HOME Featured Stories May 2006 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web

Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Cinnamon Stillwell, May 31, 2006.

In times of war, when daily doses of death and destruction are the norm, one learns to steel oneself against the tide of bad news. Particularly since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the many horrors committed by our enemies in the years since, it often feels as if nothing's shocking anymore. Yet occasionally something pierces the armor that we've constructed about ourselves and reminds us just what we're up against.

The tragic death of Florida teenager Daniel Wultz[1] was one such instance.

Daniel was visiting family in Tel Aviv for Passover last month, when he was seriously injured in a suicide bombing at the restaurant where he and his father were having lunch. They were two of sixty innocents injured, on top of the nine who were killed. Daniel remained in a coma for several weeks, only waking up once, before succumbing to his injuries on May 14.

American-born Israeli novelist and playwright Naomi Ragen[2] became personally invested in Daniel’s recovery and her writings on the subject touched a nerve. Following the bombing, she sent out several e-mails to her mailing list asking members to pray for Daniel's recovery and to send messages of support to his family. As a result, his family received hundreds of such e-mails and expressed their profuse gratitude. When the news came that Daniel had woken up briefly, it seemed as if all those prayers had been answered. But sadly, it was not meant to be.

The last message sent out on the subject included the eloquent words of Rabbi Michael Gold[3] of Temple Beth Torah, Tamarac Jewish Center in Florida. Rabbi Gold visited Daniel's Hebrew Day School and spoke to the students he'd known. When faced with the moral relativism so common among the youth these days, the rabbi told them this: "There are absolute standards of good and evil. The deliberate taking of innocent life to advance a political cause is always wrong, in every culture and every society."

Such moral clarity is in stark contrast to the sentiments of Abu Nasser, a senior leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which along with the Islamic Jihad was one of the terrorist groups involved in plotting the attack that ultimately killed Daniel. Nasser[4] rejoiced in the news, saying that he was, "sorry there was not more of this stuff. American and Zionist -- this is the best target combination we could dream of. This is the ideal target. He is a young American who came to encourage the enemy to continue his war against us."

Daniel was one of over 200 Americans[5] to either be wounded or killed by Palestinian terrorists, but such crimes against humanity should be condemned, whether the targets are American, Israeli or anyone else.

Yet somehow when it comes to Jewish deaths, there are still those who dismiss them as some kind of deserved end. Apparently any Jew inhabiting or visiting Israel, whatever their nationality, is fair game in their view. Meanwhile, Palestinians can get away with any atrocity (even when their own people are on the receiving end) and there will always be those willing to turn a blind eye.

Furthermore, far too many in the Jewish community seem to believe that they can avoid such violence by ingratiating themselves with their enemies. Author and talk show host Dennis Prager[6] devoted a recent column to trying to explain this very pathology. But Jews' enemies do not differentiate between the secular or the devout, the young or the old, the civilian or the warrior. As Islamic Jihad senior member Abu Ayman[7] put it, "The meaning and the goal of our lives is to fight the devil spiritually and physically. The Jews are the expression of both kinds of devil. No mercy for devils."

Still, all too often, appeasement continues to be the order of the day. Indeed, as Israel's new Prime Minister Ehud Olmert visits the U.S. asking for funding so that his government can continue to expel Jews from their homes, one can only shake their head and wonder what has happened to the Jewish people? What happened to the warrior spirit, the pride and the ability to overcome even the most insurmountable odds? Have Jews been so crippled by the self-loathing endemic to years of leftist indoctrination that they no longer have the will to survive?

A glimmer of hope can be found in a Washington D.C. rally timed to coincide with Olmert's meeting with the Bush administration. The "anti-retreat" rally on May 23 was the brainchild of Jonathan Silverman, who with the help of groups such as B'nai Elim, Chabad, Women in Green, AFSI, Manhigut Yehudit and the local chapter of the ZOA, organized the rally in order to urge the US government not to fund further Israeli withdrawals and concessions. But ultimately, it's up to the Israelis to chart their own course.

Let's hope they do so wisely. For Jews owe it to Daniel's memory to stand up for themselves and for the existence of a Jewish State.


1. www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961336110& pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

2. www.naomiragen.com/

3. www.heartfelt.com/

4. www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49952

5. news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_american_victim

6. frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22479

7. www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49952

Cinnamon Stillwell is a columnist for SFGate.com, The San Francisco Chronicle online, and a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. She maintains a website at www.cinnamonstillwell.com and can be reached by email at stillcinn@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 31, 2006.

Read the below 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision about the right to teach Islam in our Calif schools. If this were about Judaism or Christianity, the teaching would have been declared as a violation of separation of church and state. I hope this case is appealed to the Supreme Court!

This was an Issues & Insights editorial in Investors.com May 19, 2006 (www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20 &artnum=3&issue=20060519).

Please send this to all you know, especially talk radio show hosts.

Education: In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran. Yup, the same court that found the phrase "under God" unconstitutional now endorses Islamic catechism in public school.

In a recent federal decision that got surprisingly little press, even from conservative talk radio, California's 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it's OK to put public-school kids through Muslim role-playing exercises, including:

Reciting aloud Muslim prayers that begin with "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . ."

Memorizing the Muslim profession oAllah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger." Praise be to Allah" in response to teacher prompts.

Professing as "true" the Muslim be"The Holy Quran is God's word."

Giving up candy and TV to demonstrate Ramadan, the Muslim holy month

Designing prayer rugs, taking an Arabic name and essentially "becoming a Muslim" for two full weeks.

Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam.

But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture."

So the parents appealed. Unfortunately, the most left-wing court in the land got their case. The 9th Circuit, which previously ruled in favor of an atheist who filed suit against the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, upheld the lower court ruling.

The decision is a major victory for the multiculturalists and Islamic apologists in California and across the country who've never met a culture or religion they didn't like -- with the exception of Western civilization and Christianity. They are legally in the clear to indoctrinate kids into the "peaceful" and "tolerant" religion of Islam, while continuing to denigrate Judeo-Christian values.

In the California course on world religions, Christianity is not presented equally. It's covered in just two days and doesn't involve kids in any role-playing activities. But kids do get a good dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting history of its persecution of other peoples. In contrast, Islam gets a pass from critical review. Even jihad is presented as an "internal personal struggle to do one's best to resist temptation," and not holy war.

The ed consultant's name is Susan L. Douglass. No, she's not a Christian scholar. She's a devout Muslim activist on the Saudi government payroll, according to an investigation by Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington." He found that for years Douglass taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy just outside Washington, D.C. Her husband still teaches there.

So what? By infiltrating our public school system, the Saudis hope to make Islam more widely accepted while converting impressionable American youth to their radical cause. Recall that John Walker Lindh, the "American Taliban," was a product of the California school system. What's next, field trips to Mecca?

This case is critical not just to our culture but our national security. It should be brought before the Supreme Court, which has outlawed prayer in school. Let's see what it says about practicing Islam in class. It will be a good test for the bench's two new conservative justices David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Renalee Colon, May 31, 2006.

This was written by Reuven Prager of Beged Ivri and it is called "Shavuoth 5766". Contact him at http://www.begedivri.com or send an email to reuven@actcom.com

On 26 Iyyar 5766 (May 24, 2006) I received a phone call summoning me to the upcoming weekly meeting of the Sanhedrin, followed the next day by a written invitation to appear.

This was followed by two more calls that day preparing me for the meeting. I was told that I should be patient. It was likely that I would be the last called to speak, and the possibility existed that because of the amount of work covered at each meeting, they might not even get to me, and I might need to come to a subsequent meeting to speak, I shouldn't take offense. Asked if this was okay with me I responded with "of course". I was also told that I would have a maximum of 15 minutes to speak, without exception.

I was informed that there was at least one Chaver Sanhedrin that was already predisposed to rejecting my entire work on behalf of the restoration of the Holy Half Shekel, who had himself created a Half Shekel coin. I asked if it was possible to purchase two of his coins for our archives. I was also told that it would be recommended at the meeting that a committee be appointed to deal with the whole subject of the Half Shekel, on an ongoing basis, to act as liaison between the Sanhedrin and Beged Ivri.

What prompted the summons was a discussion at the previous session in which ideas were raised as to how to create a means of income to support and expand the activities of the Sanhedrin, and the idea was raised to institute a levy of 1/2 NIS as a monthly donation given by Jews resident in the Land. The discussion led to one Chaver Sanhedrin suggesting that since they were talking in terms of a half shekel levy, they should contact Beged Ivri, as an expert in the field, to come to the next meeting to discuss it.

Wow. After nine years of minting, distributing, collecting, and performing 26 Trumat HaLishka ceremonies, the Holy Half Shekel was to have its "day in court."

Sort of.

It was clear to me that the intention of the Sanhedrin WAS NOT to discuss the restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment of giving the Half Shekel. Nonetheless, I also knew that this was exactly what it would become.

I spent the week preparing for the meeting. I put together 23 packets which each included the following;

1) 1 Year 58 Half Shekel

2) A list of 29 questions (that have arisen since the reinstitution of the fulfillment of the commandment, that are to be the first in a series of questions and answers that will eventually become a guideline for the public, informing how to fulfill the commandment.)

3) The packaging for the MASHAL (Machatzith Shekel L'chayal -- Half Shekel for Soldiers) program we instituted three years ago, which allows the public to sponsor soldiers, providing them with free Holy Half Shekels.

4) Two flyers prepared years ago promoting the reinstitution of the commandment.

What was to be my goal here? After all, I was being summoned, I hadn't asked to appear. I certainly wasn't seeking confrontation or permission. I knew the reason I was invited. So how to make the best of the opportunity? It became clear to me that my goal for this initial meeting was to leave that room having taken the Half Shekel from "concept" to "reality". When I left, I needed to leave those people in attendance with a clear, unambiguous knowledge that the Half Shekel was REAL, not just a concept, not something that was merely to be "used" as has been the case for the last century, where the concept was used, in remembrance of the Half Shekel, to raise funds for various religious institutions in the month of Adar. How best to affect this? I put together from our archive's collections, a fabulous selection of ancient weights, scale pans, and coins from the First and Second Temple Eras, actual ancient artifacts that were used by our ancestors to fulfill the commandment. In addition, I brought to the meeting the nine coins we have issued to date as well as photos of the Chests for New Shekels and Old Shekels, which have been used to collect the coins.

As the day of the meeting approached my thoughts became more concentrated on the upcoming encounter. This morning, 3 Sivan (May 30th) I awoke with just one thought; how to make the Half Shekel REAL in the minds and hearts of the Chavre Sanhedrin, and rather than start work or run errands, sat wrapped in Tefilin (phylacteries) for hours concentrating and focusing my energy on this momentous meeting. My thoughts flew at an accelerated pace.

Though the meeting was called for 1:30-4:00 pm, I was there at 1:00. I waited outside for 10 minutes, watching for the Chaverim to arrive. I saw one elderly gentleman arrive and enter the building. I waited outside trying to figure out whom from amongst the people passing the building would turn into it. The thought occurred to me that the Sanhedrin members ought to have a special dress appropriate for the office, just as judges who appear at the bench don robes to distinguish themselves from the public. At 1:10 I entered the building and made my way to the meeting room. There were two members present. When I entered the room one asked me who I was, and not recognizing my name, asked for what purpose I was present and when I replied the Half Shekel he responded; "ah Beged Ivri, please, have a seat." A few minutes later a third Chaver entered and seeing me sitting there began to ask the other two members if it was correct to have a guest present for the opening of the meeting or if the invited guests should wait outside and be called when it came time for them to speak. I immediately arose and offered to wait outside so they could discuss this privately and they asked me to remain, and went into a huddle at the far side of the room to discuss it between themselves. They decided that I should come to them and discuss whatever it was I had to share with them, right then and there, and to be rid of me within minutes before the other members arrived and the meeting began.

Now I had prepared myself for what I thought was any eventuality; not being allowed to speak at all, being shot down, being given short shrift, and even fantasized a standing ovation for the exceptional contribution I had made to Am Yisrael. But this? Being treated with such disdain? Given five minutes to have my say and thrown out before the majority of attendees even arrived?

Of course I complied, came to the head of the conference table where the three Chaverim sat, asked if it wasn't more sensible to wait till the meeting began so what I had to share could be heard by all those expected to attend? I was told -- no, begin now and whoever comes while you're talking comes. My head swimming with this unexpected slight, especially since I had invested so much thought into what I brought to share, I said "I would like to begin by giving you the historical background of what the Half Shekel was, so that we can better understand what we are talking about." They agreed. I opened my briefcase and began to fill a tray with weights and coins, silently, and during the five minutes it took me to prepare the tray, several other members arrived. I began to explain the items on the tray and how they were used to fulfill the commandment in each of the centuries, each of the millennia. The first question asked, and repeated over and over again, was, "are these real?" Again and again I repeated that by me, everything is real. Forty five minutes later, after I had covered the historical background as well as the work of the last nine years I tied it to the reason I was invited. By this time the room was full, I had regained my composure and was speaking at full force, having completely established my credentials and the direction of the discussion.

When it was said that the Sanhedrin can not be involved in sales, I suggested that an affiliate group be established to distribute the coins, both regarding the soldier's program and the general public, under the auspices of the Sanhedrin, which would earn an income for the Sanhedrin.

Questions were raised. How many coins have been collected by Otzar Hamikdash and what was their value? I answered that Otzar Hamikdash has not counted the coins collected in the last nine years, but that their value had increased threefold in the last year due to the rise in the price of silver, and that we were talking about thousands of coins. I was asked if I was willing to oversee the programs I was suggesting and I replied that by myself I would not be able to achieve these goals, but that working together with the Sanhedrin I could. This prompted one member to remark that nothing plus nothing is nothing (meaning that the Sanhedrin, as yet unrecognized by most, together with Beged Ivri's efforts, also universally ignored by the Jewish People, would amount to nothing.) I replied; "our Aperion (Royal Wedding Litter) weighs about 350 pounds, and together with the bride, is a heavy load to lift. Individually our Litter bearers would not be able to lift it, but together they lift it easily. Likewise, two groups that come together can accomplish more than the individuals can working alone." I emphasized that just as the public ignores Beged Ivri's efforts, likewise they ignore the Sanhedrin, and that working together we can bring legitimacy to both endeavors.

I then went on with a vision track, how rather than the Sanhedrin meeting in such an incongruous venue, a first class, though temporary, venue should be established in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, big enough to house the Sanhedrin, Otzar Hamikdash and the Lishka (Treasury Chamber) with enough room to create the other 11 Chests for the collection of Temple related funds and how the Half Shekel could provide the means to accomplish this. I shared how the universal reinstitution of the Half Shekel would provide enough funds to replace the ridiculous security "fence/wall" surrounding Jerusalem with proper Walls of Jerusalem.

A latecomer, who also happened to be the Chaver who I was forewarned, was in opposition to my work, arrived during the last five minutes of my speaking. He asked if the Sanhedrin was considering the recognition of the restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment or was merely speaking about selling coins to raise funds. The chairman of the meeting replied "the latter" and another Chaver repeated several times "as a zecher" (as a remembrance), thereby allowing everyone present to accept the proposal. A committee was duly established to continue discussions with Beged Ivri, and I was dismissed.

It was mentioned in passing that this Chaver had also created half shekels, and that he had made copies of the ancient Tyrian Half Shekel as his suggested "restored half shekel". (In the Talmud, bringing down teachings from the Second Temple Era, it is stated that "anywhere where the Torah commands payment of Shekalim, only Tyrian coinage can be used." This was because of the 95% silver purity of the coins, as well as the fact that we were under Roman Imperial rule forbidding us from minting our own coins. Of course with the outbreak of the First revolt, our first act of rebellion was to mint our own 95% silver coinage, without the face of a foreign god on the obverse, which obviously ignored the halachah quoted above.) The ridiculousness of reviving a coin depicting the face of a foreign god was so overwhelming at this point that this Chaver did not even offer his "revived" coin for consideration.

When I left the meeting I sat down to consider what had transpired. It became clear to me that I had succeeded in leaving the meeting with the Half Shekel as an absolute physical reality in the minds of everyone present, which I thought beforehand was my goal, and at the same time completely failed to make the half Shekel a spiritual reality in those same minds. They just weren't ready for it. A complete disassociation between physical reality and spiritual reality, the same disassociation that haredi elements make regarding the State of Israel. The Half Shekel coins -- yes, as a fund raising means, as a zecher (a remembrance) . The restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment -- no way. And this from our revived Sanhedrin, which is exactly on the same plane as the Half Shekel. How amazing. And it doesn't matter an iota. The fact is that whatever one wishes to call it, what has begun will eventually become the universally acknowledged fulfillment of the commandment of giving the Half Shekel, just as Hebrew has returned as the universal language of Am Yisrael in Eretz Yisrael, over the objections of all the nay Sayers, just as the restoration of the State of Israel has become reality despite all those "holy warriors" who still bury their heads in the sand with their muffled screaming Galut is our salvation!

G-d Bless,
Reuven Prager

Contact Renalee Colon at renalees@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jack Halpern, May 31, 2006.

Please urge your representatives in the U.S. House and Senate to call for swift Congressional passage of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act highlighted in Prime Minister Olmert's Speech to a joint session of the U.S. Congress.

HR 2730 the House Bill, and S 1862, the Senate version, respectively of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act are sponsored by a bipartisan coalition of more than 65 House Members led in the House by Representatives John Shaddegg (R-AZ) and Brad Sherman (D-CA) and in the Senate by Senators Gordon Smith, Dianne Feinstein, Maria Cantwell, Bob Menendez, Barack Obama, Frank Lautenberg, Tim Johnston and Mike Dewine. It is an outgrowth of efforts by AJCongress over the last three years to promote U.S.-Israel collaboration on energy research and development. It would apply Israel's extraordinary engineering and scientific talent to help the United States address our energy needs through a collaborative program of alternative energy technology R&D.

Not only would passage of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act reduce United States dependence on foreign oil, it would reduce the flow of petrodollars that currently support terrorism and the arming of Israel's and America's enemies, and it would help establish a new energy industry in Israel.


In 2003, the American Jewish Congress under the auspices of the Energy Independence Task Force Chaired by Senior Vice President Jack Halpern hosted a conference in Israel, along with the U.S. Department of Energy and Israel's Ministry of National Infrastructures to initiate cooperation between our two countries to solve the energy. At that conference, the concept of establishing a permanent mechanism for such cooperation was established. Key to this concept was the understanding that Israel has enormous scientific and engineering talent, as exhibited by those who helped produced the Arrow Missile in cooperation with the U.S.; those who produced unmanned aerial vehicles; treatments for heart disease and cancer; and advances in computer science. If past collaborations are any measure of future success, these similar talents should be applied in helping solve America's energy problems.

When we arrived back in the U.S. our staff worked with members of Congress to establish such a cooperative program of research and development in alternative energy technology. We were fortunate to find skilled and committed champions in Congress who took up this cause and shepherded the bill to the point where passage this session is possible. This past Tuesday, we visited Washington in advance of Prime Minister Olmert's trip and hosted a meeting on Capitol Hill in order to promote passage of the bill. Senator Frist helped make that meeting possible; he joined us at it, along with more than 15 other Members of House and Senate.

HR 2730 and S. 1862 would both establish a program of grants totaling $20 million per year for alternative energy research and development (both basic and applied research) through the U.S. Department of Energy, in cooperation with the Binational Science Foundation (BSF) and Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation (BIRD). Only projects entailing both a U.S. and an Israeli partner would be eligible for funds. It is important to note that funding pursuant to the bills are grants, not foreign aid, and are subject to repayment provisions.

All you need to do is click here to reach your Senator. Once you do, you will then be directed to the page where you can reach your House Representative.

Jack Halpern chairs the American Jewis Congress Energy Independence Task Force. Contact him at EITF@AJCongress.org. Contact the American Jewish Congress by email at communications@ajcongress.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 31, 2006.

At least three years before George W. Bush entered the White House in January 2001, Ariel Sharon said a Palestinian state is inevitable. Israel's greatest warrior had succumbed to a self-fulfilling prophecy, to defeatism, in fact, to Arafat's cunning campaign of psychological warfare.

Given Mr. Sharon's reputation as a hawk, is it any wonder that Mr. Bush became the first American president to publicly advocate a Palestinian state?

Sharon's self-fulfilling prophesy, repeated over and over again by the media, has demoralized the people of Israel.

That self-fulfilling prophesy has advanced the Arabs' phased plan for the annihilation of the Jewish state.

That self-fulfilling prophecy reveals that Sharon was not only a defeatist, but also ignorant of some basic principles of military science.

Carl von Clausewitz, perhaps the greatest military scientist in the modern era, understood that to achieve excellence as a military scientist one must also possess the knowledge of a political scientist. One must understand not only the strengths and weakness of your own country and of its allies, but also the strengths and weakness of the enemy and of its allies. This is not merely a matter of taking a few courses in comparative government and international relations, because political science, properly understood, includes knowledge of the social sciences, especially psychology.

By propagating the self-fulfilling prophecy that a Palestinian state is inevitable, Sharon, the world-renowned warrior, must be held responsible -- more than others -- for the Palestinian Authority's psychological, diplomatic, and political victory over this country. There is not a single nation in the world whose policy toward Israel is not warped by that prophecy. But this does not exhaust Sharon's culpability.

Prime Minister Sharon was actually given the green light to destroy the entire leadership of the Palestinian Authority! In The High Cost of Peace (2002), Yossef Bodansky, then director of the U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, writes: "In late June [2002], a very senior member of the Bush White House privately told a senior Israeli minister that the administration 'would not shed a tear if you (Israel) get rid of Arafat.' And on July 11 [2002], National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, told Israel's Channel 2 TV News that the Bush administration resolved that the entire PA leadership should be replaced..."

More than 1,000 Jews were murdered by Arab terrorists during the premiership of Ariel Sharon -- on that basis alone the worst prime minister in Israel's history. And now Prime Minister Ehud Olmert boasts of being Sharon's heir. He is certainly committed to Sharon's brainless legacy.

The people of Israel must know and face the truth: They have been undermined by their democratically elected prime ministers at least since July 1992 when Yitzhak Rabin formed the government responsible for the disastrous Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement.

Democracies do make mistakes. But one of the virtues of a genuine democracy is its inherent tendency to be a self-corrective system of government by virtue of freedom of speech and of the press -- a freedom that facilitates criticism of government policies. But is Israel really a democracy?

I have exploded this myth in books and in countless articles. But if further proof is wanted, Israel's gallant Nadia Matar is being tried for "insulting a public servant," Yonaton Bassi, who was appointed by Prime Minister Sharon to head the Evacuation Administration, which supervised the expulsion of 10,000 Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria. Mrs. Matar sent Bassi a fax comparing his appointment with a letter that had been written by the Berlin Judenrat in 1942 to the Jewish community, with details and explanations of their approaching deportation.

The trial of Nadia Matar is not only indicative of the paltry despotism to which this country has fallen. No, her trial for insulting Sharon's lackey is symptomatic of the on-going psychological victory of the Palestinian Authority over the militarily powerful but morally impotent and degraded State of Israel.

