seashore and close to the settlements of Kfar Yam and Shirat Hayam. However, the exercise underscored potential difficulties such as settlers jumping into the water or overturning small vessels. Military sources said, nevertheless, that reinforcements to the ground forces could be brought to the area via the sea.

Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon instructed the officers of units involved in the exercise to discuss the evacuation with their soldiers and to encourage them to raise any dilemmas.

Marlene Young is vice-president of TODA - Torah Organization for Disability Access, as well as an advocate for Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ruth Matar, March 28, 2005.

Dear Friends,

The situation in the Holy Land is worsening daily. Ariel Sharon is driving his "Disengagement-Deportation of Jews Plan" with frightening speed toward the precipice.

He is now suppressing any vestiges of Israeli democracy! Israel has become a virtual police state!

Opponents to the Disengagement Plan are arrested and put in Administrative Detention, which means that they are not entitled to a trial, and are not allowed to face their accusers.

Young opponents of Disengagement, who engaged in non-violent demonstrations, are locked up in the newly-constructed "disengagement ward" in Ma'asiyahu Prison, without being brought before a judge. Last Thursday night there was a shocking occurrence. These young detainees, some of whom are religious, who asked to be allowed to hold a prayer service and to read the Purim Megillah, were refused permission. Claiming they were denied their basic rights, the prisoners announced they would not return to their cells unless they were allowed to pray.

Large prison service forces were alerted to the scene and, according to the prisoners' families, the young inmates were beaten with clubs and were pushed and kicked until they returned to their cells. One of the prisoners required medical attention.

The Disengagement Authority has received its long awaited budget supplement, and is using these funds (tax payers' involuntary contributions) for Sharon's immoral and illegal war against the Jews of Gush Katif and northern Samaria.

Five thousand policemen will take part in what police have called the "inner circle" where they will "evacuate" settlers. In addition, sixty GERMAN-BRED HORSES are to be used by the police cavalry department! "Horses will play a fundamental role in the evacuation from Gaza," said Assistant Commander Amos Carmeli. "One horse is the equivalent to one-hundred policemen," the Assistant Commander explained.

What will these German-bred horses be used for? To trample little Jewish children? To trample old grandmothers?

Another innovation in Sharon's war against the Jews is a tear-gas rifle with the ability to hold five canisters of tear-gas instead of only one. This will be used for "unruly" demonstrations. In Sharon's lexicon, any public disagreement with his Disengagement Plan is an "unruly" demonstration.

What happened to Israeli democracy?

The election of Ariel Sharon, who turned out to be the consummate con-artist, that is what happened to Israeli democracy. Sharon is fighting tooth and nail against a national referendum, where the Jewish People could voice their opinion on Disengagement, which might topple him from his position as Prime Minister.

The Israeli government was in danger of falling if Sharon's Budget would not have been passed by March 31, 2005. Sharon, the skillful general and tactician, leaves nothing to chance. On Saturday night, March 26, he invited the anti-religious Shinui leader, Yosef Lapid, to his Negev ranch. Yosef Lapid caved in to enormous pressure and agreed to allow his 14 Members of Knesset to vote in favor of a 700 million shekel bribe, thus rescuing Sharon's Government. The Shinui leader promised to vote for every clause in the budget, except for one allocating NIS 290 million for religious kindergartens. Yosef Lapid does hate religious kids, especially little boys with yarmulkes.

Former National Religious Party Chairman Effi Eitam said: "Sharon, the father of corruption, stole the votes of the Right, and now is robbing the public coffers to buy his political survival and prevent the public from having its say."

The Israeli Knesset (Parliament) which was chosen in a democratic election on January 23, 2003, gave the Likud Party and its leader Ariel Sharon a landslide victory. The Likud Party increased to 40 seats and the Labor Party decreased to 19 seats. The Knesset was voted in with a mandate NOT to remove Jews from Gaza, which had been the specific platform of Amram Mitzna, the Labor Party candidate.

The Knesset in place now bears no resemblance to the one elected in 2003. This Knesset has been hi-jacked and rebuilt by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has a strange and distorted view of democracy. He has fired every one of his government ministers who dared to disagree with him. He has removed the I.D.F. Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon from his position, because Yaalon had previously given his opinion that withdrawal from Gaza was dangerous, and "might blow up in Israel's face."

The most evil thing the Sharon Government has accomplished is to divide the Jews of Israel between "left" and "right," between "religious" and "anti-religious," and between those who have become extremely wealthy (such as the Sharon family) and the Israeli poor, whose children literally don't have enough to eat. Sharon has also completely ignored the very platform of the Likud Party, which he led in the last election. This platform stated unequivocally: "NO to a Palestinian state, and NO to Jewish Land to be given away to the enemy."

In order to try to understand the enormity of the betrayal of the Jewish People by Ariel Sharon, it is essential to read his autobiography WARRIOR, which was republished by Simon & Schuster, as recently as 2001.

In a new foreword, his life-long friend Uri Dan remarks that Ariel Sharon fully realizes that as Prime Minister of the Jewish state he assumed responsibility for the entire Jewish people, who have finally achieved their 2,000-year-old dream of reestablishing their homeland.

What happened to Ariel Sharon? There are many theories as to why his outlook changed so radically, such as, for example, his and his sons' legal problems in connection with financial misdeeds. He may feel that he needs to abandon his erstwhile support base, those who believe in the necessity to reestablish Jewish communities in the historical Jewish homeland of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. His complete 180-degree turnaround may have been to placate his opponents on the Left, and thereby avoid their clamor for his legal prosecution.

There is no doubt, however, that what he professed to believe in his autobiography, republished in 2001, is radically at odds with his actions today.

p. 553: And we must say very clearly that concern for our own survival does not permit the establishment of a second Palestinian state on the West Bank.

p. 554: Withdrawal form the territories is, unfortunately, an easy answer that may satisfy a certain number of people initially but which will inevitably create more violence and a greater threat to our survival than we have faced since the first part of the War of Independence.

p. 554: Gaza at this point is our southern security belt. What will we do once we withdraw from Gaza and find, as we inevitably will, that Arafat or his successors have stepped in and that squads of terrorists are again operating from there into Israel, murdering and destroying? What will we do when the Katyusha fire starts hitting Sderot, four miles from the Gaza district, and Ashkelon, nine miles from Gaza, and Kiryat Gat, fourteen miles from Gaza? A Katyusha is nothing more than a metal tube seven feet long, easily transportable, virtually undetectable.

p. 556: The great question of our day is whether we, the Jewish people of Israel, can find within us the will to survive as nation that is necessary to solve the problems confronting us.

Ariel Sharon, who once was considered a courageous defender of Israel, is now intent on dividing our Promised Land, the Land which G-d gave the Jewish People as an everlasting inheritance. He has unfortunately lost his will!

Another factor has entered the discussion. Both U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Kurtzer and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have implied that Sharon's understanding of President Bush's declarations of April 14, 2004, is faulty and "at odds with American policy" and could threaten peace with the Palestinians.

Wow! Then Ariel Sharon fooled the Jewish People by convincing them that President Bush had promised him all kinds of wonderful things at that meeting, if he disengaged from Gaza and gave it to the Arabs as a confidence-building measure, and for them to enjoy a better lifestyle.

Knesset Member Aryeh Eldad was absolutely correct when he recently said that you can read President Bush's letter of April 14, 2004, to Prime Minister Sharon one-thousand times, but you won't find those President Bush "promises" that Sharon continually boasts of.

Can you imagine a greater immorality than dragging the Cohen family and their children out of their home in Gush Katif? Three children of the Cohen family lost four limbs between them in a terrorist school-bus bombing, ordered by the U.S. State Department's "moderate darling" and Abu-Mazen's security chief, Muhammad Dahlan. And in addition, is their lovely home with all its beautiful memories to be given over to the very terrorists who maimed the Cohen children for life?

Have we lost the battle already? No way! IT'S NOT OVER UNTIL THE FAT LADY SINGS! We desperately need to unite and to fight the immoral, illegal Disengagement-Deportation of Jews Plan. Time is running short.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE CANCELING THE MAY 19, 2005, RALLY IN WASHINGTON, D.C., and we are instead organizing a protest rally in CRAWFORD, TEXAS, which is as near as you can get to President Bush's ranch.


The April 11 visit will be Sharon's first to Bush's ranch in Crawford after nearly ten visits to the White House since taking office in 2001. Israeli officials had said earlier that the meeting would take place in Washington.

The change in venue can be seen as a move by Bush to bolster a close ally who is under fire from settlers at home over a U.S.-backed Gaza pullout plan, and by Christian Zionists in the United States.

The Jewish community, both in Israel and in the United States, has found a wonderful, powerful ally in Baptist Pastor Jim Vineyard of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. He is sincere and passionate in his defense of the Jewish State of Israel. He told me that his reason for his involvement is a simple one. He believes that the Tanach (Bible) is truly the word of G-d, and that G-d has promised the Holy Land to the Jews as an everlasting inheritance - no ifs, ands, or buts.

Now for the particulars:

APRIL 11, 2005

We pray to have 500 buses with at least 30 people in each bus, which will give us 15,000 protestors. (Of course, double or triple that amount will be even more effective!)

Will you come?
Will you get a car-load to come?
Will you get a van-load to come?
Will you get a bus-load to come?
Will you get a plane-load to come?

Make up signs on orange poster board, the color of Gush Katif resistance, such as:


Let Pastor Jim Vineyard know how many of you have coming. Write him at: whbc@windsorhills.org or call him at 405 943 3326.


I am looking forward to meeting you there.

With Blessings and Love for Israel,
Ruth Matar

P.S. Please pass this article on to as many people as you can think of.

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 Unity Coalition for Israel, March 28, 2005.

This article was written by Jan Willem van der Hoeven and is archived at http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/home/link.php?file=.. /html/article.html?id=5425. Jan Willem van der Hoeven is Director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. He can be reached by email at iczc@iczc.org.il or visit his website: www.israelmybeloved.com

Jerusalem Newswire (www.jnewswire.com), in the last two communications, alarmingly reports:

Israel's plan to retreat from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria proves unrelenting Islamic terrorism has weakened the Jewish state in a way five full-scale wars failed to do, a senior Hamas official said Thursday.

"The painful and qualitative blows which the Palestinian resistance dealt to the Jews and their soldiers over the past four-and-a-half years led to the decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip," Ahmed al-Bahar, a top Hamas leader, was quoted by The Jerusalem Post as saying.

"The suicide attacks have taken their tolls on the Jews, both psychologically and economically, in addition to the high number of casualties," he continued.

Bahar said Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement" plan was a sign Israel had been morally defeated by its Arab Islamic foes.

"All indications show that since its establishment, Israel has never been in such a state of retreat and weakness as it is today following more than four years of the intifada," he told reporters.

"The withdrawal marks the end of the Zionist dream and is a sign of the moral and psychological decline of the Jewish state. We believe that [terrorism] is the only way to pressure the Jews."

When Sharon first announced his plan last year, he insisted Israel would retreat from a position of strength and that quitting Gaza would increase security for the nation's Jewish population.

Sharon also claimed the disengagement would help Israel to retain sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria.

One of the primary justifications put forward by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon when selling his "disengagement" plan to the Israeli public was that quitting the Gaza Strip would result in US support for continued sovereignty over "West Bank" settlement blocs.

But American officials have for months been hinting that Washington would never publicly support such an outcome. They say Sharon misunderstood a letter from US President George W. Bush that supposedly lent support for annexation of large Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

Last week, US Ambassador Dan Kurtzer stopped hinting and got frank with his Israeli hosts.

There is no deal between Bush and Sharon regarding the future of Jewish towns such as Ma'aleh Adumim, Ariel and the Etzion Bloc, Israel's Yediot Ahronot quoted Kurtzer as telling Foreign Ministry cadets during a closed-door meeting.

The belief that there is such an agreement is based on a letter Bush sent to Sharon in 2004, which the Israeli prime minister interpreted as the president's support for continued Israeli sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria in return for the Gaza pullout.

In the letter, Bush seemed to suggest that current realities on the ground would preclude a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders.

"In the agreement between Bush and myself we [received] tremendous achievements that Israel never had since its establishment," WorldNetDaily quoted Sharon as saying in his annual address to the foreign press corps last month.

"Sometimes, an American will end a conversation with the words 'I understand', and an Israeli will mistakenly take that as an formal Declaration of Understanding," Kurtzer said, attributing the error to poor Israeli knowledge of American English nuances.

"But I can assure you that no such understandings were reached. I have discussed the matter with Washington, and I have received full support on this matter."

Kurtzer predicted "the current government won't make it to the next elections (scheduled for 2006)" after it becomes clear Israel will be receiving no diplomatic rewards for its surrender.

To this I may add what former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once said about the danger that all these, U.S. and Quartet pressured, withdrawals will finally lead to, namely: A Palestinian State.

To those who think that the establishment of a Palestinian state will bring peace, I say it will bring the exact opposite. It will be a base for large-scale terror in the heart of our country. It will import tanks, missiles, cannons and people. A flood of refugees and also soldiers, from Iraq and Iran and Syria. Soldiers from countries with which bi-lateral agreements are going to be signed. This is within the rights of a sovereign state, even if it is bound by international agreements not to do it. Such a state will implement the "Doctrine of Stages" (a recipe for the destruction and conquest of Israel stage after stage, accepted by the PLO as their official policy). A Palestinian state will be a threat to our very existence. (Makor Rishon (Hebrew), March 31, 1999)

May his words be heard at least by his own party.

The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

"Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 28, 2005.

It all starts in the office of the Prime Minister of Israel. >From there it flows downhill through the hands of his advisors and then into the offices of the high-ranking Police Commanders and the Israeli Intelligence Services. Once the Police Force and the Shabak were admired protectors of the Israeli people. When such politicians as Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Ariel Sharon got their hands on these public institutions, they used them as their private Mafia.

Police and Intelligence, once proud and honorable professions, have been badly stained by both the politicians who have misused them and those who agreed to be used. Hopefully one of the higher ranking officers or intelligence agents tasked to be an "agent provocateur" will come forward and expose these corrupt politicians.

Speaking of gagging, I watch with disgust the politicians of the Knesset who vote their pockets instead of for the sovereignty and security of the country. Shinui and Shas are not different from each other in this act. Comments by Emanuel Winston

[Editor's note: Aryeh Zelasko also contributed this article. He commented, "What next? Maybe some one will burn down the Knesset or discover a plot of Yeshah doctors to poison Sharon?"]

This is a news item from today's Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). It is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=79150

An agent provocateur seems to have been discovered attempting to entrap members of the Yesha Council by offering them explosives. The episode includes police complicity and use of a gag order.

The episode began Wednesday when a student who had been volunteering for the Yesha Council was asked to return the vehicle he had been using to distribute anti-disengagement literature.

The "volunteer" handled logistical tasks such as distributing flyers and hanging banners and was therefore loaned a vehicle by the Yesha Council to use for the work. Ohad Bart, the council's logistical director contacted the volunteer, told him they no longer needed his services and requested that he return the vehicle. The volunteer gave various reasons why he could not return the vehicle and in the end Bart agreed to send a Yesha Council employee to pick up the car from the volunteer's home in Lod.

When the Yesha Council employee spoke with the volunteer a few days before the Purim holiday, the volunteer asked him, "Do you maybe need grenades for the struggle? I could sell you grenades." The Yesha Council employee responded that that was not the way the struggle would be waged.

The disturbing offer was relayed to Bart who immediately contacted MK Uri Ariel. The two became suspicious that the whole affair was a frame-up and that even though they had refused the explosives, once they picked up the vehicle from the agent provocateur they would be stopped by Police and grenades would suddenly be "found" hidden in the car - resulting in a "exposé" of Yesha Council involvement in violence and illegal activity.

Bart and the Yesha Council worker decided to call the police instead of picking up the vehicle themselves - asking that they arrest the volunteer/provocateur.

The police then made a strange request of the two Council workers. They asked them to go to the volunteer's house "with an undercover officer disguised as a settler." They instructed them to tell the volunteer that they were in fact interested in procuring explosives, and buy them - in order to catch him in the act.

Bart, familiar with the Shabak (GSS) tactic of using agents provocateur to delegitimize the right-wing, immediately refused, suspecting the police would then arrest everyone, accuse them of buying explosives - and result in headlines about the Yesha Council in the next day's papers aimed at torpedoing the anti-expulsion movement. He told the police to go alone, saying he would come afterward to recover the Yesha Council's vehicle.

When the two men arrived to collect the vehicle, police refused to inform them whether the volunteer was in fact arrested or not and whether grenades were found.

When Yesha Council spokesman Emily Amrousi called a press conference to expose the incident to the media, police slapped a gag order on the entire episode.

Yesha Council member Bentzy Lieberman took the initiative of publishing the name of the volunteer and the fact that he was a student at Yeshivat Ateret Kohanim in Jerusalem's Old City. Lieberman signed the letter with a request that security forces refrain from "planting provocateurs like Avishai Raviv."

Raviv was the Shabak agent responsible for several fictional swearing-in ceremonies as well as the distribution of posters prior to the murder of Yitzhak Rabin often cited as examples of right-wing incitement (such as the poster of Rabin dressed a Nazi). Raviv, in fact, sent out a beeper message to reporters minutes after Rabin was reported shot, reading, "We missed this time but next time we won't." Raviv even founded a fictional "extremist" group called Eyal which consisted of youths he paid to pose for reporters, some of whom were in on the ruse.

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 Batya Medad, March 28, 2005.

Part of the terrorist war we're fighting is the one for our souls. Our hearts are being raped by agent provocateurs abusing our innocence. We are being forced to lose our trust in our friends, neighbors and even family. It is impossible to know if someone is sincerely concerned and enthusiastic, or just acting a role to tempt and trap us.

Avishai Raviv was neither the first nor the last Jew to earn his living destroying Jewish lives. Reliable sources keep telling us that there are "Avishai Raviv's" in every yishuv and every high school, yeshiva, women's seminary, hilltop, university etc. The Shabbak is probably the second biggest employer after the Ministry of Education. Is it true? There's no way for ordinary people like me to know.

What are the implications of this? It's very simple. We can't trust anybody. Even married couples have discovered that one was an agent. http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=67853 Avishai was married and divorced during his decade working for the Shabbak. Yes, he was active in a wide variety of nationalist political groups, which attracted youth, from the mid 1980's until he was finally exposed after the Rabin assassination. He always had the money the kids needed to cover expenses, and who looks a gift-horse in the mouth? The students on limited budgets were easily trapped by his looks and generosity.

And how can an average person like myself know whom not to trust? Can the agent be the neighbor always available to help, lend a hand or an ear? Could it be someone who's always complaining? Maybe it's the unemployed neighbor? Or could it possibly be the one who has a job in the community or in a position of authority? Is it the one who always knows what's going on? Or maybe it's someone with radical ideas, or the one who seems so quiet? Or is it someone in high office making decisions that seem, not the wisest?

Just the fact that we've reached the stage that we take for granted that there are spies in our midst, like lice in the kids' hair and viruses in the computer? There's an inherent danger in all of this. It causes serious cracks in our social structure, and I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't one of the primary aims. All the government has to do is plant rumors, laced with a few true tidbits, and human nature will do the rest.

What's the truth? Honestly, I don't know. Whom can I really trust? Just G-d, but we mustn't live alone, without support and companionship. As it says in Pirkei Avot, Ethics of the Fathers, Chapter 1, Mishnah 6: "Yehoshua Ben Perachya said: 'Provide yourself with a rabbi (teacher); acquire a companion; and judge every person with merit.'"

We must find ourselves someone from whom we can learn Torah, which encompasses every facet of life. "Acquiring" a companion requires an investment; true friendship isn't superficial and fleeting. And lastly, judge others, as you would wish to be judged. None of us are perfect; we all make mistakes.

And if we've made mistakes, there's tshuva, repentance. That's one of the beauties of Judaism; it's aware of human frailties. We must constantly improve ourselves; focus on what we must do in both the personal and public parts of our lives.

These are very difficult and frightening times, and we mustn't lose our trust in our friends and family. I have absolutely no idea if any of my friends and neighbors are employed as agent provocateurs. I must focus on what I believe is right and not let myself be drawn off the track, because the final responsibility for my actions lies here with me.

May G-d give us the strength to know what's right.

This is Musing #107. 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 Rachel Saperstein, March 28, 2005.

The Knesset has voted to turn down the people's demand for a referendum on the expulsion plan of Ariel Sharon.

Sharon, using the government purse springs to shower largesse or penury on each political party has b(r)ought the Knesset to its knees. The promise of huge sums of money to those who vote for his plan made this vote a foregone conclusion.

Another window, another door closes on the people of Gush Katif.

People ask me time and time again - no, they don't ask, they weep - "How do you take this pressure, knowing that for the first time in history a Jewish government has decided to eradicate the presence of Jews on it's holy land?" This holy land is to be given to its enemies. "Rachel, how do you manage to survive each day, awaiting your expulsion?"

I listen to the sadness, the bewilderment, the fear, the despondency in the voices of callers.

How do you comfort the people, those people who wanted their voices heard, and the Knesset of Israel forbade it? The voices will not be heard. No referendum.

But yesterday we celebrated the bringing of a Torah scroll to the beautiful new synagogue, "Beit Shimrit Zohar", named in memory of a young girl who died of a rare blood ailment.

Three busloads of young English-speaking families from Beit Shemesh, near Jerusalem, joined the people of Neve Dekalim in this communal celebration. Under a canopy of prayer shawls the Torah, covered in blue velvet and silver filigree, was brought to its new home accompanied by joyful singing and dancing.

Our friend Moshe Burt, who has devoted himself to finding Torah scrolls for needy congregations, had worked long and hard to bring this particular scroll to our new synagogue in a community which has just been voted out of existence.

Am I in denial? Am I not facing facts? Should I pack my bags as another door is closed on me? Should I be realistic and see that the struggle is over? After all, a Jewish Knesset has voted to throw me out of my home.

Yesterday I looked at my friends and at their smiles and their joy as we shared in the celebration of a new Torah scroll.

We will remain on G-d's land. I am so certain of this I can dance with joy!

To Go To Top
Posted by A. Koltov, March 28, 2005.
These are Islam's global aims - the text below is the way the Nineteen Twenty Four organization puts it. No surprise here, but it's reassuring (well, kinda) to see it spelled out so clearly. I found the following site by backing up from one of many oy vey sites listed on the World of Islam (http://www.worldofislam.info). I urge you to also review the site: http://www.humiliateamerica.com/

OUR VISION (www.1924.org/index.php?id=1394_0_1_0_C)

Our vision is to cultivate a Muslim community that lives by Islam in thought and deed, adhering to the Shari'ah rules and nurturing a strong identity as Muslims. Our vision is this community stands as a model and an example to the wider society, making the basis of this relationship the carrying of the Islamic da'wa. Furthermore, our community needs to be aware of her destiny as an integral part of the global ummah, taking up the call for the return of the Khilafah and the unification of this ummah internationally (emphasis added).

We must work intelligently in the west, by not compromising Islam, but rather presenting a convincing argument in the west against western imperialism and interference in the Muslim world. Raising the call for the Muslims to own their political destiny and in turn building a support base in the west for the return of the Khilafah state.

If our community puts our resources together then we can change attitudes, inspire the society and contribute to the return of Islam internationally.

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

According to the UN, evicting 8000 peaceful Jews from their homes promotes human rights and is a good thing. The eviction of 416 Hamas terrorists to Lebanon in 1992 was a violation of human rights, and a bad thing to do.

In a report to the UN Human Rights Commission, which is holding its annual meeting in Geneva, Dugard singled out the disengagement plan as a positive and brave move on the part of Israel. He emphasised that the human rights problem is a long-term issue, and that Israel needs to act quickly before Palestinian terrorists renew attacks. The report also emphasised that the PA must do more to control terrorist groups responsible for suicide bombings and attacks on settlers and the IDF.

This article is entitled "The Hamas Class of 1992: The Force and Farce of International Law." It was written by Michael Shurkin, Associate Editor of Zeek: A Jewish Journal of Thought and Culture and it is archived at http://www.zeek.net/politics_0405.shtml

The year is 1992. Iran has just blown up the Israeli Embassy in Argentina, an event little remembered today. Algeria - which last month sponsored the U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel's assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as a violation of international law - has cancelled a democratic election that was about to be won by an Islamicist Party, declared martial law, and has sunk into what would become a ten-year civil war against Islamic radicals that featured heinous acts of terrorism, torture, mass executions, and so many "disappearances" that just last year Human Rights Watch declared Algeria to be the world leader in them. And, in the final months of the year, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin has rounded up 416 Hamas leaders and activists and deported them to Lebanon, dumping them on a hilltop in the no-man's land between Israeli and Lebanese lines.

The world howled. Israel was accused - in countless newspaper editorials as well as by United Nations Resolution 799 (with America's vote) - of violating international law and due process. Israel had no right to round up these men and deport them without a trial. Worse, since Lebanon refused to admit them, they were left to survive on their windswept hill in makeshift tents, thereby creating a humanitarian crisis as well as a public relations fiasco. Major newspapers all of the world featured images such as one that graced the pages of Libération of a shivering Hamas exile reaching out to the viewer in a supplication reminiscent of Goya's moving May 3rd, 1808. Accompanying the Hamas pieta was an article that echoed so many of the editorials current at the time; it spoke not just of the basic injustice of the deportation but the fact that the Hamas members in question were all educated university types, suggesting, implicitly, that Israel's fear of them was out of proportion. (Libération and many French papers also referred to the Hamas exiles as déportés, which in contemporary usage refers to Jewish victims of the Holocaust; an analogy is when people refer to Guantanamo Bay as a "concentration camp.") Meanwhile, French papers from that time also noted, invariably without comment, in small articles buried somewhere toward the back, that Algerian security forces were rounding up militants and shooting them. Extrajudicially. Needless to say, no global outrage.

Time passed. Under intense international pressure, Rabin let more and more of the Hamas exiles back into Israel, eventually bringing them all back as part of the Oslo Accord in September 1993.

What's become of these men, these university-educated victims of Israeli aggression? Let's check in with the Class of 1992, to see how they're doing.

First, although the first Hamas suicide bomb attack dates to April, 1993, the campaign only began in earnest after the militants had all returned, in 1994. (This was the same year that Iran, via Hezbollah and with the complicity of the Argentinean police, bombed the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, killing 87, and the same year that the radical Algerian GIA, which many have linked to the Algerian government, hijacked an Air France plane with the intention of flying it into the Eiffel Tower. French commandos successfully raided the jet and killed the terrorists.) This coincidence of timing bore out Israel's rationale for the deportation in the first place: that Hamas was now a ticking time bomb. A terrorist group of the first order. Does anyone remember this rationale today?

(The photo here is of Hamad after an Israeli sniper killed him in late 2001.)

It is impossible to know what happened to all 416 alumni of the Lebanese exile. Perhaps many of them have spent the past twelve years at home, tending their gardens. What is clear, however, is that they have had a prominent place in the suicide bombing campaign; they are not the "martyrs" themselves who carry the bombs, but the commanders, managers, and organizers of the attacks. Rahman Hamad is a typical example. He organized the bombing of the No. 5 bus in Tel Aviv in 1994, which killed 24 people. Under Israeli pressure, the Palestinian Authority arrested him but then let him go. He then planned and dispatched the bomber in the attack on the Dolphinarium disco, and he killed two boys at a gas station in Neve Yamim in 2001.

Another alumnus, Jamal Mansour, ran suicide bomb operations in the northern West Bank, where he oversaw its implementation, targeting, and infrastructure. Jamal Dmouni became Hamas commander in Samaria, where he oversaw Mansour.

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

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

This is what Jerusalem would be like under Arab control.

This was written by Subhi Mejahid, IOL Correspondent, Islam Online (www.islamonline.net/English/News/2005-03/27/article04.shtml).

CAIRO, March 27, 2005 (IslamOnline.net) - Denying participation in a talked-about conference of the three monotheistic religions on sacred rights in Al-Quds (occupied East Jerusalem), Al-Azhar said on Sunday, March 27, that Jews have no religious rights whatsoever in the holy city.

"There is nothing called sacred rights in Al-Quds," Sheikh Fawzi El-Zefzaf, chairman of Al-Azhar's Interfaith Dialogue Committee, told reporters.

"Al-Quds is a Palestinian right that should be given back to the Palestinians," he stressed.

Mohammad Abu Ghadir, professor of Hebrew in Al-Azhar University, agreed.

"Excavations and geological research have proved that Jews didn't have any right to claim sacred places in Al-Quds," he said.

"Israeli archeologists didn't even manage to prove that the 'wailing wall' is part of the so-called Temple of Solomon," Abu Ghadir added.

"Unfortunately, the world mistakenly believes that Jews do have sacred sites in Al-Quds like Muslims and Christians because of Israel's heavy media campaigns that distorted historical facts."

No Meetings

Al-Azhar, the highest Sunni authority in the Muslim world, categorically denied that it will take part in the reported conference.

"Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Sheikh Mohammad Sayed Tantawi has not received any invitation of that kind," an official source said.

He underlined that Al-Azhar's stance remains unchanged as it rejects talks with Jews over Al-Quds "because it is a very thorny issue that has not been yet resolved" on the political arena.

Sheikh El-Zefzaf said his committee has not got the faintest idea of such a meeting.

Some media reports suggested that preparations were underway to organize a conference grouping Muslim, Christian and Jewish leaders on the religious rights of each faith in the holy city.

No to Dialogue

Zefzaf further said that Muslims cannot engage in a dialogue with Jews in view of the ongoing Israeli aggressions on the Palestinians.

"If you want to sit and talk religion you should stop aggressions first against sacred sites, which is not the case with the Israelis, who frequently attack Al-Aqsa Mosque," he said.

Manei Abdel Halim, the dean of Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence College in Al-Azhar University, said no one can deny the Jews their religious rights as long as they are not trespassing the rights of the other.

"But Israel is trying now to claim rights at the expense of Al-Aqsa Mosque," Islam's third holiest site, Abdel Halim added.

"Muslims should step in and protect their mosque and have the lead in Al-Quds."

On Wednesday, March 16, Israel's Channel Two television showed a video of Jewish rabbis and far-right extremists discussing ways to occupy the Aqsa compound at a secret meeting in the Old City in Al-Quds.

In recent months, sources in the Israeli Shin Bet security service have expressed concern regarding possible missile or air bombing attack by individuals or groups on the compound.

Several times before, Israeli occupation forces had stormed the mosque's esplanade and clashed with Muslim worshipers.

Archeologists have also warned that ongoing Israeli excavations weakened the foundations of Al-Aqsa mosque, cautioning it would not stand a powerful earthquake.

A part of the road leading to one of the mosque's main gates collapsed in February, 2004, due to the destructive Israeli digging work.

Al-Haram Al-Sharif, which includes Al-Aqsa Mosque, represents the heart of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict because of its religious significance for Muslims.

Jews claim that their alleged Haykal (Temple of Solomon) exists underneath Al Haram Al Sharif.

Al-Haram Al-Sharif was the first Qibla (direction Muslims take during prayers) and is the third holiest shrine after Al Ka'ba in Makkah and Prophet Mhuhammad's Mosque in Medina, Saudi Arabia.

Its significance has been reinforced by the incident of Al Isra'a and Al Mi'raj (the night journey from Makkah to Al-Quds and the ascent to the Heavens by Prophet Muhammad).

Contact Israel Zwick by email at israel.zwick@earthlink.net

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

Israel has engaged the constitutional lawyers of the American Jewish Congress to bring people and viewpoints together, in preparation for drafting a constitution for the Jewish state (if it still is to be one). It is a serious effort, neglected when the State was established under fire.

It may be too late for the task. There is too much bitterness by the secular against the religious, by the Left against the Right, and by the appeasers against the patriots (and hardly the reverse). Vested interests would oppose switching to a representative Knesset. The result is likely to entrench the Arab fifth column and not to curb the Supreme Court from usurping power over the other branches and to curb the other branches' excessive power and discretion.


The Western press interpreted Abbas' dismissal of some police commanders as an intent to repress terrorism. It is guessing. It could be simply the traditional means whereby a new official gains personal control over bureaucracies. His appointment of a coordinator of the separate police forces would give him much control.

Since he arms rather than disarms terrorists (by recruiting them into the P.A. police), any lull in terrorism would be temporary. Actually, there is no lull, if one counts, in addition to attacks, preparation for attacks that the truce makes possible. His so-called ceasefire, which doesn't totally cease, is a cynical phase of his war. It should not be chalked up to his credit.


On tour in Morocco, a friend was told that traditionally, Jews and Muslims got along well. I asked who told her that. The guide." I asked his religion. "Muslim." Dictators' guides are not a reliable source of judgmental information.

"Getting along" is a relative term. Periodically, when Jews prospered, Muslims grew envious or felt it necessary to put the infidels in their place. (Many white Americans used to have that feeling about blacks.) They launched pogroms. Moroccan kings, having the Jews under their protection, mitigated the effects of the pogroms.

The late King Hassan used to boast about his protecting the Jews. He did fulfill that duty. However, the question is, protect from what. From Muslim mobs. A country whose minority has to fear mob assault, and must pray that the ruler's protection arrives swiftly and effectively, is not tolerant. Protection is not the same as tolerance. The Jews of Christian Europe found that true, too. Sometimes the Pope, bishop, or lord protected them, but sometimes a mob was too strong.


Many Democrats were skeptical about Pres. Bush's stated explanations for warring upon Iraq. Some went so far as to call him a liar. Those same Democrats were credulous about his explanations about setting up a PLO state at Israel's expense. They brought skepticism to one policy but not to his other policy. Most curious! I found him reasonable about Iraq and a liar about his assurances to Israel and his stated reasons for advancing the "national aspirations of the Palestinians," which aspirations are to destroy the Jewish state and probably the Jewish people. They failed to see that his aid to the P.A. terrorists contradicts his supposed war on terrorism. The "NY Times" did not enlighten them about that.


In addition to the ceasefire agreement, Israel has agreed to allow several dozen deported terrorists to return to the P.A. or from Gaza to Judea-Samaria. Some had hostage the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, one of Christianity's holiest sites. They just have to promise to abstain from terrorism, and submit to probation under P.A. supervision (IMRA, 2/12).

They had defecated on its altar, stolen its gold, and murdered a US citizen. US complicity in their return contrasts with US demands for punishment of the murderers of three Americans in Gaza.

Should Israel accept the promise of the lying jihadists of the P.A. to monitor the lying fanatics released, after the P.A. has broken all promises and we find that half the released terrorists resume terrorism?


A CIA official has calculated that the illegal oil sales and kickbacks allowed Saddam to increase spending on his Military Industrial Commission "a hundredfold." Had the US not intervened militarily, such sums would have enabled Saddam to finance illegal weapons of mass destruction. The UNO cannot be trusted with peace and security (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.35 from Dore Gold, Jer. Post, 12/30).


"Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF), guarding the nearby illegal Jewish settlement of Aztmona, opened sporadic gunfire killing 20-year-old Fathi Abu Jazar from the Rafah refugee camp in southern Gaza Strip on Thursday."

IMRA explains that the man was killed while attacking the community. The P.A. will not admit that its people commit terrorism or that the Israelis merely exercised the right to self-defense (IMRA, 2/12).

There is no such thing as "Israeli Occupation Forces." But there are "P.A. terrorists."


James Baker was the Sec. of State for Pres. Bush Sr.. Sec. Baker gained notoriety for not disguising his hostility towards Israel. Now Mr. Baker runs the Institute for Public Policy, at Rice U.. That Institute devised the well-known Road Map. That same Institute has fleshed out the Map for the current Sec. of State, Condoleezza Rice.

The Map includes yielding territory that the US Joint Chiefs of Staff called essential to Israeli security. By abandoning Gaza, PM Sharon would make it possible for the P.A. to fire rockets at every coastal Israeli city and at Ben-Gurion Intl. Airport. When the first airliner is shot down (if not sooner in anticipation of it), the airport would have to close. While taking off or landing, airliners have no protection against rockets. Only Israel equips its planes with protection against rockets, effective only during high-speed cruising. The foreign airlines claim such protection is too costly (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/13).

The US would say that the P.A. is "not trying hard enough" to stop terrorism. Small comfort, those words! The US also would warn Israel not to move in and try, itself, to stop that terrorism that victimizes its people.


One of the chief pieces of witnessed evidence of violence against Israeli officials for upholding PM Sharon's abandonment plan was an altercation against Min. Netanyahu at a religious affair. Min. Netanyahu's tire was low on air, so the media reported that his tires were slashed.

It turned out that a journalist had put two youngsters up to yelling at Netanyahu, "You are a bunny, Jewish blood isn't valueless." The government is using dirty tricks as in Rabin's time, to set up an atmosphere of fear by the Right and to enable the government to take undemocratic measures against it (IMRA & Arutz-7, 2/13).

The Min. of Internal Security pointed out that no violence was committed against Min. Livnat, as earlier reported. She, too, merely was yelled at. The media nevertheless continued to accuse the Right of "attacking" the pair, without indicating that the assault was verbal and to the issue, not threatening (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 2/13). Actually, her guards assaulted hecklers.

What was called violence was verbal and not physical. Now the verbal abuse turns out to have been minor. I am not sure it was out of place. It is very difficult for citizens in what are supposed to be democracies to present their grievances to public officials or to the public.


"Anyone who worked against his (Sharon's) "idea" of "Disengagement" became the Jungian classic example of blaming your victim before you attacked the victim so you could claim your own innocence." "Sharon made himself "a liar, a cheat and a fully fledged Dictator. He betrayed every principle of democracy and still called it Democracy. Sharon attacked a peaceful community and called them aggressors. He unleashed a full propaganda assault against a quiet, resourceful people whose only offense was to grow crops in barren, sandy soil, live a quiet, productive life. No discos, no political ambition, no power trips, no ego trips. Sharon once called them "the Best of Israel" - until he turned against them."

"But, if you are sufficiently ruthless, have the levers of Government control in you hands and have a Media so acutely twisted to the Left then it isn't hard to turn one side of the population against another. Which puts a criminal dictatorial government regime against that part of the people who does not wish to be forced from their homes."

"Despite multi-page treatment by the written media, and hours of radio talk, the GSS (Shabak) has stated categorically: There is no increase of threats on PM Sharon or other leaders." But government officials then ask why aren't the right-wingers arrested. This government and leftist demagoguery is anti-democratic (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/13).

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 Aryeh Zelasko, March 28, 2005.

About fifteen years ago a friend of mine was in Poland. At the time there were maybe four or five thousand Jews living there. Most of them elderly war survivors. When my friend was in Warsaw he saw a large demonstration being addressed by a priest. He asked his guide what was happening and was told that the local bishop was leading a demonstration against the Jewish control of Poland. His Polish guide informed him that the Jews were much too powerful in Poland and that Polish independence was threatened, no less.

When my friend asked him if he had ever met a Jew in Poland or could name any of these powerful Jews who ran Poland, his answer was: "Of course not. They keep themselves well hidden. Nobody knows who they really are."

There is no way to argue with insanity.

This article is called "Ban Sought on Jewish Organizations." It's by Anatoly Medetsky, Staff Writer, The Moscow Times, and appeared on monday, March 28, 2005, page 3 (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/03/28/012.html).

About 5,000 people, including former world chess champion Boris Spassky, have signed a letter asking prosecutors to ban Jewish organizations because they believe one of the basic Judaic books professes religious hatred, said a center that monitors religious freedom.

The group sent the letter to the Prosecutor General's Office last Monday, the Sova center said last week.

The signatories claim that "Kizur Shulkhan Arukh," an abbreviated version of a 16th-century book that lays out daily rules for Jews, teaches hatred toward non-Jews, Sova said.

Moscow sculptor and head of the obscure nationalist All-Russian Cathedral Movement Vyacheslav Klykov, a signatory of the petition, confirmed the report, Interfax said.

A Prosecutor General's Office spokeswoman could not immediately confirm Friday that the the petition had been received.

One of Russia's two chief rabbis, Adolf Shayevich, condemned the letter as a way for "a number of ambitious politicians" to "earn cheap popularity."

Boruch Gorin, a spokesman for the Russian Federation of Jewish Communities, called for an investigation into manifestations of anti-Semitism. "People who have achieved success in life and have certain authority in society must understand that they cover their names with indelible shame by signing such documents," he said, in an apparent reference to Spassky, Interfax reported.

Shakhmatnaya Nedelya, or Chess Week, of which Spassky is editor, said Friday that he was in France and was not available for comment.

The letter came two months after 20 State Duma deputies sent a similar letter to the Prosecutor General's Office.

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 Marlene Young, March 28, 2005.


* Harav Hillel Lieberman, 36, from Elon Moreh murdered near Nablus
* Rabbi Binyamin Herling murdered in Kedumim
* Midhat Yusuf murdered in Joseph's Tomb Nablus
* St.-Sgt. Yaakov Krenchel, 23, murdered between Itamar and Elon Moreh
* Arieh Arnaldo Leon Agranionic, 48, murdered in Itamar
* Gilad Zar, 41, murdered in Itamar
* Sarah Blaustein, 53, from Efrat, murdered en route to Zar's funeral
* Esther Alon, 20, from Efrat, murdered en route to Zar's funeral
* Yair Har-Sinai, 51, father of nine, near Sussia
* Meir Lixenberg, 36, father of five, murdered between Itamar and Nablus
* Rochel Gavish, murdered first day Passover 2002, Elon Moreh
* David Gavish, murdered first day Passover 2002, Elon Moreh
* Avraham Gavish, Rachel and David's son, murdered first day Passover 2002, Elon Moreh
* Yitzhak Caner, Rachel Gavish's father, murdered first day Passover 2002, Elon Moreh
* Avi Siton, 17, yeshiva student murdered near Itamar
* Nati Riachi, 17, yeshiva student murdered near Itamar
* Gilad Steiglitz, 14, yeshiva student murdered near Itamar
* Rachel Shabo, 40, murdered in Itamar
* Neriyah Shabo,15, murdered in Itamar
* Tzvika Shabo, 12, murdered in Itamar
* Avishai Shabo, 5, murdered in Itamar
* Yossi Tuito, 40, murdered in Itamar
* Shlomo Miller, 50, father of seven murdered in Itamar August 2004, The murderer, Yusef Ahmad Hassan Hanany, was a member of the Palestinian Authority's Preventative Security Force that is responsible for preventing terror attacks.





"Happy is the Nation - Visit to Homesh," By Israel Harel, Haaretz.com Feb 25, 2005.

On Monday morning, the day after the government decided to uproot the communities of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, a delegation of American Likud leaders arrived in Homesh, a settlement in Samaria slated for destruction under the disengagement plan. At about the same time, Alice Ziman, a young woman in her twenties, arrived in the settlement to prepare the house that her family would be living in from now on. The visitors that expressed their amazement about the timing of the move ("After all, just yesterday-") were told that Alice, a student of industrial design, and her husband, Re'i, an engineering student, were part of a trend documented in a film made by Menorah Hazani, another resident of Homesh.

That trend involves young couples coming to live specifically in northern Samara because of the security related and "political" circumstances. They have come to fill the settlements that have been abandoned by many of their original residents as a result of the tribulations of the war. At the high point of the terror war, three people living in Homesh were killed within a span of 10 days, and 25 families picked up and left. Now, in recognition of the courageous few that remained and did not leave, the government has decided to completely and finally uproot them.

From another spot in the settlement, the chimneys of the Hadera power station and planes taking off and landing at Ben-Gurion Airport can be clearly seen - without binoculars - from Homesh. All that is needed is one salvo of Katyusha rockets aimed at these strategic targets to paralyze the entire country. Ariel Sharon said these exact words, at exactly this spot - but at a different time - to the many visitors he used to bring to this observation point in Homesh, including foreign heads of state and generals.

Marlene Young is vice-president of TODA - Torah Organization for Disability Access, as well as an advocate for Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by TheRaphi, March 28, 2005.

This article was written by Rahel Neuwirth, 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.

The Iranian mullahs are intractable in their all-out push to achieve nuclear weapons as soon as possible. They cunningly toy with the West, while cynically insisting that their nuclear program is intended to only produce peaceful nuclear energy.

Meanwhile, they prevent full inspection, and disperse and hide their facilities in underground sites protected by ground-to-air missiles. They are repeatedly caught lying about their nuclear preparations and respond with more lies. They openly acquire offensive missiles with increasing capability to deliver nuclear payloads ever further and more accurately. They vow to exterminate Israel as soon as they achieve nuclear capability. The brazenness of the mullahs suggests a deep contempt for the West, and especially America, as they confidently flaunt their hatred and provocation and then dare us to do something about it.

The Bush Administration faces a grim dilemma while the mullahs pour out their invective and contempt towards us. Our so-called European 'allies' are insisting on a diplomatic solution, which means that we cannot count on them for much more than talk. Our government says that we are prepared to bring the matter before the Security Council, as if that is supposed to impress Iran. Such empty talk actually makes us look foolish and weak, because China, France and Russia will likely veto any UN sanctions, and even Britain is edging away from support for the US.

China just signed a seventy-billion-dollar deal to buy Iranian oil and Russia is proceeding to supply Iran with nuclear fuel to start up their 'peaceful reactor', despite urgings by the Bush administration to refrain from doing so. There are also reports that Iran was having difficulty processing uranium to weapons-grade concentration and may be opting to simply purchase it from cash-strapped North Korea. Yet, even suggesting a serious economic embargo at this time might be asking too much of our so-called allies, because it could raise the high price of oil still further and damage Western economies. Ultimately, they may even be prepared to live with a nuclear-armed Iran while retreating into their own world of denial and engaging in business-as-usual with Iran's mullahs, offering endless rationalizations.

Having stated repeatedly that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable, President George Bush, who heads the world's presumed superpower, has raised the stakes and he must now deliver soon. If he doesn't, he will lose credibility, which would then further embolden our enemies. Iran and the world will smell fear and hesitation coming from the Bush administration.

The United States faces daunting choices. Unilateral military action to disarm Iran would entail great difficulty and high risk. We would be limited to air strikes against many dispersed and highly protected sites. A ground invasion is unlikely because our all-volunteer army is already deployed in Iraq, and Iran is strong on the ground. Iran's military has substantial firepower and could react fiercely if attacked, including missile strikes on US bases in the region. They could also attack Israel, which by now has no reason to heed any more US urgings about 'showing restraint' while their people are being blown up. An Israeli response could be massive, which could generate widespread Muslim rage against America. Having waited far too long to confront Iran, we are now virtually without allies while facing a powerful enemy who cannot be knocked out in a quick air strike, and who is totally ruthless.

Another daunting scenario is that Israel might be compelled to preempt to avoid facing nuclear annihilation. That would embarrass us with the Muslims, who would naturally blame America for anything done by Israel. George Bush and Bill Clinton both ignored long-standing and repeated Israeli warnings about Iran's nuclear weapons program and its public threats to exterminate Israel. But our government did express concern over Israel's possible preemptive action to neutralize the Iranian threat and how that would complicate our relations with the Arabs.

Another unspoken consideration may also be guiding US thinking. In World War II, we fought a schizophrenic war against Nazi Germany. On the one hand we fought the Germans fiercely and also aided our allies and various victims of the Nazis as well - but with one glaring exception. The US carefully avoided any action that would interfere with the extermination of European Jewry. For example, we bombed German rail lines, but never those leading directly to the death camps, even when asked to do so. Even then, were we pandering to the Arabs, who supported the Nazis and who opposed any help for the Jews?

In 1981, US intelligence had to know that Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor at Osiraq was nearing completion and intended to provide nuclear weapons to attack Israel. And yet, the US allowed France to build that reactor, perhaps assuming that if Israel were the only target then 'we could live with that'. Also note the very harsh response of the US administration against Israel following its air strike on Osiraq. Instead of deserved congratulations, there was a suspension of American support as punishment and Vice President Bush was reported to have demanded that we bomb the Israeli air base that launched the strike. Yet, even Iraq's neighboring Arab countries felt relieved and safer after the Israeli action.

Today, the US and even the Europeans rightly fear a nuclear Iran under the extremist mullahs. But given the Jewish experience of World War II and of seeing the West allow Saddam Hussein to seek nuclear weapons - not once, but twice - we can now pose an 'ugly' question, however hypothetical. If the West could be assured that only Israel, and not the US or Europe, would be threatened by a nuclear Iran, would that then be acceptable? History suggests that the 'ugly' answer is probably "yes". But the problem now is that, unlike during World War II, those 'troublesome' Jews may refuse to die quietly for our convenience. Israel may realize that the US is an unreliable ally and decide to preempt. In a worst case scenario they can deliver a massive nuclear punch of their own with huge consequences. It seems that our problem is more to hold Israel back than to disarm Iran.

In all of this, our government seems reluctant to openly discuss other ramifications of a nuclear Iran. Iran's launching nuclear missiles directly at the West is not likely because that would obviously reveal their origin and bring immediate and awesome retaliation. The Iranians could easily intimidate the Europeans by merely issuing credible threats to 'play ball or else'. With Europe neutralized, they could then distribute easily smuggled small-size nuclear weapons and dirty bomb devices to Al-Qaeda for use inside the US while claiming plausible deniability. We cannot retaliate against an unknown enemy and Al-Qaeda has long sought, and may now have acquired, such weapons on their own. It would be very difficult to strike Iran without proof of culpability, which may prove elusive to obtain.

A further problem for the Bush administration is that we have failed to prevent North Korea from going nuclear, and our earlier bribe under the Clinton Administration with Jimmy Carter as negotiator was a total failure. Those opposed to military measures will argue that after our having 'allowed' North Korea and Pakistan to go nuclear, we cannot now make an 'exception' for Iran, which would then insult and enrage the entire Muslim world.

Will the Bush administration act in time to use necessary military force to disarm Iran? Only a revolution against the mullahs would derail the apocalyptic scenario we now face. It may not take long to find out.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 27, 2005.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon lies to his own Likud Party; lies to the Knesset and gets his Cabinet to attest to his lies. On the other side, we have the pro-Arab Bush Dynasty tied to the Arab oil nations. Here we find one of James Baker's Jew-boys, Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer working like a rodent to gnaw at the pillars that support the Israeli nation.

President George Bush, using American tax-payers' dollars believes he has bought and paid for Israeli obedience in his policy to appease Arab Muslims.

I personally think that the Jihadists will still attack America - no matter if America continues betraying Israel. You just can't bribe a Terrorist and expect them to stay bribed.

This is from Israeli & Global News. It was written by Steven Erlanger and it appeared in yesterday's New York Times.

JERUSALEM, March 25 - The United States' displeasure with Israel's intention to expand a West Bank settlement grew Friday, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice condemning the plan as "at odds with American policy."

In an interview with The Los Angeles Times, Ms. Rice said the Israeli response to American concerns was "not really a satisfactory response."

Israeli officials say the announcement about adding 3,500 homes to Maale Adumim, near Jerusalem, is just a bureaucratic step, and point out that the houses will not be built for a few years. But Palestinian officials have complained that the Israeli intention is to cut off Jerusalem from the West Bank and destroy the contiguity of any future Palestinian state, and they reject any Israeli or American efforts to predetermine the outcome of negotiations.

The ambiguities surrounding American policy were underlined Friday when a diplomatic furor erupted over remarks reportedly made by the American ambassador to Israel, Daniel C. Kurtzer, in an off-the-record session nearly a month ago with new Israeli Foreign Ministry employees.

According to the newspaper Yediot Aharonot, which was leaked a copy of notes taken at the meeting, Mr. Kurtzer said Washington had never reached an understanding with Israel that would let it keep its large settlement blocks in the West Bank. The newspaper also quoted him as saying he expected Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government to fall before completing its term in November 2006.

Mr. Kurtzer angrily denied the Yediot story on Friday, saying he was misquoted and misunderstood. "What I tried to explain to them is exactly what U.S. policy is," he told Israeli radio and television on Friday. "And U.S. policy is the support that the president has given for the retention by Israel of major Israeli population centers as an outcome of negotiations."

Mr. Sharon's office said it believed that Mr. Kurtzer had been misquoted.

American officials said they believed that the leak was an effort by the foreign minister, Silvan Shalom, to boost his standing in Mr. Sharon's right-wing Likud Party and undermine him just before a crucial budget vote next week that could bring down the government.

A senior Sharon adviser said the leak was intended to undermine an important political accomplishment: understandings on the settlements that Mr. Sharon reached with President Bush last April.

Mr. Sharon has justified his plan to pull all 21 Israeli settlements out of Gaza (as well as four small ones on the West Bank) to his own party on the basis of his belief that Washington will support Israel's intention to keep its main settlement blocks around Jerusalem and Tel Aviv in peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

One key Likud member, Education Minister Limor Livnat, said Friday that she would not have agreed to support the Gaza withdrawal plan in the absence of Mr. Bush's commitments. Arye Eldad, a legislator from the right-wing National Union, said that "the prime minister's great fraud has been uncovered; Israel is not getting a thing in exchange for the transfer" of the Gaza settlers.

Diplomatic ambiguities are becoming more exposed, officials from both countries conceded. Washington has agreed that Israel can keep major population centers in the West Bank, presumably like Maale Adumim, and yet also insists that Israel do nothing to "prejudice the rights of other parties or the outcome of final-status negotiations" with the Palestinians.

Mr. Sharon, for his part, prefers to emphasize the first part and play down the second. And no matter how annoyed Washington may be, the Americans do not want Mr. Sharon's government to fall and his Gaza plan to fail.

Mr. Sharon has promised Mr. Bush, in the peace plan called the road map, to dismantle illegal outposts erected by settlers after March 2001 and to freeze settlement construction and expansion. But the Israelis also say they have tacit understandings with Mr. Bush that a settlement freeze would allow for "natural growth" of the existing population and new building within the existing boundaries of settlements.

American officials do not officially confirm such understandings, but even if they exist, the proposed new housing in Maale Adumim, the largest settlement in the West Bank, with about 30,000 people, would not represent merely "natural growth." The Israeli announcement "embarrassed the Americans," an Israeli official conceded, one reason why Ms. Rice reacted so strongly.

Washington is also eager to support the new Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, whose own position is undermined by the Israeli announcement. "What was acceptable to the Americans under Yasir Arafat is not acceptable today," the official said.

In a letter last April 14, Mr. Bush acknowledged that a final peace deal with the Palestinians would not be made on the basis of Israel's 1967 boundaries, but would reflect the "new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers."

For Israel, one key reality is Maale Adumim, which looks like a Jerusalem suburb and which no Israeli government is likely to be willing to negotiate away. But Washington has never been willing to identify what it means by "demographic realities," let alone give its approval to specific settlements.

Speaking for the European Union, its foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said Friday that the Israeli plan to expand Maale Adumim "runs counter to the commitment by parties involved to abstain from any unilateral action that could affect a final solution" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Saeb Erekat, a Palestinian negotiator, said: "The United States can't decide on behalf of the Palestinians and can't decide final-status negotiation issues by itself. We urge the United States to have Israel stop settlement activity."

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 27, 2005.

New York Times News Service To The Chicago Tribune, March 27, 2005: (1)

The full story (or rather the 'untold' story begins) begins long before 9/11/01. The U.S. Congress has gone along with the cover-up just as they did the Iran/Contra Affair using national security to obscure what should be defined as Treason.

The Story begins with the pro-Arab State Department accommodating such nations as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. (The hijacking suicide bombers of 9/11 were 15 Saudis and 4 Egyptians.) The FBI and the CIA, while not wholly innocent of protecting Saudis nevertheless ensured that our investigating Intelligence Agencies would not track, expel or prohibit the influx of Arab Muslims whom they knew to be dangerous to America.

The 9/11 Commission under fire, Senator Lee Hamilton insured that the U.S. State Department would not be deeply investigated with the blame thrown on the FBI and the other U.S. Intel Agencies. Avoiding interference with Arabs coming into this country became a culture of avoidance for the FBI. Any agent who went too far in tracking Arab Muslims soon found themselves either transferred or received advisories to cease and desist.

The Players were such people as George Herbert Walker Bush, first as Director of the CIA, then as Vice President - then President, always with the able assistance of James Baker III - who was Treasury Secretary before he was Papa Bush's Secretary of State. Their influence on the State Department was deep and overpowering. This was a Shadow Government that controlled American foreign policy, particularly that connected with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, et al.

The American Congress, at least some of them, understood and went along with the controlling power of the Shadow Government, particularly when it came to oil. Here we find Arab funds making their way to political war chests. The recipients took the money and kept quiet.

It wasn't just the Bush Dynasty and their oil cronies both in Congress plus the multi-national corporations. Take a hard look at the Clintons while Bill was in office and their buddy system with the Arab oil sheiks.

For years the FBI were the escorts of Arab Muslims as they roamed Washington even brought into our most secret facilities. Some of the most well known Terrorists were given the royal tour of Washington, courtesy of the State Department and FBI as the tour guides.

When a high-ranking Egyptian General laid his hands on the re-entry cone technology for missiles, called carbon-carbon, he tried to leave the country. He was stopped at the airport. Instead of bringing him to trial the State Department slipped in and had him released and sent back to Egypt.

We never did find out if the plan was to give Egypt this material or the technology to make it - or if he was sent home without the technology. This would be consistent with the on-going policies such as when Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger transferred the technology and manufacturing capability of the new M1A1 Abrams tank to Egypt without notifying Congress nor seeking legal appropriations' funding before he went on his secret venture.

The 9/11 Commission knew that the FBI had secretly hustled the Saudi royal families out of America but, the Commission deliberately chose to ignore it. Later Lee Hamilton said on TV that we must seek the friendship of the Arabs (specifically the Saudis). No one questioned him about the artful avoidance of the 9/11 Commission to question the fast assisted escape of the Saudis nor the role of the State Department in authorizing the FBI to assist the escape of the Saudi royal family.

Even now the Bush Administration has launched a well funded Public Relations campaign to win the heart and minds of the Arab Muslim world (especially the Saudis) using Karen Hughes as the apologist for daring to attack Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11. Add to that the effort to dismember Israel as the Bush family's gesture of sacrificing an ally to appease the Arabs.

Loop around and find the earliest connections to the Bush Administration and associates oil arrangement. Just prior to Bush's first successful election to office there was a huge oil play. In the late 1990s, there was a super glut of oil offshore in foreign oil farms and super-tankers with their holds full of oil.

Yet the multi-national corporations played as if there was no glut nor was there an investigation why they had not ordered the crude into their storage reserves. Nor did Congress want to investigate why the U.S. based cracking plants were not producing refined oil product. At the same time that the false reports of an oil shortage were being pumped out of Washington, there was pressure to open up the Alaskan fields, the off-shore drilling in Florida and California.

The artful shortage was to be the pressure needed to break through the conservation and ecology laws protecting tender habitats. If there was a national crisis then Congress could be persuaded to over-ride the conservation laws designed to protect sensitive areas. So, the oil companies manufactured a crisis and the Bush Administration went along with the scheme.

There was also the value in rising crude oil prices that allowed U.S. oil prices to also be artificially raised. The excess profits to U.S. oil companies topped out in the billions of dollars, perhaps trillions. That is all being replayed as the crude oil shoots up to $55 per barrel and the Saudis and multinational oil corporations are rolling in money. The rest of the world is suffering.

The Congress refused to pass on excess profits tax as the oil companies swindled the American consumer. The Bush Administration played its role in ushering in this flagrant embezzlement to move smoothly. The oil and power industry poured in substantial donor monies for the Bush campaign and he delivered profits and a pollution safety net.

What the government hasn't told us would fill volumes. Regrettably, we cannot count on Congress to intercede because they too have their hand-out for donor monies.


1. "New Records: FBI Helped Saudis Leave U.S. After 9/11" by Eric Lichtblau, New York Times News Service, Chicago Tribune, March 27, 2005.

New Details on F.B.I. Aid for Saudis After 9/11 By Eric Lichtblau, New York Times, March 27, 2005

WASHINGTON, March 26 - The episode has been retold so many times in the last three and a half years that it has become the stuff of political legend: in the frenzied days after Sept. 11, 2001, when some flights were still grounded, dozens of well-connected Saudis, including relatives of Osama bin Laden, managed to leave the United States on specially chartered flights.

Now, newly released government records show previously undisclosed flights from Las Vegas and elsewhere and point to a more active role by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in aiding some of the Saudis in their departure.

The F.B.I. gave personal airport escorts to two prominent Saudi families who fled the United States, and several other Saudis were allowed to leave the country without first being interviewed, the documents show.

The Saudi families, in Los Angeles and Orlando, requested the F.B.I. escorts because they said they were concerned for their safety in the wake of the attacks, and the F.B.I. - which was then beginning the biggest criminal investigation in its history - arranged to have agents escort them to their local airports, the documents show.

But F.B.I. officials reacted angrily, both internally and publicly, to the suggestion that any Saudis had received preferential treatment in leaving the country.

"I say baloney to any inference we red-carpeted any of this entourage," an F.B.I. official said in a 2003 internal note. Another F.B.I. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said this week regarding the airport escorts that "we'd do that for anybody if they felt they were threatened - we wouldn't characterize that as special treatment."

The documents were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Justice Department by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, which provided copies to The New York Times.

The material sheds new light on the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, and it provides details about the F.B.I.'s interaction with at least 160 Saudis who were living in or visiting the United States and were allowed to leave the country. Some of the departing Saudis were related to Osama bin Laden.

The Saudis' chartered flights, arranged in the days after the attacks when many flights in the United States were still grounded, have proved frequent fodder for critics of the Bush administration who accuse it of coddling the Saudis. The debate was heightened by the filmmaker Michael Moore, who scrutinized the issue in "Fahrenheit 9/11," but White House officials have adamantly denied any special treatment for the Saudis, calling such charges irresponsible and politically motivated.

The Sept. 11 commission examined the Saudi flights in its final report last year, and it found that no Saudis had been allowed to leave before national airspace was reopened on Sept. 13, 2001; that there was no evidence of "political intervention" by the White House; and that the F.B.I. had done a "satisfactory screening" of the departing Saudis to ensure they did not have information relevant to the attacks.

The documents obtained by Judicial Watch, with major passages heavily deleted, do not appear to contradict directly any of those central findings, but they raise some new questions about the episode.

The F.B.I. records show, for instance, that prominent Saudi citizens left the United States on several flights that had not been previously disclosed in public accounts, including a chartered flight from Providence, R.I., on Sept. 14, 2001, that included at least one member of the Saudi royal family, and three flights from Las Vegas between Sept. 19 and Sept. 24, also carrying members of the Saudi royal family. The government began reopening airspace on Sept. 13, but many flights remained grounded for days afterward.

The three Las Vegas flights, with a total of more than 100 passengers, ferried members of the Saudi royal family and staff members who had been staying at Caesar's Palace and the Four Seasons hotels. The group had tried unsuccessfully to charter flights back to Saudi Arabia between Sept. 13 and Sept. 17 because they said they feared for their safety as a result of the Sept. 11 attacks, the F.B.I. documents say.

Once the group managed to arrange chartered flights out of the country, an unidentified prince in the Las Vegas group "thanked the F.B.I. for their assistance," according to one internal report. The F.B.I. had interviewed many members of the group and searched their planes before allowing them to leave, but it nonetheless went back to the Las Vegas hotels with subpoenas five days after the initial flight had departed to collect further information on the Saudi royal guests, the documents show.

In several other cases, Saudi travelers were not interviewed before departing the country, and F.B.I. officials sought to determine how what seemed to be lapses had occurred, the documents show.

The F.B.I. documents left open the possibility that some departing Saudis had information relevant to the Sept. 11 investigation.

"Although the F.B.I. took all possible steps to prevent any individuals who were involved in or had knowledge of the 9/11/2001 attacks from leaving the U.S. before they could be interviewed," a 2003 memo said, "it is not possible to state conclusively that no such individuals left the U.S. without F.B.I. knowledge."

The documents also show that F.B.I. officials were clearly riled by public speculation stirred by news media accounts of the Saudi flights. They were particularly bothered by a lengthy article in the October 2003 issue of Vanity Fair, which included charges that the bureau considered unfair and led to an internal F.B.I. investigation that the agency named "Vanitybom." Internal F.B.I. correspondence during the review was addressed to "fellow Vanitybom victims."

Critics said the newly released documents left them with more questions than answers.

"From these documents, these look like they were courtesy chats, without the time that would have been needed for thorough debriefings," said Christopher J. Farrell, who is director of investigations for Judicial Watch and a former counterintelligence interrogator for the Army. "It seems as if the F.B.I. was more interested in achieving diplomatic success than investigative success."

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, called for further investigation.

"This lends credence to the theory that the administration was not coming fully clean about their involvement with the Saudis," he said, "and we still haven't gotten to the bottom of this whole affair."

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 Evelyn Hayes, March 27, 2005.

phone the White House at 202-456-1111
fax the White House at 202-456-2461
send an e-mail to president@whitehouse.gov

phone Ariel Sharon at 972-2- 670-5555
fax Ariel Sharon at 972-2-670-5475
send an e-mail to pm_eng@pmo.gov.il

"It is possible to halt the disaster. In Kiev, Ukraine, it worked. In Beirut, a government fell due to mass protest. It can also happen in the only democracy in the Middle East."

Thus opens the notice calling for mass participation in a marathon 36-hour protest against Disengagement and for a national referendum at the Knesset tomorrow.

The demonstration - organized by the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Council and grassroots activist organizations - is scheduled to coincide with deliberations on two critical votes in the Knesset that impact the implementation of the Disengagement Plan. The rally will begin on Monday at 10:00am, several hours ahead of the Knesset vote on the proposal for a referendum on the government's plans for Gush Katif and northern Samaria. On Wednesday, the morning after the demonstration is to conclude, the Knesset will begin a marathon of voting on the budget and its accompanying Arrangements Bill. Judea, Samaria and Gaza Council organizers of the 36-hour protest say that approval of the national budget presented by what they termed "the expulsion government" is tantamount to approval of the Disengagement Plan itself. If the budget bill does not pass, new elections must be held within 90 days.

"We will show that it is truly the will of the people to be able to have their say on such an important issue as the future of Gaza and the northern Shomron," say the organizers of the mass rally. Labor party leaders have already stated that if the Knesset approves a referendum, then they will act to bring down the government and move for new elections. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is also said to prefer elections to a referendum on Disengagement.

Former Chief Rabbis Mordechai Eliyahu and Avraham Shapira are two of over 60 rabbis appearing as signatories to the announcement that was printed in the nation's newspapers over the weekend calling for the public to join the demonstration. The rabbis' statement concludes, "We will take part." Participants will circle the Knesset, as the promotional literature says, "to protect democracy", as well as attending Torah lectures and hearing speeches by rabbis, Knesset members and other VIPs.

When Ariel Sharon was in the opposition and advising protest against the Oslo Accords, he advocated lengthy, silent mass protests against the government, rather than the noisy demonstrations that were common in the early days of the negotiations with the PLO. Organizers of tomorrow's protest have billed it as a "Demonstration of Silence".

Evelyn Hayes lives in Brooklyn, New York and can be reached by email at "haze@rcn.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff, March 27, 2005.

JERUSALEM - Muamar Gaddafi, the always flamboyant Libyan leader, did not fail to deliver his usual dose of blunt views and wild theories when the leaders of the Arab world met in Algiers, Algeria last week.

But when addressing the issue of the Israeli-Arab conflict, Gaddafi managed to point out some glaring discrepancies typically glossed over by the media and those involved in the "peace" process.

"The Palestinians and the Israelis are stupid. Why? I'll convince you, and explain to you why they are stupid," Gaddafi said from the podium on the closing day of the Arab League summit.

The Palestinian Arabs "are stupid because [Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip] were theirs. They were in their hands for 20 years. Why didn't they establish a state there?"

"The 'West Bank' was Jordan's, and Gaza belonged to Egypt since 1948. Why didn't you establish a Palestinian state then? Where was this problem until 1967?" the Libyan asked.

The so-called "Palestinian" Arab nation did not begin clamoring for sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha) until those areas came under Israeli control as a result of the 1967 Six Day War.

[Ed. Note - It should be noted that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was founded in 1964, a full three years prior to the Six Day War. The cornerstone of its existence was and remains the annihilation of the entire Jewish state.]

Turning to the Israelis, Gaddafi said they were fools for not pressing their claim to Yesha from the very beginning.

"The Israelis paid no attention to the 'West Bank' and the Gaza Strip for 20 years, and showed no interest in them. They declared statehood and called it Israel in 1948, and put aside the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

Apparently Israel "considered [these areas] dispensable and unimportant," Gaddafi stated, and asked, "Why are they fighting for them now?"

These facts lead to a "moral, fundamental, and legal problem." Gaddafi said the only real solution was a single Jewish-Arab state he had previously dubbed Israstine.

Gaddafi went on to refute assertions that Ariel Sharon was an enemy of the Arab world, and said the Israeli prime minister was really an enemy of his own people.

Sharon "commits acts that lead to the murder of dozens and hundreds of Israelis," the dictator said.

"Someone who brings upon his people such tragedies and massacres is an enemy of his people. His actions have negative consequences for the Israelis," concluded Gaddafi.

The Jerusalem Newswire is an independent Christian-operated source for daily Israel-centered news. This article is archived at http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php?articleid=473

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 27, 2005.

No comment is really necessary about this. Not only is this a common practice in all tyrannical regimes but has been quite common in Israel. This was how the Sephardim were treated in the 50s and 60s, the Yemenites when they demanded information about their missing children and how the Haredim have been treated through out the years.

As the desperate rulers of Israel become even more frantic, the brutality will increase and spread. Now it is confined to active demonstrators, in the near future there will be attacks against "Right wing" neighborhoods or towns as well. The Leftists are determined to have their civil war come what may.