Far more than freedom of expression is involved in the trial of Nadia Matar. Israel's raison d'etre as a Jewish state is on trial. The conflict is between what the heroic Nadia Matar stands for and what defeatists like Ariel Sharon or Ehud Olmert stand for. It is nothing less than a conflict between good and evil -- indeed, between life and death.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Marcel Cousineau, May 31, 2006.

Israel Has Surrendered Their Right of Self Defense. Israel has surrendered this right to the Master of the false peace Road Map.

They are not permitted to defeat their enemy and willingly go along with the dead end Road Map which is set up to exterminate the people of Israel and their land.

The two state solution of emperor George is Israel's death sentence and the blind and faithless, the fearful and the Idol worshipers go along with the suicide of their nation.

Their hands are tied and they must 'consult' the emperor before any real action is taken.

Only token, limited and useless responses to attacks are permitted and the new Puppet P.M. Olmert is very,very obedient to his Master, sacrificing Israel to the president's demonic vision 2 state final solution from hell.

The Road Map is Satan's plan and the president is his loyal disciple. Israel has been severly limited by the dragon who slowly destroys her before our eyes under the LIE and LIAR of peace.

The Jews are 'cautioned' not to endanger this phony peace by any determined action against the growing Palestinian threat.

So Israel has allowed it self to be restrained in every response.

This is why we see such small rockets fired by the IAF and why the IDF fire artillery into empty fields.

The marriage Israel has made to the U.S. for no peace is a noose around it's neck which has choked much of the life from it!

Will G-d annul this marriage?

YES, He will !!!

Contact Marcel Cousineau by email at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com or visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Larry Rued, May 31, 2006.

Two years ago, Presbyterian Church USA leaders began a divestment of corporations doing business in Israel. Since then, thousands of writers have written millions of words on the topic. Today, a Google search with keywords (Presbyterian(s), Israel, and Divestment) produces 181,000 hits.

Missing in the 181,000 results is an analysis of the money spent by the PCUSA creating and promoting its Israel Divestment Movement. A volunteer group of Concerned Presbyterians[1] have studied the obvious and hidden costs of our church's anti-Israel actions.

One finding: "The Middle East resolutions passed by the 216th and prior General Assemblies have created a network run amuck of headquarters staff, GA committees, and outside organizations receiving PCUSA funding." Our three page report details the major players.

Another finding: "As the estimates show, our leadership has directed 4% of the national budget to staff, committees, and outside organizations dedicated to promoting a propaganda attack on Israel." Four percent of the PCUSA national budget is $4 million per year.

Our letter rhetorically asked: "Who has paid for this biased and unfounded propaganda against Israel? We have, through our contributions to per capita and special offerings." Contributions from churches to the denominational offices are voluntary.

Our analysis has been emailed to over 11,000 Presbyterians. While the number is large, it is but 5% of the membership. We are asking for your help to reach the other 95%. As we wrote in our letter to fellow members: "Presbyterians, neither the Israeli Government nor the American Jewish Community can stop this assault on Israel. It is our problem -- and our responsibility." Presbyterians need to contact their commissioners before General Assembly begins June 15.

The actions detailed in our analysis have been reported by many writers. For the first time, the actions have been put into one document[2] with their associated cost.

Thank you for your consideration and help to End Israel Divestment Now.

Larry Rued
One of the Concerned Presbyterians

1. "Divestment is a Costly Mistake"

2. Download the document from http://concernedpresbyterians.net/Funding.pdf"

Contact Larry Rued at LRued@tampabay.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 31, 2006.

1. So the daughter of the head of the Hamas gets arrested inside Israel while trying to sneak into a prison to visit with prisoners using a fake ID. And what do the cowards who run Israel do? They let her out again!

2. A minor brouhaha has been operating at the Hebrew University in recent weeks. It seems the university opened a special program for officers in Israel's intelligence services. The Campus Moonbatocracy, led by the far-leftist anti-Israel "post-Zionist" professors, had a conniption.

The leftist profs claimed that the Hebrew U had lowered admissions requirements for the officers. The University denied that. The leftist profs oppose lowering admissions standards for anyone unless they are Arabs. But of course the real reason for the selective outrage on the part of the Hebrew University's academic friends of the Hamas was the same as the reason for all those protests on US campuses against ROTC and the right of army recruiters to speak to students. They simply hate their own country and express this hatred by doing everything they can to show their contempt for the military. The difference of course is that in Israel the military is the only thing standing between the jihadniks and their plans to conduct a second Holocaust of Jews. The irony is that Israel's security services are themselves largely dominated by leftists who would feel well at home in some of the goofier corners of Mt. Scopus.

The two main crusaders against allowing intelligence service officers on to the Hebrew U campus have been Moshe Zimmerman and Baruch Kimmerling. Both are fanatic anti-Israel extremists. Zimmerman is best remembered for his frequent denunciation of settlers as nazis and of settler childen as Hitlerjugend. (see http://www.meforum.org/article/87) This same prof who wants to bar the intelligence officers from campus has a policy in his classes according to which students in prison for refusing to do military service get automatic exemptions from assignments and tests, while students called up for reserve duty do not. Kimmerling is a Marxist sociologist who is widely acknowedged by himself as being some sort of expert on Palestinians. He claims to detect signs of a Palestinian "sense of national identity" centuries before any Palestinian claimed any such thing. He turns out pathetic poorly-written, shallow, transparently propagandist "books" about "Palestinians". Kimmerling in the past has justified terrorist bombings of Jewish civilians (see http://www.meforum.org/article/87).

Kimmerling is so extremist that he is a hero of the fanatic anti-Semite Jonathan Cook at the fanatically anti-Semitic Counterpunch magazine (see www.counterpunch.com/cook05302006.html). Israel's failure to tar and feather Cook or at least deport him to Syria has long been a matter of great regret. Kimmerling also writes for Counterpunch, in part because he despises the United States (see www.counterpunch.org/kimmerling1009.html). He played a crucial role in the "Jenin Massacre" fabrication and blood libel (www.counterpunch.org/kimmerling0501.html). He is arguably the worst anti-Zionist at the Hebrew University (see www.frontpagemag.com/ARticles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14906), although Zimmerman is also a serious contender also (see www.discoverthenetwork.org/moonbatcentral/2005/03/ hebrew-ward-churchills-of-_111044620767719192.html).

3. Hang George Galloway!

George Galloway, Saddam's paid agent in the British parliament, unreformed commie stooge, has issued a call to murder Tony Blair. The Independent reports that Galloway wants to see Blair assassinated!

In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked him: "Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber - if there were no other casualties - be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?" (In photo, something here stinks.)

Mr Galloway replied: "Yes, it would be morally justified.... It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did."

Galloway has never seen an Islamofascist terrorist he does not wish to promote. He makes Lord Haw-Haw look like a patriotic Brit. He has never met a Jew he does not think needs to be murdered. He is the darling of teh Left and personally exemplifies the convergence between the Far Left and the Neo-Nazi Right.

We strongly recommend the Hang Galloway blog.

4. May 30, 2006
Jew-Bashing in Bucharest
By Radu Ioanid

Two months ago, at a government-sponsored training course for Bucharest's political elite, I had the opportunity to teach a section on the Holocaust. The topic sparked some unexpected reactions. One participant ranted on about how Israeli companies and employers doing business in Romania are allegedly the source of contemporary anti-Semitism in the country. Another wondered how so many Jews managed to escape from the Twin Towers on Sept. 11, 2001, thus giving credence to the anti-Semitic lie that the Jews and Israel were behind these terror attacks. On Romanian TV, meanwhile, it is not unusual to see Orthodox priests repeating that 2,000-year-old charge of deicide: "The Jews killed God."

Jew-bashing in Romania seldom comes without racist attacks on the country's other ethnic minorities, Roma and Hungarians. Nationalism is so popular that not one but two xenophobic parties compete for votes. There is the extreme nationalistic Party of Greater Romania (PRM), which won 13% in the last parliamentary elections and gets up to 18% in recent opinion polls. Then there is the New Party Generation (PNG), not (yet) represented in parliament but also gaining in popularity, getting around 6% in polls. Finally, the illegal but tolerated Iron Guard -- which traces its roots to the main pre-World War II fascist party of the same name -- is gaining influence on university campuses. Even the mainstream media have found praise for some members of this criminal movement.

The leader of the PRM is Corneliu Vadim Tudor, a megalomaniac demagogue whose political program boils down to vicious hatred toward Hungarians, Jews and Roma. He was Nicolae Ceausescu's court poet and denounced fellow writers and dissidents to the former dictator's feared secret police, the Securitate. An open admirer of Slobodan Milosevic and Saddam Hussein, Mr. Tudor regularly publishes in his weekly Romania Mare publication anti-Roma and anti-Semitic incitements, Holocaust denials and "black lists" of political adversaries he considers "guilty of anti-Romanian activities." Among his campaign promises is to rule with the machine gun and organize public executions. Mr. Tudor believes that "America is a colony of Israel...a small mouse dragging after it a giant elephant" and that "Zionism keeps the planet under terror, and puts Christianity and Islam into a state of conflict and of reciprocal extermination."

Gigi Becali, leader of the PNG and a rich, vulgar, violent man, promises to "turn Romania into a country like the holy sun in the sky," a close variation of an old Iron Guard slogan. Mr. Becali calls himself an "athlete of Christianity" and has generously endowed the Maglavit church, the gathering point of Romania's mystical extremists in the '30s.

While everywhere else in Europe the extreme right is politically isolated, some of Romania's political establishment help these demagogues gain an aura of respectability. One could not imagine Jean Marie le Pen even coming close to the gates of the Elys.e Palace, let alone being invited into the president's office. And it would simply be inconceivable for a French socialist leader to negotiate with the extremist Front National. But in Romania, Mr. Tudor maintains friendly ties with many prominent members of the opposition Social Democratic Party (PSD), who discreetly try to help him gain credibility with Western governments in exchange for cooperation from Mr. Tudor. The two parties are in talks for a formal parliamentary alliance. The recently elected president of the Romanian parliament, Bogdan Olteanu, who represents the pro-Western, business-oriented Liberal Party, won his new job with the crucial support of the PRM. The president of Romania, Traian Basescu, receives Mr. Tudor at his palace and socializes publicly with Mr. Becali. The PSD, meanwhile, gives Mr. Becali campaign advice in hopes of weakening the PRM.

That mainstream politicians would find it so easy to rub shoulders with extremists is not that surprising in a country where the use of racist and populist rhetoric is not limited to the fringes of the political spectrum. Particularly anti-Hungarian, anti-Roma and homophobic comments have become vote-winners for all political parties. The boundaries between extreme and mainstream parties are more fluid in Romania than in other countries in the region. And although Holocaust denial is a crime, no Holocaust denier has ever been punished in Romania. As in many other domains, the country does not lack tough laws but rather the will to enforce them.

How are such odious dealings possible in a country that is a NATO member and ready to join the European Union next year? History is, as always, a good guide. Visceral nationalism has a long tradition in Romania, going back to pre-World War II times when the Iron Guard, which would later play an important role in preparing the destruction of the Romanian Jewish community during the Holocaust, advocated hate toward foreigners in general and Jews in particular. Communist dictator Ceausescu for years hammered the same themes into the national conscience.

Is Romania now reverting to its pre-World War II roots? Is nationalism the only real ideology in today's Romania? Is it justifiable to get close to the extreme right in order to divide it and steal its votes, as some mainstream politicians have claimed?

Romania's political class should not have a short memory. Striking alliances with extremists always backfires. After the 1937 elections, when the Iron Guard and the anti-Semitic National Christian Party won 22% of the votes, the Romanian political class followed the same course as it is doing again today. Back then, mainstream political leaders also entered into electoral alliances with extremists, foolishly believing they could control them. Fifty-one years of fascist and communist dictatorship followed. Playing this dangerous game with the extreme right tarnishes not only Romania's image abroad but threatens its national security.

Mr. Ioanid is author of "The Holocaust in Romania" and "The Ransom of the Jews."

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 Naomi Ragen, May 30, 2006.

I had a lecture to give in Haifa the other day. My usual driver wasn't available, so I called a local cab company to arrange a ride. Call it instinct, but when the cab arrived and I looked at the driver, he just didn't look the part.

For one thing, he was in amazing shape: handsome, young, with an athlete's lean body. Not what I usually find in the men who sit behind the wheel all day. Something about his face, the way he spoke, too, struck me as unusual.

"It's a long ride to Haifa," I finally said. "How do you like being on the road so much?"

"Oh, it's fine. I like driving. Actually, I haven't been in the business long. Just a few months," he said smiling. 'And before this....?"

"I worked for the Ministry of Defense. I was a security guard."

We spoke a little more, and I began to realize that I was in the presence of one of the men from those elite units who protect the lives of our most elite citizens, including our former Prime Minister.

"You didn't like the work?"

"No, actually....."

This is what happened. A yeshiva graduate, he had served in the army's most elite units. He had been trained in advanced counter-terrorism techniques, and had been asked to lead men into battle in some of the most dangerous missions possible. He had spent 3.5 years in Lebanon. It was no wonder that the leaders of the country had put him on staff to protect their lives.

And then came the disengagement. They asked him to be responsible for leading soldiers to attack the residents of Gush Katif should trouble ensue. He knew Gush Katif well. he had been stationed there.

"The people there treated us so well," he said. "They made sure we had enough to eat and drink. They invited us over on Shabbat and holidays.

They were the most wonderful people in the world. How could I now go into their communities and treat them like enemies? How?"

So, he walked into Sharon's office (which should give you an idea of who this person is, and what kind of job he had). I said: "I'll do anything you want. If you want me to wipe out a terrorist cell. Fine. That's what I'm trained to do. But please don't ask me to do this. Please."

Sharon didn't budge. Wasn't interested.

He also didn't budge. Despite the years he had spent risking his life to defend his country, and the people who run it, he was not only fired, he was thrown into jail for more than a month! When he got out, he married his girlfriend. He wasn't worried about getting another job. "The security companies were lining up to hire me.

But when I went to get a weapon's license, I found he'd been blackballed. "It was pure revenge. So it was impossible for me to work."

He bought a taxi, and now he drives. His wife is expecting. He's not making anywhere near what he used to make.

You've paid quite a price, I told him.

"I'm not sorry for a minute. I got my medal when my father told me he was proud of me. In the end, I have to live with myself. I have to face my little nephews. What would they think of me if I treated my own people like the enemy?"

Instead, he went to visit the people of Gush Katif, in their hotel rooms and dormitories. He hugged them, and they hugged him. "I don't have a single regret," he shrugged.

He has a court case against the government for denying him a license. I wished him well. And I thought of the men in power, those complacent, greying old men whose lives he had risked his young one for so many times. And I was glad he wasn't protecting them anymore. Glad that he wasn't being sent on dangerous missions anymore. Not for these men anyhow. And I thought of what he had sown, and what he had reaped. And how much we were all losing because he couldn't use his skills.

And once again, the reality of living in a country with wonderful people and terrible leadership struck me full force, making me want to punch somebody in the nose; somebody really high up; somebody fat, complacent, and careless, who makes all the wrong decisions and makes others pay the price.

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 David Meir-Levi, May 30, 2006.

Where are the militant feminists? Why are they not picketing the Iranian embassy?

Why are there no human shields for female activists and their children in Iran?

Why is the ISM, an INTERNATIONAL solidarity movement, showing no solidarity with Iran's dissidents?

Note the child abuse:

"It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents."

Burn her children to death in front of her!!.....where are the advocates on behalf of children? Where is UNICEF?

And let's recall that this is extreme barbarism of Moslems against Moslems, in the name of Allah and the Moslem clerics. Where is the Moslem outrage of such treatment of Moslems and such a desecration of the teachings of Islam?

Why does gut-wrenchingly brutal Moslem barbarity against Moslems, Christians, Jews, women and children get a free pass with most Western press?

This is called "Child Abuse - Mullah Style" and was written by Philip Sherwell. It appeared today in www.Telegraph.co.uk.

A leading Iranian pro-democracy and women's activist, who was jailed on trumped-up charges last year, has revealed how the clerical regime cynically deploys systemic sexual violence against female dissidents in the name of Islam.

Roya Tolouee, 40, was beaten up by Iranian intelligence agents and subjected to a horrific sexual assault when she refused to sign forced confessions. It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents.

Perhaps just as shocking as the physical abuse were the chilling words of the man who led the attack. "When I asked how he could do this to me, he said that he believed in only two things - Islam and the rule of the clerics," Miss Tolouee told The Sunday Telegraph last week in an interview in Washington after she fled Iran.

"But I know of no religious morality that can justify what they did to me, or other women. For these people, religion is only a tool for dictatorship and abuse. It is a regime of prejudice against women, against other regimes, against other ethnic groups, against anybody who thinks differently from them."

Miss Tolouee's account of her ordeal confirms recent reports from opposition groups that Iranian intelligence officials use sexual abuse against female prisoners as an interrogation technique and even rape young women before execution so that they cannot reach heaven as virgins.

Few women from the Islamic world are willing to discuss such matters, even with each other, but Miss Tolouee said that the regime routinely committed sexual attacks against female detainees.

She dropped her voice to a whisper and sobbed quietly as she described her experience, hoping not to upset her six-year-old son, Nima, as he picked at a piece of pizza in a hotel restaurant.

But he tried to comfort her. "I don't like it when my mummy talks about prison. It makes her cry," he said sadly. Miss Tolouee, who founded a women's group in Iranian Kurdistan and then launched a monthly magazine that was closed down by the judiciary last summer, was detained in the city of Sanandaj in August after taking part in anti-regime demonstrations that spread across Kurdish areas.

"Four armed men and three armed women barged into my house at night and took me away," she said. "My kids were terrified and crying. I was questioned all night by different interrogators and then thrown alone into a cell."

She was held in solitary confinement in the prison of the feared internal intelligence service, with only a blanket and a cup that often had to serve as a lavatory.

For the first six nights, she was taken to a basement where interrogators demanded that she admit to organising the protests, and also that she identify co-conspirators on a list of names they put to her.

"When I wouldn't do what they wanted, they slapped me. But after the sixth night, the routine changed. I was left alone in a small dark room with two men. One was the assistant prosecutor and called himself Amiri. The other had a filthy mouth and said terrible things. They started slapping me again. For the rest of the night they did to me what no woman should ever experience. Amiri said, 'I'm going to hang you, but before I hang you, I will make an example of you so that no woman will dare to open her mouth here again'." He then sexually assaulted her.

When she asked Amiri how he could act like that, he told her that only Islam and clerical rule were important to him. The attack left her badly bruised and bleeding internally, but she refused to sign the papers they put before her. To her assailants' fury, she demanded to see a lawyer and cited international treaties on human rights.

The following night they did not sexually molest her again as she was still bleeding - and hence "unclean". Instead, they told her that they would kill her children by setting them on fire before her eyes.

Finally, she admits, she cracked. "I threw myself at Amiri's feet and begged him not to harm my children. I said I'd do anything they wanted. Whatever they wanted, I would sign." She admitted to conspiring against the regime by giving interviews to the foreign media and leading the protests, but said that she did not implicate others.

After several more nights in solitary confinement, Miss Tolouee was moved to a general women's prison, where she saw horrendous festering wounds inflicted by lashings on other detainees.

Trying to maintain her dignity and strength, she taught the women about their basic human rights and helped to secure the provision of sanitary supplies for the first time. "We had a great feeling of camaraderie," she recalled.

Miss Tolouee was released on bail after 66 days in jail because, she said, "The regime had got what it wanted". But she still feared for her children's lives and decided to flee. She made it first to neighbouring Turkey with Nima and then her daughter Shima, 14, was smuggled out to join them.

Fearful of the reach of regime agents, who have killed exiled dissidents, an opposition group called the Alliance of Iranian Women helped them to reach the United States last month.

Miss Tolouee has been granted political asylum and intends to maintain her campaign against Teheran. She still has relatives in Iran - she does not want to go into details for reasons of security - but says that they have given her their blessing to speak out, despite the possible consequences.

The world's attention is currently focused on Iran's nuclear ambitions under its hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who came to office while Miss Tolouee was in prison. But inside Iran, she says, little has changed.

"Sometimes the regime seems a bit better, sometimes a bit worse, but for the people of Iran, the suffering continues," she said.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 30, 2006.

Arab leaders told us to flee Israel in 1948

PMW has documented yet another corroboration by an Arab "refugee" that it was Arab leaders who were responsible for the flight of Arabs from the new State of Israel in 1948. A backbone of Palestinian Authority (PA) ideology, and indeed of anti-Israel propagandists worldwide, is the myth that Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel and created the Palestinian "refugee" situation.

However, an elderly woman who left Israel during Israel's War of Independence, and is today still considered a "refugee," confirmed in a PA newspaper last week that it was Arab leaders and not Israel who told her and her neighbors to flee, for tactical military reasons. This corroborates Israel's contention of the last 58 years that Arab leaders were responsible for telling their own people to leave Israel, and for the subsequent "refugee" problem.

Following is this most recent testimonial, as well as two earlier statements by other "refugees" that have appeared in the PA press, all of which corroborate Israel's historical narrative. The latter two are significant because they were corroborated by still other more public Palestinians, indicating that the responsibility of the Arab leaders is known in the Palestinian world. One was confirmed by Arab Member of Knesset, Ibraham Sarsur, who was then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, and the other by a Palestinian journalist, Fuad Abu Higla, in the official PA daily.

The following are three statements corroborating that Arabs fled Israel, under instructions of the Arab leaders:

1. Woman who fled Israel in 1948

"We heard sounds of explosions and of gunfire at the beginning of the summer in the year of the Nakbah [1948]. They told us: The Jews attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and return, after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few hours."
[Asmaa Jabir Balasimah Um Hasan, Woman who fled Israel, Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006]

2. Son and grandson of those who fled in 1948

An Arab viewer called Palestinian Authority TV and quoted his father and grandfather, complaining that in 1948 the Arab District Officer ordered all Arabs to leave Palestine or be labeled traitors. In response, Arab MK Ibrahim Sarsur, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, cursed the leaders who ordered Arabs to leave, thus, acknowledging Israel's assertion. Statement of son and grandson of man who fled:

"Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]. I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [establishment of Israel in 1948], our district officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [near Ashkelon- Southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor."

Response from Ibrahim Sarsur, Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel:

"The one who gave the order forbidding them to stay there bears guilt for this, in this life and the Afterlife throughout history until Resurrection Day."
[PA TV April 30, 1999].

3. Article by senior PA journalist

Fuad Abu Higla, then a regular columnist in the official PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadida, wrote an article before an Arab Summit, which criticized the Arab leaders for a series of failures. One of the failures he cited, in the name of a prisoner, was that an earlier generation of Arab leaders "forced" them to leave Israel in 1948, again placing the blame for the flight on the Arab leaders.

"I have received a letter from a prisoner in Acre prison, to the Arab summit:

To the [Arab and Muslim] Kings and Presidents, Poverty is killing us, the symptoms are exhausting us and the souls are leaving our body, yet you are still searching for the way to provide aid, like one who is looking for a needle in a haystack or like the armies of your predecessors in the year of 1948, who forced us to leave [Israel], on the pretext of clearing the battlefields of civilians... So what will your summit do now?"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah, March 19, 2001]


It is clear from these statements that there is general acknowledgement among Palestinians that Arab leaders bear responsibility for the mass flight of Arabs from Israel in 1948, and were the cause of the "refugee" problem. Furthermore, the fact that this information has been validated by public figures and the media in the Palestinian Authority confirms that this responsibility is well-known - even though, for propaganda purposes, its leaders continue to blame Israel publicly for "the expulsion."

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. Contact PMW by email at pmw@pmw.org.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, May 30, 2006.

Despite renewed assurances given to Washington that it is no longer enforcing a trade boycott against the Jewish state, Saudi Arabia continues to prohibit Israeli-made goods from entering its territory, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

And while a senior US trade official sought to assure Congress last week that the embargo had in fact been removed, the Post found ample evidence to indicate that it remains in place.

"If a product is made in Israel, then it is a problem. It is not allowed here," Muhammad al-Matrafi, a spokesman for the Director's Office of the King Khalid Airport in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, said by phone on Monday.

"That is the law here in Saudi Arabia, and we do not allow those kinds of things into the kingdom," he said, adding, "If there is any mention of Israel on the container or on the product, then it can not enter Saudi Arabia."

A Saudi customs official at the Persian Gulf port of Ras Tanurah was equally adamant that no Israeli-made goods would be permitted to enter the country.

"There is still a ban on Israeli products, and anything declared as coming from Israel will not be allowed," said the customs official, who gave his name only as Capt. Hosni. "Some people may try to say that a product was made elsewhere, but if there is anything which shows it was made in Israel, then it is a problem," he said.

Another Saudi customs official at the Al Durah land crossing on the Saudi-Jordanian border reaffirmed that the ban on Israeli-made goods remains in place. Asked by phone if products made in Israel could be brought into the desert kingdom, he angrily replied, "No, no, no. Absolutely not," before hanging up.

The Saudi position appears to contradict assurances given last week by US Deputy Trade Representative Susan Schwab. In written responses to questions raised by members of the Senate Finance Committee, Schwab said that Saudi Arabia had told Washington that it was abiding by its pledge to end the boycott of the Jewish state.

In November 2005, the Saudis promised the Bush administration that they would remove restrictions on trade with Israel, after Washington conditioned Riyadh's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) on such a move.

But, as the Post first reported on March 7, the Saudis went ahead and played host to a major international conference aimed at intensifying the anti-Israel boycott, raising concerns in Congress about Riyadh's compliance with its commitments.

In addition, an official Saudi delegation took part in a meeting of the Arab League's boycott office in Damascus earlier this month.

"We have raised this issue directly with senior Saudi officials on several occasions, both in Riyadh and in Washington," Schwab told the Senators last week. "In all cases, we have received assurances that Saudi Arabia fully understands and remains committed to its WTO obligations, including the WTO obligation to treat all WTO members according to WTO rules."

The WTO bars members from engaging in discriminatory trade practices, such as embargoes or boycotts.

Nonetheless, the Post has also found that a report authored by a former US diplomat and issued recently by one of the largest banks in Saudi Arabia reaffirms that the country's boycott of Israel remains in place, despite Riyadh's accession to the WTO.

The 44-page document, "Saudi Arabia and the WTO," was prepared by Brad Bourland, chief economist at the Saudi Samba Financial Group.

Bourland previously worked for the US State Department for 18 years, including as first secretary of the American Embassy in Riyadh, where he was responsible for analyzing the Saudi economy on behalf of the US government.

In a question-and-answer section Bourland's report notes that, "Saudi Arabia's trade stance toward Israel does not change due to WTO accession... The primary Arab League boycott of Israel remains in place."

Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. This article is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1148482069432&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 30, 2006.


A new trend in the West is to demand that one's adversaries be investigated and punished for mere opinion, and be tried for crazy conspiracies and impossible-to-commit crimes. US government officials constantly leak and try to railroad opponents by falsely accusing them of leaking. A Pentagon anti-terrorism expert, Michael Rubin, was accused of making a leak from a country he was not in at the time.

Mr. Rubin lectured in Iceland, where local activists, some even calling themselves democrats, tried to block his events and called him a war criminal for having served in the US military and advocating the liberation of Iraq. His other crime is being a Jew.

"On April 15, 2002, Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden endorsed a U.N. Human Rights Commission resolution legitimizing suicide bombing as a legitimate form of resistance. Europe calls its lock-step approach multilateralism, but it is group-think. Human-rights groups have condemned Israel's security fence, while ignoring previous construction of anti-terrorism barriers on disputed land not only by India, Saudi Arabia, and Morocco, but also by the United Nations itself." The resolution shows the good sense of Bush administration policy against the Intl. Criminal Court, which would subject Americans to sanctions by criminal judges. Unfortunately, Sec. Rice indicated that the US is veering towards accepting that Court (Middle East Forum, 5/12). The UNO makes more trouble than it is worth. Imagine, endorsing terrorism, totally criminal!


Syria has compelled some minority-owned businesses to contribute to foreign terrorist organizations (IMRA, 5/13). One does not want to be arrested by the police of Syria!


"Jordan: About 2,500 Immigrants to Arrive in Israel This Summer"

That was the headline of an IMRA article. I misread it as indicating that Israel was accepting 2,500 immigrants from Jordan. I was dismayed at this further evidence of Israeli stupidity about the Arab enemy. Actually, the Jordan news agency was reporting immigration of Jews into Israel.


Another ship was spotted sailing from Gaza to Egypt and then back through prohibited areas. The Israeli Navy halted it. Israeli sailors boarded the ship before the Arabs could throw all the bags of explosives overboard, to destroy the evidence. This is the second known attempt at maritime smuggling, this month (IMRA, 5/15).

I won't report every such incident, but wanted to show that the effort to smuggle arms continues. The proposal to let the P.A. have a port would lead to more terrorism.


The government of Russia intends to subsidize the P.A.. The euphemism for supporting the P.A.'s bigoted jihad is "humanitarian." It is the only evidence I have seen of Russia being humanitarian. What a strange way to manifest it, by bolstering a jihad society! The Soviet Union did the same thing, using the euphemism, "anti-imperialist." Pres. Putin, who was a dedicated Communist functionary then, and claims to have transformed himself, although he expresses nostalgia for the good old days (of mass-murder), learned to express his imperialist drive in a more acceptable, positive term.

The frightening thing about this new drive against the Jewish people, as the memory of the old drive fades, is the spectacle of the supposedly more reformed and decent Western world jumping on the bandwagon. Europe is hardly Christian, and many Christian sects in the US don't level charges of "Christ-killer." But they nevertheless put the Jews in jeopardy in the name of human rights. Their indignation is reserved in behalf of Arabs hurt by Jewish self-defense, and not against Arabs acting out their bigotry in violence against Jews' human rights. Many Islamists deny that Jews have human rights or are human. The West ignores that.

Sometimes people suggest that someone is not all bad, for being sincere. No credit is deserved for evil programs just because some of their followers are sincere or idealistic. Evil is evil.


The "not in my neighborhood" syndrome has reached a new low in Europe's lowlands. A naturalized member of the Dutch Parliament, an ex-Muslim who reveals Islam's program for conquest, had to have guards at her apartment house. Her neighbors won a lawsuit demanding her eviction. They complained that her presence risked their lives. Muslims trying to murder her might injure them. Then evict the Muslims! They are making the whole country unsafe. In what house might she live?

The government found she lied on her immigration application, so it is deporting her. She had changed her name to avoid her husband tracking her down to capture her. Muslim men do that. It's another mark against their religion, not against her. She is taking refuge in the US.

The Netherlands is a country from which loyal citizens must evacuate under threat from disloyal ones, because it thinks tolerance means condoning the disloyal ones, who are intolerant and violent. Worse, political correctness is combined with selfishness. Each person looks out for himself. There should be national solidarity against the alien threat of Islam. The Dutch should expel the Muslims, and live in freedom and security. They have political correctness but neither security nor freedom of speech. Let them jettison political correctness, which couldn't be more ethically incorrect!

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 30, 2006.

The Int'l Solidarity Movement, an organization working in tandem with terrorist groups in Palestinian Authority areas, has begun its summer recruiting activities. Some call it a dangerous cult.

The organization's goal, writes long-time anti-ISM fighter Lee Kaplan, is "to interfere with anti-terror operations of the Israeli army [and to] act as human shields for terrorist groups opposed to the existence of Israel." Citing the example of the anti-Israel rallies every Friday in the village of Bil'in, he says ISM activists incite the local Arab villagers to riot and attack Israeli soldiers guarding the security fence, and interfere at IDF roadblocks set up to keep out suicide bombers and armed terrorists.

Investigative journalist David Bedein of the Israel Resource News Agency told Arutz-7, "The Israeli government classifies the ISM as a terrorist organization. This has been known ever since it was found that the two terrorists who committed the Mike's Place terrorist attack entered Israel as ISM activists."

Three Israelis were murdered in that Tel Aviv attack in April 2003. Several weeks afterwards, it was learned that the terrorists had gained entry into Israel as British "peace activists." They spent the next two weeks before the attack taking part in anti-IDF demonstrations, as well as visiting Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Hevron, Ramallah, Shechem, and Gaza. They even had themselves photographed by the Western Wall, complete with kippot on their heads, while in fact they were observing and recording the security arrangements at the holy site.

While traveling the country, the pair made use of their ISM contacts, some of which had been made in Gaza, with Italian journalists and with an Arab from the village of Na'ama.

The Prime Minister's Office released a statement at the time condemning the ISM for playing an active role in "illegal and violent actions against IDF soldiers...." and for conducting activities "under the auspices of Palestinian terrorist organizations."

Undercover Agent

Kaplan, who has attended many ISM meetings in the United States, writes that the organization's volunteers are told to work "in solidarity" with Arabs who throw Molotov cocktails or rocks at soldiers. The goal is two-fold, he writes: "To try and create an international incident by having ISM activists from abroad be arrested by Israeli Authorities to undermine Israeli sovereignty, and to train US and other foreign anarchists for their perceived 'revolution' against the capitalist West and, most notably, eventually against the United States itself."

Kaplan says he knows of an ISM cell in Massachusetts, named Boston2Palestine, whose members are apparently "planning on going to the Middle East for a summer of fun interfering with the Israel Defense Forces and aiding the new Hamas government in the Palestinian Authority." He has forwarded their photos to the Israel security services. In Georgetown several months ago, would-be ISM volunteers changed their minds about joining when they heard that their identities would be forwarded to the Israeli border authorities.

Robert Malovany, the father of one ISM activist has written to Kaplan as follows:

"I thought I would give you an update on our situation with our son Brian. As you might have expected, our relationship has gone from bad to worse. We had hoped that we would have some warning [before he went] back to the West Bank with the ISM. It didn't work out that way... He took off for Israel and stayed there for 4 or 5 months doing the kind of mischief the ISM is famous for... Interestingly, we stayed in contact with his girlfriend [who] gradually realized that he had become absorbed in a cult (ISM)... The ISM cult really has a hold on him...

"While in Israel, he pulled another typical ISM maneuver. He visited a cousin of ours on her Kibbutz. He stayed with her and her family for a few days, took advantage of her hospitality, and then went back to his friends on the West Bank. Clearly he used his family relationship to extend his visa in Israel. So there he was being all harming and friendly with our cousin and using her hospitality in order to extend his stay in Israel while working with an organization which is committed to the annihilation of her country. Nice!...

"It appears less and less likely that we will ever again have a civil relationship with our son. He really needs help. Deprogramming might not even be enough. He has cut himself off from anyone who ever really cared about him, his family, his girlfriend, and he has made his obsession with ISM politics the centerpiece of his life. He has no real job or any prospects. My guess is that as soon has he can, he will go back to the West Bank. All that he needs is someone to bankroll him, and people are continuing to give these useful idiots money. Be that as it may, he is putting his life in danger. He may not realize it, but to his Palestinian handlers, he is worth more dead than alive. He is valuable to the ISM in that with his Jewish background he can pretend to be Jewish so they can pretend not to be anti-Semites. But over there, a nice dead white American martyr would be great Public Relations..."

The local director of the Solidarity Movement, George Rishmawi, explained to the San Francisco Chronicle that the recruitment of American student volunteers is useful to the Palestinian Movement because "if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice."

For more information, go to http://www.stoptheism.com/

Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, May 30, 2006.

In light of all the current unilateral concessions the Jew of the Nations continues to make to merely gain acceptance for its survival from a largely hostile world, there is some important advice and wisdom to be heeded originating in the Muslim world itself.

Zionism has come to mean different things to people over the millennia. The one thing that all the various interpretations have had in common, however, involved an eradication of the victimization and statelessness the Jew had witnessed since he took on the Roman conqueror of much of the world for his freedom and lost. Massacres, forced conversions, ghettoization, demonization, dehumanization, inquisitions, and such all carefully paved the road to Auschwitz. The Jew was the alleged deicide people in the Christian West and kilab yahud--"Jew dog"--killers of Prophets in the Muslim East.

Zionism meshed together all of the Jews' subsequent diverse fears, hopes, and dreams for a better tomorrow. And the key to its future had everything to do with transforming the powerless state of the Jews as a people. Enter 'Abd-ar-Rahman Abu Zayd ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun.

Born in the early 14th century C.E., Ibn Khaldun was one of the most important philosophers, jurists, and scholars the Islamic--or any--civilization would ever produce.

Graduate students in Middle Eastern Affairs usually come to know Ibn Khaldun through his work, The Muqaddimah. It is actually the introduction to and Book I of the Kitab al-'Ibar, his History of the World. Besides simply giving an account of events, he offers a rational explanation of the "hows" and "whys" they occurred. Using frequent historical illustrations to make his points, it is here that this great Muslim scholar has some very important things to say about both Jews and Israel.

Indeed, Israel's current leaders should pay careful attention to the lessons.

Before The Muqaddimah was introduced into this discussion, I had mentioned the tragic state of the Jewish experience and the negative consequences which had derived from this. Ibn Khaldun spoke to this matter as well. Let's listen:

"Students, slaves, and servants brought up with injustice and tyrannical force are overcome by it ... it makes them feel oppressed induces them to lie, be insincere... their outward behavior differs from what they are thinking. Thus they are taught deceit and trickery... they become dependent on others... their souls become too indolent to acquire ... good character qualities. Thus they fall short of their potentialities and do not reach the limit of their humanity. That is what happened to every nation which fell under the yoke of tyranny and learned the meaning of injustice.

One may check this out by observing any person who is not in control of his own affairs and has no authority on his side to guarantee safety. One may look at the Jews (as an example)... The reason is what we have said."

However one chooses to respond to his assessment, Zionism's non-religious raison d'etre would have been obvious to Ibn Khaldun, one of the world's most important thinkers of all times. He devoted much effort to the evolution and development of the Jewish nation, its early struggles with its adversaries, and its later fight for freedom with the mighty Roman Empire and its consequences. He then followed this with an analysis of the Jews' condition of powerlessness throughout subsequent generations.

Ibn Khaldun would have well understood the rebirth of Israel and the 'asabiyah -- the essential group consciousness emphasized throughout his writings--which made it possible... even if it was a consciousness born not only out of a "noble house" but also from the desperation of the Jews' perpetual victim, scapegoat, and whipping post status.

While he commented that the Jews, who had one of the most "noble houses" in the world, had subsequently lost their 'asabiyah and for centuries suffered constant humiliations as a result, he would have applauded and understood their desire to end this unfortunate turn of events.

The Muqaddimah emphasizes that the Jews were forced to wander in the desert for forty years due to their "meekness." Ibn Khaldun stressed that this was necessary so that a new generation would arise with a new, more powerful 'asabiyah. Prime Minister Olmert and his supporters should pay close attention to this...Jews can't afford another of such wanderings.

At a time when Arabs are demanding their 22nd state (most having been created by the conquest of non-Arab peoples and their lands), this great Muslim scholar would have approved and viewed the resurrection of Israel as an answer to the unique plight of stateless Jews... the end of an even more tragic and extensive wandering and period of meekness and powerlessness in the desert.

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. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php

To Go To Top

Posted by Robert Samet, May 29, 2006.

The Washington Post has continued its steady drumbeat of slanted and agenda-driven reporting and editorializing on matters pertaining to Israel. Many of you have been following our alerts on the Eye On The Post web site at http://www.eyeonthepost.org. For those of you who may have missed them, we are setting forth below the headlines of our alerts for the months of April and May, 2006, along with a clickable link to enable you to read the full alert.

Whether or not you live in the Washington, DC area or even subscribe to the Washington Post, you are vitally important to us. Part of our success depends on widespread circulation of our message. The Post is protective of its reputation as one of the leading newspapers in the US, and it will respond if shown that its image worldwide is suffering because a few editors or journalists are determined to inject their own political opinions and biases into news reports. You can help us simply by reading our alerts, being aware of the Post's anti-Israel agenda and then forwarding this email alert to as many people as you know who care about the damage being done to Israel's image. Our alerts are already reaching many thousands of people around the world. With your help we can expand our readership exponentially.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

The Washington Post Fails To Report On The Constant Stream Of Vicious Anti-Semitism Preached And Taught Throughout The Arab World

Friday, May 19, 2006

Carping At Israel Is Habit Forming - Post Prepares for Olmert Visit By Donating Op-Ed Space to Critics of Israel's Planned Unilateral West Bank Withdrawal

Thursday, May 18, 2006

The Washington Post Doesn't Just Report News, It Makes It - Post Campaigns To Reverse International Community's Suspension Of Direct Aid To Hamas

Monday, May 15, 2006

Post Op-Ed Piece Advocates Appeasement Of Hamas

Friday, May 12, 2006

Post Reporter Injects Own Opinion By Asserting, Without Adequate Support, That Withholding of International Aid is Causing Palestinians to Increase Their Support for Hamas

Tuesday, May 9, 2006

On Eve of Quartet Meeting, Post Publishes Slanted Article Favoring Resumption of Funding of Hamas-Led Palestinian Authority - Conceals Hamas's Violent Past and Goal To Destroy Israel

Monday, May 8, 2006

Post Uses Terminology Portraying Terrorist Groups and Their Acts As Those of Legitimate Armies During Times of War - Continues to Airbrush Hamas by Omitting Any Reference to the Thousands of Israelis Murdered and Goal to Destroy Israel

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Post Columnist David Ignatius Sees Iran, Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hizbollah as Fighting A War Against The West For Dignity and Respect

Saturday, April 1, 2006

Washington Post Fails to Report Terrorist Launch of Katyusha Rocket Into Israel

Robert G. Samet is Chairman EyeOnThePost, Inc. Contact "Eye on the Post" at info@eyeonthepost.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Sarah Yoheved Rigler, May 29, 2006.

In Honor of my mother
Muriel (Miriam bat Sarah)
and in loving memory of my father
Herbert (chaim ben Josef) Schnider

What would the world look like if the Torah had never been given? Join me, if you will, for a tour of New York City in a hypothetical world where the revelation at Sinai never took place.

We drive across the Brooklyn Bridge, speed down the FDR Drive, and park our car in a massive concrete-and-steel garage. We walk through the streets of downtown Manhattan and crane our necks to gaze at the glittering tops of the skyscrapers. Knowing that the pagan civilizations of antiquity excelled in technological accomplishments, we're not surprised that technology forges ahead in a world devoid of Torah.

Next we meander through Lincoln Center. We hear the music of a concert in progress, pass a theater where a contemporary drama is being enacted, and see well-dressed people lined up to buy tickets for the ballet. Art does not need Torah to flourish.

From there we head to Wall Street. We peek into the Stock Exchange. Business and commerce are thriving. No difference here.

Our tour then takes us to residential neighborhoods crammed with high-rise apartment buildings. Here for the first time we notice something missing. There are no schools.

What happened to PS 132 and Woodrow Wilson High School and City College? Uptown, we are told, there is one lively academy for the wealthy and well-born, but education for the masses? Our guide snickers. "How ludicrous!"

As Rabbi Ken Spiro points out in his superb book, WorldPerfect education for all was an implausible notion in the pagan world (as in polytheistic societies today), where the literacy rate was generally 1/10 of 1%. Even ancient Rome, which needed a literate ruling class to administer its far-flung empire, boasted a literary rate of only 10-15%. Not only did Greece and Rome not deem it beneficial to educate the masses, but they viewed education as a potential danger to the stability of society.

The Torah innovated the idea of education for all. It specifically commanded parents to educate their children. [Deut. 6:7] In fact, a code of law as intricate as the Torah and as obligatory on all members of the society, inherently demanded study. If a Jew didn't know what all the commandments entailed, how could he fulfill them? Thus mass education was a Torah-mandated value throughout Jewish history, causing the medieval monk Peter Abelhard to write: "A Jew, however poor, even if he had ten sons, would put them all to letters, not for gain as the Christians do, but for understanding of God's law. And not only his sons, but his daughters."

As we continue our tour of New York City, we notice that we have not heard a single ambulance siren. When we ask, "Where are the hospitals?" we are met with a blank stare. "You must know what we mean," we persist, "the place where the sick are cared for and lives are saved."

A glint of understanding: "Oh, yes. We have a place which provides medical care... for those who can afford it, of course."

"And for the others?" we ask, appalled. "You can't just let them die."

"Why not?" is the puzzled retort.

No society before Torah or without Torah attributed intrinsic value to human life. It follows that for the government or society to spend its resources to heal or preserve life -- and to feel such urgency to save life that they would outfit ambulances -- would be considered a nonsensical enterprise. The right to life, which the American Declaration of Independence considered "self-evident," was not evident to any society in the world before or after Sinai, except where the Torah's influence penetrated.

On the contrary, infanticide of undesirable babies (such as girls and those with even minor disabilities) was universally practiced, and endorsed by such "enlightened" thinkers as Aristotle. Killing for entertainment was the most popular amusement in ancient Rome, where 50,000 people would crowd into the Coliseum to watch convicted criminals (for capital crimes such as professing Christianity), slaves, and POWs fed to the lions and gladiators fight to the death. In between these spectacular killings, lest the crowd get bored, routine executions by burning, beheading, and skinning people alive were offered for amusement during intermission.

Into a world where killing for convenience or sport was the universal norm, the Torah introduced the concept of the sacredness of life. "Do not murder," the sixth of the Ten Commandments revealed at Sinai, was not simply ethical pragmatism as it was in other ancient law codes, whose goal was to protect not the individual, but rather the stability of society. The Torah asserted that all human beings -- including infants, slaves, and convicted criminals -- were holy because they were created in the image of God. As the Talmud proclaimed: "He who saves one life is as if he had saved the whole world." The value of the individual -- and therefore his or her life -- is a Torah innovation.

In India in 1981, I knew a couple whose 22-year-old son had been injured in a traffic accident while riding his motor scooter through the streets of Calcutta. The young man lay on the crowded thoroughfare for seven hours, until he bled to death. This is a society where Torah has not penetrated.