This is a news item from today's Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com. It is called "Police Break Up March, Beat Doctor, 3 Teenage Girls" and it is stored at http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=79129

(IsraelNN.com) An eyewitness Sunday night said that police assaulted a Magen David Ambulance (MDA) doctor and his three daughters who joined a women's solidarity march from Netanya to northern Samaria.

One witness, Esther Eliezer of Netanya, said that when she went to the police station to testify in the doctor's behalf, a policeman threatened to arrest her if she didn't leave immediately. The police also said they would arrest all of the women if they continue their walk Monday morning.

Penina Moati, a resident of Elkana, a Samaria community east of Tel Aviv, reacted with shock at what she said was unjustified police brutality against people who had not committed any offense. She said that a dozen women began to disperse after police said they could not walk together without a permit. When Haifa resident Dr. Shai Gross, an MDA doctor, arrived and a policeman insulted one of the women, Dr. Gross criticized the policemen. Four officers assaulted and arrested him while throwing his three teenage daughters to the ground, Moati asserted.

Moati said that on Monday the women will continue their walk, which she said is not a demonstration.

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 Yuval Zaliouk, March 27, 2005.

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said on Sunday that despite attempts by the Palestinian Authority to uncover weapons smuggling tunnels on the Gaza-Egyptian border, Strella anti-aircraft missiles were smuggled across the border. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1111634309442&p=1101615860782

Dear friends,

A great disaster is about to happen and nobody seems to be able to stop it, or PM Sharon for bringing it about. It is a national catastrophe for Israel and the Jewish people.

Please read the following Hamas spokesman Bahar statement very carefully:

Bahar said the disengagement plan should be seen as a major and strategic victory for the Palestinians "due to Israel's regression on all levels." He said the planned pullout was a sign that Israel had been morally defeated despite the full backing it enjoys from the US.

"All indications show that since its establishment, Israel has never been in such a state of retreat and weakness as it is today following more than four years of the intifada," Bahar told reporters. "Hamas's heroic attacks exposed the weakness and volatility of the impotent Zionist security establishment. The withdrawal marks the end of the Zionist dream and is a sign of the moral and psychological decline of the Jewish state. We believe that the resistance is the only way to pressure the Jews."

Here are two articles for your consideration.
Your Truth Provider,

[Editor's note: Also see: "Agents Involved In Arms Smuggling Into Gaza" below.]

Anti-aircraft missile,
Jerusalem Post

This article is called "Israel weaker now than ever, say terrorists" and was written by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff and appeared on their website, http://www.jnewswire.com/ March 25th, 2005.

JERUSALEM - Israel's plan to retreat from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria proves unrelenting Islamic terrorism has weakened the Jewish state in a way five full-scale wars failed to do, a senior Hamas official said Thursday.

"The painful and qualitative blows which the Palestinian resistance dealt to the Jews and their soldiers over the past four-and-a-half years led to the decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip," Ahmed al-Bahar, a top Hamas leader, was quoted by The Jerusalem Post as saying.

"The suicide attacks ... have taken their tolls on the Jews, both psychologically and economically, in addition to the high number of casualties," he continued.

Bahar said Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement" plan was a sign Israel had been morally defeated by its Arab Islamic foes.

"All indications show that since its establishment, Israel has never been in such a state of retreat and weakness as it is today following more than four years of the intifada," he told reporters.

"The withdrawal marks the end of the Zionist dream and is a sign of the moral and psychological decline of the Jewish state. We believe that [terrorism] is the only way to pressure the Jews."

When Sharon first announced his plan last year, he insisted Israel would retreat from a position of strength and that quitting Gaza would increase security for the nation's Jewish population.

Sharon also claimed the disengagement would help Israel to retain sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria.

But many Israelis fear the Arabs will use the precedent set by the pullout to press their advantage.

Former Sharon aide Ra'anan Levy wrote last month that Israel was sending the disastrous message that "We are giving the Palestinians what is theirs and we are taking out our own people who settled on Arab territory."

Sharon, Levy noted, "will further harm the Jewish claim of historic rights to the land, and he will cement even further the international claim that only Jews moving in one direction, over the rubble of their own homes, can be the foundation for peace."

"Hamas: Gaza pullout is victory for intifada" was written by Khaled Abu Toameh, The Jerusalem Post, and appeared Mar. 24, 2005

Israel's decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip is the biggest achievement for the Palestinian resistance as the heavy casualties it inflicted on Jews through suicide attacks and other operations was the direct cause of the pullout, according to a senior Hamas official in the Gaza Strip.

"The painful and qualitative blows which the Palestinian resistance dealt to the Jews and their soldiers over the past four-and-a-half years led to the decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip," Ahmed al-Bahar, a top Hamas leader, said. "The suicide attacks and the [booby-trapped] underground tunnels have taken their tolls on the Jews, both psychologically and economically, in addition to the high number of casualties."

Bahar said the disengagement plan should be seen as a major and strategic victory for the Palestinians "due to Israel's regression on all levels." He said the planned pullout was a sign that Israel had been morally defeated despite the full backing it enjoys from the US.

"All indications show that since its establishment, Israel has never been in such a state of retreat and weakness as it is today following more than four years of the intifada," Bahar told reporters. "Hamas's heroic attacks exposed the weakness and volatility of the impotent Zionist security establishment. The withdrawal marks the end of the Zionist dream and is a sign of the moral and psychological decline of the Jewish state. We believe that the resistance is the only way to pressure the Jews."

The Hamas leader said the current period of calm could evolve into a full cease-fire if Israel released all the security prisoners and halted its military raids in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. "Islam does not forbid a hudna (temporary truce) as long as it's in the interest of the Palestinian people and the Muslim nation," he explained, dismissing reports that Hamas had agreed to stop its terror attacks for fear that its leaders would be targeted by Israel.

"There's no doubt that Hamas suffered painful strikes with the killing of its leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz Rantisi, but despite this loss Hamas has retained its power. The martyrdom of these leaders and others has served as a resurrection for the Palestinian people and the Muslim nation."

Bahar said Hamas did not see any difference between Yasser Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). "We have dealt with President Arafat in the past and today we are dealing with Abu Mazen with the same fixed positions of Hamas," he said. "When Sheikh Yassin said that we are partners in blood and decision-making, this had a great impact on the Palestinian street." He expressed doubt that Abbas would be able to fight corruption in the PA as long as he's surrounded by the same people who belonged to the former regime. He also noted that the ongoing power struggle in the ruling Fatah faction was hindering reforms in the PA.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Marlene Young, March 27, 2005.

This is how Abbas and the Arabs keep their word. It's time to call your Senators and representatives and the White House. We do need a rest period - a period where for once we WAIT until the Arabs PROVE they want peace and, for once, Israel isn't pressured to weaken its security.

This article was written by Gideon Alon, Haaretz correspondent and appeared in Haaretz.

Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said Sunday that Palestinian Authority military intelligence agents were involved in recent attempts to smuggle anti-aircraft missiles into Gaza.

Mofaz was speaking at the weekly cabinet meeting, and said Strela missiles may have been smuggled into the Gaza Strip from Egypt through tunnels, despite the fact that the PA has recently acted against such infrastructure and exposed about 20 tunnels.

Mofaz said the Palestinians had crossed a red line, adding that Israel demanded the PA work to prevent such efforts and locate any missiles that may already be in the Gaza Strip. The minister did not disclose when the alleged smuggling took place.

"There is still a gap between the PA's intention to fight terror and the situation on the ground," Mofaz said, adding that there were still not enough reforms in the structure of Palestinian security services.

Mofaz also addressed recent changes in Palestinian public opinion, which he stated was more supportive of new PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and less sympathetic of terror. He noted, however, that there were Palestinian political leaders who were trying to undermine Abbas' authority.

To Go To Top
Posted by Ted Belman, March 27, 2005.

RICE: Plan to expand settlement 'at odds' with U.S. policy

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Israel's plans to expand a West Bank settlement was "at odds with American policy" and could threaten peace with the Palestinians, marking her sharpest attack of Israel since taking office, according to a newspaper report Friday.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Rice said the plan to add 3,500 housing units to the Ma'aleh Adumim settlement east of Jerusalem was "not really a satisfactory response."

I commented on this American position in my article "Making a Silk Purse out of Sow's Ear." (www.israpundit.com/archives/2005/03/making_a_silk_p.php)

"Israel must also take no actions that prejudice a final settlement, and must help ensure that a new Palestinian state is truly viable. A state of scattered territories will not work." -- Condi Rice

Unfortunately, no surprise there. It has been the US policy since the Six Day War to prevent Israel from acquiring territory by force. No doubt this position was cooked up in the "Oil Cabinet".

As a result, UNSC Res. 242 emphasized "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" even though this was not then and is not now, a recognized principal of international law. True that the words "all" or "the" were not included when it required "that Israeli armed forces withdraw from territories occupied as a result of the recent conflict", resulting in what diplomats call "constructive ambiguity". The resolution also required the establishment of "just and lasting peace in the Middle East" and "a just settlement of the refugee problem ..."

For the next twenty-five years Israel kept talking about what would constitute secure borders. During the years that Labour was in power settlements were constructed that were deemed for security purposes and it was generally accepted that Israel must retain the high ground including the Golan and must retain the Jordan Rift.

During this period of time the US maintained the position that the settlements were illegal or at least an obstacle to peace. In addition the US when not referring to the settlements also emphasized the need for secure borders. No longer.

Israel can blame no one but its own leaders for the Oslo Debacle. That was its first big mistake. This process lead to the negotiations at Camp David in which Barak offered from 93% to 97% of Yesha to the PA to reach a final agreement. Everyone thought that this was a very generous offer including President Clinton. Everyone except the Arabs. the US State Department and the EU.

Arafat rejected it saying that among other things that it left his future state with enclaves rather than contiguous territory. He then launched the murderous Intafadah II.

As a result Israel was not in the mood to better the offer and instead wanted to offer less next time around. Terrorism must have consequences, negative ones for the perpetrators, that is.

The EU for its part started to say that the Palestinians needed "hope" which was a a code word for a state preparing the way for Bush to make his June '02 speech in which he called for a peaceful Palestinian state.

The State Department started working with the Arabs and Great Britain to get support for the invasion of Iraq. To accomplish this they engineered the Roadmap that was said to be under the auspices of the Quartet. Not only did that document promise the Palestinians a state but "a viable state". It also required a settlement freeze. Thus Arafat came out the winner once again. Strangely, and regretably, Israel accepted it. That was its second big mistake.

Now the whole debate is about Israel's obligation to create a viable state rather than the Palestinian's obligation to concede land to make the border secure. This shift in focus changes the paradigm which existed since Res 242. No one talks about secure borders anymore. Its all about what it takes to make Palestine viable. (See the Debka article at (http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=97) as to the meaning of "viable"). Arafat, supported by the world, has won.

As a result of Israel accepting the Roadmap, Rice can now say to Israel that it is bound to freeze settlement activity because it accepted the Roadmap. Otherwise Israel could still be arguing for secure borders. To accept a settlement freeze is tantamount to accepting that Israel has no right to the land itself,

The talk has also progressed to the point where the Armistice lines of '48 has become the point of reference rather than the '67 borders.

The State Department recently created a diverse coalition of forces to force Syria to end its occupation of Lebanon. The quid pro quo was the American promise to get Israel to end the occupation of Yesha.

In fact, if you step back and view events since the failure of the Camp David talks, the State Department has been engineering a substitute for the failed offer together with Saudi Arabia and the EU. It accepted the position of the Arabs that the offer was not enough and more had to be offerred. First came the Saudi Peace Plan which had America's blessing in advance of its release and the Plan was then enshrined in the Roadmap with the added idea that there must be a settlement freeze. The US continues to value Saudi Arabia as its indespensible ally. Diplomatically S. Arabia supported the invasion of Iraq and the demand that Syria get out of Lebanon. In exchange, The US has accepted the Saudi Plan and is committed to getting Israel out of Yesha. This plan requires all Arab countries to make real peace with Israel. So far the US has given Saudi Arabia a pass on its support for terrorism and incitement all over the world. Oil is very important.

When will Israel ever learn?

Ted Belman is co-host of IsraPundit, a pro-Israel activist website (http://www.israpundit.com).

To Go To Top
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, March 27, 2005.

The caller sounded authentic.

"I'm a Manhigut Yehudit activist," he introduced himself, "and I've read the booklet, The Obligation to Refuse to Obey Orders. Now I've received a call-up notice for reserve duty - to guard sttlements in Northern Shomron. I told my battalion commander that I don't wish to participate in the activities of an army making preparations to evict Jews from their homes, and that I don't intend to appear. The commander explained to me that there is no connection between our

assignment and the disengagement plan, that other soldiers will guard the Jews in Northern Shomron while I sit in jail. What do you advise me to do?" my caller asked.

"First of all," I replied, "I don't advise you to do anything. It's your decision. I can only think together with you and say how I think I would act. Obviously, if my service would facilitate the active participation of other forces during the actual eviction, then I would even refuse to wash dishes on a remote army base."

"That's not the situation," he explained. "The activity is planned for Pesach. My task would be to guard Jews in settlements."

"OK," I replied. "It's now clear that we are not talking about refusal with the intention of interfering with the implementation of the eviction order, but refusal in a far broader context."

"First of all, the true struggle for Gush Katif is not a tactical struggle. It is important to demonstrate at road junctions, to establish a mass physical presence in Gush Katif, and we encourage such activities. However, in the final analysis we aren't stronger than the State itself. All the acts of protest and struggle are based on the assumption that the government does not reflect the wishes of the nation; accordingly, its decisions are not legitimate."

"As long as we fail to prove that the disengagement plan is contrary to the nation's wishes, Sharon will find the tactical solution for all the forms the struggle takes. The disengagement plan will be finally discarded only when it becomes crystal clear that the nation is opposed to it. The solution will take the form of a decision by the nation."

"For precisely this reason, Sharon and the Left are afraid of a referendum. They know that a referendum campaign will recreate the direct link between the belief-based public and the national public that we saw in the Likud referendum. Thus will be revealed the natural, healthy inclination of the majority of the nation towards its Jewish identity and beliefs and towards the public that represents these values."

"Of all the activities aimed at thwarting the disengagement plan, refusal to obey orders is the most important, not because it will necessarily halt the eviction, but because large-scale refusal is in fact an alternative form of referendum! The IDF is still the army of the people. If the majority of the soldiers refuse to carry out the order, it will be an unambiguous vote by the nation against the disengagement plan."

"You have to make up your own mind, but if I were to receive a call-up notice today, I would refuse to appear for reserve duty. The army's main assignment at the moment is to evict the Jews of Gush Katif. As long as the IDF prepares and trains for the execution of this crime - I shall refuse to wear its uniform."

"Refusal today - is referendum, and is the only possible way to vote against the disengagement plan."

There was silence on the line.

"So what do I reply to my battalion commander when he says that what I am actually doing is abandoning the security of Jews living in Northern Shomron?" he then asked.

"In my opinion this is a far simpler question," I replied. "Until Rabin shook hands with Arafat, a single company of the Border Guards could maintain security in the entire region. You are required to do reserve duty because of the Oslo process. The danger to the settlements and to the entire country does not come from the Arabs, but from the Left that brought the murder organizations here and gave them hope of victory. The soldiers guarding the settlements are carrying out a very important task, but they are dealing with symptoms not with the illness. In contrast, soldiers who will now refuse to serve, and will consequently be jailed, are carrying out a far more important task, since they are attacking the root of the matter, and because of their efforts we won't need guards at all in the future."

"It's important to realize that the problem doesn't lie with the Arabs but with the Jews. The IDF is, therefore, no longer the ultimate tool for the realization of our national objectives. We must continue to stand in the vanguard of the Israeli army, but education, settlement, and concern for the weaker sections of the population are currently more important. An Air Force cadet who evicts Jews - because if he refuses we won't have a religious pilot - is in my opinion a person whose values have become totally confused."

"Thank you for talking to me," said the voice on the other end of the line.

"With G-d's help, the situation will be turned upside down, just as in Megilat Esther," I replied.

"Happy Purim."

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 TheRaphi, March 27, 2005.

This was written by Faigie Heiman. She is a native of Brooklyn, who made aliyah with her husband in 1960. The Heimans live in Jerusalem.

On March 15, Memorial Hill in Jerusalem witnessed an unusual ceremony.

The large outdoor plaza at the entrance to the new Yad Vashem Memorial Museum was filled with hundreds of foreign dignitaries seated on plastic chairs. European delegates led by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, representatives of North and South America, Holocaust survivors, Knesset members, and important visiting personalities from Germany, France, Poland, Russia, Denmark and elsewhere came for the opening festivities.

The dignitaries had identical plastic faces. They bowed their heads in memory of six million Jews annihilated by the parents and grandparents of their fellow citizens. The temperature was low enough to cause physical discomfort, yet not a single frozen tear was perceived on any cheek.

The opening address, delivered by President Moshe Katsav, was eloquent, as were all the addresses that followed. Nevertheless, cold mountain air permeated the atmosphere. Israeli commentators described the ceremony, along with the museum itself, as "stately." One of them explained the difference between the Holocaust museum in Washington and Yad Vashem in Jerusalem: "The Washington museum was created for the purpose of evoking emotional reaction. Yad Vashem is for the stoic and brave. Statesmen do not shed tears."

"We are all paratroopers," the commentator remarked. "Paratroopers do not cry."

A long wailing shofar blast and Hatikva, sung by Dudu Fisher, opened the ceremony. Next came speakers, musical interludes by children, songs interspersed with poetry readings, and short film clips of European Jewish life before and during the Holocaust. Eli Wiesel, the last and most impressive speaker, stood at the podium without a piece of paper. When he addressed the audience his words increased the impact of the large banner in the background - Zachor et asher asa lecha Amalek?.

"Where was the rage when we discovered the magnitude of the killing?" Weisel thundered. "Was this man`s inhumanity to man? No! It was man`s inhumanity to Jews!"

"Why should there be suicide bombers?" he asked. He was the only speaker to suggest that the killing of Jews continues to this day. In the stately presence of presidents and prime ministers, his purpose was clear: "Messengers have to deliver messages. We have to become the messengers."

Two weeks ago, Orthodox Jews held ceremonies all over the globe honoring completion of the seven-and-a-half year Daf Yomi learning cycle. In cities throughout Europe, America and Israel, from Lublin to Melbourne to Sao Paolo, in stadiums, community centers and synagogues, hundreds of thousands of Jews celebrated the completion of one cycle and then immediately began the next one.

Last week, Jewish men, women, and children attended services on Shabbat parshat Vayikra to read and hear the words of zachor: "Zachor et asher asa lecha Amalek..." They listened to the reading of parshat Zachor as they do every year on the Shabbat before Purim, for it is a mitzvah in the Torah to hear and "never forget" what Amalek did to the downtrodden Jews after they left Egypt.

The Jewish people have thousands of years of experience in collective memories. Through their daily learning programs, Jews heroically maintain their faith and they remember. Torah-loving Jews are a non-stop learning community. There is no museum anywhere in the world that has been receiving visitors continuously for 2,000 years. Only in Israel, at the Kotel, the last remnant of the Beit Hamikdash, can one find thousands of visitors throughout the day and night, praying all year long.

Yeshivot and Jewish educational institutions are the answer to the requirements of the living. They are living testimony to faith through Torah study for Jews worldwide. New members have joined the Daf Yomi club, and, in seven-and-a-half-years, please God, their memories will be sharper, their level of understanding broader, the celebrations even greater.

Amalek is remembered in all the various masks and costumes he's donned through the ages - and, yes, Jews are proud to shed warm, salty tears. Tears express the pain, bitterness, hardship, and martyrdom of our people throughout the centuries, from the time we left Egypt all the way to our own era.

Memorial Hill in Jerusalem is considered today`s answer for Holocaust remembrance. It does not, however, answer the anti-Semitism, the hate, the desire to murder Jews for being Jews. Moments after the ceremony at Yad Vashem, newscasts switched their focus to the White House where President Bush was saying, "Israel will have to sacrifice and Palestinians need to work hard."

For the nations of the world, and even for some of our own brethren, we are not yet done sacrificing. Six million Jews in the years 1939 - 1945 were not enough. Thousands have been sacrificed to the present-day Amalek on the altar of the State of Israel since 1948, and that, too, is not enough. Inhumanity against Jews hasn`t had the last word yet. Now we are being called upon to add homes, businesses, and our land - in the world's one and only Jewish state in - in order to help create yet another Arab state.

Yes, a Palestinian state will cause the Arabs to, in President Bush`s words, "work hard." They will work hard looking for ways to kill us - while European and American heads bow reverently, their faces tearless on the frozen exterior of a Memorial Hill that doesn`t answer the timeless desire to murder Jews for being Jews.

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 Yaacov Ben-Yehudah, March 27, 2005.

So - there are no 'agent provocateurs,' just agents seeking credibility. As ...?

This comes from IMRA and was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis). It is archived at http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=24681

It should be noted that while the Israeli security services are adamant that there is no plan to use Shabak (ISS) agents to defame opponents of the Sharon administration, agents are expected to be planted in protest groups to monitor them. These agents need to establish their credibility in the groups.

The question thus is at what point a Shabak agent is acting in order to establish credibility and when he is acting as an "agent provocateur".

To Go To Top
Posted by Israel Zwick, March 26, 2005.

In this article by Ariel Natan Pasko, the author reminds us how Israel was condemned in 1992 for exiling 400 terrorists to Lebanon. Yet, today, Israel is being praised for plans to evict 8000 peaceful Jews from their homes. No one seems to be concerned about the humanitarian rights of Jews.

The article appeared as an opinion piece in Our Jerusalem (www.ourjerusalem.com/opinion/story/opinion20030819.html) as a reprint from the Jewish Press, August 13, 2003.

There`s a well-known story the late Rabbi Meir Kahane used to relish telling:

In 1985, Israel's Shamir government carried out a prisoner exchange with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, releasing 1,150 Arabs incarcerated for terrorist activities against Israelis in exchange for three Israeli soldiers. All the "Palestinian revolutionaries" had signed agreements before their release foreswearing any future violent activity. Three days after release, one of these "repentant activists" was brought into an Israeli hospital`s emergency room; he had blown himself up - what is commonly called a "work accident" these days - preparing a bomb for his next "revolutionary act" of murdering innocent Israeli shoppers.

Kahane, at the time a member of Knesset, had received a phone call from one of the doctors involved and tried to publicize the incident in the Israeli media. He spoke to several journalists, giving them full details. After a couple of days went by and nothing appeared in the newspapers or on radio or television, he again contacted the journalists and was told that the military censor had blocked the story.

Kahane tried several more journalists, waited, and got the same response. He then contacted the censor`s office itself, and was told that the government didn`t want the public to know that the released terrorists were returning to "work." Rather than warn the public to be on heightened alert - and by implication admit to a failed policy - the Israeli government chose a media blackout.

Later, after the first intifada "broke out" in December 1987, many among the leadership were traced back to that prisoner release.

Zoom ahead to December 1992. Yitzhak Rabin is now prime minister, and he "exiles" 400 Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists to Marj az-Zuhour in Southern Lebanon. The international media portray their daily struggles against hunger, cold weather, etc., when in fact they get hold of cell phones, make contact with Hizbullah operatives, and for months receive continuous Jihadist indoctrination, bomb-making lessons, and practice in guerrilla warfare techniques.

In an interview on Israel Television the night of the expulsions, Rabin explained his decision to temporarily deport the Hamas and Islamic Jihad activists, saying, "I was motivated, on the one hand, by the reality of the situation. The reality in recent months has been a worsening of murderous terrorist activities by fundamentalist Islamic organizations such as Hamas, such as the Islamic Jihad...At the same time, I considered the political and legal ramifications."

Rabin said that in his view, the action was not a deportation, even if it was described as such by legal terminology: "This is the temporary removal of inciters and abettors to inciters of repugnant acts of murder. Some of them for two years, some temporarily removed for one year." He added that a great deal of thought had been given to what means were necessary to fight terrorism. "...Let`s not forget," he said, "what alternatives did we have? Capital punishment, destruction of houses?"

Interestingly, an Israeli poll conducted right after the deportation showed that 91 percent of the public supported the government`s decision to deport the Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists. Those surveyed were also asked how they thought this act would influence terrorism. Fifty-five percent answered that it would reduce terrorism; 26 percent thought it would intensify terrorism; and 18 percent said it would have no influence.

The UN Security Council strongly condemned Israel for these temporary expulsions and threatened sanctions. Under mounting international criticism and wishing to avoid such sanctions, the Rabin government offered to take back more than a hundred of the exiled terrorists and to cut in half the time of exile for the remaining terrorists. By September 1993, half of the deportees had returned to Israel and the remainder - with the exception of eighteen who decided to remain in Lebanon to avoid arrest - returned in December 1993. Not coincidentally, terror by Hamas and Islamic Jihad has grown exponentially since the mid- 1990`s.

Fast forward to late July 2003. The Israeli cabinet decides, by a 14-9 vote prior to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon`s trip to Washington, to release 540 Palestinian prisoners, including more than 400 Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah terrorists. These include relatively senior officials in Hamas`s civilian leadership in the West Bank, as well as activists who served as liaisons with Hamas` s leadership overseas - people involved in arranging the transfer of funds to Hamas institutions in the territories or military training for Hamas members.

All this is being done as a "confidence building measure" to convince the Palestinians and Americans that Israel wants to move forward on the road map peace plan. But Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas has consistently said this is not enough, flatly stating that Israel "must release 6,000 prisoners in order to push the road map forward."

It's true that President George W. Bush, after meeting with Abbas at the White House, said, "We ought to look at the prisoner issue on a case-by-case basis...Surely nobody wants to let a cold-blooded killer out of prison....I would never ask anybody in any society to let a prisoner out who would then commit terrorist actions."

And it's true that Sharon, with Bush in Washington a few days later, said that he and the president agreed there would be no release of Palestinian prisoners "with blood on their hands" or those likely to return to terrorism or prisoners who, when released in the past, resumed terror activities.

But how can we be guaranteed that isn`t exactly what will happen, since it keeps happening?

Sensing the weakening of Israeli resolve, Hizbullah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah Nasrallah called upon Germany to send an emissary for a final attempt at reaching a mutually agreeable deal for a prisoner exchange with Israel. Nasrallah threatened that if a deal were not reached, Hizbullah would resume the abduction of Israelis.

Hizbullah, which taught Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror techniques and set the example of how to drive the mighty Israeli army out of a field of operations, is now learning from the Palestinian prime minister, who, in violation of the road map, has publicly refused to disarm and dismantle Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the other terror groups, all the while demanding the release of thousands more terrorists.

Israeli government policy regarding terrorist prisoner releases may not have changed much over the last two decades, but there are some signs of improvement among the Israeli people. A telephone poll, which included Israeli Arabs, conducted for Israel Radio in early July asked: Do you support or oppose the release of Hamas and Islamic Jihad prisoners who are labeled as being "without blood on their hands" within the framework of the negotiations with the Palestinians? Only 43.4 percent supported it, 48.5 percent opposed, and 8.1 percent held no opinion.

In another Israel Radio poll taken at the end of July (also including Israeli Arabs), respondents were asked, Do you support the decision of the government to release Hamas and Islamic Jihad prisoners who do not have "blood on their hands"? Opposition to the release had risen to 80 percent while only 14 percent supported it. (Six percent gave no reply.) Clearly, Israelis today don`t believe in the "ostrich" approach - the hope that by ignoring terror it will somehow go away.

Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon told reporters at the Tel HaShomer Army Base recently that the IDF is preparing for a renewal of terrorism, "as the Palestinian Authority is currently not dismantling the terror infrastructures....There could be an interim period of quiet, maybe even a long one, but I`m starting to count the days until the next outbreak of violence."

Yaalon explained that the terrorists are taking advantage of the hudna - the temporary cease-fire - to manufacture combat materials.

How much will this latest prisoner release bolster their forces and abilities?

To Go To Top
Posted by Marlene Young, March 26, 2005.



This is a news item from Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) of March 24, 2005.

While all attention is turned to Gush Katif, plans are proceeding to expel the Jewish residents of northern Shomron, demolish the buildings, and station soldiers there to make sure no one returns.

O.C. Central Command Maj.-Gen. Ya'ir Naveh met with the residents of the four towns slated for oblivion yesterday, and calmly told them what the army is planning for them. In two weeks, he said, Prime Minister Sharon will declare the area a "closed military zone," such that relatives, friends, and service-providers will not be able to arrive.

In addition, Naveh said, the houses and all the buildings in the communities will be destroyed - at least according to his recommendation - so that "Hamas will not be able to wave their flags in victory from the rooftops." He said that the army will build outposts in each of the former communities, which they will man at least until the end of the year.

A Yediot Acharonot reporter was present at the meeting, and reported that Naveh said, "You will have a difficult period until the actual disengagement. We will try to make your lives tolerable, but I advise you to leave before that." A young resident of Kadim responded, "Over my dead body."

The Four Towns in Danger

The four yishuvim (communities) slated for destruction are Ganim, Kadim, Sa-Nur and Chomesh. The first two are secular towns, while the others are currently populated by recently-arrived religious families.

Ganim and Kadim are twin communities founded in the early 1980's, and each with 25-30 families. They are located just southeast of the Palestinian Authority-controlled city of Jenin, around which a bypass road was built to allow free access to Afula and the Jezre'el Valley. Planned to house a total of 500 families altogether, they were established as part of what was to be a string of Jewish communities in the northeast Shomron leading to the Gilboa area.

The residents of Ganim and Kadim are largely prepared to leave without a struggle, with the exception of the above-quoted individual and possibly a few others.

Sa-Nur and Chomesh are located five kilometers from each other along the road leading from Jenin southwards to Shavei Shomron. Sa-Nur has undergone several changes since it was first built - in the modern period - in 1977. Originally called Dotan, its core group of pioneer settlers resided in the old British police building and in caravans until receiving permission to move to their permanent home. The group moved to Mevo Dotan, some 15 kilometers to the north, in 1979. A secular group then moved in, which later divided into two groups and founded Kadim and Ganim.

Next to arrive were a group of artists and families, mostly new immigrants from Russia, and Sa-Nur became known as an artists' colony. When the Olso War started in 2000, the residents began to leave, and Chabad Hassidim began to take their place. In the second half of 2004, Sa-Nur's population grew by more than 50%, and more than 100 people now live there.

Chomesh began in 1980 as a mixed religious-secular community, and now houses some 30 families. It was founded for security reasons, as it oversees the entire area from its height of 650 meters above sea level.

The Shomron area, Samaria, was formerly the capital and residence of the kings of Israel, commencing with King Omri. Jerusalem was the capital of the State of Judea.

Being "Kicked Around Like Dogs"

Most of the residents do not yet know where they will live next year, and have not begun to make plans. Yesha Council chief Bentzy Lieberman told Gen. Naveh, "You'll see hundreds of people with suitcases and with nowhere to go. You're kicking these people around as if they were dogs."

Gen. Naveh said that the residents would be housed in a hotel in Zikhron Yaakov, receiving full room and board until they "get organized." He added, however, that those who remain in the area after the day of the disengagement - scheduled to begin July 20 - will "find themselves in prison instead of a hotel."

Naveh said that the army presence will prevent both Israeli and Arab infiltration into the areas to be evacuated. "It's different than in Gaza," he said, "where we are leaving and closing the gates behind us. We have no intention of leaving Judea and Samaria. We will remain here in one way or another for hundreds and thousands of years."

The residents were angered at the decision to close their areas even before the Passover holiday, "when all the rest of the country will be traveling and hiking freely." Naveh said he would dispatch the IDF musicians' band to play for them, and that IDF female teachers would arrive to entertain the children during the vacation. "If we have to, we'll send reinforced buses and cars in order to bring your guests over."

The residents of Sa-Nur informed Gen. Naveh that they refuse to meet with "the man who will destroy our houses."

The Security Dangers The northern Shomron area, if Israel in fact withdraws its forces and residents, is liable to become a "second Gaza," security sources warn. Jenin and Shechem will become cities of refuge for terrorists, and Kassam rockets could be fired at Israeli towns and cities bordering the area. Hizbullah has built a foundation of terrorism in this area over the past few months, mainly with the Islamic Jihad, but has not scored much "success" due to the IDF activities in the area. With the departure of the IDF - whenever it occurs - Hizbullah and the Islamic Jihad are expected to increase their terror activities.

Terrorist activity is currently dammed by IDF measures such as isolating villages, encircling areas, checkpoints, and nonstop local activity by the army and GSS. A senior officer said, "It's no coincidence that though there are explosives, labs, lathes and the know-how - there have not been Kassams in the Shomron. Our control doesn't allow the translation of these resources into rockets. But when Israel leaves, the situation will change, and it will just be a matter of time until the first Kassam lands. The Beit She'an and Gilboa communities will come within rocket range." The municipal leaders in these areas have already been warned of the dangers awaiting them.

The withdrawal is also expected to endanger Israel's water supply from the area. PA elements currently dig illegally, and are expected to intensify this activity once Israel leaves - depleting and salinating the water supply used for agriculture in the Gilboa region and possibly wiping out regional farming.

Marlene Young is vice-president of TODA - Torah Organization for Disability Access, as well as an advocate for Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Israel Zwick, March 26, 2005.

This is important information from a web expert about an anti-semitic website. It was sent to me by Brent Sims (brent@webokay.net). Hi Israel,

Check out this anti-semitic website, it's astonishing

The person behind this is obviously quite skillful. The site is owned by a Carol Valentine out of Virginia and some searching on google.com shows her commentary to be on many many web sites and almost as many web sites have commented on her comments and activities. The scariest thing, in my opinion, I once had a well meaning Jew send me to a Talmud site that turns out to be owned by this same person. Something didn't seem quite right so I bailed out and stayed away but that sums things up pretty well in my opinion.

If you do a search for "talmud" (without the quotes) on google.com her Talmud site is listing number 14 and if you follow the link you end up at what looks to be a valid site to learn Talmud on. Listing 10 (and I can tell you with some authority that getting into the top 10 listings on Google for a single word, popular search term, such as 'talmud', is no easy feat) is also an anti-Semitic site.

Good Shabbos,

To Go To Top
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, March 25, 2005.
Citing Manfred Gerstenfeld:
Anti-Semitic Jews have also become an important tool in the anti-Israeli campaigns of Western media. On the British media, Robert Wistrich observes: "Only those Jews who smash Israel appear in the media, and Israel is routinely represented as an ethnic-cleansing rogue state - when not compared to Nazi Germany and South Africa - and at the same time is held to a higher standard than other countries." ...One also finds anti-Israeli Jews in various human rights organizations and other NGOs. Jews with a strong anti-Israel bias in the media are another group requiring in-depth research.

For this article and others see: http://www.israel-academia-monitor.com/ Contact Israel Academia Monitor by email at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 25, 2005.

Something is happening in Israel that warrants a penetrating look by Congress. President Bush wanted a process which is turning out to be more of a political slogan than a process of any practical value for Israel. The recent Bush initiative to start a public relations campaign through the employment of Karen Hughes and others, to seek the good will of the Arabs by using suicidal concessions by the State of Israel as part of the payment is un-American.

While the idea of democracy can be stirred into the Arab-Israel conflict, the fact is that they are totally separate events. Voting in Iraq has nothing to do with their statements of hostility to the Jewish State. The voting illusion in Saudi Arabia has not lessened their hostility toward Israel. Egypt's gesture to allow one other candidate to run against current President Hosni Mubarak has not changed the state-run media to continue its condemnation of Israel.

Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) was elected as the new President of the Palestinian Authority after Yasir Arafat's death. Abu Mazen was Arafat's co-partner in Terrorism from the beginning of the formation of the PLO in 1964. Mazen has repeatedly stated that he has no intention of disarming the many Arab Muslim Terrorist organizations - other than to verbally ask them to cease Terror.

The election of Abu Mazen meant very little to Hamas (the most virulent of Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorist organizations), Hebz'Allah (Party of god - Sponsored by Syria and Iran), Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade (Terrorist branch of Fatah and Abu Mazen's direct organization), or any of the other Terrorist organizations who have pledged to eliminate the Jewish State from the Jordan River to the Sea.

In Iran, the same statements of eliminating Israel continue, despite the media wave to portray Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza as the great wave of peace to come. Whatever vague form of democracy that could be adopted grudgingly, over many years to come, will not diminish the centuries-old taught-hatred against Jews by Muslims.

No doubt, the American Congress has been informed that the Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorist organizations have used the so-called cessation of violence to arrange for a tonnage of new armaments to flow into Gaza from Egypt. The assessment of Israel's Intelligence is that a far greater military thrust will be made by the Arabs during and after the deportation of Jews from Gaza.

Why should Congress take a closer look beyond the political benefits to the Bush Administration and the reality that a slogan, the Road Map (portrayed like a hopeful road sign that we are going someplace with peace) is merely an imposition of a future opportunity for the Arab Muslims' pledged Genocide of the Jewish State? Equating Democracy in the Arab nations with the media harangue that "they will live in peace with the Jewish State" is wholly false and exceedingly dangerous for Israel.

This is not a theory or quibbling over words, phrase and slogans. We already have prima facie evidence from the case history when Adolph Hitler declared his intentions in "Mein Kampf" - much the same as the Arab Muslim nations have pledged a similar Genocide based upon Wahhabist Koranic law and what the radical Islamists wish to achieve. And we have the very current evidence since Oslo was signed September 13, 1993 - of Arab Muslim Palestinian unremitting, ongoing Terrorism (low-intensity warfare) who murdered more than 1700 Jews, many Americans, wounded tens of thousands, many maimed for life.

Arab Muslim nations are achieving very little in either the short range or even the long range that looks like free Western democracy. Whatever happens in their respective nations that imitates democracy will not change the immutable force of religious diktats which they adhere to faithfully - zealously. Islam for them means that no other religion or non-Islamic people can be tolerated on soil that was occupied at any time in history by Muslims. Infidels (non-Muslims) could be tolerated only as Dhimmis (second-class citizens or slaves to the Muslims). This includes Jews, Christians and any other religion that does not follow Shariah law (strict laws of Islam) and the other tenets of Islam.

While such nations as Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Libya, Egypt and even Saudi Arabia may have achieved internal changes, even insurrections against dictatorial rulers but, these changes will never alter their basic attitudes toward the Jews and the Jewish State.


America is spending Billions of Dollars to tighten her borders against (Yes!) Muslim Arab Terrorists - even as it tells Israel to bring Terrorist borders close enough to its own civilian population for Terrorists to successfully hit its cities, towns, villages, airfields within a rifle shot. In some cases the supposedly protective Israeli fence is smack up against the houses of Jewish civilians. What good does that do? Are the women and children supposed to wait for the Arab Muslim Terrorists to climb over or shoot rockets over the Fence at them (G-d Forbid) before they are allowed to defend themselves?

Congress and President Bush have already seen Israel hit by more than 6000 Kassem Rockets, mortars and Katyusha rockets with a range of 5 miles. The new, improved rocket called "The Arafat" can fly 11 miles - accurately. Other missiles being shipped and smuggled in from Iran through Egypt can fly 10 to 20 miles. The U.S. is protecting herself from suitcase nukes, biological spray and chemical releases such as the Sarin gas that was used in Japan's subways with devastating results while insisting that Israel make herself vulnerable.

Bush, acting like a Roman Caesar, tells Israel to evacuate 9,000 Jewish men, women and children who live peaceful, fruitful lives, building industry, tilling farms and creating the innovative insect-free produce grown on formerly barren sand dunes in miles of greenhouses. Condoleezza Rich, the U.S. Secretary of State, orders Israel not to build new housing near Jerusalem because it "disturbs" the Palestinians.

But, neither Bush nor any other American government official has even suggested how to pay for this mass evacuation and how to build new homes, schools, synagogues, farms, jobs for the 9,000 people who will shortly be transferred from homes they built and lived in for 30 years, 3 generations.

Bush and the U.S. State Department have been fully informed about what the Palestinians will do next - and it is NOT making peace with the Jewish State of Israel. All the words and moves by the Arab leaders and States are merely to sucker the Free West into forcing Israel into a compliant, vulnerable position by reducing her minuscule size even further. Israel today is only 300 miles long and 50 miles wide. With the reductions insisted upon by the U.S. State Department, she will then be only 9 miles wide at her center - an irresistible temptation for attack by any coalition of Arab Forces.

The scheduled new tenants are hostile Arab Muslim Palestinians including its so-called civilians who are polled and agree that their Terrorists should continue bombing and teaching their children to be Shahids (Martyrs for Islam)

Clearly, it is time for Israel to thank America for her past support and ignore further dictates, given that this bear-hug of affection is killing us.

Congress has virtually ignored this reality - with the exception of providing funds to the Palestinians or an occasional piece of politically theatrical legislation wherein they threaten to cut of funds (as in the Syrian Accountability Act) which they and the President never do.

Congress is casually presiding over another Holocaust of the Jewish people IF the Arabs and President Bush have their way. Bush's way is the Highway called "The Road Map". You ignored those of us when we warned you that Hitler was implementing his pre-planned and advertised Genocide. During those horrific years, everything possible was done to avoid interfering with Hitler's "Final Solution to his Jewish Question".

Once again, this time well before the full assault, we are alerting you that the Arab Mein Kampf to assault Israel has been written and is already underway. You can stop it IF you stop President Bush from appeasing the Arabs by using Israel for bait.

We do not need more Holocaust Museums nor gatherings of nations to offer crocodile tears for what their nations caused - even as anti-Semitism ramps up in their nations.

It is time for you of the American Congress to stop the dismantling of the State of Israel.

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 Elan Journo, March 25, 2005.

European "diplomacy" with Iran - now supported by Washington - is self-destructive.

The widely hailed diplomatic effort led by Britain, France and Germany is touted as a reasonable way to settle the dispute over Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program without any losers. By enticing Iran to the negotiating table, we are told, the West can avoid a military confrontation, while Iran gains "economic incentives" that can help build its economy. But this deal - now backed also by the Bush Administration - can only strengthen Iran and turn it into a greater menace.

The European deal - which is said to include the sale of civilian aircraft and membership for Iran in the World Trade Organization - rests on the notion that no one would put abstract goals or principles ahead of gaining a steady flow of economic loot. And so, if only we could negotiate a deal that gives Iran a sufficiently juicy carrot, it would forgo its ambitions.

But to believe that Iran really hungers for nuclear energy (as it claims) is sheer fantasy. Possessing abundant oil and gas reserves, Iran is the second-largest oil producer in OPEC. To believe that it values prosperity at all is equally fantastic; Iran is a theocracy that systematically violates its citizens' right to political and economic liberty.

What Iran desires is a nuclear weapon - the better to threaten and annihilate the impious in the West and in Iran's neighborhood. Iran declares its anti-Western ambitions stridently. At an official parade in 2003, Iran flaunted a Shihab-3 missile draped with a banner announcing: "Israel must be wiped out." A missile paraded last year declared another of Iran's targets: "We will crush America under our feet."

A committed enemy of the West, Iran is the ideological wellspring of Islamic terrorism, and the "world's most active sponsor of terrorism" (according to the U.S. government). A totalitarian regime that viciously punishes "un-Islamic" behavior among its own citizens, Iran actively exports its contempt for freedom and human life throughout the infidel world. For years it has been fomenting and underwriting savage attacks on Western and American interests, using such proxies as Hezbollah. Like several of the 9/11 hijackers before them, many senior Al Qaida leaders, fugitives of the Afghanistan war, have found refuge in Iran. And lately Iran has funneled millions of dollars, arms and ammunition to insurgents in Iraq.

It's absurd to think that by offering Iran rewards to halt its aggression, we will deflect it from its goal.

The only consequence of engaging such a vociferously hostile regime in negotiations is the whitewashing of its crimes and the granting of undeserved legitimacy. The attempt to conciliate Iran with "incentives" further inflames the boldness of Iran's mullahs. What it teaches them is that the West lacks the intellectual self-confidence to name its enemies and deal with them accordingly. It vindicates the mullahs' view that their religious worldview can bring a scientific, technologically advanced West to its knees.

Far from converting Iran into a non-threat, the "incentives" would sustain its economy, prop up its dictatorial government and perpetuate its terrorist war against the West. Whether Iran accepts the European deal or merely prolongs "negotiations" indefinitely, so long as the "diplomatic" approach continues Iran gains time enough to engage in covert nuclear-weapons research. Iran's flouting of a previous agreement to stop enriching uranium (which prompted the current talks) and its documented attempts to acquire nuclear-bomb technology erase any doubts about how it will behave under any future deal.

This approach of diplomacy-with-anyone-at-any-cost necessarily results in nourishing one's enemy and sharpening its fangs. That is what happened under a 1994 deal with communist North Korea. In return for boatloads of aid and oil from the United States, Japan and other nations, North Korea promised not to develop nuclear weapons. Despite U.N. inspections, North Korea flouted the agreement repeatedly. When caught cheating, it promised anew to end its nuclear program in return for more "incentives." In February 2005 North Korea declared (plausibly) that it had succeeded in building nuclear weapons.

Another, older attempt to buy peace by giving "incentives" to an enemy was a cataclysmic failure. In 1938 the Europeans pretended that Hitler's intentions were not really hostile, and insisted that "peace in our time" could be attained by allowing him to walk into Czechoslovakia. Instead, he was emboldened to launch World War II.

Ignoring the lessons of history, the Europeans are advocating a deal with Iran that likewise purchases the reckless pretence of peace today, at the cost of unleashing catastrophic dangers tomorrow.

To protect American (and European) lives, we must learn the life-or-death importance of passing objective moral judgment. We must recognize the character of Iran and act accordingly. By any rational standard, Iran should be condemned and its nuclear ambition thwarted, now. The brazenly amoral European gambit can only aid its quest - and necessitate a future confrontation with a bolder, stronger Iran.

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 of Objectivism.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 25, 2005.

Arabs routinely make demands as agreements with one-sided conditions. If the enemy accepts and implements the conditions, the Arabs tack on another condition, before actually agreeing. Gradually they get more than originally agreed, and the enemy gets less than promised. Deceit is the trademark of Arab culture. Since the Arabs make that a practice, Israeli leaders who make new agreements with the Arabs apparently lack loyalty, sanity, knowledge, and/or intelligence.

Arab doctrine favors truces upon conditions that set the stage for a more aggressive Arab resumption of jihad. It is a doctrine whose existence the State Dept. studiously ignores, lest it become too obvious to Israelis that truces are worse than pointless for them.

Nor is a P.A. truce a genuine ceasefire. The Associated Press and the newspapers that use its news briefs go along with the diplomats' pretense that the ceasefire is working, except for some blatant violation. (The violations are by the Arabs.) They ignore the constant shelling of Jewish towns by the Arabs, unless sensational. Then they excuse the P.A. leadership as having tried to stem the attacks but lacking the political power to do so, and as needing more Israeli concessions to gain sufficient popular standing to control the terrorists. That the P.A. leadership is condoning or promoting those attacks while denying responsibility does not come out in the mainstream press. Arafat utilized that ruse. He knew that the world is divided up into the naíve and the devious. The Jewish and American masses are naíve.

The media plays along with the charade. Journalists, such as those in the Associated Press, may not identify the terrorist organizations that supposedly agreed to a truce. They just indicate "Palestinian terrorist Factions." Some of the terrorist organizations then may deny having agreed; they make further demands upon Israel. So long as Israel is pliant, the Arabs will pursue that practice as productive for their jihad against Israel. Israel doesn't see that such concessions advance jihad. The rest of the West probably does but prefers it that way.

In mid-March, the Associated Pres phrased the condition as Israel halting violence against P.A. Arabs and freeing prisoners. The media often fails to define "violence," which the Arabs afterwards define more loosely than its true English meaning, and "freeing prisoners." Hamas may mean all the terrorist prisoners, while the Israel public is considering a portion of them. The total capitulation that PM Sharon is thought to be contemplating is frightening. He, his media, and the US media do not analyze the consequences. Only dissidents do.

Israeli patriots are trying to get out the news that half the freed terrorists return to terrorism. Since a ceasefire at best is temporary, then freeing terrorists in return for a (spotty and) temporary ceasefire guarantees worse terrorism when it resumes. Freeing such prisoners is just as foolish as would be supplying the terrorists with arms and training (which the US and other countries are doing, with connivance by the Sharon regime, for the terrorist forces known as the P.A. police, but which recruit known terrorists. Israel cannot win the war that way. Sharon doesn't want to win. He just doesn't want it to seem as if he were being forced by the Arabs, when he abandons traditional Jewish Territory, lest his criminal negligence turn public opinion against him.

The implications of Israel "halting violence" also are dire. Israel fights back when attacked and by pursuing wanted terrorists whose locations it learns of and intercedes against imminent terrorist raids. If the terrorists hewed to the "hudna" (temporary ceasefire), there would be no need to fight back or intercede with terrorist plots. Since these terrorist activities violate the truce, they void it. A genuine truce document would put Israeli reaction as conditional upon terrorist restraint. But the world does not want Israel to defend itself even when the Arabs are violating the truce. They make a fraud of the truce and corpses of Jews. Is it any less dishonest than Nazi assurances that they were not shipping Jews to their deaths?

Thus a truce primarily has advantages for jihad and disadvantages for Israel. Why does Israel agree to it? If Sharon is not a puppet of the Left and the US, he acts the part well. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH VS. NGO MONITOR

In a sarcastic rejoinder to criticism of HRW by Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor, Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle E. Director of HRW New York made these points: (1) HRW repeatedly condemns terrorism and authored the definitive study of human bombs in Israel, but Mr. Steinberg claims that "contributed to incitement to terrorism"; (2) "Our strong and widely publicized rejection of unjustified criticisms of Israel at the 2001 nongovernmental conference on racism in Durban, South Africa become a 'contribution of NGOs to incitement in the Palestinian (i.e., P.A.) territories'"; (3) "Mr. Steinberg dismisses human-rights criticisms of Israeli war crimes and other violations simply because Palestinians have also condemned them. For him, there is no difference between 'Israeli defensive actions' and blatant violations of the Geneva Conventions, which seek to spare civilians from government excesses even in time of war or serious security threat. Israeli abuses are fueling radicals in Muslim countries and eroding Western sympathy for the embattled country, but criticizing those abuses somehow 'boosts the most radical Palestinians and undermines moderate voices'"; (4) He omits from his books' biographical sketch his role as an Israeli government security consultant.

Steinberg rebutted HRW's attempt to discredit his criticism: (1) "While Ms. Whitson highlights HRW's single 'definitive' study of suicide bombing, she does not explain why they buried all the evidence of Arafat's role"; (2) "As Anne Bayefsky, Shimon Samuels and other delegates to the 2001 Durban conference have testified, HRW's representatives were parties to shifting the conference's focus from battling racism to attacking Israel; (3) "... her claim that the defense of Israeli lives against terror constitutes the source of radical Islam (abetted by HRW's accusations of 'Israeli war crimes') is... foolish"; and (4) Many academics' views are elicited by governments, including those of the head of HRW. It does not necessarily disqualify them all (IMRA, 2/12).

HRW is like the New Israel Fund, in claiming it is constructive. The New Israel Fund cites its good work with battered women, but omits its much greater funding of far leftists groups that seek to undermine Israeli defense against foreign Arab attacks and internal subversion. So, too, HRW cites one study but not its much greater, biased effort against Israel.

The notion that what Israel does erodes Western sympathy assumes much Western sympathy. There is little of it. Large Muslim immigration and a loss of fidelity to Western society has, in concert with rampant pacifism and mercantilism, turned W. Europe against Israel. Israel can't help it if what it must do is distorted by the media.

One wonders what "moderate" Palestinian Arab voices HRW is referring to. The media would love to amplify them, if it came across any. What it does is substitute Abbas' pretense at ending the war, while he continues to support it substantively.

HRW misstates NGO Monitor's view of the Israeli military. Whitman's sarcasm takes for granted that NGO Monitor understands that the IDF is abusive, but does not care. That assumption either is careless or deceitful. In either case, it is defamatory, because Monitor does not find the IDF abusive. Accusations against the IDF so often are baseless. They propaganda, a war tactic.

HRW still suffers from its own failure to acknowledge that the entire P.A. jihad is illegal, fought by means of war crimes, and is responsible for whatever harm results. Shame on HRW for not glorifying Israel for what I think Israel does to excess, which is to minimize Arab casualties at risk to its own soldiers' and civilians' lives. I don't think the bigoted Arabs are worth the risk to innocent Israelis.

There is a need still unfulfilled for major human rights organizations. Fortunes go to organizations that often side with enemies of human rights, probably out of leftist antisemitism. Their pro-Arab bias encourages the Arabs to commit the crimes that get Israel condemned for. HRW is too ideological and insufficiently humane. We need to get the word out, and the money flowing elsewhere. The trouble with the charitable impulse is its misdirection.


Most people think that S. Arabia has a low crime rate, because its severe criminal code calls for amputation for theft. However, shoplifting is pervasive there. Store detectives do not apprehend most shoplifters. Perhaps the detectives, themselves, are too busy pilfering. Dishonest employees start thieving about three weeks after having been hired. By then they have learned the flaws in the security system, and improve their technique.

People rip the tags off clothing, and mend the swag at home. Others come with a lighter and a drill and try to melt tags off.

"'Most people we catch shoplifting are women, though men do it too,'" one security guard in Jeddah told Arab News. 'For the women it is easier because they are wearing abayas which help them conceal things and they carry big bags. The male security guards don't like to watch them or confront them because they are women. They almost always start yelling and screaming that they were being sexually harassed. No one likes to be in that situation,' he continued. 'All one has to do to see the lack of awareness in theft prevention is walk around any mall or chain of stores. There are very few operating camera surveillance systems in place and very few stores use inventory alarm systems to protect their wares. Stores that train their employees in spotting and reporting shoplifters are non-existent'" (IMRA, 2/12 from Arab News.)

Note: it was not indicated whether the shoplifters are Arabs or the millions of foreign workers. The story reminds one of the Jordanian families that steal and sell manhole covers as scrap.

The USSR also was thought to be relatively crime-free, because little crime was reported there, in contrast to US media focus on sensationalism. Actually, Soviet crime was rampant. Neither was large-scale unemployment there known in the West, because it was concealed by the regime's hiring many more people than needed. They worked half the time, and spent the other half on lines at stores that lacked sufficient goods to engender confidence of availability unless customers came early and waited on queue.

P.A. terrorists utilize women to transport weapons through checkpoints, because the world's pro-Arab bias intimidates Israeli troops, actually chivalrous, from thorough enough searches.


The Arab Students' Collective of the U. of Toronto organized a lecture program on what it calls Israel's ethnic cleansing and segregation of Arabs. (Israel is about to ethnically cleanse Jews.) In defense against accusations of prejudice, it claims it merely is opposed to Israeli "oppression" and with it participate some Jewish students and Israeli historian Ilan Pappe. Unfortunately, Jews can be antisemitic, too. (Mr. Pappe is an anti-Israel, Communist official, who falsifies history.)

Canada has the fifth highest rate of antisemitic incidents. "Is the U. of Toronto hosting a free and scholarly exchange of ideas, or a racist rally masquerading as an academic conference?" (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.41 from Beth Duff-Brown, AP, 1/31.)

What exchange of ideas? These programs are formatted by people who do not allow an exchange of ideas, if one calls jihadist false propaganda "ideas". They shout down dissidents. Did you think they bring Western tolerance from the Arab world?

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 Professor Ya'akov Golbert, March 25, 2005.

This was writen by Yael Bauer.

While American soldiers risk their lives to wage a war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq to protect US citizens from further attacks, the US State Department, under the direction of James Baker, via Condoleezza Rice, is legitimizing the PLO that continues to murder US citizens living in Israel.

The question is why?

Why did Colin Powell, former Secretary of State say on January 6th "Abu Mazen is a good man; we know him well?" Of course we know him well. He was the PLO terrorist who financed the 1972 Munich Olympics Massacre.

Are we so superficial and dim-witted that all we care about is image? Arafat wore a kafiya, but Abu Mazen wears a suit and this is all it takes to transform the PLO terrorist to a man of "peace" and the new darling of the State Department. The State Department suddenly is asking the American taxpayers to give more money to a terrorist organization that continues to pursue a policy of murdering Jews, many of whom are American citizens.

In a landmark declaration on Sept. 20, 2001 President Bush proclaimed: "We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism ... Any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."

Why then is the American taxpayer once again asked to turn a blind eye to the PLO even though the definition of terrorism as spelled out in Bush's Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism, clearly defines the Palestinian Authority as a terrorist organization? In addition, Clinton's Executive Order 12958 prohibits funding to terrorist groups that impair the peace process.

Executive Orders are law after publication in the Congressional Register unless modified by Congress. Congress has not modified these Orders. There are no exceptions to these orders and no immunity for employees of the federal government. It makes no difference if it is Condoleezza Rice, Eliot Abrams or any employee or appointee of the State Department that violates the executive order. All employees are held accountable to uphold the law.

Condoleezza Rice wants to train Palestinian police, ignoring that the Ramallah lynch was in the police station and numerous attacks were by Palestinian police and ex-police. The new security force will include 150 Hamas members. She has offered money and training, both prohibited under executive orders 13224 and 12958 as they are a terrorist organization.

In addition to supporting a terrorist organization in violation of the above Executive Orders and Federal Law, Ms. Rice now illegally demands that Jews be removed from Judea, Samaria and Gaza to satisfy the insatiable hatred of the PLO. The United States State Department has taken the position that it is only "illegal" for Israeli or American Jews to remain in Gaza, Samaria or Judea, but legal for American or Israeli citizens of the Moslem or Christian faiths to remain.

The State Department actions are blatantly racist, violate fundamental Constitutional rights of Jewish American citizens and patently illegal.

So why does the State Department continue to pursue its own racist agenda? In addition to Baker's and other Department of State employees anti-Semitism, there is a hidden agenda.

The US consumer demands cheap oil. However, environmental policies have made the domestic drilling of oil a political hot potato. After all, why should the US destroy its land and environment, when we can import cheap oil from the Middle East? Until now, the US oil-wolves were kept at bay by Israel's military power to inflict huge losses on its enemies.

While oil supplies were plentiful, US policy - through its consumers - had the upper hand. But, demand for oil has changed in recent years. There is no longer a glut on the market as the rise of China's and Russia's economies have put pressure on existing oil supplies. The Muslim nations in control of the world's oil supply have become more Anti-American and they no longer need the security of the American markets.

At the same time, with the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, US support for Israel has become a liability rather than an advantage. The question for the State Department is how to "gracefully" back out of support of Israel without seeming to antagonize the Christian right electorate? Abu Mazen, the monster in a business suit, serves this purpose.

Today the Jews, tomorrow the Christians. By creating another terrorist dominated country, we add more danger not only to Israel, but to America. By appeasing the financial brokers of terrorism, we increase the likelihood that the free world will become hostage to a nuclear threat vastly more dangerous than we could have ever imagined from the Soviet Union - namely that these people are willing to kill themselves in order to promote their agenda of a Muslim Empire.

Do you really want to leave your children a world in which the safety and innocence of childhood is no longer a reality - where going to the mall or to a movie means a substantial risk that they may never come back alive?

Want to do something positive to help, something more than talking with your friends or demonstrating? Want to really fight to stop terrorism? Then join us in our fight against the State Department's Anti Semitism and the creation of a new terrorist state within the Middle East.

American Jews residing in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria are welcome to join the class action suit. It will not cost anything and those that join stand to recover compensatory and punitive damages. To view the complaint and for more details, browse http://www.yesha.homestead.com/classaction.html or contact us at yeshahomestead@hotpop.com.

We need lawyers to refine the complaint and to appear for motions and become part of the team and we need to raise a modest sum for costs of suit. The attorney fees will be collected only if they win.

We are not naive Don Quixote's tilting at windmills, but Americans who believe in the American justice system and the war on terrorism.

Ya'akov-Perez Golbert is a practicing lawyer in Jerusalem and co-founder of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yishaqer (http://www.netzahyisrael.org).

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 25, 2005.

Igor Pecharsky: No intention of removing the patch.
Eyal Warshavsky / Ba

Israeli universities are as crowded with left-wing moonbats and tenured traitors as are American campuses. These are documented and exposed by Israel Academia Monitor, which is the Israeli cousin watchdog group to Campus Watch in the US.

Ordinarily, Weizmann Institute is not the main target on anyone's radar screen for political correctness and suppression of academic freedom. It is usually the least politicized of Israel's academic institutions and has the smallest number of leftist faculty moonbats. But today's headline is an exception. Weizmann is becoming a new battleground for the Left's 'First Amendment', which holds that free speech is an important protected right for leftists only. All others can get stuffed.

Igor Pecherksi is a Russian-born (St. Petersberg) Israeli computer programmer, who works in the molecular genetics department at Weizmann. The administration at Weizmann Institute is threatening to fire poor Doctor Igor. His grievous sin? He expressed his political opinions quietly by wearing a small pin shirt. The pin is about the size of one of those little lapel flag pins. But it shows a small orange Jewish star. It is the symbol of the movement to support the Jewish "settlers" in the Gaza Strip and oppose their expulsion under the Sharon-Mitzna "disengagement plan". You can see poor Doctor Igor wearing his illegal pin in this photo!

Doctor Igor wears the pin when he comes to work. Some leftist busybodies on campus complained that the pin is interfering with their ability to do THEIR work. Now Igor is a mild-mannered skinny little guy, not exactly a Hulk Hogan threatening the leftist secretaries, as you can see in the above photo link. The pin in his lapel is tiny, the size of an AIDS ribbon. THAT is what the lefties on campus claim is interfering with their work. Leftists at Weizmann of course always park their cars with the "Expel the Settlers" bumper stickers in campus parking lots, but THAT is protected academic free speech!

Doctor Igor is now under threat of expulsion and dismissal from his job for quietly expressing an opinion.

If you would like to tell the chiefs at Weizmann what you think of all this, go to http://www.weizmann.ac.il/homepage/pages/pres.shtml and http://www.weizmann.ac.il/homepage/pages/leaders.shtml http://www.weizmann.ac.il/committees/

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. This appeared on the Moonbat Central - Hunting the Radical Snark website. It is archived at http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/moonbatcentral/2005/03/ lefts-first-amendment-strikes-weizmann.html

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 25, 2005.

This is the first trial balloon to see what the reaction would be if the Junta were to formally dissolve the State of Israel and replace it with a military dictatorship. The Negev is already slated for martial law and no one seems to have really noticed that Yeshah has always been under martial law, so why not try for the whole country? Of course, Sharon will give his solemn promise that it will all just be temporary and "in the very near future" there will be new elections and the restoration of civilian rule. However, in the mean time "in order to preserve DeMockracy" martial law will remain. Get ready for it.

This is a news item from Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=79030

"Barak Wants Military Gov't During Evacuation" Friday, March 25, 2005 / 14 Adar 5765

(IsraelNN.com) Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak has told a publication that Israel should become a military state during the planned evacuation this summer of residents of 25 Jewish communities in northern Samaria and Gaza.

Speaking with "The Left" newspaper, Barak that the army should erect road blocks and check points not only in the northern Negev, as planned, but also further north. He said the government should "shut down the country" and limit travel and work in order to prevent disturbances.

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 TheRaphi, March 25, 2005.

This essay was written by Shifra Hoffman, founder of the Victims of Arab Terror International organization (VAT). She is a noted journalist and executive director of Shuva (Return), the Israel Emergency Aliyah Movement.

For generations, Jews have marked this festive day by attending either professional or amateur productions in which reality becomes topsy-turvy, and everything is considered fair game in pursuit of mirth and levity.

Of all the jovial events with which the holiday of Purim is identified, perhaps the most popular is a satiric theatrical play known as the Purim-shpiel. For generations, Jews have marked this festive day by attending either professional or amateur productions in which reality becomes topsy-turvy, and everything is considered fair game in pursuit of mirth and levity. Yet, if one considers what has transpired in the Middle East since the start of the Oslo Accords, it is not the Jews, but rather the Arab world that has staged an unparalleled Purim-shpiel.

Artfully masking their true intentions by masquerading as Israel's 'peace partners', Arab leaders have succeeded in convincing a majority of the nations (and the obtuse prime minister of Israel) that they no longer wish to annihilate the Jewish State. Led by their star performer, the late and unlamented PLO chief terrorist Yasser Arafat (let us give the devil his due, as his performance earned him a Nobel Peace Prize), one after another of Israel's sworn Arab enemies have suddenly became baalei t'shuva (penitents). They agree to live 'side by side' with Israel if - and here's the rub - the so-called 'Palestinians' will be given a state. Not just any state, mind you, but one with contiguous territory. That means Israeli retreat to the l967 borders. (Other players in this bizarre production, such as Hamas and their compatriot murderous ilk, demand a retreat to pre-l948 borders.) Of course, this peaceful (sic) "Palestinian State" must have Jerusalem as its capital.

One can only imagine the incredulous look on the face of Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak when the wily Arafat related that Israel would be willing to make insane concessions, if only he and all the other Arab leaders would continue to play the part of peacemakers. Thus, Egypt (which, thanks to divine intervention and our heroic IDF, was not able to "drive the Jews into the sea") has become the 'peace negotiator' between Israel and the 'Palestinians'. Mubarak's acting talents have even persuaded Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the fearless warrior, to allow (among other suicidal concessions he is making) Egyptian soldiers to patrol strategic areas vital to the security of our Jewish State.

The Arab Purim-shpiel, however, does not end there.

The script calls for a "two-state solution", as ordered by US President George Bush, Director of this Theatre of the Absurd. Furthermore, the script says, in order for peace to flourish between Jews and Arabs, thus creating a 'happy ending' in the Middle East, other demands by our so-called 'peace partners' must be met: Israel must release all Arab terrorist prisoners; Israel must uproot all the Jews from Gaza, Judea and Samaria from their homes, and leave all their property for the 'Palestinians'; and Israel must allow the return of all of the so-called 'Palestinian refugees' (albeit, there was no Arab state of Palestine from which they were made refugees).

In the Megillah of Esther, which is read in synagogues throughout the world since the original Purim centuries ago, it is recorded that the evil plans of Haman, the arch-Jew-hater, were miraculously overturned and, instead, descended upon him. Today, too, we pray that the Almighty, blessed be His holy name, will cause the evil designs of Israel's Arab enemies (disguised as they are in a Purim-shpiel) to be overturned - and instead, descend upon them.

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 Gerald A. Honigman, March 24, 2005.

Well, the day has finally arrived. I now find myself in agreement with the Secretary General of the Arab League.

Recently, at the end of the Arab League Summit, Amr Mussa declared that peace could not arrive until there was withdrawal from occupied territories, the creation of another state, and the return of refugees.

He's basically correct. So what if he got a few details mixed up.

Native Copts in Egypt - millions of them - had their country overrun by conquering, settling, and subjugating Arabs.

To this day, they never know when the next murder will occur, the next church will be burned down, and have learned that to survive they must consent to the forced Arabization process. Their leaders have even written that for Israel to "get along," then it too must consent to a variation of this. Pretty pathetic...Uncle Butros instead of Uncle Tom...but the same breed, if you know what I mean. Just imagine the world-wide outcry if Israel did this to Israeli Arabs.

The majority Berber population of North Africa saw its lands overrun as well over the past centuries by conquering, settling, and subjugating Arab hordes creating Arab empires. Imperialsim is evidently only nasty when non-Arabs so indulge. Berbers who dared to insist on keeping their own pre-Arab language and culture have been murdered for trying to do so. A look on any number of websites dealing with Berbers in these regards will be revealing indeed.

In 1968, Ismet Cherif Vanly wrote The Syrian Mein Kampf Against The Kurds (Amsterdam). A Kurdish nationalist, he described the murderous and brutal Arabization policies Syrian settling, conquering, and occupying Arabs employed against Kurds who predated them in the land by thousands of years. Settling, conquering, and occupying Iraqi Arabs did likewise to Mesopotamia's ancient native Kurds (the Hurrians, Guti, Kassites, and Medes of old), Assyrians, and other non-Arab peoples as well - Jews included.

Literally millions of native African Blacks have been butchered, maimed, enslaved, turned into refugees (all of this still going on today), seen their lands forcibly Arabized, and such. And not just in the Sudan.

Half of Israel's almost six million Jews originated in the "Arab"/Muslim World. They too predated the Arabs in many of those lands that they were forced to flee as refugees, leaving far more property and valuables behind than Arabs who fled in the opposite direction after the latter's brethren invaded a reborn Israel in 1948.

Alexandria Egypt's famous Jewish community was prominent centuries before Jesus. The Jews of Iraq had been there at least since the days of the Babylonian Captivity and Nebuchadnezzar. The Jews of Yemen were on the Arabian Peninsula before Muhammad was born, and the latter Prophet of Islam fled Mecca to Medina, a Jewish date palm oasis on that peninsula where the Jews were still prominent when Muhammad sought refuge there during the Hijra. When they would not convert to his new faith (based largely on their own) nor accept his religio-political leadership, he butchered and enslaved them. Jews also took part in the resistance against the Arab imperial invasions of North Africa in the 7th century C.E.

Etc., etc., and so forth.

So, considering Amr Mussa's above demands...

It's time that the Africans of southern Sudan gain independence from the Arabs who have butchered, subjugated, and enslaved them over the centuries - long before the hypocrites in the United Nations only recently first started to mutter anything at all about this.

It's time for thirty million truly stateless people - the Kurds - to finally get their sole state. They were promised one after World War I but saw it sacrificed on the altar of British petroleum politics and Arab nationalism. An Arab Iraq was pieced together in its stead.