Our tour of Manhattan-sans-Torah takes us to a small but stately building. We're informed that this is the courthouse for the entire city. "How can such a small courthouse serve millions of people?" we ask, perplexed.

"Millions of people?" is the astonished reply. "Only a few thousand people -- the elite -- have the right to bring lawsuits."

When the Torah laid down the principle of equal justice before the law, the rest of the world must have laughed. "You shall not commit a perversion of justice; you shall not favor the poor and you shall not honor the mighty" [Lev. 19:15] would have been regarded as outlandish had not God commanded it. According to the Torah, even a king is not above the law and even a slave is not below it. Jewish courts do -- and always have -- heard cases initiated by wronged workers, women, and foreigners. By contrast, ancient Athens, the so-called "cradle of democracy," extended full legal rights to only a few thousand men who owned land, leaving its other hundreds of thousands of residents (including women, artisans, peasants, and slaves) with no recourse to the law.

In the corridor of the courthouse, we notice something curious on the wall. It is a conglomeration of twelve lines of numbers. "This is a calendar," our guide explains. "It marks off the days, months, and years."

"What about the weeks?" we ask.

"What are weeks?" our guide inquires quizzically.

The division of time into seven-day units punctuated by the Sabbath, a day of rest, is an invention of the Torah. It corresponds to no natural cycle. Completely counter-productive of material goals, the Sabbath addresses the unique spiritual need for reconnection and re-creation. Even those denizens of the Western world for whom "the weekend" means not spiritual refreshment but shopping at the mall must appreciate the Torah's gift of one day off in seven.

Having lived in India, a society where every day resembles every other (except for the Sunday closing of schools and government offices, imposed by the British colonizers), I have seen how human beings are eroded by the tedium of a 365-day year of unremitting work. Now, in the small courthouse, I look around and notice the same exhausted expressions.

We head over to First Avenue and 46th Street only to discover that the familiar landmark of the United Nations headquarters is absent. Bewildered, we ask: "Isn't there some international body whose purpose, at least in principle, is to settle disputes between nations in a peaceful manner, without resort to war?"

Our guide is confused. "What would be the point of that? War is the noblest endeavor of man. War spawns heroes -- mighty warriors whose prowess vanquishes the enemy. And how else will a nation expand its borders and increase its power without the glorious enterprise of war?"

We despair of a meeting of minds, and begin to search for a curved wall where the antithetical vision of the Hebrew prophet Isaiah is emblazoned: "And they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, nations shall not lift up sword against nations. Neither shall they learn war anymore."

We search in vain. There is no inscription, no wall, not even the ideal of peace in this world in which the Torah was never given.

We walk north, past the fashionable uptown, into a low-income neighborhood, and here the most conspicuous difference grips us. The streets are lined with unfortunates -- blind people, crippled people, starving children. They reach out their hands and plead with us for help. It reminds me of the cities of India. "Why are these people on the street?" we demand. "Where are the orphanages? The social service agencies? The institutions for the blind and the deaf? The soup kitchens? The rehabilitation centers for the handicapped?"

"What are you suggesting?" comes the outraged response. "There's nothing like that here, and why should there be? We didn't hurt these people. It's not our fault if they're hungry or handicapped. We bear no responsibility to help them."

As Ken Spiro points out in WorldPerfect, into a world where numerous law codes prohibited murder, theft, and various anti-social behaviors, the Torah burst into the scene with a completely novel concept: the obligation to proactively do good. "Love your neighbor as yourself," [Lev. 19:18] and "Do not stand by your neighbor's blood," [Lev. 19:16] charged humankind with social responsibility, an idea that sans-Torah societies never dreamed of.

The Torah, which Thomas Huxley called, "the Magna Carta of the poor and of the oppressed," drove this point home with a multitude of specific commandments aimed at providing aid to the impoverished, the widow, the orphan, and the alien. The Torah obligated human beings to take responsibility for the welfare of people outside their own clans and beyond the precincts of their own homes, not because it was salubrious for the body politic, but because a just and loving God demanded compassion from all His children for all His children. This planet has never known a more original idea.


Our tour of New York City would not suffice to reveal the truly cataclysmic revolution caused by the revelation at Sinai. Without Torah not only our world but also our lives would be profoundly different.

If we lived in a world in which the Torah had never been given, we would be unrecognizable to ourselves. As author Thomas Cahill, a
Catholic, wrote in his book, The Gifts of the Jews:

Without the Jews, we would see the world through different eyes, hear with different ears, even feel with different feelings. And not only would our sensorium, the screen through which we receive the world, be different: we would think with a different mind, interpret all our experience differently, draw different conclusions from the things that befall us. And we would set a different course for our lives.

It is important to keep in mind that all the innovations with which Cahill credits the Jews (whom he labels, "the inventors of Western culture") have their source not in the Jews themselves, but in the Divine revelation to the Jews. While the Patriarch Abraham was indeed an original thinker and the one who discovered monotheism, no person or force in the world could have so radically changed the world. The lever which lifted the planet had to be positioned outside it. Such drastic transformation could have been initiated only through Divine revelation.

What was the paradigm shift that revolutionized human thinking and striving? Cahill points out that all ancient cultures viewed time as cyclical. No event or person was unique. He writes:

The Jews were the first people to break out of this circle, to find a new way of thinking and experiencing, a new way of understanding and feeling the world, so much so that it may be said with some justice that theirs is the only new idea that human beings have ever had. But their worldview has become so much a part of us that at this point it might as well have been written into our cells as a genetic code.

Time is the warp upon which human beings weave their sense of reality. Where time is regarded as cyclical, reality is characterized by fate, the inexorable predictability of nature, the devaluation of the present moment, and the futility of human striving.

Circles have no purpose; they revolve round and round. The gods of the ancient pantheons, like the gods of India today, claim no purpose. Their actions are divine sport, lila in Hindu terminology, meaning "play." In such a worldview, the only worthy human goal is liberation -- to somehow escape the wheel of birth and death.

The Torah introduced a purposeful God, with a plan for human history. If humankind will obey the commandments -- the Divinely ordained blueprint -- then a utopian world will ensue. The future will be different -- and better -- than the past. Thus the Torah introduced linear time. In so doing, it catapulted humanity into a world of meaningful moral choices, where human beings could create their own destinies, forge their own futures.

The narratives of the Torah take place in linear -- not cyclical -- time. They recount the stories of people who were important not as archetypes (as in all other ancient epics), but as individuals, people who were important not because they wielded great power, but because they made significant choices.

Those inner choices impacted their descendents and created history. History not as a record of wars waged and won, but as a testimony of moral battles that gave life meaning and purpose. Abraham obeying God even at the cost of his precious son's life, Jacob wrestling with the angel of evil, Joseph resisting the temptations of Potipher's wife, Moses reluctantly accepting the mantle of leadership at the burning bush -- these are the momentous events which the Torah chooses to recount. In so doing, it imbues all of our lives, all down the ages, with meaning and possibility.


The upcoming holiday of Shavuot commemorates the world-shaking event of the Divine revelation at Sinai. It is a day to reaffirm our commitment to studying and implementing the Torah.

On that day 3316 years ago, the infinite God burst through the barrier of human finitude and in the presence of an entire nation revealed His Commandments.

Thomas Cahill's description of the setting is lyrical:

It is no accident, therefore, that the great revelations of God's own Name and of his Commandments occur in a mountainous desert, as far from civilization and its contents as possible, in a place as unlike the lush predictabilities and comforts of the Nile and the Euphrates as this earth of ours can offer. If God -- the Real God, the One God -- was to speak to human beings and if there was any possibility of their hearing him, it could happen only in a place stripped of all cultural reference points, where even nature... seemed absent. Only amid inhuman rock and dust could this fallible collection of human beings imagine becoming human in a new way.

The revelation at Sinai was the singular most momentous event in human history. When I consider what our lives would have been without it, I can only shudder.

Sara Yoheved Rigler is a graduate of Brandeis University. Her spiritual journey took her to India and through fifteen years of teaching Vedanta philosophy and meditation. Since 1985, she has been practicing Torah Judaism. A writer, she resides in the Old City of Jerusalem with her husband and children. Her articles have appeared in: Jewish Women Speak about Jewish Matters, Chicken Soup for the Jewish Soul, and Heaven on Earth.

Sara Rigler is one of the feature authors in Aish.com's latest book, "Israel: Life in the Shadow of Terror". This article is archived www.aish.com/shavuotthemes/shavuotthemesdefault/ The_Revolutionary_Revelation.asp

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, May 29, 2006.

Human Rights Watch shows a disturbing disparity in its treatment of Israel and China. This article appeared in National Review (http://article.nationalreview.com/ ?q=YzdkNDA3NTY4ZmMwMzFmNWYwYTBkMWU4MzFiMTMxNGM)

Human Rights Watch, published a powerful piece on China coinciding with President Hu's recent visit to the U.S. It was an eloquent defense of the need to press China to implement basic human rights, and it was evidence that HRW, when it is not influenced by personal political agendas, can be an effective advocate of human rights. Unfortunately, when it comes to Israel, this has not been the case.

HRW has been criticized in the past for Israel-bashing. This has been the source of intense disagreements between Roth and me. I went so far as to call for his replacement, accusing him of exploiting human-rights norms in promoting a radical anti-democracy agenda. In his article on China, however, I found myself agreeing with his every word. And the same has been true with respect to HRW's recent emphasis on Sudan, Syria, and Iran. So either it is I, along with other critics of HRW, who blindly oppose legitimate criticism of Israel (it might be dismissed as part of a neoconservative ideology), or it is Roth and HRW who apply different and unique criteria that single out Israel unfairly. The evidence shows that it is the latter.

As a detailed NGO Monitor study has shown, between 2001 and 2004, during the height of the terror attacks against Israel, HRW focused one-third of its entire Middle East effort on condemnations directed at Israel. This went far beyond legitimate criticism, and suggested an obsession. Far more pages, reports, press conferences, letters, films, and photography-exhibits sponsored by HRW were devoted to allegations against Israel than to the slaughter taking place in Sudan, or the Palestinian terror campaign. Roth and other HRW officials adopted the false characterization of an "all powerful and aggressive Israel" in contrast to "Palestinian victimization." In the process, human-rights norms were reduced to instruments used to promote personal ideologies and entirely subjective perceptions of power.

The most infuriating instance of HRW's bias came in 2004, when Roth went to the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem to promote "Razing Rafah," a one sided denunciation of Israeli policy. Its contents were based primarily on unsubstantiated reports of Palestinians, selected journalists, and so-called experts on tunneling. (The IDF actions were in response to the smuggling of weapons and explosives through tunnels under the border with Egypt.)

Apart from the tendentious reporting, the extensive use of loaded terms, such as "war crimes," "violation of international law," etc. -- used far more often in HRW reports on Israel than in reports on all other Middle East states -- fed anti-Israel divestment and boycott campaigns. HRW officials participated actively and directly in demonstrations to promote the Caterpillar boycott, and in pressing the U.N. resolutions referring Israel's security barrier to the misnamed International Court of Justice.

As a result, it is questionable whether HRW's reports on and activities concerning China and elsewhere can be considered credible. The answer, which is far from satisfactory, lies in the recognition that Israel is increasingly treated emotionally, making for an exceptional case in almost every sphere. In contrast, there is no such political or ideological framework that taints HRW's activities with respect to China. After the Cold War, Robert Bernstein, who founded Helsinki Watch (HRW's original name) in the 1970s, has focused much of his energies and attention on China. For him, and for many other HRW's founders, opposition to China's oppression of dissidents is a direct continuation of Helsinki Watch's original mission. Moreover, HRW's activities concerning China are overseen by serious professionals, such as Harvard Professor Merle Goldman. As a result, HRW's articles and reports on China are focused, credible, and do not reflect personal and agendas and emotions.

This is not the case for HRW's activities with respect to Israel. In addition to Roth, Reed Brody, who served as legal counsel, has shown a particular antipathy to the Jewish state. Brody headed HRW's delegation to the NGO forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, which adopted the strategy of labeling Israel as an "apartheid state." He was also among the leaders of the effort to bring Prime Minister Sharon to trial in Belgium. (Brody's candidacy for a position on the U.N. Commission on Human Rights was recently withdrawn.) HRW's Middle East group also includes Joe Stork, who had been a senior figure in the radical MERIP, Sarah Leah Whitson, whose anti-Israel agenda was reflected in her work with MADRE, and Lucy Mair, who had previously written for the Electronic Intifada. These are not professional appointments, and do not create confidence in the credibility of HRW's reports on Israel.

This bifurcation, or even schizophrenia, in HRW's approach to evaluating human rights is disturbing. The absence of credibility in one area inevitably spills over into the others, as HRW's board members increasingly recognize. In the past year, they have imposed a control mechanism on activities dealing with the Middle East, leading to a noticeable (if belated) emphasis on Darfur, as well as adding Syria, Libya, and Saudi Arabia to HRW's agenda. The hostility toward and distortions concerning Israel continue -- as seen in recent public letters with the standard condemnations -- but the volume has been reduced significantly.

Nevertheless, if HRW wants to be seen as credible, and to have the moral impact on China, Darfur, and elsewhere that its founders and main supporters seek, the emotional anti-Israel agenda that goes far beyond legitimate criticism must go. Beyond rehabilitating this important organization, these measures will help to restore the tattered reputation of human-rights worldwide.

Gerald Steinberg heads the Program on Conflict Management at Bar Ilan University and is the editor of NGO Monitor.

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 29, 2006.


Egyptians are rising up in. Only naked power keeps the government in position, for now. The US has again confused the arming of a foreign government for external war with keeping it stable against civil strife.

As people protest openly against corruption and oppression, their ostensibly democratic movement may pave the way for Islamist hegemony. The result would be more oppression and the use of that big army that US taxpayers provided. It would be a big victory for jihad.

I don't know whether US criticism of Egyptian corruption and oppression, unaccompanied by warning about Islamic oppression, helps or harms. We don't want to be identified with the outgoing regime, but we don't want to grease the skids for an incoming Islamist regime. There is no indication that the US is aware of the problem.

Likewise, there is no indication that, when the US denounced Russia for its retreat into totalitarianism, it stressed the issues it is likeliest to get results with. Did we just goad Pres. Putin to dig his heels in? Were we warning him or our own people of the Cold War's return? Did we try to convince Putin that Russia's interest lay in working with the US to stop Islamism, contain China, and gain prosperity without risking nuclear war by rogue states? How come he talks about the US being an enemy? How do we try to dissuade him? Tactfully or bullyingly? But I digress.

How did Egypt descend into semi-anarchy? For one thing, Pres. Bush set in motion a movement for democracy without defining "democracy." All the dissidents now claim to speak in its name, though some of them are far from democratic. For another, dictators often don't have good retirement plans. They usually try to retain power until they are too feeble to sustain it. They defer putting their successors into the limelight in time to show there is what appears to the people as a legitimate succession. Perhaps they amass wealth too long, far beyond what in the few years left to them, they can spend in eventual exile.


Hebron Jewish activist Noam Federman has been arrested on false charges dozens of times. Recently his wife, of slight build, held weekly, legal demonstrations outside his jail. One night, the police kicked her, threw her down, and beat her in front of her children and followers, whom the police kept at bay. She asked to go to the hospital for her injuries. The police instead interrogated her for three hours at the station, before letting her go. Her injuries kept her from demonstrating the next week, but she is not afraid. She has her husband's courage. Those are people to be proud of. The government is to be ashamed of. It has a reputation of being a democratic, but speech is not free, policemen's fists are. US police would have let her be treated first.


The Arabs have been firing rockets daily from Gaza. They have been trying to smuggle rockets into Judea-Samaria and to manufacture them. IDF raids have destroyed some of those rocket factories.

The IDF raids have been minimal, rather than sweeping. Several times the Army denied that rockets have been fired at Israeli cities from Judea-Samaria, but then admitted they were fired from there. The political leadership knows of these attacks, but does not comment about them.

If the leadership publicly admitted that rocket raids have begun from Judea-Samaria, and that if the Jewish population and Army were removed from Judea-Samaria, the Arabs would get thousands of rockets, which could reach all of Israeli cities, the withdrawal policy would come in for thoughtful criticism. Could official government policy be that what the people don't know, will hurt them? (IMRA, 5/11.)

Persisting in a policy that the leaders know would lead to thousands of casualties is more than stupidity but neurotic. It shows the grip upon supposedly sentient human beings of ideology, corruption, bias, and neurosis.


After a long period of daily strife among the armed groups in Gaza, Hamas and Fatah declared a truce. It lasted one day. Then Hamas people attempted to assassinate Fatah members. Fatah men shot some Hamas men in retaliation.

The EU got Israel to relinquish some funds into that snakes' den for "humanitarian" reasons (Arut-7, 5/11).


Since the 1920s, before there was modern Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, the Palestinian Arab leadership frequently has tried to rouse its masses to violence by claiming that "the Jews" were attacking al-Aqsa mosque or planning to destroy it or were at war with Islam. A Nazi ally, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem accused the British of plotting to destroy Islam (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/11).

Islam does not respect other religions' rights; Israel does. Britain and Israel practice appeasement of Islam. Muslim complaints about attacks and plots by Britain and Israel bear no truth. Non-Muslims should disregard Muslim complaints as mere propaganda. The complaints are no reliable than those of the Nazis and Communists. Totalitarians paint themselves as victims to mask their aggression and to provide a pretext for attack. Our government and journalists should become adept at exposing the false accusations.


Jordan has uncovered plots by Hamas, which smuggled arms into Jordan, to attack in Jordan. Jordan invited Hamas to discuss a resolution with it, but Hamas refused. The royal government issued a statement expressing puzzlement that despite its support for the Palestinian Arab cause, Hamas tries to attack it (IMRA, 5/11).

Doesn't Jordan get it? Islamists don't work against its enemies in an orderly, hierarchical way. It doesn't attack only those whom it considers its worst enemies. It attacks lukewarm friends. It seeks power wherever it can get it. As fellow Muslims sharing the same religious beliefs and code of ethics that permits dissembling and requires intolerance, Jordanian officials should understand that. Just as W. European appeasement of Islamists did not leave it safe from the Islamists, neither does Jordanian appeasement. The only safe way to be safe is to crush the Islamists and to keep them from organizing.


Israel may have its worst government ever. From the Prime Minister on down, all the officials seem to have been given their posts as inducements to support PM Olmert's abandonment scheme. Many of these officials are under threat of indictment for corruption. Few are competent to run any department. They have been acquiring riches and power, while neglecting water shortages and defense. They are training the Army to attack Jews and not the real enemy.

The abandonment scheme fits in with Bush policy. There may be a fake peace obtained by major Israeli concessions, so that Pres. Bush can pretend he is leaving a legacy of peace and to have solved the Arab-Israel conflict (Winston Mid East Analysis, 5/12).

If there were the alleged Zionist propaganda machine, it would denounce Olmert's scheme and undercut Bush's pretense by showing no fake peace would last.


An Arab reformer took the taped death threats by the three most notorious Islamist leaders as marks of desperation. He contends that they know they cannot win by argument, so they resort to threats. He thinks they are being ground down and that the reformers slowly are winning (IMRA, 5/12 from MEMRI).

Not convincing. Although those three are in hiding, Islamists are gaining ground in the P.A., Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel. They are strong in Lebanon, are fighting now in Somalia, and are making a comeback in Afghanistan. The other N. African countries just granted Islamists an amnesty, which indicates seeking their support. The government of Iraq is dominated by Islamists. The US and Israel practice a degree of appeasement.

Appeasement encourages people to join the Islamists. Our timidity emboldens them.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 29, 2006.

In his book The Future of Israel, historian Devin Sper writes eloquently about the Land of Israel. He cites ancient writers who confirmed that the Land of Israel had the most excellent and fertile soil, productive of every variety of fruit. Josephus is quoted:

The whole area is excellent for crops or cattle and rich in forests of every kind, so that by its adaptability it invites even those least inclined to work on the land... All their steams are remarkably sweet, and lush grass is so plentiful that the milk-yield of their cows is exceptionally heavy. The final proof of their outstanding productivity is the swarming population of [Judea and Samaria].

Linen from Beth Shean was considered the best in the Roman Empire. Israel was the only source in the world for balsam, the most valued fragrance in the ancient world, sold for its weight in gold. The Dead Sea produced a superior asphalt known as "Bitumin judaicum," valued for caulking ships and for medicinal purposes.

From the Mediterranean shores of Haifa and Tyre came the world's only source of the snail from which was produced the purple dye sought by all royalty in the western world, still the color of royalty today. And on these same shores were beaches -- seasonal delights -- and elsewhere hot springs for relaxation and natural mineral baths.

Crowning this glorious land was her capital Jerusalem. Jerusalem was deemed by foreign observers as among the most strongly fortified and most beautiful of cities.

Alas, all this beauty was destroyed by the Romans, and, over the centuries, the Land itself was laid waste by the Arabs.

But Sper reminds us: "In what other land do people, whose ancestors resided elsewhere for almost 2,000 years, on arriving for the first time, kneel down and kiss the ground? 'For every Jew, wherever he lives, possesses a portion of the Land of Israel.' What other people, when forbidden the opportunity, to live in its land, has over centuries, insisted on being buried there, consoled by the hope that their remains might yet touch its sacred soil."

This land is ours. Our law instructs us to mourn for the land as we would mourn for the dead. Rav Avraham Kook, the first Chief Rabbi of Palestine, teaches us: "The hope of Redemption is the force that sustains Judaism in the Diaspora [and] the Judaism of Eretz Israel is that very Redemption."

Nahmanides (the RAMBAN) instructs us: "In all generations we were enjoined to conquer the land; and I say, that the precept to which the Sages ascribe such importance, namely to dwell in the Land of Israel -- all of it is a positive precept. Consequently this is a positive precept incumbent on each generation, binding upon every one of us even in time of exile."

The Rabbis taught, "A man should ever strive to live in the Land of Israel, even in a city whose inhabitants are mostly heathens, and should avoid living outside the Land even in a city whose inhabitants are mostly Jews. For he who lives in the Land is like one who has a God, whereas he whom lives outside the Land is like one who has no God."

Sper reminds us that, "Jews, whose ancestors had resided in other lands for centuries, proved ready to pick up and leave at a moment's notice when promised even the faintest hope of return to the Land of Israel. In the 17th century, return to the Land of Israel was not only preached but also actualized by followers of Shabtai Zevi, the Gaon of Vilna, and the Baal Shem Tov: hundreds settled in Safed, Tiberias, and Jerusalem."

Most remarkable, the Jews of Yemen, who had resided in Yemen since Biblical times, upon hearing of the reestablishment of the Jewish state in Israel in 1948, simply started walking "home" en masse, across the Arabian Desert!

In every synagogue throughout the world the entire congregation faces the Land of Israel. This land belongs solely and exclusively to the Jewish People. This land is ours.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Gary S., May 29, 2006.