Trusting Arabs - whether Shi'a or Sunni - is probably not a wise decision (regardless of what Foggy Bottom says) - given the track records of Arabs of any stripe towards these people. While Arabs - with almost two dozen states already, including one carved out of almost 80% of the original 1920 borders of "Palestine" and today called Jordan - have an American-sponsored roadmap to help create yet another for themselves, somehow those same folks demanding justice for Arabs seem deaf, dumb, and blind regarding Kurds.

And it's time for the subjugation of North Africa's huge Berber populations to come to an end and for those folks to be able to decide if they want to remain forcibly tied to Arabs or not. If not, then why should they not get territory to create a Berber State if Arabs can get to have yet a second one carved out for themselves in "Palestine?"

You see, Mr. Musa, justice should not be exclusively for Arabs.

Unfortunately, for the Copts, not too much to offer here...So many more will become refugees.

And the above Arabs' victims' list is by no means complete. Just ask native Christian, Semitic but pre-Arab Lebanese - as just one other example.

The hypocrisy of the conquering, racist, and subjugating Arab League is nauseating enough. That the latter, however, is widely supported in its demands on Israel by much of the rest of the world should be appalling to anyone with any semblance of fair play. I thought Dubya knew better. Unfortunately, despite his comments last April to the contrary, it now looks like I was wrong...a cruel April Fool's joke, indeed, played on Mr. Sharon and his tiny, vulnerable country as well.

Despite all of the international pressure on it to consent to becoming a reincarnated 1938 Czechoslovakia, ready to sacrifice itself for another "peace for all time," Israel must now muster the strength to do what it must do.

The only appropriate response of Israel to all of this should be to counter offer the Arab League peace for peace - not consent to slowly being eroded via the Arabs' openly admitted "Trojan Horse" destruction in stages plans. And it must free itself from the belief that it must allow Arabs to determine the rules of the road if widespread violence erupts again. Abbas' folks have said that they would support quiet only as long as Israel continues to cave in to all of their demands. And they're the "moderates."

Millions upon millions of non-Arabs became refugees because of the Arabs. Many of these people fled to America, Great Britain, Germany, and elsewhere. They're not returning to those "Arab" lands. Likewise, Arabs will have to take care of their own refugees - created in a war that they started and far fewer in number - in the same manner.

The occupied territories Amr Musa mostly speaks of are disputed lands - not purely "Arab." Jews had as much or more rights to be on those lands as Arabs had. Much has been written about this, UN Resolution 242 indirectly addressed this, and leading experts such as Eugene Rostow, William O'Brien, Arthur Goldberg, Lord Caradon, and others have been quite vocal on these matters as well.

Jews have a word describing demands such as those made by Amr Musa. It's called chutzpah.

Israel must have leaders who will respond to such so-called Arab prerequisites for "peace" by telling them where to stuff them.

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 Eric Rozenman, March 24, 2005.

The Washington Post's March 22 article, "Israeli Settlement To Reach Jerusalem; Palestinians Say Plan Violates 'Road Map,'" by correspondent Molly Moore, continues the newspaper's one-sided, negative reporting about construction of housing for Jews in and near the capital.

Palestinians' megaphone

Moore writes that "the expansion of Maleh Adumim - the West Bank's largest Jewish settlement with 30,000 residents - is part of an Israeli government plan known as E-1, which anti-settlement activists have called the final step in sealing off Palestinians living in the West Bank from north and east Jerusalem. The development is also part of a plan to cordon off Jerusalem's Old City and its disputed holy sites."

1) Moore quotes critics of the plan. She does not quote supporters or experts who are not critical. One of them, former Jerusalem city planner Israel Kimhi, now at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, specializes in Jewish and Arab growth in the municipality. He calls allegations that Israeli construction around the capital, including the E-1 area (about 4 square miles), will isolate Arabs in Jerusalem from the West Bank "quite exaggerated." Kimhi adds that the E-1 property is state land, not private property, and no Arabs will be displaced.

In fact, according to Kimhi, without such building in E-1, Arab construction might "cordon off" Jewish neighborhoods on the northern and eastern arc of the city from western Jerusalem and the rest of Israel.

2) Moore writes that "construction of 3,500 new homes [in E-1 adjacent to Ma'ale Adumim] for Jewish settlers ... would link the largest settlement in the West Bank to Jerusalem." Ma'ale Adumim, a bedroom suburb just three miles east of the Old City, already is linked to the capital functionally, many residents commuting between the two each day. E-1 development is to prevent it from being separated physically.

3) The viewpoint of Moore's dispatch is unbalanced. It's overwhelmingly that of unnamed "anti-settlement activists" - perhaps the same two Israeli sources relied on for previous Post "exposes" about Jewish residential growth around Jerusalem - and Palestinians. Former Arafat spokesman and chief negotiator Saeb Erekat is quoted charging that "If they carry out this scheme, they're going to be shutting the door for peace" and that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is "abandoning negotiation" for "facts on the ground." Except for a generality by Sharon spokesman Raanan Gissin terming E-1 expansion necessary "for strategic importance," the development is not explained from an official Israeli perspective.

4) Moore asserts that "the final status of Jerusalem and access to its holy sites are among the most contentious issues dividing Palestinians and Israelis, who both claim the city as their capital." Israel has assured access to Christian and Muslim, as well as Jewish holy sites, in Jerusalem ever since reuniting the city in 1967. So access to holy sites is not an issue; Arab-Islamic denial of Jewish religious and historical ties to Jerusalem is, but goes unmentioned.

Israel does not claim Jerusalem as its capital, Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish state. The president, prime minister, legislature, supreme court and most government agencies are headquartered there. Palestinian Arabs demand some or all of the city as the capital of a state they hope to establish. Israeli and Arab positions on Jerusalem are not equivalent claims.

Biased by omission Key facts missing from "Israeli Settlement To Reach Jerusalem" include:

* Arabs are engaged in large-scale building in eastern Jerusalem, both legal and illegal. Arab construction has actually occurred at a faster rate than Jewish building since 1967. Kimhi, in "Arab Building in Jerusalem: 1967 - 1997," noted that Arab housing construction in Jerusalem grew at a rate of 122 percent, compared to 113.5 percent for Jewish construction. Justus Reid Weiner of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (author of "Illegal Construction in Jerusalem; A Variation on an Alarming Phenomenon" ), has documented a wave of illegal Arab building in the city, subsidized by the Palestinian Authority and other Arab governments, despite the fact that Israeli authorities have issued housing permits to more than meet the Arabs' housing needs. This frantic pace of illegal construction continues despite the fact that the city has authorized more than 36,000 permits for new housing units in the Arab sector, more than enough to meet the needs of Arab residents through legal construction until 2020.

* Illegal [Arab] construction has reached epidemic proportions. A senior Palestinian official boasted that they have built 6,000 homes without permits during the last 4 years, of which less than 200 were demolished by the city.

* During the last few years, the great majority of illegal structures demolished by the Jerusalem Municipality were in the Jewish sector.

* The Palestinian Authority and Arab governments have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in an intentional campaign to subsidize and encourage massive illegal construction in the Arab sector, seeing this as part of their "demographic war" against Israel.

Eric Rozenman is the Camera's Washington office representative. His essay on the two-state proposal is a classic; see "Anatomy of an Illusion: The Israeli-Palestinian Two-State Solution", http://www.think-israel.org/rozenmanillusion.html

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.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, March 24, 2005.

My readers know what a totally peaceful person I am. Whenever a conflict allows a non-violent solution, at least in theory, I am all for it. My older brother is a different kind of a guy. That's why I find it difficult to explain the phenomenon he told me about when we were both still attending junior high. According to my brother, if you beat someone up, he will keep trying to greet you first every time he happens to run into you, even if you never respond to his greetings. It doesn't matter whether the beaten deserved the beating or whether the beater defended a righteous cause. Regardless of all accompanying circumstances, the beating instills a great respect for the beater both in the beaten and the witnesses. This could be a manifestation of the Stockholm syndrome. It's very important to remember that the winner, along with all the other spoils, wins the admiration of the public, while the loser's lot is utter contempt, which will inevitably only become stronger if, in all fairness, the loser should have won.

Older Russian immigrants, who during the Six Day War still lived in their old country, told me how that war was reflected in the Soviet media. During the weeks leading to the war, the papers wrote of the righteous wrath of the Arab masses against the malignant Zionist entity. Without details (loose lips sink ships), they informed their readers of the movement of Egyptian and Syrian armies towards the Israeli borders. Every commentator impatiently predicted the imminent demise of the odious country.

During the first couple of days after the war finally began, it looked like it was progressing as planned. The papers described unstoppable advances of the Arab armies and hasty, cowardly retreat of the Zionists. Israel's collapse was imminent. Then the war suddenly disappeared from the front pages, replaced by more urgent matters, mostly the unprecedented successes of Soviet agriculture and heavy industry. Any day now, the Soviet Union was expected to produce more milk and meat per capita than the United States, and that, of course, was more important news than whatever Arabs were at the moment doing to Israel. Meanwhile, the Voice of America and BBC painted a very different picture of current events in the Middle East. Poisoned by enemy propaganda, some Soviet citizens were passing along vicious rumors of the devastating defeat that was dealt to the Arabs. Eventually, the papers had to admit that the enemy voices had told the truth that time. The Soviet people learned that Israel treacherously, without reason or warning, attacked peaceful, defenseless Arab farmers and dispatched them like a national hockey team would dispatch the varsity team of a boarding school for the blind. Sudden funerel notes suddenly penetrated the perennial optimism of the offivial news. Commentators solemnly promised that sooner or later the Jewish Nazis would have to pay a terrible price for their crimes. In the meantime, however, Tel Aviv and Haifa temporarily remained in the possession of the Zionist aggressors.

It was unheard of: Israel, a totally unnecessary country the size of a sparrow's beak, populated with people famous for their cowardice and trickery in commerce, defeated an enemy that not only outnumbered it many times over, but was brainwashed, armed, and trained by the invincible Soviet Union. Cases had been reported where representatives of ethnic majorities with nothing but pure Slavic blood and a tad of alcohol in their veins approached Jewish strangers in grocery stores and other public places to express their admiration for the Israeli victory. And even though most of them didn't use the words victory or admiration, referring instead to kicking those curly-haired butts, their meaning nevertheless was perfectly clear. As always, even those who disliked the winners were showing their sincere respect.

The beginning of the mass exodus of Jews from the USSR was yet another unprecedented phenomenon in the Soviet history, and it was not synchronized with the Six Day War by sheer coincidence. The Soviet policy towards Soviet Jewry had always vacillated between cultural genocide and physical genocide. Most of the time it was almost entirely cultural, but as we can see from the Doctor's Case and the mysterious transformation of Birobijan into the Jewish Autonomous Region, physical genocide was never entirely off the table. Hebrew, the oldest still viable language on the planet, was declared officially dead. According to the definition concocted by Lenin (whose maternal grandfather was a rabbi), Jews constituted not a nation, but an unnecessary ethnicity. Soviet Jews themselves perceived Israel as a foreign country that had absolutely nothing to do with them, like Togo or French Guiana. Israel's victory in the Six Day War demonstrated to Soviet Jews that they had a very good reason to be proud of their Jewishness; that no matter where they lived, Israel was their native land; and, gradually, they came to the realization that they were not some obscure tribe, but a great, even if not numerous, ancient nation that had an inalienable right to self-determination. And the understanding of the Jews' inalienable right to self-determination constitutes the very basis of Zionism, regardless of the opinions on that subject held by Herzl, Jabotinsky, and even the UN.

Future historians may disagree with my conclusion that Israel's victory in the Six Day War put the first crack in the cast-iron monolith of the Soviet Union. Of course, the aftereffects of the arms race and personal contribution by President Reagan shouldn't be underestimated. And yet, don't forget how it started: the Russians armed the Arabs against the Jews, and the Jews refused to yield; thirty years later, Israel was still there, but the Soviet Union was no more.

Ironically, the very first thing Israel did after winning the war with the Arabs was to lay the foundation of its future defeat by them. That was easy: instead of reclaiming Gaza, Judea, and Samaria and removing their hostile population, Israel turned them into a festering wound that could never be healed. There is no doubt that decisive, righteous actions by Israel would have inevitably caused an international outcry. Israel would have been accused of illegal occupation of foreign territories and eviction of billions of innocent Arabs from the land where their ancestors had lived millions of years before 1948 when the word Israel was first invented by the worst enemies of humanity, the Zionists.

Frankly, even I find it difficult to judge Israeli leaders for such a decision. Gas chambers and crematoriums had been rusting unused for more than two decades. The Holocaust had become a thing of the past, more and more distant with every passing day. Burning shame for the senseless murder of millions of Jews had forever cured all civilized nations of anti-Semitism. If only Jews behaved, all the people of the world, thanks to the innate goodness of every human being, would feel nothing but love and well-deserved respect for the Jews. Wolves and lambs would peacefully, although for no apparent reason, lie together, and there would be peace on earth and good will in all men - pardon me! - persons. And as you all know, this was exactly what Jews had been dreaming about ever since Moses herded them out of Mizraim.

And Israel, almost breathless from its own noble generosity, allowed its mortal enemy to stay on its land.

Putting myself in the shoes of the Israeli leaders of that time, I understand how difficult it was then to imagine that this sacrifice would prove to be in vain; that it would not prevent fellow humans from wrathful protests against the illegal Israeli occupation of the lands that used to belong to Arabs long before the last dinosaur disappeared from the face of the earth. It was hard to see that, unlike the dinosaurs, anti-Semitism has not disappeared and will not disappear as long as at least one Jew and one goy remain alive; that peace-loving humanity will continue to suffer terribly from the unresolved Jewish problem until the final solution is finally found and implemented. And yet, they were elected to lead. They should have known.

In our times, every commentator writing about the Middle East considered it his or her sacred duty to refer to Arafat's death as the beginning of a new era in the "peace process". This is such a terrible nonsense! Today, anyone can predict the future of the "peace process". Led by Mahmud Abbas, the "Palestinians" will matter-of-factly, without thanks, accept everything Sharon, hoping to delay the demise of his country, offers to them. Then they will say they want more and produce another list of demandslist. And another. And another. If Israel tries to object, a new intifada will follow, and Zionist atrocities against the defenseless "Palestinians" will stoke the usual wrath of the international community against the Jewish state, while blown-up busses and Jewish kids and pregnant women shot point-blank by Arabs will fail to provoke even mild interest. Determined to live in peace, the planet will once again stand behind the Arabs. The choice Israel is facing - to destroy the enemy or be destroyed - will become even more obvious. In theory, there is a possibility that this desperate situation will produce a courageous leader who will say that after six decades of unsuccessful attempts to achieve peace with the Arabs, Israel is implementing a policy of uncompromising self-defense. There is a clear chance that the international community will, in response, try to kill Israel for its refusal to lie down and die. I don't think, however, that is the most likely scenario. The world will be choking on its hatred of Jews, and the stench will reach the sky, but their hatred will be diluted by the inevitable and well-deserved respect for the winner.

Of course, I hope that Israel will survive as a country, even if the rest of the species will treat Israel the Polish peasants treated Jewish innkeepers. This is much better than the exhibition of trophies of yet another global pogrom in the museums of the future Holocaust. And yet, if Israel is not destined to survive, I hope it dies the way the Jews of Warsaw did rather than the rest of the six million victims of the last Holocaust.

I will not attempt to predict what will happen after the land given by God to the Jews is surrendered to their enemies. Probably, the United States and Europe will decide to punish the Arabs for the new Holocaust, and Israel will continue to exist in the same form in which it existed from the destruction of the Second Temple until 1948 - as an amorphous community of people united by universal hatred towards them, the Torah, and the impractical dream of Jerusalem. It's also possible that the death of Israel will accelerate the Islamization of the planet, and, within a couple of generations, space explorations, beaches, antibiotics, good wine, particle physics, and other things Muslims have no use for will survive only in China. In any case, it's perfectly obvious that God, as He always does, will curse those who curse us; but, also as always, it won't help us.

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 Rachel Saperstein, March 24, 2005.
Four Rachels sat in one row in the synagogue. I was one of them. Once again "mother Rachel weeps for her children."

Today is the Fast of Esther, the day before Purim. Purim is the day of miracles. The day the evil decree to kill the Jews of Persia by Prime Minister Haman was annulled. How fitting that the women of Gush Katif gathered together to beg the Almighty to annul the evil decree of expulsion by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Charged with emotion, we were told that the same prayers were being said at that hour by women in Israel and abroad. The prayers were simple: "Please G-d, save not only Gush Katif but the whole of Israel. For as we see, if Gush Katif falls so will Judea and Samaria fall."

We read the special prayer for Gush Katif by the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu.

We read Psalms reminding us that it is the Lord who makes decrees, and not mortals.

One theme seemed to permeate each prayer: this year, with the threat of expulsion of Jews from Eretz Yisrael, an amazing phenomenon occurred. Suddenly, we grew in stature, we the people of Gush Katif. Instead of us being torn apart we brought all of Israel together. We realized we cannot take our beloved land for granted. We must never fail in our commitment to our Land.

We heard the shofar blown long and loud. We wept with emotion because we had never heard the shofar blown on the Fast of Esther. Only in times of deep distress is the shofar blown. Today we blew the shofar.

Then, woman came up individually to recite personal prayers that they had composed. Speaking through tears and sobs, one after another reminded the Almighty that we had obeyed His command to settle the land of Israel. We had planted each tree, flower and vegetable to bring glory to His holy land. We beseeched him to remember us and to show His rachamim, His mercy, so that we could continue to stay here and carry out His mitzvoth on His sacred land.

There are several places in the Bible where it is said the Almighty was prepared to destroy the Jews, but spared them because of the merit of the women of Israel."

May that merit again be invoked. May the Almighty grant us our wish.

Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe live in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel. She is a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council.

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, March 24, 2005.
This appeared in http://www.geostrategy-direct.com, an organization that provides "cutting edge intelligence."

Why Syria loves Lebanon: Billions in skimmed revenues, Bekaa Valley's drug paradise, top-secret WMD tunnels

President Bashar Assad loves little Lebanon because he and his cronies have been sucking their neighbor dry for years. Lebanon feeds billions of dollars into Assad's coffers that allows him to resist Western sanctions and maintain power.

Assad inherited this revenue stream, U.S. officials said. His late father, Hafez, created the system. First, Lebanon has been a drug paradise for the Assad regime. The Bekaa Valley, heavily guarded by Iranian and Syrian troops, contains one of the largest drug operations in the world. Laboratories in Baalbek and other towns in the Bekaa take opium from Afghanistan and convert it into heroin. From there, the cut-grade heroin is shipped to Europe and Africa.

Assad junior also runs one of the largest counterfeiting operations in the world. Want a fake dollar bill? The Bekaa makes the best $50 and $100 bills - perfect for crime syndicates and governments that can't afford real U.S. currency.

Lebanon has also been the haven for Arab investment, particularly from Saudi Arabia. For the Saudis, Lebanon represents a summer haven where they can rest on the shores of the eastern Mediterranean and live a secret Western lifestyle. Assad provides the security for the Saudis and he is handsomely rewarded.

Assad takes a hefty cut of virtually every government project in Lebanon. The cut involves cash for government concessions as well as guarantees that Syrian labor will be used. Assad also obtains a cut of the salary of each of the more than 1 million Syrians working in Lebanon.

The Syrian president also rents space in Lebanon to Iran and terrorist groups. Those needing to train in Lebanon or Syria, of course, pay a fee to use Lebanon for exercises - whether in southern Lebanon or the Bekaa Valley. The result is that everybody from Chechens, Algerians and even Al Qaida operatives use this terrorist resort.

The Bekaa Valley also contains the darkest of Syria's secrets, including Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. More than a few U.S. officials are convinced that Iraq brought convoys of medium-range missiles and WMD warheads to Syria at the end of 2002 and early 2003 - on the eve of the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Some of the WMD stayed in Syria. Most were regarded as too hot to handle, even for Assad. The material was stored in tunnels in the Bekaa Valley.

Given this, it is clear why Syria wants advanced SA-18 anti-aircraft system from Russia. Syria wants low-signature surface-to-air missiles to prevent any Israeli or U.S. air raid over the Bekaa Valley. Damascus has heavy anti-aircraft systems for inside Syria. But to bring these Soviet-origin weapons into Lebanon would present a juicy target for any Western military.

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
DON'T TRUST SHARON'S PROMISES Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 24, 2005.

It has been reported that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon promised the so-called Likud rebels not to carry out additional withdrawals after Gaza and North Samaria deportations - unless in a framework of peace talks with Palestinians.

This statement comes from a quintessential liar who even exceeds Shimon Peres in "double-speak". Clearly, his reply had the deft touch of Dov Weisglass in drafting this twisty promise with all those drafty, back door escape clauses.

As he has done before, Sharon simply ignores his promises and does as he pleases. He ran his election and won 60% to 40% on positions totally opposite what he is now doing. He totally ignored the 60-40 vote in the Likud Party Central Committee against uprooting 9000 Jewish men, women and children. He fired two Cabinet members to get a vote passed for the evacuations.

Sharon is undemocratically manipulating the IDF so there will be fewer soldiers imbued with religious dedication to the Land. Sharon is trying to reconfigure the IDF to change the higher percent of Orthodox (40%) to secular (30%) - with 60% Orthodox soldiers in elite units. Now, one in every two soldiers enrolled in the officers training program is said to wear a Kipah. Sharon has proposed withdrawing funding for the hesder Yeshiva programs where a soldier serves five years while learning in Yeshiva. On March 20 men wearing Kipahs were not allowed to attend the ceremony where Sharon spoke commemorating the 56 years since Eilat became part of the State of Israel.

As he has done before, Sharon simply ignores his promises, the votes of his own Party and Cabinet. He just does as he pleases. Perhaps he will start the evacuations and/or purge under the guise of negotiating with Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) while accepting the marching orders most recently dictated to him by Elliott Abrams, an official of the U.S. National Security Council and David Welch, Assistant Secretary of State for the Middle East.

Saeb Erekat, a PA negotiator, is pressuring Abrams and Welch to officially deny Israel the right to build 3,500 new housing units in Ma'ale Adumim, the eastern most suburb of Jerusalem. This plan was initiated by PM Rabin after Oslo in 1993, to ensure Israeli control over the eastern slopes of Jerusalem up to Ma'aleh Adumim, 5 kilometers east of the capital.

Sharon, I would not trust you with any promise or the family's silverware. That you are an inveterate liar, you have proven beyond any shadow of doubt. That your are untrustworthy in keeping commitments or contracts with your own people, that too you have made abundantly obvious.

If any of those you call Likud Rebels take your word for anything, then they too are too inexperienced in dealing with you or in running the nation.

If they have not come to understand that you are a creature or a Golem, manipulated by foreign masters, then they are too gullible to lead the opposition.

As for those illegally ordered by the Sharon government to carry out the expulsions and who do not outright refuse such illegal orders, they should be notified as follows:

In a document each officer should be advised that accepting and carrying out illegal orders, they will under another government in the future, be prosecuted for crimes against the Jewish people. That accepting prior orders (by you PM Sharon or Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz) will not be mitigating. They will be charged, indicted and imprisoned for their specific roles under the return to prior law. Punishment would vary from imprisonment to loss of rank, loss of retirement benefits and other specific punishments.

Politicians who failed to protect their people and succumbed to threats in order to keep their political seats, perks and privileges would be dismissed and would thereafter be barred from any public office with forfeit of retirement benefits.

These notices would be either hand-delivered in the field and mailed in duplicate. If possible, a Public Notice would be displayed on billboards and posted in the newspapers.

Since Sharon has notified the residents of Gush Katif and Northern Samaria (as well as the rest of YESHA) of his intentions, it is only proper that he and all Military officers, Police officers should be similarly notified as to the risks they are taking in fulfilling illegal orders.

Sharon has exceeded the authority that any Prime Minister or other Government official has. The authority vested in all such officials is only temporary custody of the Land and People of Israel - to protect them both.

A new government can and must reverse Sharon's draconian decisions and punish those who acted to carry them out.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 24, 2005.

Many of us watch in horror as the Government of Israel launches into a self-destruct mode. Only the outer wrap of democracy remains of what can only be described as Jewish fascists in the Sharon Government eat away any semblance of law or respect for the people of Israel. Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon's dictatorial plan of forced "Disengagement" will engender a hatred by disenfranchised Jews for decades.

Those who use the true, honored methods of protest are being treated by the Sharon regime as enemies of the Jewish State. Some already have been arrested under false pretenses; some beaten with serious injuries by their fellow Jews, called Police. Their hospital records were mysteriously "mislaid".

We observe a hand picked Attorney General Menachem (Mendi) Mazuz, not only protecting Sharon from criminal charges on several issues but Mazuz has been used as point man as a political shill for Sharon and foreign interests.

If a Peoples' Court were convened, there would be a veritable parade of politicians, appointees, black-robed judges of the activist Supreme Court and more on trial. These people have eviscerated honest government and abused their power of office. Attorney General Mofaz in collaboration with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has issued orders to punish - in the extreme - any soldiers and/or officers who have refused what they believed are illegal orders to forcibly remove Jews from their homes. Worse yet, they have turned half of the people of Israel against the other half, using the warped idea that, by selling out their brothers, they will be made safer.

We all recall the defense offered by German soldiers and officers: "I was just following orders." Would these Germans only have refused what they knew to be illegal orders, we would not have suffered a genocide.

Sharon has approved the removal of name tags on Police and Special Military Units (an illegal act) to avoid charges of Police/Military brutality. The Media, even private photographers and videographers, will be barred as Sharon unleashes his Transfer Legions. Is this the decency of a Jewish nation? I think not.


Are these orders to uproot, evict, transfer Jewish men, women and children from their homes, schools, farms, land, synagogues, businesses and even their cemeteries acceptable in any written or verbal Jewish statement of laws for the Jewish and Democratic State? Obviously not. Our Torah scholars must publicize the complete list of Jewish laws about to be broken, but anyone who reads the Bible will know that the Land was promised to the Jewish people by G-d as far back as Abraham and repeated often within the Tanach. G-d's order to King Saul to kill all the Amalekites was broken by him and, therefore, he lost his King's crown. Why is Sharon attacking Jews and not the Amalekites who have attached themselves to the Jewish Land? Gaza had a strong Jewish history back into Biblical times and forward into modern times. Gaza was never a Muslim or Arab inheritance.


Is it not time for honest Likudniks and yes, even Labor Left in its earliest form to say "Stop, Mr. Sharon!"?...That your draconian policies are those of a dictator misusing the office of Prime Minister and the Courts.

Why haven't those whom Sharon called "Rebels of Likud" stated plainly that they are ready to replace the Sharon government and return to basic democracy and even decency? That upon replacing Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Shaul Mafuz, Shimon Peres, among others - they will reverse the dictatorial and onerous ruling of the Army under Defense Secretary Shaul Mofaz and the activist Supreme Court under Aharon Barak.

All those punished for standing up for the peoples' rights would be exonerated and their status returned to them. Public servants, soldiers, those engaged in legal civil disobedience would be reinstated to whatever position lost under Sharon's heavy handed regime. This should be one of the political contracts the new government should pledge to the people in new elections. I would also remind public servants, namely the Police and Military that, using excessive and brutal force would be considered a criminal act under any new Government and return to democratic sanity.

This is a remarkable opportunity to separate from Sharon's "Disengagement" policies of bringing a Terrorist nation within easy firing range of every city and person in Israel. The Jewish nation was supposed to be a "Light Unto the Nations" of the world - not another dark sub-culture, driven by one man.


by Ha'aretz Staff March 16, 2005

The Israel Defense Forces has, for the first time, issued direct orders regarding officers and soldiers who refuse to evacuate settlements under the disengagement plan, Army Radio said Tuesday.

Head of the Personnel Directorate, Major General Elazar Stern sent out a letter to senior commanders in the IDF, stating explicitly how to deal with refuseniks.

According to Stern's letter, a soldier who announces he intends to refuse orders will be given the chance to renounce his refusal and report to his officers that he has changed his stance. Soldiers who fail to do so will lose their position in the army.

Any soldier who directly refuses orders or calls for others to refuse, risks being ousted from a commanding position, and may be stripped of his ranks under the new orders.

"Refusal on the right and left threatens the very existence of the IDF and the existence of Israel as Jewish and Democratic state," Stern writes in his letter.

"We must remember that we are brother, before the disengagement, during it and after it," Stern says.

Military officials said in an interview with Army Radio that the letter must not be interpreted as a sign that there is a widespread problem of refusal in the ranks of the IDF.


A PERSONAL COMMENT by E. Winston on Ha'aretz article above

When Stern uses or rather misuses the term, that we are brothers, he ignores having the Left programmed to demonize the settlers who indeed are their brothers. When their true brothers at the front lines are forced to withdraw and the Kassem rockets, mortars, and Katyusha rockets start to fall on Tel Aviv from their closer firing position, only then will the Left in Tel Aviv regret their self-serving bias.

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 David Ha'ivri, March 24, 2005.
This is a news item from the Jerusalem Post Online: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1111634308199

Arabic posters have been erected on the Temple Mount and in various mosques with the picture of an ultra-nationalist Israeli activist who is trying to bring thousands of Jews to the bitterly-contested holy site in protest over the unilateral withdrawal plan from Gaza, eyewitnesses said Thursday.

The pictures of David Ha'Ivri, which went up earlier this week but were subsequently taken down, have also appeared in several mosques in east Jerusalem as well as in Israeli-Arab towns, the eyewitnesses said. Both Jerusalem Police and the Wakf director Adnan Husseini said Thursday that they were unaware of any such posters, and it was not immediately clear who erected them.

Earlier this week, Jerusalem Police announced that they would bar a massive Jewish pilgrimage to the Temple Mount by a group of ultra-nationalists opposed to the planned withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

Palestinians officials have denounced the campaign as a provocation, and have warned that such a visit could lead to a renewal of violence at the Temple Mount.

Police said they had notified Islamic Wakf officials of their stance, and that the site would only be open to regular visits of smaller groups and individuals, all of whom undergo a security screening check before entry.

The campaign, which is being organized by Ha'Ivri and is slated to be launched on April 10 to coincide with the eve of the Hebrew month of Nissan?


"We're talking about our civil and religious right to have access to the Temple Mount. The Temple Mount is the single holiest place in the world for Jews. It's time the Israeli government restores control to the rightful owners - the Jewish people." David Ha'ivri

"Israel bans Temple Mount ascent of 10,000 Jews Says it would allow thousands of Muslims," http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43426

"Jewish group plans al-Aqsa march," http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/650D32A1-B701-4132-9830-65AA1DB1C4ED.htm

Contact David Ha'ivri at haivri@hameir.org or by phone in U.S. at 212-561-5924 and in Israel at 03-906-0875.

Revava English website: http://revava.org/index.php

To Go To Top
Posted by Avraham Weissman, March 24, 2005.

John B. Simon President
DePaul University Trustees - and -
Rev. Dennis Holtschneider, President,
DePaul University


I urge you direct your attention to the issue of academic freedom with regard to Professor Thomas Klocek's right to freedom of speech. In Professor Klocek's case he is in fact expressing views that - while factually accurate are unacceptable because they are considered politically incorrect in your academic environment, influenced as it is by an assortment of anti-Semitic, "pro-Palestinian Arab," Palestinian elements and social tendencies. The same ignorance of facts and lack of historical accuracy can also often be found in media reporting about the Middle East, - some examples of which I cite and quote below - taken from two letters that I wrote recently. I think they are very pertinent in this particular case.

The first -

"I am in agreement with what your Samuel Katz's article (printed in the Jerusalem Post,) had to say. However, he might have made his case more strongly had he reminded the public that "jihad" (with the exception of Sufi Islam) is an acknowledged major religious obligation of the mainstream branches of Islam - and to which historians who have written about Islam attest. For example, in his book The Holy Sword (Collier Books), by Robert Payne, Payne writes -

"For the Muhamadan the jihad, or "holy war" has become an essential element of the faith; all of Islam would have to be turned upside down if the doctrine were eliminated." (Page 102, second paragraph from the bottom).

No wonder then that Moslems are unable to accept a non-Moslem state in the heart of the Middle East where Islam was born. Islam divides the world into two areas - "Dar al-Islam" or the area where Islam dominates; the other (remaining) areas where Islam does not hold "sway," are referred to as "Dar al-harb," the arena of (holy) war.

"... I wonder if the government of Israel really have the right to place the lives of its citizens at risk for nothing more than the "hudna" or temporary cease fire that they are being offered - while Abu Mazen insists that he will not take up arms against the various dissident terrorist organizations (including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al Aksa Martyr's Brigades) that operate in the areas of Gaza and the "West Bank."

A quick look at some relatively recent past history - will show that the Saddam Hussein's Iraqi war vs. Moslem Mullah run Iran featured the extensive use of 14, 15 and 16 year olds by both sides and the media reported that approximately 1 and 1/2 million of them were killed in that war! So, anyone really interested enough to do some basic research would realize - that the use of teen age children is part of Moslem jihadi culture. In addition, one must remember that the typical Palestinian (armed) terrorists are civilians themselves.

The second -

"Not long ago AP published an article by Lara Sukhtian and Josef Federman headlined - "Count shows Mideast fighting has killed 514 Palestinians and 97 Israelis aged 16 or under." the article implies that the Israelis are at least "mostly" at fault - and offers as evidence the fact that many more Palestinian Arab civilians and children have been killed, than Israeli civilians and children..

"The important point that both the AP article (and Arnold Roth's reply) fails to mention however is - that using children and civilians for terrorism has been part and parcel of the Palestinian Authority's 'modus operandi" - their deliberate policy, - and therefore there should be little if any surprise that Palestinian children are killed when Israel fights Palestinian terrorism (more accurately known as "jihad," which is a part and parcel of much of mainstream Moslem culture and religious values)..For that very reason the AP's comparison, its "equivalency formula" between Palestinian and Israeli casualties is totally false, misleading and harmful to all those interested in living in peace - whether Palestinian Arab or Israeli..Palestinian Arab militants, or to use a more straight forward term - "terrorists" - often fire from behind teenage stone throwers - hoping for some propaganda advantage when 1 or more of their teen age pals is killed in the "return fire." Furthermore, the stone throwers also often throw Molotov cocktails or firebombs - lethal weapons in anyone's book - but the newsmen rarely tell you about that. I have in fact seen them do it. In addition AP and other news reporters and stringers in the Arab areas are often Arab Palestinians themselves, some of them even members of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or the Al Aksa Brigades, from whom no fair news reporting can really be expected.

"The perpetrator-terrorists that fired the mortars or rockets aimed at Israeli civilian targets may very well have been teen agers themselves who had been brainwashed into believing that terrorism and murder are admirable activities. Certainly a regular armed force made up of uniformed, disciplined personnel - could and would have prevented the presence of civilians and children within a field they were operating from - or they would not have been there in the first place. And what about parental responsibility. What responsible parent allows their children to play in fields from which mortars or rockets have been fired a few minutes or even a 1/2 hour or so earlier.

"The Palestinian Authority's permitting civilian armed groups to circulate and operate unhindered in areas under their control - is in fact, a very large part of the problem!"

In any case, your treatment of Professor Klocek and his political opinions are hardly worthy of an academic institution such as yours - and are more of what one would expect in the dictatorships and news managing governments invariably common in the Arab world.

Very truly,

Avraham Weissman
33 Degel Reuven
Petach Tiqvah, 49551

Avraham Weissman can be reached by email at avna@bezeqint.net

To Go To Top
Posted by Voice of Judea, March 23, 2005.

The Israeli army reportedly wants to off-set the preponderance of religious troops in its combat units. Maariv said Thursday that the top brass are seeking ways of boosting the number of secular youths conscripted into the ground forces, whose ranks are now 30 percent to 40 percent Orthodox. The religious representation is even higher in elite units - 60 percent in the Givati Brigades reconnaisance company, which is very active in the Gaza Strip - while one in every two soldiers enrolled in the combat officer program is said to wear a yarmulke. According to Maariv, the new recruiting initiative is a matter of bringing the ranks more into line with the demographic breakdown of Israel as a whole, rather than an expression of concern over the political leanings of religious troops. The army declined comment.

Voice of Judea Commentary:

What fraud! Kibbutznikim represent a tiny percentage of the population and yet have always represented a disproportionate percentage of the IDF combat units and pilots.

This smells and sounds like anti-Semitism. Does one need to hide their Yarmulke to advance in certain units? If this is how high-ranking officers speak openly, then what do they say and how do they act privately?

Unfortunately, a very ugly form of racism and discrimination is promoted and encouraged not only by high-ranking IDF officers but also by the general Israeli media, Israeli courts and other bastions of the Israeli leftist elite.

Last week, people wearing yarmulkes were not permitted to attend a lecture given by Sharon in Eilat.

Ministers and Knesset members who to not bow to the party line 200 percent are replaced and smeared by the media.

Bogee Yaalon, Israel's Chief of Staff testified before the Knesset Foreign and Defense Affairs Committee earlier this week saying that he was fired because of his political views. Moufaz, Israel's Defense Minister told Yaalon that he was releaving him of his duties because he did not think he fully supported the disengagement plan. Moufaz conceded that Yaalon was one of the finest Chief of Staffs Israel ever had and said that he has not one complaint against Yaalon other than the fact that he once voiced doubt about the disengagement plan.

Ironically, Yaalon has given full backing to Sharon and has since showed complete loyalty to the plan. A successful Chief of Staff is being thrown out of the army, in spite of his support for the disengagement plan, because he once commented that he had his doubts about the plan.



While it is incumbent upon every Jew to celebrate the festive holiday of Purim to commemorate the great and miraculous victory of the Jews over their enemies in ancient Persia, the battle for Jewish survival is not quite over.

We would like to suggest to our readers, this Purim, to do more than just read the Book of Esther in the past tense but rather to address it as a guide for the present and the future. Our sages teach us that Purim is one of the few holidays that will remain, when Moshiach comes. No doubt, there is an absolute need to internalize the story of Purim and to learn the lessons to help us in our modern battle for Jewish survival.

Where does one find modern day Mordechais? Where does one look for them? One can start looking for such heroes on the hills of Judea and Samaria and Gaza. There we can see regular, ordinary people just like you and I, who risk their lives to settle the holy land of Eretz Israel. It is on these beautiful hills where we can find the purist youth farming and building the land, in complete defiance of world opinion. These G-d fearing noble Jews could care less if their refusal to bow provokes or upsets the modern day Achashverosh - world leaders who seek to appease the modern day Hamans.

We urge our readers to make a generous contribution now to the heroic volunteers of the Jewish Legion who have come to Israel from all over the world to defend these hills and "settlements". The canine unit of the Jewish Legion continues to provide service dogs and volunteers to needy towns in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. These guards dedicate their lives to protecting fellow Jews.

Purim is a wonderful time to show them that we appreciate and support their vital life-saving endeavor. Please send a generous contribution to the Jewish Legion..Kfar Tapuach D.N. Efrayim, Israel, 44829.

A 500 dollar contribution can help sponsor a volunteer and a specially trained canine service dog for 1 month.

Volunteers are also needed. This Purim, would also be a great time to join the Jewish Legion for a year of voluntary service in Israel. The Jewish Legion offers housing, food, and the highest standard of canine defense training. The Jewish Legion also operates a yeshiva program for those who are interested in learning Hebrew and Torah.

Visit www.defendisrael.net Donate now at http://www.defendisrael.net/donate.shtml

3- Fast of Esther Prayer Service to be Held at Prison Where Anti-Expulsion Activists Being Held 11:55 Mar 24, '05 / 13 Adar 5765

(IsraelNN.com) In a show of support for the youths still imprisoned for blocking roads an afternoon prayer service will be held at 2:30 PM opposite the prison where they are being held.

The anti-expulsion activists are being held for at least six more days as part of an ongoing police investigation to try to identify the organizers of the road-blockings. The disruptions have repeatedly embarrassed police and security forces who say they "can't be everywhere at once."

They are being held at Maasyahu Prison in Ramle. The prayer service is open to the public.

Voice of Judea Commentary:

How obscene and unjust to hold Jewish children in jail over the holidays, for days, without trial, for the minor offence of peaceful civil disobedience. What an outrage!

There is more madness in a land that is rapidly turning into a Cookoo Land:

The authorities went as far as to arrest the bus drivers who drove the kids to the protest. There is more. The Israeli Attorney General is pushing for a 20 year maximum sentence for political protesters who peacefully block traffic. In any democratic country in the world such criminals are given a slap on the wrist and a 50 dollar fine. Laws have been passed that could punish Jews who travel to Gush Katif to protest the expulsion of the Jews there, with grotesque 5 year prison terms. There is talk of stripping MK Eitam of his diplomatic immunity for the crime of moving to Gaza.

Last week, a 53-year-old accountant from Netanya was arrested and had his legal weapon confiscated because he sent a fax to Sharon, condemning him for the disengagement plan and for writing that Sharon would burn in hell with Arafat for his treasonous behavior.

Sharon is not only betraying Jewish and Zionist values, he is making a complete mockery out of the claim that Israel is a democracy.

Israeli leaders are openly claiming that they plan on rounding up right wing activists to hold them without trial and without any charges under emergency administrative detention. Those arrested can be held for up to 5 months without ever being charged with any wrong doing other than holding the wrong political and religious views.

We urge our readers to call Gideon Ezra, Israel's Minister of Police and Internal Affairs. Demand of him not to arrest good Jews under administrative detention: In Israel: 02 530 8500. From US 011-972-2-530-8500.

4- Group seeks to reclaim Israeli control of holy site

JERUSALEM -- On Sunday April 10, 2005, the first day of the Hebrew month of Nisan, Revava-a grassroots Jewish organization-plans to bring 10,000 Jews to the heavily restricted Temple Mount to spark Israeli dialogue about reclaiming the holy site from its Muslim custodians. "We're talking about our civil and religious right to have access to the

Temple Mount. The Temple Mount is the single holiest place in the world for Jews. It's time the Israeli government restores control to the rightful owners-the Jewish people." David Ha'ivri, Chairman of Revava www.revava.com for more info

Subscribe to Voice of Judea emails by sending an email request to jsid@dorsai.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 24, 2005.


The previous Spanish regime led the EU to assist the democratic opposition to Fidel Castro. Castro complained. One of his power plays is to refuse to repay his billion-dollar loans as to Spain, unless Spain appeases him. The new Spanish regime agreed to ignore Castro's opposition. It got the EU to switch to a policy of "constructive dialogue." The Czech republic prefers the EU to be forceful with Castro, a major violator of human rights. US policy on Cuba, once forceful, had been greatly compromised (Meghan Clyne, NY Sun, 3/18, p.7).

The EU is for "constructive dialogue" with Saddam, Iran, and probably N. Korea. I don't know why it calls the dialogue "constructive." Nothing constructive has come out of it. By staving off forceful action, the EU lets certain dictators harm more people, increase their threat to other countries, and entrench themselves further.

If the EU joined with the US in forceful policy, they could achieve much reform for the world.


The Grand Mufti of Lebanon asserted that Syria-Lebanon agreements take precedence over the Security Council Resolution mandating Syrian troop withdrawal from Lebanon (IMRA, 2/11).

The Arabs constantly accuse Israel of violating UN resolutions, and claim it therefore is an outlaw state. The accusers fail to distinguish between resolutions that have the force of law and ones that are advisory. Israel does not violate the former. The Arabs do. In this case, the Grand Mufti is claiming that the Security Council Resolution does not bind Lebanon and Syria, when it is supposed to.

There isn't the usual indignation in this case as there is in the charges against Israel of violating UNO resolutions.


The commander of IDF troops attempting to remove an unauthorized outpost claimed that the settlers tried to run him over. Israel radio later reported that an investigation determined that the officer had lied; the settlers drove away from him (IMRA, 2/11).

Running over people and ramming into cars is an Arab tactic.

Martin Peretz of "The New Republic" claimed that settlers tore down Arabs' olive trees, and lamented how terrible that was. He gave no specifics. Usually such claims either are fabricated by the Arab for Western suckers who believe Arab defamation of the settlers, or the trees are pruned to remove cover used by terrorists, or the Arabs illegally planted them on the Jews' property in order to claim the land for themselves.

Peretz should be lamenting the murders by Arabs of Jews. The murders indeed are terrible.

There is much defamation of settlers, because they represent genuine Judaism, Jewish nationalism, and Israeli defense against the world's inclination to put Israel down.


Armed Arabs broke into a P.A. prison, and murdered three prisoners against whom death sentences had not been carried out. This is getting to be routine. Some of the attackers were arrested. Terrorists also shell Jewish communities extensively, despite the supposed ceasefire. Israeli residents of the targeted towns complained that PM Sharon's concessions to the Arabs made the shelling possible. (One such concessions is to stop examining cars for contraband. Hence rockets can be distributed to the launching squads.)

Abbas fired about 20 police officials, apparently in reaction (IMRA, 2/11).

One wonders who are the raiders? Are they part of Abbas' own gang? Are they subsidized by him, as they were by Arafat?


The State Dept. has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to the terrorist P.A., which teaches children to become human bombs. Therefore, the State Dept. is one of the main sponsors of terrorism. It should insert its own name on its list of state-sponsors of terrorism. Congress passes standards to rule out terrorism, but the Dept. falsely claims that the P.A. meets those standards. How unfortunate that the Dept. gets the US taxpayers to pay that bill!

In its new scheme, it would unify the terrorist organizations in the P.A. into 2-3 efficient units. They would become a powerful terrorist force. This is not the first time that the US subsidized terrorists. The US trained bin Laden.

The State Dept. long has been pro-Arab, to suit the oil companies. Before and even during WWII, some US companies were pro-Axis. The State Dept. and especially the CIA cooperated with Nazis.

The new hundreds of millions of dollars that the US is short of but which Pres. Bush proposes to send the P.A., are likely to further help the terrorists. The P.A. has not shut off funding of them. The US claimed that the money went for infrastructure, not terrorism. However (as with Iraq over the UNO's oil for food program), the P.A. found ways to skim off large sums and charge taxes and fees that went for terrorism. Every ordinary business was assigned a terrorist partner without his investing in it. The State Dept. knew that much of the US aid went to employ terrorists or insure their families, but it did not inform Congress (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/11).


Sec. Rice asks Israel to be flexible (like a dishrag) about convicted Arab prisoners. Meanwhile, the US is rigidly inflexible about Pollard, who has served much longer for his sort of crime, which did the US no harm and saved many lives. One US official claimed that Pollard was being kept in prison so long as a bargaining chip with Israel. Then let Israel call in that chip and at least demand his release before it would free terrorists (IMRA, 2/10).

Now that crime carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. Pollard is in his 20th.


He says it would delay the abandonment plan by a year and it would engender hatred. He gave no evidence for either notion (IMRA, 2/10) nor why he was in a hurry for a plan he never justified. Even if a referendum took half a year, it would be warranted by the gravity of the subject.


The Right objected when the abandonment plan passed a crucial Knesset vote by one vote, that one coming from an Arab who previously had abstained. "Haaretz" thought that indicates that the Right, which complains that PM Sharon is not proceeding democratically, itself is not democratic in objecting to equal weight to an Arab's vote in Knesset (Foreign Ministry, 2/10).

It does seem an anomaly to let the fate of thousands of Jews, perhaps of all of them, be sealed by the vote of the Arab fifth column that seeks to destroy any democracy there.


Egypt barred books and speakers calling for domestic democratic reform and books from Israel (IMRA, 2/11). US pundits included Egypt among the democratizing countries, because Pres. Mubarak said he might let somebody else (his son?) run for President, this time. Big deal!


The leftist Yesh Gvul organization protests against the Israeli Army for killing some children, when it returns fire. The organization does not understand that international law holds the terrorists responsible for those deaths. It is simple logic. If the terrorists did not open fire from amidst the children, which is criminal, the children would be spared (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/11, e-mail).

If the Left criticized the criminal Arab tactics, the Arabs would find no advantage to risking their children. By not criticizing it, but in fact criticizing Israel when the Arabs utilize that tactic, the Left indirectly encourages terrorism.

The Yesh Gvul logic must be that Israelis do not have the right to self-defense, but terrorists have the right to attack. It isn't children that Yesh Gvul cares about, or it would lament P.A. murders of Israeli children, often deliberate. It is that they hate fellow Israelis more. Pathetic, those far-leftists, self-imagined idealists!


The UNO long ago abandoned its mission to protect persecuted people, and instead has become a branch of jihad persecution of Israel.

For example, a UNO headquarters display in December exaggerated the problems for Arabs of Israeli self-defense measures such as checkpoints. It omitted the problems that Arab terrorism, which is unacceptable, causes Israelis. There also was a display about AIDS, but it had only a fraction of the space devoted to the Arabs' false claims.

The UNO has one division devoted to a single group, the UN Division for Palestinian Rights. The UNO has one website devoted to a single group's claim, the UN Info. System on the Question of Palestine. The UNO has one refugee agency, UNRWA, dedicated to a single group, the Palestinian Arabs. The only day set aside to commemorate a specific people is the Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. There was "'a minute of silence?for all those who have given their lives for the cause of the Palestinian people?' which would include suicide bombers."

One of the UNO's six committees of the whole devotes 30% of its time to (unfairly) condemning Israel. UN Human Rights Commission resolutions are 30% against Israel and 0% against China, which oppresses a billion people. The emergency sessions are devoted mostly in behalf of the Arabs against Israel. No emergency session was held for the millions murdered in Rwanda and Sudan. No definition of terrorism was established within the UN. Beware when one is!

The Islamic states control and ruin the UNO. Other groups' needs are neglected (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.34 from Anne Bayefsky, National Review, 12/13).

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 Judy Lash Balint, March 23, 2005.

Like many successful projects, Moshe Burt's Sefer Torah Recycling Network (STRN) was born by accident.

In December 1994, the Philadelphia native went looking for his beshert at a Jewish singles event in Brooklyn. Instead of finding his match there, Burt became a matchmaker between a Torah scroll and a small Jewish community in Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem when a couple he met at the event told him that Bat Ayin was looking for a Torah and could not afford the $25-30,000 cost of a new one.

Back in Philadelphia, Burt discovered that his rabbi, Mordechai Young of Congregation Young Israel of Wynnefield, had a Torah in storage waiting for a home. With the pro bono help of a sofer in Brooklyn, Burt had the Torah restored to perfect condition and five months after his initial meeting, the grateful community of Bat Ayin was using the scroll.

To his surprise, Burt, an observant Jew, learned that many small and new communities in Israel had no sefer Torah. "It is said that one is truly connected to a place only when that place is a Makom Torah (a place of Torah) and that's accomplished through ownership of a Sefer Torah," Burt says, as he explains why he conceived of the idea of starting the STRN. The organization now has tax-deductible status in the U.S, and Canada and is run by Burt on a volunteer basis from his home in Ramat Beit Shemesh.

Burt feels a particularly urgent need to help communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza establish themselves as Makom Torah, and over the past 10 years his Sefer Torah Recycling Network has matched eight YESHA communities with donated Torah scrolls.

Burt has received strong endorsements for the STRN from a number of prominent rabbis including Dov Brisman and Shmuel Kamenetsky of Philadelphia and Zev Leff, Menachem Shapira and Chaim Soloveichik in Israel.

On Shushan Purim, March 27, Burt and his supporters will dedicate their second Torah donated to a community in the Gush Katif region, slated for destruction by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan this summer.

Last July, the tiny beachfront village of Shirat Hayam in Gush Katif received a Sephardic style Torah scroll for its 15 families. The newest Torah will be dedicated in the Chasdei Shimrit community center at the nearby town of Neve Dekalim. The Center was named after Shimrit Bonfeld, a young resident who died of a rare blood disease several years ago. Her father, David Bonfeld, is a postman in Gush Katif who has been active with youth in Neve Dekalim. The Torah scroll was donated by a group of donors from Beit Shemesh to show their support for the threatened communities in the south.

Future STRN plans call for the restoration of a Torah donated by a Baltimore family, that will find a new home next July in The Rachel's Children Reclamation Foundation Beit Midrash (adjacent to Rachel's Tomb) and another scroll that will be used by a new Yeshiva High School, Knesset Yisrael when it opens in Beit Shemesh in September.

As word of his unique project spreads, Burt receives constant requests from communities without a Torah. "I'm constantly on the lookout for additional used Sifrei Torah," he says.

"I'm currently searching for Sifrei Torah to be placed in Yishuv Adura, near Hebron, as well as two locations in Ramat Beit Shemesh and Russian-speaking synagogues in Beitar Illit and in Ma'alei Adumim. There's a third Gush Katif town, Kerem Atzmona, that's in need of a Torah too." Burt explains that Adura suffered a deadly terror attack in May 2002, when five residents were killed in their homes as terrorists dressed as Israeli soldiers broke into the village. "The people of Adura seek a Sefer Torah to memorialize those who lost their lives in that attack," Burt says.

Another benefit of the project is that it helps provide employment for Israeli Torah scribes, Burt adds.

For further information and details on this Sunday's dedication, visit: http://www.sefer-torah.com/

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

To Go To Top
Posted by Barry Rubin, March 23, 2005.

Those most likely to support democracy in the Arab world are the ones convinced that they would win fair elections. And large groups holding such ideas are most likely to arise among already existing ethnic religious communities rather than from diverse parties built up gradually from individuals' conversion to a liberal world view.

Lebanon is the only Arab state where these groups have always been legitimate political actors. Paradoxically, it is also the sole Arab country where local patriotism has also openly existed. Among other things, Lebanon was loved because it let these groups flourish rather than subordinated them to a powerful central government.

Lebanon thus represented freedom and pluralism, something worth protecting from subordination to a Sunni Muslim-dominated regional empire operating in the name of Arab nationalism. Of course, there were always those, intoxicated on ideology or seeking their own advantage - especially Sunni Muslims historically - who were ready to align with the outsiders. In the end, though, the outsider which took over was Syria.

Now, Lebanese patriotism has been reborn on a broad basis bringing together three communities - Christians, Druze, and Sunni Muslims - against a Syrian domination which is seen as benefiting none of them. Hizballah, the most important single Shia Muslim group (but not the only one) is a Syrian client and has pushed its community to support a continuing Syrian presence. But even among the Shia, there are elements of Lebanese patriotism as well.

Getting rid of Syria and too traumatized by a long, bloody civil war to let disputes get out of hand would let Lebanon get back to "normal," which means that politics would revolve around communal parties making deals to divide power and resources.

But in other Arab states there are three problems which Lebanon does not share. First, communal-based parties are rising with no precedent for such a system. Arab nationalist regimes were ruthlessly centralizing, stamping out expressions of communal interests or differences in the name of Arab nationalism. Second, they have not yet had their ethnic civil war to teach the futility of such a struggle. And third, unlike Lebanon, where there are too many communities for anyone to win, somebody just might emerge triumphant.

Take Iraq, for example, where almost 80 percent of parliamentary seats were won by communal parties - and it would have been more if the Sunni Muslims had not virtually boycotted the elections. The elections succeeded so greatly not because of any doctrinal loyalty to liberal democracy but because the Kurdish and Shia leaders - including clerics - ordered their people to vote. And they did so because they knew they would win.

In a sense, this makes democracy more secure. For, given the demographics they know they will go on winning every election in the future. And if these two communities can make a deal, it is the beginning of pluralism. This is not a democracy based on individual preferences, purely national loyalties or liberal values but on communal ties. There is no strong liberal parties which can appeal to national patriotism, transcending communal loyalties and winning support on the basis of issues.

Yet that system also builds an Iraqi patriotism because only a sovereign Iraq can preserve this deal, even if each communal group is tempted to look across the border for allies. Perhaps this is the best that can be expected. It sounds rather like historic Lebanon.

Syria potentially faces a rougher future. There are Kurds and Christians but in political terms only two communities matter: the ruling Alawites and the big majority of Sunni Muslims. There is certainly a liberal Sunni opposition but if the masses are going to be mobilized it is probable they will do so behind the clerics.

What is the Islamist attitude toward democracy? Much publicity was given to a January statement by the al-Qaida leader in Iraq - who it should be remembered is not an Iraqi - Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi - who condemned democracy as intrinsically heretical by giving authority to the people instead of to the deity, to human law instead of to divine law.

Yet this is not inevitably the Islamist position. After all, Zarqawi's Sunni Muslims knew they could not win elections. Meanwhile, their Shia counterparts were telling their people that it was a sin not to vote. When Islamists put themselves at the head of communities which can gain a majority they quickly change their tune. Syrian Islamists already know this fact.

The Palestinian Hamas has no ethnic community to lead but it can try to capture control of the anti-Israel national struggle, the way Communist parties tried, and sometimes succeeded, in doing. After a good performance in the Gaza Strip local council races, Hamas suddenly changed its decade-long policy of boycotting Palestinian Authority elections to announce it would run in the June elections. Jordanian and Egyptian Islamists are now also starting to catch the "democratic" bug as they calculate their chances of winning if elections were ever fair.

The point is that while the intellectual advocates of democracy are individual liberals, the fruits are likely to be reaped by large communal-based parties and Islamist movements, which have a much easier time organizing large groups of people. The outcome will vary according to the specific situation. In some places, like Lebanon and Iraq, the results may be good. In others, the existing regimes will have far more appeal as people fear the potential for civil war or an Islamist takeover.

Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya (IDC), and co-author of Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography and Hating America: A History (Oxford University Press, August 2004). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html

To Go To Top
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, March 23, 2005.

The principle that basic human rights must be safeguarded internationally, and that traditional rules of national sovereignty should not be allowed to interfere, is a direct consequence of the Holocaust. A United Nations commission and powerful nongovernmental organizations were created to promote this code, and they did it successfully. This framework played a key part in gaining the freedom of political prisoners in the Soviet Union, exposing torture by the military dictatorships of Latin America and other accomplishments. Jews were very instrumental in this process, particularly through the work of Helsinki Watch, which became Human Rights Watch.

But in the past decade, the norms of universal human rights have been replaced by a narrow and particularistic political agenda. The UN Human Rights Commission, which is meeting again this month in Geneva, became a leader in the campaign to demonize Israel as an "apartheid state." It has been aided and abetted by the NGO community, including HRW. The NGO forum of the UN Human Rights Commission's 2001 Durban conference on "racism and xenophobia" was a focus for vicious Israel bashing while suicide bombings were killing hundreds.

New York-based HRW, led by a former prosecutor named Ken Roth, has focused an inordinate portion of its energies and resources against Israel. Roth brought in Joe Stork, a major figure in the radical political group that publishes MERIP, which took a consistent pro-PLO and anti-Israel position. Additional funding was used to employ Sarah Leah Whitson and, more recently, Lucy Mair. Whitson had been associated with an extremist group known as MADRE, and Mair's credentials include writing for the Electronic Intifada, an explicitly pro-Palestinian political and ideological Web site. Mair's publications are studded with stereotypes of innocent Palestinian victims and brutal Israeli soldiers, with no mention of terrorism.

These Durban-style political biases are reflected in HRW's consistent stream of reports, press conferences, letters, e-mails and other activities that condemn Israeli policies. These reports, more than 100 in the past four years, far exceed HRW's declarations on the mass killings in Sudan and other areas where human rights are being systematically violated. This has created two standards of conduct - one for Israel, and one for everyone else.

HRW reports on Israel mix a clear political position against the "occupation" with the bald assertion that Israeli anti-terror policies are illegal. Its report on the 2002 Israeli army operation in Jenin, while noting that there was no massacre, unjustly accused Israeli soldiers of "war crimes." Similarly, a 135-page report titled "Razing Rafah," accompanied by a public relations campaign led by Roth, is filled with unverified Palestinian "eyewitness" reports alleging Israeli violations of international law.

Using this indictment, HRW's current campaign focuses on firms selling protected machines used by the Israel Defense Forces to destroy buildings in which terrorists are hiding, or where weapons and explosives are prepared. (The alternative would be to use aircraft to bomb these targets, or simply allow Palestinian terrorists to kill Israeli civilians.)

In this way, HRW is abetting the "boycott Israel" campaign that recently received the endorsement of the Presbyterians and the World Council of Churches and is the core of the Durban strategy of delegitimizing Israel as a "racist apartheid state."

HRW's obsession, which is common to many NGOs that reflect an anti-American, anti-Israel and post-colonial ideology, has totally distorted the human rights agenda. The objectives of the authors of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights are entirely inconsistent with demonizing the efforts of Israeli Jews to protect themselves against war and terror. And when the Israeli government and military do make mistakes in judgment, the coinage of human rights rhetoric has been so debased and politicized as to strip it of any impact.

In order to rectify this situation and restore the universality of human rights principles, HRW and other NGOs with multimillion-dollar budgets need a system of independent checks and balances on their power. The NGO superpowers that preach political ethics to others are among the most secretive and closed organizations. Transparency should be the norm in their decision-making processes, including budgets and priorities for public relations and political campaigns, as well as critical employment procedures. And it is time to remove the "halo effect," which has allowed Roth and other individuals in the NGO network to act without consultation and approval, even from board members and donors.

In a democratic society, all government organizations are subject to such controls, and the same is true for other sources of power. The major news organizations recognize the need for an ombudsman or "public editor" to challenge and often criticize the prejudices and lack of professional conduct of senior journalists and editors. Even the prickly BBC has created a review process to consider complaints about its biased coverage of the Middle East in order to try and restore its shattered credibility.

Political NGO superpowers such as HRW must now be brought into a similar framework, including transparency and the creation of independent and active review mechanism. This would require an allocation of at least 5 percent of available funds, and the appointment of a professional staff whose power, salaries and advancement are not subject to the control of Roth or his inner group. To restore the principles of truly universal human rights, protected from private ideologies and obsessions, it is necessary to "watch the watchers." Gerald M. 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 current Jewish Week as "Checks and Balances for NGO Superpowers." It is archived at http://www.thejewishweek.com/top/editletcontent.php3?artid=4055

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 23, 2005.

Right and the tooth fairy will leave you a quarter under your pillow as well. Sharon's pogrom is scheduled for Pesach, the interment camps have been built, the Negev will be under martial law and it will take 12 to 18 months under the best of conditions to build 500 housing units of even substandard quality and that is from the day they actually start something. Here they a just beginning to talk about it!! What about the factories, the farms, the schools, the religious institution and everything else?

This is all a bluff and a poorly presented one. Only a total fool could believe that Sharon intends anything other than the extermination of these communities. THERE WILL BE NO COMPENSATION. There will, however, be murder, brutality, interment camps and massive persecution.

Expel Sharon, not Jews!

This is from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). It is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78887 "Government to Build Homes for Gaza Residents in the Negev," Wednesday, March 23, 2005 / 12 Adar 5765

(IsraelNN.com) The Housing Ministry plans to construct 500 new homes in 15 communities in the Negev for Jews uprooted from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria. According to Israel Radio, the communities in question belong to the Eshkol, Ashkelon Coast, and Sha'ar HaNegev Regional Council.

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 Mordechai Ben-Menachem, March 23, 2005.

Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf, a bestseller in many sectors of the Muslim world, has become a best seller in Turkey - traditionally considered a moderate country.

Tens of thousands of Arabic-language copies of Hitler's book - the English title of which is My Struggle - have been snatched off the shelves ever since they were reprinted in Turkey several months ago. The book outlines Hitler's plans for world domination and his intense hatred of Jews.

Muslim apologists attribute the book's popularity to its cheap price. It was printed in paperback form with out the permission of the German state of Bavaria, which owns the rights to the book.

"The book Mein Kampf should not be reprinted," Bavarian Finance Minister Kurt Faltlhauser said in an official statement. "The state of Bavaria administers the copyright very restrictively to prevent an increase of Nazi ideas."

Lina Filiba, executive vice president of Turkey's Jewish Community, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that the popularity of Hitler's book is "disturbing." She said it was part of a "worrying trend" that includes the sale of anti-Semitic publications such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion at popular local department stores.

Since January, the book has sold more than 50,000 copies and is #4 on the bestseller list drawn up by the D&R bookstore chain. Traditionally priced at about $20 a copy, it now sells for about $5.50 and less.

Turkish political scientist Dogu Ergil sees the book's rise in popularity as evidence of anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism, and Nazism. "Buried in the dustbin of history in Europe, Nazims is beginning to re-emerge in Turkey," he warned.

This is not the first time the book has been translated into Arabic and become a best seller in the Arab-Muslim world. Sami al-Jundi, one of the first leaders of Syria 's ruling Baath party, writes in his autobiography of Syrian admiration for Mein Kampf and Nazi ideology in the 1930s: "We were racists, admiring Nazism, reading its books and the source of its thought - We were the first who thought of translating Mein Kampf."

Mein Kampf has been translated into Arabic several times and distributed widely in Lebanon and Syria. The book was also distributed in the PA-administered regions of Israel by Al-Shuruq, a Ramallah-based printing press. The book became a best-seller in the PA in 1999.

Adolf Hitler had close ties with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin Al Husseini. Husseini supported the Nazis and especially admired their program for the mass murder of the Jews, visiting numerous death camps and encouraging Hitler to extend the "Final Solution" to the Jews of North Africa and pre-state Israel. Husseini was the uncle of the late PA representative in Jerusalem Feisal Husseini and a commander and mentor of terror chief Yasser Arafat.

Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben-Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 23, 2005.

If there was any doubt before that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's mind has stopped, the following should remove all doubt. Not only has Sharon negotiated a unilateral immunity for the top 500 Terrorists but agreed to legitimize their carrying weapons as if they were honorable members of Israel's Shin Bet (Secret Services). Laughably, they refused Sharon's plea to become legitimate Terrorists. Sharon has become a laughable bloated punching bag for Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) and President Bush.

Resign old man, with whatever honors from the past you can take with you. You are a tragic stumbling figure and have become quite dangerous for the nation.

DEBKAfile - We start where the media stop

Israel Turns Blind Eye to 500 Fugitive Palestinian Terrorists' Private Arsenals

DEBKAfile Exclusive Counter-Terrorism Report March 23, 2005, 3:18 PM (GMT+02:00)

Attended by a flock of legal advisers, senior Shin Bet security service officers have been engaged in talks with a prominent member of the Fatah young guard in Gaza, Abdel Fatah Hamail, on rules regulating weapons licenses for 500 Palestinian terrorist fugitives. These fugitives, including some of Yasser Arafat's most notorious terrorist masterminds, have already won an Israeli pledge to stop pursuing them, a reprieve made to further peace efforts. Now, on behalf of Palestinian chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and interior minister Nasser Yousef, Hamail working with Israeli security officials has drawn up a set of new Palestinian Authority criteria governing their "right" to stay armed.

DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources stress that this under-the-counter deal flies blatantly in the face of the US-backed Middle East roadmap to peace and reiterated demands by President George W. Bush, Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon and Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz, that the Palestinian Authority disarm terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure.

Yet Israeli officials and Hamail have just hammered out a 10-point pledge for Nasser to present to the terrorists for their signature:

DEBKAfile's informants saw the document and reveal it here for the first time:

1. I, the undersigned, pledge to respect the Palestinian Weapons Law of 1998 and its annexes.

(DEBKAfile: Palestinian terrorists never bothered with the law for seven years and have no intention of honoring it now.)

2. I promise to be bound by all parts of the accords signed between the Palestinian Authority and international governments or organizations.

(DEBKAfile: "Israel" is conspicuously omitted here. Palestinian suicide bombers and their controllers are hardly up to speed on international accords that even many Palestinian Authority officials have never heard of.)

3. Weapons and ammunition may not be transferred to second parties.

4. The bearer of the licensed weapon undertakes to renew his license on the date stipulated.

(DEBKAfile: No licenses were ever issued to the terrorists.)

5. The bearer of the gun license undertakes to possess no more than one weapon.

(DEBKAfile: The document does not stipulate who is to enforce this restriction. A terrorist could have 10 concealed weapons and no one would be wiser.)

6. Guns may not be carried in public places, at rallies or at celebrations.

(DEBKAfile: There is no bar to using weapons in terrorist attacks; nor do Israeli civilians or soldiers rate mention as banned targets.)

7. Weapons and ammunition must be insured against loss, damage and fire. It is forbidden to sell them.

8. The serial numbers of weapons may not be altered.

(DEBKAfile: Israel issued side-arms to Palestinian "security officers" under the 1993 Oslo interim peace accords. Their serial numbers have been changed long since by those officers in their capacity as terrorists. Palestinian-fabricated guns are not imprinted with serial numbers.)

9. The bearer of a licensed weapon promises to defer to the authority of the Palestinian interior minister.

(DEBKAfile: This clause is a general one referring to all orders handed down by the minister.)

10. Offenders against the above provisions will be subject to criminal or civil charges.

Israeli and Palestinian officials assumed that the fugitive terrorist chiefs would sign this very lax document with alacrity. After all, it contains no real limitations on the use of their weapons or their targets. They could not have been more wrong.

Yousef approved the document Monday, March 21 and asked the fugitives to come in and sign it. His was bowled over when they refused in the bluntest terms, according to DEBKAfile's counter-terrorism and Palestinian sources.

"Do they (Palestinian authorities) think we're idiots," one fugitive fumed, pointing to clause 9 on obeying the Palestinian interior minister's every order. "Once we sign this paper, Yousef will immediately order us to hand in our weapons. We are not signing, and that's final."

The upshot of the exercise: Palestinian Authority weapons licenses have been dumped on a mounting stack of accords and commitments - from the Oslo accords to the recent understandings for the transfer of West Bank cities to Palestinian security responsibility - that are not worth the paper they're printed on. Top-flight terrorist chiefs not only remain at large but are allowed to be heavily armed.

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 Naomi Ragen, March 23, 2005.