This was written by Susan Philips, who has been a delegate to the Church of Ireland Dublin and Glendalough synod and was for several years an independent member for Wicklow County Council.

Rite and Reason: It is disconcerting that God's plan for the Jewish people - their return to the land from which they were dispersed - is ignored by those who support the Palestinian cause, writes Susan Philips.

If any sense is to be made of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict it is imperative for writers to understand that politics and religion are inextricably intertwined. To even remotely suggest that the hatred and antagonism between the two is merely a matter of land, completely ignores the dictates of Muslim extremism where jihad (holy war) is not an option but a duty.

The very roots of this argument lie in a spiritual conflict between two opposing faiths and therefore can never be resolved solely through political initiatives or liberal ideological reflection.

The Church of Ireland is a broad-based church and therefore allows for diverse opinions in relation to biblical understanding. However, when John Couchman, writing in this column from his position as a delegate at the recent General Synod, discusses the Palestinian/Israel impasse and openly champions the Palestinian cause, it is disconcerting to find that in doing so he ignores the spiritual and Biblical exhortation to bless Israel.

He prefers to adopt an anti-Semitic stance in his open support of Hamas, a recognized terrorist group whose demands include "a single Palestinian state from the sea to the sea". Their recent elections may indeed have been under democratic rules, but does that confer legitimacy to an internationally-labelled illegitimate organization?

As Europe sped towards the Holocaust in the 1930s, similar misplaced liberal support helped keep the train for Hitler's final solution firmly on the tracks.

Central to the Israel/Palestinian dispute is that land which was for centuries the home of Jewish people, was conquered by Muslim armies in the 7th century and generally remained under their control until the Ottoman Empire was disbanded after the first World War.

It is important to understand that within fundamental Islam it is considered an abomination for land that was once Dar al-Islam (land controlled by Muslims) to become Dar al-Harb (land where the struggle for ownership continues).

This explains why Muslims are waging war along the edges of the Islamic world in countries such as Chechnya, Indonesia, Somalia, Kashmir, the Philippines, Sudan and Ethiopia and why those behind the Madrid bombings spoke of the return of the Spanish city of Seville to the "lost paradise" of Al Andalus. The Moors left Spain in 1492!

Meanwhile Israel has had to fight five wars in order to survive the barely 50 years of official statehood. It is of little wonder that although they do react to international pressure and recently, for example, withdrew from the Gaza, they also resort to fences, checkpoints and some pretty brutal retaliation in order to preserve their existence.

Actually, many know that the concept of some "land for peace" will never lead to a settlement because Muslims see it as their religious duty to cleanse all land previously under Muslim rule.

And even if the international community managed to herd Israel into a patch the size of a tennis court, the Palestinians will demand more.

But at least on this point Hamas are totally upfront with both their manifesto and rhetoric demanding the total destruction of Israel. Such aspirations are summed up by Imam Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi who was reported as stating in a Gaza City mosque recently: "We are convinced of the future victory of Allah; we believe that one of these days, we will enter Jerusalem as conquerors, enter Jaffa as conquerors, enter Haifa as conquerors, and all of Palestine as conquerors, as Allah has decreed." How on earth can anyone do business with that sort of opinion?

Jewish and Christian belief places the roots of their faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and understand from the Old Testament that God's plan for the Jewish people was always to include a physical return to the land from which most were dispersed by the Romans.

Christian replacement theologists like to see such God-given promises as spurious and confused, but the fact remains that against all odds the Jewish State was established by the United Nations in 1948, fulfilling biblical prophecy.

Many argue that as Christians we should support the existence of Israel as it faces the vast opposition of the Islamic world. As the Quartet (US, Russian Federation, EU and United Nations) discuss the holding back of funding to the Palestinian people, perhaps we should wonder why it is that we never hear about any serious alternative funding by their oil-rich Arab neighbours.

When John Couchman refers to the "superb" record accorded to Hamas in areas of social provision, some might wonder what he makes of their official policy of honouring/financing those who offer their sons and daughters to the fire of suicide.

The inference that Arab Christians are suffering due to Israeli aggression is to totally ignore the Muslim practice of dhimmini where Christians in Muslim jurisdictions are relegated to second class citizenship with rights to property and participation totally limited.

In recent times, Islam has been particularly harsh to the Christian population of the Middle East and Christianity leads a precarious existence in the region, with the Copts of Egypt fearful for their future or in Saudi Arabia where churches and the Bible are totally banned. Interestingly, the only country in the Middle East which has genuine freedom of religious practice is Israel.

Come on guys, let us here in the West wake up to the threats on our doorstep and not even consider lending credence to Hamas, a regime fully intent upon a 21st century Holocaust. Ireland has not always had a very good record in relation to its treatment of the Jews, and it behoves us as a nation to demand the right of "God's chosen people" to survive and thrive.

Contact Gary S. by email at ahavat@telkomsa.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Saperstein, May 29, 2006.

With the expulsion of our people from Gush Katif came the reality of almost total unemployment. The need for jobs became acute as government promises of fair monetary compensation remained just that, promises.

FRIENDS OF GUSH KATIF, under Lior Kalfa and Dror Vanunu, are behind many exciting projects providing employment for refugees.

JOB KATIF, founded by Rabbi Yosef Zvi Rimon, came to the rescue with an excellent program of finding employment in nearby cities.

Unfortunately, the vast majority have yet to find work.

OPERATION DIGNITY is taking another approach complementary to the efforts listed above by creating businesses that will employ Gush Katif refugees.

"The Orange Gallery" is moving ahead with plans to establish a Gush Katif gallery for artists and artisans in Nitzan, the largest relocation center. The plans include mobile shows throughout Israel as well as an on-line website for people abroad to view and buy directly from the gallery. Artwork will include paintings, sculpture, paper-cuts, glassworks, Judaica, mosaics, jewelry and original hat designs. A brochure and disc are now in preparation. The staff includes Artistic Director Miriam Greenblatt [0545-684158, motag1@biu.013.net.il] , Marketing Director Debbie Rosen [0547-775779, debbie_r@walla.com] , and Financial Director Einat Danino [0547-446741, asherd1@014.net.il].

The gallery appears to have excited not only the powers on high, but our artisans are delighted that their wonderful wares will be on sale.

On Thursday night, 22 June, we will be exhibiting and selling our artwork at the Gerard Behar Auditorium in Jerusalem. A music play in English for women only based on a Gush Katif motif, written and performed by the women of Beit Shemesh, will be presented.

On the evening of 27 June a musicale, for women only, dedicated to Gush Katif will be presented at the Emunah Center, 7 Ben Zion Street, Kiryat Moshe, Jerusalem. Once again the Orange Gallery will be exhibiting and selling our artwork.

A "Beauty Spa" will be established to cater to the needs of women from nearby Ashkelon and Ashdod. Over thirty Gush Katif women took "beauty culture" courses, only to find no jobs available. A planned day Spa will give each woman an area of her choice. The Spa will provide manicures, pedicures, hair design, facials and massage under one roof. "A Gift of Makeovers" will be the thrust of our advertising in the southern cities. We are in need of a building and the equipment necessary for this venture to come into fruition.

"Dr. Fixit" is our third employment venture. Many Gush Katif men worked in maintenance and are skilled craftsmen. Their skills will be used to provide much needed home repairs to city people. Providing honest labor by religious men would be a godsend to women living alone. This project will need an office, a toolshed, tools and a van to transport our men to their jobs.

The various funds you are supporting are working together to bring employment to our people, who were turned into refugees and need your help. And the best help is a job.

OPERATION DIGNITY, in the forefront of creating jobs, continues to aid families in need. Send contributions earmarked for OPERATION DIGNITY to

Central Fund for Israel
13 Hagoel Street
Efrat 90435


Central Fund for Israel
[attention: Arthur Marcus]
Marcus Brothers Textiles
980 6th Avenue

Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe lived in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel. She was a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council. Her recent book, "Eviction: A Gush Katif Viewpoint", with photos by Moti Sender can be ordered from www.pavilionpress.com. They now live in a trailor camp in Nitzan.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Peck, May 28, 2006.

Years ago, I remember speaking with a psychologist who told me that the opposite of love was not hate, but apathy. When a couple came into her office fighting, she knew that they had a chance. However, when one of them sat there, bored and uncaring, she knew the relationship was over.

That, folks, is how I am getting to feel about my constant defense of Israel. Oh, I still feel that unshakeable tie to and emotion about the Jewish State. I, even for the most part, consider myself an American-born Israeli. However, I am getting to that point of apathy in the relationship.

For more years than I care to count, I have written columns and given talks to groups and on my television show promoting Israel and trying to warn about the dangers that I hoped were obvious to everyone. I would write about how they just didn't "get it". However, I never considered the people of Israel being so stupid that they would vote people into government who are determined to destroy the country, either for their own greed or for personal political power. Yet, from what I see, it is fast approaching the point of no turning back and I just do not want to deal with it anymore.

Hell, I don't even have the energy to deal with my anger on a local level anymore. I write a syndicated column and also have a television show, Wow! It's Arlene Peck! My program has a pretty wide audience. For the most part, I have a celebrity interview show. However, every four or five shows, I try to do something for Israel. The next topic would have been "Victims of Arab Terrorism". Virtually every time I have called into the consulate office and offered my show as an outlet to show Israel's viewpoint, I've been told on a regular basis, "Sorry, the Consul or the Vice Consul or anyone from the media or any other office is 'too busy' to go on." In my less-than-humble opinion, they should have at least six fabulous speakers available who, at a moment's notice, could be ready, even raring, to go on camera and promote Israel.

So, why should I be surprised or even appalled that the people of Israel now have a prime minister who seems to be hell-bent on finishing the incompetent and incomplete job that other loser, Ehud Barak, started? I just cannot anymore support and promote the Olmert-led corrupt and stupid coalition now in power. I cannot justify a government that promotes national suicide, even if voted in by the people of Israel. They don't need the terrorists and their suicide bombers to destroy them. The conduct of the corrupt and incompetent officials they voted in will do it for them. All this, they believe, is done under the guise of compromise. However, you do not compromise with enemies that want to kill you. They need to be destroyed. Period.

And Israel needs to remember that she once had guts and did not consider herself impotent or act like a banana republic. This would be the time to conduct a mass protest attended by millions - millions! - protesting the Chamberlain appeasement now in progress. It is ironic that while I was reading about the trip of Olmert to beg for 10 billion dollars to cleanse the Jewish areas of Judea and Samaria, the anti-Israel Los Angeles Times had a headline that said: "Gaza Gets Police Force of Militants". Who gives George Bush and Olmert the right to give away a country? If Israel is really a democracy, don't the people of Israel have the right to debate and then vote on something as crucial to their existence as this?

Frankly, I am delighted that Palestinian Authority savages, because of the security fence in Israel and specific targeted killings of the Hamas leaders, cannot get into Israel with the ease they once did. Now they're 'forced' to kill each other. It's almost comical that the Times considers the terrorist group Fatah the "good guys" and writes, "Until now, the security forces have been dominated by the largely secular-minded Fatah."

It doesn't matter anyway, because everyone knows that Bush and Olmert are gleefully and stupidly planning to de-Judaize much of Israel, leaving the fate of the Jews to the 80,000 Palestinian "security forces" that Shimon Peres and others like him armed, resulting in the armed terrorist state of Gaza. I'm surprised, considering the mentality that I've seen these past few years in Israel, that they haven't offered the terrorists seats in the Knesset.

Perhaps I speak too soon.

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 David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006.

Two emails commenting on Oprah Winfrey and her strangely one-sided approach to helping victims of terrorism.

1. "Oprah Winfrey's world,"

Last month, Oprah's "O" asked readers to understand "The Heart of a Destroyer," Mohammed Atta -- the Al-Qaeda ringleader of the 9/11 hijackers who murdered 3,000 Americans.

Beneath a picture of young Mohammed and his smiling sister on the Egyptian beach, "O" exhorts you to read a book that "sets out to understand the hearts and minds of the men behind the photos" of the 9/11 hijackers, a group of "lonely, exiled young men."

The book, "O" tells us, "is a simultaneously passionate, compassionate, and dispassionate book that [doesn't] indict Islam."

But the fatherless and motherless children who lost their parents to Atta -- they go unmentioned.

To add insult to injury, the latest issue, "O"'s June 2005 edition, demands that we understand the pain and turmoil of Yusra Abdu, a teen-age Palestinian would-be homicide bomber, fianc√¬©e of Hani Akad, leader of Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist group. Akad's group, funded by Libya (one of "O" Mag's "Five Places to See in Your Lifetime"), murdered 27 children and injured 134 when they attacked a Jewish school in Ma'alot, Israel (and has carried out hundreds of attacks against Israeli civilians since then: DML)

"O" calls Akad "a charismatic and young rebel." (a new euphemism for terrorist? DML).

"O" describes Abdu and Akad as "a Shakespearean tragedy." Nowhere in that tragedy is there any awareness of the death and suffering of the innocent civilian victims of these "Shakespearean" players.

And it's not their fault that they're homicide bombers. Or Islam's fault. "O" quotes Saudi-funded Islam apologist John Esposito blaming not Islam, but the desperate "context" of their lives.

Nowhere is it mentioned that in reality most Palestinian homicide bombers, like the 9/11 hijackers, come from well-to-do middle class or even wealthy families. Also omitted conveniently is their oft-proclaimed hatred for Jews, America, and Christianity; and the Palestinian education into hatred and "martyrdom" that begins in kindergarten.

Incredibly, Oprah calls this psychobabble-ish, understanding-the-world's-Islamic-terrorists sob-story, "Rescuing the World's Girls, Part Five."

And to help right the wrongs of this "Shakespearean tragedy", Ophra urges readers to donate to Oprah's Angel Network, "which is awarding a grant to one or more programs that work to prevent Palestinian children from becoming suicide bombers." Or donate to UNICEF, "which runs summer camps and trauma programs for Palestinian children." [Nowhere it is mentioned, but actually, UNICEF helps UNRWA (both UN agencies) propagandize future Islamic terrorists from cradle to grave, maintain terrorist training bases in refugee camps, and provide bombs and ammunition to terrorists].

And through all of this caring about the impact of violence, nothing emerges about Israeli children's trauma resulting from the heinous deeds of these "Shakespearean" terrorists?

Oprah's agenda isn't new. Her unique understanding of Islamic terrorists is manifest in:

  • A post-9/11 "Islam 101" show -- a pandering presentation featuring Jordanian Queen Rania Al-Abdullah. Rania claimed that honor-killings of raped women doesn't really happen in her country. Actually, a 60-minutes TV show on honor killings, done by Barbara Walters c. 15 years ago, revealed that hundreds of honor killings occur annually in Jordan alone, and many more in the less westernized Arab and other Moslem countries.

  • A September 2004 Oprah show discussed the terrorist massacre of children in Beslan, Russia. Oprah banned the use of the word Islamic, saying the terrorists "came from the mountains." Oprah stated that the Beslan massacre was "a watershed because terrorists never before killed children." Odd that she has no recollection of the murdered Jewish kids in Ma'alot, thanks to Akad's DFLP, whose pain and turmoil she wants us to understand.

  • An episode on which a guest claimed Jews practice ritual sacrifices of babies. Oprah: "I want to make it clear that this is one Jewish person, so don't go around now, saying to people, you know, "Those Jewish people, they're worshipping ..." This is the first time I heard of any Jewish people sacrificing babies, but anyway -- so you witnessed the sacrifice?"

  • Ignoring the mass-murder, rape, torture, and slavery of Black Christians by Sudan's Arab Muslim government, despite repeatedly teasing a group of Colorado children (who bought some Black Christian slaves' freedom) that they'd be on her show. She told them the issue was "too complicated."

  • Refusing President Bush's invitation to serve our country by touring Afghani girls' schools on his behalf. The normally vocal Oprah had "The View's" Star Jones speak on her behalf, saying the Bush White House "used" her.

Keep the above in mind when someone solicits money from you to "Rescue the World's Girls" by donating to Oprah's Angels Network.

[Edited and shortened from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column052505.shtml by David ML]

2. Subject: Your work
To: info@freethechildren.com

Dear Sir

"Free The Children is the largest network of children helping children through education in the world, with more than one million youth involved in our innovative education and development programs in 45 countries. Founded by international child rights activist Craig Kielburger, Free The Children has an established track-record of success, with three nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize and partnerships with the United Nations and Oprah's Angel Network."

This all sounds very encouraging. Before I send you a donation, however I would like to know how "Free the Children" is helping Palestinian children's education and safeguarding their human rights:

I know that Palestinian children exhibit a range of psychological problems. Hamas, (and before it Yasser Arafat's PLO and Fatah) rarely takes steps to shield children from the consequences of their incursions into Israel. Rather they deliberately launch attacks on Israeli civilians from centres of civilian popluation in the West Bank and latterly in Gaza.

There is widely available television footage of children hurling stones, rocks and molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers whose standing orders are not to retaliate. Palestinian terrorists deliberately launch attacks on soldiers using these children as human shields. What are you doing to encourage the parents of these children to take more care to keep them safe?

The incidence of neglect and violent child abuse is high in the West Bank and elsewhere in Arab countries in the Middle East (in Iran little girls as young as nine years of age are married off to much older men). What are you doing to safeguard these children's rights?

Quite apart from all this, there is the deliberate encouragement of Palestinian children to aspire to an early and horrific death by suicide bombing, by means of comic books, school textbooks and children's television programmes. This, whatever the distorted rationale for it, is morally reprehensible and is an infringement of their human rights. This wish for death is inculcated into them almost from kindergarten age, thereby ensuring that there will be generation after generation of children who are reared to love killing and death:

www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/ index.php?imgIndex=0&autoShow=off

www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/ index.php?imgIndex=0&autoShow=off

www.internationalwallofprayer.org/ A-096-Child-Abuse-In-The-Palestinian-Authority.html



And this one in particular:


Once again, my question to you, and to Oprah Winfrey whose idea the Angel Network is, are you going to speak out against this and do something about it, or do you just want to look nice?

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Fern Sidman, May , 2006.

It has been recently reported by Arutz Sheva that Israel has decided to arm PA President Mahmoud Abbas' (Abu Mazen) Presidential Security Force in light of growing reports that he has been targeted for assassination by Islamic opponents. Violent clashes and shooting attacks between Hamas and Fatah-aligned security forces have sharply increased over recent weeks, prompting a Ramallah meeting on Thursday, seeking to reach a truce that would bring an end to the internal fighting and increasing death toll.

While Abbas is powerless to speak on behalf of the PA since losing the winter election to the now-ruling Hamas party. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has agreed to a recommendation from Defense Minister Amir Peretz, permitting the transfer of a limited number of weapons to Abbas' security personnel. The weapons are intended for the expressed purpose of keeping Abbas alive.

According to Israeli sources, the weapons will be closely monitored and only handed to those troops known to be loyal to Abbas. Opponents to the move have stated that the weapons will be turned against Israel and fired at residents of Sderot and western Negev communities.

Ironically, Olmert has signaled his intent to enter into negotiations with Abu Mazen in the immediate future, but openly commented that Abu Mazen cannot speak on behald of the PA since he is no longer in a position of power. PA Prime Minister Ismail Haniyah, affiliated with Hamas, has repeatedly stated that he and his colleagues will never recognize Israel's right to exist, and the existing western-nation economic boycott will not succeed in bringing his administration to its knees. Haniyah stated he will raise the badly needed funds among Arab nations, thereby substituting the missing donor nation funds previously forthcoming from the European Union and the USA.

And while Israel is making attempts to protect Abbas from an assassin's bullet, Abbas, the so called moderate and peacemaker is busy declaring that Arab terrorists are "heroes" of the Palestinian people. Palestinian Media Watch, an organization that monitors and reports on anti-Israel hatred in the PA media, reveals that Abbas twice this week referred to Arab terrorists servings "tens of life sentences" in Israeli jails as "our heroes." PMW's Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook report that the terrorists referred to are "arch-terrorists who have personally killed tens of Israelis and are sentenced to one life sentence for each murder."

Speaking on PA TV on May 23 about the jailed terrorists' recent "conciliation plan" between Fatah and Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas expressed his satisfaction with the initiative of those he called "our brothers, our jailed heroes... their initiative proves that these heroes, who are sentenced to tens of life sentences, fell too that the homeland is in danger."

The PMW concludes that "Abbas rejects terror for tactical reasons only, and not because it is immoral... Abbas has always been careful, in Arabic, not to condemn terror because it is evil or immoral. He has criticized suicide terror only because it hurts the PA cause, as he did after the December 2005 suicide attack that killed five in Netanya."

It is quite clear that Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is no friend of Israel. It is also clear that President Bush's attempts to persuade Olmert to enter into a diplomatic process with Abbas are clearly futile. Despite Bush's hopes that this move will help Abbas muster enough support to regain control and once again move into a decision making position is unrealistic at best and totally preposterous at worst.

Hamas is clearly in control and they voice the desires and aspirations of it's constituency. They do not want peace and will not accept a Palestinian state in pre-1967 borders.

And while the state of Israel rushes to protect it's enemies such as Abbas, it also attempts to expedite the process of evacuating tens of thousands of Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria in the futile attempt to reach an "unreachable" peace with Hamas. Abbas' influence in negligible despite his political rhetoric aimed at the Bush administration.

In the last few days we witnessed tens of thousands of Jews in the streets of Jerusalem and it's old city, in celebration of the 39th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. In 1967 we witnessed the power of the Almighty G-d of Israel when Israel defeated six Arab armies and the holy city of Jerusalem was once again in Jewish hands. It was General Mota Gur who declared, "the Temple Mount is in our hands." And yet, we took this great and awesome miracle and threw it away. The leaders of the State of Israel seek to protect the lives of those who would celebrate the eradication of a Jewish presence in Jerusalem. We protect the rights of those who would destroy our holy sites and defile the name of the G-d of Israel.

The leaders of the State of Israel are busying themselves with providing military aid to protect our enemies, while Jerusalem Police Chief Ilan Franco appeared in Supreme Court to defend his decision not to allow the Temple Loyalists to visit the Temple Mount. He said that the site is "extra sensitive," and that the Moslems would be likely to respond with violence to any perceived Jewish intention to visit the Mount en masse.

It is now the Arabs that can say that the Temple Mount is in their hands. Who is the conqueror and who is the conquered? Is the holy city of Jerusalem truly liberated and in Jewish hands. Is it truly the undivided capitol of the State of Israel, under sovereignty of a Jewish government?

Despite all the governmental pronouncements of the special and unique quality of Jerusalem for the Jewish people, it is the very same government that is paving a path towards the relinquishing of Jerusalem as it's capitol. And that is just the first move towards the relinquishing of the entire State of Israel into the hands of its enemies. The same enemies that it seeks to protect. If only the leaders of the State of Israel would make such attempts to preserve Jewish lives and Jewish land.

Woe to a people that has turned it's back on it's only savior. Hashem Yisborach, the Almighty G-d of Israel, who in His infinite kindness and compassion allowed us to reunify Jerusalem and preserve it as His holy city. It is only through Jewish pride and Jewish power that we can maintain our very existence in Jerusalem and the Land of Israel. In the next few days, we will (G-d willing) celebrate the Yom Tov of Shavuot. And we will beseech Hashem as we do on all the Shalosh Regalim (three festivals) with the words of the Ya'aleh V'Ya'avo prayer we can ask for "the remembrance of Jerusalem the city of Your Holiness, and the remembrance of Your entire people, the House of Israel, before you for deliverance, for goodness, for grace, for kindness and for compassion."

May it be the will of the G-d of Israel that he give us the wisdom and strength to protect ourselves and not our enemies.

Contact Fern Sidman at AriellaH@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006.

Below in (1.) is an email from a Chicago Professor of Modern Italian history. He compares modern UK and EU anti-Israel sentiment to 1938 Italy and its fascist collaboration with Nazi Germany in the isolating and demonizing of Jews.

His comparison is apt.

Many have pointed out the similarities between the pre-World War 2 Nazi Jew-hatred that permeated much of Europe, and the current rise of Jew-hatred and Israel-hatred which is spreading, thanks in large part to Islamofascist Arab leaders, throughout that same Europe and the UK.

Historian Will Durant condemned Europe (including the UK) for the near-success of Nazism and the even-nearer-success of the Holocaust. He called that great and incredibly tragic debacle the "failure of Civilization".

Durant minced his words. It was NOT a failure of "civilization".

It was a failure of Christian civilization in Europe (including the UK).

Now, 70 years and 2.5 generations later, it looks as though Christian civilization in Europe is heading toward the same failure, with the same victims, deja-vu all over again.

There is, however, one critical difference that today's UK and EU and USA hate-mongers fail to notice.

Islamic leaders along with rank-and-file Moslems before and during World War 2 were the camp-followers of the Nazi war machine. Moslem states in the Balkans, Syria, and Iraq declared their fealty to Germany and lined up behind Hitler's leadership. The Hajj Amin el-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and thus chief spiritual leader of all the Moslems in British Mandatory Palestine, tagged along after Hitler in Germany, urging Der Fuehrer to transplant his genocidal campaign against world Jewry into the fertile soil of Moslem Palestine, with pre-Israel Zionists as their target.

Today, the Moslem leadership under the guidance of the European Arab League (EAL) has taken the lead (*). This time, the Christian Jew-haters and Israel-haters of the EU and UK enthusiastically fall into line behind the EAL's anti-Israel machinations, and they gleefully cooperate with Arab anti-Jewish propaganda.

The boycott movement in the UK and the divestment movements (in universities, churches, and minor political parties) in the USA are manifestations of just this active and enthusiastic cooperation. Universities' acceptance of the ghastly anti-Semitic diatribe of Moslem anti-Israel events on campuses all over the USA, England and Canada, along with the routine and nonchalant acceptance of toxic anti-Jewish hate speech as protected manifestations of free speech... hese are examples of Western society's tacit but no less palpable cooperation.

But, blinded by their hatred of Jews and/or Israel, these Christian collaborators in the Arab genocidal campaign against Jewry world-wide (with its epicenter in Israel) fail to note that they are helping history to repeat itself in a manner that augers ill for Western Civilization and for Christianity world-wide.

The early Caliphs, leading primitive and ill-equipped armies much smaller than those of the Greeks, conquered the Eastern Byzantine Empire in part because they were sly enough to employ the age-old tactic of divide and conquer. With the help they received from renegade Christians who had a theological or financial axe to grind with Byzantine Christianity, the 7th century Arab Moslem armies of Arabia were able to dismantle Byzantine defenses in Israel, Syria, and Egypt....piece by piece. The Christian collaborators thought they were advancing their own ends against their Christian Byzantine brethren. Too late they discovered that their fate was the same as that of their Christian erstwhile enemies.....dhimmitude: crushing, humiliating, impoverishing, blood-sucking dhimmitude, under the religious apartheid and imperialist triumphalist supremacist rule of Islam.

The same strategy worked in the East as the Arab Moslem armies conquered Persia and destroyed the Sassanian empire and imposed first a "convert or die" and then a "dhimmitude or die" regime over the Zoroastrian world.

There was no need for this strategy as the forces of Jihad swept across north Africa, conquering and converting Copts and Berbers (**). But mighty Christian Visigoth Spain fell to its Arab invaders in 711 only because of the same successful Arab strategy of divide and conquer. Local princes of one Spanish Christian kingdom connived with the Arabs against an enemy neighboring Christian kingdom. And in the end, all but the very northernmost of the Christian kingdoms of Spain fell to the Arab invaders.....for almost 800 years.

The same strategy worked for a while in France, where the Arab armies crossed the Pyrenees and enlisted the cooperation of Lang-d'Oc French against the forces of Lang-d'Oiu Charles Martel. But, fortunately for Europe and the West, Charles Martel decisively defeated the Moslems at Poitiers (English historians say it was Tours) in 732. And his son, Pipin the Short, and his grandson, Charlemagne, continued the victorious campaign until the Moslems were bottled up in Spain. Had they failed, all of Europe would have fallen prey to Islamic Jihad.

Sicily fell to the Arab onslaught, and southern Italy, in the same way, with the help of Christians who thought they could advance their own particularistic designs by enlisting the aid of the Moslem Jihad leaders; only to discover too late that they and their Christian enemies were both, in the end, easy prey to the advance of imperialist Jihad.

Jihad continued for hundreds more years. In the 15th century Constantinople fell to the Ottoman militant purveyors of Islam; in part because of the alliance of Hungarian Christians with the Ottoman Turks. The Hungarians, after all, were very unhappy with the overlordship of the Greek Byzantine Christians. Western Christianity failed to come to the aid of their eastern co-religionists; because, after all, the Eastern Christian (Byzantine) Empire was at odds with the Western Christian (Roman) Empire over a variety of doctrinal differences that still engage the zealous interests of the Latin and Greek Orthodox churches today.

The Hungarians regretted their perfidy when they too fell to the Saracen scimitar, brutal slaughter, conversion at sword-point, and centuries of humiliation and degradation as dhimmi to their new Moslem overlords. And Western Christians soon rued the day that they abandoned their Greek Orthodox brethren in the East, as Ottoman Moslem Jihad continued to assail the gates of Europe and turn the eastern Mediterranean into a great Islamic lake for the next two hundred years. It took two hundred years of Turkish Moslem imperialist aggression before eastern Europe could unite to end the endless threat of Islamic Jihad. John Sobieski, king of Poland, decisively turned the tide against the Turks in 1673 and 1682, when he led a three-country army to victory against the Turks, at the very walls of Vienna itself. Had he failed, all of Europe could have fallen prey to Islamic Jihad.

But it took two hundred years more before Hungary, Romania, the Balkans, Crete and Greece would be able to free themselves of what Byron's Childe Harold called "the dead hand of the Turk" -- the dhimmitude fate of the non-believer under the religious supremacist imperialism of Islamic Jihad.

Today, after 1,300 years of almost continuous Moslem assault against Christianity at one end of Europe or the other, leaders in Christian and secular institutions in the EU, the UK, the UN, Russia, and the USA are still unwilling or unable to unite in order to face the old, but newly invigorated, threat of Islamic Jihad. Islamic Jihad is a war against global non-belief. Global non-belief is all of us: Christians and Jews and atheists and agnostics, and even Moslems who are not Moslem enough (***)

Under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, Ayman ez-Zawahiri, Abu-Mus'ab az-Zarqawi, Abu-Yusuf el-Qaradhawi, Khaled Mash'al, Hassan Massawi, and scores of other mostly Arab terrorist practitioners, the Moslem world is being led into an unrelenting religious and imperialist war against the West. And all of Western civilization is in its cross-hairs.

The boycotters, the divestors, the media who refrain from calling a terrorist a terrorist, the diplomats and parliamentarians and congresspersons who accept petro-dollar bribes, the academicians who rant against Israel and the USA as their institutions crave and receive multi-million petro-dollar grants, the anti-Semitic hate mongers who maintain an endless rabid diatribe against Israel and Jews while praising the Islamic purveyors of religious apartheid and hatred of all things non-Moslem, and the countless followers who mouth the vapid words and chant the toxic slogans and attack Jews all across Europe... they are all, knowingly or not, setting themselves up for the dhimmitude or death that has befallen every other Christian quisling to Islamic Jihad.

The fascist Nazis led the war against the Jews in the 1930's, and most of Europe followed. By 1939 the fascist Nazis began their war against the rest of the world. Within a year all of Europe was in flames, and over the next five years somewhere between 50 and 70 million died.

Today the fascist Arab world leads the war against the Jews (and Israel)... and most of Europe is following. How long will it take before Europe is again in flames, and how many millions will die before Christian Europe wakes up to the threat of its own extinction?


(*) The European Arab League, EAL, established in the 1970's with headquarters in several European cities, is a mechanism for the Arab League to have direct interaction with, and influence over, European leaders on behalf of the rapidly growing and increasingly influential Moslem communities in Europe and the UK. EAL Arab leaders are in close contact with the Prime Ministers and Parliamentary leaders of EU countries and the UK. The EAL has very heavily influenced, and to some degree even guided, the development of the EU's and UK's failed policies of dealing with the massive immigration of Moslems into Europe and the UK. It was directly involved in the instigation, and indirectly involved in the management, of the massive Moslem riots that afflicted many European capitols from September 2005 to February 2006.

(**) Many Copts, fervently believing Christians, chose death over Islam. Many others submitted to dhimmitude. All Berbers, pagan animists at the time, converted to Islam.

(***) See below articles (2) and (3) from recent JihadWatch email newsletters. The practitioners of terrorist Jihad tell us, in no uncertain terms, that they intend to conquer the West, destroy Christianity, and make Islam uber alles.

The first article below is about 1938 Italy and modern Europe. It was written by Wiley Feinstein, Professor of Italian at Loyola University, Chicago. The other two are from Jihad Watch. My comments are in square brackets and italics.

(1.) As a scholar who has worked in the area of Italian anti-Semitism, I find campaigns against Israeli scholars particularly appalling.

I have studied in depth the anti-Semitic campaigns in 1937-38 Italy and the zeal with which two or leading cultural figures of the 1930s Giovanni Bottai and Giovanni Papini attacked Jewish thought and Jewish scholars in particular and led the successful charge to have all Jewish professors expelled from Italian universities as per the Sept 5, 1938 edict.

In the 1930s in Italy as now in Europe, Zionism was hyper-demonized and Italian Jews were forced to repudiate Zionism in absolute terms. In the 1930s when the anti-Semitic campaigns were raging in Italy, a famous WWI area Italian Jewish general (Liuzzi) marveled at how all the newspapers in Italy could be so adamant in singling out Jews as alien elements in an Italian society in which there were many other ethnic and racial elements (Liuzzi gave the examples such as Greek and Albanian elements).

I along with many others ask the precise same question that Liuzzi asked in 1938 Italy:

why are British teachers so intent on the singling out of Israeli scholars for boycott?

Whose vision of peace and justice is being promoted by this boycott?

Is there no knowledge among British teachers that the work of scholars who blame Israel for all the problems of the Palestinians and of the Arab world has many serious detractors and that reasoned consideration of the controversial nature of anti-Israel "scholarship" would incline one to stay far, far away from reckless boycott campaigns?

Have none of you any sense of reason, proportion and also ... decency?

www.spme.net/cgi-bin/display_petitions.cgi? ID=2&Action=View&Rank=1&Mode=all

For more on the UK boycott, check out:
www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/ and
www.biu.ac.il/rector/academic_freedom/7.htm (Bar Ilan University)

(2.)"Jihadists coming home to roost"
May 27, 2006 JihadWatch

In my book Onward Muslim Soldiers I discuss the phenomenon of mujahedin traveling the world, going from jihad to jihad. From the looks of this report by Kathryn Haahr for The Jamestown Foundation, the next battleground is Europe. "Foreign fighters allegedly returning to Europe," from the International Relations and Security Network:

Recent pronouncements by a Spanish judge who has led high-level inquiries into al-Qaida in Spain, Baltazar Garzon, and the head of France's domestic security service, Pierre de Bousquet, imply that Iraqi foreign fighters are already returning to Europe to re-establish or establish new networks to support terrorist operations in Europe (AFP = Agence France Presse, 9 May). While Garzon's and Bousquet's official comments provide no concrete details about the number of European Islamists returning from Iraq nor their nationalities, it is apparent that there is terrorist activity. With Iraq being the new center of gravity for jihad, Europe has become the de facto center of gravity for recruitment, weapons and financial activities, all critical to ensuring the continuation of jihad in Iraq and, increasingly, in Europe.

The return of jihadists from Iraq and Afghanistan would transform European states from logistical platforms (support infrastructure) to "battle front stations" (operational structures). After their experiences in Iraq, jihadists are probably returning infused with the intention to engage in jihad in their respective European countries and to make Europe the new front in the international jihad. These jihadists will bring back ideological concepts and recruitment and fighting techniques that can assist their efforts in radicalizing and mobilizing segments of the Muslim populations in Spain, Italy and France. Of particular concern is training they may have received in fighting techniques (such as IED's and suicide bombings) and the use of chemicals for unconventional attacks. Several jihadi personalities, including Abu Musab al-Suri, have legitimized the use of chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological weapons as a tool in jihad.

(3.) "Terrorism: Europe A Target of Iranian Suicide Bombers,"
JihadWatch, 5.27.06
from AKI (AdnKronosInternational: Italian/English/Arabic web news)

Tehran, 26 May (AKI) - (Ahmad Rafat) - On Thursday afternoon in Tehran's cemetery of Behesht Zahra a group of 100 aspiring suicide bombers was sworn in at a ceremony also attended by a group of Hezbollah militants from Lebanon. The would-be terrorists are the new recruits of a movement which claims to have 50,000 members and is called Setad Pasdasht Shohadaye Nehzat Jahani Islam (Headquarters for the Commemoration of the Martyrs of the International Islamic Movement).

A day after the ceremony, Mohammad Ali Samadi, the organisation's spokesman, told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone conversation that "Each Israeli, soldier or civilian, must not feel safe wherever he or she is."

[How is it that this devout Muslim doesn't know that Islam forbids the killing of civilians, as we are tirelessly told in the West? - Jihad Watch editors ask]

Samadi said Israel is a target of the group along with the US and European Union countries where the group has allegedly recruited militants. "We have brothers who are ready to sacrifice their lives for the triumph of Islam in Great Britain, France, Belgium, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and also the United States," he said.

Samadi's organisation was created two years ago and is led by a woman, Forouz Rajaifar.

According to Samadi, there are over 50,000 members of the group who are ready to become suicide bombers. Sources in Tehran say the number is widely exaggerated though they claim the group can still count on 25.000 would-be attackers.

"A fatwa from a leading cleric is enough to set off these madmen," said a political analyst and reformist, who asked that his name be withheld.

[Why would a leading cleric, who has devoted his life to the study of Islam, issue such a fatwa if it were really so patently un-Islamic as Islamic apologists in the West would have us believe (without a shred of evidence)?: Jihad Watch editors ask.]

Samadi said aspiring organisation members must fill in forms asking them, among other things, which enemy they want to fight against. The options ain the form are three: "Americans who desacrated the sites of Shiite Islam occupying Iraq and Afghanistan"; "Jews who occupy Jerusalem"; and the "British who gave protection to [Indian writer] Salman Rushdie" against whom Iranian clerics have issued a fatwa for his 1988 book Satanic Verses.

However, Samadi said his group is thinking to "widen the list" of targets in the membership forms and include the Netherlands, Italy and France.

"We have learnt that they want to make a follow up to the trash movie 'Submission'," by Theo Van Gogh, who was killed in 2004 by a Dutch-Moroccan Islamic militant, he said. Submission highlighted the repression of women in some Islamic cultures.

France will reportedly be a target "for greatly offending Islam after it prohibited to young women to go to school with the hijab."

[Why does he think that violence is a legitimate response to those who offend Islam?: Jihad Watch editors ask.]

Italy was included in the potential list of new entries for granting political asylum in March to an Afghan man who risked the death penalty for converting to Christianity from Islam.

"Giving political asylum to an idiot who defied Islam is a very serious offense which cannot be ignored," said Samadi. "We will make Italians pay for this offence."

[Why doesn't he know what Abdurrahman Wahid assured us, that Islam actually allows for freedom of conscience?: Jihad Watch editor asks.]

Samadi's group, Setad Pasdasht Shohadaye Nehzat Jahani Islam, is registered in Iran as a non-governmental organisation and is supported by leading members of the religious elite.

[Why would leading members of the religious elite support something that is so obviously un-Islamic -- or at least not in accord with the view of Islam that we must accept in the West or else risk being denounced as "Islamophobes"?: ask Jihad Watch editors.]

Many Ayatollahs in the holy city of Qom support it along with members of Abadgaran, the main political force supporting the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Its meetings are attended by well known clerics such as hojjatolislam Heidar Mosalahi, who represents within the armed forces Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme guide.

Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani, a mujtahed - a cleric with the authority to interpret the Koran and Sharia, and who can issue a fatwa - is another supporter of the movement.

Recently Ayatollah Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, who heads the secretary's office of Ayatollah Khamenei, also gave his blessing to the group.

Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khameni has still not issued a fatwa supporting suicide attacks but he has recently said that "should the United States or the Zionist entity [Israel] attack nuclear power plants in Iran, the Islamic Republic would respond without hesitation and would strike the aggressor's interests worldwide."

Suicide attacks were also blessed by the head of the office of Iran's spiritual guide.

"Our leader [Seyyed Ali Khamenei] has volunteers ready to take action everywhere, also in the United States and Israel," said hojjatolislam Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani.

[What has gotten into all these clerics? Don't they know the Qur'an teaches peace?: asks Jihad Watch editors]

Members of parliament such as Mehdi Kuchekzadeh, Marzieh Dabbagh, Fatemeh Alia, Eshrat Shayegh and Mohammad Hossein Rahimian regularly attend the group's meetings.

The man who is believed to be the group's strategist is Hassan Abbasi, a professor at the University Imam Hossein in Tehran and an advisor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"Our youths who are ready for martyrdom will be more effective in striking the enemy than any missiles system," Abbasi allegedly vowed to the would-be suicide bombers at the cemetery Behesht Zahra in Tehran on Thursday night.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006.

An alternative to the Moslem tradition of Jew-hatred and Fascist Imperialist Triumphalist Supremicist Totalitarian Terrorist Jihad

There are many Moslem spokespersons in the West who speak to American groups: students from high school through university, military and prison populations, corporate and government leaders, media editors and journalists. Their message is the same: Islam has been misunderstood. True Islam does not countenance terrorism. True Islam is "Radiant Islam": a religion of peace, a religion that respects other religions, a religion of love and acceptance and universal caring.

The problem that some in those audiences encounter is the abundance of hate speech, hate preach, and call to universal and eternal Jihad that is so abundant in the Qur'an and related sacred text (the Sunna, collection of Ahadith, and rulings of Shari'a Islamic religious jurisprudence). And those who know Moslem history wonder at the incongruity between the Radiant Islam of these spokespersons and the 1,300 years of brutal barbaric bloody imperialist triumphalist totalitarian Islamic Jihad.

There are at least (after a while it is hard to keep count) 123 verses, in the Qur'an's 114 chapters, which command the Moslems to the war and murder and torture and execution and captivity and enslavement and degradation of Jews and Christians and pagans (kufar and mushariqoon). And there are many other verses that command the Moslem to avoid contact with Jews and other non-believers, to shun them socially, to consider them impure (najji = putrid, unclean, foul) and thus not touch or greet them, and to look upon them as thought they were the descendents of apes and pigs. And then there are numerous verses in almost every surah (chapter) which declare in no uncertain terms that all other religions are false, and that the practitioners of these religions will burn in hell for all eternity. No one cometh unto the Father save through the Prophet.

And then there is the famous "Hadith of the rock and the tree", listed in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim (and a few others) from which we learn that Mohammed, in an extra-Qur'anic tradition, taught that the final redemption of the world, the Moslem "end of days" scenario, would come only after the Moslems had killed all the Jews in the world. Salvation must await the genocide of the world's entire Jewish population (Hmmm... no wonder the Hajj had such an affinity for Hitler). The Moslem knocks on heaven's gates with the skulls of Jews.

But our Moslem spokespersons focus only on the verses listed below, which tell of God's choosing the Jews for a special relationship with Him, giving them the Holy Book of Power( the Book of Moses), settling them in their Promised Land, and then bringing them all back to the Holy Land before the apocalyptical events of the end-of-days.

And, of course, there are the oh-so-often-quoted verses in Surah 109:2 ("Your religion is your religion, and my religion is my religion"), and Surah 2:256 ("let there be no compulsion in religion"). These are the only two verses in the entire Qur'an which describe Islam as a religion that seeks tolerance, peace, and accommodation with other religions.

The Israel-friendly verses:

2:47 & 122: Oh, Children of Israel! Call to mind the favor which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations.

5:20-21: "Remember when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favor of God unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the people. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and then turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'"

7:137: And We made the children of Israel, who were considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel, because they had patience and constancy, and We leveled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride).

10:93: We settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place, and provided for them sustenance of the best: it was after (divine) knowledge had been granted to them.

17:104: And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land of promise"... And we said to the Children of Israel afterwards, "... scatter and live all over the world -- and when the end of the world is near We will gather you again into the Promised Land".

20:80: O ye Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy, and We made a Covenant with you to give you the right side (the blessed side) of Mount Sinai, and We sent down to you Manna (special food) and quails.

32.23-24: And certainly We gave the Book to Moses, so be not in doubt concerning the receiving of it, and We made it a guide for the children of Israel... And We made of them Guiding Lights and leaders to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications.

44: 32 And We have chosen them (the Children of Israel) above the 'Alam√¬ģn (mankind, and jinns) and Our choice was based on a deep (i.e., divine) knowledge.

45:16: We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book the Power of Command, and Prophethood; We gave them, for sustenance, things good and pure; and We favored them above all other nations.

So, to summarize the above: according to the uncreated, inviolable, and inerrant Qur'an:

The Jews are Allah's chosen people

The Jews are Allah's chosen people, chosen from among all other nations (2:47 & 122; and 44:32). He protected them and fed them in the desert (20:80); and He made them a chosen people, blessed with Divine knowledge in the divinely bequeathed Book of Moses (Book of Power: 45:16); and He made them as a guiding light (unto other nations? Would that include the Moslem nation?)(32:23-4)

Allah gave them the Holy Land as an eternal possession

Allah gave the Jews the Holy Land as their divinely pre-destined possession, thus recognizing the sovereign right of the Jews over the Land of Israel (5:20-21)

Allah made the Holy Land the inheritance of the Jews because they were loyal to Him (7:137)

Allah settled them in that beautiful land once they were equipped with Divine Knowledge (10:93)

Allah will gather Diaspora Jewry back into the Holy land before the End of Days

Allah had them dwell there securely, then scattered them, but will bring them back to their Holy Land shortly before the end of days, thus declaring that it is the will of Allah Himself to gather the Children of Israel again in their promised land before the end days (17:104) (How, then, can any Muslim interfere with the in-gathering of Diaspora Jews back into Israel -- since by doing so, the Muslim will be countervailing the sacred will of Allah and thus interfering with the Divinely promised end-of-days?).