Before Congress votes more billions out of tax-payer money to be handed over to the Palestinian Authority, I hope they'll read the article below. A perfect e-mail for your own Congressman or Senator. And I'd add, if the Palestinian Authority lacks money, how about using Yassir Arafat's Swiss bank accounts? After all, we know he never earned an honest penny, so all the millions he got from the U.S. and Europe that are keeping his grieving widow ensconced in a Paris hotel suite while his "people" are penniless should be the perfect way to answer the PA's shortfall. This article was written by Caroline Glick and appeared in the Jerusalem Post, March 21, 2005.

Israelis and Palestinians alike owe a debt of gratitude to US House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Because of DeLay, last week Washington was forced, at least perfunctorily, to engage in a debate that in spite of the more than four-and-a-half-year-old Palestinian terror war, it had until now refused to countenance. It revolves around a single question: Does the Palestinian Authority need financial assistance?

Until now, it has been taken on faith that of course the PA needs money. After all, the Palestinian economy has failed. Unemployment among Palestinians reaches "all-time highs" every month. But will this economic disaster be mitigated by the infusion of billions of dollars of aid into the PA's budget as "everyone who is anyone" seems to think?

In a dispatch in last week's Jerusalem Post, Khaled Abu Toameh gave a glimpse of how the PA makes its budgetary decisions. The Palestinian Legislative Council just decided that at a time when some 80 percent of Gazans live beneath Third World poverty lines, its priority is buying Palestinian politicians new luxury cars.

Each of the PA's 26 ministers is set to receive a $76,000 Audi, while each of the 86 "mere legislators" will suffice with cars costing the PA budget $45,000 apiece. All told, the PA will spend almost $6 million on vehicles for the Palestinians most able to buy their own luxury cars. And this allocation does not include what must necessarily follow: The politicians will approve a budget for chauffeurs and receive disbursements for gas and insurance for their PA-supplied vehicles.

As well, no doubt, as in the past, senior PA officials will also receive these perks. Since on average each Palestinian ministry has four or five directors-general and another dozen deputy directors-general plus 10 to 20 department heads, it can be safely assumed that in the next few weeks the PLC, (if it hasn't already), will be approving the outlay of tens of millions of dollars for cars and drivers and gas for all of these PA VIPs.

The cars are just one tiny example of the waste, graft and purloining of PA funds by its politicians, militia commanders and bureaucrats, which have rendered the Palestinians one of the poorest Arab societies in the world today. It should be emphasized that this impoverishment has occurred during a decade which saw the 2.3 million Palestinians receive more international donor aid per capita than has ever been transferred to any group by the international community in the history of foreign aid.

WHEN DISCUSSING the question of international assistance to the PA, it is necessary to relate to two other aspects of PA spending. First is the fact that the billions of dollars that have been stolen from the PA's budget over the years were taken by all the heads of the PA - from Arafat to Abbas to current Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei to Muhammad Dahlan and Jibril Rajoub. That is, it was not only Arafat and his economic adviser Muhammad Rashid who were stealing the billions. Commenting on this state of affairs in 1996, Abbas himself told a senior UN official: "You simply have to accept the fact that we are all corrupt."

Aside from the direct involvement of Abbas and his cronies in grand larceny for their personal enrichment is the fact that over the past 11 years, since the PA was formed as a repository of international aid dollars, millions of dollars in additional funds for the PA and relief institutions have been diverted from development programs to terrorism. Even today Fatah terrorists are paid salaries from the PA. Abbas now wants to extend the terrorist support program by putting Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists on the PA payroll as part of his much-vaunted "reform" program.

Given the PA's endemic corruption - from petty theft to grand larceny - and the fact that much of the stolen monies have gone to financing terrorism, both the Palestinian people and the Israeli people owe a debt of gratitude to DeLay for his efforts over the past several weeks which prevented the transfer of $200 million in direct American government payments to the PA.

DeLay bucked heads with the Bush administration, the Israeli Embassy, AIPAC and its new partner, Peace Now, and with Jewish members of Congress in order to make sure that none of the $200 million dollars that the Bush Administration promised to the Palestinians last month will be transferred to the PA budget. All these groups believed, as Labor Party Minister Matan Vilna'i told the Forward newspaper last week, that "Abbas should have some discretion over deciding which projects are funded. It is important that he is perceived as having control - at least of some of the funds - in order to strengthen his authority - to empower him."

That is, all those who attack DeLay believe that "in the interests of peace" the US should support the continuation of the PA's kleptocratic, terror-supporting tyranny over Palestinian society.

That the Israeli government has been pushing Congress to approve direct aid to the PA is made all the more ironic by the fact that the Foreign Ministry launched a strenuous protest of the EU's announcement last week that, in spite of mountains of documentary evidence Israel provided, Brussels could not conclusively determine if some of the billions of dollars it has transferred to the PA since 1994 have been used to finance terrorism.

It is reassuring to know that in this period during which Israeli policy has become near-schizophrenic and the Bush administration appears convinced - in spite of all evidence - that Abbas is a man who can be trusted, at least one powerful man in Washington is not buying into the current peace charade.

Thank you for your courage and your wisdom, Tom DeLay.

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 IsrAlert, March 23, 2005.
This was written by Dr. Emmanuel Navon, CEO, The Business Network for International Cooperation (BNIC) - www.bnic.org. Email him at emmanuel@bnic.org

One of the central themes of Arab propaganda is that Israel is preventing peace because of its stubbornness, cruelty, and territorial greed. This line was played again this week with considerable success.

The Arab League is holding a summit in Algiers in the shadow of US pressures to put an end to Syrian occupation of Lebanon and to democratize the Arab world. George Bush is pressuring for a democratization of the Arab world because he came to realize that dictatorships, far from being a guarantee for stability, are actually the main cause of instability and terror. This is because dictators, in order to remain in power, need to redirect the frustration of their peoples toward external enemies. Dictators need external enemies and war to remain in power. For European fascist regimes, the external enemy was the "Bolshevik Threat', for Stalin and his successors, it was the "Imperialist Threat", for the Iranian Ayatollahs it is the "Great Satan" and the "Little Satan", and for the Arab World, it is the "Zionist Entity." This is why Iran and Syria support Hizballah and why Saudi Arabia exports Wahabism (most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis). On 9/11, Bush understood the kind of "stability" you get by cajoling dictators for fear of affecting oil supplies.

So now the Arab world is under pressure to democratize. Damn. Luckily, the "Zionist Entity" is always handy to divert the pressure from the Arab world to Israel. And so, instead of talking about the lack of democracy in the Arab world, let's talk about "Israeli Occupation." Yes: it's not that the Arab-Israeli conflict will continue as long as Arab dictators need the "Zionist enemy" in order to remain in power, rather if only Israel would end its occupation, there would be peace (which is why there was peace between 1948 and 1967, remember?). And so the Arab League came with a peace proposal, to which Israel responded by more settlement building in the occupied territories. The Arabs want peace, and Israel decides to build in Maale Adumim. See?

Except the "peace proposal" calls for a total and unconditional Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines and to a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem." But UN Security Council Resolution 242 says that Israel shall withdraw "from territories" not all of them, and that this withdrawal is conditional on Arab recognition of Israel. And regarding the "just solution for the Palestinian refugee problem" it is up to the Arab states to provide it: they are the ones who have been using Palestinian refugees as pawns for three generations instead of integrating them. The best way for the Arabs to prove that they are serious about peace is to solve the refugee issue instead of using the refugees as a weapon against Israel.

One word about Maale Adumin. CNN correspondent Guy Raz said this week that "According to the Geneva Convention" Maale Adumin is built on occupied land. This is untrue. Israel disputes the contention that the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention regarding occupied territories applies to the West Bank. As explained by former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Meir Shamgar, there is no de jure applicability of the Convention to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip because the Convention is based on the assumption that an occupied territory is a territory from which a recognized, established and legitimate sovereign has been ousted (which was not the case of the West Bank and Gaza).

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 Evelyn Hayes, March 23, 2005.

Imagine all the world as Gush Katif,
Gan Eden, vegetation everywhere.
No more suicide jihad
Around us only flowerings.
Imagine all the people
living as the sages did.

Imagine all the peoples,
so many species special
with their different cultures
learning about each other,
teaching each other,
embracing each other's good,
sharing so many truths,
appreciating so much diversity.

Imagine so many species,
all the varieties of Gd.
No need to be another
All plowers, planters, doers,
learners, givers,
sharing and caring,
loving and living.
Imagine all the people
turning swords to plowshares
like in Gush Katif.

You may dream, but Gush Katif is real
because the Jews are busy planting,
redeeming and redeemed.
I hope real soon you'll realize
you can't replace seeds with bombs
and keep the world a garden
and feed everyone.

Imagine all the world is Gush Katif
Plowshares, not swords; Gardens, not grenades;
Love not hate; Truth, not lies,
Loving Families not Big Bad Brothers
and Deathlords seducing kids to blow themselves apart.
Imagine all the world as Gush Katif,
with the oldest religion, that divested of evil,
respecting Their Maker, ancestors, elders, neighbors, life
and the generations as inheritors of such a life force.

Imagine all the world as Gush Katif,
lush with vegetation,plush with flowers,
bountiful with all the fruits like manna enough to be a gemach for all the poor.
Imagine all the world as Gush Katif....

Imagine all the Jewish people
living in the ways of goodness, graciousness, blessed and a blessing.
Imagine such a light for all the nations.
Imagine all the efforts for production for all,
not selection for casinos to gamble with villains using other peoples' moneys and efforts.
Imagine all the sustenance, all the love, all the history, combining past and present as a foundation for the future.
Imagine all the patriarchs, matriarchs, benefactors of mankind benefiting all human kind.
Imagine the combinations of the Jews from all the lands, from all the races in a place that
places life above the moment, the hedonism, the delusions that
evil can be good if it eliminates all good, the dream that all can be one if there is not everyone.

Imagine all the world as Gush Katif
not a world without Gush Katif....

Evelyn Hayes lives in Brooklyn, New York and can be reached by email at "haze@rcn.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Itamar Marcus and barbara Crook, March 23, 2005.

The Palestinian Authority's (PA) vast misuse of foreign financial assistance has frequently been exposed and well- publicized.

A statistic cited in Tuesday's official PA daily, Al Hayat Al Jadida, gives some indication of the scope of the corruption. According to Salam Fayad, the PA Minister of Finance, the PA was able to achieve a staggering 27% rise in its 2004 income by "fighting corruption and smuggling." This gain in income indicates how much money, including foreign aid, had previously been siphoned off by corrupt officials even before reaching the PA books.

The full scope of the corruption is far greater, however, as this figure merely represents the improvement in 2004 over 2003. In 2004 itself, corruption was still so rampant that it was a major issue in recent PA local elections, even causing the electoral defeat of the Fatah candidates. [See analysis by Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research of Khalil Shikaki, March 10-12, 2005].

Despite these crackdowns to increase money reaching the PA, Palestinians continue to complain about the questionable ways in which the PA is spending the money. An editorial in last week's Al Hayat Al Jadida criticized the PA for purchasing luxury cars costing up to $76,000 for the new PA ministers.

To see this editorial on PA corruption is a positive development, as this kind of criticism in the official PA daily was unheard-of for many years.

The following are the texts of the two articles from Al Hayat Al Jadida: 1. 27% rise in PA income - just by fighting corruption and smuggling. Fayad: "A 27% growth in the PA's income last year is the result of fighting corruption and smuggling."

Dr. Salam Fayad, Minister of Finance, yesterday informed Agence France-Presse that during 2004 there was a growth of 27% (in comparison to 2003), as a result of fighting corruption and smuggling.

He confirmed: "Despite the fact that the financial market did not expand compared with 2002 and 2003, this growth was not a result of an increase in taxes, but rather a result of a struggle against corruption and smuggling." -- [Al Hayat Al Jadida, March 22, 2005]

2. PA Ministers' cars cost $76,000 and $45,000.

"...The ministers and the members of the Legislative Council have begun receiving their new Audi cars, of the A6 and A4 models, which are expensive cars. The cost of the first model is $76,000 and the latter one is $45,000...

"How can it be that the Ministry of Finance cannot guarantee a sum of 150 shekels [US$35] for one soldier's salary, while it can guarantee a sum of $76,000 for a new car for a minister, who already has an excellent government car in very good condition. The proof that some of the older cars are still in very good condition ... is that their owners refuse to hand [the old car] in, in exchange for the new one, but rather, some of [the ministers] deceive and manipulate in order to keep both." -- [Editorial in Al Hayat Al Jadida, March 17, 2005]

Itamar Marcus is director of PMW - Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative.

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 23, 2005.


There is a widespread misconception that terrorism cannot be defeated. However, the Taliban are declining. Terrorism seemed to be winning in Columbia, when Pres. Uribe went to war against it. He cut terrorist incidents in half. Pakistan's nuclear proliferation network was disbanded. Europe is waking up to the need for tough measures against terrorism (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.25 from Wall St. J., 12/31) except if the Jews might benefit.

Israel was defeating terrorism in the P.A., but granted it a new lease on life, called "ceasefire."

Defeating terrorism does not necessarily involve economic revival, which may be counter-productive.


During a declared ceasefire, P.A. Arabs rained 36 rockets upon the small Gush Katif settlements in Gaza. Israel formally protested to the US and Egypt. But PM Sharon withdrew the checkpoint that kept the Arabs from distributing rockets throughout Gaza. It is not that he did not know this would happen. It has happened before. Question is why he lets it happen again. Some Israelis are suspicious that he gave permission for it to happen, since the large number of shells fell all within Gaza, whereas formerly some were inflicted upon the State of Israel (Arutz-7, 2/10).

Not only do ceasefires give terrorists opportunity to rearm, but terrorists keep fighting, while the Israeli government still feels constrained not to root out the terrorists. If the IDF went after those terrorists, the world would accuse Israel of breaking the ceasefire. I wouldn't be deterred by the false criticism of hypocrites and enemies, but my fellow Jewish people are. Besides, it is not clear whose side the Israeli government is on. It wants the Jews out of the Territories almost as badly as the Arabs and the US do. Hence the formal protest to the US and Egypt is risible. Does the government of Israel and do the Israeli people expect anything to come of formal protests, when the US and Egypt aid the P.A. regardless of terrorism and, at least in the case of Egypt and the arms smuggling tunnels it condones, in order for the P.A. to commit terrorism?


Israeli Pres. Katsav said that he and PM Sharon agree not to give Presidential pardons to convicted murderers among the terrorists. PM Sharon demurs. He accepts the P.A. leaders' complaints that after having dispatched the terrorists, the leaders enjoy hotel accommodations all over the world, while the terrorists sit in jail. The Victims of Terrorism Assn. rejoined that if equality is the problem, then imprison the leaders. (Indeed, apprehending the leaders is the duty of duly constituted national authority all over that world.)

Some Jews convicted of security offenses complain about not being released when the Arabs are.

Research indicates that almost half of the thousands of terrorists released by Israel in the past 20 years have resumed terrorism (Arutz-7, 2/10).


Some Israeli officers wrote to their commander that they consider the military part of the plan to abandon Gaza and northern Samaria non-Zionist, illegal, immoral, and not a fitting task of the military. They asked the commander not to have the men choose between loyalty to country and to army. The commander stripped them of their own command, on the grounds that they called for refusal of such orders. They deny having called for refusal. The Army won't listen to their denial. They find their being purged as political as the Sharon plan (Arutz-7, 2/10).

The IDF long has discriminated against its best officers for not being leftist. In this case, Sharon is purging those with Jewish loyalties rather than blind obedience to illegal and brutal orders against their own people.


Rashid Khalidi, head of Columbia's Middle E. Institute repeatedly asserts that international law accords Palestinian Arabs the right to "resist Israel's occupation." By "resistance" he means killing Israeli soldiers. (Other Arabs claim that they may kill civilians living in the Territories. Still others, or the same ones at different times, deny that any Israelis are civilians. The Arabs claim anything and everything. They like to deny their evil and inflict it, too.) He raged against an Israeli Cabinet Minister who protested his false assertion, and counter-charged Israel with unspecified war crimes.

If there were an occupation, then, according to the Geneva and Hague conventions and other treaties, only lawful combatants. i.e., soldiers openly carrying arms and wearing military insignia, have the right to attack soldiers. An Arab human bomb does not qualify (NY Sun, 3/14, Ed.). In other words, the Arabs commit war crimes, what they accuse Israel of doing.

The editorial might have added that the PLO and the P.A. has foresworn any right to combat by signing the Oslo accords, in which they pledged to resolve disputes via diplomacy, not combat.

Actually, Israel is not an occupying power, under international law, but a more legitimate claimant to the territories than the Arabs. Even if Israel were an occupier, it would be legal, having won the area in self-defense. The moral onus is on the Arabs for having committed aggression. Moreover, a victim of aggression has the right to annex territory if needed for future security. It is not convenient for the pro-Arab state Dept. to remember this part of international law. The US, like many other countries, has taken that land under that authority and sometimes without that authority.

Prof. Khalidi is waging a form of warfare, not engaging in the scholarly exchange of opinions. What then, is he doing at a supposedly great American university?


"Yediot" complains that a referendum, sought to stop PM Sharon's abandonment plan, is not democratic. It would override the Knesset's decision-making power, given to it by the people (Op. Cit.). IMRA notes that the Left did not call it undemocratic when PM Rabin suggested a referendum on Oslo. Pres. Katsav denies that a referendum would undermine the Knesset, since it would be the Knesset that votes to hold a referendum (IMRA, 2/10).

What an illogical notion of democracy that newspaper has! If sovereignty resides in the people, then a referendum is more democratic than a Knesset decision. That is a logical notion of democracy. It refers to direct democracy. It is only because it would be impractical for the people to vote on all the issues, that they elect representatives to do so for them.

The Knesset is not representative of the people, however. For one thing, Israel's last several Prime Ministers pursued a policy of appeasement of the Arabs contrary to their tough statements during the campaign. For another, the people vote for a Party, but have no say over particular Members of Knesset. Nobody in the Knesset has a district to which be responsible to.


While Israeli reports a reduction in anti-Israel agitation over the P.A. media, now that Abbas controls it, actually, P.A. defamation and threats continue. P.A. cartoons still depict PM Sharon as eating Arab children. The preachers still demand the conquest of Israel (IMRA, 2/10).

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 Steven Plaut, March 23, 2005.

1. This appeared today in Front Page Magazine (www.FrontPageMagazine.com). The original has direct links to more material.

Since November 2004, University of Michigan professor Juan Cole has served as the "Rais" (the Palestinian term for head of state) of the Middle East Studies Association. MESA is far less an academic organization for scholars than it is an anti-America and anti-Israel advocacy group, operating a nonstop jihad against Bush's war against terrorism. A professor of Modern Middle Eastern and South Asian History, Cole has been named one of the eight most biased professors in America.

Cole, who led the lobby to clear Saddam of any ties with terrorism, believes that a group of Jewish "neo-conservatives" largely runs U.S. policy toward the Middle East. His recurrent theory is that a nebulous "pro-Likud" cabal controls the U.S. government from a small number of key positions in the Executive Branch. Jonathan Calt Harris has declared: "He (Cole) is blindly anti-Israel to the point of being an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist, an apologist for radical Islam, and someone who despises American public opinion."

Some of Cole's most outrageous statements include:

"Much of the Arab world has a formal peace treaty with Israel." (Actually only Egypt and Jordan have, and the former is observed by Egypt mainly in its non-compliance.)

"Chemical weapons are not weapons of mass destruction."

Saddam Hussein never gave any real support to the Palestinian cause, and he did not pay suicide bombers to blow themselves up."

"Supporting orphans is, in any case, not the same as funding terrorism." (Cole is referring to subsidies to the families of suicide bombers by Saddam, the Saudis, and others. Of course there is nothing wrong with the PLO making Jewish children orphans in Old Juan Cole's eyes.)

Cole has also pushed the Israel divestment campaign by campus anti-Semites, supposedly because Arabs are "mistreated" by Israel. Never mind that Arabs in Israel are treated a thousand times better than are Arabs in Arab countries.

Of course, Cole's so-called passion for speaking out against human rights abuses in underdeveloped countries is rather one sided. Concerning the atrocities and massacres in Darfur, Cole has blamed it on the U.S. and the U.K., claiming the Iraq War took attention away from Sudan. Imaginary mistreatment of Arabs by Israel upsets Cole, while mass murder of hundreds of thousands of Christians and Black Muslims by Sudanese Arabs is not worth a Michigan yawn. And Cole has been notably quiet about the 200,000 people massacred in Algeria. Maybe he could not figure a way to blame the Jews or the neocons for those. Needless to say, Cole has never called for divestment from Syria until it frees Lebanon, nor from Iran or any other anti-American regime for which tenured extremists feel enlightened affection.

A while back Cole crayoned a piece in which he complained that the media are ignoring America's "historians of Iraq" - people who "know about the country in its historical context." He is referring, of course, to the academic members of MESA, who by and large hold the same opinions as Cole. Middle East Scholar Martin Kramer has shown that the dearth of real scholarship on Saddam's Iraq was due to pressure from the pro-Arab MESA professors to treat Saddam with kid gloves. Cole has endorsed conspiracy theories concerning the CIA about which one ordinarily has to go to neo-nazi web sites like RENSE to read. IraqPundit called Cole "dependably misinformed" and poked fun at him and his insane conspiracy theories, mentioning how some Iraqis refer to Cole's site as "Misinformed Comment," a play on the title of his web page "Informed Comment."

The Bay2beirut weblog writes:

"So what does Cole do? What he does best. Weave conspiracy theories that of course involve the Neocons (see that second link to IraqPundit for another one of those) on how Iraq The Model is 'suspicious' and how 'far out of the mainstream of Iraqi opinion' the posters are. Yes you heard right. An Iraqi site, whose authors have formed a pro-democracy liberal Iraqi party, based in Iraq, living through the war and its dangers (esp. when Cole's favorite, Sadr, was bullying other Iraqis and when Jihadists are killing anyone pro-American, while Cole is sitting pontificating from his Michigan office) is not reflective of Iraqi opinion, which Juan Cole is supposedly an expert on! The pretentious self-importance is nauseating.

"But there's more. This amounts to the worst 'Orientalism' (in the Saidian sense) there is. It presumes that Iraqi opinion must not only be monolithic, but it must also conform to an anti-US, pro-Arabist party line (because Arabism is the 'authentic' voice of the East)! Or, it must be what Juan Cole says it is! If not, it's an attempt 'to spread disinformation ... It is a technique made for the well-funded Neoconservatives,' i.e., not only must 'Arabs' have one opinion, but if they are dissenters then they are passive agents of manipulation by outside (Jewish) forces! (Iraq the Model was quoted by Wolfowitz a while ago in a WSJ op-ed. Well that 'proves' they're Neocons!)"

Another weblog operated by pro-democracy Iraqis, IraqtheModel, writes:

"I came across this article by Dr Juan Cole that made me feel ashamed of myself. This man who doesn't live in Iraq seems to know more about the history of Iraq than I do. In his article he was criticizing the westerns, journalists in particular, for making judgments without knowing much about Iraq's history, which I must admit is true..... What Dr. Cole was trying to tell us, as you can see in his article, is that Fallujah is celebrated in Iraq's history as a symbol for the large rebellion/revolution against the British back in 1920."

The blogger then notes that no such incident ever took place. Fallujah was under the control of the British army the whole time.

Cole was one of the people spreading around anti-Semitic blood libels about Israel before the invasion of Iraq, claiming that Israel was going to commit atrocities and mass murders against Palestinians as soon as the Allies landed in Iraq. He once wrote that Larry Franklin had "a Brooklyn accent" even though "he himself was not Jewish." Nevertheless he was close to Wolfowitz and "the predominantly Jewish Neoconservatives" and thus he was part of "a clever scheme." Cole also cast suspicions on Sephardic Jews for possibly being infiltrated by the Mossad.

Cole responds to criticism of his fanaticism and doubts about his scholarship by groups like Campus Watch or individuals like Martin Kramer, with ad hominem shrieks, threats, and insults. He routinely sends letters to people like Daniel Pipes and Martin Kramer, threatening to sue them for criticizing his writings and statements. He sees Jewish cabals manipulating the Pentagon and other organs of power, including when Arabs whom he dislikes are involved. He has written: "The FBI should investigate how Phares, an undistinguished (Arab) academic with links to far rightwing Lebanese groups and the Likud clique, became the 'terrorism analyst' at MSNBC."

Andrew Sullivan, who is not Jewish, thinks Cole is an anti-American crackpot. He adds: "If you ask me, that's why the far-left Middle East academic elite has had so little influence over this debate. Their shrillness crowds out their expertise."

Cole himself was targeted by the Middle East Media Research Institute, which threatened to sue him for lies he published about MEMRI's finances - claims which, according to MEMRI's president Yigal Carmon, were factually untrue. Cole claimed that MEMRI was funded "to the tune of $60 million a year" (an absurd figure), that MEMRI is biased, and that it is somehow linked to the Likud party. MEMRI demanded a retraction on all three points, and threatened Cole with possible legal action if he fails to do so.

Lately scholar Cole has turned to historic revisionism and simple misrepresentation to serve his political agenda when it comes to Lebanon. He tells his readers (yes, he has more than one reader) that, first, "The Israelis expelled 100,000 or so Palestinians north to Lebanon in 1948." In actual fact, they lost their war to annihilate Israel and fled at the orders of the Arab militia commanders.

Cole went on to say, "The prospect of a PLO-dominated Lebanon scared the Syrians. Yasser Arafat would have been able to provoke battles with Israel at will, into which Syria might be drawn. Hafez al-Assad determined to intervene to stop it. First he sought a green light from the Israelis through Kissinger. He got it." The Syrians were hardly upset about the prospect of PLO power in Syria, which they had long promoted and built up. Some of the PLO's component organizations had their offices in Damascus. Kissinger did not invite the Syrians to annex Lebanon and the civil war was only the pretext for Assad to pursue his imperial ambitions regarding Lebanon.

Then Cole adds, "In 1982 the Israelis mounted an unprovoked invasion of Lebanon as Ariel Sharon sought to destroy the remnants of the weakened PLO in Beirut." Unprovoked apparently means that since terrorists operating against Israel freely in Lebanon, firing missiles and rockets and mortars, only killed Jewish Untermenschen, these murders and aggressions should not count.

Syria's occupation Lebanon was part of Syria's official doctrine of establishing a "Greater Syria," which holds that all of Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon rightfully belong to Syria and are under temporary alien control. Syrian maps often portray all of Israel and Lebanon as southern Syria. Cole feins to be unaware of that doctrine, while he routinely refers to the "policies and decisions of Tel Aviv." Seems he has never discovered that Israel's capital city is Jerusalem. Tel Aviv is where you can go to the beach.

But Old Juan Cole's biggest fear these days is that President Bush might get some of the credit for Syria's sudden pusillanimous behavior. Cole writes, "I don't think Bush had anything much to do with the current Lebanese national movement except at the margins." Of course, we would not want anyone to credit Bush's removal of the Taliban and of the Ba'athists in Iraq with spurring calls for democracy in the Middle East.

It is very common among leftwing extremists to find that their entire world-view is based on reversing cause and effect. Hiroshima was the cause of Pearl Harbor, for example. Comrade Cole seems to have based much of his "academic" career on such inversions. Consider his diatribe on the History News network, "Want to End Terrorism? End Foreign Occupations." In it, he claims that Iraqi terrorism is a byproduct of Allied "occupation" of Iraq, and also that Palestinian terrorism is a byproduct of Israel's occupation of "Palestinian lands."

Here is Cole at his most vociferous and least scholarly:

"You want to end terrorism? End unjust military occupations. By all means have Syria conduct an orderly withdrawal from Lebanon if that is what the Lebanese public wants. But Israel needs to withdraw from the Golan Heights, which belong to Syria, as well. The Israeli military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank must be ended."

Palestinian anti-Jewish terrorism actually began in the 1920s, back when "Palestine" was governed by the British, under a League of Nations Mandate, after Britain freed it from its Turkish colonial rulers. Palestinian anti-civilian atrocities escalated in the 1950s, conducted by "fedayeen" terrorists sponsored by Egypt and other Arab fascist regimes. All of this was many years before the Six Day War of 1967. In other words, neither Gaza nor the West Bank were "occupied" by Israel when Palestinian terrorism developed and escalated. Instead, they were occupied by Egypt and Jordan (the latter illegally holding the West Bank). Egypt and Jordan could have set up a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip had they wished to, any time between 1949 and 1967, without the need even to ask Israel what it thought.

Cole likes to denounce Israel for its "land grab.? Let us note that this is the same Israel that is the size of Massachusetts and whose land in total is far less than 1 percent of the land controlled by the 22 Arab states which surround it. This is the same Cole who refers to Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel, while the suburbs around the actual capital, Jerusalem, were gained by "illicit land grabs." As far as we know, Cole has never denounced Ann Arbor as an illicit grab of Indian lands nor offered to restore his own real property there to those Native tribes from whom he grabbed it.

Cole routinely refers to Middle East terrorists as "guerillas." He defends Hizbollah thusly:

"It (Hizbollah) cannot simply be ignored or dismissed as a terrorist organization. Hizbullah isn't that different from the Dawa Party or the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which the US just helped to power in Iraq."

In another post, Cole says:

"When Ariel Sharon sends American-made helicopter gunships and F-16s to fire missiles into civilian residences or crowds in steets, as he has done more than once, then he makes the United States complicit in his war crimes and makes the United States hated among friends of the Palestinians. And this aggression and disregard of Arab life on the part of the proto-fascist Israeli Right has gotten more than one American killed, including American soldiers."

Once again, Cole is reversing cause and effect. He absolutely refuses to consider the possibility that Israel's gunships were operating because the PLO was sheltering, sponsoring and assisting suicide bombers to conduct mass murders of Israeli civilians, many of them children.

In Cole's view, these choppers were just shooting for absolutely no reason, just because the "proto fascists" in Israel, who were not elected the same way Cole's democratic Assads were, felt like it. It never occurs to Cole that, had the PLO complied with its Oslo obligations and prevented terror attacks on Israel, no Israeli choppers would be targeting Palestinian terror leaders at all, and no Palestinian civilians would get hurt in the aftermath.

In the same article, Cole cites as his scholarly source Uri Avnery, who in fact is an Israeli cross between Larry Flint and Lord Haw Haw, an anti-Israel street protesters with no academic credentials, which is why Alexander Cockburn also uses him. Perhaps the University of Michigan's Department of Middle East Studies should be renamed the Department of Duh.

Now if we were to test the Cole Doctrine on history, it fails. US occupation of Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Diego Garcia, and Samoa have never produced terror. Soviet occupation of the Baltics and Siberia did not either. Romanian occupation of Transylvania has not. Italian occupation of Sardinia has not. Spain's occupation of enclaves on the North Moroccan coast has not. Nor has China's occupation of its Moslem colonies and Tibet. Nor Turkey's "occupation" of Syria's Alexandretta region.

On the other hand, there are lots of examples of terrorism arising where there is no occupation. The Moslem terror against Malaysia, Thailand, and Algeria, the Bader-Meinhof gang, the Weathermen, the Hizbollah terror against Israel AFTER it fully withdrew from Lebanese soil, the Michigan militia that bombed Oklahoma City, all these are examples of terror in the absence of occupation.

Cole is incapable of placing any "occupation" in historic context, nor of asking what produces occupation. In fact, Israel's "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza (which are more "Jewish Lands" than they ever were "Palestinian", in any case) was a consequence of Arab terror and aggression against Israel, not their cause. The Arabs attacked Israel in 1967 when it was not occupying anything except Israel. (Why will they be excused if we suspect that Cole regards Tel Aviv and Haifa as illicit occupations of Palestinian lands as well.)

The West Bank and Gaza were "occupied" in Israel's counterattack against aggression. The Golan Heights had belonged to Syria before 1967, although its claims to the area were dubious even back then; the only use the Syrians made of the Golan Heights was to bombard Israeli civilians in Galilee. Israel's annexation of the Golan after the war is also one of those "occupations" that Abu Cole thinks must be ended.

Cole says, "People need a sense of autonomy and dignity, and occupation produces helplessness and humiliation. Humiliation is what causes terrorism." Actually, occupation is a consequence of fascist aggression, not its cause. The American occupation of Germany and Japan was just like the Israeli "occupation" of "Palestine." The difference is that the Germans and Japanese underwent denazification. So terror is in fact the consequence of an absence of denazification.

Cole has consistently opposed any form of anti-terrorist campaign by the US, other than capitulation to terrorist demands. He denied Saddam had any terror connections at all, saying: "The idea that Iraq is deliberately harboring Islamist terrorists is absurd, since the Baathists would be afraid of them themselves."

Here is the Cole take on bin Laden and 9-11, taken from the pro-al-Qaeda "antiwar.com" web site:

"The attack on the World Trade Center was exactly analogous to Pearl Harbor. The Japanese generals had to neutralize the U.S. fleet so that they could sweep into Southeast Asia and appropriate Indonesian petroleum.... Likewise, al-Qaeda was attempting to push the United States out of the Middle East so that Egypt, Jordan, Israel and Saudi Arabia would become more vulnerable to overthrow, lacking a superpower patron. Secondarily, the attack was conceived as revenge on the United States and American Jews for supporting Israel and the severe oppression of the Palestinians.... Ironically, however, the Bush administration then went on to invade Iraq for no good reason."

He then adds:

"Al-Qaeda has succeeded in several of its main goals. It had been trying to convince Muslims that the United States wanted to invade Muslim lands, humiliate Muslim men, and rape Muslim women. Most Muslims found this charge hard to accept. The Bush administration's Iraq invasion, along with the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal, was perceived by many Muslims to validate bin Laden's wisdom and foresight.... The U.S. is not winning the war on terror. Al-Qaeda also has by no means won. But across a whole range of objectives, al-Qaeda has accomplished more of its goals than the U.S. has of its."

Cole's atrociously written rants are not simply the proliferation of shallow and wacky ideas about the Middle East. Cole is a horrendous writer in general, who can barely construct a proper sentence, and sometimes spouts juvenile nonsense about other things besides the Middle East. Consider the following:

"Before the rise of the neocons in the 1970s, it was well understood by minority communities in the United States that they had to work against bigotry in general. Because if an atmosphere was created or allowed to persist that allowed one minority group to be targeted, it had the potential to boomerang on the others, as well. Racialist hatred is no respecter (sic) of persons. Now I perceive a cockiness among some minorities in the U.S., such that they - former victims of discrimination - advocate racial profiling and discrimination, even demonization, for some. I solemnly predict that if they continue on this path, they will eventually come deeply to regret it, as shall we all."

Cole recently went ballistic in response to comments by Fred Ikle in the Wall Street Journal, who wrote:

"Those who out of cowardice use their wealth to pay danegeld to the preachers of hate and destruction must be taught that this aggression will boomerang. A nuclear war stirred up against the 'infidels' might end up displacing Mecca and Medina with two large radioactive craters."

Cole denounced Ikle as "racist, ignorant and monstrous. Why aren't Paul Gigot and James Taranto forced to resign over this monstrosity?" My guess is that Ikle can correctly name the capital of Israel, unlike Cole.

Moslem atrocities are not racist and monstrous, in Cole's opinion. He writes, "What is the difference between talking about nuking Mecca for political purposes and Mulla Omar's destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan, which was rightly denounced as barbaric? The difference is that no human beings were vaporized at Bamiyan." In other words, non-nuclear atrocities just do not count. Why hasn't Cole been fired by U-M because of his anti-Semitism?

To sum things up, the entire thesis concerning "occupation" and terror by the learned Cole is a lie. Cole is incapable of going beyond his bumper-stick-depth methodology of analysis by slogan. After all, if the Russian occupation of Afghanistan triggered terror, as did Indian "occupation" of Kashmir, this must mean that Middle East terror is a desperate act of protest against US and Israeli occupiers and helicopters. Cole's claims to being an expert on the Middle East are about as persuasive as Ward Churchill's claims to being an Indian chief.

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 Boris Celser, March 23, 2005.

Daniel Pipes is absolutely correct when he disagrees with the US Administration tentative steps to engage Hamas and Hizbullah in the political process pending their making a few changes. Arafat and the PA did not worry too much about fixing potholes, either, while the Palestinian charter still calls for Israel's destruction.

The explanation for the new American position, however, is remarkably simple and even overdue. Legacy! Any leader in any country wants to leave a legacy, but most can only do so internally. America, being a superpower, allows a President to pick and choose. And they prefer to choose Israel. It didn't quite happen with Bush Sr. because he wasn't reelected. Clinton, after all the scandals, did his utmost to get Barak to give up the whole farm, lock, stock, and barrel. Had Arafat signed, Israel would have been in an even worse mess today, but Clinton would have claimed victory, regardless. Blame can always be shifted to others in the future.

Now that George Bush has got his second term, it is time to take stock and plan for his historical legacy. There are also books to be written by him and Rice, money to be made, and maybe a Nobel Peace Prize. The Iraq situation won't be concluded by the time he leaves office, if ever. No victory to be claimed there. The Arabs won't democratize because tyrants are not fools and know that in two years Bush will be a lame duck.

Therefore, the Administration's glory can only happen at Israel's expense. It is a risk free strategy for Bush. If Hamas and Hizbullah continue with their current policies, the US pressure on Israel to create a Palestinian state by the end of 2008 will continue unabated. If the two terrorist organizations pretend to reform, the US can embrace them and put even more pressure on Israel to capitulate, so that Bush can achieve what Clinton couldn't.

The Israelis will be the ones paying the ultimate price, but it won't be Bush's fault if the sides can't get along afterwards, will it?

Since I have no information that Bush doesn't, I invite the readers to take a look at the Memri TV web site, video clip #570 - "Anti-Zionist Rabbis Join Hizbullah and Hamas At Beirut Pro-Palestinian Convention", and draw their own conclusions. A picture is worth 1000 words, George Bush.

This is a link to the video - note that the entire address has been split and must be combined to get you to the video: http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/ video_480x360.asp?ClipMediaID=51575&ak=null

Below is the article by Daniel Pipes, who is director of the Middle East Forum (www.mef.org). It appeared as an opinion piece in the Jerusalem Post yesterday (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1111461690053&p=1006953079865). You can comment on the article at http://www.DanielPipes.org

If al-Qaida renounced terrorism, would the US government welcome its running candidates in American elections? Had the Nazis denounced violence, would Hitler have become an acceptable chancellor for Germany? Not likely, because the tactics of al-Qaida and the Nazis matter less than their goals.

Similarly, Hizbullah and Hamas are unacceptable because of their goals. These organizations are important elements of the Islamist movement that seeks to create a global totalitarian order along the lines of what has already been created in Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan under the Taliban. They see themselves as part of a cosmic clash between Muslims and the West in which the victor dominates the world.

Washington, trying to be consistent in its push for democracy, prefers to ignore these goals and instead endorses involvement by Hizbullah and Hamas in the political process, pending their making some small changes.

These signals began last week when President George W. Bush stated that although Hizbullah is "a terrorist organization," he hopes it will change that designation "by laying down arms and not threatening peace." White House spokesman Scott McClellan then elaborated on this comment by specifying the two alternatives: "organizations like Hizbullah have to choose, either you're a terrorist organization or you're a political organization."

Bush himself explained further what he meant a day later, presenting elections as a method to shed the terrorist designation: "I like the idea of people running for office. There's a positive effect when you run for office. Maybe some will run for office and say, vote for me, I look forward to blowing up America. I don't know, I don't know if that will be their platform or not. But I don't think so. I think people who generally run for office say, vote for me, I'm looking forward to fixing your potholes, or making sure you got bread on the table."

Hamas, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice noted, could also evolve in the right direction once it enters the democratic process:

"When people start getting elected and have to start worrying about constituencies and have to start worrying not about whether their fire-breathing rhetoric against Israel is being heard, but about whether or not that person's child down the street is able to go to a good school or that road has been fixed or life is getting better... things start to change."

The theory implied here is that running for office - with its emphasis on such mundane matters as fixing potholes and providing good schools - will temper Hizbullah and Hamas. Count me skeptical.

The record does not support such optimism. When politically adept totalitarians win power democratically, they do fix potholes and improve schools - but only as a means to transform their countries in accordance with their utopian visions. This generalization applies most clearly to the historical cases (Adolf Hitler in Germany after 1933, Salvador Allende in Chile after 1970), but it also appears valid for the current ones (Khaleda Zia in Bangladesh since 2001, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey since 2002).

Then there is the matter of their undemocratic intentions. Josef Goebbels explained in 1935 that the Nazis used democratic methods "only in order" to gain power. Looking at Islamists, then-assistant secretary of state for the Middle East Edward Djerejian explained in 1992, "While we believe in the principle of 'one person, one vote,' we do not support 'one person, one vote, one time.'" Khomeini's Iran indicates that Islamists do manipulate elections to stay in power.

Washington should take a principled stand that excludes from the democratic process not just terrorists but also totalitarians using the system to get into power and stay there. It is not enough for Islamist organizations to renounce violence; being irredeemably autocratic, they must be excluded from elections.

In a famed Supreme Court dissent in 1949, the eminent justice Robert H. Jackson argued for the arrest of a neo-Nazi rabble-rouser in Chicago on the grounds that not doing so "will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact." The same imperative for self-protection applies also to international politics.

Even if Hizbullah and Hamas promise a change in tactics, the US government - or for that matter, Israel and other Western states - should not accept them as legitimate political parties.

Boris Celser can be reached by email at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, March 22, 2005.

The first essay below is from the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org/). It was excerpted from a new book, "Roadmap to Nowhere", Balfour Books, www.balfourbooks.net, written by Dr. Yitzchak Ben Gad, Israeli Consul General, 2005

The second essay is from the Citizen Soldier website (http://www.citizensoldier.org/koranone.html).

Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), the great Arab historian, in The Introduction to History, defines the loss of collective consciousness of the children of Israel, their dispersion throughout the world, their alienation from the rest of humanity, and their living a life of disgrace and degradation. He even claims that the Jews were infected with such evil character traits as corruption and deceitful plotting.

As a result of their rejection of him, Mohammed turned against the Jews and their religion and he never forgave them. Mohammed's angry reactions to the Jews were recorded in the Koran, giving millions of Moslems throughout history "divinely based" antipathy to the Jews.

Question: What did Mohammed change?

Answer: First and most significantly, he changed Abraham from a Jew to a Moslem: "Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian. [He] surrendered himself to Allah. Surely the men who are nearest to Abraham are those that follow him, this Prophet" (Koran 3:67-68)

Question: What were his views about certain Jewish Laws?

Answer: Mohammad said that the Torah laws had been given to the Jews as punishment for their sins: Because of their iniquity, we forbade the Jews good things, which were formerly allowed them. (Koran 4:160).

Q: What was his accusation against the Jews?

A: Mohammed charged the Jews with falsifying their Bible by deliberately omitting prophecies of his (Mohammed's) coming. Example: In the Koran (2:129) Mohammed has Abraham mouth a prophecy of his coming. Mohammed charged that the Jews extinguished the light of Allah (Koran 9:32) by having removed such prophecies from their Bible.

Q: How else does Mohammed accuse the Jews?

A: Mohammed asserted that Jews, like Christians, were not true monotheists, a charge he substantiated by claiming that they believed the prophet Ezra to be the son of God. "And the Jews say that Ezra is the Son of God ... And Allah fights against them. How perverse are they?" (Koran 9:30)

Q: What can be concluded?

A: These anti-Jewish fabrications, articulated by Mohammed as reactions to the Jews' rejection of him, have ever since been regarded by Moslems as God's word. As such, they have formed the basis of Moslem anti-Semitism to the present day. Though originally directed against specific Jews at a specific time, these statements often have been understood by succeeding generations to refer to all Jews at all times.

By the Jews remaining Jews they constituted a living refutation of Mohammad and Islam. Thus under Islam, Jew-hatred was ultimately Judaism-hatred. Any Jew who converted to Islam was accepted an equal. Important to note is the fact that Christians under Moslem rule fared little better. Moslems and their laws generally dealt harshly with Christians and Jews.

(The Moslem legal code prescribed the treatment of Jews and Christians as Dhimmis, a well-defined form of second-class citizenship, which is discussed later in the book.)

"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him and in the hereafter he will be in ranks of those who have lost." Koran, Sura 3: 85

Suras commanding war against unbelievers appear throughout the Koran, but the one that is short and clear is 9:73: "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Dawood)

"O Prophet, struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be thou harsh with them; their refuge is Gehenna - an evil homecoming" (Arberry - the word translated "struggle" is the Arabic word "Jihad" - holy war)." O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end." (Pickthall).


Muslims are also promised heaven if they fight for the "cause of Allah" in many places. Suras 9:86-90 are clear:

"Whenever a Chapter (Sura) was revealed, saying: 'Believe in God and fight alongside His apostle," the rich among them excused themselves to you, saying 'Leave us with those who are to stay behind.' They were content to be with those who stayed behind: a seal was set upon their hearts, leaving them bereft of understanding. But the Apostle and the men who shared his faith fought with their goods and with their persons. These shall be rewarded with good things. These shall surely prosper. God has prepared for them gardens watered by running streams (the Koran's metaphor for heaven), in which they shall abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph.

Some Arabs of the desert turned up with excuses, begging leave to stay behind; while those who denied God and His apostle remained idle at home. A woeful scourge shall fall on those of them that disbelieved." (Dawood).

"And when a sura is sent down, saying, 'Believe in God, and struggle with His Messenger,' the affluent among them ask leave of thee, saying, 'Let us be with the tarriers.' They are well-pleased to be with those behind, and a seal has been set upon their hearts, so they understand not. But the Messenger, and the believers with him, have stuggled with their possessions and their selves, and those - for them await the good things; those - they are the prosperers. God has prepared for them gardens underneath which rivers flow, therein to dwell forever; that is the mighty triumph.

And the Bedouins came with their excuses, asking for leave; those who lied to God and His Messenger tarried; there shall befall the unbelievers of them a painful chastisement." (Arberry).

"009.086 And when a surah is revealed (which saith): Believe in Allah and strive along with His messenger, the men of wealth among them still ask leave of thee and say: Suffer us to be with those who sit (at home).

009.087 They are content that they should be with the useless and their hearts are sealed, so that they apprehend not.

009.088 But the messenger and those who believe with him strive with their wealth and their lives. Such are they for whom are the good things. Such are they who are the successful.

009.089 Allah hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide. That is the supreme triumph.

009.090 And those among the wandering Arabs who had an excuse came in order that permission might be granted them. And those who lied to Allah and His messenger sat at home. A painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve." (Pickthall)


TERROR is a pervasive theme in Koran - inflicted both by Allah and by Muslims on those who don't believe. Here are several suras.

Sura 3:151 - aimed at Christians who believe in the Trinity:"We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. They serve other deities besides God for whom He has revealed no sanction. The fire shall be their home; evil indeed is the dwelling of the evil doers." (Dawood).

"We will cast into the hearts of the unbelievers terror, for that they have associated with God that for which He send down never authority; their lodging shall be the Fire; evil is the lodging of the evildoers." (Arberry)

" We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners, for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong-doers." (Pickthall)

This is Allah talking here. My 1967 Encyclopedia Americana says "On many issues the Koran is unclear or incomplete, and on others...it is sharply contradictory."

The biggest contradiction in Koran is that while it claims God had no son (no partners with Allah) it mentions the Holy Spirit and is written in the first person plural - "We".

Sura 7:4, again Allah casting terror:

"How many cities have We destroyed! In the night Our scourge fell upon them, or at midday, when they were drowsing." (Dawood)

"How many a city We have destroyed! Our might came upon it at night, or while they took their ease in the noontide...." (Arberry)

"How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them." (Pickthall)

Sura 59:2 - here Allah and Muslims cause terror:

"It was He that drove the unbelievers among the People of the Book (Koran's phrase for Jews and Christians) out of their dwellings into the first exile. You did not think that they would go; and they, for their part, fancied that their strongholds would protect them from God. but god's scourge fell upon them whence they did not expect it, casting such terror into their hearts that their dwellings were destroyed by their own hands as well as by the faithful (Muslims). Learn from their example, you that have eyes." (Dawood)

"It is He who expelled from their habitations the unbelievers among the People of the Book at the first mustering. You did not think that they would go forth, and they thought that their fortresses would defend them against god; then God came upon them from whence they had not reckoned, and He cast terror into their hearts as they destroyed their houses with their own hands, and the hands of the believers; therefore take heed, you who have eyes." (Arberry).

"He it is Who hath caused those of the People of the Scripture who disbelieved to go forth from their homes unto the first exile. Ye deemed not that they would go forth, while they deemed that their strongholds would protect them from Allah. But Allah reached them from a place whereof they recked not, and cast terror in their hearts so that they ruined their houses with their own hands and the hands of the believers. So learn a lesson, O ye who have eyes!" (Pickthall). (highlighted by Isralert)


SLAYING UNBELIEVERS is specifically commanded, though they can also be made slaves and their property can be confiscated. Non-muslims have no legal rights in Muslim societies. If unbelievers are not killed, they can be made to pay "Jizya," a tax to buy back rights like owning property, working, or going to school.

Sura 2:191: "Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed. But do not fight them within the precincts of the Holy Mosque unless they attack you there; if they attack you put them to the sword. thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they mend their ways (become Muslims), know that God is forgiving and merciful." (Dawood)

"And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them - such is the recompense of unbelievers - but if they give over, surely God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate." (Arberry)

"And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers." (Pickthall).



The Koran is perverse, but it is logical. The Koran teaches that unbelievers are sinners, and every day they live they pile up more sins. Because Muslims believe that Allah will judge people by weighing their good deeds against their bad deeds, they believe that by forcing non-Muslims to become Muslims at the point of a sword they are actually doing non-Muslims a favor - "saving their souls" as it were. But because unbelief is a sin - idolatry - it must be wiped out wherever it is. This effectively means that the Muslims goal is to spread Islam to everyone who will accept it and kill everyone who won't.

Sura 2:193: "Fight against them (non-Muslims) until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil-doers." (Dawood)

"Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is God's; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers." (Arberry)

"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers." (Pickthall)

Sura 2:216 "Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it. But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a thing although it is bad for you. God knows, but you know not." (Dawood)

"Prescribed for you is fighting, though it be hateful to you. Yet it may happen that you will hate a thing which is better for you; and it may happen that you will love a thing which is worse for you; God knows, and you know not." (Arberry)

"Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not." (Pickthall)

Sura 2:217-218 - we can well expect attacks during Ramadam.

"They ask you about the sacred month. Say: 'To fight in this month is a grave offence; but to debar others from the path of God, to deny Him, and to expel His worshippers from the Holy Mosque, is far more grave in His sight. Idolatry is more grievous than bloodshed.' They will not cease to fight against you until they force you to renounce your faith - if they are able. But whoever of you recants and dies an unbeliever, his works shall come to nothing in this world and in the world to come. Such men shall be the tenants of Fire, wherein they shall abide for ever. Those that have embraced the Faith, and those that have fled their land and fought for the cause of God, may hope for God's mercy. God is forgiving and merciful." (Dawood)

"They will question thee concerning the holy month, and fighting in it. Say: 'Fighting in it is a heinous thing, but to bar from God's way, and disbelief in Him, and the Holy Mosque, and to expel its people from it - that is more heinous in God's sight; and persecution is more heinous than slaying.' They will not cease to fight with you, till they turn you from your religion, if they are able; and whosoever of you turns from his religion, and dies disbelieving - their works have failed in this world and the next; those are the inhabitants of the Fire; therein they shall dwell forever. But the believers, and those who emigrate and struggle in God's way - they have hope of God's compassion; and God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate." (Arberry)

"They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for persecution is worse than killing. And they will not cease from fighting against you till they have made you renegades from your religion, if they can. And whoso becometh a renegade and dieth in his disbelief: such are they whose works have fallen both in the world and the Hereafter. Such are rightful owners of the Fire: they will abide therein." (Pickthall)

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, March 22, 2005.

I must admit; I try to stay disengaged from the news. Unfortunately it's hard to do. Like the bird with his head in the sand to avoid air pollution but gets sick from the contaminated dirt, try as I might to avoid it, I am forced to listen when traveling/tremping in vehicles not my own.

Just today, for instance, I heard a newscast that put thoughts in my head that could get me arrested. The reporters were reporting, with such admiration, how the government was meticulously planning how to disengage Jews from their homes in Gush Katif and Northern Shomron. They stressed the professionally detailed procedures that not only included the humane removal of animals, but the timing of the funerals for all the bodies that will be ripped out of their graves and transferred to new ones in other cemeteries. The staff qualified to do this very sensitive job is limited in the amount they can handle per day. Remember that this must be dignified; respect the dead.

These newscasters are so professional, so disengaged from the strong emotions troubling others. They mentioned the debates among the government officials as to what to do to the homes, stores, schools, factories and other buildings that would remain in the Judenrein territories. Apparently the experts believe that it would be best to destroy them totally, like what was done to Yamit and the agricultural communities that populated the Sinai until Menachem Begin decided to give it all away.

Do you know why these buildings must be razed totally? Did you think like I did that it was to keep the terrorists from enjoying them? No, I was wrong. It was to keep the refugees from having something to return to.

And then they discussed the expensive infrastructure "the Israelis" built in the area. Yes, the broadcast was in Hebrew, Kol Yisrael, and they used the words: "HaYisraelim," "the Israelis." Totally disengaged from being personally connected with Israel.

I felt like I was participating in an episode of "Twilight Zone."

I knew that the media and many of the politicians were disengaged from our Land, but I still thought that they considered themselves Israelis. Apparently I'm naive. This is just a few days after their pro-disengagement demonstration where the slogan "A settler is not my brother," was prominently heard. "The demonstration was planned in conjunction with the Prime Minister's strategic advisors. They examined promotional messages, the wording of signs and the language used in advertising..." (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw= pro+disengagement+demonstration&itemNo=553715) Apparently, it wasn't an easy demonstration to pull off, since even their most prominent fans preferred a soccer match.

Believe me this isn't a Purim Spiel.

Just like no fiction can beat the surprises, twists and ironies of true life, today's news reports are traumatic in their unexpectedness. "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." Mark Twain, http://www.bartleby.com/66/33/62133.html Even when we think that G-d has deserted us, He's here, behind the scenes. But like the story of Purim, there may be things He's waiting for us to do.

NaHafoch'hu! Let the Evil be reversed!

Chag Purim Sameach!

This is Musing #106. 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 Women in Green, March 22, 2005.
This was written by Rabbi Dov Begon, who is the head of the Yeshiva Machon Meir, in Jerusalem, Israel. (www.machonmeir.org.il)

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik penned an article entitled "Catharsis" in his book "Five Sermons". In this article the Rabbi distinguishes between two traits: gevurah and koach. The English translation of both is "might." The word koach in Hebrew connotes physical might; whereas the word gevurah in Hebrew connotes spiritual might.

A "gibbor" is someone who possesses spiritual strength. The rabbis in "Ethics of the Fathers" ask, who is a "gibbor" - They responded: "He who conquers his evil impulse." The physically strong person does not need physical might (gevurah) when he fights those weaker than himself. By contrast, when the physically weak person fights someone physically stronger than himself, he demonstrates spiritual strength (gevurah). Spiritual strength (gevurah) means continuing to struggle even when the chances of victory seem very slim, when logic dictates that one should surrender, since the battle seems lost. Spiritual strength (gevurah) means attempting the impossible. On Chanukah and Purim we bless G-d in the prayer concerning miracles that occurred in the past to the Jewish People, "For the miracles, for the redemption, for the mighty spiritual deeds, and the victories, and for the battles which You performed for our ancestors in those days, at this time." The miracle is that spiritual strength overcame physical strength.

Rabbi Soloveitchik in his above book continues as follows:

"If you ask me who is a Jew, I will answer you: whoever leads a valorous life is a Jew. In my eyes, a Jew is someone who is willing to be a hero, to always be in the minority, to be ready to fight. Part of what makes a Jew special is his living a heroic life ... It means sometimes fighting alone on a dark night, as when 'Jacob was left alone and struggled with a man until the dawn (Genesis 32: 25).' This represents the inner content of the Jew ... that Jewish life means leading a life of valor."

Indeed, Rabbi Joseph Karo begins his Law Code ("Shulchan Aruch") with the concept of spiritual strength (gevurah), saying: "A person should show the valor of a lion when he gets up in the morning to serve his Creator."

Today the inhabitants of Gush Katif and Samaria, the settlers, those who love the Land of Israel and are faithful to it - they are the heroes of our generation. The settlers stand fearless before Prime Minister Sharon despite his brutal efforts to trample them. All the power is in his hands - the army, the police, the legal system, the media and the country's wealth. He is using strong-arm tactics against the settlers, the people of faith, Torah, and action. These people are devoted and faithful to their Torah, their People, and their Land.

These are fearless people, for the Arabs have shed their blood like water, and many of them have died martyrs' deaths, sanctifying G-d's Name. Many of them have left behind entire families of widows and orphans who are continuing to hold on, out of faith and love for the Land. They are in Kfar Darom, Netzarim, Netzer Chazani,

Gan Ohr, Neve Dekalim, Itamar, Hebron, Yitzhar, Har Berachah, Psagot, Beit El, Ofra and many dozens of other settlements. These citizens, widows and orphans, holding on with their fingernails to our beloved Land, do not have Sharon's brutal strong-arm tactics, but they do possess valor, love and faith. No force in the world will be able to break their spirits and their faith.

Most certainly, victory will go to those who possess faith. Little David, the believer, beat the brutal Goliath. For thousands of years, all the brutal people from within and without the Jewish People did not succeed in breaking our faith and valor, our living connection to the Land of Israel.

The marvelous settlers bring merit to the entire Jewish People. It has been written about them: "Those who are insulted without insulting in return; those who hear themselves humiliated without responding; those who act out of love and rejoice in suffering, are the living fulfillment of the verse, 'Those that love Him are as the sun when it goes forth in all its might' (Judges 5: 31; Shabbat 80b)."

Residents of Judea and Samaria ... how fortunate you are! How good is your lot! Be strong and courageous, my brothers, valiant heroes.

We look forward to complete salvation, may it be soon and in our day.

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 Aryeh Zelasko, March 22, 2005.

Well I guess it's official. Israel is no longer a sovereign nation but once again under a "Mandate." Decisions as to what an Israeli cabinet minister can or can not call himself or write are decided by the US Ambassador, the UN has extraterritorial rights in Jerusalem and the Waq decides what is Jewish history and religious practices. This is from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78832)

Attorney-General Menachem Mazuz wishes to overturn a Jerusalem District Court ruling - because it may not sit well with the United Nations.

The incident began when a man named Reuven Paul, who owns a property in eastern Jerusalem, turned to the District Court with a complaint against the United Nations for housing its personnel on his property. The Court held hearings on the matter, at the end of which it ruled that the UN must either evacuate the premises or pay Paul a sum of two million dollars.

When the Foreign Ministry staffers heard of the ruling, they realized with concern that it might impair Israel's relationship with the UN. The Ministry asked the Court to freeze the ruling so that it could be appealed, and the Court agreed.

Attorney-General Menachem Mazuz did not suffice with this, however. He presented the court with documents signed by representatives of the State of Israel granting the UN immunity from Israeli court decisions. Mazuz said that the ruling against the UN should therefore be annulled altogether, and he asked the Court to do so.

The District Court judge reviewed the case, and ruled that the UN's immunity does not include private claims against the UN.

But Mazuz did not give up. He appealed once again to the Court, claiming that he is motivated by the "weighty ramifications on Israel's foreign relations." The appeal is now awaiting another hearing by the Court.

Arutz-7's Shimon Cohen notes that this is the second time in four months that the UN is seeking to actualize its "right" to be above the law in Jerusalem. In November 2004, Jerusalem City Councilman David Hadari complained that the UN was illegally building a new large structure in Maalot Dafna, near Ramat Eshkol and Ammunition Hill. Then, as well, he found that the authorities were unwilling to take action - and even after they grudgingly issued a stop-work order, the construction continued, and continues today.

Hadari has now written a letter to A-G Mazuz, asking to "review our obligations towards the UN. We must demand that the UN's judicial immunity apply only in cases where the UN is acting in good faith and without having been warned beforehand by the relevant authorities. We must make it clear that the judicial immunity we grant the UN does not justify continuous nose-thumbing at our laws and impairing of our sovereignty."

Hadari's letter also relates to the case of the UN's ongoing illegal construction in Jerusalem: "The UN is building illegally in Maalot Dafna in Jerusalem, without having received any permit or authorization from the Jerusalem Municipality, and in blatant violation of the laws of the State of Israel. Despite my many queries on this issue, and despite the duly-issued stop-work orders, the UN has continued to act as it pleases, all because of the judicial immunity granted it by the State of Israel."

The Attorney-General's request that the District Court freeze its decision against the UN's presence in Reuven Paul's private property is pending.

Mazuz recently drew right-wing ire when he threatened to prosecute anti-disengagement road-blockers on charges of "endangering public safety" - charges that could net violators 20 years in prison.

"Mazuz is a danger to democracy," said MK Benny Elon (National Union). "With his campaign of fear and encouraging arrests without trial, he is simply trying to shut people up. Where was he when he charged Omri Sharon with collecting illegal campaign contributions, while leaving his father, the Prime Minister, out of it? What, Ariel Sharon knew nothing? He didn't call to thank anyone? ... And what about Sharon's agreement to give over security control of Jericho to the PA, against the army's recommendations, merely to allow Dov Weisglass' clients to open the casino there? Is there nothing there to investigate?"

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 Richard H. Shulman, March 22, 2005.


Likud Party officials warned that Members of Knesset would not be elected if they continue to support PM Sharon's plan to abandon Gaza and northern Samaria. (Israelis' use of English can leave me with misunderstandings. The officials' wording is vague. Does it mean that the Party slate would lose much popular support, and that therefore, under proportional representation, many of its Members of Knesset would be defeated? Or does it mean that the officials would not nominate them in the first place?)

Sharon did not explain how to reconcile with democracy his breaking the Party's pre-election, winning pledge against abandoning Territory (IMRA, 2/10). He deceived the electorate.


Abbas keeps announcing ceasefires, but terrorist militias, one of which, Fatah, is his, keep making or attempting terrorist attacks. It happened again a day after Abbas and Sharon announced another ceasefire.

Arab News anticipates that Israel will demand that those militias be disarmed. The Saudi agency considers this deeply humiliating to the militias. IMRA remarks, "Of course, 'humiliation' is the highest Arab concern." (The West has what would be a surprising sensitivity against causing the Arabs humiliation. I think it isn't sensitivity, unless it manifests dhimmi thinking. I think it is an excuse for not treating the Arabs firmly and for letting them get away with the murder of Jews.)

Arab News goes on to speculate that Israel would try to look good by making promises it anticipates rescinding when another attack comes. (Shouldn't Israel consider its promises voided by Arab violations of peace agreements? Why don't the Arabs stop attacking? Why doesn't Arab News treat the actual Arab violations and murders with the sarcasm it reserves for speculation about Israeli reactions to them?)

"Any time the Israelis want to sabotage the talks, they have only to make a provocative raid in the near certainty that Hamas or Islamic Jihad will immediately strike back and so can be presented as fanatical terrorists." (IMRA, 2/10.)

Arab News supposes that Israel wants to sabotage negotiations. Actually, Sharon is eager to appease the Arabs. If they don't negotiate, he would dispossess thousands of Jews, anyway. He would do so in a way that would delight the world's fellow antisemites.

IMRA thinks the editorial has it backwards. It is the Arabs who launch raids, and Israel that retaliates. Actually, Israel raids when: (1) Terrorism has gotten so heated up that the Israeli public demands retaliation; or (2) Wanted terrorists, smuggling tunnels, or rocket launchers are located. The Arabs raid when they can but call it retaliation, to seem justified. Raids that they call retaliation had to have been planned out long in advance of the current pretext.


Military bases and weapons of mass-destruction are banned from space. Most countries propose extending that ban to all weapons. The US opposes banning certain types of weapons.

Israeli strategists (except for PM Sharon, who wants to cede vital territory to the Arabs) realize that their country lacks territorial depth. Some of them suggest exploiting the military use of the sea and space. One warns that Israel has had many failures in launching satellites, more failures than have been publicized. He is not confident that Israel could use space reliably (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.19 from Barbara Opall-Rome, DefenseNews, 1/10).


S. Arabia has underwritten by tens of thousands of dollars the Columbia University program that trains public school teachers about the Mideast. Columbia withdrew its participation in N.Y. City, in a huff, when the City criticized the program director, Prof. Khalidi, for being an Islamist. Now some candidates for the mayoralty urge Columbia to return the money to Saudi Aramco (Jacob Gershman, NY Sun, 3/10, p.1). The program is run by enemy propagandists.

Our own petrodollars are circulating back to subvert our way of life. The Saudis and such have infiltrated our university Mideast centers. They, in turn, reach into the public schools. The Saudis also set up mosques and the Islamists set up schools that indoctrinate in hatred and medieval notions of despotism, right in the Land of the Free and formerly home of the brave.

Money seems to be more corrupting than ever. (It is the prospect of donations that get the richest but least loyal Jews to become head of most Jewish organizations in the US.)

An association of Universities ought to adopt a code of refusing donations from ideological enemies of the US. The US government ought to ban such funding and immigration from such countries, while there still is some patriotic sentiment left in this country. It is ironic that so many leftists have become anti-American in favor of countries that are dedicated to evil. Finally, Congress ought to suspend its subsidies of university Middle East Centers, which echew scholarship in favor of the Arabs, including jihadists.


"Officials said the Defense Department has acknowledged the export of classified military hardware to U.S. allies in the Middle East and other regions. They said the banned hardware was shipped inadvertently because of sloppy accounting and the authority by officials to override export bans." (IMRA, 2/10.)

Can we believe this excuse from a regime whose predecessors arrange Iran-Contra and secretly gave Gulf War equipment to Egypt?

No Arab state is reliable as an ally.


"Israeli military sources said Hamas has used Israel's ceasefire pledge to rebuild its military capabilities. The sources said this includes production of the Kassam-class short-range missiles, anti-tank rockets and mines. At the same time, Hamas was said to have restored strongholds destroyed by Israel's military. The sources said the strongholds have included weapons factories and warehouses."

"'Hamas and other groups are preparing for another offensive. They are being encouraged and paid by Iran to stage provocations that would end the ceasefire." (IMRA, 2/10.)

This is just what the Right predicted. Why didn't the Left see it? Does PM Sharon not know that the losing side uses ceasefires rebuilding decimated militaries, and that doing so is Islamic doctrine? Does he feel constrained by world opinion? But it is antisemitic.


Israelis have put the knowledge gained from developing missiles to civilian use. They turned it into promising medical advances. One is a capsule that photographs the digestive tract. Another removes tumors non-invasively. The Israeli scientists' goal is bloodless operating rooms (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.20 from Ammon Barzilai of Haaretz, 12/30).

That is what "the Jews" are plotting, not the world domination that the Arabs accuse them of and themselves plot.


PM Sharon has reversed himself about releasing prisoners who had committed terrorist attacks, beyond the first 900, if the Arabs (whom he had almost defeated, until the ceasefire enabled them to rearm) withhold fire while he uproots the Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria. He has abandoned "almost every commitment." "Clearly, Sharon is either under some kind of mind control or out of control in some other unknown way." Releasing terrorists who have attacked Jews puts the whole population at risk. It mocks the security forces that lost lives capturing these terrorists (Emanual Winston, Mid East Analysis, 2/10). Perhaps he cynically risks their loss again, to obtain a withdrawal without noteworthy incident.


France and the UNO think they can coax Hizbullah into switching from terrorism to politics. The US now does, too, or at least it wants Hizbullah not to impede efforts to get Syrian troops out of Lebanon (Claudia Rosett, NY Sun, 3/10).

Hizbullah already was in both politics and terrorism. It is unrealistic to expect fanatical jihadists to give up dreams of conquest.

The US lost its opportunity when it let Israel withdraw from Lebanon, where it had been keeping Hizbullah from growing. It should have encouraged Israel to expand the free-Lebanese forces to exterminate Hizbullah and force Syrian troops out.

How much good would be the departure of Syrian troops, if it would leave Hizbullah as the dominant military force in the country?

P.S.: Hizbullah murdered many Americans.


The Commission just chose its 5-member panel that screens petitions. Three of them are S. Arabia, Cuba, and Zimbabwe, grave human rights violators. "In December the Commission was indicted by the UN itself for 'eroding credibility and professionalism' and for being dominated by states whose interest is 'not to strengthen human rights but to protect themselves against criticism or to criticize others.'" (IMRA, 2/10.) Evil.


The Israeli government, concerned about its Arab enemies, is allowing Jewish owners to sell or rent their businesses to Arabs, intact, besides getting government compensation (IMRA, 2/10).

Would government compensation and Arab purchase prices be at fair market value. P.A. Arabs evade debts to absentee Israeli owners, who are not in a position to collect.

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 Marlene Young, March 22, 2005.
This article was written by Helen Eliassian and appeared in Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/555098.html

Generations of Jews have protected the holy site. Will the Iranians continue to do so? Women of all religious backgrounds visit the site to pray for children, bringing colorful curtains and cloths to place on the tombs and to donate to an adjacent prayer room.

Though the holiday of Purim is celebrated by Jews worldwide, the story, based as it is in Persia, has special resonance for the Jews of Iran. Recent decades have proved difficult for Persian Jews, many of whom fled the country after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. From a community of about 100,000, an estimated 25,000 to 35,000 now remain.