And what our Moslem spokespersons showing us the "radiant face of Islam" neglect to tell us is how, over 1,300 years of Islamic jihad and Jew-hatred, Islamic religious leaders reconciled the so very numerous verses of hatred and rejection and Jihad against Jews with the fewer but very specific verses of Israel's election and its divinely ordained possession of the Promised Land. And the same regarding the endless relentless Qur'anic diatribe against the kafir (Christian and Jew as unbeliever but possessed of divine scripture) and the pagan (all other non-believers bereft of divine input).

For that we must ourselves learn about and understand two very important Moslem theological concepts: the concept of naskh (also pronounced nasikh = abrogation), and the concept of "satanic verses".


Mohammed himself (Abuh) recognized that there were earlier verses in his teachings that were contradicted by later revelations. So, several times in the Qur'an, he declared that if a later verse contradicts an earlier verse, the later verse rules (*). The later verse abrogates the earlier verse.

The verses speaking kindly about Jews and affirming the Jewish concepts of "chosen people", divinity of the "Book of Moses", "Land of Israel for the people of Israel", and in-gathering of exiles at the end of days, are all chronologically early in the process of Qur'anic revelation. So, per many Moslem theologians, they are abrogated by the later verses. The later verses rule. Thus, Moslem animosity to Jews is what Allah wants.

Unfortunately, the only two verses in the Qur'an which decry religious imperialism (Surah 109: 2, "Your religion is your religion, and my religion is my religion:, and Surah 2:256, "let there be no compulsion in religion") are both considered to be abrogated by the very many other verses calling every Moslem to the imperialist triumphalist supremacist Jihad by means of which Islam will replace all religions and reign supreme in the world. The most famous of these later verses is in Surah 9, especially vss. 5 and following; also known as ayat as-sayif (the verse of the sword). So, conversion or death for the pagan, and conversion or death or dhimmitude for the Jew and Christian, still remain the only religiously viable options for non-Moslems according to traditional Islam today.

Satanic Verses

Later Moslem theologians had difficulty with some verses that contradict others even among chronologically contemporaneous segments of the Qur'an. To explain this, they developed the concept of "Satanic verses". These are verses that were put into the sacred text by Satan himself (**). Satan did this in order to confuse the true believer and make him doubt that the Qur'an is divine, and thus inerrant, inviolable, and uncreated. The problem with this theological legere-de-main is that different scholars disagree as to the number and the identity of the verses in question. The lowest number of verses identified as "satanic" is 5. Some scholars find hundreds. And, predictably, the theologians don't agree as to which specific verses are of Satan's authorship.

The Way Forward

Ironically, these two concepts themselves open the portals to a re-interpretation of Islam's militant, violent, and hate-mongering texts. It is interesting that Moslem scholarship does not seem to have noticed a rather obvious oxymoron in the concepts of Naskh and Satanic Verses.

These two orthodox, Moslem, centuries-old and widely accepted concepts disprove the traditional Moslem insistence that the Qur'an is uncreated, inerrant, and inviolable. This is an important issue. The inerrancy and inviolability of the Qur'an, and the belief that the text of the Qur'an is in toto a product of divine revelation (hence: uncreated) and not the product of human interaction with the divine (created by man under divine inspiration), are critical cornerstones of orthodox Moslem belief.

Yet, the concepts of Naskh and Satanic verses make it clear that:

a.) the Qur'an is indeed created. Instead of being an "uncreated" single divine revelation, the Qur'an is the product of both Allah and Satan; and it is the job of Moslem religious scholars to figure out who wrote which parts. Thus the text is not totally of divine origin, and human Moslem theological intellect must sort out the divine from the satanic and thus re-create the supposedly uncreated text.

b.) the Qur'anic text is not inerrant. Instead, some of its verses are indeed not just errors, but satanic insertions meant to lead the believer into error. Same re the issue of Naskh. Naskh and Satanic verses mean that man's limited intellect must figure out which verses were written by Satan, which by Allah, and which verses abrogate other verses. Therefore, the text as orthodox Moslems should accept it, is ultimately a product of human interpretation. As such it cannot be inerrant.

c.) the Qur'anic text is not inviolable. Satan violated it.

And, indeed, as noted above, over the centuries, Moslem scholars have disagreed as to which verses abrogate which, and which verses are to be ascribed to Satan. They cannot all be right, and they could all be wrong.

So, given that by virtue of the orthodox and revered theological institutions of Naskh and Satanic verses, there is room for human interpretation in the Qur'anic tradition, and that some verses can be condemned to the trash-heap of history (as abrogated by other verses) or rejected as the product of Satan, it stands to reason that Moslem religious scholars today could apply these same two concepts to the verses of hatred and violence, compulsion and conquest... if they chose to. It might be possible, therefore, for modern Moslem Qur'anic scholarship to argue that the verses that speak positively about Jews are not abrogated; and that Jew-hatred and Christian-hatred and Hindu-hatred and hatred of all things non-Moslem are themselves the verses inserted by Satan. Indeed, is not hatred a characteristic of Satan, and quite the antithesis of peace, love, and acceptance of others?

As such, the modern phenomena of el-Qaeda and Wahhabi Islam and Jihad against "global non-belief" and Hamas' genocidal insistence that Israel must be destroyed and its Jews exterminated...these are all of demonic origin and are at variance with Allah's divine will expressed in the Qur'an.

But, so far, to my knowledge, the only Moslems pontificating on the Islam of peace and love are those speaking to Jewish and Christian audiences in the West; and telling us about the "radiant face of Islam" -- the religion that preaches love and peace and respect for other religions.

When will Moslem religious leaders like Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid (see below: the Indonesian scholar writing in the Washington Post) start issuing fatwas and huqums against Osama bin Laden and Ayman az-Zawahiri and Abu Yusuf el-Qaradhawi and Abu Mus'ab az-Zarqawi and Hassan Nusralla and Khaled Mash'al and Isma'il Haniyeh? When will these Moslem spokespersons for the radiant Islam start telling Osama and his pals how wrong they all are, how they have misunderstood Islam, how they are really under the influence of Satan?

If Islam really is a religion of peace, then thousands of Moslem leaders, with hundreds of millions of Moslem followers, have demonstrated their total mis-understanding of the true tenets of "radiant Islam"...for 1,300 years. Then, today, the hundreds of millions of Moslems who cheer at the deaths of innocent non-Moslems, and the hundreds of thousands of terrorists world wide (almost all of whom are Moslems) who perpetrate almost daily acts of terror and mass murder against non-Moslems all over the world. ...they are all fundamentally mis-directed.

Isn't it time that those Moslems who do understand "radiant Islam" start to educate the deeply misguided and tragically mis-informed Arab terrorists and Moslem Mujahideen who seek to destroy Israel, genocide its Jews, conquer the West, put an end to Christianity and Judaism, re-conquer India, and ultimately make Islam "...uber alles"?

At very least they could issue some supportive statements for those very few and very courageous individuals who have spoken out: inter alia Wafa Sultan, Walid Shoebat, Brigitte Gabriel, Nonie Darwish, Joseph Farah, Irshad Manji, and Fu'ad Ajami.

What are they waiting for?

Or are they part of the demonic Islam of Jihad and genocide and hatred and terrorism? Is their role the application of Taqiyyeh and Kitman to lull the West into a placid acceptance of the religion and its practitioners who seek to destroy Western civilization? .all in accordance with Mohammed's pronouncement: "War is Deceit." (***)


(*) Cf. Surah 2:100: "For whatever verse We cancel or cause (the messenger: aka Mohammed) to forget, We bring a better or the like."

Surah 13: 39: "Allah deletes or confirms what He wills; with Him is the mother of the Book."

Surah 16:103: "When We substitute one verse for another -- Allah knows best what He sends down -- they say: 'Thou art simply an inventor'; but most of them have not knowledge."

(**) Surah 22:51: "We have not sent a messenger or prophet before thee; but when he formulated his desire Satan threw (something) in to his formulation; so Allah abrogated what Satan threw in, then Allah adjusted His signs".

(These are from Richard Bell's translation in his An Introduction to the Qur'an, as quoted in Ibn Warraq's What the Koran Really Says.)

(***) For a detailed explanation of taqiyyeh (lying to advance the cause of Allah), and kitman (deceit), cf. "Islamic Honesty and Honor" in Faithfreedom.org, by: Vernon Richards (islam_undressed@yahoo.com); extracted from his book Islam Undressed, available free upon request. See also at http://www.think-israel.org/richards.html

See also Robert Spencer's critique of Wahid's article in Front Page Magazine. "Is Islamic Law "Extremist?", May 26, 2006, www.FrontPageMagazine.com.

The article below is called "Extremism Isn't Islamic Law." It is by Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid, and it appeared May 23, 2006 in A17, The Washington Post.

For a few days this year the world's media focused an intense spotlight on the drama of a modern-day inquisition. Abdul Rahman, a Muslim convert to Christianity, narrowly escaped the death penalty for apostasy when the Afghan government -- acting under enormous international pressure -- sidestepped the issue by ruling that he was insane and unfit to stand trial. This unsatisfactory ruling left unanswered a question of enormous significance: Does Islam truly require the death penalty for apostasy, and, if not, why is there so little freedom of religion in the so-called Muslim world?

The Koran and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad do not definitively address this issue. In fact, during the early history of Islam, the Agreement of Hudaibiyah between Muhammad and his rivals stipulated that any Muslim who converted out of Islam would be allowed to depart freely to join the non-Muslim community. Nevertheless, throughout much of Islamic history, Muslim governments have embraced an interpretation of Islamic law that imposes the death penalty for apostasy.

It is vital that we differentiate between the Koran, from which much of the raw material for producing Islamic law is derived, and the law itself. While its revelatory inspiration is divine, Islamic law is man-made and thus subject to human interpretation and revision. For example, in the course of Islamic history, non-Muslims have been allowed to enter Mecca and Medina. Since the time of the caliphs, however, Islamic law has been interpreted to forbid non-Muslims from entering these holy cities. The prohibition against non-Muslims entering Mecca and Medina is thus politically motivated and has no basis in the Koran or Islamic law.

In the case of Rahman, two key principles of Islamic jurisprudence come into play. First, al-umuru bi maqashidiha ("Every problem [should be addressed] in accordance with its purpose"). If a legal ordinance truly protects citizens, then it is valid and may become law. From this perspective, Rahman did not violate any law, Islamic or otherwise. Indeed, he should be protected under Islamic law, rather than threatened with death or imprisonment. The second key principle is al-hukm-u yadullu ma'a illatihi wujudan wa adaman ("The law is formulated in accordance with circumstances"). Not only can Islamic law be changed -- it must be changed due to the ever-shifting circumstances of human life. Rather than take at face value assertions by extremists that their interpretation of Islamic law is eternal and unchanging, Muslims and Westerners must reject these false claims and join in the struggle to support a pluralistic and tolerant understanding of Islam.

All of humanity, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, is threatened by the forces of Islamist extremism. It is these extremists, masquerading as traditional Muslims, who angrily call for the death of Abdul Rahman or the beheading of Danish cartoonists. Their objective is raw political power and the eventual radicalization of all 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide. Western involvement in this "struggle for the soul of Islam" is a matter of self-preservation for the West and is critical given the violent tactics and strength of radical elements in Muslim societies worldwide.

Muslim theologians must revise their understanding of Islamic law, and recognize that punishment for apostasy is merely the legacy of historical circumstances and political calculations stretching back to the early days of Islam. Such punishments run counter to the clear Koranic injunction "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256).

People of goodwill of every faith and nation must unite to ensure the triumph of religious freedom and of the "right" understanding of Islam, to avert global catastrophe and spare millions of others the fate of Sudan's great religious and political leader, Mahmoud Muhammad Taha, who was executed on a false charge of apostasy. The millions of victims of "jihadist" violence in Sudan -- whose numbers continue to rise every day -- would have been spared if Taha's vision of Islam had triumphed instead of that of the extremists.

The greatest challenge facing the contemporary Muslim world is to bring our limited, human understanding of Islamic law into harmony with its divine spirit -- in order to reflect God's mercy and compassion, and to bring the blessings of peace, justice and tolerance to a suffering world.

The writer is a former president of Indonesia. From 1984 to 1999 he directed the Nadhlatul Ulama, the world's largest Muslim organization. He serves as senior adviser and board member to LibForAll Foundation, an Indonesian- and U.S.-based nonprofit that works to reduce religious extremism and terrorism.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 28, 2006.

Perhaps the most influential terrorist regime in the world Saudi Arabia, underwriters of Wahhabi madrassas most notably in Pakistan, a/k/a homicide/suicide human bomb factories, escapes the evil eye of industrial oil-dependent Western nations that are customers, including the U.S.A. and E.U. Should any significant war on misogyny and terrorism not include that "evil-doer" country on a short list of villains? Is such a sanctimonious pass even tolerable if morality and justice have any meaning whatsoever? Schools within that Islamic royal autocracy, despite promises to reform, still demonize Jews, Christians, and all those including other Muslims who do not adhere to an intolerant jihad-obsessed repugnant hate-filled fundamentalist faith. Rulers of that regime, alas, know that the reservoir of fossil fuel they possess trumps all. Oil uber alas, indeed, remains the motto of this "fascist in robes" dictatorship, and Western nations, especially the U.S.A., that rail about terrorism let the Sauds get away with their criminally abhorrent policies. On the other hand, let us note former and current despotic Middle East sovereignties such as Iraq and Iran, likewise saturated with fossil fuel, not so curiously were and are lambasted in much of the Western press. The Bush Administration and a handful of allies, including Britain, preemptively invaded Sadist Hussein's dysfunctional Iraqi enclave, a regime more enthralled with petroeuros than petrodollars, and now attempt to put the pieces back together. Emerging nuclear nemesis Iran, with a yen to direct its oil flow eastward, concurrently yearning to wipe Israel off the map, is boldly and justifiably displayed in the crosshairs of many Western governments including the U.S.A., ruminating the possibility of branding it with the scarlet S (for sanctions). What about the Sauds? Of course, you don't bite the hand that turns the fossil fuel faucet for you.

No doubt, Iran's nuclear ambitions are of paramount concern, still any Saudi wealth that directly or indirectly finances WMD projects worldwide should also be of paramount concern, yet it is not. There is nothing accidental about the fact that 15 of the 19 infamous 9/11 hijackers, as well as the planetary mindset-altering event's planner bin Laden, were all native products of Saudi Wahhabiism, yet dots remain intentionally unconnected when it comes to holding the House of Saud, in fact the Allahfather of the worldwide Islamic terror network, accountable. Faustian fossil fuel contracts denominated in petrodollars trumps all, thus that one overriding factor explains an otherwise inexplicable Western case of regal blindness, especially in the U.S.A., when it comes to the despicable Sauds. Furthermore, Russian reluctance to sanction Iran is also traceable to its fossil fuel contracts with that terror promoting state. Not surprisingly, the choice by "humane" nations planet wide to provide ineffectual lip service in lieu of a coordinated military effort ever-needed to stop the genocide in Darfur Sudan, is similarly explained by heartless world leaders, especially those in China, not wishing to ruffle the robes of sadistic Islamic rogue royal rulers in Khartoum lest they renege on contractual agreements, withholding addictive black gold ever necessary to power oil-dependent economic dynamos, especially one possessed by that up and coming Oriental superstar. Essentially, there is little chance the Sauds or kindred spirit terror promoting nations will alter their behavior while they hold their particular clienteles of energy craving industrial states hostage. Hence the war on terror is truly a war complicated by fossil fuel dependence, not likely winnable until planetary powers break their addictions to the vicious viscous substance, allowing them to deal appropriately with their favorite pushers.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 28, 2006.

In response to Nadia Matar's article, "Psychiatrist Needed Urgently!" (see below) which contains much wisdom, allow me to say the following:

As that gallant lady well knows, far more than a psychiatrist is needed to overcome Israel's malaise. Needed is nothing less than a revolution. But inasmuch as the government controls all the levers of power, what can be done to facilitate a revolution?

WORDS will accomplish nothing if not geared toward ACTION -- by which I do not mean protest demonstrations. Episodic ACTION will not change the suicidal course of this country.

The people of this country are jaded. They are sick of words and unaffected by conventional demonstrations. They have been inundated by so many lies, and have either witnessed or suffered so much abuse, that questions of truth and falsity, of right and wrong, do not seriously impact their lives any more. So long as they can repair to the malls on Saturday night, they cannot take words about existential threats seriously.

Only "right-minded" people worry about existential threats -- yet they too have serious shortcomings. They indulge in excessive ANALYSIS which only leads to PARALYSIS.

Mere analysis is futile because the Left, having corrupted the language of public discourse, has corrupted the mentality of countless Israelis. And there's nothing "right-minded" people can do about this decrepit state of affairs merely by calling "Disengagement" of "Realignment" a CRIME, or by saturating Internet with CRITICAL ANALYSIS.

WORDS are not going to cure Israelis of their moral malady. Nor will words deter the Olmert government from repeating the CRIME of its predecessor. The SYSTEM is a cesspool of corruption, of self-aggrandizing and heartless politicians -- religious as well as secular.

So allow me to suggest this to our "right-minded" people -- those who fear that Israel faces a threat to its existence. If this is what you fear, GET REAL. If you are going to talk about an "existential threat," GET REAL and form a Congress of National Salvation!

If you think Israeli governments¬¬ł regardless of which parties are at the helm, are perfidious, don't wait for another (futile) election, but form an "Alternative Government." GET REAL!

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah 15, May 28, 2006.

(Hat tip: LGF readers.)
www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ ?PHPSESSID=68a8ba7f98b3fa2ade57a1f00c9352f5

BAGHDAD -- An Iraqi tennis coach and two of his players were fatally shot last week in Baghdad because they were wearing shorts, authorities said yesterday, reporting the latest in a series of recent attacks attributed to Islamic extremists. ...

In the Baghdad incident, gunmen stopped a car carrying the Sunni Arab coach and two Shi'ite players, asked them to step out and then shot them, said Manham Kubba, secretary-general of the Iraqi Tennis Union.

Extremists had distributed leaflets warning people in the mostly Sunni neighborhoods of Saidiyah and Ghazaliyah not to wear shorts, police said.

"Wearing shorts by youth are prohibited because it violates the principles of Islamic religion when showing forbidden parts of the body. Also women should wear the veil," the leaflets said.

Wearing shorts "violates the principles of Islamic religion" -- but murdering athletes apparently doesn't.

Contact Avodah 15 by email at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by IsrAlert, May 28, 2006.

This was a JTA oped May 4, 2006. It was written by Bennett Zimmerman, Dr. Roberta Seid and Dr. Michael Wise.

1. Demographic fatalism underlies the assumption that a retreat from geography -- which possesses a critical security significance -- is required to salvage Jewish demography. Demographic fatalism (that Jews are, supposedly, doomed to be a minority west of the Jordan River) has marginalized the role played by the issues of History and Security in Israel's political debate about Judea & Samaria.

2. The "Prophets of Demographic Doom" have managed to weaken the resolve of the Jewish State -- and its friends - more effectively than have Palestinian terrorism and global pressure. They've instilled unprecedented faintheartedness in the national state of mind - a self-destruct prescription in the Mideast.

3. However, the "Prophecy of Demographic Doom" has been based on grossly erroneous assumptions and on misrepresentations. In fact, a 67:33 Jewish majority has been in effect west of the Jordan River (without Gaza), at least, since 1967! Long term trend indicates a rise in Jewish birth rate with sustained positive migration (Aliya), while Palestinians experience (since 1990) a decline in birth rate and a high annual emigration.

4. This OpEd, on the Jewish Demographic Momentum in Israel, sheds light on some of the misrepresentations perpetrated by the "Prophets of Demographic Doom" (JTA, May 2006, http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16575&intcategoryid=1). The OpEd was written by Bennett Zimmerman, Dr. Roberta Seid and Dr. Michael Wise.

5. Corroborated by evidence from the Palestinian Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education and Central Elections Commission, a 70% inflation in the number of Arabs in Judea & Samaria has been documented.

6. According to Dr. Nick Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the recent study on Palestinian demography "caught the demographic profession asleep at the switch."

7. For more information on the demographic study -- which featured at a March 8, 2006 House International Relations Mideast Subcommittee hearing -- please visit www.pademographics.com.

Arab Demographic Momentum has become part of the Israel lexicon. In this theory, population growth in the Arab sector will overwhelm the Jewish population as "baby boom| generations give birth to an even greater number of children. Arab births will accelerate even if birth rates remain stable or drop slightly because such a large number of women will enter their childbearing years.

But the evidence is now in: demographic momentum exists -- but the momentum is occurring among Jews, not Arabs.

Jewish births grew rapidly, from 80,000 per year in 1995 to 96,000 in 2000 and to over 103,000 in 2003. The demographic outlook for Jews has been improving because the Jewish total fertility rate (TFR), or the number of children a woman is likely to bear over her lifetime, has been rising. In 2005, it reached 2.7, the highest rate in any advanced industrial nation. While the ultra-Orthodox contributed to this rise, secular Israelis and the immigrants from the FSU also experienced increasing fertility. When aliyah and returning Israelis (averaging over 20,000 per year from 2001 to 2004), are added to the mix, the demographic weight of the Jewish sector grows even further.

In contrast, the absolute number of births in the Israel Arab sector grew from 36,500 births in 1995 to 40,800 in 2000 and has remained there ever since. In fact, after rising slightly to a record 41,400 births in 2003, the number of Israel Arabs births fell for the first time in 2004 to 40,800. The overall Israel Arab fertility figure (which includes Israel Moslem, Christian Arabs, and Druze) declined from 4.4 in 2000 to 4.0 in 2004. Israel recently enacted policies that are impacting the highest fertility sectors of the Israel Arab population. In 2004, the government stopped granting stipends for every child born to a family, restricting them to only the first two children born. There was an immediate drop in Bedouin pregnancies.

The problem with demographic predictions is that they apply yesterday's or today's fertility rates to tomorrow's forecast. However, earlier childbearing patterns may have little relationship to the number of children the next generation will have. By applying the Muslim TFR rates from the 1960s (between 9-10 births per woman) to forecasts, Israeli demographers had projected that Israeli Arabs would overtake Israeli Jews by 1990. When the TFR dropped to 5.4 in the early 1980s and 4.7 in the second half of the decade, demographers applied this rate to their next series of forecasts. However, by 2005, the Arab TFR had dropped even further, to 4.0, echoing the more dramatic drops reported throughout the Middle East where most nations display fertility levels near 3 births per woman while countries such as Iran have displayed fertility below 2 births per woman. Furthermore, Israel Arab women currently in their 20s will not necessarily repeat the same childbearing characteristics of today's 30 year olds. Thus, Israeli Arab women who are having fewer children in their late teens and 20s might have fewer children in their 30s than today's 30 year olds who still display fertility characteristics of earlier generations. In contrast, Israeli Jewish women in their 20s might carry their choice to have more children into their 30s, at numbers above the current set of 30 year olds.