This month, Jews from across Iran will pray at a shrine in Hamadan, in northwestern Iran, dedicated to the heroes of the Purim story. They will likely be met upon arrival by Muslims and Christians, who pray year-round at the unusual shrine. The building follows the architecture of emamzadeh ("Islamic shrine"), but has walls adorned with Hebrew inscriptions describing Esther and Mordechai's origins. In fact, it might come as a surprise to learn that the story of Purim has resonance for all Iranians.

Not only was Esther a Jewish queen, but, as the wife of King Ahasuerus (Xerxes I), she also continues to be revered as a Persian queen and, thus, an icon of national Iranian history.

Though her original name, Hadassah, means "hidden" in Hebrew, she is known as Esther. Scholar and writer Haideh Sahim explains that "Esther" is derived from the Persian word astaar, meaning "star." It is believed that Esther and Mordecai were buried in the shrine at Hamadan, originally called Hegmataneh, in the fifth century B.C.E.

According to one Persian legend, the resting place and its surrounding land served as a refuge for Iranians during the Arab conquest of Persia in 621 C.E. As the story goes, when the Arabs began to conquer the city of Hegmataneh, the people of Iran came to the gravesite so that the spirit of Esther and Mordechai would protect them. A monument - the exact date of origin has been disputed, ranging from the 13th to the 17th century - has been built over the tombs, and both Jewish and non-Jewish Iranians now believe that the site is holy and cannot be destroyed.

For generations, the Jews of Hamadan safeguarded the tomb and the customs of the holiday of Purim. Touba Somekh, a woman who was instrumental in bringing about the restoration of the site in the 1920s, explained in an interview in 1998, four years before her death, how the Jews were able to continue maintenance of the tombs.

Somekh used to be an active member of a small women's group in Hamadan, progressive for its time, named Hadassah, after Esther. The women would recite Psalms, talk about the news of the day and study together.

Around 1925, Somekh learned that the city government planned to build a wall around the tomb and to take it over, unless the local hebra, or Jewish organization, could accomplish such a task. Though she was only 15 - and already the mother of two - Somekh immediately thought of Hadassah's monetary savings of 300 toman (a significant sum for the day) and boldly declared to her brother-in-law that the women's committee had the means to safeguard the shrine. The next day, her brother-in-law informed the members of the hebra of this.

"I began to sweat under the chador," Somekh remembered. "I was a young girl who had declared something and was now being taken seriously. What was going to happen?" The women's committee was indeed able to provide the initial funding for the restoration and expansion needed at the time.

These days, the shrine - and the holiday in general - is of particular importance to women. Women of all religious backgrounds visit the site to pray for children, bringing colorful curtains and cloths to place on the tombs and to donate to an adjacent prayer room. It is believed that a cloth coming into contact with the shrine will be blessed. A person in monetary or spiritual need would then take some raw cloth and make from it articles of clothing.

Of the Jews left in Iran, only four or five families live in Hamadan, leaving some with fears about the future of the shrine. According to Houman Sarshar, editor of "Esther's Children: A Portrait of Iranian Jews," "To my knowledge, the issue was never one of custody. The caretaker now is not Jewish. The synagogue attached to the sight is the only functioning one in Hamadan."

Some believe it is the spirit of Esther and Mordechai that will live on and protect the Jews of Iran, extending a legacy of 2,500 years. Others, including Sahim, wonder, "Who will take care of our Esther?"

Marlene Young is vice-president of TODA - Torah Organization for Disability Access, as well as an advocate for Israel.

To Go To Top
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, March 22, 2005.

A Zionist reality check is needed.

There are too many who have by their silence become part of the problem.

The Oslo to Road Map peace process signed on the White House lawn is none other than Israel's much anticipated defeat.

Israel's enemies knew that they had to devise what Psalm 83 calls a 'shrewd 'plan and they did together with one mind.

The first thing Israeli's still capable of thinking need to realize is that it is finally defeated and all that we see unfolding is part of the surrender process.

What her enemies could not do in five wars, the Bush Road Map has succeeded in.

The few who resist this process are in danger as the Israeli government has already capitulated to the global powers that demand Israel's slow death and end, defeated by the peace. The Conspirators have no problem with those who resist dying as an exapmle to all others who would stand in their way.

The evidence is overwhelming that all who would not be willing and obedient stooges for the will of the U.S.,E.U., and U.N. have been fired by Chief Israeli stooge Sharon.

The puppet has been warned that he must move forward with the surrender and retreat or foreign intervention, foreign feet on Israel's little remaining land is next. Sharon's mad and fearful capitulation to this combined global cabal does not bode well for Israel's immediate future.

The earthly judges have decreed,Israel must die. Israel's feeding tube has been removed and death is imminent without direct intervention from a Greater power.

Marcel Cousineau can be reached by email at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 22, 2005.

There are two hidden items in this. Firstly, most if not all of the internment camps slated to be used against the opponents of the Sharon Junta are in the Negev. It would no doubt prove uncomfortable to the Junta for videos or pictures of beaten and half starved Jews in concentration camps to be shown to the world. Secondly, since the plan is to cut Israel in half and isolate the Negev, it is necessary to have a justification to setup border control points. This is the stratagem that has been used successfully against Yeshah. Once the Negev residents become use to these check points that will physically separate them from what is left of the State of Israel, the process of mentally separating them will begin. The goal, of course, being to abandon the Negev to either Egypt or its surrogate, the PLO. This will all be done for peace.

This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). It is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78820

Checkpoints at many intersections in the northern Negev, possibly as early as six weeks from now. This is how the IDF plans to fight the expected onslaught of disengagement opponents this spring.

"Don't bother planning any weddings for the summer," a senior Israel Defense Forces officer told a contingent of northern Negev representatives last week, "because it's not certain that your guests will be able to attend."

The meeting was one of a series between O.C. Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Dan Har'el and Gaza brigade commanders with northern Negev community leaders and security officers last week. They said the plan is to encircle the entire northern Negev with army checkpoints "around Passover [the last week in April] or Independence Day [May 12]." They could not give more precise dates.

Arutz-7's Haggai Huberman said, "No one has more detailed information, but it's not very likely that the army will close off the area on Passover - it's more likely that it will happen shortly afterwards. But it's impossible to predict."

The meetings were closed, and the officers asked that the information not be leaked. Huberman learned, however, that the army is planning to place checkpoints at intersections leading to Gaza, such as Sderot, Nir-Am, Netivot, Nirim, and the Eshkol Area. Though there is only one entrance to Gush Katif, at the Kisufim Junction, there are many ways to reach Kisufim.

The army is planning to deploy soldiers even in the fields in the area, in order to prevent opponents from reaching the area. "Only residents who can prove they live there will be able to pass," according to the plan.

It was not reported how the army will deal with thousands of people coming to the intersections, thus holding up traffic all the way to Ashkelon (4-5 miles to the north), Sderot, Netivot, Kibbutzim Saad and Alumim, and other areas.

The Negev representatives left the meeting very concerned over what their daily routines will look like in the coming months. In addition to questions about weddings - which they were told not to plan - they also asked about more day-to-day issues: How will workers who live outside the area, such as teachers, nursery teachers and day-care workers get to their jobs? What about the agricultural work? How will trucks arrive to deliver and take agricultural produce and other goods? How will the crops be harvested? What about friends and family members who wish to visit?

Most of the questions remained unanswered. The officers merely promised that the army would not abandon the Negev communities, and that they would find solutions to all the problems.

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 Aryeh Zelasko, March 22, 2005.

Does the term, crooked politician, contain a redundancy?

This article was written by Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's Jerusalem bureau chief, whose past interview subjects have included Yasser Arafat, Ehud Barak, Shlomo Ben Ami and leaders of the Taliban. It is archived at www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43421

JERUSALEM -- The Knesset Ethics Committee yesterday presented a private investigative group with a series of questions concerning Israel's Vice Prime Minister Shimon Peres' alleged involvement in a technology fund coordinated with the Palestinian Authority while he was a government minister.

Some critics charge the move was a conflict of interest requiring him to step down from his government position, WorldNetDaily has learned.

The investigation, first reported by WND, was presented to the Knesset Ethics Committee in February. It focuses on the establishment by Peres of the Peace Technology Fund, a $160 million venture-capital entity created in part to encourage investment in the Palestinian economy.

Investors in the fund, allegedly procured while Peres was minister of regional cooperation under Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 1999, include the Palestinian National Authority and several companies that in the past have contributed to the Peres Center for Peace, a non-profit think tank founded by Peres.

If Peres is found in breach of the Israeli government's official code of ethics, he would be required to vacate his post, a move that likely would undo Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's current unity government between Likud and Peres' Labor party, and precipitate new elections in Israel.

The fund's first investment was announced in Business Week in June 1999, one month after Peres assumed his ministerial position that year.

The article reported, "A venture capital fund founded by former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres has taken a $9 million, 3.3 percent stake in Paltel, the Palestinian Telecommunications Co., according to officials of the Peace Technology Fund. The investment is the first by the peace fund, which was established last year by Israeli and Palestinian investors."

"The fund has raised $60 million from Israeli, Palestinian, and foreign investors. The Peace Technology Fund was established by Peres and the World Bank as part of an attempt to spur investment in the Palestinian economy."

The Palestinian National Authority, according to a report by the Democratic Council, invested $22 million in the fund, also allegedly while Peres was an Israeli minister. The PNC is a monetary branch of the Palestinian Authority.

Other investments in the fund, totaling nearly $10 million, were made by Bank Leumi, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Federmann Enterprises, Koor Industries, Arison Investments, Strauss Holding, Delta Galil, Daimler Chrysler and Keter Plastics. Most are contributors to the Peres Center for Peace, which itself is listed as a member of the fund's advisory board.

David Bedein, director of the Israel Resource News Agency, alerted members of the Knesset Ethics Committee last month to the fund's activities. The committee replied yesterday to his agency with a series of questions to help facilitate their investigation, including whether Peres received payments from the fund, and if so, why no payments are listed in the Fund's records; whether Peres currently holds any shares in the Fund, which may be a conflict of interest since the Palestinian Authority is a major investor; and why the Peres Peace Center is qualified to provide financial consultation services to the Fund.

Other questions surround wether Peres, who was a government minister at the time, helped facilitate the Fund's $9 million investment in Paltel in 1999.

The price of Paltel's shares rose from 2.5 Jordanian dinars in May 1999 to 4.5 in August 1999, reportedly realizing a nearly $10 million profit for the fund's investment that year.

The stock increase has been widely attributed to a monopoly license granted in August 1999 by the Palestinian Authority to Paltel for the company to operate exclusive wireless services in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

WND has learned the Ethics Committee has asked whether Peres knew in advance, through contacts while he was a member of the Israeli government, the PA was planning to grant Paltel the exclusive contract and whether Peres personally profited from the fund's investment.

Other questions surround Peres' relationship to Evergreen Canada Investment Management, a Canadian company listed on the advisory board of the fund. A subsidiary of the company reportedly was granted an advisory contract to help the Palestinian Commercial Services Corporation, a financial arm of the Palestinian Authority, invest more than $170 million in international private equity funds in the U.S., Europe and Asia.

The investigation comes at a delicate time for the Sharon government, which must pass a country-wide budget by the end of the month or his government could be legally disbanded.

As well, the Israeli prime minister is forging ahead with a controversial plan to vacate Jewish settlements from Gaza and parts of the West Bank, a move that has divided his Likud party and created many nationalist opponents who call regularly for Sharon's resignation.

Shimon Peres is a regular political fixture in the Jewish state. He served twice as Israel's prime minister - following the formation of a unity government in 1984, he was an alternate prime minister with Likud leader Yitzhak Shamir, and again in 1995 after Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated.

Peres has held numerous other government posts, including deputy defense minister, minister of immigrant absorption, minister-without-portfolio, minister of transport and communication and minister of information. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon appointed Peres foreign minister until Labor left the government in 2003, and created for him the position of vice prime minister when Labor again joined Sharon's coalition in December.

Peres founded the Center for Peace in 1996 with the aim, according to its website, of "realizing [Peres'] vision of a 'New Middle East,' in which people of the region work together to build peace through socio-economic cooperation and people-to-people relations."

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 Manfred Gerstenfeld, March 22, 2005.
This is an interview with Anne Bayefsky by Manfred Gerstenfeld. It was published in JCPA, No. 31, 1 April 2005. Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute and a visiting professor at both Metropolitan College and Touro Law School. In 2001 she published a report in collaboration with the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Bayefsky has written extensively on the UN.
  • The United Nations discriminates against Israel in several ways. It delegitimizes the self-determination of the Jewish people, denies Israel the right to defend itself and demonizes it in the framework of the international regime of human rights protection. The UN also encourages terrorism directed at Israelis.

  • The UN has played a major role in the failure to defeat racism. The organization has become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism - intolerance and inequality against the Jewish people and their state.

  • In June 2004 the United Nations organized its first conference on anti-Semitism after almost 60 years of existence. It became just one more element in the organization's effort to separate anti-Semitism and Jews from Israel.

After 60 Years: First Conference on Anti-Semitism

"The United Nations has become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism - intolerance and inequality against the Jewish people and its state," Professor Anne Bayefsky told participants at the first UN conference on anti-Semitism held in New York in June 2004.(1)

After almost 60 years of existence the UN had organized this conference on anti-Semitism in order to mitigate increasing criticism of its lack of concern for this scourge. The organizers were ill prepared for Bayefsky's speech, in which she also stated: "The Nuremberg Tribunal taught us that crimes are not committed by abstract entities. The perpetrators of anti-Semitism are no more abstract today than were the Nazis of yesterday."

"Today they are the preachers in mosques that exhort their followers to blow up Jews. They are the authors of Palestinian Authority textbooks that teach a new generation to hate Jews and admire their killers. They are the television producers and official benefactors in authoritarian regimes like Syria or Egypt who manufacture and distribute programming that depicts Jews as blood-thirsty world conspirators."

Bayefsky, who has since become a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, concluded by challenging the Secretary General and the UN to prove that they were serious about eradicating anti-Semitism: "Start putting a name to the terrorists that kill Jews because they are Jews. Start condemning human rights violators wherever they dwell, even if they live in Riyadh or Damascus. Stop condemning the Jewish people for fighting back against their killers; and the next time someone asks you or your colleagues to stand for a moment of silence to honor those who would destroy the State of Israel, say no."

The conference on anti-Semitism, Bayefsky now concludes, was just one more component of the United Nations' effort to separate anti-Semitism and Jews from Israel. "To some extent they succeeded. What the UN says is a new version of an old motif. It boils down to: 'Some of my best friends are Jews, but Israel is still the worst human rights violator in the world today.' The UN thinks that these things go comfortably hand in hand. It doesn't recognize anti-Semitism when Israelis and the State of Israel are its victims, and the conference on anti-Semitism was part of that dynamic."

The Jewish People's Charge Sheet against the UN

When asked about the main items on the charge sheet of the Jewish people against the United Nations, Bayefsky mentions that several accusations are interconnected. "The first one is that the UN tries to deny the effective realization of the Jewish people's right to self-determination; that is, the continuity and well-being of the State of Israel.

"Since the creation of the United Nations, the number of member states has multiplied. The essential framework for its growth and membership has been the basic principle of self-determination in international law - which is coupled with statehood if certain conditions are satisfied. The principle applies to peoples with various defining characteristics; a shared history, ethnicity, language, as well as a historical and physical connection to a defined territory.

"The Jewish people satisfy all these criteria in the land of Israel. Yet the UN has, on the one hand, expanded the number of states to which self-determination applies and, on the other hand, done everything possible to delegitimize the self-determination of the Jewish people."

Denial of Right to Self Defense

"The second accusation is that the UN denies Israel the right to effectively protect itself against the mortal threats which it has faced since its creation. Self-determination is meaningless if a country does not have the right to defend itself against such dangers. The role of the UN has been to attempt to tie the hands of Israeli victims behind their backs, as opposed to affirming their entitlement to protection.

"The right of self-defense means, in simple terms, the legal ability to fight back. The immediate enemy Israel has faced in recent years is not a state entity, although it consists partly of players who act on behalf of states. Prevailing against such an enemy entails certain practical necessities.

"For instance, the Geneva Convention and the laws of war anticipate that civilian populations who are used as human shields by armed combatants may unfortunately suffer harm as states defend themselves against such combatants. This is not because those who attempt to fight back against these combatants deliberately target civilians, but rather because the latter become the inevitable indirect victims of warfare. But who is responsible for those civilian casualties? The answer must be those who use the civilians as human shields and not those attempting, as in the case of Israel, to defend itself against aggression."

Kofi Annan Discriminates against Israel

"However, the UN response has been to criticize Israel for fighting back, even when there are minimal or no civilian casualties. These criticisms can be heard regularly from Secretary General Kofi Annan and senior representatives such as Peter Hansen, until recently Commissioner General of the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) or Terje Roed Larsen, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process."

Bayefsky explains: "When Israel targets terrorists the UN says that Israel is in violation of international law by committing an extra-judicial execution. On the contrary, the terrorists are illegal combatants and this is a war. They are not entitled to judicial process before being targeted. Still, Israel will try to arrest where it can. But in many cases arrest is not possible without the likelihood of many more casualties and unacceptable risks. The local authority, the Palestinian Authority, makes no effort whatsoever to arrest them.

"When Israel killed Hamas terrorist Abdel Aziz Rantisi, though there were no civilian casualties, Secretary General Kofi Annan denounced it as an extra-judicial killing - which it is not. In the last few years there have been three thousand extra-judicial killings in Brazil, people shot in the back by forces connected to the authorities. A UN report on this was presented in 2004 to the Commission on Human Rights. On these executions Annan remained silent.(2)

"In addition, homes used by terrorists during combat are legitimate military targets. But the Secretary General and his staff criticize Israel for targeting such homes. Most importantly, they and the main UN bodies, including the Security Council, refuse to identify the terrorists by name, Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade."

Security Fence

Bayefsky points out that the United Nations' even condemns Israel's use of non-violent means to protect itself. The UN's International Court of Justice denied the legality of Israel's security fence. "Among those who voted in favor of the advisory opinion was Judge Rosalyn Higgins from the UK. One reason she gave was that the UN Charter's rule of self-defense did not apply to non-violent means.

"The Court's decision makes no attempt to consider the context of terrorism and decides that self-defense in article 51 of the UN Charter does not apply to actions taken against non-state actors. This opinion is problematic for many other democratic nations, not only for Israel."

UN Demonizes Israel

"The third accusation is that the UN demonizes Israel in the framework of the international regime of human rights protection. The UN turns Israel into the archetypal human rights violator in the world today.

"There have been more resolutions and more meeting time spent on the State of Israel in the history of the UN Commission on Human Rights than on any other country in the world."

In her lecture at the UN conference on anti-Semitism, Bayefsky said: "There has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the more than a million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia being kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, UN bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning, and cross-amputation. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state."

The Durban Conference

Bayefsky adds now: "Although the 'Zionism is Racism' resolution was formally repealed in 1991, the United Nations Anti-Racism Conference in Durban in 2001 gave rise to a declaration which says Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. Israel is the only country specifically called racist.

"The Durban Conference's influence, contrary to popular opinion, is not past history. It is the centerpiece of the UN's anti-racism agenda, and now mandates reports, resolutions and conferences all over the world. These 'follow-up' activities are paid for through regular UN dues, 22% of which are coming from the United States. This notwithstanding the fact that the United States walked out of the Durban conference and refused to be associated with its Declaration."

Bayefsky observes that in UN contexts the false analogy between South Africa and Israel is repeated over and over again. "The UN has turned the racism issue on its head, however contrary this is to the facts. Arab states have almost entirely emptied their nations of Jews. In Israel on the other hand one fifth of the population are Arabs, who have full democratic rights. Arabs have more democratic rights in Israel than they have in the Arab world.

"This perversion of the racism issue is particularly grotesque in view of the fact that the United Nations was founded on the ashes of the Jewish people. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 acknowledges the debt. In its words, 'disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind.' But over time, the UN has turned the Jewish victims of the Nazis into their counterparts of the 21st Century."

Deifying the Palestinians

Bayefsky mentions that while Israelis are demonized, the Palestinians are almost deified. "UN rapporteur John Dugard described Palestinian terrorists as 'tough' and said that their efforts were characterized by their 'determination, daring and success.' Every year the UN marks November 29th as International Solidarity Day with the Palestinian people, because this was the day the UN partitioned the British Palestine Mandate. The Palestinians call it the beginning of the onset of Al Naqba, the catastrophe. In 2002, Kofi Annan described the 29th of November as a 'day of mourning and a day of grief.'

"In November 2003, at the front of the room - in the presence of representatives of 100 member states - stood the Secretary General, the president of the Security Council and the president of the General Assembly. To their right was a Palestinian flag, a UN flag on the other, and in the middle a map that pre-dated the State of Israel. All individuals present were asked to rise for a moment of silence in memory of 'all those who have given their lives for the Palestinian people.' This thus included suicide bombers." Bayefsky notes she was the only attendant who did not rise. On 29 November 2004 the exact same scenario took place, except that the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Danforth, who was president of the Security Council at the time, contrived to walk in only after these opening events had taken place.

"This inseparable bond cemented at the UN between demonizing Israelis and glorifying Palestinians makes it clear that the core issue is not the stated cause of Palestinian self-determination. If concern for the welfare of Palestinians was the UN's driving force, then its resolutions would decry the practice of the Palestinian Authority and their media to encourage Palestinian children to participate in armed conflict. This is contrary to the Geneva Convention and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

"If the UN were truly concerned about human rights they would also decry the glorification of suicide bombers, or the calculated use of the civilian population by terrorists as human shields, or the refusal by Arab states to integrate long-standing Palestinian refugees into their societies and offer them the benefits of citizenship, which is directly inconsistent with policy for every other refugee around the world.

"The Division of Palestinian Rights within the UN is the only such entity in the whole organization devoted to a specific people and is funded by the UN's regular budget."

Encouraging Terrorism

"A fourth accusation concerns the encouragement of terrorism. Resolutions of the United Nations Commission for Human Rights refer, by incorporation, to an earlier General Assembly resolution (1982 A/RES/37/43) which says that all available means including armed struggle are legitimate for fighting against foreign occupation and for self-determination. Though the Commission resolution refers only to Israel, other nations should realize that this kind of a statement is a threat to all countries facing terrorism."

Bayefsky points out that this attitude is being promoted in a context which encourages people to believe that the root cause of terrorism against Israelis is very different from the terrorism faced by other democratic societies. "It is a UN driven falsehood that the occupation is the root cause of violence in the Arab-Israeli conflict and that if the occupation would end there would be no more terrorism in the Middle East.

"Sometimes that claim even goes further and says that democratic societies everywhere face terrorism because of Israel's occupation. It is thus stated that Islamic fundamentalist terrorism the world over would disappear if only Israel were to withdraw from the territories. However incredible such a claim appears to be, it has taken hold in the psyche of many in democratic societies.

"In November 2004, the U.S. House International Relations Committee disclosed that money from the United Nations Oil for Food program had helped pay the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. This program was meant to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people. This is a further example of UN-related involvement in terrorism directed at Israelis.

"The UN never mentioned the close relationship between Fatah terrorism and Arafat as the head of the Palestinian Authority. The UN doesn't name entities such as Hamas, Hizbollah or Islamic Jihad as terrorist organizations. This inhibits the ability of both states and the UN to take actions against those terrorists through economic and political measures. By exempting them from unequivocal and direct criticism, the UN encourages them."

Regional Groups

Bayefsky also mentions that Israel is the only state which is not fully a member of a UN regional group. "That means it is denied entry into meetings, important negotiating sessions, in UN organizations and agencies elected outside New York. Many UN bodies are elected in Geneva or elsewhere. This state of affairs is also the case for those which are elected in New York but which meet in Geneva.

"When the UN Human Rights Commission convenes for six weeks every year, each morning from nine to ten, the regional groups meet. Even the PLO representatives are permitted into one of the regional group. Only Israel is left standing in the halls."


Bayefsky adds a further accusation. "The demonization of Israel amounts in effect to anti-Semitism. The latter, after the creation of the State of Israel, is no longer just about discrimination and demonization of individual Jews, but also about that of the Jewish State. The demonization of Israel is not an abstraction. It fuels terrorism and encourages the enemies of human dignity to target and kill Israelis. It is anti-Semitism of the worst kind because is a violation of the Jews' right to life.

"Since its creation the United Nations has never, despite its historical indebtedness to the Jewish people and the victims of the Holocaust, had a single solitary resolution of the General Assembly dedicated to the subject of anti-Semitism or a single report focused on this subject. It has omitted mention of anti-Semitism and of the Holocaust deliberately in UN treaties and declarations for the past 40 years. Over the past decade, minor references to the one word "anti-Semitism" have been buried in resolutions without being clearly tied to a demand for detailed study and reporting on the subject - in contrast to UN reports on discrimination against Arabs and Muslims.

"The UN has not made any effort to investigate systematically anti-Semitism in all its forms. If one does not do that, one cannot explore and describe it as a global phenomenon and one that is endemic in Muslim societies. Israel's enemies in the Arab world and the UN play a major role in failing to defeat the racists of our time. On the contrary, they turn racism on its head, blame the victim and fuel intolerance."

The 2003 General Assembly

"One example of this occurred at the 2003 General Assembly. The issue arose of including the word "anti-Semitism" in a resolution on religious intolerance in a preamble. Ireland, which had been the lead state on the subject of religious intolerance for many years, was determined to keep mention of anti-Semitism out.

"So Israel decided that it would move an amendment to add it from the floor. The Irish were unnerved. Irish Foreign Minister Brian Cowen and Israel's Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom made a deal that Israel would withdraw its threatened amendment to the resolution on religious intolerance. In exchange Ireland would introduce for the first time in UN history a resolution on anti-Semitism.

"Israel was delighted by the prospect. The Irish delegation sat on the third committee, waited for the resolution on religious intolerance to pass through the committee without the mention of anti-Semitism. Then they withdrew their promised resolution on anti-Semitism. Their excuse was the lack of consensus. Among others, Ireland went to the Iranians for their support. They afterwards claimed that they were surprised at the opposition. To sum it up: there was no resolution on anti-Semitism."

The Dilution of Resolutions

In an article, Bayefsky described developments after the June 2004 conference on anti-Semitism at the UN. She wrote once again that the June conference served the UN's two track approach: "Put the Jews on one side, Israel on the other, and divide and conquer."(3)

Bayefsky observed that for several months there were discussions about a UN resolution dedicated to anti-Semitism. "The battle associated with presenting a new and substantive stand-alone anti-Semitism resolution, however, scared off every democratic UN member state. The next idea was to have the European Union (EU) sponsor a resolution on anti-Semitism modeled on the Berlin Declaration, which was adopted in April 2004 by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). In that document there was a small reference to Israel, though Europeans could not quite bring themselves to say that terrorism aimed at ethnically cleansing Israel of Jews was also a form of anti-Semitism.

Another failed expectation was that Germany would play a leadership role in presenting a specific resolution condemning anti-Semitism. Writes Bayefsky: "In true gangland style, Germany was given to understand that such a role would jeopardize its hoped-for permanent seat on the Security Council, and any sense of historical responsibility vanished. Nor was any other EU member prepared to confront Arab and Muslim opposition. Ultimately the word anti-Semitism was allowed into the resolution on religious intolerance. But the opposition was public and considerable, and managed to dilute the mention to a minor add-on in the midst of a range of other issues including Islamophobia. On the other hand, there is an annual resolution of the Commission on Human Rights focusing on the defamation of Islam."

Bayefsky observes: "Besides all this there is also sometimes blatantly overt anti-Semitism. At the United Nations Human Rights Commission, the UN's major human rights body, Palestinian representatives have claimed that Israel can only happily celebrate holidays like Yom Kippur by shedding Palestinian blood, and have accused Israel of injecting Palestinian children with HIV positive blood. The Algerian delegate at the 2002 and 2003 Commission on Human Rights said that Israeli actions repeat Kristallnacht daily. He also said that Palestinians have numbers put on their arms and wondered how long one was going to wait for the Israelis to commit a massacre like Babi Yar. No state, except for Israel, drew attention to that statement."

Asking Racists for Opinions on Anti-Semitism

Bayefsky says that in November 2004 one UN special rapporteur - on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance - convened a meeting to gather material for his forthcoming report, and anti-Semitism was on the agenda. "The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNESCO invited experts to Barcelona. They were asked to provide Doudou Diene, the UN rapporteur, with advice on anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and Islamophobia."

Bayefsky, in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, wrote: "From whom did the UN get advice? There was Tariq Ramadan of Switzerland's Fribourg University, who was denied entry to the U.S. in August on the basis of a law concerning aliens who have used a 'position of prominence within any country to endorse or espouse terrorist activity' or are considered a 'public safety risk or a national security threat.' But apparently the UN thought it was worth listening to the views on racism of someone who said on 25 September 2001, that '[Osama] Bin Laden is perhaps a useful straw man, like Saddam Hussein, whose diabolical representation perhaps serves other geo-strategic, economic or political designs.'"(4)

Bayefsky mentions that among the invitees were also some Israelis at the extreme fringes of the country's society. "These people are avowedly anti-Zionist and believe that the destruction of the Jewish state would make the world a better place. The UN invited people, who have views that are antithetical to combating anti-Semitism, to a conference that was supposed to be about the defeat of anti-Semitism."

In her article Bayefsky summarized the message of the draft report of the UN meeting: "According to the draft report it is the perception of unconditional Jewish support for Israel that leads people to attack a Jewish cemetery, and that anti-Semitism was absent from the Muslim world prior to the Arab-Israeli conflict (the mufti of Jerusalem and his ally Hitler notwithstanding). The draft report therefore suggested that the way to defeat anti-Semitism is for Jews to cut loose of the defense of the State of Israel. And anti-Semitism will diminish if jews stop emphasizing the unique horror of the Holocaust.

The same UN rapporteur who convened this conference, Doudou Diene, wrote in his October report to the General Assembly that Israel's actions ultimately contributed to the rise in anti-Semitism. Bayefsky quotes him in her Wall Street Journal article: "'The cycle of extreme violence triggered by the dynamics of occupation ... has fuelled profound ethnic antagonism and hatred ... The Palestinian population... is ...suffering discrimination. Even if Israel has the right to defend itself ... a security wall ... constitutes a jarring symbol of seclusion, erected by a people ... marked by the rejection of the ghetto. One ... effect of this conflict is its ... contribution to the rise of ... anti-Semitism.'"

Bayefsky identifies the real message as: "Simply put, Jews are responsible for anti-Semitism. Or, if it weren't for Israel's insistence on defending itself on the same terms as would be applied to any other state faced with five decades of wars and terrorism aimed at its obliteration, Jews would be better off."

The Actors Involved

When asked about the actions of specific UN functionaries against Israel, Bayefsky mentions Peter Hansen, the former head of UNRWA. "He recently came to the defense of Hamas members who are employees of UNRWA. He has repeatedly distorted and misrepresented the facts, starting with the Operation Defensive Shield in Jenin. One of the UN press releases said 'Stop the killing in the camps.' Another senior functionary who grossly exaggerated events on the ground in Jenin was Terje Roed Larsen.

"Kofi Annan and his close associates fail to denounce terrorism against Israelis by naming the terrorists and those responsible for the terrorism. The way the United Nations deals with terrorism when Israelis are its victims is to issue general statements which say either that the two parties should cease all violence or that the Palestinian Authority should work harder to end the violence. They never say who is specifically responsible for the violence directed at Israelis.

"UN special advisor to the Secretary General Lakhdar Brahimi called Israel - a member state of the United Nations - 'the great poison of the Middle East.' Such comments are not about Palestinians. They are about hatred of the Jewish state."

Commemorating the Liberation of Auschwitz

Bayefsky responds to the January 2005 commemorative session of the General Assembly and corresponding exhibit on the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz this way: "One week before the session and the opening of the exhibit, the Secretary General went forward with the General Assembly's plan to create a register of Palestinian damages said to result from Israel's security fence. If developed, it could have serious political and economic implications. There are no plans to register Israeli damages from Palestinian terrorism.

"One month before the Holocaust exhibit, there was an annual exhibit connected to the UN 'solidarity day with the Palestinian people,' long suffering from the catastrophe (Al Naqba according to many UN members) of the creation of the State of Israel. This year the UN displayed a series of photos of Palestinians both real and stylized with clothing revealing their midriffs, the point of which was to establish wanton Palestinian humiliation at Israeli hands. Nothing in the exhibit provided a context for the display. The General Assembly session itself was crafted so as not to have a lasting result; there is, for example, no final document or agreed statement of intent. In short, while the UN may commemorate long dead Jews, the recently deceased or the real and present danger of more Israeli dead - targeted because they are Jews in the Jewish homeland - are not connected to the message of Auschwitz or of serious concern."

The Paralysis

Bayefsky summarizes her opinion on the UN: "The evil of anti-Semitism today moves through its UN host like an opportunistic pathogen. First, discrimination of Israel followed by its demonization; the deification of the enemies of the Jewish state; the denial of Jewish victimhood; denunciation of the Israeli who fights back; and finally, the refusal to identify the assailants.

"Yet there are many who still deny that this is anti-Semitism. They point to commercial interests, to regional politics, to group identity, to opportunistic solidarity - and the aim to prevent the scrutiny of human rights violations closer to home - or to enhancement of individual careers.

"Political scientists see a hard core of Arab and Muslim states with a political agenda; a network of developing countries which count Arab and Muslim states among their friends or align themselves against a long list of Western interests; liberal democracies that are paralyzed by the critique of colonialism and racism, and collaborators among non-governmental organizations and self-appointed representatives of civil society.

"UN actors and supporters remain almost uniformly in denial of the pathogen and its nature. In the final analysis, however, while the motives of international actors do vary, the terrible consequences of these combined forces of cowardice, of opportunism, of anti-Semitism - mobilized and empowered through the UN - are the same." * * *


1. Anne Bayefsky, "Perspectives on Anti-Semitism Today," Lecture at Conference 'Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding,' United Nations Department of Information, New York, 21 June 2004. "One Small Step," WSJ.com, Opinion Journal, Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2004, http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005245.
2. E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.3, 28 January 2004.
3. Anne Bayefsky, "Fatal Failure," National Review online, 30 November 2004.
4. Anne Bayefsky, "Your Tax Dollars at Work," Wall Street Journal, 18 November 2004.
Manfred Gerstenfeld is co-publisher of the JCPA series. To contact JCPA by email at jcpa@netvision.net.il or visit their website: http://www.jcpa.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by David Frankenthal, March 22, 2005.

AOL is still repeatedly blocking JtB's emails to AOL users despite many requests to them to stop this CENSORSHIP. We have also received reports of blatant anti-Israel bias in AOL member forums. JtB advises using one the many far superior options for high speed cable and DSL Internet access

http://bbyinternet.getconnected.com/v_internet/i_common_geography.asp?caller= /v_internet/i_common_offers.asp%3F

See the latest at

David Frankenthal is with Join the Boycott.

To Go To Top
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, March 22, 2005.

CLICK HERE to send this message to President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon, their Cabinets, leaders of Congress and the Knesset and 20 mayors of communities in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. You may edit it as you see fit.

We Oppose the Disengagement Plan! We Americans do not want our taxes to be spent on expelling 8,500 Israelis from their homes in Gaza.

Who will pay for the eviction of thousands more Israelis who will soon be dispossessed in Judea and Samaria? Gaza is only the beginning of the disengagement. Arabs are free to work in Israel, live as citizens in Israel - vote in Israel - and serve in the Israeli Knesset. Why can't Jews living in Gaza have the same rights as Arabs living in Israel?

The Two State Solution is NO SOLUTION!

The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

"Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, March 21, 2005.

This was written by Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org). He is the author of "The Battle of Ideas in the War on Terror: Essays on U.S. Public Diplomacy in the Middle East" (2004).

Memo to: Karen P. Hughes
Re: The Mission of Public Diplomacy
By Robert Satloff
Weekly Standard

Congratulations on your nomination as undersecretary of state for public diplomacy. Though this is a third-level State Department appointment, with an office about a half-mile away from your former prime spot in the West Wing of the White House, it is actually one of the most important jobs in the U.S. government. Like the generals in charge of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the intelligence chiefs running the global war on terror, you will now be in charge of fighting the "battle of ideas."

The battle of ideas is the ideological component of the war on terror. As the 9/11 Commission found, America's real enemy is not terrorism, which is just a tactic. Rather, our enemies are the adherents of an ideology, radical Islamist extremism. On that fateful September morning in 2001, our enemies employed box-cutters and 747s to achieve their objectives; on different days and in different places, they employ less gruesome tactics to the same sinister ends. The Pentagon, the CIA, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security have hundreds of thousands of people fighting the terrorists. Your lonely job is to combat their ideology.

The main theater of conflict is abroad, in Arab and other Muslim societies. That is where Islamist extremists are trying to win control of the social, economic, cultural, and eventually the political lives of countries around the world. But distance from American shores does not make the battle less relevant to American lives.

The question of whether Islamist extremism finds fertile ground in these countries is as fateful as whether states chose to be Communist or free during the Cold War. Although this is, at its core, a fight among Muslims, the United States is a central player; American values, policies, and interests are at stake as well. Your mission is to find ways to identify, nurture, and support Muslim allies in this war. If they win, we win; if they lose, we lose.

This is a hopeful moment in the battle of ideas. In Beirut, Cairo, and elsewhere, people yearning for freedom are challenging the unholy nexus of fear that has made secular authoritarian regimes and radical Muslim activists strange allies over the past two decades. The Bush administration has done an excellent job of leveraging transformative events - the Iraqi election, Arafat's death, etc. - into fulcrums of positive change. Our traditional diplomacy seems right on track.

But since 9/11, our public diplomacy has failed to keep pace. Most critics focus on the paltry resources directed to this task. That obscures the real problem, which has been a vacuous strategy and the absence of leadership. Your nomination, however, raises the prospect of getting it right. You come to the job with two vital qualifications: You are personally close to the president and, by all accounts, you actually support his policies, especially in the Middle East.

After living in an Arab capital for most of the post-9/11 period, and seeing our public-diplomacy effort in action in countries around the Middle East, I humbly offer this series of do's and don'ts:

-- Focus on mission, not message: Your job is not to win friends for America. Your job is to support Muslims committed to the political, social, and cultural battle against Islamist extremism and to advance the cause of freedom within Muslim societies. If we do that properly, friendships will follow.

-- Fight to win: Defeating Islamist extremism is not some policy fad, it's a war. We should wage this battle by supporting our friends, isolating our critics, and punishing our adversaries. And remember - our allies are not an abstraction; they are a hardy band of real-life, flesh-and-blood democrats. In the Middle East, we need more democrats, not just more democracy.

-- Compete for the minds of young Muslims. Squeeze every dollar you can find into promoting education, especially English-language education. As the president said, the ideological war is a generational fight, and education is our most effective strategic weapon. At the moment, however, the Islamists are winning this fight.

-- Banish the terms "Arab world" and "Muslim world" from America's diplomatic lexicon; be as country-specific as possible, in both word and deed. Radical Islamists want to erase borders and create a supranational world where the lines of demarcation run between the "house of Islam" and the "house of war." Don't cede the battlefield to them without a fight.

-- Don't be condescending or bashful. Talk to Muslims as you would have them talk to you - maturely, candidly, openly. Many may oppose certain U.S. policies - such as the war in Iraq or our support of Israel - but that's okay. We should be ready to listen to complaints about U.S. policies, engage in continual dialogue, and "agree to disagree" in order to join forces in an anti-extremist coalition. Whether they are orthodox, pious, lapsed, or secular Muslims, if they are willing to serve on the front line in the struggle against radical Islam, America should be ready to hear them out.

-- Never read polls: If you judge your success by America's poll numbers, you will fail - both in your mission and your job. In the Middle East, polls tend to distort and exaggerate; public opinion is episodic and driven by news cycles; and popular attitudes seem to have little impact on people's behavior. In your old job, polls may have been essential; in this job, they are toxic.

-- Don't try to accommodate, co-opt, or "dialogue" with Islamists. They are much better at this game than we are and, in the process, we confuse and demoralize our allies. And don't try to tell Muslims how to be "good Muslims" or suggest that America knows what is "true Islam." Focus on what we really know something about, i.e., running a reasonably well-functioning democracy for 229 years.

Here are two last pieces of advice.

First, recognize from your first day on the job that you sit in a building whose mission can run counter to yours. While your task is to reach out to foreign publics, the State Department is set up to engage with foreign governments. Even if your fellow tenants of the seventh floor have all the right intentions - which certainly seems the case - you need to ready yourself to do battle with a bureaucracy hard-wired for quiet, capital-to-capital diplomacy. At best, you can trigger some creative tension with regional bureaus; at worst, you will go hat-in-hand to them for personnel, resources, and access.

Your ties to the president will be helpful but they won't be enough. You need to be empowered - by him and by the secretary of state - to be in charge of our nation's strategic communications. You should be prepared to use that power to improve the entire range of outreach to Arab and Muslim publics, using all media at our disposal, from the Internet to textbooks. This may require White House commitment to legislative reforms and additional appropriations to improve America's capacity to fight the ideological battle properly and successfully.

Second, and this may be the toughest part - do no harm. Since 9/11, dozens of smart, well-meaning people have taken a look at America's public diplomacy problems; some of the ideas they have come up with are clever and creative; others run the gamut from silly and stupid to downright masochistic. Put every suggestion to this simple test: If it were implemented, would radical Islamists be better off or worse off? You would be surprised how many reasonable-sounding proposals fail this test.

Finally, if the president's second term is about "legacy," then you are in the right job. So far, the president will be remembered for having met the challenge of 9/11 with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However successful those two democratic experiments may turn out, their legacy pales beside the current opportunity - to define the second Bush administration as the one that turned the tide against the global ideological threat of radical Islam, thereby giving strength and succor to democrats in every Muslim country. Now, that's something worth chiseling into granite.

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 Brodetzky, March 21, 2005.

This speech was delivered by Joseph M. Hochstein (hochjm@netvision.net.il). It is entitled "Who was Wingate?" The memorial program marked 61 years since the death of Maj. Gen. Orde Charles Wingate.

Joseph Hochstein was editor of the Jewish Week in Washington until he made aliyah. He wrote this:

"We had the Wingate memorial program today (March 21) in Jerusalem. We held it today because March 24 falls on the Fast of Esther this year. We had two last-minute replacements. Dan Nadel was bedridden, so Ivan Goldstein, the new JWV post commander, chaired the program. Dr. Fisher (sp?) of the Wingate Institute spoke about Wingate in Eretz Israel, filling in for Dr. Chaim Peri of Yemin Orde. Michael Oren gave a nice talk on Christian Zionism. My remarks are below.

All the best,

When Dan Nadel asked me to talk on "Who was Wingate" he explained he had just spoken with two people who didn't know who Wingate was. One worked for the Knesset, and the other for the army.

I can add that I heard on the radio recently that half of British high school students don't know who Winston Churchill was.

If that is true, it certainly doesn't justify Israelis' forgetting Orde Wingate.

But it does say something about how a new generation can grow up ignorant of what came before.

Who Wingate was depends on who is describing him. Churchill said Wingate was a genius who might have become a man of destiny. Another Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, wrote that Wingate would have been Israel's first military chief of staff, if he had lived. Moshe Dayan and other Israelis who served in Wingate's Special Night Squads saw him as a leader who, as Dayan put it, "taught us everything we know."

Wingate's detractors also held strong opinions. Toward the end of Wingate's career, a British general in New Delhi said Wingate was unfit to command a brigade. When Wingate heard about this, he said: "The personal attacks cannot be answered by argument. But they can be, and are, answered by the facts. It is because I am what I am, objectionable though that appears to my critics, that I win battles."

Wingate was unusual, by any standard. He was bold, eccentric, a brilliant tactician, a person of great determination and immense physical endurance, a fierce warrior who said it was wrong to hate one's enemy, a loner and outsider who once tried to take his own life but went on to become a hero so celebrated that a popular American comic strip used to mention him. These are qualities that give rise to legends, but they are not the main reason we gather each year in Wingate's memory.

Nor do we remember him only for his battlefield accomplishments.

Wingate's story is remarkable. He came here as a captain in British intelligence during the Arab uprising in 1936. He recruited Jews for counter-insurgency operations which soon put Arab attackers on the defensive. His pro-Jewish stand eventually led to his recall to England in 1939, with a note in his passport forbidding him from ever returning here. In 1941, he led an insurrection in Ethiopia, defeating a superior Italian occupation force and restoring Emperor Hailie Selassie to the throne. In 1943, he led 3,000 jungle fighters, the famous Chindits, behind Japanese lines in Burma, and the allied world hailed him as a hero.

In 1944, sixty-one years ago this week, Wingate died in a plane crash while commanding a second, much larger Chindit operation in Burma. By that time he was 41 years old and a major general.

This barebones story doesn't reveal the many sides of Wingate the person. I'd like to mention briefly three of Wingate's qualities that bring us here today - his vision, political involvement, and affinity for the Jewish people.

While Wingate excelled as a tactician, he also took the long view. In 1937, after four months in the country, he told his cousin Sir Reginald Wingate that the British Empire should ally itself militarily with the Jews. Although the Jews had no army at the time, he said they would be better soldiers than the British and could provide the key to preserving the Empire. He saw a general war coming. He said the League of Nations' failure in Ethiopia in 1936 made the war inevitable. He said Mandatory Palestine could take in one million Jews in seven years. This was when Britain was moving toward barring Jews from entering at all. A few years later, with World War II in progress, he preached Long-Range Penetration - attacking deep behind enemy lines. He explained that this meant armies could extend the range of ground forces by exploiting two factors relatively new in warfare - aircraft and radio. He felt that once he could prove its effectiveness in Burma, his concept of building strongholds behind enemy lines could become the way to take Hanoi and Bangkok, and eventually China.

Wingate represented the fifth consecutive generation of his family in the military. This did not make him immune to politics. He was close to Chaim Weizmann, Moshe Sharett and other Zionist leaders. His banishment from the Holy Land came after his commanders objected to his lobbying for the Jewish cause while on leave in London.

Wingate often seemed to be an outsider, but he has been called an "insider's outsider." Through most of his career he had patrons in high places, among them Sir Archibald Wavell, Sir Edmund Ironside, Lord Louis Mountbatten and Churchill himself. Churchill had Wingate accompany him to the 1943 Quadrant conference in Quebec. There Wingate briefed the U.S. President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and won American support for an ambitious airborne operation that became his last campaign.

Wingate made enemies among the military establishment. One biography itemizes what other officers disliked about Wingate - "his rebellious scorn, his arrogance, his paranoid touchiness, his reckless rudeness, his flouting of convention, his personal scruffiness, his leftish ideas, and (dare one suggest it?) his strange obsession with Zionism and the Jews."

In 1939, Wingate made an official declaration: "neither I, nor my wife, nor any member of our families has a drop of Jewish blood in our veins." He said this in a formal appeal against critical evaluations he received from his commanders. He added, "I am not ashamed to say that I am a real and devoted admirer of the Jews ... Had more officers shared my views the rebellion would have come to a speedy conclusion some years ago."

What made Wingate a Zionist remains a matter of speculation. He grew up in a small Protestant denomination known as the Plymouth Brethren. He knew the Bible from childhood. He clearly identified with the warrior Gideon. He made his base at Ein Harod, where Gideon recruited his little army. When he was sent to liberate Ethiopia, Wingate called his command "Gideon Force." In the last year of his life, he proposed the name "Gideon Force" for the second Chindit expedition. He was turned down. The approved name was Special Force.

After Wingate arrived here in 1936 and told the Jews he wanted to help them, they were suspicious. He was, after all, a British intelligence officer. By Wingate's own account, every other British official here in those days disliked Jews.

In time, the Jews came to see that this unorthodox Christian who aspired to command a Jewish army was indeed their friend. That's what they came to call him - in Hebrew, "Hayedid - the friend." And that's how we remember him still. At a time when the world was turning its back on the Jews, Wingate chose to be their friend. We do not forget such a friend.

I'd like to close with some of Wingate's own words - excerpts from his Order of the Day launching the first Chindit operation behind Japanese lines in Burma, in February 1943. Here is Wingate, in a message to 3,000 soldiers who are about to follow him into the jungle on a mission from which more than 800 will never return.

"... It is always a minority that occupies the front line. It is a still smaller minority that accepts with a good heart tasks like this that we have chosen to carry out....

"We have all had the opportunity of withdrawing, and we are here because we have chosen to be here; that is, we have chosen to bear the burden and the heat of the day. Men who make this choice are above the average in courage. We therefore have no fear for the staunchness and guts of our comrades...

"Victory in war cannot be counted upon, but what can be counted is that we shall go forward, determined to do what we can to bring this war to the end we believe best for our friends and comrades in arms - without boastfulness or forgetting our duty, resolved to do the right, so far as we can see the right.

"Our aim is to make possible a government of the world in which all men can live at peace and with equal opportunity of service." Note Wingate's ultimate war aim - equal opportunity of service.

Wingate concluded: "Finally, knowing the vanity of man's effort and the confusion of his purpose, let us pray that God may accept our service and direct our endeavors, so that when we have done all, we shall see the fruit of our labors and be satisfied."

That's who Wingate was.

Moshe Brodetzky is an American, now living in Jerusalem. He was a leader in the "Let My People Go" campaign to persuade the USSR to let Jews leave for Israel; he developed innovative and creative ways of dramatising the plight of the Soviet Jews.

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 21, 2005.
Professor at Depaul suspended for supporting Israel; Same Campus where Neonazi Norman Finkelstein Teaches Undisturbed

Depaul "University" is a Catholic college in Chicago, best known for its hiring neonazi Norman Finkelstein as an assistant professor in political science after Finkelstein got fired from two NY area adjunct teaching jobs. Finkelstein is a disciple of Holocaust Denier David Irving and claims Irving is a great and authoritative historian. Finkelstein refers to the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis as the "Six Million" in quotation marks and says that every Holocaust survivor is a fraud and a thief and a liar. Finkelstein routinely libels Elie Wiesel and is the star on every Holocaust Denial neonazi web site on earth, serving as the "Jew who proved there was never any Holocaust". He has been denounced as a fraud and anti-Semite by ALan Dershowitz, historian Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, and just about everyone else on earth. The NY Times compared Finkelstein's book to Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

In the latest news from Depaul "university", a professor has been suspended for supporting Israel. This article is from http://frontpagemag.org/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17425: "Professor Suspended After Defending Israel"

Roger L. Simon (http://rogerlsimon.com/) tipped me to the outrageous story of DePaul University Professor Thomas Klocek, who has been suspended after a verbal altercation with Muslim student groups.

The Chicago Jewish News has an account of the confrontation; if this is accurate, professor Klocek is apparently guilty of nothing more than expressing pro-Israel views in the face of extremist Palestinian propaganda, including the ever-present canards about Rachel Corrie:

What happened, then, on the afternoon of Sept. 15 has been pieced together from accounts by Klocek, his attorney, John W. Mauck of the law firm Mauck & Baker, accounts from the school and from the DePaulia, the student newspaper, as well as from an e-mail account by Salma Nassar, president of the DePaul group Students for Justice in Palestine and one of the students who was involved in the incident. (Nassar did not respond to requests for an interview from Chicago Jewish News).

Here's what all the parties agree on: The trouble began when Klocek stopped at a booth run by Students for Justice in Palestine and one next to it from UMMA (United Muslims Moving Ahead.) He picked up some literature from the SJP table and read a sheet depicting the death of Rachel Corrie, the American activist who was killed by an Israeli bulldozer when she tried to stop a house demolition in the West Bank town of Rafah.

The handout described Corrie as being "murdered by Israeli bulldozer" and went on to state that she "was deliberately ran (sic) over, twice, after a two-hour confrontation between the non-violent international activists and the Israeli armed forces."

Klocek said he turned to the student staffing the SJP booth and said, "You know, there's more than one perspective on the Middle East conflict. You're only presenting one side here."

Students at the booth "began to engage me in conversation," he said. Klocek expressed his belief that "strictly speaking, right now there is no such place as Palestine on the map. The Palestinian people were simply Arabs who lived in the West Bank and Gaza."

One of the women at the table told him that she was a Palestinian, then, according to Klocek, "she got up from the table and said, you know, the Palestinians are being treated by Israelis the same way Hitler treated the Jews."

"I took umbrage," Klocek said. "I told her that was an absolutely scurrilous statement, an absolute lie. I said that I believe the Israeli armed forces have exercised very careful restraint in their responses to what has been almost daily suicide bombings. There is a big difference between (Israelis) targeting a terrorist and someone strapped with bombs going in to a cafe or a seder and blowing up people."

Then, Klocek said, "the UMMA people began to come over. It was eight against one. A very spirited conversation" ensued.

Klocek said that when he felt the discussion was generating more heat than light on both sides, he decided that neither side was going to convince the other and started to leave. When a student asked if he had any connection with the university, he told her who he was and what courses he taught.

As he walked away, Klocek said, "students began coming after me, and I thumbed my chin at them. It's an Italian New Jersey expression meaning, 'I'm finished,' 'I'm out of here.'"

"Students for Justice in Palestine," of course, has a wildly different story; and as usual, it involves "racism:"

Nassar, the SJP president, described the event in an Oct. 4 e-mail she sent to a number of campus organizations as "a racist encounter." She wrote that when students "responded to (Klocek) in a polite and professional manner ... he continued to make derogatory and racist comments," including making comments about how all terror attacks have been committed by Muslims. (Klocek said that he was quoting Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg, who in turn was quoting Abdel Rahman Al-Rashed, the manager of an Arab news channel, who stated that "It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims.")

Nassar went on to state that "we tried engaging Professor Klocek in conversation but he kept interrupting us and did not allow us to answer any of his questions." In addition, she wrote, "he continuously referred to Palestinians as 'those people' and went on to say that Palestinians 'do not exist.'"

She wrote that when Klocek was leaving, he "made an obscene hand gesture (he flipped us off.)"

Nassar wrote that she and other students from SJP and UMMA immediately reported the incident to the dean of students and the dean of the School of New Learning, as well as to the advisors of their groups. "Professor Klocek disrespected the student/professor relationship," she wrote. "It was completely inappropriate for him to approach students in an aggressive manner, his racist and ignorant comments about Muslims and Palestinians, and the profanity he used completely crossed the line." (Klocek admits that he "raised his voice" but denies using profanity.)

In an interview she gave to the DePaulia, the student newspaper, Nassar added that Klocek "was very aggressive and angry and would go from one topic to another. Every time we tried to address a topic he'd get angry and switch." She reiterated in the interview that his comments were "inappropriate and offensive."

And that was all it took for Dean Dumbleton to cave in:

Nine days after the incident, Klocek was called to the office of Susanne Dumbleton, dean of the School for New Learning. Dumbleton told him that she had received two letters, one each from SJP and UMMA, and that "there were very serious charges against me from the students," according to Klocek, who never saw the letters.

He said Dumbleton told him that she had met with the students and their faculty advisors from the two groups, and that they were "hurt and crushed" by Klocek's remarks. "They said you used your title as a professor and your power over them to force them to accept your remarks as true. The dean said she agreed with them," Klocek related. (Dumbleton did not respond to repeated requests for an interview with Chicago Jewish News.)

She then told Klocek he was suspended, with pay, for the remainder of the autumn quarter. She also advised him to stay off campus, which he did, and suggested that he not talk to the student newspaper, the DePaulia, Klocek said. (The school denies that the latter suggestion was ever made.)

Marathon Pundit (http://marathonpundit.blogspot.com/) has more on this outrage. Sunday, March 20, 2005 http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog

Depaul University is today essentially a center of Holocaust Denial and anti-Semitism. To tell its officers what you think, a list of them and their emails is available at http://www.depaul.edu/about_DP/university_officers.asp

Here is Finkelstein's vita on the DePaul web site, http://condor.depaul.edu/~psc/vitae/FinkelsteinCV.htm which also links to Finkelstein's personal pro-nazi web site: http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/

The chair of the department is

Patrick Callahan
Room 2201, 990 West
Ph.D., Ohio State University
Chair, Political Science Department
international relations, American foreign policy, and ethics of war

For more information on the Thomas Klocek Affair, go to http://www.thedepaulia.com/story.asp?artid=77§id=1 and http://www.chicagojewishnews.com/cover.jsp and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1353875/posts and http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17335

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 Rachel Saperstein, March 21, 2005.

We had guests this Shabbat: our Jerusalem rabbi, Rabbi Chaim Eisen and his wife Raya; and Member of the Knesset Dr. Arye Eldad and his wife Leora and their newlywed son and daughter-in-law.

There was more to the visit than a pleasurable Shabbat with friends. This was a test of compatibility. Would we all get along if the visit were to be extended one month, or two? The homes in Gush Katif need to be filled with opponents of the expulsion plan, and with two guest bedrooms we wanted our home to be filled as well. Pastor Jim Vineyard of Oklahoma City has already reserved his place, even, as he puts it, "if I have to parachute in."

We need quality here, not royalty. The women have to be tough. The stress level will grow. The men need to pitch in with physical work. Will they hang in if the government shuts down our water and electricity?

We need calm, easy-going people. Those given to hysteria won't find their place here. The people of Gush Katif are quiet and self-effacing. Prima donnas need not apply.

Shabbat guests are always a joy but if you want to visit please remember we are people trying to maintain normal lives. We have homes and jobs and children to care for.

We often go out at night to deliver information kits to the people of Israel. We speak to people eye-to-eye, heart-to-heart. We are tired at the end of the week. Our children have not seen us and need our attention. They, especially, feel the stress.

So if you come, offer to help. Bring your own linens and towels. Play with the children. Help set the table, help serve, wash dishes, take out the rubbish, make your bed, keep your room and bathroom clean, clean up before you leave. I am writing this to the young men as well as the young women who visit. Please don't be a prince or princess. We need kind hearts, willing hands and soft voices. Please don't cry and exhaust us emotionally with your tears. We need smiles, kind words and encouragement. A jovial "So where are you going when they throw you out?" is not our idea of a warm greeting.

I personally dislike "the look" of pity or concern. Being the wife of a twice-wounded husband I have been on the receiving end of "the look" many times. We always smile and joke when people meet us. A smile or joke in response is much appreciated. We don't want "the look".

Many parents have called asking us to host their child and at least three of his or her friends. Your desire to have your children experience a Gush Katif Shabbat is admirable, but we can't do it all the time. And when we can do it, please advise your child on how to be a good guest.

There is much to see in Gush Katif and as the days grow warm you might enjoy a day trip to the beach. We have separate beaches for men, women and families. Shower in the shower rooms. Bring your own towels and food. Neve Dekalim has a lovely zoo, three restaurants, two pizzerias.

The army is planning to declare Gush Katif a "closed military zone". Access to Gush Katif might be limited or restricted. So come and enjoy Gush Katif now, and may we all be privileged to enjoy its beauty and hospitality for many many years to come.

Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe live in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel. She is a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 21, 2005.

I t is difficult to decide if Attorney General Meni Mazuz is naturally stupid or his Leftist bloodlust has overwhelmed any rationality he possessed. Every day sees a more extreme threat being issued by him on behalf of the Sharon Junta. The clear intent of it all being to squash any protest against this Junta. What will happen in fact will be something else entirely. Most of the "casual" protester who oppose the Junta will probably be frighten off but the "hard core" will prepare for active violence.

The vast majority of Jews in Israel are opposed to the Junta. They see its actions and policies as wrong and dangerous yet most do not see the Junta as an existential threat to either the State of Israel or to themselves. They believe that "some how" there will be a tomorrow and we will (at great cost and with even greater suffering) overcome the damage they are doing. There is a minority, however, that views the situation differently. They see the Junta as an existential threat to both the existence of the State of Israel and to their own lives and those of their families and friends. As long as there are non-violent means to protest and influence the situation, the vast majority of this group will not use violence. However, take away all democratic means of protest and they will turn to armed struggle.

Unfortunately, that may very well be the intent of this escalating scale of judicial threats. The hatred and bloodlust of the Left is well know. Over the years it has been the Left and only the Left that has talked of Civil War and praised the benefits of murdering their opponents. The Leftist SHABBAK has time and time again invented "Jewish undergrounds" (in a transparent attempt to justify repression of dissent and free speech) only to come up empty handed each time or with one or two mental cases. Even their use of agent provocateurs has had only the most limited of success.

Unable to force those they hate with such intensity to commit real crime and present the excuse they seek to destroy them, they began to invent crime. First came the crime of racism. Then we were given incitement and insulting a public official. Then it became a crime not to being able to foretell the future and know if someone intended to commit a crime. Now jaywalking is to be a Capital offence. All of this happening simultaneously with the release of thousands of Arab murderers and the paying of US$50 Million tribute to the PLO every month by the Government of Israel.

Israel's Leftist rulers have so isolated themselves mentally and physically from the rest of the nation that they do not realize that they are a tiny minority. If not for the corrupt and manipulated electoral system in Israel, they would have been thrown out years ago. Should they, G-D forbid, succeed in igniting public ire against themselves and cause a violent confrontation, they will be utterly destroyed.

This is a news item from Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com; it is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78778

(IsraelNN.com) Anti-disengagement protesters who seriously disrupt traffic face up to 20 years in jail, Attorney General Meni Mazuz warned today. He told police officials that freedom of expression does not include causing civil disturbances. A few dozen protesters last week tied up Tel Aviv traffic for hours when they burned tires on a major highway.

Mazuz said he will seek the harshest punishment possible under the law. He added that disturbing traffic restricts the public's freedom. Police official have said that the toughest part of the planned evacuation this summer might be demonstrations throughout the country at the same time that most of the police force will be in the 25 Jewish communities to be dismantled.

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 Richard H. Shulman, March 21, 2005.


"Yediot Aharonot says that, 'Ever since the Sharm summit was declared, the leaderships in Jerusalem and Ramallah have taken care to portray it in gray colors,' and suggests that, 'The intifada has returned both peoples to a situation of mutual suspicion, rage, and lack of trust.' The editors suggest that, 'While the majority in Israel still believes that the Arabs want to throw us into the sea, most Palestinians (i.e., Arabs) still believe that Israel prefers land over peace. Both sides have continued to think - and this belief has almost become a rule since September 2000 - that the other side understands only force? But right now, when the leaders are meeting, the question is still - is there another way?'" (Foreign Ministry, 2/8.) If Israel gives up territory it needs for self-defense, it would get war. What the Arabs suspect is false and what the Israelis suspect is true. That is how it always has been. This Israeli daily's even-handedness between their peace-loving country and the deceitful, bigoted, war-loving Arabs is unwarranted and shameful. It means that the Israeli Left is deceitful, too, only it is deceitful towards its own people.


"The Jerusalem Post comments: 'Based on experience, yet contrary to the international conventional wisdom, premature Israeli concessions lead not to the beginning of a peace process but to the end of Palestinian (Arab) compliance with their commitments. This time, as in the past, Israel will doubtless release prisoners, pull back its forces, stop running after wanted terrorists, release funds, remove checkpoints and welcome more Palestinian workers. But if this time is to be different, the Palestinian claim that Israel has not done enough of all these things should not be accepted as an excuse for the PA not doing what it can and must do. Showering Abbas with 'help' will have the opposite of the intended effect if such help is not made conditional on concrete results.'" (Op. Cit.)

The editorial's facts are correct but its premise and hope are not. There can't be an "end" to Arab compliance when there never was a beginning. So much for the "Post's" premise. "if this time is to be different?" Why should there be any hope that this time it is different. Practically the same cast of characters, jihadist covenants, performance, and reassurances to their own people.

I think no concessions should be made to a fanatical enemy. At least withhold concessions until the Arabs comply. The editorial pulls its punches by failing to denounce the government for not withholding such concessions and the US for demanding them in advance of long-delayed Arab compliance.

The US has never demanded Arab compliance seriously but only as a formality. It donates large sums to the terrorist entity without its having to live up to agreements made as much with the US as with Israel. A proper editorial would ponder why the US still demands such concessions.


This is the apt title of an article pointing out that if Israel did not exist, the same pathologies would be driving Arab society. If in 1947, the Jews had left Israel, the foreign states still would have carved up western Palestine and there would have been Arab refugees. This pathology drives the Arab-Israel conflict and all the other conflicts the Arabs initiate, which involve states, ethnic groups, and religions (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.17 from Josef Joffe in Foreign Policy, 1/2005).


"Haaretz" asserts that Sec. Rice was coming to the region to help solve the Arab-Israel conflict (Foreign Ministry, 2/8).

Not to solve it. To demand that Israel knuckle under.


There will be progress unless blocked by "extremists on both sides." IMRA calls that comment "Typical equalization of "extremists on both sides." (IMRA, 2/8.)

They never say what is extremist about anyone on the Israeli side, but the Israelis do not go in for murder and do not deny the legitimacy of the other side's religion. The Arabs do.


"The self-hating Israeli may be someone raised within Israel society, someone who knows its institutions and people well, someone who is even a part of its academic, journalistic, legal or political elite. This familiarity and knowledge of the society he is criticizing gives his criticism particular force and even authenticity. It legitimizes the criticism of Israel-bashers, even anti-Semitic Israel-bashers, as they will exultantly proclaim, "But we are only saying what the Israelis says about themselves."

"One great locus of Israeli self-haters is its most prestigious daily newspaper, Haaretz. The long list of Israeli self.haters is headed by Gideon Levi and Amira Hass. Their identification with Israel's enemies is total, and they have been known to invent and distort facts, do anything and everything possible, to absolve the Arabs and blame Israel in disputed incidents. Another vicious hater of Israelis is the writer Yitzhak Laor, whose reputation was built in part on a blood-libel poem featuring Israelis baking matzot from Arab children's blood."

"But the list is very long indeed and is frequently expressed not only in what is said, but also in its tone. What joy is in the tone of these writers whenever anything goes wrong for Israel. And how eagerly do they rush to proclaim an Israeli defeat and disaster."

"Haaretz is always ready to open its paper to academic Israel self-haters. Ze'ev Sternhall and Baruch Kimmerling frequently tell us why the Israelis are the stupidest, cruelest, most inhumane people in relation to the kind, peace-loving and gentle-souled Palestinian Arabs." (Israel is humane to the inhumane Palestinian Arabs, but not always humane to its own people.)

"Another answer is that these people are 'idealists', who expected perfection from Israel and are deeply disappointed. They may have been raised with pictures of Israel as a light to the nations, and come by their own eyes to see how filled with faults and failings it is. Many have suffered, as I suspect most of us on occasion have, from rudeness, stupidity and inconsiderateness. But they, instead of considering the great stress many are especially subject to here, are unforgiving; instead, they are angry and resentful."

"All this, however, does not answer the question of why their resentment and hatred is so deep, why it leads them to so blindly and absolutely support the 'other side' when the other side is clearly, in terms of basic human decency, a very bad lot indeed. It does not answer the question of why, instead of dislike and resentment and criticism of undesirable parts of Israeli society, there is such hatred of it. And it does not answer the question of why, instead of desiring to change the society for the better, they seem to be aiming at the undermining of it." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/8, e-mail from someone's essay concluding that those people promote antisemitism).

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 NGO Monitor Organization, March 21, 2005.
SUMMARY: By employing Lucy Mair as a researcher in Israel/Occupied Territories, Kenneth Roth has once again demonstrated his policy of filling Human Rights Watch's Middle East department with like-minded politicized individuals whose priorities are not in keeping with the promotion of universal human rights values. Ms. Mair's qualifications include writing for the "Electronic Intifada: and work with Grassroots International (www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v1n03/v1n03-1.htm), a radical pro-Palestinian political organization.

Ken Roth and Human Rights Watch have employed Lucy Mair as a researcher in Israel/Occupied Territories. Ms. Mair's qualifications include writing for the "Electronic Intifada" and work with Grassroots International, a radical pro-Palestinian political organization. (Since HRW's employment process is secret, and not subject to independent review, we are unable to compare her credentials and expertise on universal human rights issues with the other candidates - www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v3n04/NGOsAdvertisePositionsinMiddleEast.htm) Her descriptions of Life in Palestine (http://electronicintifada.net/v2/diaries.shtml), and articles for "Palestine Now" (http://www.grassrootsonline.org/Palestine%20Now/pal_0426/main.htm), etc., focus exclusively on Palestinian "fear and the loss and the humiliation and the despair", with no mention of terror, suicide bombings, and the human rights of Israelis. References to Israeli soldiers "protected by arrogance and hatred" are hostile stereotypes, and she echoes the false massacre claims in referring to Palestinians "killed in their homes in Jenin when the tanks and the bulldozers ate up their camp". In this extreme biased approach to Israel that extends far beyond legitimate criticism, she joins the other members of HRW's Middle East team, including Sarah Leah Whitson (from MADRE) and Joe Stork (from MERIP).

Writing for the "Electronic Intifada" in partnership with Robyn Long of the highly politicized Palestinian Environmental NGO Network (PENGON) - http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#pengon - and the "Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign", Mair excuses Palestinian responsibility for their situation. Using a simplistic hypothesis (http://electronicintifada.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/7/2205), she claims that "the Palestinian economy lay decimated from the three-year long Israeli military crackdown against the intifada". Referring to access gates in the security barrier, Mair makes unsubstantiated claims that "there have been reports of Palestinians shot, beaten, humiliated, and prevented from crossing." Mair even goes as far as stating opposition to the security barrier even if its route was moved to the Green Line, calling it "unacceptable to Palestinians, who recognize that even building the Wall along the Green Line, while perhaps minimizing the loss of land and damage to property, would make Israel's crippling closure of the West Bank and Gaza permanent and devastate the Palestinian economy."

Mair has previously demonstrated her politicized involvement in Middle East issues, sharing a platform with recognized anti-Israel activists such as Phyllis Bennis at a "Freedom and Justice for Palestine Conference on 31 March 2001 (http://cesr.org/low/node/view/626). On 3 May 2003, Mair spoke at a meeting of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, again making allegations based on unsubstantiated Palestinian incitement claims. Speaking about water issues on behalf of the Center for Economic and Social Rights, Mair claimed (http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/0/ 717593574B3A7D41C1256D1E004ACFC1?opendocument) that "the Israeli army had destroyed two wells in Rafah, in the Gaza Strip, that provided nearly half of the city's drinking water. Drivers of water tankers and water maintenance personnel had been physically attacked and threatened by the Israeli army and illegal settlers." Then, representing the Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens' Rights, she asserted that "The military forces were shooting at people, including newborn babies. Patients seeking medical assistance were dying at Israeli checkpoints because they were not given access to hospitals."

Thus, HRW has hired someone whose experience in 'human rights' is based upon a history of promoting the Palestinian cause with absolutely no regard for the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the rights of Israelis to defend themselves from Palestinian terror. Kenneth Roth has once again demonstrated his policy of filling HRW's Middle East department with like-minded politicized individuals whose priorities are not in keeping with the promotion of universal human rights values.

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 - see http://www.ngo-monitor.org.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, March 20, 2005.

The season of NPR's fund raising is upon us. Despite NPR's often heard self hipe that its news is accurate, its reporting about Israel and the Middle East conflict is often far from it. Ask yourself the following question: If one segment of the news is proven inaccurate, how can I rely on the accuracy of any other segments?

Following, you will find the very interesting latest CAMERA report about NPR and Israel.

With regard to Peter Kenyon's dispatch of March 9, 2005, in which he reported that "most observers believe under international law all Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are illegal." Please read Eugene Rostow's letter on the subject which I attached below the CAMERA Report. Maybe someone in NPR would care to send Rostow's letter to Peter Kenyon and all other NPR reporters? When will NPR cease to use the Arab lie of the "illegal" settlements in the "occupied territories?"

When considering a contribution to NPR, please take into account its role in maligning Israel and harming its cause. Certainly, any person, Jewish or not, who cares about Israel, should withhold contributing any money to NPR until it changes its biased ways. Your Truth Provider, Yuval.

1. This article is by Andrea Levin and is entitled "On CAMERA: Another NPR Winter of Distortion," March 18, 2005. Andrea Levin is Executive Director of CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. www.camera.org

As sure as the calendar moves toward spring, National Public Radio stations turn to a fresh season of fund-raising. For listeners wondering about the status of the network's longstanding bias against Israel, a snapshot of coverage in early 2005 offers few signs of positive change. Instead, the tilt toward Arab positions continues. Network gestures of accountability, including sporadic corrections and quarterly self-examinations of Middle East reporting, amount to little more than public relations damage control efforts.

Sloppiness with factual precision is still commonplace. NPR's Peter Kenyon, for instance, declared on March 9 that "most observers believe under international law all Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are illegal." Who these unnamed "observers" are and how Kenyon tallied up their views to conclude "most" consider settlements illegal is unclear. His count would necessarily exclude American policymakers, since the official U.S. view does not hold that settlements, regardless of considerations of their strategic utility, are illegal.

The round-up of guest speakers was also numbingly familiar, with, for instance, no fewer than nine interviews in eight weeks with Palestinian-Jordanian journalist Rami Khouri, editor at large of Lebanon's Daily Star. An outspoken advocate of Arab views, Khouri, for example, argued on March 8 that Hezbollah is "a very impressive, legitimate, even heroic resistance movement" and he dismissed any menace that group poses to the Jewish state. "Hezbollah," he declared, "is not a big threat to Israel." Neither Khouri nor the NPR host mentioned Hezbollah's declared dedication to Israel's destruction, or Israeli estimates that 13,000 Iranian supplied artillery and short-range Hezbollah rockets are trained on northern Israel, some in reach of major population centers.

Nor are any references made to Hezbollah's Nazi-style anti-Semitic rhetoric, widely disseminated on the group's Al Manar television. Omitted too are Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah's screeds against Israel, terming the nation a "cancerous entity," an "ultimate evil," and a "predatory beast." Excluded are rantings such as: "Throughout history the Jews have been Allah's most cowardly and greedy creatures."

Among others repeatedly invited to comment on events was Khaled al Maeena, editor of Saudi Arabia's Arab News who has written that Israel "commits mass murder against Palestinians" and has railed against the monitoring group MEMRI for its exposs of Arab anti-Semitism.

Robert Malley, an outspoken proponent of the view that Israel was insufficiently forthcoming at the Camp David/Taba talks in 2000/2001 when it offered the Palestinians a state in more than 95% of the West Bank and Gaza, made another of his frequent appearances. So too did author Patrick Seale, a notorious apologist for the late Hafez al Assad. In each of these and other similar cases the guest speaker was presented as a neutral commentator.

During this same time, NPR's Robert Siegel spent several weeks in Israel, reporting from the region and filing at least fourteen stories. Although he was there during the February 25 terrorist attack on a Tel Aviv nightspot, he did not cover the breaking story or do a follow-up on the victims. There were predictable segments with Hanan Ashrawi, Nabil Shaath and Saeb Erakat. There were familiar paired segments of Israeli and Palestinian students and predictable NPR laxity in challenging blatant Palestinian falsehoods. When Arab students recited a litany of distorted allegations about Israel, Siegel interjected one apologetic corrective, noting that contrary to a Palestinian student's claim that Israel had failed to open checkpoints or release prisoners: "By Palestinian standards a very small release, but a few hundred people have been released so far."

To the ludicrous claim that "during Oslo period, there was no bombings, there was nothing," Siegel was silent, failing to remind listeners that Oslo spawned unprecedented terror bombings. In fact, the Palestinians killed some 250 Israelis between Arafat's arrival in the territories in July 1994 and his launching of the terror war in September 2000.

But Siegel does not just fail to counter distortions, he himself presents Palestinian views as fact. On March 1, for instance, he declared that "one of the real obstacles of the moment...is the security barrier..." He added: "In many parts, it is pretty - although the word is disputed - it sure is a wall."

In the Israeli view, "one of the real obstacles of the moment" is the ongoing failure of the Palestinians to eradicate the terrorist infrastructure, and the fence is a monument to Palestinians' refusal to control the killers in their midst. Nor is it accurate and professional of Siegel not to report the actual makeup of the security barrier, which is 95% fence and 5% wall.

Early 2005 has been more of the same on NPR. Listeners who care about factual, balanced and unbiased reporting should keep this in mind when they're asked to send a check.

2. This was a Letter to the New York Times on April 1, 1992 by Eugene V. Rostow. It is entitled "Israeli Settlement and the Geneva Convention."

To the Editor:

I apologize for an error in "Agreements Don't Bar West Bank Settlements" (letter, March 18), on the legality of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which states that "international lawyers differ on whether the 1949 Geneva Convention applies to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, because Israel is not a signatory." Both Israel and Jordan did sign and ratify the convention, Israel with a reservation.

The error does not affect my argument, however. Article 2 of the convention provides that the agreement applies "to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a high contracting party." Thus the convention cannot apply because the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip have never been generally recognized as territories of Jordan. Jordan administered them as a belligerent occupant between 1948 and 1967 after a war of aggression against Israel in 1948. Jordan's attempt to annex these areas in 1950 was recognized only by Britain (except for Jerusalem) and perhaps by Pakistan.

In any event, Jordan has formally renounced whatever claims it may have had to the territory, which is a residual part of the Palestine Mandate and therefore subject to the rights of "the Jewish people" to make "close settlement" on the land. I regard this aspect of the controversy as legally more important than arguments based on the Geneva Convention.

Eugene V. Rostow
Distinguished Fellow,
United States Institute of Peace
Washington, March 23, 1992

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Arlene Peck, March 20, 2005.

I will be the first to admit I am a bit opinionated. In addition, if the truth were told, I have gotten myself in a lot of trouble over the years by being a strong-minded woman. But, hey, it doesn't make me a bad person! However, in the eyes of conglomerate Dell Computers, I am an "argumentative and opinionated reporter", not worth the time of their spokesperson, David Frink.

Actually, Mr. Frink was partly right. Except, he made his mistake when he accused me of being a "bad reporter". I never said I was a reporter. I am a syndicated columnist. A columnist is someone who writes their feelings about issues, and right now, my issue is Dell Computers.

It all started when one of my readers sent me a notice from the American Congress for Truth that Dell has "buckled under pressure by CAIR to allow Muslim employees to disrupt their work for the five times daily Islamic prayer." Well, that didn't sit too well with me. I had visions of the gradual take-over by this culture happening at the offices of Dell the same way our prisons have been turned into hotbeds of Islamic Fundamentalism and the way some school districts are buckling and teaching Islam. The work place is supposed to be just that. Not a "feel good" refuge for Muslims or any religion to go and pray five times a day no matter how nice they are.

Being a curious woman, I called the corporation and was transferred to their spokesperson, Mr. Frink. I proceeded to ask a few of the questions that had been bothering me. Initially, we got along beautifully. That is, until I began to ask tougher questions and to bring what he called "my obvious biases into the interview."

I suppose I sounded a little dubious, or possibly incredulous, when, questioning how they could spare the time for employees to leave for their "pray-ins"? I was told, "Our guidelines instruct managers and supervisors to grant paid time away from employees work area for prayer as long as those request are reasonable, don't disrupt our business operations and are consistent around our policy of operating a respectable work place."

I kind of pushed it "with regard to five times a day." I was told, "Most of these prayers are handled during their lunch breaks or on other regular scheduled breaks, depending on what shift they happen to be working on." How lovely.

I wondered what started this pray-in policy and was told words to the effect, "In early February, there was an issue regarding a number of Muslim contract workers employed at our Nashville plant who, feeling they were not going to be able to do their sunset prayers, left their jobs."

Actually, for any of you readers out there that might be a little curious yourself... why don't you click on the CAIR website (http://www.cair-net.org/) and you can read yourself about how they are ever so thrilled with the benevolent support people at CAIR received from the advocacy groups. So now, all of those 31 traumatized Muslim employees of Dell Inc. at their Nashville, Tennessee plant are now happily praying back at work.

They also report that CAIR has "reached a settlement with the computer giant on issues related to a recent dispute over prayer in the workplace." Not only have their CAIR attorneys made sure that "they will be reinstated, they will also receive back pay and be granted continued religious accommodation policies and practices." Oh, and this is the best part, "Other terms of the settlement will not be made public." Hmmmm, as a stockholder in Dell, I wonder how much of my dividend money is not being made public. I'm curious as to whether they have gotten Dell to agree to sending the homicide bombers' families regular paychecks too! Sounds to me like another one bites the dust and the cave-in to CAIR from Dell makes all of us a little less safe.

Now, I suppose Mr. Frink thought I began to get a bit testy when I calmly asked, "Were they all legal immigrants?" Moreover, that is when the tone changed and I was told, "I cannot tell you that. I will not argue with you."

He continued, "As a company, we have a strong history of providing prayer in the workplace as it extends to all faiths." Hmmmm, I questioned aloud, "If Holy Rollers come and want to set up meetings, which would be acceptable if it does not disrupt your respectful work place. Should they try to use the prayer sessions to attract non-believers, would such proselytizing be permitted? Is wearing the head gear or a bursa permissible if it doesn't disrupt the workplace?" He assured me that proselytizing would not be looked upon favorably. Ah, but how would they know? Would a representative of Dell sit in on the Muslim prayer sessions five times a day?

I asked whether Dell has a large Muslim population. He said, "We are a global company, headquartered in Texas, we do not provide specifics on the diversity of our workforce. This will be at all Dell offices and the first one is Round Rock, Texas. Prayer is an individual issue and those needing a special area will be provided with special areas outside the normal traffic flow the same as we provide for the needs of nursing mothers." Gee? I wonder if they have a special place, maybe behind the copy machines for Kaballah study in a room, perhaps, behind the nursing mothers. As for Muslim studies, I was told, "This is not new. Most of these prayer breaks can be accommodated as long as they do not interrupt their jobs."

This got me to thinking. I wonder if Dell, other large and small companies, school districts, and local governments have, in their haste toward finding well-meaning and obviously politically correct solutions, opened up Pandora's Box. Will we now use this as justification for prayer rooms for Muslims in schools, sporting events, and even public buildings around the country? Why do I ask? Well, we have denied Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and others those same privileges, yet make exceptions for Muslims. Why? What is going on here? In addition, where and when will it end? Dearborn, Michigan is already a Muslim city right here in the USA. Holland and Sweden are so concerned about being politically correct that they are well on the way also. Is the next target for CAIR going to be with Dell? If you have a moment, check out http://www.anti-cair-net.org/for ...the rest of the story....

My questions about the legality of the immigrant status of the Muslims who left the job in Nashville were not greeted warmly. They must be secure in their employment if they could walk off their jobs because they did not have arrangements for prayer at the office.

Nor was my comment that I was a stockholder AND a member of the press greeted with a positive attitude. I was getting a queasy feeling that a public company such as Dell did not seem to have a policy of Church vs. State. And was now sponsoring Muslim Prayer sessions five times a day.

Did this new "long-standing" policy on religious freedom have anything to do with a threatened lawsuit by CAIR? About that time, Mr. Frink told me, "Your questions are argumentive. You have been argumentive for fourteen minutes and sixteen seconds and I think we have covered the subject." He then hung up the phone.

Actually, I had a few other questions that I e-mailed to the nice Mr. Frink at Dell. So far, I have not heard anything back. Maybe he thought I was too argumentative. However, I really do want answers to these and other questions. And, I promise to be more politically correct. Maybe just a little biased but, hey, you already know that!

Dell is setting a precedent that the rest of us just may not want to follow.

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

To Go To Top
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, March 20, 2005.
This was written by Caroline Glick and appeared in The Jerusalem Post, March 18, 2005.

During the course of his negotiations with Damascus-based Palestinian terror masters in Cairo this week, PA chieftain Mahmoud Abbas made two revealing statements.

First, on Tuesday, Abbas said that upon receiving security control of Jericho, he would release from custody all of the Palestinian terrorists who have been incarcerated there since May 2002.

Those terrorists, who were transferred to Jericho from Yasser Arafat's Ramallah headquarters as part of a British and US deal with Israel, include the assassins of tourism minister Rehavam Ze'evi in October 2001 and Fuad Shubaki, the PA's chief arms purchaser who oversaw the Karine A terror weapons ship purchase from Iran that was intercepted by Israeli commandos on the Red Sea in January 2002.

On Wednesday, Abbas went a step further. He told the terror masters who are now based in Damascus that after the exit of Israeli forces and civilians from Gaza and the transfer of control over the international border with Egypt to the PLO, they would all be invited to move their headquarters to the Gaza Strip.

That is, Abbas said that in the aftermath of the implementation of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to forcibly expel 8,000 Jews from their homes and end all IDF counter-terror operations inside Gaza, Abbas will respond by transforming it into a base for global terrorism. This offer can be viewed as particularly credible given that it was made in the presence of Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Mualem, whose government is now facing increasing international condemnation for enabling these global terrorists to operate in its capital.

Surprisingly, the Sharon-Peres government reacted with near hysteria to Abbas's statement about releasing the terrorists in Jericho. Government members and spokesmen took to the microphones immediately after Abbas's statement was published and said that if he dared to free Ze'evi's killers, Israel would contemplate ending the peace process and hunt them down. The government's reaction was frankly inexplicable, given that Sharon and his fellows have given credence to Abbas's demand that Israel release all Palestinian terrorists from its jails. Acting on this demand, the government has already released 500 terrorists from prison and is planning on springing another 400 in short order.

Indeed, every single demand that Abbas has made on Israel, like every step he has taken to placate the various Palestinian terror groups, has been met with understanding by Israel. Israel has accepted his policy - practically if not publicly - of taking absolutely no action against any terror organizations, leaders or infrastructures.

After all, if it hadn't, the government would not be transferring security responsibility over Palestinian population centers to the PA as it did in Jericho the day after Abbas's statement about the prisoner release.

Israel has accepted Abbas's demand that it stop trying to catch terror fugitives. Israel has accepted his demand that it allow the Palestinian mass murderers who violently took over the Church of the Nativity in April 2002 to return to Bethlehem from their European exile and receive amnesty for their crimes.

The government has made no protest against Abbas's order to execute 15 Palestinians who are accused of having helped our security forces fight Palestinian terrorists. And Israel has made no protest over the fact that according to IDF sources, wanted Palestinian terrorists are being sheltered in Abbas's offices in Ramallah.

Given all of this, why should the government care if Abbas lets Ze'evi's murderers and Shubaki leave Jericho? As it stands, their incarceration has been a farce.

Journalists have reported repeatedly since their transfer to Jericho of their relative freedom within the compound. More than being imprisoned, they are being sheltered there from Israeli forces. Of course the answer is public opinion. The public would simply not accept such a concession by the government and it would fall.

Given the government's fear of the public, it becomes clear why it is that our leaders have been mute about Abbas's declared intention to turn Gaza into a new Afghanistan.

Since Sharon announced his withdrawal and expulsion plan last year, the point has been made repeatedly that the only thing that prevents Gaza from becoming a capital of global terrorism is the IDF troops stationed there and controlling the international border with Egypt.

Last summer Maj.-Gen. (res.) Doron Almog, who headed the Southern Command from 2000 to 2003, wrote in the Middle East Quarterly that if Israel transferred control of Gaza's border with Egypt to the Egyptians or Palestinians, Gaza would become a "mini-Afghanistan."

Former director of Military Intelligence Research and Assessment Department Maj.-Gen. Ya'acov Amidror has warned repeatedly since Sharon unveiled his plan that in the absence of the IDF, Gaza would become a focal point for global terror groups from Hizbullah to al-Qaida.

Sharon has ignored all such warnings, has fired cabinet ministers and cut short the service of security officials who have doubted the wisdom of his withdrawal policies and has plowed ahead, demonizing and criminalizing his detractors.

So what do we expect Sharon to do now that Abbas has announced his intention to prove all Sharon's naysayers correct? The only thing he can do, if he wishes to continue to force through his plan, is to keep his head down and hope that no one notices what is happening. In this bid he is being ably assisted - to the point of ostensible collusion - by the Israeli media. Not only has the government made no comment on Abbas's offer to move global terror masters from Damascus to Gaza, but the Israeli media, to their shame, have had a near complete blackout on the issue.

Neither Channel 2 nor Channel 10 mentioned it in their news broadcasts Wednesday night. None of Thursday's newspapers had any report of it.

Israel Radio devoted less than one minute of laconic coverage to Abbas's offer 10 minutes before the end of its two-hour-long morning news magazine Thursday morning.

Israel's overwhelmingly left-wing media's lockstep support for Sharon's withdrawal plan is being matched by the support Sharon is enjoying from the left wing of the American Jewish community.

According to a report this week in The Forward newspaper, Americans for Peace Now, like the Israel Policy Forum, two of the most left wing groups on the American Jewish political and organizational spectrum, are now actively colluding with the Israeli Embassy in Washington and consulates throughout the US to combat opposition to Sharon's policies among American Jews and American Christian supporters of Israel.

On Monday, Ambassador Danny Ayalon participated in a forum on Capitol Hill sponsored by American Friends of Peace Now together with the PLO representative to Washington and the Jordanian and Egyptian ambassadors.

In June, Vice Premier Ehud Olmert is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at the Israel Policy Forum's annual dinner. In an interview with The Forward, Arye Mekel, the consul-general in New York, said that neutralizing opponents to Sharon's withdrawal policy is "the No. 1 priority on the agenda of the consulates at the moment, and it's the task that is keeping me the busiest." In their discussions in Cairo, the various terror chieftains have been employing the explicit vocabulary of jihad to describe their various positions.

Reportedly on Thursday, Islamic Jihad and Hamas accepted the idea of a "thahadiya" or a temporary cessation of attacks for a defined time period. In jihad rhetoric, the purpose of a "thahadiya" is to regroup to enable the forces of jihad to fight their infidel enemy more successfully in the next round.

The significance of the resort to jihad-speak has been completely ignored by the Israeli politicians and commentators praising Abbas's policy of mainstreaming violent terror organizations.

One of the most absurd aspects of the Cairo discussions as a whole is that in all its concessions to the Palestinians since Abbas replaced Yasser Arafat last November, Israel has justified its moves to the public and to the Americans as payback to Abbas for his achievement of a cease-fire with the terrorists.

And yet, if he already has a cease-fire agreement, why is he negotiating one now? And again, if he is a peaceable man, why is he employing the language of jihad together with leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad?

And further, why is Egypt being praised by Israel and the US for hosting this terror parley, whose clear aim is to legitimize terror and whose direct result is Abbas's offer to turn Gaza - where Egypt has supposedly agreed to block terrorists from entering after Israel withdraws - into an epicenter of global terrorism?

Unfortunately, the answer to all of these questions - unasked by the Israeli media - is internal Israeli politics. Once Sharon abandoned his natural support base and preferred instead the embrace of the Left, he has boxed himself into a situation where he can do nothing except advance the Left's agenda of appeasing terrorists.

In moving down this road, Sharon, like Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak before him, rendered his political fortunes completely dependent on the whims of the terrorists.

As a result, he cannot admit that what Abbas is doing is not simply antithetical to peace but also manifests a strategic threat to Israel's security - and indeed, to global security. If Sharon were to tell Israelis the truth about Abbas and his terrorist chums or about their Egyptian sponsors, he would be admitting that all his detractors in his own political camp were right all along.

Given this state of affairs, the inevitable conclusion is that the only thing left for the Israeli public to do is to demand new general elections.

With Sharon now fully committed to a policy that is manifestly dangerous to the state, he must be replaced by a leader who has not so committed himself. It is the only chance that Israel has to prevent the establishment of a new base for global terror on the outskirts of Ashkelon. (Reported by IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis Website: www.imra.org.il)

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top
Posted by Aviad Visoly, March 20, 2005.



Sharon still lacks a majority for the budget vote!

The 2005 budget is the only instrument that Sharon's government still lacks to carry out the "disengagement" plan in which the beautiful Gaza coastal area will be purged of all Jews. Prime Minister lacks a majority both in the Knesset's Finance Committee and in the Knesset itself - that's why he didn't call for a vote on the budget this past week. Your phonecalls and faxes last week made important dents in the parliamentary landscape - these dents must remain under wraps for now.


Please note:

1. You don't have a fax, but you are a Israeli citizen? Send your name, place of residence and phone number to sddym@bezeqint.net and another volunteer will fax the MKs in your name.

2. You have a fax? Great! Please notify sddym@bezeqint.net how many faxes you're willing to send and we'll send you names. (For example: "I'm prepared to send faxes to the 13 MK's from 5 people, total 65 faxes.")

3. Do you have healthy self-confidence? Perfect!!! CALL the MK's! If the MK double-talks you, answer very firmly : "I'm sure there's a solution to the problem you're experiencing - I ask you to please vote AGAINST anyhow".

4. Know anybody with a fax machine? Urge them to send even 3 faxes a day - signed by them, or - if they feel uncomfortable - signed by you.

5. Print this notice up and hang it in your Shul, Youth group, or any other public place. Email this to all your contacts who might be ready and willing to help out.

MK Name Fax Number Phone Number
MK Ruby Rivlin 02-6496193 0505-233 818
MK Gila Gamliel 02-6496085 0522-700 727
MK Ayub Kara 02-6496541 0506-233617
MK Danny Benlulu 02-6496456 0505-493233
MK Chaim Katz 02-6496525 0544-274333
MK Michael Gorlovsky 02-6496103 0506-654835
MK Yehiel Chazan 02-6753567 0545-655269
MK Rav Meir Porush 02-6496523 0505-809091
MK Rav Avraham Ravitz 02-6496520 0505-45663
MK Ruby Rivlin 02 6496193 0505-233818
MK Eli Yishai 02-5004052 02-6753827
MK Gideon Saar 02-6496114 0506-343111
Min. Bibi Netanyahu 02-5635769 02-5317200
Shmuel Halpert 0505-510 055
Min. Silvan Shalom 02 530 3506 02 530 3531
Min. Danny Naveh 02-678- 7662 02 670 5811
MK Ruchama Avraham 02 675 3360 02 675 3206
MK Yaakov Edri 02 530 8933 02 530 9980
MK Eli Aflalo 02 649 6164 02 675 3240
MK Michael Eitan 02 675 3199 02 675 33273
MK Zev Boim 02 649 6591 02 675 3846
MK Roni Bar On 02 675 3486 02 675 3937
MK Inbal Gavrieli 02 649 6406 02 675 3443
MK Tsachi HaNegbi 02 677 3699 02 675 3266
MK Yisrael Katz 02 675 3237 03 948 5800
Min. Limor Livnat 02 560 2246 02 560 2330
MK Yuval Steinitz 02 675 3100 02 675 3123
MK David Tal 02 649 6014 02 675 3221
MK Chemi Doron 02 649 6186 02 675 3870
MK Yigal Yasinov 02 649 6503 02 675 3666
MK Victor Breilovsky 02 670 3729 02 670 3748

From outside Israel, dial ++972- and leave off the first zero 7. Best of all - even better than faxing - is CALLING. Here's what you might say: (please send feedback from your call to sddym@bezeqint.net - every call report may yield information):

To: Yehiel Chazan, Chaim Katz, Michael Gorlovski and Ayub Kara: "I appreciate your opposition to the "disengagement" plan. You're a member of the Finance c'tee, right? Please vote AGAINST the budget, in the Knesset plenary of course, but also in the Finance Committee. I know that you're being threatened for doing so but we must hold on to our principles, right?"

To Gideon Saar, Daniel Ben-Lulu and Bibi Netanyahu: "I have great respect and admiration for you but I could NEVER forgive you if you fire loyal Likud members from the Finance Committee just for voting according to their consciences."

To Avraham Ravitz, Meir Porush, David Tal and Eli Yishai (all ultraOrthodox): "I beg you and all the members of your party to vote AGAINST the evacuation of Gush Katif and the Northern Shomron. "Budget=Disengagement!" I'm sure you're a professional politician and know that you can vote against something that so endangers our country!

To Ruby Rivlin: "Please vote against the budget. This Government is simply a bad government for Israel, in all ways."

PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD: (from now till the end of March, which is the budget deadline) -

a) Please forward this to all who share your views.

b.) Print the notice and hang it up wherever you can in your neighborhood, Shul, etc.

c.) PLEASE report your activities to sddym@bezeqint.net - successes, disappointments, mistakes, everything. All of this information is so important for us to have. We'd appreciate knowing exactly what you did so we can plan for next time.

Have a Happy Purim! Make sure your Mishloach Manot includes greens from Gush Katif plus as many Yesha products as you can (here's a list of Yesha products: http://www.gush-shalom.org/Boycott/boyceng.htm

Thank you so much. If you want a copy of this notice in Hebrew, just write sddym@bezeqint.net and we'll send you one immediately.

Susie Dym, spokesperson,
on behalf of the activists of MATOT ARIM

Aviad Visoly can be reached at aviad@mateh-haifa.org. Sysie Dym can be reached at sddym@bezeqint.net

To Go To Top
Posted by Naomi Ragen, March 20, 2005.


I haven't been writing much, because I am truly heartbroken by what is happening to Israel. It is so overwhelming, that I am temporarily at a loss for words. So much is happening, so fast, and in all the wrong directions. While our Leftist friends on papers like Haaretz take aerial photos to "expose" the terrible crime of Jews building on their land and release this news to the international news networks, the new Palestinian leadership, which has yet to prove it is any different from the old Palestinian leadership, is being handed Palestinian cities by the IDF on a silver platter. Places like Jericho are already in their hands. And what will happen to the cities they turn over? I have zero doubt that they will become bomb factories once again, and that our sons will again have to risk their lives to go in and destroy them.

There is an old Peter, Paul and Mary song which goes:" Some men will rob you with a shotgun, and some with a fountain pen." Our government is in the throes of yet another wrong-headed attempt to appease world opinion by sacrificing national security, uprooting Jews from their homes, and entering into negotiations with sworn enemies. Talk about Hamas turning into a "political organization" makes me sick. The Nazi Party was also a "political organization." I urge you to read my book The Covenant if you want a true picture of who the Hamas is and what they represent.

I have lost my faith in politicians, what little I ever had. One exception is MK Effie Eitam, who is moving with his family into Gush Katif. What guts! I believe in God, and in good people, and those two working with each other to foil the terrible plans that are being laid that will destroy this country.

My son goes into the army in two weeks. I am not sending him there to tear Jewish infants from their cribs so that Hamas can build more rockets on the ruins of peaceful Jewish homes and businesses. But who can say what will happen to our precious armed forces with the present administration rushing forward into another abyss?

Below, some words from our Christian friends. I take hope that at least someone out there understands what is really going on and is not afraid to speak out.

This first article was written by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. It is called "For this we want to commit suicide?"

The Announcement for Thursday March 24, 2004 is from Sondra Oster Baras, Director of the Israel Office of the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities. Please forward it to your mailing lists.


For not even a proper ceasefire Israel is willing to commit suicide and bring herself to the brink of civil war, while Israel's enemies will exploit this lull in the fighting and the subsequent Israeli withdrawal from Gaza to establish there a bastion of deadly terror.

To tear the nation cruelly apart by decreeing that Jews cannot live in peace where Arabs form a majority. They have to leave their own G-d given land torn from their houses so that Gaza and other parts of the ancient homeland of the Jews can be made Judenrein, that is totally free of Jews. Israeli Jews cannot even any more visit Jericho after it for the so maniest time has been given over to Palestinian control. The city has to be made free of Jews - not even a visit of them is allowed. That's the extent of the peace the Muslim Arab world seeks with the Jews. The Israelis have to get out of every area they claim for themselves, in contrast to Israel who has to learn to live with over 1 million Israeli Arabs, many of whose loyalties increasingly make them side with the enemies of their own Jewish State, even so far as giving help to those who plant bombs or are willing to become bombs themselves.

So what if Mr. Bush or Tony Blair were to be told that they were to evacuate their own homes to make place for those who have mutilated or murdered their offspring like the Cohen family in Gush Katif who after a terrorist attack on the school-bus have now 3 of their children maimed for life without some of their limbs? Would President Bush or Tony Blair give their houses to people that perpetrate such things?

David Hatuel who had his wife and five children slain, literally shot to pieces by such terrorists now has to evacuate his carefully built home to those who rejoiced at the murder of his wife and all his children?

It is truly unthinkable! And an Israeli government that will force this solution upon some of her finest people, many of them G-d fearing people, will bear the consequences of this terrible inhumane and cruel act! An act that will not even lead to a semblance of peace but to the very opposite as Carolyn Glick so rightly wrote in Friday's Jerusalem Post column, frighteningly true:

On Wednesday, Abbas went a step further. He told the terror masters who are now based in Damascus that after the exit of Israeli forces and civilians from Gaza and the transfer of control over the international border with Egypt to the PLO, they would all be invited to move their headquarters to the Gaza Strip.

That is, Abbas said that in the aftermath of the implementation of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to forcibly expel 8,000 Jews from their homes and end all IDF counterterror operations inside Gaza, Abbas will respond by transforming it into a base for global terrorism. In the same Jerusalem Post article she writes:

In their discussions in Cairo, the various terror chieftains have been employing the explicit vocabulary of jihad to describe their various positions.

Reportedly on Thursday, Islamic Jihad and Hamas accepted the idea of a "thahadiya" or a temporary cessation of attacks for a defined time period. In jihad rhetoric, the purpose of a "thahadiya" is to regroup to enable the forces of jihad to fight their infidel enemy more successfully in the next round.

Jews and Christians have been praying and crying out to G-d to prevent this all last Thursday the 17th of March and will do so again next Thursday the 24th of March from sunset to sundown - also in solidarity with these courageous people of Israel. I believe, as I have written before, that G-d in his justice and great mercy will find a way to stop this folly, a mainly unilateral evacuation which will not even lead to a semblance of peace!

His answer however may be swift and terrifying for those who failed to hear the pleadings of their G-d and the cries and sufferings of their own brethren.

Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director
International Christian Zionist Center He can be reached by email at iczc@iczc.org.il

or visit his website: www.israelmybeloved.com An Important Announcement:


On Thursday, March 24, 2005, Jews all over the world will fast and pray in commemoration of the 3 days of fast and prayer of the Jews of Persia more than 2,500 years ago. Then, the Jews of Persia were threatened with annihilation by the wicked Haman and they were miraculously saved. Now, the Jews of Samaria and Gaza are threatened with forced evacuation and we are praying for divine intervention.

The leaders of the US and Israel are certainly not wicked Hamans. But they are misguided. They believe that withdrawing from Gaza and Northern Samaria will save Israel. We are convinced that it will seriously endanger Israel, both from a spiritual and from a natural perspective. Spiritually - for how will God view the voluntary relinquishing of His land to another? Naturally - for how will Israel defend itself when Gaza and Northern Samaria become terrorist states?

Christians and Jews will join hands on the Fast of Esther, to pray for Israel and its territorial integrity.

On that same day American Christians and Jews will bombard the White House with phone calls and e-mails. The message will be short and clear:

President Bush - Honor G-d's covenant with His people. Stop Disengagement.

On Thursday March 24, 2005, phone the White House at:

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461

On Thursday March 24, 2005 send an e-mail to:

President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov
If millions will contact the White House on the same day, we will be heard.

May G-d bless you all.

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 Steven Plaut, March 20, 2005.

1. The Swastika on Alexander Cockburn's Armband

The myrmidons over at Counterpunch, led by Alexander Cockburn, have a new cause and a new Enemy of the Week. The target of leftist wrath this week is professor of history at Brown University Omer Bartov. His crime? Bartov dared to criticize anti-Semite Norman Finkelstein. Cockburn runs a column crayoned by one David Green, who savagely attacks Bartov for denouncing the pseudo-scholar and crackpot Finkelstein.

Let us back up a little and explain. Norman Finkelstein is the darling of every neonazi Holocaust Denial web site on earth. He is a pseudo-historian who is a follower of Holocaust Denier David Irving, and regards Irving as a great and authoritative scholar. Nominally Jewish, he is every stormtrooper's dream, cheered by them as the "Jew who proves there was never any Holocaust of Jews by Nazi Germany."

Finkelstein kept getting fired from his adjunct teaching jobs in New York, and when he realized he could not get any job at a real university, he took a gig at Depaul "University" in Chicago as an Assistant Professor. By comparison with Depaul, Ward Churchill's University of Colorado maintains the highest academic standards of hiring!

Anyway, there Finkelstein continues to produce his anti-Semitic diatribe, which routinely get gobbled up by the world's neoniazis. Finkelstein constantly denounces all Holocaust survivors as frauds, thieves and liars, refers to the six million Jews murdered by Hitler as the "Six Million" in quotation marks, and mass produces anti-Israel pro-terror propaganda from his perch at Depaul. He has endlessly libeled Nobel Prize laureate and Holocaust survior Elie Wiesel for many years. A couple of years ago he tried to engage Alan Dershowitz in a battle of wits, except Finkelstein was only half equipped. Dershowitz made wiener shnitzel out of him. Finkelstein has been denounced as a neonazi, anti-Semite, or Holocaust Denier by virtually every Jewish group from any political corner anywhere on the planet. Daniel Jonah Goldhagen and all other serious historians have dismissed Finkelstein as a crackpot anti-Semite and fraud.

Bartov's sin, in the "minds" of the Counterpunch team, is that he also considers Finkelstein a fraud and a neonazi. Bartov in the NY Times compared Finkelstein's scurrilous "book" about the "Holocaust Industry" to the Czarist anti-Semitic forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Cockburn's magazine has not yet reprinted the Protocols, although it has produced an equally anti-Semitic book by Cockburn himself that is just as full of ravings. and it openly endorse Finkelstein's ravings about a "Holocaust Industry."

Bartov has given a series of lectures and published several articles debunking the lunatic ravings of Finkelstein. And that seems to be what has upset Herr Cockburn, who runs Green's pitdog attack against Bartov in this weekend's Counterpunch. Green and Finkelstein belong on the same plane that carried deported nazi Ernst Zundel back to their Fuhrer's fatherland.

What really arouses the Counterpunch ire is this quote from Bartov:

"For one of the most frightening aspects of Hitler's book is not that he said what he said at the time, but that much of what he said can be found today in innumerable places: on Internet sites, propaganda brochures, political speeches, protest placards, academic publications, religious sermons, you name it. As long as it does not have Hitler's name attached to it, this deranged discourse will be ignored or allowed to pass. The voices that express these opinions do not belong to a single political or ideological current, and they are much less easy to distinguish than in the 1930s. They belong to the right and the left, to the religious and the secular, to the West and the East, to the rabble and the leaders, to terrorists and intellectuals, students and peasants, pacifists and militants, expansionists and anti-globalization activists. The diplomacy advocated by Hitler is no longer relevant, but his reason for it, his 'worldview,' is alive and kicking, and it may still kick us."

Green goes on to libel Alan Dershowitz and Elie Wiesel on the same page.

I have always suspected that Alexander Cockburn wakes up each morning, gives himself a Heil with raised arm in the mirror, goosesteps to the breakfast room, and then asks himself which act of outright anti-Semitism he can perform today to outdo even yesterday's. (For links from in article, open http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/moonbatcentral/2005/03/ cockburn-defends-anti-semite-disciple.html)

2. Well, the press in Israel is reporting that the demonstration last night to back Sharon's Mitzna "disengagement" plan for capitulation in the Gaza Strip had 10,000 people show up. Except th epress always inflates the numbers in leftist protests. I figure there were maybe 3000. In all, 100 buses brought people in, but most were largely empty.

In other words, here we have a manifestation of the REAL reason Sharon and his cronies are refusing to allow a national referendum on his plan. Because he knows it will LOSE! 2. "Equal Time for a Holocaust Denier" by Richard Cohen, The Washington Post March 16, 2005.

Deborah Lipstadt will not appear on C-SPAN, America's nonprofit cable channel whose mission is "to provide public access to the political process." The Emory University Holocaust scholar has a new book, "History on Trial," and her upcoming lecture at Harvard was to be televised on the public affairs outlet. The book is about a libel case brought against her in Britain by David Irving, a Holocaust denier, trivializer, prevaricator and, by ruling of the very court that heard his suit, "anti-Semitic and racist." No matter. C-SPAN wanted Mr. Irving to "balance" Ms. Lipstadt.

The word balance was invoked repeatedly by C-SPAN producers who seemed convinced that they had chosen the most noble of all journalistic causes: fairness. "You know how important fairness and balance is at C-SPAN," the network's Connie Doebele told me. "We work very, very hard at this. We ask ourselves, 'Is there an opposing view of this?"'

As luck would have it, there was. To Ms. Lipstadt's statements about the Holocaust, there was Mr. Irving's rebuttal that it never happened - no systematic killing of Jews, no Final Solution and, while many people died at Auschwitz of disease and the occasional act of brutality, there were no gas chambers there. "More women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz," Mr. Irving once said.

Ms. Lipstadt cited Mr. Irving in her 1993 book, "Denying the Holocaust." Mr. Irving sued her for libel in Britain, where the book was also published. Under Britain's libel laws, Ms. Lipstadt had to prove the truth of what she wrote which, after a lengthy trial, she did in spades.

By dint of maniacal industry, Mr. Irving had turned himself into an admired writer on Nazi Germany. He mined the archives for material which it seemed others had overlooked. Increasingly his books gave a whiff of anti-Semitism and admiration for Hitler. When Richard J. Evans, a Cambridge University historian (and one of Ms. Lipstadt's expert witnesses), carefully examined Mr. Irving's work, he found it a stew of misrepresentations, falsifications and outright quackery. Mr. Irving was authoritatively exposed: a propagandist hiding behind scholarly seeming footnotes.

This is the man C-SPAN turned to for "balance." It told Ms. Lipstadt that since it was going to air her lecture, it would air one of Mr. Irving's too. On March 12, Mr. Irving spoke at the Landmark Diner in Atlanta. C-SPAN was there, though Mr. Irving's advance warning that cameras would be present apparently held down attendance. (His people apparently prefer anonymity - or, in the old days, sheets.) Ms. Lipstadt was effectively being told that if she wanted to promote her book on C-SPAN (an important venue) she would also have to promote Mr. Irving. If she was to get a TV audience, then so would he.

For a book on the evils of slavery, would C-SPAN counter with someone who thinks it was a benign institution? Why does it feel there is another side to the Holocaust?

In the end, Ms. Lipstadt had to choose between promoting her book and giving Mr. Irving equal status and a dream audience. On this one occasion at least, Mr. Irving did what he could not do with his libel suit: He silenced Ms. Lipstadt. 4. "Abolish Tenure" by Max Boot, March 18, 2005, http://www.nysun.com/article/10799

To see where the balance of power lies in American academia, look no further than the University of Colorado, where the Ward Churchill scandal has claimed its first victim. No, not Mr. Churchill, the professor who gained national notoriety for describing the victims of the World Trade Center attack as "little Eichmanns" who basically deserved what they got. He's stepped down as chairman of the ethnic studies department, but he's still teaching classes and earning $94,242 a year, in spite of the university's attempts to sack him.

It's the university president who's heading out the door. Elizabeth Hoffman tendered her resignation on March 7 because of the Churchill controversy and more familiar problems of hanky-panky in football recruiting and excessive debauchery at student parties. Whatever Ms. Hoffman's alleged failings, they are dwarfed by Mr. Churchill's.

Since the original controversy over his essay justifying the September 11 attack, a gobsmacking litany of accusations has been leveled against Mr. Churchill. He has been accused of plagiarism, of falsely claiming Indian ancestry and a Vietnam War combat record, of threatening faculty members and punishing students who disagreed with him, of fabricating historical evidence, and of getting tenure under suspicious circumstances (he lacks a Ph.D.). If even a tenth of the allegations are true, Mr. Churchill deserves to be thrown out on his ear - not for his pro-terrorist remarks but for all his other transgressions.

Easier said than done.

Mr. Churchill and his professorial colleagues are beneficiaries of the most ironclad protection for mountebanks, incompetents, and sluggards ever devised. It's called tenure.

To fire a tenured professor requires a legal battle that can make the Clinton impeachment seem like a small-claims dispute by comparison. Even if there is clear evidence of wrongdoing, professors are entitled to endless procedural safeguards against being fired. The University of Colorado wanted to offer Mr. Churchill a generous financial settlement to leave voluntarily, but that idea has been torpedoed by regents angry at the idea of buying off this buffoon. An epic struggle looms in which Mr. Churchill and his numerous faculty defenders will nail their colors to the mast of "academic freedom."

One wonders whether so many savants would be rushing to defend Mr. Churchill from supposed "McCarthyism" if he had tried to justify the deaths not of the September 11 victims but of the victims of AIDS ("little perverts"?) or the Holocaust ("little Shylocks"?). It's a safe bet that if Mr. Churchill were a loony right-winger, rather than a loony left-winger, his colleagues would be forming a lynch mob instead of a defense committee.

Harvard offers a good illustration of how harshly transgressions against liberal pieties are punished within academe. President Summers has been censured by his own faculty after daring to suggest that innate differences in ability, not discrimination, may explain why there are so few prominent women in math and sciences. Only weeks of abject groveling have prevented his ouster - so far - for the crime of committing free thought in public.

The rigid ideological intolerance of American universities makes a mockery of tenure's primary justification: It is supposed to allow scholars to pursue their work without outside pressure. Professors like Mr. Churchill are all too happy to take advantage of this freedom to mock off-campus pieties. But few dare to disagree with the received wisdom of the faculty club, where the political spectrum runs all the way from left to far-left.

The primary practical effect of tenure is to make universities almost ungovernable. Those ostensibly in charge - presidents and trustees - come and go; the faculty remains, serene and untouchable. This helps to explain some of the dysfunctions that mar big-time universities, such as the overemphasis on publishing unintelligible articles and the under-emphasis on teaching undergraduates. Armies of junior faculty and graduate-student drudges have been enlisted to assume the bulk of the teaching load because most of the tenured grandees think that instructing budding stockbrokers and middle managers is beneath them. And there is almost nothing that administrators can do about it because mere laziness is no grounds for removing someone with a lifetime employment guarantee.

The solution is obvious: Abolish tenure. Subject professors to the discipline of the marketplace like almost everyone else. But, of course, this is an idea too radical to be seriously entertained on campus. Comparing America with Nazi Germany, as Mr. Churchill routinely does, doesn't raise an eyebrow among the intelligentsia, but suggesting that there may be something fundamentally wrong with a system that rewards a Ward Churchill is considered too outre to discuss.

Mr. Boot is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, where this first appeared.

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 Bryna Berch, March 19, 2005.

Effie Eitam is a mensch.

This is a news item from Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78670)

Former NRP head Knesset Member Effie Eitam will be moving to Gush Katif with his family. He made the announcement shortly after Friday's IDF order forbidding Jews from moving to Gaza communities.

Knesset Law Committee chairman Michael Eitan (Likud) responded that Eitam's status as Knesset Member protects him, but not his family, from prosecution for violating the new IDF order. Eitam, who lives in the Golan Heights, said he will move before the Passover holiday next month.

Eitam and MK Yitzchak Levy recently quit the National Religious Party (NRP) and promptly founded the Religious Zionism Party. They hope, however, to include the NRP and the National Union in a large religious-Zionist bloc of parties for the next national election.

Eitam said that he and his family will tour Gaza this week to decide where they will choose their new home. They currently live in Nov, an agricultural community in the southeastern Golan.

Asked if his decision is merely a "provocation," Eitam said, "This is an act of solidarity with the residents of Gush Katif; if it's a provocation, then all of Zionism is a provocation." He said he has not studied the new army directive, but the "order of my heart" is stronger.

Gaza Coast Regional Council spokesman Eran Sternberg compared the new IDF rule to that of a Russian czar who decided where Jews were allowed to live.

Attorney Elyakim Haetzni of Kiryat Arba likened the planned evacuation of Jews from Gaza to Milosevic's violent ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Albanian civilians from Kosovo.

The new IDF decree against Jewish address-changing to Gaza was issued in the wake of an increasing stream of residents moving to Jewish Gaza. Some 600 Jews have moved to there in the past several weeks and months.

The army is expected to declare the area a closed military zone sometime in the coming 2-3 months. The significance of this is that non-residents will not be allowed to enter the area at all without army permission.

MK Benny Elon (National Union), a member of the Knesset Law Committee, said that despite current rumors, "the army cannot declare the army a closed military zone now, so far away from the scheduled date of the expulsion, leaving the residents in closure for such a long time. We debated this clause [in the committee] for a long time, and it was determined that the closure can be put in effect a 'reasonable' time before the date of the disengagement."

To Go To Top
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 19, 2005.

Please, President Bush, always be a friend to Israel but, step back from trying to be her master. Israel should not be held to the same examination as Syria, Iran or Palestinians. Israel has had to fight off these nations and their Terrorist proxies since 1948 with no real end in sight. I suspect you and follow-on America Presidents would have continued to assist Israel in an open manner had it not been for the crude oil the Arabs have been sitting on.

Because these oil nations are our suppliers, you have adopted - or at least pledged - to share their hostility of the Jewish State. This tilted balance is designed to show we are friends of the Arabs despite our knowledge that they are religiously intolerant and very dangerous to Israel and America.

In the last few days it has been reported that you have re-employed Karen Hughes, to start a friendliness campaign toward the hostile world of Islam. That seems to be in synch with your efforts to ethnically cleanse Jews from parts of the Land G-d promised to the Jews out of Abraham and Moses. A propaganda campaign to make Arab radical Islamists like us while similarly propagandizing America that Saudi Arabia, "Palestine", Hezb'Allah, and the other Terror organizations are really not so bad.

Is this then one of the coins you would use in the betrayal of the the Jewish people in your family's attempt to appease Islam and the oil nations? Is this a perfidious use of the power of your office and America tax-payers' dollars?

As a Christian, you do recall the 30 pieces of silver of betrayal? Are we to equate pieces of silver with barrels of oil which your family and the friends of your family want so much?

As one watches you plunge ahead in the Middle East, we get the sense that behind your Iraq and Afghanistan wars was a more hidden, far-reaching agenda. Have you, in partnership with the multi-national oil companies conjured up a plan of using the face of Democracy for a 'Democratic' Middle East Spring breaking out, while encircling the oil regions of the Middle East. While I have no problem seeing you maneuver to ensure a constant oil supply for the U.S., I do have a problem using Israel as a necessary expendable to achieve your goals.

When President Carter assisted in the fall of the Shah of Iran and the return of Ayatollah Khomeini, it was obvious we had lost our cop on the block guarding the Gulf Oil States. When we saw the resulting expansion of radical Islam - first out of Iran, we looked around for another policeman to serve own interests and we found Egypt.

So we began courting Egypt who soon kicked out their Soviet suppliers and soon accepted our bigger bribe to be their supplier of free high tech armaments. Egypt was to be America's replacement military colossus and the choice to occupy Saudi Arabia in the event Iran, Syria or Iraq moved to absorb Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States - the way Saddam's Iraq's invaded and took over Kuwait - for the oil under Kuwait's sands.

It would appear that there is a Grand Plan wrapped around a Larger Master Plan, first called Democratization and on to Super Domination.

Strangely, I predicted this more than 40 years ago, only I thought it would be the Super Power of America and the then Soviet Union who would divide the world's resources between them and now I must add China. Huge Super Powers must look ahead 100 - 500 - 1000 years in terms of energy, food and other raw resources. That's done by dominating those areas that produce or have these raw resources. It's far too dangerous to grab it all because those other Super Powers will then attack us to get their share so a certain accommodation of sharing takes place.

Granted, smaller nations can suffer and can even be lost as the gargantuan Super Powers trample their rights. Clearly, Israel has been scheduled as an expendable for the "good of all".

Right now, you have moved forward a Master Plan that tramples the rights of Israel while making promises to both Israel and to the Muslim Arab oil nations. Each gets to hear what you want them to hear. You recruit the Jews of the Left, with promises of a better future, with peace - knowing all the while that pacifying Arab nations and Muslim people is virtually impossible with their attitude toward the Jews and yes...Christians.

Concurrently, through the State Department and its Embassies in the 26 Arab Muslim countries, the word goes out that you will diminish the Jewish State, understanding that to the Arabs this reads as their wish fulfillment that Israel will ultimately be destroyed.

Each hears and believes what they want to hear. For the great powers, Israel is merely an irritant to those who hold the oil and a small sacrifice in the greater scheme of things. Israel will, however, be useful when she is truncated on her way to elimination as you maneuver to lock in the greater prize of oil you intend to dominate.

Here we can see the fingerprints of your father who was President before you and his Secretary of State James Baker, the CEOs of the oil maggots and think tanks who plot America's future through thwarted paradigms which often fail. While I feel certain you certainly do not wish the expenditure of a remarkable, innovative nation, nevertheless, your actions, speech and otherwise.

We have just heard the latest of Jim Baker's Jewboys, Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer, was the one who commissioned the Talia Sassoon report on the Settlement Outposts. Sassoon is a woman who hates the Jewish Settlers almost as much as Baker and Kurtzer. Also, Kurtzer also commissioned the coming Spiegel Report, designed to further demonize the pioneering Settlers.

Sharon's Cabinet just approved that the settlement outposts would be removed in deference to Bush and his Road Map pogrom. All of this in a planned cascading of efforts to drive the idea of evacuating Jews from the center of the Jewish Nation in order to create a "contiguous" (to use Condoleezza Rice's word) Arab Muslim Palestinian nation.

If Israel is diminished on her way to being extinguished, do you think the nations of Islam will be grateful to you, to America? Might it not work in reverse where you will have built up a false confidence and expectations among hostile Islamists by extinguishing a friend and ally? Will they not increase their efforts to hit America with whatever WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) warheads that they can acquire thinking America is weak for betraying her friends. As loathsome as Russia can be, at the very least, they do not betray their real allies.

I think that you need another Think Tank - an honest one - which has a longer and wider view to offer. You can always ignore our advice and analysis but, at least you will have heard from all sides - at least on earth.

But, there is another voice that you may have not yet heard from although you think you have. You, President Bush, have committed a grave sin that will bring G-d's wrath down upon you, yours, and, unfortunately, the American nation. In your anxiousness to betray the Jewish nation, you have brought a great calamity upon us. We have been savaged and dispossessed from Time Immemorial by Romans, Spanish, Russians, Germans, Poles, the Church, and now it is your turn, claiming to be an enlightened born-again Christian. Perhaps you have noticed how many great civilizations have disappeared as we Jews continue to trek on through history.

Yes, we can be once again be deported as the Russian Czars pushed us out of Russian villages. The Germans and the Europeans did the same and now a born-again Christian who brings us his idea of Peace. Congratulations, Mr. President, you join an historical line up of Jew haters.

Regrettably too, we have among us the traitorous "Erev Rav" (the mixed multitude). They attached themselves to the Jewish people as Moses took us out of Egypt. They have been with us ever since always gnawing away at the supporting pillars of the Jewish nation and employing Leftists - using the cover of calling themselves Jews - as they burrow in deeper to now destroy the Jewish nation.

No doubt, you were pleased to find these willing quislings to recruit but, still you must be disgusted and repulsed by having to deal with people who are traitors to their own people.

As for your Grand Scheme to sell out the real Jewish people - along with HaShem (G-d), I have a feeling that we in America will share in the punishment for your gross sin.

Please read the article below on Bush telling the Press that Israel must withdraw from the settlements. Then forward it to our Christian friends and then on to President Bush.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 18, 2005.

Many of our distinguished Israeli heroes are yet alive, dating back from some of the earliest battles for the Jewish State's sovereignty and security. Some like Meir Har Tzion have come out of their years of silence to tell Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that they believe his "Disengagement Plans" will destroy the nation. Har-Tzion, the legendary fighter and long-time close friend of Sharon's, has called upon IDF soldiers to refuse orders to expel Jews from their homes. Har-Tzion, who co-founded with Sharon the famous counter-terrorism Paratrooper Unit 101 in the 1950s, now says of his former friends and comrade in arms: "Sharon has gone crazy." Har-Tzion calls Sharon's "Disengagement Plan" a holocaust." He says: "Arik Sharon is crazy...the great fighter is running away. He has become a very dangerous man." Har-Tzion joined the call for IDF soldiers and officers to refuse the uprooting of Jewish homes. He says that soldiers with a conscience should be prepared to go to jail rather than follow such orders, which he calls illegal. "The Palestinians" he continues "will be able to do anything besides terrorize us until we leave altogether. If, G-d forbid, [a Palestinian State] should occur, it would be the beginning of the end." Moshe Dayan once referred to Har-Tzion as the bravest warrior since Bar Kochba. Har-Tzion, 70, retired from the IDF after being seriously wounded in 1956. (1)

Strangely, Sharon already knows this, having been advised by his General Staff in the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) and the Intelligence Agencies - each offering a separate opinion that agrees with their comrades.

Sharon has now acknowledged that, given the amount of armaments pouring into Gaza during (his) Hudna (temporary cease fire), the evacuation of Jewish men, women and children will come under heavy fire. In effect, he has already accepted the anticipated losses and considers them acceptable and expendable.

Sharon has blustered that he will send troops into Gaza to suppress that fire but, the Terrorists have promised to drive him out under a rain of mortars, Qassem rockets and already implanted Roadside bombs. This will prove that, as with PM Barak midnight retreat from Israel's security zone in Lebanon, Jews can be made to run and encourage them to drive the Jews into the sea.

Clearly, any dead or wounded will be laid at Sharon's feet as the enabler. IF there is any justice or semblance of Law left in this de-democratized nation, Sharon should be immediately relieved of his office, brought to trial and, if found guilty, either jailed or sentenced for a capital crime against the Jewish people and again humanity.

Naturally, that would apply to all those who supported his decision, despite knowing the facts of great risk entailed.

As a former top General, Sharon knows full well that leading your troops into a trap through bad judgement warrants a Court Martial and dismissal. However, leading your whole nation into such a trap after being already informed of its clear and present danger, is a crime again your whole people.

Add to that, choosing to accept the mission on orders from a foreign nation is the highest order of treason. It seems clear that, for reasons yet to be exposed, Sharon has personally chosen to betray the Jewish nation. If execution by the Courts is still on the books, should you be found guilty of such offenses, perhaps capital punishment would be your best choice.

Living out your life in a cell, with your nation despising your very name would hardly be a choice for such a vain and arrogant man. Even without trial, your name when spoken is received by many as is Haman's when the people should to drown out the sound of your name.

In conclusion, for those who know who and where the oldest and youngest heroes of past battles can be found, ask them to come out of seclusion. Ask them to speak to all the people. Ask them to confront Sharon like Meir Har-Tzion did. Perhaps they can even lead the citizens and soldiers who refuse to betray fellow Jews to confront Sharon's legions. If affordable, such illustrious names featured in newspapers would impress even the most dedicated Leftists of Tel Aviv who believe making Gaza Judenrein will insure their safety and future.


1. "Legendary IDF fighter calls for refusal, says friend. Sharon went 'crazy'". By Israel Insider Staff NS partners, Feb. 23, 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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 18, 2005.

How far will Prime Minister Ariel Sharon go, with President Bush leaning on him, to protect Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), head of the Palestinian Authority? (1) < p> Rehavam (Gandhi) Ze'evi was assassinated October 17, 2001. If his killers Ahmed Aadat and Fuad Shobaki are released - as demanded by Abbas - then the theatrics will go something like this:

Abu Mazen will look like a hero (as intended) to the various Terrorist organizations for both the reality of their release and defying Sharon. Then Sharon has the released killers assassinated as planned as a bone thrown to the angry Israeli public. Sharon then looks the hero at home while Abbas is elevated as a trustworthy leader for the Terrorists. In which case, both buy time.

Abbas is temporarily moved back from assassination by a tick of the clock and the Terrorists continue the Hudna (fake and temporary cease-fire) a bit longer while re-building their forces. Sharon uses his assembled legions to push the Jewish men, women and children out of their homes in Gush Katif/Gaza. Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon once again warns that the Palestinians are using the Hudna as a time for a major re-armament and re-staffing. Ya'alon was forced out of his job early - just before the Jews in Gush Katif are to evicted - by Minister of Defense Shaul Mofaz (no doubt, on orders from Sharon). Ya'alon had previously outlined the threat to the Jewish nation publically.

This is both real and circumstantial evidence that demonstrates that Bush is keeping his word to the Saudis, the Arab Muslim world and the Palestinian Terrorists with respect todriving out the Jewish settlers.

Both Bush and Sharon need Abbas alive for a while longer in order to close a loop on the Bush fantasy of a democratic Arab Muslim Middle East.

But, there is more happening in parallel which may defeat the Bush strategy - even with Sharon trailing along on a short leash.

Syria: When Bashar al-Assad (an Optometrist and son of Hafez) first came to power, I wrote an article opining that he would merely be a puppet of the father's close allies, namely the Alawite General Staff. That Bashar would be the figure-head as long as he followed directions. Now under pressure from Bush, he is withdrawing from Lebanon (slowly) but, this is critical for the Generals who use Lebanon as their income. This is about one Billion dollars a year plus, includes the revenue from the opium poppy crop, grown in the Lebanese Beka'a Valley.

Unsubstantiated reports indicate there is a coup in process wherein Bashar may be overthrown by the Generals. The Generals are, of course, also linked with the Hezb'Allah in Lebanon. (More on this later) (2).

Egypt: President Hosni Mubarak is beginning to show signs of drawing away from American influence. Mubarak may leave either from age, assassination or simply wish to pass control over to his son which means coming to a compromise with the ever-growing Islamic Brotherhood. That means bringing the Jihadists closer and, for course, sharing the $60 Billion (from the Camp David Accords) of free American armaments. Egypt was to be armed so if or when necessary, Egypt could occupy the Saudi oil fields as America's agent and thuse continue to deliver oil to U.S.-based multi-national oil companies. The State Department planners did not factor in the familiar Egyptian tendency to betray America and Egypt's desire to be the Super Power of the Arab Muslim world.

In order, for Egypt to accomplish this, Israel would have to be seduced and offered a part in the Bush family's overreaching plan for the Middle East region. Should Egypt make such a move, Israel would need to sit on her hands and allow Egypt to take control. Thus Egypt, already a military colossus, will add the entire Saudi armory of America's best plus their vast oil resource. The threat to the region, to Israel and America would grow exponentially.

Bush has made certain promises to Sharon - such as an economic safety net, additional high tech weapons platforms and spare parts, and a protection shield - should Egypt with its massive armory moved to take Israel out.

Naturally, any such help would arrive too late - if at all.

Bush having his fill of Global Terror due to his experiences in Iraq, is already going soft on this commitment. He has back-pedaled on Hezb'Allah s he stated that this Shi'ite group, backed by Iran could be something other than a Terrorist organization. (Yah, George, you must be listening to your father and to Jim Baker again.)


1. Summary by Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Hatzofeh Editorial from GPO 3/17/05

Hatzofeh says that Mahmoud Abbas's (Abu Mazen's) decision to release Rehavam Ze'evi's murderers "should not surprise anybody," and maintains that he "is continuing in Arafat's ways, only he is more sophisticated in that the have been able to gain the support of the European countries and parts of the U.S. Administration." The editors argue that Abbas's reason for releasing these prisoners, that it will enable him to incorporate Islamic Jihad into the Palestinian political system, will undoubtedly be use as a reason to release additional murderers and claim that Abbas will, in the event that the hudna fails, blame them for the breakdown and thus shirk his own responsibility. The paper believes that, if Terrorism is renewed, "We must act toward Abu Mazen in the same way that we acted toward Sheikh Yassin."

2. from Israel & Global News, March 18, 2005, Special to WorldTribune.com "Syrian military split on pullback; Opposition reports Assad has fled."

The regime of President Bashar Assad has come under severe strain over the decision to pull back forces from Lebanon and, according to an unconfirmed report, Assad has fled Damascus to regroup in Aleppo.

Lebanese opposition sources said the Assad regime has been divided over the decision to withdraw thousands of troops from Lebanon. The sources said some elements of the military have refused to follow orders for the pullout of troops as well as intelligence agents from both central Lebanon and the eastern Bekaa Valley.

Syria's military increased deployment around Damascus due to tension within the regime. The opposition Lebanese Foundation for Peace said the Syrian military has undergone a split, with a rebel faction having taken control over parts of the capital, Middle East Newsline reported.

The rebel faction was said to be led by Syrian Interior Minister Ghazi Kanaan and Firas Tlas, the son of former Defense Minister Mustapha Tlas. The sources said this group, which included Syrian intelligence chief in Lebanon, Maj. Gen. Rustom Ghazaleh and Maj. Gen. Ali Madi, has rebelled against Assad's decision to withdraw from Lebanon.

"Around 3 a.m. [Wednesday], Damascus time, the Syrian Air Force bombarded two military airfields around Damascus, the air force base of Dumair, and the air force base of Katana," the opposition Lebanese Foundation for Peace said. "Also, late night around 3 a.m., the Syrian Air Force bombarded military positions of the Syrian Army west of the city of Homs."

There was no confirmation of this report. There were no unusual military movements reported in Damascus on Thursday.

The foundation said Assad has fled to Aleppo and amassed a force of loyalists in an attempt to regain control of Damascus. Assad was said to have left Damascus with Syrian military intelligence chief Gen. Assaf Chawkat, the president's brother-in-law.

"The dissident group took control of Damascus as they were very upset at the Lebanon withdrawal, for they left behind a billion dollar industry," the foundation said.

Over the last day, Syrian intelligence officers left their Beirut headquarters and Lebanese forces moved in. On Thursday, Lebanese sources said Damascus completed the first stage of its withdrawal from Lebanon and redeployed 8,000 troops and military intelligence personnel to the Bekaa Valley and Syria. The sources said Syria has removed its military presence from central and northern Lebanon.

"There's a lot of movement going on in Lebanon," U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said on Wednesday. "I would say there's a certain lack of clarity, which we continue to look for from the government of Syria. The lack of clarity is where are they going and when will they leave and will it be all of them."

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 Nadia Matar, March 18, 2005.

Egged buses are currently festooned with huge posters bearing the slogan: "Let the People Decide." My stomach turns when I think about the hundreds of thousands of shekels - and perhaps more - that the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is wasting on this campaign, instead of channeling the money to preparations for the upcoming struggle this summer - the renovation of empty houses to absorb the thousands of new residents, the purchase of generators, tents, stores of food and water for the tens of thousands of people who will dig in, and the like.

But what is even more troubling than the waste of money, is the message of the campaign itself. We must declare, once and for all, that whoever promotes the "Let the People Decide" slogan inflicts the greatest possible damage on our struggle for The Land of Israel. In my humble opinion, the campaign for a referendum is actually spreading calumny about the Land, and is a return to the Biblical account of the sin of the spies.

When the spies returned from scouting out the Land, the people had to decide whom to follow. Would they follow the ten spies who told them how beautiful the Land was, but "we cannot go forward against that people, for it is stronger than we," "the country is one that devours its inhabitants" - or would they go with Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun, who declared: "Let us by all means go up, and we shall gain possession of it, for we shall surely overcome it" (Deuteronomy 13).

Let the people decide? The people did decide. Not only did they want to stone Caleb and Joshua,

"the whole community broke out into loud cries, and the people wept that night. All the Israelites railed against Moses and Aaron [...] "Why is the Lord taking us to that land to fall by the sword? Our wives and children will be carried off! It would be better for us to go back to Egypt!" And they said to one another, "Let us appoint a new leader and head back to Egypt." (Numbers 14:1-4)

Could any modern referendum be clearer than this? All the Children of Israel, the whole community, an overwhelming majority, were against Caleb and Joshua, and for a return to Egypt. What did G-d say to this? Did He accept the results, and say that, since a majority of the people wished to renounce the dream of the Land of Israel, they should return to Egypt! Definitely Not!

And the Lord said to Moses: "How long will this people spurn Me, and how long will they have no faith in Me despite all the signs that I have performed in their midst. I will strike them with pestilence and disown them, and I will make of you a nation far more numerous than they!" (Numbers 14:11-12)

G-d wanted to destroy all the whiners and those lacking faith. Only after Moses intervenes, does the Lord agree not to kill them all. Instead, the punishment is that they will not see the Land of Israel. Only Caleb and Joshua would merit to enter the Land, together with the new generation. That night, when all the people wept, was the night of Tisha be-Av. The midrash says that G-d told them: "You wept for nothing, therefore I will establish this night for you as one of lamentation for future generations."

If G-d was so harsh with the liberated Israelite slaves when they were still in the wilderness on their way to the Land of Israel, a land that they had never seen - how much more scandalous is it when we, who have already settled and taken possession of this Land, dare to speak about the possibility of handing it over to the enemy?

Therefore, in my humble opinion, those among our camp who call for a referendum are essentially no different from Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres. All belong to the faction of the ten defeatist spies, who spread calumny about the Land. All are actually saying that in certain instances we must - obviously, with a grieving heart - surrender the Land of Israel or parts of it. All are weak people, who do not have complete faith in our divine destiny, who do not believe in our ability to remain in the Land and protect it. All say: "We cannot go forward."

If we do not want endless lamenting here, once again, if we truly desire to be victorious, to block the Sharon plan, to prevent the deportation and uprooting, and to thereby save the State of Israel and the Land of Israel - goals that are within our reach, if we only organize properly - then we must follow only leaders who speak in the spirit of Caleb and Joshua. Leaders who say clearly, without stuttering or hesitation: The Sharon plan is a crime. A crime against the Holy One, blessed be He, a crime against the Torah, a crime against the people, a crime against the land.

This land belongs to us because G-d gave it to us, and no Jew is entitled to give it away. Likewise, no government or Knesset is entitled to give it away, even if an absolute majority votes in favor. Consequently, every Jew - soldier, policeman, Border Patrol soldier, attorney, government official, etc. - is forbidden to participate or assist in this criminal plan, whether directly or indirectly. On D-Day, all the people must leave their homes to stand and be counted in Gush Katif and the Northern Shomron, to prevent, with their bodies, the realization of the crime. If our leadership will speak in such a clear manner, and act and organize accordingly, then, with God's help, we will succeed in preventing the execution of the decree.

To all those in our camp who - still - advocate only the policy of "With Love We will Win," we say: Don't you understand that Sharon and the band of Oslo criminals around him plan to love us to death? To all those in our camp who send mixed messages and weaken our cause with demands for a referendum; to those who sabotage our struggle with talk about the "moral" obligation of soldiers to obey the patently illegal and immoral deportation order; to those who are too fearful to say like Caleb and Joshua " If G-d desires to help us, He will indeed bring us into the Land and give it to us[...] only you must not rebel against the Lord"-

To all these well-meaning people we say what Mordechai told Esther thousands of years ago: "If you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from another quarter" (Esther 4:14)

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 Beth Goodtree, March 18, 2005.

I never thought I'd see the day when Jews, supposedly true Jews tried to censor free thought and speech. But then I never thought I'd see the day when I was no longer the youngest, thinnest and prettiest. However, getting middle-aged and zaftig is not nearly the crime that the Israeli government is now trying to foist upon the Jewish people.

I should have seen it coming. Most recently, a very well known writer on Jewish issues made an appeal to me, along with 24 other writers, to help in censoring a fellow Jewish writer. To say I was surprised would be an understatement. This censorship-advocating writer was one who had consistently advocated freedom and equal rights, particularly regarding the residents of Yesha, who are about to be ethnically cleansed from their homes, businesses and land.

The writer about whom this campaign of censorship is being secretly waged may be somewhat on the fringe, but does not compare to others whom this censorship campaign has chosen to ignore. For example, I despise every evil fiber in Noam Chomsky's being, yet I would never censor him. Nor would I respect anyone else who made such an attempt.

But shortly before this, Ariel Sharon bullied through a decision to prosecute/persecute those who would speak about resisting the ethnic cleansings he plans in Yesha or against his government.

I shoulda seen it coming.

Why wasn't I taught about this is religious school? Why wasn't I taught that censorship and fascist rule was the apparent modern-day Jewish way of life. But then again, why wasn't I taught that to be liberal meant to stifle opposition and to pick on and demonize the weakest members of society? Why wasn't I taught that to be liberal meant to advocate ethnic cleansing if you thought it might benefit you?

However, what I have learned through experience is that censorship is the act of a government that is terrified and guilt-ridden. We have seen it before. In Stalin's Russia, in the communist USSR, in WWII Germany, in North Korea, in Saddam's Iraq, in Saudi Arabia and in Iran. In fact, in every despotic regime, when they feel they might lose their stranglehold grip they resort to censorship. But in the case of Ariel Sharon, this latest move will not work.

Why? Because a word is merely a string of letters indicating a sound. While a word does represent an idea, banning the word does not ban the idea. And it is the idea - freedom of thought - that Sharon is now seeking to ban. But I can demonstrate that although the word 'Nazi' may become verboten, I can get the idea across very clearly without ever using it. Here is an example:

Curiously, the powers-that-be seem to be moving Israel closer and closer to another country from our recent past. When I hear about plans to rip infants from the arms of their mothers, I am reminded of this fallen relic.

When I hear about taking away generational homes from Jews, forbidding them on their own land and turning it over to those sworn to their genocide, I am further reminded of this aberration on the history of civilization.

When I hear of assigning four 'specially-trained peacekeepers' to every unarmed man, woman, infant, child and elderly person, to drag them away from their homes and load them into buses to forcibly and permanently remove them from their towns, I am reminded of the crimes against humanity committed by the tools of this fallen relic - the Gestapo, the SS and Hitler's other minions.

When I hear about forbidding Jews to enter certain areas, I am reminded of a Hitlerian Germany that Israel was created to prevent from happening again.

And I said it all without once using the dreaded 'N' word.

So before the law passes, I want to get as much use out of that soon-to-be-banned word as possible. NAZI, NAZI, NAZI...so there! I bet you know who you are.

Banning a simple collection of letters that form a word will not erase the idea that what the Sharon government is doing is the ultimate in despicable evil and reminiscent of the tactics used by that soon-to-be-banned appellation. And the very idea of this ban proves that Sharon and his cronies are running in abject and utter fear.

Beth Goodtree is a writer specializing in political commentary, Islamism and the Middle East. She also writes the occasional science and humor articles. She has a background in advertising and works as a consultant on Islamism and terrorism to a security firm. Contact her at her website: http://hometown.aol.com/bgoodtree/

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 18, 2005.


Every country where the western Palestinian Arabs have influence, they try to dominate or wreck. (1) They could have enjoyed peace and prosperity in Israel, but tried to destroy the country; (2) Failing that, masses of them received citizenship in Jordan. Violating their agreement, they set up roadblocks, intimidated native Jordanians, and started to usurp power. The King had to send the army against them; (3) Fleeing largely to Lebanon, they were given refuge. Instead, they engaged in rape, extortion, usurpation of jobs, used the country as a base for committing terrorism against Israel, and set off a religious civil war; (4) When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the Palestinian Arabs guided the enemy to key points and prominent officials to liquidate, and jhelped torture Kuwaitis. Upon being liberated by the Coalition, Kuwait, and then S. Arabia, expelled several hundred thousand whom it had given jobs to in the oil industry; (5) Given rule of the P.A., Arafat turned it into the corrupt dictatorship and center of jihad we know of it today.

What does Abu Mazen propose? He proposes that millions of such Arabs be sent into Israel. The purpose is to destroy the Jewish state. It also would ruin it.

There isn't much solution. I think that Israel must make conditions in the Territories and Israel inhospitable for the Arabs, so they leave. They would have to disperse, because no sane country would welcome them. At one time, it was simple to suggest that the Arab states integrate them. The Arab states were keeping them unsettled as sources of agitation against Israel. Now, however, even Jordan is afraid of fellow Palestinian Arabs coming in and tipping the balance of power in harsh ways.


Aren't you struck with how often PM Sharon, Peres, other Israeli leaders, and everyone else repeats one-sided shibboleths as mantras, such as that it is up to Israel to make "hard choices?" Why innocent Israel? Why not the Arabs, who caused the Jewish and Arab refugee problems, who committed aggression, who commit war crimes, who preach hatred and violence, and who steal the foreign aid meant to boost their people's standard of living?

The answer is that all these leaders are misguiding the Jewish people into destruction, not a solution. A solution is not reached by making the aggressors dominant. Considering that the Muslims will wage jihad until either stopped or totally victorious, sacrificing Israel to them only brings the West' day of reckoning closer, it does not solve anything.


Consumers are considered suckers if they believe corporate promises not delivered. It is worse that they believe leaders of the US, Israel, and the Arabs, giving Israel assurances. These people have a record of false promises. The purpose of these promises is to lull the Jewish and American peoples into complacency and a false sense of security.

It is difficult for skeptics among those peoples to express their doubts. The media is misinformed or party to the deception. Skepticism is a neglected attitude. People would be wiser to ask their leaders to explain how they would implement their assurances and to demonstrate good faith.


The term, "extremist," is used a club by extremists for intimidating moderates, just as "racist" often is used as a club by racists for intimidating tolerant people. People have to stop taking epithets used against them seriously. Be skeptical. Challenge accusers for specifics.


For years, some of us have noted the systematic dulling of Israel's supposed "qualitative military edge." Not only are the Arabs and Iran developing their own military industry including the means for weapons of mass-destruction, and not only has Russia resumed sales to them of advanced weaponry, but the US has built up a powerful Egyptian army free. The US sells advanced military technology to the Arabs with boilerplate language that the new arms do not affect the regional balance of power, when of course they do.

It is worse than that. The US always restrains Israel from dealing decisively with the Arab, in this context, Hizbullah and the P.A.. In fact, the US is sponsoring the rebuilding of the P.A. army. That army and its never-to-be-disarmed terrorist auxiliaries would be able to disrupt Israeli mobilization against foreign invasion, in concert with a barrage from Hizbullah rockets.

As the repeated victim of Arab aggression, and whose enemies remain jihadists, Israel should have more than a mere "edge." Why should it suffer high casualties? Why should the Arabs have several times the weaponry and the hope of eventually breaking through Israeli defenses?

The State Dept. is about to realize its immediate goal of driving Jews from the Territories, site of Jewish holy places, source of about a third of dry Israel's water, barrier to Arab tanks, early warning against Arab planes and missiles, and minimal strategic depth for proper alignment of Israeli brigades. This would doom Israel. Now that affects regional balance of power!

The shadow of Holocaust hangs over Israel. Evil reigns. There is a general (mis)understanding that Israel is the main problem in the world, and must be rendered innocuous, first by detaching the Territories. The Western world leaders pretend to oppose terrorism, but they still are appeasement-minded and hate the Jews more than they fear the Arabs. Europe has made its bargain with the Arab states in a Mediterranean alliance. The US is protecting the terrorists in the P.A.. US policy on Iraq may be falling apart, as Ayatollah al-Sistani demands that Islamic law, which is intolerant and therefore anti-democratic, be the basis for Iraqi law.

Americans are under the illusion that's Pres. Bush is anti-terrorist and pro-Israel. And the Jewish people won't know what hit them. They don't know that their leaders have sold out to the EU and US. Their media keeps them half misinformed. The Establishment is too powerful for the people.


A strange dullness overcomes bright people when they discuss the Arab-Israel. They come up with inanities. More than uninformed, they don't think matters through.

Consider brilliant Martin Peretz' favorable quotation of Jimmie Carter's stamp of approval for the undemocratic P.A. election as democratic: "there is no Israeli intimidation?" Well of course there wasn't. Israel doesn't do that. The problem with P.A. elections is not Israel but Arab dictatorial and corrupt tactics, such as Fatah men voting twice, rival candidates denied access to the media, and threats. Even if the election were democratic, P.a. society isn't. The candidates all were jihadists, so the outcome was irrelevant. Why if this is clear to me is it obscure to Carter and Peretz? They seem more interested in blaming the Jewish state for the Arabs' problems, although the Arabs cause problems for Arabs and Jews, alike

Then there is Mortimer Zuckerman's scintillating article that ends declaring about Arafat's Arabs, "The Palestinians deserve peace?" If those bigoted terrorists are deserving, who isn't? Doesn't he know right from wrong? That kind of judgment is out of fashion when Israel's ultimate fate is concerned. After favoring and committing terrorism for decades, the Palestinian Arabs deserve much suffering. Otherwise, there is no justice.


Long before the state of Israel was re-established, the Arabs wanted to wipe out the Jews in it. During WWII, the Arabs generally sympathized with, and sometimes helped, the Axis.

Now a Jewish government would uproot Jews (Winston Mid East Analysis, 3/11).


Abu Mazen must: allow dissent; educate against incitement; stop using refugees as political pawns; build a middle class to be independent of the government (Israel impedes the growth of its middle class by excessive government ownership and control); and expand freedom instead of resentments. Then, suggests Natan Sharansky, the P.A. should receive legitimacy, financial aid, territory, and support for statehood (Jewish Political Chronicle, 1/2005, p.13 from Wall St. J., 1/11).

The territory belongs to the Jewish people and should not be given to their enemies. Hence it would be shortsighted and unjust to grant the P.A. granted legitimacy, statehood, or financial aid. It also would hamper Israeli defense against invasion from other neighbors. Has Israel no leader who stands up for his own people's interests?

Having a middle class won't help if they follow the fundamentals of Islam, which is intolerant and imperialistic. In Germany, the original Nazi movement drew heavily from the middle class.


"Senior wanted [terrorists] are hiding in the Mukata [Ramallah offices of Chairman Abbas] to this very day and are engaged in arms trade and the transfer of weapons within the compound itself. They are engaged nonstop in making contacts with additional 'activists' and in preparing the terror organizations for the day that the calm ends." (IMRA, 3/11 from Senior Israeli military source quoted by Makor Rishon reporter Erez Tadmor).

Sec. of State Rice calls the Chairman a "man of peace." Not true. Either US briefings are so poor that she does not know of his many deceptions that the alternative, right-wing media and Israeli intelligence reports, or she does and piles her deceptions onto his. Why is she deceiving her own people, not to mention the Jewish people? For what is she really preparing the Jewish people, in leaving them unprepared for war? How antipathetic towards Israel is US policy really?


He denounced "extremists on both sides" (exempting his Arab colleagues, who wish to conquer Israel, and himself, whose plan would render Israel defenseless). He hopes that (dictatorial jihadist) Abu Mazen would lead his (undeserving) people towards a democratic state. Violence will not win, said Sharon, as he prepares to reward violence by withdrawing from Gaza and clubbing objectors. We must "act together with determination to dismantle the terror infrastructures, disarm them and break them once and for all." (He forfeited that by: (1) Signing on to the Road Map that requests it but doesn't specify it clearly, instead of insisting on P.A. compliance with Oslo; and (2) Circumventing the Road Map by unilateral cession of territory to Abu Mazen, who pledges not to disarm the terrorists but to make them official troops.

"While Abu Mazen talked of attaining Jerusalem, and the return of refugees, and the stopping of settlements and the partition," Saar said, "Sharon said nothing that [extreme left-wing] Yossi Beilin couldn't agree with. He didn't mention Jerusalem as Israel's eternal capital, nor anything that he would insist upon as a final Israeli position." (IMRA, 2/8.) Israel's leaders rarely do!


"The P.A., in its Arabic messages to its people, has always denied Israel's right to exist and has often presented the peace process as a tactic leading to Israel's destruction."

"This goal was repeated Friday, on the P.A. television, in the official sermon. Senior religious figure, Ibrahim Mudyris, explained that the limitation of the diplomatic process is that it can only achieve the 1967 borders, and that at a latest stage the P.A. will achieve its goal, the destruction of Israel: "the way Muhammad returned there as a conqueror". (IMRA, 2/8)

If IMRA can note the self-contradictions emanating from the P.A., why cannot our Sec. of State, who, instead, only tells us that the P.A. has turned to peace. What is her game?

According to Prof. Plaut, it was not Muhammad but his successors who conquered Judea from the Jews, who had just taken their country back from the Byzantines.


King Abdullah of Jordan (a descendant of the Prophet) complained about the Islamists. He depicted them as a wayward sect carrying the religion to an extreme and giving it a bad name. He said that Muslims, Christian, and Jewish extremists all are wrongdoers. Don't expect him to accomplish anything concrete soon, because reform takes time (IMRA, 2/8). What reform?

Let him talk for himself! No Jewish schools of thought are extremist or imperialist. The Christians are not aggressors at this stage in history. He is slandering other religions, just as do the Islamists. Deceit is a common ruse by Arabs, who their religion authorizes to do so in its defense. Let him explain that that is not Islamic, if he can.

Does he mean it really is a religion of peace? Then why did his country make war on Israel twice and the Arabs have been making war among themselves and against others many times since having attained post-WWII independence? Most Arabs live outside the Arabian Peninsula, i.e., on the remnants of one of the world's most extensive empires. The empire was formed by imperialism. The King's condemnation is welcome, but I think false. It should be specific and indicate what is non-Islamic about the Islamists. I don't think he could specify anything. He may simply help lull proper firm reaction against the Islamists. Better he close their officers in Jordan.


Vice PM Peres was asked about P.A. claims that Israel was not meeting its commitments towards the Arabs. All that Vice PM Peres said in his reply was that there may be some "disappointments." He did not defend Israel's record of performance (IMRA, 3/8).

Neither did he cite the Arab record of total non-compliance. Whom does Peres represent?


Towards the end of February, Arab terrorists committed a deadly attack in Tel Aviv. The Arabs keep committing terrorism, despite promises by Abbas to stop it and boasts that he has persuaded the unofficial militias to stand down. The record is worse than that. On March 8, a major attack against the Jews of Hebron failed at the last minute. The intent was deadly. The extent of terrorism must be gauged by the launched and aborted attacks combined. Abbas should not be believed (Hatzofeh from Foreign Ministry, 3/8).

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 Eliezar Edwards, March 18, 2005.
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

The Palestinian terrorists' agreement reached in Cairo yesterday is even less binding than a hudna [a temporary cease fire], and can be violated at any time. IDF Chief of Staff Yaalon says it's downright dangerous.

Although the details of yesterday's agreement are not totally clear, it appears that 13 terrorist factions, including the three major terrorist organizations - Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad - have agreed to extend the present informal ceasefire until the end of the year. They refused to agree to anything resembling an official truce with Israel, however.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak that the agreement reached among the terrorist leaders in Cairo yesterday is an important first step. PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) was happy with what he achieved in Cairo, calling the agreement "important and serious," and saying it will "give the peace process a chance to move forward."

Some say the agreement is downright dangerous for Israel, however. Hisham Abdel Rezak, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, said today that the agreed-upon arrangement is a dahadiye, or somewhat less than a hudna. A hudna is a ceasefire that remains in effect until one of the sides feels that it can defeat the other. Rezak said that the present arrangement is even less binding than that, and is really only a "calming" of the situation that will allow the sides, if they wish, to easily "get down from the ladder."

Hamas official Muhammed Nazzal said that even this limited agreement will expire at the end of the year if Israel does not meet its demands. These include the release of all terrorists, withdrawal from Arab-populated cities in Judea and Samaria, and an end to all military activities.

Outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon - who apparently feels less restricted in his speeches following what most see as his "firing" by Prime Minister Sharon and Defense Minister Mofaz - said today that the "calming" agreement is nothing for Israel to get excited about. "Until Abu Mazen collects all the weapons, this conflict will not end," he told a Haifa audience today. "Camouflaged by [this agreement], the terrorists are arming, manufacturing explosives and shoring up their forces."

Ynet reports that at least one terrorist leader, Salah A-Din Brigades leader Abu Abir, refuses to be bound by even this limited agreement. "I say to the residents of Sderot that you better return to your shelters," Abir said, "because what is awaiting you - you have not yet seen the likes of it."

A top PA official told The Jerusalem Post that Abu Mazen invited the Damascus-based terrorist groups to move to Gaza Strip after Israel leaves - and that most of them had agreed to do so.

To Go To Top
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 18, 2005.
Here are two news items from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). Remember the IDF is now some 40% religious Jews (Isn't it a kicker that you can't automatically assume a Jew living surrounded by the history of his people is religious?) So Israel is planning to bring in some 30,000-40,000 non-Jewish and Peace Now thugs (Ain't that another kicker?) to drive the Jews of Gaza from their homes and farms and nurseries. So how will they pay for it? Will they ask the USA?

In the longterm it will be the kiss of death for any American politician who agrees to ethnically cleanse Jews from Biblical Israel. As the IDF General says, people may not be horrified when the first group of Jews is expelled but after the second routing - when the Government's Official Thug Corps (GOTC) has done the beating and shooting the IDF was too kindhearted to do in Jenin and Ramallah - the world be treated to lots of pictures. I know the second news item says the media will be kept out. But they can't search everyone for tiny cameras with instant relay out to the world. Not to worry. Pictures will get out. And in big numbers. And then the world will be told how Sharon's far-Left government lets Arab terrorists out for another round of killing Jews but holds innocent Israelis in administrative detention (that's jail without a trial) and they harass and and break the wrists of Jewish women who are protecting their homes and families.

And then what happens to Sharon and Mazuz and Peres? Right now they are backed by Peace Now and the other Arab-lovers. And the Lefties have lots of power. But they are only 4-6% of the Israeli population. And very soon, numbers are going to count.

Maybe then Israel will come to its senses and start fighting its enemies, not fellow-Jews.

1. "IDF General: Army Doesn't Realize Extent of Crisis"

"Hundreds of soldiers will tell their officers that they simply cannot carry out the expulsion orders - if not at the first community, then at the second." So says a high-ranking army general.

Defense Minister Sha'ul Mofaz decided earlier this week to shorten the duration of the planned expulsion in Gush Katif and northern Shomron from 8 weeks to 3-4 weeks. The significance of this for the army is that it will be more actively involved than thought, as the police will not be able to carry it out alone. Some 8,500 Jews live in the 25 communities that are slated for demolition. Not all of them will have to be forcibly removed, as they will have left voluntarily before the final date, but many others will come to take their place.

Veteran Haaretz journalist Amos Harel writes that the IDF General Staff does not have an authorized estimate of the extent of the expected refusal among soldiers ordered to take part in the disengagement plan this summer. One general told him that the army is underrating the intensity of the crisis, and that hundreds of soldiers will tell their soldiers that they "simply cannot" carry out the orders to forcibly remove Jewish women and children from their homes in the Land of Israel.

At least 10,000 soldiers have signed petitions saying they will refuse such orders. The signature collectors reported that for every soldier who signed, there were five - some said seven - who said that they don't want to sign, but could be counted on not to take part in the disengagement.

One fear in the army is that the refusal phenomenon will gather steam as the expulsions continue: Soldiers who take part in an evacuation will be shocked at the experience, and will then not take part in the next one, etc.

Another general expressed a different view to Harel, saying that refusals will not be widespread.

The army has reviewed the signatures of those who signed their refusal to carry out the disengagement, in order to see in which units they face the most problems. Only one signatory has been punished, as far as is known: an armored corps soldier serving in Gaza, who was sentenced to 21 days in the dock.

Two IDF divisions are to be deployed in the "inner circle" of the evacuation. A third one - the Gaza Division, commanded by Brig.-Gen. Aviv Kokhavi - will be in the "second circle," and will be responsible for rebuffing Arab attacks on the soldiers and/or residents.

In four communities of the northern Shomron, the residents are not of the same mind. Those living in Ganim and Kadim plan to leave without a fight, while in Sa-Nur and Homesh the residents plan to stand strong. In Gush Katif, only a small percentage have agreed to take government-offered compensation, and even of this number, most are not expected to leave for the date they absolutely have to.

2. Gov't To Limit Media Coverage of Expulsion

Some Israeli media have denounced as "unreasonable" government plans to severely restrict free press coverage during the scheduled expulsion of Jewish residents from 25 communities this summer.

The army has announced the Gaza and northern Samaria communities to be evacuated will be closed military zones. Radio, television and newspaper reporters will not be allowed to move from one community to another without permission and a military escort.

The only journalists who will be allowed to enter the communities will be "embedded" with military personnel who will restrict photographers. "Wherever there are cameras, passions are ignited," explained an army spokesman.

The IDF insists it has no intentions to gag the press. One of the army's explanations for the restrictions is that each community is "too small" to accommodate all the reporters. The major communities range in size from several dozen to several hundred families and cover hundreds of acres.

Israeli Channel 10 commentator Alon Ben-David accused the government of trying to "dictate to us where to go." Another reporter said the limits are "unreasonable."

The government already has announced that beginning at a date to be announced, it will not allow non-residents into the area, thus preventing a massive resistance effort planned by opponents to the program. Beginning next week, Israelis will be forbidden from officially moving to the affected communities. In recent weeks, hundreds of people have officially changed their addresses to Gush Katif, in order that they not be restricted from entering the area at any time in the coming months.

To Go To Top
Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, March 17, 2005.

In addition to the political and civil (disobedience) fronts in the struggle against the disengagement, the spiritual front is also very active. Today and March 22 are key dates.

Today, a day of fasting has been declared by leading rabbis from various sectors of the Jewish population. Among those behind the call are former Chief Rabbis Avraham Shapira and Mordechai Eliyahu, as well as rabbis of Chabad and others. Those who can fast a full day are recommended to take the commitment upon themselves during tomorrow's afternoon Mincha prayer; those who can't should fast, if they can, until the early afternoon.

The day is devoted to prayer and fasting to overturn the government's decision to expel Jews from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria and turn the communities over to Israel's enemies. During the fast, an assembly will be held in N'vei Dekalim in Gush Katif, which will be attended by the two former Chief Rabbis. See below.

In addition, it has been announced that children around the world are being called upon for a day of prayer a week from today, in the spirit of the "turnabout miracle" spirit of the upcoming Purim holiday.

"We have tried to bring about the nullification of the cruel disengagement decree in various ways," say the organizers in an announcement. "We have demonstrated, held assemblies, hung posters at every possible intersection, and some of us have even carried out activities of real self-sacrifice. These acts have certainly have had some effect, but not enough. Apparently, to fight such a harsh and cruel decree we need the strong powers of children. Their strength is complete, pure, and not motivated by any other external factors."

"Therefore, on the 11th day of Adar Bet (March 22), two days before the Fast of Esther, the Jewish nation in Israel and around the world will unite, and will conduct a special prayer service, with the participation of all the children of all the sectors in our nation."

The organizers ask every adult who is responsible for children - parents, nursery teachers, teachers, grandparents, older siblings, and the like - to recite, together with them, specific Psalms and to study specific passages of Jewish Law. The children should also give a coin for charity.

The Psalms are Chapters 20 and 150, as well as the verse, "Take counsel and it will come to naught; talk of a plan and it will not arise, for G-d is with us."

The relevant law is that which appears in Orach Chaim 329,6: "Gentiles who besieged Jewish towns ... if it is suspected that they might be coming to kill - even if they are merely preparing to come - Sabbath must be desecrated to fight them. And in cities that are close to the border, even if the enemy only wants to steal straw, Sabbath must be desecrated [to fight them] for fear that they want to conquer the city, thus enabling them to capture the whole country.

To Go To Top
Posted by TheRaphi, March 17, 2005.

This article was written by Aliza Karp, who is the Administrator of the Friends of Families of Hebron fund. She writes about issues of concern to the Jewish world, including the Lubavitcher Rebbe's perspective on defending Israel.

Bureau Chief of the Israel Resource News Agency, Mr. David Bedein, has a plan. And you can do it from your home in America.

It involves signing your name, but not on a check. Oh yes, you can do that too, but there is another plan that is not mutually exclusive with signing checks.

Resident of Efrat, David Bedein is a social worker and community organizer who has operated an investigative journalism office for the last 18 years, since the beginning of the first intifada in 1987. His was the first agency to monitor what Yasser Arafat was saying to his people in Arabic, while he was saying the opposite to politicians and the world media in English. Bedein's slogan is, "Let My People Know." (His website is www.israelbehindthenews.com.)

Recently, Bedein was in North America presenting his information and ideas to members of Congress and laypersons alike. Among them, he spoke to a group of women in Crown Heights. We found him to be very knowledgeable and interesting. Many of us are working towards putting his plan into action. Our slogan is "Activate the Activists." We find it is too hard to wake people up and get them out of bed. We are approaching those people who care deeply about Eretz Yisroel and are looking to do something constructive to block those forces that are destructive.

Bedein pointed out that very few people have read the Disengagement Plan, including Knesset members who have voted on it. He showed how the name "Disengagement" is just another slogan. The plan has nothing to do with disengagement. It has to do with empowering the PLO to the point of being in alliance with them. A general outline of the plan can be read at pmo.gov.il (click on English and then on the Disengagement Plan in the left hand column, and go to General Outline). Note in particular paragraph five. And that is only an outline; the frightening details are not posted there.

Contrary to popular opinion, the Lubavitcher Rebbe said many times that the terms of negotiation rest firmly with the Jews and do not originate from the US. After the Jews of Eretz Yisroel show they can be pushed on certain issues, then the US pushes on those issues.

Bedein acknowledged that the responsibility of setting the limits and standing firm rests with the Jews in power in Eretz Yisroel, and yet, he thinks that Jews in America can still make a difference.

It is no secret that the policies of the State Department are not as we would like them to be, but Bedein cited cases in which Congress overruled the State Department, and he said that Congress is workable. Bedein claims that communication with Congressmen and staffers of Congressmen can make a difference. His approach is to campaign for America to uphold American law. He has a list of 14 instances where American involvement in Eretz Yisroel breaks American law.

The women at the meeting decided they wanted to concentrate on only one of those points. The point that could make a difference to the expulsion and deportation process. Bedein suggested that everyone should write to his Congressperson at the House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515. Copies of the letters should be sent to President George Bush (The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500) and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (US Department of State, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20520).

The letters to Congress should be clear and articulate, with no preaching. Bedein advises: if you can get the name of a person on the staff of the Congressperson, email a copy of the letter to the staffer and follow up with a phone call to see if he or she received it.

In response to this meeting, many women have become activated. They have sent their letters and are influencing others to do the same. One woman took upon herself to call every other woman who was at the meeting to make sure each one has already sent a letter and is asking them to call five more people they know, to get them to do the same.

It goes without saying that the goal is for as many Congresspeople as possible to begin receiving as many letters as possible. But it also goes without saying that every single letter counts. Just because you cannot assemble and mail hundreds of letters, that does not discount the value of each and every letter.

We never know which act will be the one to tip the scale and turn the world to goodness.

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 Batya Medad, March 17, 2005.

The Jewish month of Adar, which falls at the end of the winter, the dawn of spring, is known as the season of "increasing joy." This year, doubly so, since it's a Jewish leap year, meaning we have two months of Adar. In the nineteen year, Jewish calendar cycle the extra Adar is added seven times. It is very significant that it takes seven extra Adar's to complete our calendar. Seven is the traditional number for "wholeness," completion.

The Jewish calendar is the only one that unifies both the lunar and solar. Our months are counted strictly by the phases of the moon. The month ends when it's almost impossible to see even the thinnest crescent, and it begins with the first showing of a strip of light from the "new moon." If we only followed the moon, like the Moslems, we would find ourselves celebrating spring holidays in winter, and winter in summer. Holidays wouldn't appear the same season year after year. If we went strictly by the solar calendar, like the Christians, our months would not be related to the moon.

Our sages found a solution to have the best of both worlds, a calendar that follows both the moon and the seasons. This year is one with two months of Adar. How ironic, just when our country is in mortal danger, from it's own political "leaders," we have double the joy according to the calendar. Not only that, but we have a "weekend" Purim holiday, a Purim "m'shulash," a "tri-cornered" Purim. This is the only timing of Purim on which all Jews hear the "Megillat (Scroll of) Esther" on the same day.

Generally there are two days of Purim, one immediately after the Fast of Esther, before one even has a chance to eat, and the later one, for those who lived in cities that were walled, like Jerusalem, at the time of the Purim story. And there are cities like Shiloh, where Purim is celebrated on both days.

This year The Fast of Esther is on Thursday, and that evening regular Purim begins with Megilla reading, even for those who will be celebrating a "postponed" Shushan Purim on Sunday, instead of the proper calendar day on Shabbat. In the Megilla, we read a very interesting and unusual story. Considering that it's about a miracle and strong faith, you'd expect to hear about G-d, but His Name isn't mentioned even once. This isn't a story like the exodus from Egypt with the splitting of the Red Sea and other very obvious miracles by G-d.

The story of Purim is a story of how a couple of Jews, the minority of the Persian Jewish community, managed to turn a critically dangerous situation into victory. The Persian king and his government, especially his chief minister, Haman, were not sympathetic to the Jewish community at all. The Jew, Mordechai, was valued only because he had been useful to the king, informing him of sedition.

Mordechai wasn't even particularly popular amongst his fellow Jews who had gone to the king's parties, where he ridiculed them by using precious ritual objects he had stolen from the Holy Temple. If there had been a referendum or elections, Mordechai would have lost. Your ordinary Jew was interested in being part of Persian society, not like the old-fashioned Mordechai who stationed himself by the king's gate and refused to bow down to Haman. Ironically, Mordechai, the proud Jew, sent his Cousin Esther incognito into the king's harem. She was instructed not to say that she was a Jew until absolutely necessary to save her people.

Only when Haman was given permission to destroy the Jewish community did they look to Mordechai for leadership. They had been certain that they were in a civilized, cultured country and wouldn't be in danger if they assimilated. Assimilation didn't save them. They were saved only when they united, prayed to G-d and fought together against their common enemy.

And, davka, this year, when our Nation is so divided and endangered we will all be reading the Megillat Esther on the same day. G-d willing this unity will bring us Full Redemption.

Chag Purim Sameach,
Batya Medad, Shiloh

This is Musing #105. 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 Emanuel A. Winston, March 17, 2005.

Why have I come to the conclusion that, if a remnant of this twisted world is to survive, it must first be blown up by Terrorists or be blasted by incredible acts of nature as our wake-up call?

The Terrorists have gone well beyond what we all thought was a certain acceptable level of atrocities. Is there an acceptable level of Terror? To President Bush, Secretary of State Rice and the U.S. State Department, an expression of pro-forma condemnation seems to be sufficient to punish the Terrorists.

Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists blew up the Stage Caf in Tel Aviv, Israel February 25th, killing five young Jews and wounding 50, several seriously. Then we immediately heard from Bush and Rice deploring the act but, they continued rewarding the Palestinians by deporting Jews from the Land given by G-d to the Jews.

After Al Qaeda blew up 4 trains in Spain March 11, 2003, the terrified Spanish people elected a passive, seemingly pro-Terrorist government. Weakness in nations and their presidents encourages Terrorists to move forward.

Michael Freund (see below) recommends inclusion of Christians in perhaps a million man march for Israel to the Capitol to shake up President Bush and the Congress. But, don't expect a big turnout of Jews - except those who have the baitzim to do anything. You will not see the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations or Abe Foxman's Anti-Defamation League long overdue for retirement. These trembling Jews will show up for memorials for dead Jews but, you will not see them marching for the justice of live Jews. Granted, Jews have a few thousand years of being taught to cower or run which they are still doing.

Therefore, our dear Christian friends, do not count on the majority of the Jews - (with the exception of some) - to either save themselves or save the Land HaShem promised the Jews for eternity.

You have already seen the likes of Sharon and Peres whine about fighting the Terrorists and giving the Land away. Then the self-proclaimed born-again Christian Bush demands that the Jews abandon their Land to appease the oil-bearing Arab Muslim nations and, of course, their Terrorist proxy recruits.

We do not know what world Bush was re-born into but, it most assuredly wasn't the one commanded by HaShem. If the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel and to their capital, Jerusalem is the signal for the appearance of the Moshiach, then let us look for whatever is the evil who wishes the Jews to abandon their Land.

I believe a million or more Christians could shake the shrinking roots of Washington. So, before Sharon and Bush insure that, not only will the Jews living there be deported but, few Jews from the rest of the world will ever even immigrate into a Land given over to Islam.

By all means, march and shake the foundations of Washington. Who knows, perhaps the lethargy and fear of the frightened Jews will take heart when they see you championing their cause.

Jews with strength and conviction in G-d's Word, Land and People will stand with you.

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
THE WORLD LOVES DEAD JEWS: The Live Ones In Israel Are The Real Problem
Posted by Ruth Matar, March 17, 2005.

Dear Friends,

Holocaust Museums are mushrooming all over the world. Even Germany has a very elaborate museum.

Poland has decided to contribute $26 million towards the construction of a Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw. (This is 75% of the cost of the Warsaw Museum Project, despite difficult economic times in Poland!)

When Yad Vashem first opened in 1957, very few museums in the world even mentioned the Holocaust. Today, as the new Yad Vashem museum opens, there are at least 250 Holocaust museums and memorials worldwide - in Israel, the United States and Europe, but also in such far-flung places as Australia, Argentina, South Africa and Japan.

The most elaborate and expensive of these Holocaust Memorials is the new wing of Yad Vashem, which was inaugurated on Tuesday, March 15, 2005, in the Holy City of Jerusalem.

A large number of presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers and other dignitaries from abroad were invited to attend the Tuesday opening of Yad Vashem's new History Museum.

Leaders from some 40 nations attended the ceremony. Those who took part in the two-day, invitation-only opening events included U. N. Secretary-General Kofi Anna, the presidents of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Lithuania, Poland, Serbia-Montenegro and Switzerland, the prime ministers of France, Sweden, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Romania, the deputy prime minister of the United Kingdom, the vice president of the Dominican Republic, the foreign ministers of Germany, Norway, et al.

Yes, even the children and grandchildren of our executioners came to attend this festive opening of this new Holocaust museum.

Their parents or grandparents may have either collaborated in the murder of six million Jews, or were complicit, or stood by in indifferent silence.

But shouldn't we Jews forgive and forget? Shouldn't we Jews be grateful for this show of support? Such a distinguished international influx does not show up here every day! In fact, there has been nothing to compare to it since the funeral of Yitzhak Rabin almost a decade ago!

I cannot help but think that my family in Europe, many of whom were exterminated like so much vermin, would have preferred to be allowed to live a normal life, rather than this continual commemoration of their untimely, violent death.

Israel's President Katzav enthused that these leaders of the free world have come to show solidarity, not only with Israel, but against anti-Semitism. That they are now more sensitive to the Holocaust!

On the contrary! In the Jerusalem Post of the same day there was an article about Canada recalling passports that by mistake listed Jerusalem as being in the State of Israel. These passports were recalled like defective automobile parts!

One thing these important world leaders agreed on was that Israel must stop building Jewish communities in their own Land, and permit their country to be divided to allow the establishment of "Palestine," a country that never was, and inhabited by a never-was people.

Was there one of these illustrious visitors who spoke against "Disengagement"? Was there one voice raised against forcibly deporting families from their homes, from their own Land?

But U. N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan takes the cake! By the way, I feel that Sharon's fawning over Kofi Annan, the head of the United Nations, is reprehensible, certainly at the inauguration of yet another expensive Holocaust memorial. The U.N.'s track record has been viciously anti-Israel since its inception.

U.N. Secretary-General Annan said that the Holocaust was an "inconceivable event," but commended the Prime Minister on the Disengagement Plan, and expressed his hopes that Israel's budget issue will be "successfully resolved," so as to "enable the continuation of dealing with this important issue." (RM: this issue being to once again deport Jews from their homes?) Of course, Kofi Annan is an expert on manipulating budget issues (the Oil for Food scandal, which is alleged to have involved both Kofi Annan and his son!). He certainly realizes the relationship between budgets and politics.

We Jews have a terrible "genetic flaw." We refuse to face reality. Anti-Semitism is growing by leaps and bounds worldwide, in the very countries whose leaders were invited to the inauguration of Israel's new Holocaust Museum. Even "law-abiding" Switzerland experienced its very first synagogue burning a few days ago.

At the same time, Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has turned out to be a ghetto-type Jew par excellence, is wining and dining the descendants of those who were either collaborators or stood silently by while European Jewry was being murdered.

I believe that the most shocking statement of this whole conference, at least from what was published in the papers, was that of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon: "The State of Israel is the only place in the world where the Jews have the right and the power to protect themselves by themselves. This is the only guarantee that the Jewish People will never know another Holocaust."

This is the man who plans to deport fellow Jews from their Biblical Homeland, Gaza and Samaria. These areas are specifically mentioned in the Judeo-Christian Bible as being part of the eternal inheritance promised to the Jewish People by the G-d of Israel. These Jews are to be violently dragged out of their homes and their Land given to the Arab enemy for yet another terrorist state. Sharon has even promised the Arabs that the remains of Jews buried in Gaza will be disinterred, to make the very earth "Judenrein."

Unfortunately, with dictator Ariel Sharon as Prime Minister, the State of Israel is no longer a guarantee that the Jewish People will never know another Holocaust.

And, if a Jewish Prime Minister can uproot and deport Jews from their homes, what will prevent other world leaders from doing the same? This is a very dangerous situation for all Jews worldwide.

Are then, the Jews completely without friends? Be of good courage! There are millions of Bible-believing Christian Zionists in the world, especially in the United States. (See Michael Freund's article below.

* * *

Unfortunately, President George W. Bush believes that the only way to bring about tranquility in the Middle East is through the establishment of a Palestinian state. In his words: "We seek two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security."

Michael Freund suggests three things - the three P's - that U. S. Christians can and should do to make their voices heard: PROTEST, PRESSURE AND PRAY. I do agree with Michael Freund as to what we should all do. I do disagree with him on one point. Even though American Jewry is divided on this issue, there are many Jews who will be just as interested as the Christians in the survival of the Promised Land as the eternal inheritance of the Jewish People.

Emergency call to American Christians and American Jews! Start PRESSURING your elected representatives, and PRAY that the Master of the Universe should take pity on all of us. As you well know, it is written: "Those who curse Israel shall be cursed, and those who bless Israel shall be blessed."

Just as important is the planned PROTEST in Washington, D.C. on May 19th, 2005.

Circle this date on your calendar. That is the date when we all, please G-d, will join a major rally in Washington, D.C. against the "Disengagement-Deportation-of-Jews-by-Jews Plan." The rally will probably take place on or near the Washington Mall.

I will publish further particulars as soon as they become available.


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 Dafna Yee, March 17, 2005.
The JWD received a letter written in answer to a forum posting which justified boycotting products from the "settlements." Here is the letter (with identifying information removed) and my response.

We were in Israel last year. We visited the Golan hights. From the top of these hills you can see Damascus. You can also see farms that stretch about 5 miles on the Syrian side of these hills. This area is also part of what the Israelis captured when they took the Golan.

Prior there were a lot of small farms which operated at subsistence levels using ancient farming methods resulting in poor productivity. As a result of the capture several of the Syrian farmers fled. Several stayed. Israeli Druze moved in and did two things. They enlarged the farms among the remaining Syrian farmers establishing some farms for themselves. They formed a cooperative with the remaining Syrian farmers and introduced modern farming methods. This has raised production for all.

The Israeli Druze live on their farms; the Syrians go back and forth to their homes in Syria. While there is little social interaction between the two peoples, all have full rights in the cooperative, all produce is intermingled and sold through the cooperative under its labels. Business is business.

There is no way to distinguish between the goods produced by the Syrian farmers. Should we call for not purchasing farm products sold through this cooperative? Would that not teach the lesson that there should be no peaceful interaction between Israel and its Arab neighbors?

I was told this is one of many clandestine relationships between these two people. Business is business.

What is it we would hope to accomplish by not purchasing products produced in Israel? How does weakening its economy bring peace? Would such action by Jews legitimize further hatred of Israel and Jews by countries and people already refusing it full world cooperation? If Israel does not change its ways, would you consider its destruction to be a valid?

Sometimes you have to think of the unintended consequences of your success.

Dear Mr. xxxx,

While I certainly approve of the pro-Israel tone of your letter, I can't help but be disturbed that your argument seems to be that people should not boycott Israeli goods in parts of Israel like the Golan because they might end up hurting Arabs. I fail to understand why you didn't just say that people who consider themselves pro-Israel should not boycott ANY Israeli's goods because doing so hurts JEWS.

I'd like to point out that every one of the "settlers" is living on land that they moved to with the full support of the Israeli government no matter what year they moved to their homes. These "settlements" are in ISRAEL and the "settlers" are ISRAELIS! In many, if not most, cases these people moved to these communities with considerable financial incentives from the Israeli government.

Not one Israeli "settlement" was built on land where any Arabs lived; the "settlers" did not dispossess anyone. More importantly, they are not "settlements"; Gush Katif consists of many thriving communities with a population of about 9000 and the Jewish population of Judea/Samaria is more than 250,000. These neighborhoods are not "outposts," they are not "illegal," and they are not in "occupied territory"! The fact that many, although not all, of the Jews in Gush Katif are Orthodox is probably what gives them their strength not to leave their homes despite the daily horrors of Arab terrorism. To persecute these Jews and separate them from other Israelis is despicable. Indeed, claiming that they can't practice Judaism and/or live where they choose in Israel, makes a mockery out of the entire concept of Zionism.

I have to assume, since you didn't mention it, that when you were in Israel you did not visit the Jewish communities in Gush Katif. That is a real shame as you would have been proud of them. While it's no real substitute for being there, why don't you check out the short film (click on the Gush Katif link) at: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=5482 I also suggest that you listen for yourself to what these "settlers" are saying. (Try their own website at: http://www.katifund.org/katifund/eng/archives/oldindex.html). You will find that THEY are not the ones replacing democracy with fascist methods or making plans to use force against their fellow Jews. All they want to do is live peacefully in their own homes, on Israeli land and practice being Jews. (Of course they also don't want their homes that they've built and defended with their sweat and blood to be given to the very murderers who have been attacking them.) Boycotting their products is accepting the recent demonization of these "settlers." This demonization is a political maneuver devised by Sharon to appease Israeli's enemies<>, by turning these particular Jews into the villains in the non-existent "peace-process." It is NOT supporting Israel!

Perhaps you should learn exactly what the "disengagement plan" entails and what it actually says about the "settlements." I guarantee that you wouldn't have been able to learn the truth from the media, including the Israeli media. One place to start is HATIKVAH at: http://www.acpr.org.il/hatikvah/ I will be happy to supply you with other sources if you wish.

The JWD supports Israel and is proud to support the Israelis in Judea, Samaria AND Gush Katif as well as those in Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem! Our position is that anyone, whether or not they are Jewish, who boycotts products from the "settlements", is boycotting EVERY Israeli and ALL of Israel!

Please do not think that I am accusing you of boycotting the "settlers"; I am not. I just wish that your response to the person who wrote that "boycotting products made in the settlements [is separate] from the boycott of Israel" had pointed out that the "settlers" are Israelis, living on Israeli land, and they have as much right to live peacefully there as any other Israeli! If the "settlers" can be evicted from their homes, every Israeli can be too; they haven't only because they happen to live in a part of Israel which just hasn't been selected to be part of the "concessions" - at least not yet!

Am Yisroel Chai!

Dafna Yee is director of JWD - Jewish Watch Dog (http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net).

To Go To Top
Posted by Daniel Pipes, March 17, 2005.

Should anyone still have doubts about the political transformation of Ariel Sharon from stalwart of Israel's nationalist Right to paragon of its appeasing Left, Ori Nir dispels them in today's article, "Israel Reaching Out to Dovish Groups In Bid To Counteract Conservatives; Seeks Support For Gaza Plan."

"As part of a recently launched campaign to neutralize Jewish and evangelical opposition to the Gaza disengagement plan," Nir notes, "Israeli diplomats are reaching out to liberal American organizations." Specifically, the Sharon government's ambassador to the United States, Danny Ayalon, speaks on March 14 for Americans for Peace Now; and its vice prime minister, Ehud Olmert, delivers the keynote address in June at the Israel Policy Forum's annual dinner.

Leftist groups, for their part, are crowing. Here is Lewis Roth of Americans for Peace Now, referring to Sharon: "You've had someone who's been the leader of the Israeli right wing recognize the validity of some of the arguments that Peace Now has been making for several years, and start to take action on the recognition of that validity. There's a certain sense of inevitability in terms of some of the things we're talking about."

As for Israel diplomats, "Counteracting politically conservative Jews and evangelical Christians "is the number-one priority on the agenda of the consulates at the moment, and it's the task that is keeping me the busiest," says the government's consul general in New York, Arye Mekel. He adds that Israeli diplomats in the United States will redouble their efforts in coming weeks to neutralize those American opponents of the Gaza disengagement plan.

What next? Sharon speaking for the International Solidarity Movement? (March 11, 2005)

March 16, 2005 update: A hint of the tactics to come are buried in a JTA report on how The Israel Project plans to improve Israel's standing in the United States:

The group plans to pitch that message to the part of the media, such as CNN, that appeal to liberal viewers. To media seen as having more conservative viewers, such as Fox News, the group will steer clear of discussing disengagement, focusing instead on the values shared by Israel and the United States.

In other words, the pitch will target liberals. Conservatives will be by-passed.

Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum (www.meforum.org), "a think tank that "works to define and promote American interests in the Middle East." He is author of "Miniatures" (Transaction Publishers). Contact him at his website: http://www.DanielPipes.org

This article was published on the Pipes website March 11, 2005 and updated yesterday. It is archived at http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/420 The original article has direct links to additional material.

To Go To Top
Posted by Dror Vanunu, March 17, 2005.

The call of prominent Rabbis to hold a special fast and prayer in favor of Gush Katif was answered by hundred of thousands of people in Israel and around the world They read Tehilim (Psalms) and a special prayer which was written in favor of Gush Katif and the integrity of the Land of Israel.

The climax of the day was this afternoon when more than 12,000 people came from all over Israel to fill the town of Neve Dekalim in Gush Katif. This special gathering brought leading Rabbis including former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Rabbi Dov Lior and political figures such as Knesset Member Rabbi Benny Eilon and Rabbi Yitzhak Levy in a mass show of support and solidarity for the fight against Sharon's Gaza expulsion plan.

The streets all around the main synagogue where the event took place were overflowing with people from all over Israel to pray for Gush Katif and let the residents of Gush Katif know that they are not alone. People wearing orange shirts, banners, and flags filled all the streets as busloads from all over the country along with cars loads full of people packed every street.

We are delighted at the much larger turnout than what we anticipated. The People of Israel are speaking out loud and clear that they support Gush Katif.

This event takes place a week before the holiday of Purim; let's pray that like then, when the evil decree of Haman was overturned at the last minute. We expect that Sharon's plan will be overturned and Am Israel will be saved.

Dror Vanunu is with the Katif Region Development Fund, Neve Dekalim, D.N Hof-Aza, 79779. Contact him by phone at 972-8-6840863, by fax at 972-8-6840863, by email at gkatif@netvision.net.il or go the website: http://www.katifund.org

To contribute to Gush Katif, contact:

USA: Friends of Gush Katif
PO Box 1184
Teaneck, NJ 07666
Tel: 201-895-1323

To Go To Top
Posted by IsrAlert, March 17, 2005.
This was written by Dr. Emmanuel Navon, CEO The Business Network for International Cooperation (BNIC), Tel Aviv (http://www.bnic.org).

This week, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt that the EU shouldn't distinguish between Hizballah's military and political wings. Similarly, in February 2005, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom tried to persuade his French counterpart Michel Barnier that the Hizballah should be added to the European Union's list of terror organizations, but Barnier said such a move "would have political aspects. Hizballah has a political party and the entire Lebanese context must be viewed" in the matter. But as Shalom reported: "Show me another political party with 12,000 rockets."

Israel is having a hard time convincing European governments to add Hizballah to the EU's list of terror organizations, because many Europeans argue that Hizballah is basically a political party. Ah yes. Of course, when it comes to European terrorist organizations, the Europeans have no problem including them on their list. Ask a Spaniard how he/she would feel about distinguishing between the "military" and "political" wings of ETA - beside the fact that ETA does not use terrorism to destroy Spain but to kick it out of the Basque region (as opposed to Hizballah versus Israel). Below are the basic facts, and truth, about Hiszballah:

Hizballah's Ideology & Strategy

The ideological basis of Hizballah is Khomeinism and its principle goal is the establishment of a pan-Islamic republic headed by religious clerics. The organization's world view was first published in its political platform in February 1985, as follows: "The conflict with Israel is viewed as a central concern. This is not only limited to the IDF presence in Lebanon. Rather, the complete destruction of the State of Israel and the establishment of Islamic rule over Jerusalem is an expressed goal."

Part of this radical ideology is the group's militant approach using terror as a means of attaining its goals. Hizballah decries the existence of Israel ('the little Satan'), viewed as foreign to the region and which constitutes a threat to Islam and Muslims. The destruction of Israel and the liberation of Jerusalem is deemed a religious obligation. The Hizballah organization justifies the use of terror against these enemies as a weapon in the hands of the weak and oppressed against the strong aggressor. In an effort to act upon and realize the predetermined ideological lines the group's leaders actively plan and perpetrate terror attacks against IDF forces, preach religious extremism against Israel and disseminate Iranian ideology. The Hizballah extends the conflict into Israeli territory and does not restrict its struggle to areas in Lebanon.

Terrorist Activities

Using cover names such as 'Islamic Jihad', 'The Revolutionary Justice Organization' and 'The Islamic Resistance', with the blessings of its religious leaders, Hizballah has carried out a series of high profile attacks against Israeli targets in southern Lebanon and American and Multinational Forces targets in Lebanon. Only later did their attacks become more intensive as well as demonstrating better planning, especially immediately prior to the opening of the peace process.

In 1991, the Hizballah was responsible for 52 attacks, as compared to 19 attacks the organization carried out in 1990. In 1992, the Hizballah launched 63 attacks and in 1993, 158 attacks, when during the course of 'Operation Accountability' they fired hundreds of Katyusha rockets into the Security Zone and Israeli territory. In 1994 a total of 187 attacks against Israeli troops and positions by Hizballah were recorded. There were 119 instances of artillery fire, 31 detonations of explosive charges and 2 frontal assaults on IDF positions. In 1995 a total of 344 attacks against Israeli troops and positions by were recorded. There were 270 instances of artillery fire, 64 detonations of explosive charges and 2 frontal assaults on IDF positions.

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, March 17, 2005.


A P.A. legislator stated that any Arab who commits terrorism against Israelis, now that the P.A. has declared an armistice ("hudna"), may be imprisoned by Israel. IMRA put it, "now that M. Abbas has declared the Intifadah over." The legislator called it merely a ceasefire (IMRA, 2/8).

The implication is that Israel should release the approximately 8,000 P.A. Arabs imprisoned for earlier acts of terrorism. The illogicality of that is that they, too, committed terrorism when there were armistices or Oslo agreements forbidding terrorism. Why should they be released? Besides, they are not prisoners of war, but terrorists. Terrorism is not just an act of war, but a war crime. Its perpetrators are fortunate that Israel does not execute them.

Even in war, a ceasefire does not warrant release of prisoners of war. The Arabs always try to demand what they are not entitled to. Considering that their enemies are fainthearted or foolish-minded, they often get it. AS PREDICTED, P.A. PREPARING ANOTHER WAR "... according to intelligence sources the terror organizations are exploiting the cease-fire to the fullest in order to gain strength and to prepare for what they themselves term the 'third round.'" (IMRA, 2/9.) Those of us who know what to expect of the Arabs predicted that. Did PM Sharon and Pres. Bush not know what to expect or do they know and not care?


Sec. Rice made two statements about P.A. terrorist prisoners. Their gist is: (1) Punish those who murdered three Americans in Gaza; (2) Israel and the P.A. should "make progress" in determining which ones who attacked Israelis, to release (IMRA, 2/9).

If she is willing to have the murderers of Israelis released, why not the murderers of Americans? Since she wants the murderers of Americans imprisoned, why not the murderers of Israelis?

Why, if the P.A. is supposed to fight terrorists, does it want them released? Because it is a government of terrorists, by terrorists, and for terrorists. Why does Israel release unrepentant attempted murderers of its people? Because it is a government of leftists, by traitors, and for the Quartet.

Bad enough that Israel releases terrorists. It is worse, demeaning, that it gives the P.A. some say in which ones to release. This validates undeserved Arab entitlements. It makes terrorism seem les heinous. It gets the world used to making outrageous demands upon Israel.


The head of the P.A. said he was coming to the summit with clear demands (Arutz-7, 2/9).

They were the usual demands. It doesn't matter what they are. The point is that the aggressor and losing side has no ethical right to make demands. It is Israel that has the right to make demands of the Arabs who have been trying to destroy it and by foul means, for bigotry.


Representing about 140 of Spain's approximately 200 mosques, the Islamic Commission of Spain, after having consulted with Muslim leaders in N. African countries, issued its reaction to al-Qaeda's bombing in Spain. It was a fatwa against Osama Bin Laden as an apostate. The edict urged other Muslims to denounce him (NY Sun, 3/11, p.6 from Associated Press). If this is followed by some consistency, it would be encouraging. In which way is he an apostate?


"As Secretary of State Rice meets with the ostensibly peace loving new face of the PA, the ruling Fatah movement declares that it is OK to murder Israeli non-civilians within the Green Line and any Israelis beyond the Green Line. Within the framework of this statement it is permitted to murder Israelis inside Jerusalem as they pray ("occupy") at the Western Wall." The Fatah quotation bears out that summary (IMRA, 2/9).

The Arabs have no valid claim to Jerusalem. In 1947, the General Assembly had made a non-binding recommendation that the city be internationalized. It was a high-handed resolution, seeking to dispose of part of the patrimony of the Jewish people and their holiest site. It ran contrary to the Mandate. Rejecting the resolution, the Arabs forfeited their claims by launching a war from within and by invasion. They lost the war and their effort to conquer more territory. Israel kept the New City of Jerusalem, and Jordan's army seized the Old City, until that army was expelled after having made unprovoked attack on Israel. The legal status of the Old City reverted to that of the Mandate. As the Mandate's heirs, the Jewish people have the best legal claim.

Since Jerusalem long was a Jewish capital and never an Arab one, and since the Palestine Mandate reserved the area for Jewish national development and stipulated "close settlement on the land by the Jews," neither Jerusalem nor the Territories are "occupied" by the Jews.


Israel is a vibrant democracy. It affords freedom of speech for leftists.

Leftist professors at Ben-Gurion U. support the PLO, suggest that Israel be destroyed, and sometimes break the law in behalf of their sympathies for the Arabs. Nevertheless, they enjoy freedom of speech.

It is different for rightists. A right-winger offered an alternative to Sharon's plan of removing the Jews from Gaza and part or all of Judea-Samaria. His "Biblical Plan" calls for the removal of the Arabs from Yesha, though Arabs who were loyal to Israel would be allowed to stay.

The police arrested him for "incitement." They explained that PM Rabin had been killed by incitement. They knew it because the media keep repeating the charge. It never was proved. (There was political opposition but not "incitement." Agents provocateurs committed dirty-tricks, even violence, to make it appear there was. The dirty tricks were covered up.) What the media called incitement was just right-wing expression of opinion. Israel's notion of democracy is that right-wing speech is incitement and left-wing speech, often calling for murder, is protected speech. That is Israeli democracy, don't you know.

The Left called the recently deceased Adir Zik an inciter, because he had urged the public to stop Rabin from endorsing Oslo. He suggested democratic, non-violent methods of doing so. (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/8, e-mail).


The movement for a referendum on Sharon's abandonment plan is gaining adherents. "Haaretz" opposes a referendum. It relies on polls purporting to show that the public approves of the abandonment plan. It fears that in a referendum, a higher proportion of plan opponents than proponents would come out to vote. Then the result would not be democratic. (So let's never hold a referenda. Let's not hold elections either, lest the polled majority not turn out to vote.)

"The minute the government loses the public's confidence in its policies, as reflected in the loss of its Knesset majority, the public is once again asked to express its opinion." The editors forget that the Likud Party, and therefore Ariel Sharon, won a landslide vote because the Party and Sharon staunchly opposed abandonment of the Territories. That, in effect, was a referendum. (The public can lose confidence in a government, without the Members of Knesset, who are not accountable to any constituencies, bringing down that government. That is what happened recently. Didn't "Haaretz" editors notice?)

The newspaper portrays referenda as oddities. Actually, when there was talk of abandoning the Golan, PM Rabin and other officials suggested that before enactment, it be put to a popular vote.

Since, according to the editors, settlement is immoral, a referendum would not justify retaining the Territories (IMRA, 2/9). Now "Haaretz" is arguing that it monopolizes political morality and wisdom.


"The kind of hatred that one hears on campuses like Columbia, and let me say especially Columbia, is a barrier to peace," Mr. Dershowitz said. "They are encouraging the terrorists. They tell the terrorists you will have academic support even if you oppose the peace process." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/8). Nice statement, but the "peace process" is an unfair ganging up on Israel to deprive the Jewish people of the key parts of their traditional homeland and territory vital to self-defense. Hence, the so-called peace process is a prelude to further Arab aggression, or war.

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, March 17, 2005.

Dear friends,

Moshe Arens is a serious, thoughtful person and a thinker. The former Foreign Minister of Israel and a Likud member, he is not the type to shoot from the hip, spin or use propaganda. Following, please find an op-ed he published in the liberal paper Haaretz. Mr. Arens discusses the seeming frivolity of PM Sharon's fateful push to evict all Jews from Gaza.

Because of the importance of the subject, here again is a short paragraph from my own bulletin of March 15, 2005:

The end of this process, if not arrested, is the demise of Israel as a Jewish state and a complete victory to the idea of one state between the sea and the river....a Palestinian state! Contrary to leftist propaganda, the danger to a Jewish Israel is not demography but defeatism and the abandonment of Zionism as we know it.

Here is the Moshe Arens article from the March 15, 2005 Haaretz. It is archived at www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=552072

Although a good strategy should generally take precedence over good tactics, coming up with a good tactical move is a lot easier than developing a good strategy. Strategic moves deal with the more distant future, and as is well known, predicting the future is a hazardous enterprise.

These considerations come to mind as the Prime Minister's current tactics seem to be focused on maintaining Israeli control over the larger settlement blocks. At the same time, Talia Sasson's latest revelations - nothing new there for many Israelis - are a reminder that much of the settlement effort in Judea and Samaria for many years suffered from a total absence of strategic thinking. It was based on micro-tactics that did the settlement effort no good, only succeeding in giving it a bad name, and came at the expense of developing large settlement blocks.

Now most Israelis are hoping that once the security fence gets built around them, Israeli control over at least Ma'ale Adumim and Gush Etzion will have been assured, while the future of Ariel will be left hanging in the balance. The case being made, that uprooting the settlements in Gush Katif - the first large settlement block, established more than 30 years ago - is part of a trade-off that assures control over the remaining settlements blocks is pretty hard to prove.

>From the domestic political point of view, the disengagement plan seems at first sight like a clever tactical move. It has made Ariel Sharon the most popular politician in Israel. Even those who used to be his worst enemies now love him. There is nothing like saying "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, you were right all along" to endear yourself to your former political opponents. Moreover, many of his party comrades go along for reasons best known to them. But what are the long-term implications of this tactical move? On the Likud? And on the country?

It certainly does not look as if the Likud's electoral base will be broadened. It is bound to lose votes to the right, to parties that object to the disengagement plan, and it is unlikely that it will pick up votes from the left, from voters who look at the withdrawal from Gush Katif and northern Samaria only as the beginning of further withdrawals.

On that score, the Likud will have a hard time competing with the Labor party. Sharon's current popularity in the polls is an expression of support for his leadership in pushing through the disengagement plan, but is certainly not an expression of support for the Likud, whose image in the voters' minds must be pretty blurred at this stage. The implementation of the disengagement plan may well turn out to be the beginning of an "electoral dry spell" for the Likud.

But if it's good for the country, who cares about the Likud?

Whether it is good for the country we will learn in the years to come. But what is already clear is that Israel will be paying a very heavy price for the disengagement plan. A good part of the Israeli public - not a majority but a significant minority - feels a strong sense of identification and loyalty to the settlers about to be uprooted. This segment of Israel's population is by no means on the margin of Israeli society. As a matter of fact, in many ways it represents the best of Israel, as expressed by their participation in all walks of life, including the Israel Defense Forces. Pushing them over the brink, brutally forcing the will of the majority on them, might very well have long-term negative effects on the fabric of Israel's society. All the benefits claimed for the disengagement plan may not be worth that cost.

In encouraging at first the establishment of scattered small settlements without any clear direction, and then launching a plan for the unilateral uprooting of small settlements and the Gush Katif settlement block, there seems to have been an abundance of tactical moves but certainly no evidence of a long-term strategy. The basic variables of the problems facing Israel - the Palestinians, demographics and national security - have not sufficiently changed in past years to warrant this kind of a turnaround. It is unlikely to lead Israel in the right direction.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 17, 2005.

For years, we have been urging Israel to expel the journalists from scenes in the West Bank and Gaza in which the army is fighting terror.

In fact, they should be kept out of the "occupied territories" altogether, like the press was kept away from the battles against the Taliban in Afghanistan. The reason is that the very presence of the press in such scenes triggers violence. In addition, the press loves sensationism and sensationist pictures on the evening news prevent the public from forming a cool and objective understanding of military operations and the process of hunting terrorists.

For years, the Israeli government ignored such calls, preferring to be demonized on the evening news in distorted news coverage rather than have any journalists whine about not having free access to ongoing military operations.

Well, at long last, the politicians have become convinced that there is one set of army operations for which the press will be denied access, where the press will be unable to film freely the behavior of the soldiers and the cries of those being targeted by the army. I refer of course to the eviction of the Jewish "settlers" from their homes in the Gaza Strip that is planned for the summer. Think I am kidding? See http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/553094.html

2. Too little, too late.

Amnon Rubinstein, one time cabinet minister from Meretz, has suddenly discovered that the PLO is seeking to achieve "two states for one people", through the "right of return": (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1110857200024).

Well, duh.

Actually, he should have rephrased. The PLO through the right of return is NOT trying to achieve two states for one people, but rather two states for a non-people, a non-existent make-pretend people, largely invented by the Israeli Left.

3. [This is *not* an early Purim joke.]

Counteracting politically conservative Jews and evangelical Christians "is the number-one priority on the agenda of the consulates at the moment, and it's the task that is keeping me the busiest. - Israeli Consul General to New York, Arye Mekel.

4. Israel's Left is so upset by the Gush Katif settlers wearing special orange six-pointed stars, evoking associations with the yellow stars of World War II, that they are pushing through the Knesset a bill to make it illegal to use the term "nazi" in political debate and in criticism. See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78550

I have a year's salary bet that the Left and its Attorney General will never ever indict an Israeli anti-Israel Leftist Professor nor an Arab fascist politician for claiming that Israel is a Nazi country, doing to Palestinians what the Germans did to the Jews. They will only use the law to jail pregnant women protesters from Gush Katif.

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 Ellen W. Horowitz, March 16, 2005.

[Note: this article is not directed toward those very fine and brave Jewish American citizens who oppose the expulsion plan and who have made a commitment to defend the people of Israel and to ensure the integrity of the Land of Israel.]

"...For if you persist in keeping silent at a time like this, relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from some other place... And who knows whether it was just for such a time as this that you attained the royal position!" (Megillat Esther 4:13-14)

Two years ago this April I wrote an article entitled, "Time to Consider Coming Home" in which I foresaw the following scenario:

"A situation where everyone from George Bush and Condoleezza Rice to most Reform and Conservative (possibly even Orthodox) Rabbis in America will be asking Israel to make concessions and compromises for the good of the last sacred cow - personal freedom and democracy. Many American Jews will expect their Jewish brethren in Israel to put their lives and land on the line by implementing the creation of a Palestinian State, in order to preserve the comfort zone for Diaspora Jewry (http://arutzsheva.com/article.php3?id=2164).

I don't exactly qualify as a prophetess, but I am a Jewish mother who has deep feelings for her people and who has been experiencing and taking-in the panoramic view of Jewish history for a while now. To bear witness to the increasing corruption blindness and apathy plaguing both the Jewish state and Diaspora Jewry has been an agonizing journey.

When a Jewish mother says, "I told you so", she does it with a broken heart. It's not a matter of ego, because she knows she's not an expert. But a few months or years down the line when those arrogant academics, pundits, diplomats and journalists start assessing the mistakes, just remember that a Jewish mother in Israel, who would rather be painting and raising goats on her land than typing lectures on a plastic keyboard, told you so.

In my writing these past four years, I've warned American Jewry about the impossibility and dangers involved in the dual loyalty stance, and I've implored my brethren to come home to Israel before they lose their very souls. I've raked American and European foreign leaders and their policies over the coals, and warned Israel about her attraction to globalized trends. Few leaders in Israel have gotten off the hook from my scathing criticism, and I've urged Israel to abruptly wean herself from foreign influence and American economic dependence before we're choked by a rebellious umbilical cord. I've begged my nation to reassess their relationship with the United States before we lose our sovereignty and ourselves.

But, like the proverbial Jewish mother, I see that I've been knocking my head against the wall.

Recent studies indicate that American Jewry's attachment to Israel is on the decline (www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78071). And I keep reading and hearing about how Israel aspires to the realization of George W. Bush's "vision" as outlined in his Road Map, and I wonder... do we have to fulfill the President's visions? What about us? What about our hopes and dreams? Have we been sold and have we sold out?

Not to fret, as Purim is just around the corner and anything can happen. Perhaps my assessment is wrong. Maybe American Jewry has an ounce of pride left, and they'll pull out all of the stops in order pressure the U.S government into taking a stance which guarantees their inheritance (I'm talking about the Land of Israel, not social security benefits). Maybe I was premature in calling everybody home. Perhaps there's a higher purpose to the American Jew's long drawn-out sojourn in the Golden Medina and, like Queen Esther, their royal moment has arrived.

In honor of Purim, maybe we should invert our approach and our thinking. Instead of categorically and automatically assuming and declaring that America is Israel's best friend, we should be addressing some pretty tough questions to America...

Hasn't Israel been a good friend to America? And yet the US President is endorsing a map which takes an enormous bite out of our heartland, breaks off a good piece of our coastline and then slices us in two with a contiguous Palestinian state (You've heard of the organization Doctors Without Borders? I'm starting a new group called Artists for Aesthetic Borders. No bite marks, holes or broken pieces allowed - just nice, clean, defined lines). I understand that Secretary of State Rice is pleased with the Syrian troop movements in Lebanon. Does that mean Israel's Northern border is the planned payoff for Syria's good behavior?

For the argument's sake, let's say that Israel initiated this destructive plan free of all American pressure and constraints. It would appear to me that a good friend and ally would sit down with us and advise us of the dangers, not encourage our mistakes.

Galut mentality dictates that American Jews be eternally grateful to the United States for graciously hosting them for all these years and for allowing them to prosper. Any criticism of America's foreign policy vis a vis Israel must be handled with the utmost care via AIPAC or some other diplomatic Amercan/Israel advocacy group. But again, it's almost Purim, so let's turn things around a bit...

An American Jew should feel absolutely comfortable saying, "Mr. President, were loyal, patriotic citizens. We've given the very best to this nation in the fields of government, medicine, science and technology, education, law, the arts, and finance. Don't endanger our brethren in Israel with your Road Map, as the Arab and Islamic nations, and certainly the Palestinians, have not expressed goodwill towards Israel nor have they demonstrated a sincere readiness to promote peace in the region. They murder and continuously plot and devise schemes against Israel and the Jewish People. Under these precarious conditions we ask that implementation of the Road Map and plans for unilateral disengagement be put on hold."

Now if George W. Bush takes American Jewish concerns into account and, after honestly reassessing his double vision of a two-state solution, he cancels the decree, then I was wrong about the American leader and the status of American Jewry. I'll write an article of apology and send a copy to the President.

However, if he skirts the issue and tries to assuage your feelings with some sweet talking, patriotic rhetoric about the end of tyranny and an age of peace and freedom, then I was right - and you'll know exactly where you stand. In the President's view, you're far less important than a barrel of slimy black crude. You hold up the scale and place your heritage, assets, and contributions on one end, and the House of Saud with all their empty sands and oil on the other, and ask the president, who and what matters more?

Israel holds the value of a worn-out gambling chip which gets placed on the table every time America gets herself into a bloody rut. If America's Arab empowerment program backfires, you can be sure that pressure will be exerted on the regional sucker, Israel. George Bush is loathe to fail and he will have to prove that there is progress in at least one direction. And his concept of progress could very well translate into our regression and capitulation.

It's ironic that everybody is so enchanted with the Sharansky/Bush relationship. Back in the days when Natan was an imprisoned Anatoly Sharansky, American Jews knew how to throw memorable, intense protests on US soil. Jewish lives were at stake, and that situation was unacceptable. The protests made the difference and saved lives. But the same courtesy and compassion isnt extended to Jonathan Pollard, or to the 8000 Jewish residents facing expulsion from their homes in Israel.

It appears that most American Jews don't care enough to make waves. At best they can manage a sizable, but low-key Israel-American solidarity rally where they wrap themselves in stars and stripes while some local legislatures pay lip service to the splendid relationship that Israel and America shares.

But, then again, it's almost Purim and perhaps I'm wrong. Jewish America, prove me wrong. Make your protest on behalf of the land and people of Israel heard at the King's gate and, like Mordechai the Jew, express yourselves with a resounding "loud and bitter cry".

Ellen Horowitz and her family live on the Golan Heights. She is a painter, columnist and author of the upcoming book, "The Oslo Years - a mother's journal."

To Go To Top
Posted by David Ben-Ariel, March 16, 2005.
Quotes are taken from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).


Bush Tells Press: "Israel Must Withdraw from Settlements." A slip of the tongue? U.S. President Bush said yesterday that Israel must remove the Jewish communities in Yesha. His spokesman later said that he meant only Gaza and the "unauthorized outposts."

Unauthorized by who? The Promised Land of Israel belongs to ISRAEL. The Jewish homeland belongs to Jews. Doesn't President Bush believe in the Higher Power that freed him from drink any more? The Sovereign Lord of the Universe has authorized the settlement of HIS holy land by HIS People.

President Bush put away your drink of delusions about a peaceful "Palestine!"

President Bush sober up and forswear "Palestine!" (Joel 3:1-2).


Bush made the statement at a press conference with Jordan's King Hussein at his side. He had warm words for Abu Mazen, saying the PA Chief "wants to develop a state that will live in peace alongside Israel," and acknowledging that the PA needs armed forces and training to "defeat the terrorists who wish to stop the march to freedom."

How touching. How insane! How dare President Bush aid and abet terrorists, with his administration's head in the sands of delusion, while American soldiers lives are in harm's way, fighting against terrorism! Our Commander-in- Chief coddles up to a known terrorist, the co-founder of the terrorist organization called FATAH and a holocaust denier.

Terrorist Abu Mazen is an accomplice to mass murder. President Bush should condemn him and demand justice and distance himself from such an evil man, not praise him and incur divine wrath upon his own head and nation! (Dan. 9:11).


No true Christian would call for such a perversion of the Holy Land into something it was never called to support: another Arab regime!

David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." Contact him at http://www.pushhamburger.com/david.htm

To Go To Top
Posted by Lee Green, March 16, 2005.

We are happy to report that last night (March 15th), the University of Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) soundly voted down (25-11) a proposal to create a committee to investigate the university's investments in companies doing business with Israel. Kudos go to Alana Kuhn and Jessie Risch, co-chairs of the American Movement for Israel, who mobilized the campus to stand with Israel and against the unfair, inaccurate misinformation being disseminated by the anti-Israel activists.

The 7:30pm meeting had to be moved twice to accomodate the crowd of students who wanted to show support for their side. They finally ended up filling the 500 seat ballroom, with many students standing in the back and aisles as well. The meeting lasted until 1am. with students from both sides taking turns to passionately voice their opinions. According to Alexis Frankel, program director for the Univ. of Mich. Hillel, the student daily paper may have inadvertently motivated increased attendence by pro-Israel students by predicting in a large front page article the day of the vote that the anti-Israel proposal would likely pass. Students who normally don't get involved in such issues were so concerned to read of the "likely" success of the proposal that they showed up in huge numbers, demonstrating their pro-Israel support by wearing blue sticky tape all over their shirts and pants, on their foreheads or as armbands. Many students also sported blue streamers in their hair and T-shirts made by the American Movement for Israel (AMI) that said, "It's not JUST a committee."

Frankel noted, "The shirts made by AMI were homemade and spray painted with the slogan in blue....visually it had a great grassroots look." The pro-resolution supporters wore black shirts with the Palestinian flag that said: "Divest from Israeli Apartheid."

According to Frankel, "The Israeli Student Organization was there and one of their members who served in the territories in the IDF spoke passionately to the assembly about Israelis' commitment to peace and about the one-sided wording of the resolution that was completely devoid of context and made no mention of suffering on the Israeli side or the reasons for some measures such as roadblocks."

UM Hillel is the umbrella group for AMI and the Israeli Student Organization and offered logistical and moral support to the students in their organizing efforts. Hillel staff members were there until 1am along with the students to offer support and monitor the proceedings.

Frankel commented that the successful defeat of the divestment proposal was also greatly aided by the fact that many of the representatives in the Michigan Student Assembly came to the debate already being well informed about Israel, and so were not easily swayed by inaccurate, misleading anti-Israel propaganda. This underscores the importance of pro-Israel activists getting involved in student government so that fair, informed people are in positions of power to vote on important issues.

In today's Michigan Daily, instead of noting that the students felt that the proposal language INACCURATELY AND UNFAIRLY accused Israel of ALLEGED human rights abuses, the article unclearly stated: "Opponents of the resolution argued that its effect and intent went beyond merely forming a committee, instead targeting Israel and ultimately seeking divestment from the country. They cited language in the proposal that condemned the state of Israel and pointed to human rights abuses and violations of international law."

Also more proponents than opponents of the proposal were quoted, and curiously, no one from American Movement for Israel was included in the article, even though it was the primary organization mobilizing the opposition to the proposal.

This is the article in the Michigan Daily

"MSA votes against divestment" by Jeremy Davidson, Daily Staff Reporter.

Hundreds of anxious students and local community members filled an emotionally charged Michigan Union Ballroom last night, when the Michigan Student Assembly soundly defeated a proposal advocating the creation of a committee to examine University investments in companies that do business with Israel.

The overwhelming margin against the resolution - 11 representatives voted in favor, while 25 voted no - came as a surprise to many MSA officials and observers, who had said in the lead up to the vote that they expected a close outcome.

"I felt good with the outcome of the resolution especially given the recent developments in the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians," said MSA General Counsel Jesse Levine

Although MSA expected a high turnout, scheduling the meeting in the Kuenzel Room of the Union instead of MSA chambers, the turnout was so high that the meeting had to be relocated a second time to the larger ballroom and began an hour and half late.

The animosity and nervous energy in the room was palpable, leading to spontaneous altercations throughout the ballroom and cramped hallways of the Union and causing the Department of Public Safety to remove a heckler during an address by former MSA Vice President Jennifer Nathan. Raucous cheers and applause, as well as numerous parliamentary questions, punctuated the meeting, making it difficult at times for MSA President Jason Mironov to control the large crowd.

Proceedings involved a speaker's list, with advocates of both sides taking turns voicing their opinion. Speakers included students, University professors and community members.

If passed, the resolution would have instructed the MSA External Relations Committee to send a letter urging the University Board of Regents to create an advisory committee to investigate the moral and ethical implications of the University?s investments in companies that directly support the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Opponents of the resolution argued that its effect and intent went beyond merely forming a committee, instead targeting Israel and ultimately seeking divestment from the country. They cited language in the proposal that condemned the state of Israel and pointed to human rights abuses and violations of international law.

After hearing these concerns from Mironov and other members of MSA, MSA representative Matt Hollerbach and other authors of the resolution made a motion to strike every clause but the last three from the resolution, in hopes to find more support for the formation of a committee. With this move, the resolution was eliminated of any direct condemnation of Israel and called for an "advisory committee consisting of members of the University Senate, students, administration and alumni."

Students Allied for Freedom and Equality president Carmel Salhi emphasized that the resolution called for the formation of a committee to investigate University investments.

"There are investments that many students on this campus find morally and ethnically questionable," Salhi said.

RC junior Ashwini Hardikar explained that the resolution was not to encourage the University to immediately divest from Israel, but called for an investigation into potential human rights violations.

"It's not an issue of whether or not you?re pro-Israel or pro-Palestine. It's a question of whether or not human rights violations have been committed," Hardikar said.

Other proponents of the resolution echoed these sentiments.

"This resolution is about academic freedom, and the right to know whether the businesses that the University invests in realize international human rights principles and business ethics," said Nadine Naber, professor of American Culture and Women's Studies.

But Mironov said that the language of the resolution proposed a verdict before the trial.

"If it were simply a resolution to create a committee, it wouldn't have 14 clauses condemning the state of Israel," Mironov said prior to the elimination of 12 clauses.

Stories of suicide bombings in Israel were followed by stories of Israeli soldiers attacking civilians in Palestine, and while both sides ardently defended their opinions and claims, everyone agreed that the ultimate goals were raising student awareness, and peace in the region.

"You can't silence this issue any more. We know that this occupation is immoral and unethical, and we won't be silenced any longer," said LSA freshman and member of Amnesty International Nafisah Ula.

Vice-chair and co founder of the Israeli Students Organization Ziv Ragowski said he hoped the debates would open up talk between Palestinians and Israelis.

"People are recognizing the (desire) of both nations to move towards peace and to end the bloodshed," Ragowski said.

MSA General Counsel Jesse Levine said he was impressed with the passionate student support expressed at the meeting.

"I've never seen so many students at an MSA meeting before," Levine said.

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, March 16, 2005.

Anyone who works for this evil Government is a partner in its evil. There is no neutrality with evil. Sharon and his gang want a civil war so as to once and for all find a final solution to the Jewish problem of Israel. Israel must have only "Israelis," no Jews allowed. This was the explicit goal of the communist, totalitarian MAPAI and has remained the primary goal of Israel's ruling elite. The Alteneuland that is the dream of the CHILLONI establishment is Judenrein.

Having lost both the demographic and ideological battle for Israel, the Erev Rav is now in a desperate existential fight. The unJews see the situation clearly. Either the State of Israel will naturally mature into a Jewish state, with the overwhelming majority of its people being religious Jews or it must be destroyed and replaced by a Palestinian State. It is unfortunate to the point of being tragic that it is the Nationalist camp that does not have clarity and is totally confused as to what are the true issues.

* Know that the interment camps have already been built.
* Know that the psycho-goon squads have been trained.
* Know that the secret prisons have been prepared.
* Know that the mercenary units are in place.
* Know that the Jew haters in the Governments of North America and Europe will fully support Sharon.
* Know that only by following the example of this honest and brave man and resigning from any and all Government jobs is there hope for a non-violent solution to the Oslo betrayal.

Let those who truly wish to help us exit in peace from this horrible situation, encourage more and more decent people to resign from this Government.

These are excerpts from a letter written this week by a regional Absorption Ministry Office Director, explaining why he has asked to leave his job. The letter appeared today in Arutz-7 and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78539

Dear Absorption Ministry Colleagues,

I write this letter with a burning and aching heart.

I have been working for 15 years in helping to absorb Aliyah [immigration to Israel], including close to ten years in public service, as Ministry spokesman, head of the Ashkelon office, and more...

Over the past several months, I have been living with a most uncomfortable sensation that the country is taking giant steps towards trampling the feelings of large sectors of the country. It's hard to free myself of the fear that we are on the verge of a difficult civil war.

It appears to me that the government should have taken firm steps to preserve our very delicate social fabric - but instead, not only is it doing nothing to prevent this situation, but it appears to even be interested in having it occur!

I innocently thought that since 1995, the entire country has been living under the trama of the nightmarish political murder of Yitzchak Rabin - but instead I find myself working for a government that, it seems to me, is showing that it wants to bring us once again to this terrible situation.

I pray every day that we should not return to such a scenario, Heaven forbid. Totally unconnected with my political opinions, I am certain that we must all do absolutely everything we can to make sure this does not happen.

Many in Israel feel that the disengagement decision was made undemocratically... A plan like this must receive the nation's support. Not for nothing did former Prime Ministers Barak and Rabin promise that any decision to dismantle communities must be decided upon by the people in a plebiscite...

The way to prevent a civil war and bloodshed is within our grasp - but the government chooses not to use it. The government, which is willing to make far-reaching gestures on behalf of the enemy, including releasing terrorists, uprooting people from their homes and transferring security control to the PA, is not willing to make even the slightest gesture in order to prevent internal war.

...Public figures from both left and right understand now more than ever that a referendum could help prevent a split and bloodshed. But it appears that the government truly wants blood to be spilt in the streets and the destruction of that which unites us - as long as it can implement its policy.

...Already in September 2004, I wrote a letter with these ideas to then-Absorption Minister Tzippy Livny [currently the Justice Minister], and suggested a referendum to prevent the danger. Unfortunately, the only response I received was a summons to be investigated by the Discipline Wing of the Public Service Commission (which turned up nothing, of course). It seems that these "thought police" methods are increasing of late - and instead of calming down the public, they will boomerang and increase the intensity of the public's reactions.

...I can no longer bear it. My conscience no longer allows me to continue to serve in this government as if nothing has changed. I feel like Esther, who said in the Purim story, "How can I go on and see the misfortune that will befall my people."

I cannot sleep when I sit in my office all day long with my heart elsewhere. I cannot continue to work when I pass so many sleepless nights. I cannot serve the public as a representative of the State and government while many of those who are slated for uprooting are my close friends and relatives. My children are fearful... I live with dread of what the future holds in store in the coming months...

...In light of this, I have submitted a request to leave my job without pay for a year. It saddens me to leave such quality people who are engaged so intensively in a national mission of top importance. I was very proud to be part of this group, and I hope that I will be able to return.

This is not an easy decision, especially in light of the fact that I have a family - a wife and six children, the responsibility for whose support lies on my shoulders. I do not know how I will support them, but I pray that I will find something. I simply cannot go on.

...To all of you, thank you very much.

With admiration and with concern,
Yehuda Glick
Absorption Ministry

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 Honest Reporting, March 16, 2005.
[Editor's note: Deborah Lipstadt was sued by Holocaust-denier David Irving and he lost. The British court found that what she said were simply statements of fact. In Israel, Steven Plaut, a professor at Haifa University, is being sued by Neve Gorden of Ben Gurion University in a strikingly similar case. See "The David Irving Trial in Israel," March 17, 2003, for the story.]

Yesterday (3/15), leaders from more than 40 nations gathered in Jerusalem to dedicate a new, expanded Yad Vashem Holocaust museum.

Yet at the very time that this monument to Nazi evil was inaugurated, the American cable network C-SPAN planned to give a notorious Holocaust denier a broad audience to promote his ideology that the murder of six million Jews never occurred. This, in the name of 'journalistic balance'. Here's what happened:

Deborah Lipstadt, Holocaust scholar at Emory University (pictured), will deliver a talk at Harvard University this evening (3/16), promoting her new book, "History on Trial: My Day in Court" with David Irving. C-SPAN wished to broadcast Lipstadt's talk on the network's BookTV program, but informed Lipstadt that a recent speech of Irving's (recorded by C-SPAN) would need to be broadcast as well. C-SPAN producers explained their reasoning to Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen:

'We want to balance [Lipstadt's lecture] by covering him [Irving],' said Amy Roach, a producer for C-SPAN's Book TV. Her boss, Connie Doebele, put it another way. 'You know how important fairness and balance is at C-SPAN... We work very, very hard at this. We ask ourselves, 'Is there an opposing view of this?'

C-SPAN, that is, sought out an 'opposing view' to Lipstadt's confirmation of the Nazi Holocaust. Lipstadt refused to be cast side-by-side with Irving, on the grounds that Holocaust denial does not merit public debate. Cohen asks the appropriate question: 'For a book on the evils of slavery, would C-SPAN counter with someone who thinks it was a benign institution?'

In personal correspondence with HonestReporting, Lipstadt explained:

I would have been delighted to appear on C-SPAN's BookTV. It is an important venue and is watched by a book-reading audience. However, there was no way I was going to be forced into debating a man who is the equivalent of a flat-earther. I spent six years in court fighting this man. We defeated him completely. That C-SPAN should now give him an opportunity to resurrect arguments which the court found completely false is appalling.

Appalling - six million times over.

HarperCollins, the publisher of Lipstadt's book, has supported Lipstadt's decision not to appear on the C-SPAN, despite the fact that this loss of publicity means a loss of book sales.

HonestReporting encourages subscribers to write to C-SPAN, questioning its policy that grants equal air time to mendacious and immoral claims.

Comments to C-SPAN: booktv@c-span.org


HonestReporting has continually raised this issue of 'journalistic balance' in regard to coverage of the Mideast conflict as well. In the name of 'balance', the media all too often distort the truth or completely cloud over the moral dimension to stories. A few examples:

  • On many occasions, media outlets have run side-by-side profiles of 'victims of terrorism', where the 'victims' are both those Israeli civilians killed by suicide bombers, and the terrorists or the terrorists' families themselves. This brand of 'balance' fails to convey the moral outrage of Palestinian terrorism.

  • The longtime media refusal to call terrorism 'terrorism' is based on the principle of 'balance' that 'one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.' (Reuters executive Stephen Jukes used this cliche to describe why his agency refused to call even the 9/11 perpetrators 'terrorists'.) Yet as New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent recently recognized, the refusal to call terrorism by its name is itself a political act, for that omission supports the terrorists' claims to political and moral legitimacy.

  • In 2002, a British journalist reporting on the rampant incitement to violence in Palestinian media was instructed by his London editor to 'find similar examples of incitement in Israeli media, to give your article balance.' When the correspondent responded that there was no such incitement in Israeli media, the editor killed the story.

As Lipstadt told HonestReporting:

The notion that there are 'two sides to every story' is simplistic, fuzzy thinking at best, and far more dangerous than that at worst.

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 Richard H. Shulman, March 16, 2005.


Sec. Rice talk much about unifying and retraining the P.A. forces so they can fight terrorism. She fails to explain why unity matters unless it is to strengthen an aggressive attack on Israel. She also fails to explain what kind of training would get the P.A. to fight terrorism, when the terrorist head of the P.A., Abu Mazen, continues the Arafat policy of not confronting terrorists. Like Arafat, he welcomes them into those same armed forces that the US wants trained. Does it not occur to Rice that training a lot of terrorists may be counter-productive? Perhaps it does occur to her. She must have heard of the US equipping Islamists to fight in Afghanistan, only to find them eventually coming up against our own troops.


Sec. Rice has been indulging in vague praise of the P.A. Abbas is taking "positive steps" against terrorism. She does not specify any such steps or what is positive about them.

Another compliment is issued in defense of US aid for the P.A.. That compliment is that the P.A. has made its finances "transparent" and made great progress against corruption. What is "progress?" Is the P.A. any less corrupt? Did it take the price-gouging monopolies away from Arafat's cronies? Has it stopped using funds for incitement to jihad and for waging it? To the contrary, while Rice is patting Abbas on the shoulder he openly recruits terrorists into his salaried armed forces, which Israel's freeing of hundreds of convicted terrorists will handily augment (and undo much of Israel's anti-terrorism success).

This is the old ruse of praising Arab steps that lead nowhere or are counter-productive. The praise of the Arabs is abstract, but the Arab attacks on Jews are concrete.


Pres. Bush and Sec. Rice constantly refer to their goal of a Palestinian Arab state "side-by-side" with Israel. Why is unsaid. It is like putting a cobra next to Israel but calling it a cat. These US officials sugar-coat their planned imposition of an irredentist, jihadist state that could cripple Israeli mobilization against the huge Egyptian army that the US has subsidized.

Do Bush and Rice know that there already exists such a state - Jordan? Jordan is in the eastern part of the Jewish homeland denominated "Palestine" so people would stop associating it with the Jewish people, as they knew to do when Congress confirmed the Balfour Declaration. There Jordan is, a Palestinian Arab state "side-by-side" with Israel. No need for another and worse.

As for that Egyptian army, it is another US foreign policy disaster in the making. Egypt produces Islamists. Some day, Egypt will give them too much latitude, and they will take over that army. The Army would attack Israel and join the war by terrorism. Do Bush and Rice want to be known as the Frankensteins of the Mideast (although that policy was started by predecessors)?


The head of the P.A. called his ceasefire arrangement with Hamas proof of his desire for a "peaceful solution." It proves otherwise. This ceasefire, which he got Israel to join, rescued Hamas from being ground down by Israel, enables it to restock its forces, and preserves it until after Israel gives the Arabs concessions. Remember that demagogues use words to deceive, as part of their warfare. Peace was one of the favorite words of Hitler, Stalin, and Arafat.

In a way, however, he does want a "peaceful solution." He wants to conquer Israel while maintaining a peaceful relationship within his own jurisdiction.


A columnist imagined being a Saudi Oil Minister who privately tells US officials that he increased new oil field capacity by 800,000 barrels a day to assist the oil market but neglected to tell them that the older fields will decline by about the same amount (Amy Myer Jaffe, NY Sun, 3/3, p.15).

She wrote tongue in cheek, but I believe she meant that point, because that is the kind of dissembling the Arabs go in for, not that only they do it. She usually makes valid good points.


Warned about Hamas' rising electoral power, Sec. Rice replied that Abbas decisively won the P.A. elections because the people recognized they must have peace (IMRA, 2/6).

Abbas is as jihadist as the other candidates but more politic with the West. Peace? He told the militias to wait to see what his diplomacy may get for them (he would not seize their arms and arrest them). If his diplomacy does not work, they may resume warfare. Didn't she know that? He won decisively because he froze the other opponents out of his media, got his men to vote twice, and the people wanted unity. Polls show the P.A. people reject his supposed call to demilitarize the conflict with Israel. Sec. Rice cites false developments, and ignores the facts.


The U.S. has taken on two roles in mediating between Israel and the P.A.: (1) Referee compliance with mutual agreements (or agreements Israel is coerced or cajoled into); (2) Rebuild the P.A. police, ostensibly to fight against terrorism.

The two roles are contradictory. Those who nurture an armed force tend to be indulgent towards its excesses, when mediating between those troops, with whom they identify, and the other side, the Israelis (IMRA, 2/7).

True, but this overly credits US sincerity, and lets the US misrepresents its goals. The US has had this role before. The CIA both trained P.A. snipers and counter-intelligence, and monitored P.A. police compliance with Oslo. P.A. non-compliance was flagrant. The CIA never objected. It either did not care or it wanted the P.A. to soften Israelis up for US demands. Sec. Rice says the US would train the P.A. differently. She implies a previous failure she did not identify, and a remedy she did not reveal. She may serve her President but is she serving the US?

The State Dept. goal is to wrest the territories and Jerusalem away from the Jewish people. It held this goal before there was international terrorism. It adheres to this goal despite international terrorism. It doesn't care about justice. Biased against Zionism, it appeases the Arabs in a futile and often frustrated dream of finding Arabs who will act as its proxies. If it were wise and decent, it would build Israel up as its proxy. Israel would be reliable and faithful.


Commenting on a 50-state conference on international terrorism, the "Jordan Times" took a self-righteous stand into which IMRA interpolated remarks that show the hypocrisy of the Islamic approach to such conferences. The Arabs hold such conferences so as to appear to be doing something constructive. Their approach has fatal flaws: (1) Redefine terrorism so as to allow it against Israel or other enemies of theirs. They pretend that the object of war crimes justifies war crimes. Actually, terrorism is attacking civilians, that being unjustified. Another ploy is to redefine "civilians" so as to deny Israelis are civilians; and (2) Pretend the cause of terrorism is poverty rather than their bigoted school curriculums (IMRA, 2/7). If S. Arabia and Iran did not have such wealth for foreign madrassas and mosques, there would be less terrorism.


Iraq's most respected authority, Ayatollah al-Sistani, demands that the draft Constitution enshrine Islam as the sole source of national legislation. Any law contrary to its precepts would be rejected. This stance is more demanding than the tolerant one he espoused prior to the current election, in which the slate he favored gained a commanding lead. He will accept no compromise separation of state and (the Muslim) religion (IMRA, 2/7).

This stance militates against peace and the tolerance expected of a democracy. It didn't take long for the Shiites to come to it. They just waited to conclude the first election, the one that is to draft a Constitution.

The hoopla that followed a seeming Arab and Afghan tilt towards democracy and tolerance is fading. It never was justified about the P.A., afflicted with severe jihad. The P.A. was included because people don't know, don't think, or it conveniently bolsters the Arabs against the Jews.

Now that Iraq's leader has shown himself not so moderate, and has come out against separation of state and religion, let us watch whether the many critics of Israel for not having total separation of state and religion will criticize Iraq for that. I suspect that people are hypocritical in their objections about Israel, their objections being mere rationalizations for a deeper prejudice.

Israel actually has much limitation on its establishment of religion, though it pays the salaries of clergy of all faiths. In many ways, the government is hostile to Judaism. It is difficult to tell how much of its condoning of Islamic destruction of ancient Jewish artifacts on the Temple Mount is due to that hostility or to the government's appeasement of the Arabs. I think this is the least justified appeasement and the worst example of hostility, one that strikes at the country's national origin.


David Hawkins of CBS asked Sec. Rice, "Mahmoud Abbas says he opposes terror yet he is working not to fight the Palestinian terrorists but to assimilate them into Palestinian (P.A.) politics. How can the U.S. support a man who refuses to fight terrorism but instead tries to assimilate terrorists?"

The question was unusually poignant, and particularly welcome to find in CBS. Rice, however, evaded it. She said that Abbas knows he is supposed to fight terrorism (IMRA, 2/8). But?

That is the kind of answer that used to be given about Arafat, who fostered, not fought, terrorism.


Jordan announced plans to restructure its armed forces the better to intercept terrorists and arms at the border (IMRA, 2/8). Is Syria trying to destabilize Jordan or Israel?


Finding MEMRI's exposure of Arab slander of Israel and of the Jews effective, Arabs are forming a counter-organization in France that would: (1) Challenge the accuracy of MEMRI's accusations; and (2) Take the offensive by accusing Israel and the US of prejudice. For example, it would advise the world that whereas the US touts democracy, it severely punishes anyone who disputes PM Sharon's policy (IMRA, 2/8). I dispute it and am not punished. Another Arab propaganda front.

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 Aryeh Zelasko, March 16, 2005.

This article is by Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's Jerusalem bureau chief, whose past interview subjects have included Yasser Arafat, Ehud Barak, Shlomo Ben Ami and leaders of the Taliban. It appeared in today's World Net Daily and is archived at www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43326

How a small group of individuals saved a religious site

BETHLEHEM - In a decision hailed by many in Israel, the Knesset voted to keep Rachel's Tomb, Judaism's third holiest site and the area most directly associated with prayer throughout Jewish history, inside a "security zone" that will remain under Israeli control.

The decision was particularly euphoric to a small group of individuals who over the past few years have been quietly responsible for reviving the holy site devastated by the outbreak of Palestinian violence, some even taking out personal loans to bus in visitors to the tomb.

They made their stories public for the first time this week in exclusive interviews with WorldNetDaily.

The vote yesterday will annex a small, trapezoid-shaped area around the tomb, which is just meters outside a Jerusalem security checkpoint near Bethlehem's northern entrance, to be included in Area C, land under full Israeli control. The tomb was originally slated during the 1993 Oslo Accords for inclusion in Area A territory under Palestinian control.

According to the Old Testament, the tomb is the final resting place of Jacob's wife, Rachel, who died after going into labor while traveling. Jacob decided to bury Rachel on the spot and not in the cemetery of his family, the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, because he foresaw his descendants would need to pray at the site when they passed through during the forced exile in Babylon.

Jacob set up a monument over her roadside grave so that exiled Jews could recognize the site and be comforted as they were being led into captivity. Ancient writings describe the grave marker as 12 stones representing the 12 tribes of Israel with one large stone that symbolized Jacob.

Rachel's Tomb remained a principle site for Jews throughout the centuries, and was renovated by Moses Montefiore, a wealthy British Jew, in 1841, adding to it a prayer room and enclosing the dome over the grave marker so pilgrims could find shelter from the elements.

Jews were later restricted from the tomb during Jordanian control of the site from 1949 to the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol ordered the tomb to be annexed to Jerusalem. The instructions were never carried out because of objections by defense minister Moshe Dayan, and so Jews continued to venture past Israel proper into the Bethlehem neighborhood that still houses the tomb.

The onset of violence in the early 1990s brought a halt to the number of Jews visiting the site, which some say initially prompted the Israeli government to offer the section to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo negotiations.

But then the Eshet Chayil Foundation, a small American Jewish group fostering peace in Israel, worked quickly to revive the tomb and bring in large numbers of visitors.

Susan Roth, director of the foundation, personally hired hundreds of buses to bring in anyone who wished to pray at the site. Several hundred people came every week for months, prominent rabbis delivered regular sermons at the tomb, and weekly programs were held for large crowds in an effort credited for sparking renewed life at the site.

"After we did this, the Israeli government, at the time led by Rabin, dropped the idea of giving up Rachel's Tomb, a site so very dear to every Jew around the world," Roth told WND. "The foundation couldn't just sit there and allow the place specifically set aside for Jewish prayer by our father Jacob to fall out of Israeli control."

Roth also cleaned up the site and brought over to Rachel's Tomb the covers to the tombs of Joseph and his sons, Monashe and Ephraim, after Joseph's tomb was burned by Palestinian rioters in 2000. Her foundation also erected on the side of the Rachel's tomb a perpetual memorial lamp to the 6 million Jews murdered in the Holocaust, so that, as Roth says, "Rachel can weep for all her children."

But in late 2000 and often during 2001 and early 2002, there were shooting incidents near the tomb that closed the site for much of that time, once again bringing Jewish visitation to a trickle. The tomb was reopened about a year ago, and a security wall was constructed around its periphery, but few at first made the journey.

Then a Jewish Israeli couple, Bluma and Moshe Kluger, personally intervened. They founded Rachel's Tomb Institute, a group consisting of the Klugers, their in-laws and a few volunteers, that has facilitated tens of thousands of visits to the tomb.

Moshe Kluger, who described himself to WND as "not a wealthy person," engaged in a fund-raising campaign and also took out personal loans to fund three private, bullet-proof buses per weekday that make stops throughout Jerusalem for those wanting to pray at the tomb. The buses have been running for almost a year, and bring in approximately 4,000 people each month. The Israeli public-transportation system restarted service to the area, but many feel more comfortable in bullet-proof busing.

The Klugers can be found daily at Rachel's tomb, and routinely escort new visitors who say they are nervous about traveling into the Palestinian neighborhood.

Moshe and Bluma also renewed learning at Rachel's Tomb by helping to establish a Yeshiva, which offers daily classes and leads prayer services in the afternoons and evenings. Moshe teaches many of the courses.

The Klugers hold special events each month for the general public and personally serve food to Israeli soldiers stationed at and around the tomb area.

"My husband and I have been going to the tomb now for almost twelve years," said Bluma, who was reluctant to talk to the media. "When we saw people were afraid to come, we had to take action."

Kluger says she was inspired by the efforts of Roth and other foundations involved in Rachel's Tomb activities. "We just had to get the buses started again. And we couldn't wait. My husband's motto is do now and get the funds later." The Klugers have raised some money, but have gone into substantial debt, with bus payments nearing several hundred thousand dollars. They say the satisfaction of keeping the tomb alive is more than worth their monetary efforts. The Eshet Chayil Foundation still helps out by annually underwriting the learning institute and providing its members with food for the Sabbath and Jewish holidays.

"Thankfully, Rachel's Tomb is busy again and cannot be put aside or given up," said Bluma.

Her institute also opened a hotline in Israel, 011-9722-580-0863, manned by Moshe's sister, Chaya, taking calls 24-hours-a-day from those around the world in need of a prayer at the tomb. Individuals can sponsor a day, week or month of learning, or the recital in their honor of the entire book of psalms.

"The stories we have seen through the hotline are just unbelievable," says Bluma. "One time there was a man terminally ill with cancer. He was beyond treatment and the doctors really said he had almost no chance. A family member remembered we were involved with Rachel's Tomb and quickly sponsored a whole month of learning, plus reading of the psalms. Exactly two days after the month, he was cured and walking around. My husband was absolutely amazed. ...

"I was very touched when once a woman was in labor for many hours and the baby couldn't be delivered properly. They were starting to get scared. They called my husband on his cell phone, and he happened to be at the tomb. A prayer was quickly said, and minutes later a healthy baby was delivered."

The Knesset decision yesterday comes as the weekly Jewish Torah portion includes a reference to Rachel weeping for her children. The passage ends by stating the "children shall return."

Minister's from Shas, a national religious party, visited the site yesterday to applaud the decision and highlight what they called the eternal Jewish connection to the Tomb.

Meanwhile, the Klugers say they will continue their efforts "for as long as it takes. The Jewish people will never forsake our mother Rachel."

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 Women in Green, March 16, 2005.

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 Rachel Saperstein, March 16, 2005.

The people of Gush Katif have already begun to bring Mishloach Manot. They are bringing a basket of greens, along with informational material, to the people of every city in Israel.

The holiday of Purim means the reading of the Scroll of Esther, costumes and a gift of food to friends. Usually, we give a lovely basket of homemade cakes and candy. This year Mishloach Manot, the gift of food, means Gush Katif produce: lettuce, cherry tomatoes, parsley, dill and celery, all insect-free, from the Gush Katif greenhouses. Hundreds of communities in Israel and abroad have chosen to buy and distribute the Katif produce in a show of solidarity.

But now comes the best part. The people of Gush Katif have already begun to bring Mishloach Manot. They are bringing a basket of greens, along with informational material, to the people of every city in Israel.

These information kits include a CD film explaining the Sharon expulsion plan and its security implications, a booklet about Gush Katif, a drawing and a letter from a Gush Katif youngster and, of course, a "taste" of our famous produce.

Speaking with my friend Miriam, who along with other Gush Katif women went out to Ashkelon to distribute the baskets, I got a taste of an evening in Ashkelon.

Miriam, giving me her radiant smile, said:

"Two women went out together. We knocked on doors and announced that we were from Gush Katif and wanted to give them a gift. A few were wary. Others opened their doors and gladly invited us into their homes.

"We saw many lonely people who simply welcomed a chance to chat. For many, it was their first encounter with people from Gush Katif and a very first encounter with a Purim food gift.

"They were shocked at the horror of our story, that we were to be thrown out of our homes. Suddenly, what they saw on television became a reality. The women sitting in their living room were the same people being dehumanized by the government.

"'But you're so nice. You're just like us... ordinary. Why would the government want to throw you out of your homes?' they asked.

"They told us their own stories of government indifference... of poverty... of sadness. Soon, we were not people they had heard about, but people with whom they could talk, and identify. We were one! Warm relationships developed.

"The government has tried to tear the people apart. We are bringing the Jewish people together.

"I feel that I have made new friends. And the best part is that they all ask to help in our battle. I love these Mishloach Manot evenings. I feel as if I have received a gift from the Jewish people," Miriam concludes.

The story of Purim is being repeated today in our history as Jews. May the evil edict of expulsion be rescinded for Gush Katif as it was rescinded for the Jews of Persia so long ago.

Please fast for us on the Fast of Esther (March 24), and together, may we rejoice as if Purim has come once again.

[You can donate to the Mishloach Manot project. Send your check to:

Friends of Gush Katif
Katif Fund
N'vei Dekalim
DN Hof Aza 79779

Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe live in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel. She is a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council.

To Go To Top
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, March 15, 2005.

A quote from the article below:

"Morally, there is no difference between the settlement of parts of the Land of Israel inhabited by Arabs in the early 20th century and settlements and outposts in parts of the Land of Israel inhabited by Arabs in the early 21st century. Either both are moral, or both are immoral. The real debate over the Model 2005 outposts is also unrelated to law and order. It is taking place between those who think there is nothing more moral, and those who think there is nothing more immoral."

Dear friends,

The fact that such an article and a debate can even occur among Israelis today, is testimony to the shameful degree the detractors of Zionism brought the country. It is a proof to the great victory of the Arab-Palestinians and their leftist friends in Israeli society.

The end of this process, if not arrested, is the demise of Israel as a Jewish state and a complete victory to the idea of one state between the sea and the river....a Palestinian state! Contrary to leftist propaganda, the danger to a Jewish Israel is not demography but defeatism and the abandonment of Zionism as we know it.

The Palestinians and the Arabs already sense their ultimate victory. They have managed to weaken the Israeli society to the point where it is acceptable for many to drop Zionism altogether. Do I need to remind you that Zionism has always been the return to, and resettlement, of the barren Land of Israel without harm to the Arabs within?

Israeli society is torn apart while the Arabs stand tall, confident and united in their ultimate victory. The only way to keep the Zionist dream alive is to continue to liberate and resettle Israel with millions more Jews. The choice is between the settlement movement or the slow suffocation of six million Israelis inside the confinement of a narrow coastal strip ghetto.

A Palestinian state exists already, it is called Jordan. Jordan is the sovereign Palestinian state. The Palestinians who so wish are invited to live in peace and prosperity inside a Jewish state that stretches from the sea to the Jordan river.

Where is the Israeli leader who can lead and articulate this message to his own people and the world?

This article was written by Nadav Shragai and appeared today in Haaretz. It is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/552070.html

"Unauthorized settlement outposts" have existed here for many years, ever since Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel resumed in the early 20th century.

"A small Jewish settlement among large Arab villages to the east, north and south," wrote Moshe Smilansky about the first settlement, Petah Tikva, in its early years. "Its houses are in one place, in Yehud. Its fields are elsewhere, and Arab fields are in between, and the ownership of the land is complicated."

Morally, there is no difference between the settlement of parts of the Land of Israel inhabited by Arabs in the early 20th century and settlements and outposts in parts of the Land of Israel inhabited by Arabs in the early 21st century. Either both are moral, or both are immoral. The real debate over the Model 2005 outposts is also unrelated to law and order. It is taking place between those who think there is nothing more moral, and those who think there is nothing more immoral.

Both settlement movements were the product of normative political Zionism. Settlements in the Negev and the Galilee were political, just as settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are political. And who knows this better than Ariel Sharon, who, before his opinions changed, urged his colleagues to "seize the hilltops"?

Carmiel and the hilltop communities in the north were established to Judaize the Galilee. Ariel and the outposts were established to Judaize the northern West Bank. Both were established as part of the great battle over the Land of Israel. The outposts were meant to fill in the empty spaces between established settlements, to prevent the Arabs from seizing control of them. Some of the lands on which the outposts were built were purchased, as in Migron and Givat Assaf. Once upon a time, this was called redeeming the land. Today, with the confusion characteristic of the spirit of the times, this is called "seizure."

It turns out that the World Zionist Organization's settlement division, a government agency, took its organizational and ideological affiliation with the WZO too seriously. Ron Shechner, the defense minister's advisor on settlements - an honest man, the salt of the earth, who was criticized in the Sasson report - also played a role. The ministers and the prime minister knew; some encouraged the process. The prime minister himself gave a detailed explanation of how to turn a barren outpost into a settlement. And he asked Einat Ehrlich of the outpost of Amona: "Why aren't you people building?"

That is how Israel was built. Even some of the "major settlement blocs" that Sharon (still?) wants to keep began their lives as unauthorized outposts. Even Ma'aleh Adumim, a large city, the largest settlement in the territories, began as an outpost with temporary housing. It is all a matter of definition - and who is doing the defining. If the outposts are neighborhoods of existing settlements, as they have been over the last 12 years, they are legal. But if they are "new settlements," which are not "adjacent," as determined by Sasson, they are "illegal."

The Sasson report is political and problematic, not only because it ignores Sharon and the rest of the political echelon, which approved and gave orders and knew, and not only because it ignores the legal system's responsibility for what happened, but also because it was born of a discriminatory approach.

Less well-publicized investigatory committees have in the past investigated illegal building in East Jerusalem and Israel's Arab sector. Their conclusions were unequivocal. When Haim Ramon served as minister for Jerusalem affairs under Ehud Barak, he informed the Knesset that more than 20,000 buildings had been built without a permit in East Jerusalem. Documents were seized at Orient House a few years ago that proved that this construction was not merely a response to the population's distress; it was also a political move. But nobody proposed destroying these buildings. On the contrary: Israel under Barak and Shimon Peres and Ramon negotiated with the Palestinian Authority over their retroactive legalization.

Nor did anyone suggest indicting successive mayors of Jerusalem or interior ministers for having deliberately turned a blind eye to this construction, sometimes for political reasons. There is also widespread illegal building in the Arab and Bedouin areas of Israel. The state accepts this, because reality - which includes the battle over this disputed land - is stronger.

The story of the outposts, just like the story of the construction in East Jerusalem, is a story about seeking to alter the status quo. But the outposts are an action of the old Zionist variety, which is now gradually being made illegal - first by Attorney General Menachem Mazuz, then by Talia Sasson, and the High Court of Justice will doubtless follow in their footsteps.

In essence, the state is currently redefining Zionism as a movement that retreats under pressure, terrorism and threats, as a movement that gives up its dreams. The naive residents of the outposts are out of step. Nevertheless, they understand quite well what many others, perhaps even in the erring and confused Likud Party, will understand later: Gush Katif, the northern West Bank and the outposts are only the beginning. Sharon and his advisor Dov Weisglass - who, together with their new partners, Yossi Beilin and the Arab parties, are tearing the land and the nation apart - are already planning to uproot tens of thousands of additional Jews from the West Bank. And in secret, they are even talking about Jerusalem.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top
Posted by Michael Freund, March 15, 2005.

Is George W. Bush missing a couple of pages from his Bible? In a speech last week at the National Defense University, the president repeated what has become one of his primary foreign policy mantras.

Asserting that the only way to bring about tranquility in the Middle East is through the establishment of a Palestinian state, Bush said, "We seek two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security."

In addition, Bush insisted that Israel must "freeze settlement activity" and "ensure that a new Palestinian state is truly viable, with contiguous territory on the West Bank," meaning that he expects the Jewish state to withdraw not only from Gaza and northern Samaria, but from large chunks of the rest of the territories as well.

The president's statement, of course, is nothing new. It is a theme he has harped on for the past few years, laying down his conviction that the Land of Israel should be partitioned between Arabs and Jews.

But what is truly remarkable, and as yet inexplicable, is that a man so committed to his Christian faith and to belief in the Bible could possibly be unaware of the inherent contradiction in his policy toward the region.

Indeed, how is it that the most devoted Christian to sit in the White House in decades is the same person pressing to divide God's Holy Land, the very same land promised exclusively to the Jewish people by Divine right?

Now, I am neither a theologian nor a Christian, but I do know that the words "Palestine" and "Palestinians" do not appear anywhere in the New Testament. So Bush could not have gotten the idea to establish "Palestine" while attending Sunday school. Did he not learn that Jesus was a Jew who, like the Jews who today are called "settlers," lived in land given by God to the Jews, the same land in which he would now create a hostile Palestinian state?

To be fair, Bush has been a great friend of Israel, deflecting international criticism over the Jewish state's efforts to defend itself while pushing to reform and democratize some of our nasty neighbors.

Nonetheless, his insistence on pressing for the establishment of a Palestinian state remains baffling, if not incomprehensible, as it would appear to conflict with both his religious and his ideological worldviews.

Even in terms of the war on terror, Bush's stance on the Middle East is laden with inconsistency. In that same National Defense University speech last week, Bush said, "The theory here is straightforward: Terrorists are less likely to endanger our security if they are worried about their own security. When terrorists spend their days struggling to avoid death or capture, they are less capable of arming and training to commit new attacks. We will keep the terrorists on the run, until they have nowhere left to hide."

And yet, when it comes to the Palestinians, that is precisely the opposite of Bush's policy, as the creation of a Palestinian state would inevitably give terrorist groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad a perfect place "to hide."

In light of the president's position, as well as his religious beliefs, there is one group in particular that should seize the moment now and come out against the current drive toward Israeli withdrawal and retreat: American Christians.

As the core group of Bush's Republican constituency, and as a growing factor to be reckoned with on the American political stage, evangelical Christians have the clout, the numbers and the conviction to help forestall the creation of "Palestine."

Efforts by Bush and by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to carve up the Holy Land and turn over parts of it to the Arabs should offend anyone who takes the Bible seriously, including evangelicals. To stand by and watch this process unfold without speaking out is simply unthinkable.

There are three things - the three P's - that US Christians can and should do to make their voices heard: protest, pressure and pray. They shouldn't wait for a divided American Jewry to take the lead, because time is of the essence, as the planned withdrawal from Gaza is just four months away.

Hence, there is no reason why American Christians can't start taking to the streets to organize rallies and protests under the banner of "Don't Divide the Holy Land." What a powerful message it would send to decision-makers in Washington and Jerusalem to see hundreds of thousands or even millions of non-Jewish Americans speaking out on this important issue.

US Christians can also apply pressure on their elected representatives. Next Thursday, March 24, when Jews mark the Fast of Esther, a grassroots effort is being planned to get as many American Jews and Christians as possible to phone, fax and e-mail the White House, with the central theme being "President Bush: Honor God's covenant with His people. Stop Disengagement."

Lastly, it is time for Jews and Christians to pull out the most potent weapon in their arsenal, the power of prayer. The Land of Israel is in danger, and there can be no better way to influence events than by turning in prayer to the One who guides all human events.

There is still time to act, to make a difference. American Christians have been put in a unique position, one in which they can have a direct impact on the future of Israel and its land. At this critical hour, when the integrity of the Holy Land is at stake, they cannot and must not be silent.

Michael Freund served as an aide to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

To Go To Top
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, March 15, 2005.

For those unfamilar with the term,it was used to describe con men who sold fake remedies to those who fell for their sales pitch. The elixor in the bottle would fix whatever ailed you, so they said. The Road Map is supposed to bring peace to the Middle East, at least that's what its author envisions for Israel and the Palestinians.

Today, Israel's leadership is following to the letter the agenda of this man. They have put all of their hope in the elixor of Mr. freedom and democracy. He is revered and lauded by complete obedience and no deviation from the remedy. If only G-d could receive such obedience and loyalty. P.M. Sharon has been conned by this snake oil salesman and has led Israel to the abyss. The hordes of Allah are licking their lips, preparing to make their final move. The trap has been set. They taste Israel's flesh between their teeth,only it is they who have fallen into the trap.

What the SOS is pressuring Israel to do is certain to lead to a major nuclear war because Islam will never co exist with Israel in peace. The president is either too stupid to see this or he is an agent of hell. I think he's both. Soon the sun will set on Islam and it will die the death, a complete and sound defeat at the hand of G-d Himself. Then the world will know, as will the ex-moslem survivors that the G-d of Israel, He is G-d, and not Allah. Then there will be real peace between the Arab and the Jew. That's the big picture and why Israel is being led into a corner by Mr. SOS.

The blind see success in Iraq and Afghanistan,and now, Israel's retreat, appeasement and surrender to Pax Americana excites them with more false hope. I've lost track of how many billions have been wasted in Iraq and we still can't find Osama or his operations chief Zarkawi in Iraq. The pipeline keeps getting blown up along with an untold number of Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers. The Islamic Republic of Iraq is what the SOS has accomplished, nonwithstanding the spin,deception and out right lies. Success?

The Palestinian Terrorist Authority has an election and the temporary ceasefire hamas killers are on board the democracy train and you call this success?

Our troops in Iraq are sitting ducks for a surprise attack from Iranian missiles. If they feel threatened they will strike and we're done, toasted, finished.

President Bush reminds me of Captain Edward John Smith who also had a 'heady' attitude the day he left Liverpool on the maiden voyage of the Titanic.

I really think this misguided man has set in motion events that will lead to a major war that will involve Syria, Iran and their front line Hizbollah army in Lebanon, Egypt, and of course Israel.

While they are saying "Peace and safety!" then destruction will come upon them suddenly like birth pangs upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

That is the Bush legacy.

Once again Israel and the Jews are being sacrificed for the perceived good of the majority. Those still breathing and with a functional brain might by this time begin to awaken from their stupor and realize they've been had - again. This is not peace that is coming on the horizon. This road map is snake oil and almost everyone bought into it.

I've been watching and warning about this SOS for many years now, warning my fellow Zionists that George is an enemy of Israel, a fake, another globalist who used religion to get the vote from naive and stupid voters who always seem to fall for the slick snake oil salesmen. Don't follow or listen to those who pointed to George as Israel's best hope. The are the false prophets of our day. In the end ,The G-d of Abraham will have the last word.

Powerful and arrogant men will go the way of all before them who presumed to play god, along with their empires. They always trip over the little things - little Israel will remain, when they are history.

Marcel Cousineau can be reached at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com.

To Go To Top
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 15, 2005.

This is a news item from today's Arutz Sheva - IsraelNationalNews.com (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=78489). It is called " Bush Tells Press: 'Israel Must Withdraw from Settlements'."

Expel Sharon, not Jews!

U.S. President George W. Bush reveals his true vision for the future of Israel: Removal of Jewish communities to make room for a contiguous PLO state in Judea and Samaria.

Bush's statement was made at a press conference with Jordan's King Hussein at his side.

Bush called on Israel to "sacrifice, meaning that Israel must withdraw from the settlements, there must be contiguous territory for a Palestinian state - into which a Palestinian state can grow."

Inasmuch as the Sharon government is adopting the Bush vision for the Middle East, the current plan for expelling Jewish residents from Gaza and Northern Samaria can only be seen as the first-step in a more large-scale expulsion and demolition process that may soon encompass tens of thousands of Jewish residents living in dozens of towns and villages in Judea and Samaria.

Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has hinted repeatedly at the government's true intentions by actually referring to the Gaza expulsions as the first phase of a broader initiative to comply with Bush's road map for establishing a Palestinian state.

The controversial Sasson report and the soon to be released Spiegel report, damning the settlement drive as an illegal effort driven by uncontrolled government clerks usurping state authority, were designed to whip up public antagonism toward Yesha communities and provide a legal basis for tearing them down.

Both reports were commissioned at the behest of U.S. ambassador, Dan Kurtzer, acting as if the Bush Administration has started to exercise de facto sovereignty over the policies of the Jewish State.

In this context, White House spokesman Scott McClellan's contention that Bush was referring only to Jewish towns slated for removal under Sharon's disengagement plan, sounds like a exercise in damage control typical when a president finally says what he means.

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 AFSI, March 15, 2005.

As you all know, Helen Freedman, our Executive Director, is in Israel right now visiting Gush Katif with Dov Hikind and his group. Read this article about Helen, Dov and American Jewish supporters that came to visit families in Gush Katif.

Don't forget to log on to http://www.afsi.org and learn about AFSI's next Chizuk mission to Israel in May.

This article is called "Stumbling at the Arport gate" and was written by Tovah Lazaroff. It appeared in today's Jerusalem Post.

It was her shirt that did her in.

A grandmother of two, activist Helen Freedman walked off the plane from New York, wearing a bright orange T-shirt with blue words in the middle of a map of Israel that said "Not one inch."

Freedman was one of 20 Americans out of a group of 40 that arrived at Ben-Gurion Airport on Monday on a solidarity trip to Gush Katif who found themselves temporarily detained by police at the airport.

Although Freedman also had a blue bag that said "Third Prime Minister's Conference for Tourism," it was the shirt that the passport control officer focused on. Upon seeing it, the she called her supervisor and took Freedman's passport.

"She said, 'You have to be delayed,' recalled Freedman, who is the executive director of Americans for a Safe Israel.

"I said, 'why are you picking me out?'"

"She said, 'because of your shirt.'"

When asked by The Jerusalem Post if she didn't think it would have been wise to wear something else, the Manhattan resident responded, "I only brought orange with me."

Spokespeople for the police and the Interior Ministry said there was no general policy of stopping US citizens who are peacefully heading to Gush Katif. A police spokesman said they didn't fear the group, but rather they worried for their safety. He said he wanted to warn them that they were heading into an area where there has been shooting, to make sure they were taking precautions.

But members of the group said they felt it was their political beliefs that were the overriding concern.

Group leader Dov Hikind, a Democratic assemblyman from the 48th District in New York, laughed when heard the police's explanation from the Post.

"That is such malarkey. That is the most preposterous, childish, ridiculous thing I ever heard. That sounds like a Third World country answer. They are obviously lying, maybe they are embarrassed, that is pretty pathetic," said Hikind. Ironically, in spite of his long history of activism, he sailed through passport control but returned to help out members of the group who had been detained.

While they were only held for about 20 minutes, a number of people in the group said they were surprised and hurt by the incident.

One couple, Stanley Barth, 75, and his wife Vita, 73, who weren't wearing any identifying paraphernalia, had already passed passport control and were waiting for their luggage when an officer came up to them, asked if they were part of the group heading to Gush Katif, and brought them back to join the others.

"We were shocked," said Stanley.

"Do we look like major demonstrators?" asked Vita.

While Freedman said she has been temporarily stopped before, Jeffrey Reznick, executive director of Vaad, an organization that offers religious and humanitarian services to Jews in the former Soviet Union, said it was his first such experience.

"I went to the gate where I have gone 50 times. They said, 'where are you going?' I said, 'Down south.' They said, 'Where?' I said, 'To Gaza.' They took my papers and singled me out to go to detention."

He was particularly struck by the action, because he had just moved easily in and out of Azerbaijan prior to coming to Israel. "This would never have happened there," he said.

"I felt very hurt" that this happened in a "a country that I love so much," said Reznick.

During their three-day trip, the group is scheduled to travel to the 21 Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip.

Hikind said that these supporters of Gush Katif - educators, an artist, two state Supreme Court judges, the director of a bank, and mothers - is the first such trip that thousands will make to protest the evacuation by the state of 8,500 Jews from their homes by midsummer.

This article is archived at: (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1110770411682&p=1078027574097)

Also read: Battle over American Jewish support (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1110770411722&p=1078027574097) Also read: US Jews head to Gaza in solidarity: (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1110684075200&p=1078027574097)

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, March 15, 2005.

March 16 is the second anniversary of Rachel Corrie's idiotic decision to commit suicide by challenging an Israeli bulldozer driver to a game of chicken. Corrie won the game, at the cost of her life.

Corrie was in Israel as part of the Solidarity-with-Terrorism delegations sent in by the pro-terror ISM (International Solidarity Movement), an organization of anti-Israel propagandists in designer jeans, all in close, indeed slavish, coordination with the PLO. The ISM pro-terrorists have set up a memorial web site to lie about how she died. They are holding a big Bash-Israel commemoration in Oakland this week. Corrie has become the martyr saint for the Islamofascist movements. The ISM hates Jews so much that it is willing to demonize Arab Israeli patriots as part of its jihad against Zionism.

The ISM is not simply an innocent, if evil, fringe campus debating society. Within Israeli territories, its members have actively collaborated with terrorists. They have hidden weapons and wanted terrorists in their offices. The local ISM offices hosted two Moslem suicide bombers from the UK, who had entered Israel as "peace activists," only to blow a Tel Aviv bar to smithereens the next day.

In fact, Corrie died protecting smuggling tunnels, used to smuggle in explosives and weapons that Palestinians use to mass murder Israeli children on buses and other living things. Israeli troops were demolishing houses astride the tunnels in order to dynamite the tunnels when Corrie decided to challenge them. Like all ISM members, Corrie believed the PLO and its affiliates have an unalienable right to murder Jews, and that Jews trying to stop the terrorists must be hindered and harassed. That is the whole reason why ISM routinely sends its campus "anarchists" to Israel. It should be noted that ISM does not send its members to protect Chechnyan terrorists from Russians nor to protect Baathists in Fallujah, because they know how non-Israelis would handle such trouble-makers. Ironically, the very fact that they come to Israel and not to other countries is testimony to Israel's democracy, openness, tolerant nature, and probably excessive patience.

Corrie was a US Flag-burning extremist, someone who clearly sympathised with Palestinians conducting murder, but felt no "solidarity" at all for the Israeli children murdered by terrorists. The great irony was that the bulldozer operator whom Corrie was trying to harass did not see her at all. Had he seen her, Corrie's strategy of forcing the dozer to back down in the game of chicken would have worked.

After commiting suicide, Corrie was beatified by the anti-Jewish anti-American Left, turned into the patron saint of the jihadniks and their leftist amen choruses. It is not surprising that Counterpunch runs a piece this week by a propagandist trying to convince readers that Corrie was something other than a 23 year old dupe of terrorists. It is written by one Alison Weir, who runs an anti-Israel web site called "If Americans Knew". The site presents tendentious statistics showing that more Palestinians have been injured or killed in recent years than have Israelis. This is supposed to "prove" the Israelis are iun the wrong, and is about as convincing as an attempt to claim that Americans were the aggressors in World War II because the numbers of Americans killed by Germany and Japan were fewer than the Japanese and Germans killed by the Americans.

In typical Jew-bashing leftist manner, Weir ignores the fact that the Jews in question were murdered in cold blood, while the Palestinians killed were either terrorists or civilians caught in the crossfire when Palestinian terrorists opened fire from amongst civilians. The number of innocent Palestinian civilians intentionally killed by Israel is a great big whopping zero.

In Weir's parallel universe, " Congress is intimidated into denying her parents' right to an investigation of the American 'ally' who murdered their daughter." Congress would be better advised to investigate who is funding Weir's little web site and maybe also investigate parents like the Corries who cavalierly send their children off to war zones to promote terrorism and interfere with anti-terror operations by democracies. As Dennis Prager wrote:

"Rachel Corrie chose to side with a society that breeds some of the cruelest murderers of innocent people in the world. Rachel Corrie gave her life trying to protect people whose declared aim is to annihilate another country. In the name of saving children's lives, Rachel Corrie chose to defend a society that teaches its young children to blow themselves up and which deliberately targets children for death. And Rachel Corrie went to America's enemies to burn her country's flag. "

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 Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, March 15, 2005.

Creating a supportive social environment for terrorists has been a critical factor in the Palestinian Authority's successful promotion of suicide terrorism. To this end, PA policy has been to honor terrorists as Shahids (Martyrs for Allah), and to teach Palestinian mothers to celebrate when their children die as terrorist Shahids. Categorizing these dead terrorists as Shahids grants them the highest honor a Muslim can achieve, and is therefore cause for a mother to celebrate, according to this PA teaching.

This pressure on Palestinian mothers to celebrate their dead sons as Shahids continues under the regime of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, and even increased this past week with repeated PA TV promotion connected to International Woman's Day.

Preaching before an audience that included Abbas, Sheikh Yusuf Juma' Salamah said in Friday's sermon on PA TV that the ideal Palestinian woman is like Al Khansah, the heroine of Islamic tradition who celebrated her four sons' death in battle by thanking God for the honor. Salamah, the PA Minister of Waqf, quoted Al Khansah: "Praise Allah, who granted me honor with their deaths." [PA TV, March 11, 2005]

It's important to note that this was the first Friday sermon broadcast since the PA announced last week that it would control and vet all Friday sermons delivered in West Bank and Gaza strip mosques. This portrayal of the ideal Palestinian woman as one who willingly sacrifices her sons as Shahids, therefore, continues to represent official PA ideology - especially since this sermon was delivered in the presence of Abbas.

Two days later, PA TV broadcast a theatrical skit that included veneration of the same Al Khansah. A father taught his son her declaration: "Praise Allah, who granted me honor with their deaths." [PA TV, March 13, 2005]

Both the sermon and the play portray Al Khansah's celebration of the deaths of her four sons as superior to the way she mourned the deaths of her two brothers, who died before she adopted Islam.

During an interview with four university students for International Women's Day last week, PA TV broadcast a telephone call from the Dean of Media at Al-Aqsa University. He expressed admiration for the "unique Palestinian woman ... she is the one who shouts for joy on the day of the Shahid." [PA TV, March 10, 2005]

Promoting the Al Khansah ideal for Palestinians is a very powerful message for Muslims. Al Khansah was a poet in the early Islamic period. Before she converted to Islam, her brothers died, and she grieved. However, Islamic historian Ibn Athir writes that after she converted to Islam, she delivered a fiery speech encouraging her four sons to march into battle for Allah. When all four were killed, the poem she wrote was one of joy, rejoicing that Allah had honored her with the deaths of her sons.

Al Khansah is considered the archetypal mother of Shahids, a woman glorified by Palestinians for encouraging her sons to kill and die for Allah, and rejoicing when they achieved their Shahada deaths.

From a very young age, Palestinian girls are taught to adopt Al Khansah as a role model with her message of celebrating death in combat - which in contemporary Palestinian society includes death while committing acts of suicide terror. A music video for children, broadcast hundreds of times over three years on PA TV, included the farewell letter of a child Shahid, including the words: "Mother don't cry for me, be joyous over my blood."

In addition, the Palestinian Authority has named at least five girls schools "the Al Khansah School for Girls," in Bethlehem, Jenin, Nablus, Han Yunis and Rafah. [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Jan. 9, 2005]

The following are the transcripts of these and other portrayals of the ideal Palestinian mother as one who celebrates her son's death. 1. Friday TV sermon, Sheik Yusuf Juma' Salamah, Minister of the Waqf, in the presence of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and other senior PA members.

"Al Khansah, this noble woman ... The day she lost her brother Sakher [before she adopted Islam] she began crying, shouting and feeling pain. She recited poetry: "The sunrise reminds me of Sakher, and I remember him with every sunset, and had there not been around me all the mourners for their brothers, I would have killed myself." This was during the Jahiliyah [pre-Islam period]. When Allah filled her heart with love for Islam, and it became full of faith, things changed. She sent her four sons, her offspring, to battle, to Qadisiyah [near Iraq] as a service to this religion. When she was notified that they had become Shahids (Died for Allah), she said, "Praise Allah, who granted me honor with their deaths. I pray that he will take me to them at the place where His mercy dwells." This is the great woman. This is the noble woman. Have you seen how Islam changed her behavior, her virtues, and her poetry? [PA TV, March 11, 2005]
2. Theatrical Skit: Educational TV program "My knowledge, your knowledge":
A young child asks his father: "My father, my father, who is this woman?" Father: "This is the poet Tumarid, who is known by name Al Khansah. She was one of the prettiest women of her time..." Female host: "When [before she adopted Islam] her brother Mu'awiya died, and after that her brother on her father's side, Sakher, she became extremely mournful because of them" Al Khansah: "I was extremely saddened for Sakher, until my eyes became blind. In Al-Qadisiyah battle, four sons of mine became Shahids." Father: "When she was told of her four sons' deaths, she pleaded to the Creator, to him be the glory and power, and said, "Praise Allah, who granted me honor with their deaths." [PA TV, March 13, 2005]
3. The Dean of Al Aqsa University Faculty of Media [on behalf of the University's Dean], Dr Hussein Abu Shanab: Dr Hussein Abu Shanab, the Dean of the Media Faculty at Al-Aqsa University [on behalf of himself and of the University's Dean]:
"The Palestinian woman - our hearts all full of respect and admiration for her, as she is a unique woman for several reasons: she is the Shahid's mother; and she is [the one] who shouts for joy on the day of the Shahid and she is [the one] who shouts for joy, while her son is a prisoner, and she is [the one] who shouts for joy, when her son is arrested..." [PA TV, March 10, 2005]
Additional examples from the PMW archives:

4. Interview with the mother of two killed terrorists.

Host: They [Israelis] accuse the Palestinian mother of hating her sons and of encouraging them to die.

Mother: No. We do not encourage our sons to die. We encourage them to shahada [death for Allah] for the homeland, for Allah. We don't say to the mothers of the shahids, "We come to comfort you," rather, "We come to bless you on your son's wedding, on your son's shahada. Congratulations to you on the shahada." For us, the mourning is a [joyous] wedding. We give out drinks, we give out sweets. Praise to Allah, our mourning is a [joyous] wedding. [PA TV, November 17, 2004]

5. A Suicide Bomber's Imaginary Letter to his Mother


In the literature section in the official Palestinian daily, Al Hayat Al Jadida, a poem written as an imaginary letter from a suicide bomber to his mother, glorifies and idealizes every action of his murder and suicidal death.

"A letter from a Shahid to his Mother" by Abdul Badi Iraq [Al Hayat Al Jadida, official Palestinian Daily, Feb. 27, 2003]

"My Dear Mother,

...I wrapped my body with determination, with hopes and with bombs.
I asked [reaching] towards Allah and the fighting homeland.
The [explosive] belt makes me fly, strengthens me to make haste.
I calm it [the explosive], we should stay steadfast, we have not yet reached.
I freed/launched myself; I freed/launched myself, [detonated myself] like lava burning old legends and vanity,
I freed/launched my body, all my pains and oppression, towards the packs of beasts...
I freed/launched, oh mother, freed the chains and the shackles.

And you found me rising and rising like a candle that was lit with precious olive oil.
And you saw me sending a loving kiss above the mosques and the churches, the houses and the roads.
Flocks of pigeons flew above the porches
And Al-Aksa smiled and gave me a sign that we will not sleep.

Dawn is close, oh mother, and it shall rise from the guns, from the shining spears
It will be lit from a bloody wound...
The wedding is the wedding of the land.
Sound a cry of joy, oh mother, I am the groom..."

6. Palestinian Mother Proudly Prayed for her Son to Die, during her Pilgrimage [Haj] to Mecca

Below are excerpts from her interview:

"[My second son Naji] became a Shahid on Mar. 23, 2002, at the age of 20. Before I made my pilgrimage [to Mecca], he put his hands on my head and said: "Be calm, mother, be calm, this is my wish. Pray for me, that I will be a Shahid [Die for Allah]." When I did the circuit [an Islamic pilgrimage ceremony], in Mecca and Medina, I swear to Allah, that I prayed for him... And said: Praise Allah, my children asked for Shahada, and it is better than the way we will die. Their death is for Allah, death for our country, death for our Jerusalem ..."

Presenter: "Of course, we are always very proud of all of our Shahids." [Palestinian Television 5/12/02]


Links to videos of more mothers expressing their joy and honor are on the PMW web site:

1. It brings honor to all the family members "People say -'There is the mother of the Shahid'..."

2. A mother wants the best for her son, and as a Shahid he achieves the maximum. Also Allah wills he go on Jihad.

3. He had no one to marry in this world so he wanted to marry the 72 "dark-eyed maidens" of Paradise.

4. Mothers Express Joy at sons' Death for Allah

To Go To Top
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 15, 2005.

All the regular concessions and all the "confidence-building" concessions are made by Israel, none by the Arabs. The most the Arabs do is sign agreements they don't keep and the world does not hold them to. The most the world says about the Arabs is that they must "try harder" what they are not trying and do not intend.

What patience the world has with those aggressors! What impatience the world has with Israel for not making concessions fast enough. The world is irritated with Israel, the victim of Arab bigotry and aggression.

The world demands that Israel make concessions in order for the current dictator of the P.A., whether Arafat or Abu Mazen, to take credit for it with his people and then gain the political strength to eradicate the terrorism to which that dictator still dedicates his life. No light at the end of that tunnel!

Most of the world has accepted false propaganda about the Arab-Israel conflict. Let that be a lesson in not kowtowing to world public opinion. World public opinion is not some democratic gauge but demagogic rage.

Since the world has turned against Israel, despite the constant Arab war crimes, and since the Western media and universities are themselves infiltrated by Islamists and not performing their stated missions professionally, Israel has to make its very behavior a lesson about the situation. Therefore, it should not make "confidence-building" gestures, at least not without reciprocity. Otherwise, it appears to be guilty. It lets itself be put into the position of having to regain the trust of the Arabs. The truth is, the Arabs are, by their very culture, untrustworthy, as proved by the constant broken agreements and their celebration of deceit.

When Israel is asked for confidence-building gestures, it should deny the need for it, point to the Arab violations, and demand that the other side make such gestures, starting with keeping its agreements. It should assert: no new negotiations until the Arabs fulfill the ones already completed.

When Israel is asked for other concessions, it should ask why the victim should make concessions to the aggressors. Shouldn't it be the other way around? Compensate victims.

Such replies to untoward demands would get reported and would make Israel's case in forums not otherwise receptive.

Appeasement-minded Israelis make a boastful defense of concessions. Concessions, the epitome of weakness, they advocate on the basis of Israel being "strong" enough to make them. Even if that strong, they are neither deserved nor productive. Made unilaterally to a recalcitrant enemy, they undermine Israel's supposed strength and reinforce the recalcitrant enemy's. Indeed, the Arabs count on their terrorism alternating with their negotiations to bring concessions without their having to make any accommodations. Instead of the give-and-take of negotiations, with the Arabs, it is "take without negotiations." It is not an ethical stance by the Arabs, but they are ruthless and their tactic works. Israel does not have patriotic and courageous Prime Ministers, or they would insist on no arrangement-by-concession but full negotiations, a concluded agreement, and an agreement that is self-enforcing inasmuch as the Arabs have broken all their previous and ongoing agreements.

How could the Arabs prove good faith? By fidelity to agreements. If they eradicated terrorist organizations and reversed their bigoted propaganda for, say, half a year, they could be given some consideration. Would Israel ever get a government that would assert, regardless of Arab behavior, that the Mandate recognized the Jewish people's entitlement to settle in them, and that general Muslim Arab chauvinism towards everyone else requires Israel to retain strategic depth?


A friend who relies upon the "NY Times" and like-minded TV news discussed the UNO and the Arab-Israel conflict with me like this, but more animated though not personal. She complained that Pres. Bush had nominated as UNO Ambassador a severe critic of the UNO. An ambassador should be diplomatic, she pointed out. I wondered whether, since the UNO is thoroughly corrupt, wasteful, and evil, a non-diplomatic US voice in it may be more effective in demanding reform. (It would be more refreshing than the usual diplomatic hot air.)

She made a valid point about this brutal frankness towards the UNO contradicting Pres. Bush's recent turn to being more diplomatic, himself.

She thought the US should have more respect for other cultures and engage in more dialogue with them. I said that the dominant governments at the UNO are unworthy of respect (and use dialogue to delay correction of UNO corruption and of genocide). As if to defend the UNO by challenging its critic (which her tactic logically does not do), she cited unworthy US deeds, such as sending suspected terrorists to be interrogated in countries that torture them. I agreed that this is wrong of the US. However, it is not (typical of the US, on the same scale as criminality by China and the Arabs, is being reformed, and is not) relevant to whether the UNO needs reform because of the corruption and evil brought to it by those other cultures.

She also mentioned US support for criminal regimes (as if that makes the UNO any better). I added the example of the US supporting the P.A.. What is wrong with that, she asked. (She did not know that it is a mass-murder regime trying to ethnically cleanse our fellow Jew, and it preaches murder of Americans.) I replied that it would set up a terrorist state that is anti-American and anti-Israel.

Not accepting the notion that Israel would allow a terrorist state to be set up "side-by-side" with it (which is exactly what Oslo was leading to, until the Arabs could not hold fire long enough), she asked, "Do you think that Sharon is a pushover?" Yes, I replied, because the Leftist Attorn