The practice of applying yesterday's activity to tomorrow's forecast is a common mistake. The UN Population Division had confidently predicted in 2000 that the world's population would balloon to 12 billion people by 2050. Remarkably enough, four years later, they dramatically revised the forecast and now predict that today's 6.3 billion global population will plateau at 9 billion persons by 2050.

With constantly changing birth patterns, what is a forecaster to do? To have any relevance a forecast must constantly be updated with the most current information and any changes in trend. The Gallup organization recently published the results of a survey which showed a convergence in desired family size among Jews and Arabs west of the Jordan. The ideal family size has fallen to 5.1 for Arabs in Gaza and 4.5 in the West Bank. The desired family size among Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs is now identical at 3.7. While Gallup found no difference in the preferred number of children by younger Israelis, younger West Bankers aged 15 -- 19 believe an ideal family should have 4.1 children versus their older relatives over 50 years who believe the ideal family has 5.0 children. The convergence in desired birth activity among Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs, and particularly among younger West Bankers is likely to further impact the future demographic outlook for Israel and the West Bank, where Jews now form a two-thirds majority. Demographers had concentrated on past patterns in the Arab population while they were blind sighted to evidence of a slowdown in the Arab sector and the demographic revolution already being measured among Jews. By focusing on the past, forecasters anticipated demographic momentum in the wrong sector and produced an outlook that couldn't even get the present correct, let alone the future.

Bennett Zimmerman, Roberta Seid, and Michael L. Wise are authors of Arab Population in the West Bank and Gaza: The Million Person Gap, recently published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies in Israel. Forecast for Israel and West Bank 2025 debuted at the Herzliya Policy Conference in Israel and in the USA at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. The studies can be found at www.pademographics.com

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 IsrAlert, May 28, 2006.

This is an Associated Press article from Ynet. It is archived at

We encourage you to read the whole document at

The United States reached out to hostile Arabs three decades ago with an offer to work toward making Israel a "small friendly country" of no threat to its neighbors and with an assurance to Iraq that the U.S. had stopped backing Kurdish rebels in the north.

"We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel," then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told his Iraqi counterpart in a rare high-level meeting, "but we can reduce its size to historical proportions."

left to right: Yitzhak Rabin, Golda Meir, Kissinger and Lea Rabin (Photo: GPO)

A December 1975 memo detailing Kissinger's probing conversation with Foreign Affairs Minister Saadoun Hammadi eight years after Iraq severed diplomatic relations with Washington is included in some 28,000 pages of Kissinger-era foreign policy papers published in an online collection Friday.

George Washington University's National Security Archive released the collection, drawn from papers available at the government's National Archives and obtained through the group's Freedom of Information requests. p>With Rabin in 1975 (Photo: GPO)

In it, Kissinger tells Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in June 1972 that the United States, mired in Vietnam, probably could live with a communist government in South Vietnam as long as that evolved peacefully. "If we can live with a communist government in China, we ought to be able to accept it in Indochina," he said.

He also hints that the United States, newly courting China, would consider a nuclear response if the Soviets were to overrun Asia with conventional forces.

At the time, Chinese-Soviet tensions were sharp and the United States was playing one communist state against the other as best it could while seeking detente with its main rival, Moscow.

But when the Japanese recognized China with what Kissinger called "indecent haste," he branded them "treacherous."

With Ariel Sharon in 2001 (Photo: GPO)

The transcript of Kissinger's meeting with Hammadi in Paris sheds light on a little known maneuver that spoke to America's broader effort to win friends in the Arab world even as it was giving military support to the Jewish state.

The meeting was frank and open - diplomats' preferred description of any such meeting but in this case, true. And Hammadi, a friend of the Soviets, was a tough sell.

"We are on the other side of the fence," he asserted. "What the United States is doing is not to create peace but to create a situation dominated by Israel."

Kissinger pressed: "Our attitude is not unsympathetic to Iraq. Don't believe; watch it."

He said U.S. public opinion was turning more pro-Palestinian and U.S. aid to Israel could not be sustained for much longer at its massive levels. He predicted that in 10 or 15 years, "Israel will be like Lebanon - struggling for existence, with no influence in the Arab world."

Mindful of Israel's nuclear capability, a skeptical Hammadi peppered Kissinger with questions, including whether Washington would recognize Palestinian identity and even a Palestinian state. "Is it in your power to create such a thing?"

Kissinger said he could not make recognition of Palestinian identity happen right away but, "No solution is possible without it."

"After a settlement, Israel will be a small friendly country," he said.

Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula, one of its territorial gains in the 1967 Six Day War, to Egypt in a 1979 peace deal. Current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has offered to give up at least part of the West Bank for a Palestinian state.

President Bush is the first U.S. president to call explicitly for creation of a Palestinian state.

Kissinger said U.S. officials had believed Iraq was a Soviet satellite state but had come to a "more sophisticated understanding now. We think you are a friend of the Soviet Union but you act on your own principles." Saddam Hussein was then vice president, in control of internal security and oil.

When Hammadi persisted with complaints about U.S. support for the Kurds, Kissinger brushed them off by saying, "One can do nothing about the past."

"Not always," Hammadi countered as the meeting closed and he escorted Kissinger to the door. Washington and Baghdad renewed relations after the start of the Iran-Iraq war; Hammadi became prime minister in the Saddam era.

The collection, also available in microfiche, consists of some 2,100 memoranda of Kissinger's secret conversations with senior officials abroad and at home from 1969 to 1977, serving under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford.

William Burr, senior analyst for the research group, said the papers are the most extensive published record of Kissinger's work, in many cases offering insight into matters that the diplomat ignored or merely touched on in his prolific memoirs.

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 Nadia Matar, May 28, 2006.

If we want to save the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria, and thereby the very existence of the State of Israel, we apparently will have to begin with a considerable portion of our national-religious public receiving psychiatric care so that he can cure us of a mental disease that is deeply entrenched within us. As long as we suffer from this malady, we will not be able to act properly. I am referring to the fact that most of our public apparently does not regard the plans for the deportation of Jews, the destruction of settlements, and the handing over of parts of the homeland to the Arab enemy as a CRIME . And once this is not seen as a CRIME, then the public does not go out of its way to stop it. I received proof of this, once again, when I read through the responses to a report on Arutz7 Internet about Rabbi Lior's statement that "a community must vomit out a Kadima Member of Knesset."

On his weekly show on Arutz 7, Rabbi Lior from Kiryat Arba had been asked by a resident, who is a neighbor of a Member of Knesset who went over to the Kadima party, what should be the attitude to this MK.

"I want to ask about the attitude we should have to a religious MK, who acts for the destruction of settlements in our land. This MK has spoken for some time about the need, so he says, to destroy a large number of settlements in the Land of Israel. Since his election to the Knesset, his talk has not been just the expression of an opinion. He takes concrete actions in his position as a legislator, apparently at the behest of the Prime Minister, for the actual preparation for the deportation of Jews, the destruction of their property, and their exile from their place of residence. How are we to relate to him? I have known him for many years, and at times I meet him. His behavior is quite cordial, but I find it very difficult to respond to him in a friendly manner, as I did in the past."

In his response, Rabbi Lior said:

"A healthy body that eats something spoiled immediately vomits it. If you are a healthy public, you will naturally vomit him out in order to stay healthy. If he had any intelligence, he would leave the settlement on his own, and would not live in a place that he is taking steps to destroy."

Dozens of people responded to the article, many of them attacking Rabbi Lior's answer. The following two responses show the severity of our mental illness: one comment is by a woman who defines herself as a "proud settler"(!), who says: "We must not forget that we are all brothers, and before all, even when there are differences of opinion, we must respect one another." And an even more pathological comment, from a resident who calls himself: "Boaz - a resident who does not want to vomit": "Yes, I, we, the residents of the settlements in Judea and Samaria, totally oppose the withdrawals, and loathe the insane ideology behind them, but to vomit out neighbors? With all due respect to his eminence (i.e. Rabbi Lior), the Rabbi does not understand the meaning of life in a communal settlement. If and when we succeed in building healthy community life, this is mainly because we had among us quarrels, intrigues, nonsense, and the like, over the course of years.... If we extricated ourselves from all this, it was because we undertook, as a group and as individuals, to forgive, to ask pardon, to understand weaknesses, and not to vomit. If we vomit what is not suitable - we will fall apart."

I felt compelled to answer those attacking Rabbi Lior. This is my response to Boaz and to that "proud" settler:

I have a question for you. What if someone in your community was known to go around among the people in the settlement, especially among the children and youth, and forcibly inject them with dangerous drugs, and for whatever reason the authorities did not arrest him, and despite all the times people spoke with him, he did not desist? To the contrary, he was proud of his criminal acts, and publicly announced that he intends to continue with his terrible deeds, and perhaps even to begin to rape little girls. If, in consequence, a group of parents arose and demanded that this person be vomited from the settlement - what would you say? "That we must not forget that we are all brothers, and we must respect one another? That in our communal life, we must forgive and understand weakness? That all in all, we are talking about someone with different opinions, who we should respect?"

Or, perhaps, you would join those who want to vomit him from the community, and in order to protect the community and your family, you would not have anything to do with him? I am certain that you would join those who want to remove him from the area. You would understand that there is a difference between a person who takes drugs, and thereby harms only himself. This is sad, but that is his own personal concern. With such a person, it is possible to sit and talk, and even to persuade him to stop. Someone, however, who goes about in the community and actively takes measures that endanger the lives of those living in that area, must be sent away. And if there are people in the settlement who do not want him far away - then they suffer from a mental illness.

Now I have an additional question for Boaz, and the "proud" settler, and our entire camp: Why do you think that someone who actively takes steps for the destruction of the entire settlement undertaking in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza - activity that endangers the entire national homeland, and not just your private house - should be treated differently than a criminal? Why don't you relate to such a person in the same way that you relate to the one in the settlement giving drugs or to a rapist?

Master of the Universe! How can we relate to people from Kadima, including people who call themselves "religious" such as Otniel Schneller, Yonatan Bassi, and others, as people with "just another opinion"? As regards the acceptance of people with "different opinions," no public is more tolerant than the national-religious public, for which we can be proud. But deportation-plan criminals no longer represent "a different opinion"! They are acting with force, against our will, to impose their opinion on an entire public; now, they are planning to destroy, raze, and demolish the entire life's work of that public! There is a difference between a person who eats non-kosher food, that is his private concern, and a person who comes to your home, and, threatening you with a gun, forces you and the members of your household to eat non-kosher food! We continue to respect and love the first person, but we cast out from our midst and vomit the second. If there are people who are willing to embrace the second person, the one who comes to you and threatens you with a weapon, then these people are suffering from a mental illness.

This might be the profound, underlying real reason for our failure last summer. We might have found here the true problem with our public: perhaps the problem is that our public felt, and still feels, the pain of the destruction of Gush Katif and Northern Samaria and the handing over of the territory to the Arab enemy, but it did not really regard this as a CRIME. When a CRIME is planned and implemented, then regular life stops, as long as the criminal is active. If we are not successful the first time, then we mobilize even more seriously, so that the second time we will triumph and prevent the criminals from carrying out their malicious plans. But if something like deportation is perceived as "not good," but still within the category of "it's not so terrible, either," then we merely protest in a moderate manner! We will then be written in the history books as having protested, but nothing much more than that.

The fact that a majority of our public did not relate to the destruction of Gush Katif and Northern Samaria as a CRIME, and did not view the implementers of the deportation as criminals, with all that this implies, is the greatest failure of the national-religious education. This is the reason why these places were destroyed so easily. This is also the reason why so many rabbis defied former Chief Rabbi Shapira's clear ruling and did not call upon their yeshiva soldiers to disobey the order of the uprooting. For if something is not considered a CRIME, why should a soldier refuse orders?

The solution for a successful struggle against Olmert's plan to destroy the settlements in Judea and Samaria apparently is to be found here. We must give our public a quick psychiatric session, to heal the public of its mental illness. I describe this illness as: "If someone comes to eliminate you, get up early to embrace him". We must explain to everyone that the Olmert plan constitutes an existential threat for us and for the entire State of Israel. It should, therefore, be regarded as a CRIME. As soon as we understand this, we will also know how to act decisively, without "sensitivity", so that the government will understand that it will not be worthwhile for it to take us on! Where is that psychiatrist who can treat our public ¬¬≠ and urgently?

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. Or write an email to wfit2@womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Batya Medad, May 26, 2006.

The Israeli media is finally admitting that Olmert's U.S. visit wasn't such a roaring success. It's one of those classic "good news/bad news" stories for me.

The good news is that they don't like the plan, but the bad news is the reason why. I don't like Olmert's plan and strategy, because it endangers the security, the very existence of the State of Israel. It's based on a fallacy that by giving away our historic Homeland, the Arabs will give us peace.

According the article I linked to in the first sentence and can be found at samizdatblogfree.blogspot.com/2006/05/jm-post-article-about-olmerts-us-visit.html, the reason the Americans and the rest of the world don't think Olmert's unilateral (that means doing it for nothing in return) withdrawal isn't good is that:

"A viable Palestinian state," The New York Times on Thursday wrote, "It's long been clear that getting a workable, feasible Palestinian state out of two geographically separate masses of land in the desert will be an uphill battle. Now, because of two culprits and one enabler, Hamas, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel and President [George W.] Bush, that hill is becoming a mountain."

That's right. The aim of the world is a "A viable Palestinian state," not an independent viable State of Israel.

It's about time, or rather late but never, for Israel to face facts. We have no friends and no allies. The United States, England, Europe, United Nations etc are willing to sacrifice us, the State of Israel, for another Arab state, one whose essence, very aim is our very destruction.

This is not something one can negotiate.

Wise up!

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 Yoram Ettinger, May 26, 2006.

This article appeared on http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il

1. VITAL U.S. INTERESTS would be impacted by Israel's proposed retreat ("Realignment") from terrorist strongholds in Judea & Samaria.

2. Israel's retreat from So. Lebanon catapulted HIZBALLAH from a small -- to a regional - terrorist organization, the role model of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), haunting US servicemen in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN.

3. Israel's 1994-1998 series of retreats from 85% of Gaza and 40% of Judea & Samaria created the Palestinian Authority: the Mecca of homicide bombing and anti-US and anti-Jewish hate-education (please see Cloakroom #190). Palestinian terrorists fought the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. ANTI-U.S. TERROR has increased since the initial 1993 Oslo retreat!

4. Israel's 2005 retreat ("Disengagement") from Gaza and Northern Samaria has established the largest terrorist base in the Mideast, adrenalizing anti-US terrorism.

5. Israel's 2005 retreat has been perceived as a cave-in by the role-model of counter-terrorism to the role-model of terrorism. It paved the road to HAMAS' electoral victory and upgraded the posture of ISLAMIC JIHAD and AL-QAEDA, thus providing friendly platforms for IRAN, SYRIA, SUDAN, YEMEN and the PRO-SADDAM elements.

6. Bolstered Palestinian profile constitutes a present and immediate lethal DANGER TO PRO-U.S. REGIMES in Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf states, threatening US troops in the Gulf area.

7. Expanded Palestinian Authority facilitates the strategic re-entrenchment of RUSSIA, CHINA and NO. KOREA in the Mideast at the expense of US interests in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean and throughout the Mideast.

8. Another Israeli retreat would further undermine Israel's posture of DETERRENCE, which is critical to the enhancement of regional stability.

9. U.S. ENCOURAGEMENT of another Israeli retreat from Palestinian terrorist strongholds would exacerbate the threat to US interests. Would the US learn from recent history by repeating -- or avoiding -- past errors?!

Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 26, 2006.

Watching the many standing ovations Ehud Olmert received when he addressed a joint session of the American Congress and spoke of his so-called Realignment Plan -- which would dispossess and displace 50 to 100 thousand Jews in Judea and Samaria -- it occurred to me that those standing ovations were living proof that American Zionist organizations have no significant impact on U.S. foreign policy regarding the Israel-Arab conflict.

The leaders of these Zionist organizations must surely realize that all their noble efforts have not diminished the American government's commitment to a Palestinian state, hence, to a tortured future for the Jewish people.

Surely the leaders of these Zionist organizations, which have labored so long and so hard on Israel's behalf, raising and spending considerable sums for lobbying missions to Washington, for trips to Israel to boost the morale of depressed settlers, and for publishing reams of articles critical of Israel's insane policy of "territory for nothing" -- surely they must realize that none of their brave and tireless efforts has made the people of Israel more secure, or Israel's government more Zionist toward Eretz Yisrael.

Gaza has become the Mecca of international terrorism, and arsenals of weapons are being shipped from Gaza to Judea and Samaria such that every city of Israel will soon be threatened by missile attacks. Nevertheless, senators and congressmen and other public officials gave Ehud Olmert standing ovations for his Realignment Plan to forcibly dispossess countless Jews from their homes to facilitate the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Those standing ovations make a mockery of American Zionist organizations. Surely the leaders of these organizations ought to engage is serious soul-searching. They should try to understand why, despite all their lobbying in Washington, congressmen continue to respect and applaud Israel's paltry and perfidious politicians so anxious to give away the birthright of their people to appease the Palestinian Authority -- a consortium of thugs and terrorists.

The leaders of these Zionist organizations should try to understand why, despite all their efforts in America and despite all their missions to Israel, they have failed to have the slightest impact on the course of the Jewish state.

They should try to understand that regardless of the evil consequences already experienced by retreat from Gaza -- a policy criticized by Israel's highest military and intelligence officials -- Prime Minister Olmert received standing ovations by asking the United States to play the role of Dr. Kevorkian and help Israel commit national suicide.

What is there about Israel or about its reputation that fosters this madness?

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Evelyn Hayes, May 26, 2006.

In Memory of My Mother, Marion D. Solomon A"H who always read me the news and influenced me to write to right the wrongs of men who thought they saw what they wanted to see, who realigned truth because they had an unaligned agenda, hallucinating that their misaligned view is true.

As Kadima goes forward with its realignments, let's consider the symantics of the romantics romancing with Hamas, Jihad, Hizballah and other terrorist organizations. Let' s consider the reconsiderations of those who would rather be like any other nation than those who chose monotheism in contrast to Sodom and its warlords, who chose The Creator and not destroyers, who chose the higher laws for a better world and not the law-asiding for their personal interests.

As we are about to read The Book of Ruth, the geress, the great, great, grandmother of King David, that happened in the days when the Judges judged, we see the wisdom of following the path of the Jews and the blessings. It happened that Elimelech chose to flee Beis Lechem and not trust in HASHEM; he and his two sons perished in the land of Moab. The people of Beis Lechem were remembered and the famine subsided. Ruth chose to continue with her mother-in-law, Naomi saying, "Wherever you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge, your people are my people, and your Gd is my Gd, where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried...." Ruth, with the kindness of Boaz, partook in the lechem, bread of Gd's house and he redeemed her and like Rachel Imeinu who died "on the way" in Beis Lechem and Leah buried in Hevron, so close to Tel Rumeida where Ruth and Yishai, the father of David HaMelech are buried, Ruth merited and her good deeds are recorded in the Torah given on Shavous. The Pathways of the Torah are the way to actualize the positive potential of the world.

As some intellectuals at a Hillel Conference in Washington DC attempted to bust the foundations of Judaism such as monotheism and midos, redefining monotheism as a basis for terrorism and not a purging of warlords, immorality and decadence, and reclassifying the first Chief Rabbi of Israel HaRav Kook as a terrorist and not one who appealed to both the religious and the secular and was a friend of peaceful Arabs as well as an appreciator of all Gd's gifts to the world, all the variations of people and nature, the time tested Torah truths are still the prognosis for reality.

As an Iraqi refugee in a Washington Hotel asked me, "What's wrong with the Jews? Don't they know that they lived in Iraq, Iran, Syria. Lebanon. Egypt, that they were exiled without their property, that even the property they sold and the money already in Swiss banks was stolen, that they were in refugee camps in Cyprus? What's wrong with the Jews, don't they know the West Bank is theirs and their enemy is my enemy. Why don't they know when we know? They are hurting my people in Iraq." He asked me to help him who fears reprisals even in America.

As this Iraqi refugee and his people are suffering from the same pan-Jihad warlords as those in Darfur and in Israel, it is strange that the intellectuals at the Hillel Conference cannot connect the dots from one terrorist to another, cannot see that their own people are victims and are excusing their scapegoating by scapegoating and blood libeling themselves and America.

For some strange reason, Kadima is realigning with the enemy while sacrificing its roots, relatives and reality.

Kadima is out of tune. It's time for a tune up of their "idol" peace rushing down the road, crashing and crashing again and causing a multiplication of crashers. Kadima is without brakes, breaking up the Judeo-Christian foundations which have moved humankind forward. Kadima is unkind to its disengaged and planning more amputations for further terrorist invasions. Unsympathetic to its victims, Kadima plans to victimize not only its settled, but unsettle Israel's very foundations and its place among nations. This unsettlement is having repercussions all over the world from the universities to the governments and is a thorn in the tires of those too tired to fight for their legacies, legitimacies, life.

At this time of Shavuos, let us rally as our ancestors did from past to present in unity, with conviction and confidence. As Ruth, the geress, chose the ways of graciousness, goodness and giving and got to merit the lineage of Moshiach, let us not change our allegiance to our role models because they are ancient. Our models have endured, keeping the Jews as survivors while all the taking imperialistic empires and mass fads have passed, annihilating themselves and their allies. Let the Jewish people continue to follow the lead of our role models and actualize the potential granted by HASHEM for all future generations.

Contact Evelyn Hayes at haze@rcn.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 26, 2006.

What would erstwhile field general Ariel Sharon do? Israel's neighbor Gaza is in chaos, on the brink of an anything but civil, civil war. Iraq is in chaos, likewise on the brink of a similarly dysfunctional civil war. The core issue for both enclaves is Islamic fundamentalism verses a more secular brand of that faith, albeit in Iraq centuries of Sunni verses Shiite hatred further complicate their battlefield. Indeed, Shiite vengeance is not something savored cold nor is the second fiddle role foisted upon a Sadist Hussein bereft minority Sunni populace, starkly inferred by scores of tortured bullet ridden cadavers belonging to both sects, strewn about the surreally battered landscape of what was once the cradle of civilization. Although Gaza abuts Israel and Iraq does not, both enclaves would be presciently assessed by warrior Sharon and savvy advisors, before surrendering most of Judea and Samaria to morphed Jordanian Arabs in turmoil. Conflagrations throughout the entire Middle East region could merge into a unified raging inferno, thus any major land concessions by Israel could result in disaster to say the least. Iran's Persian fundamentalist Shiite rulers salivate, ever-enriching their cache of wealth with extorted fossil fuel revenues, anticipating a wider sphere of influence in the longed for Shiite dominated Iraq of their maniacal dreams, and the monetary means to assert a fundamentally intolerant influence throughout the Middle East. Do farsi translations for Gaza, West Bank, and even Jerusalem sound sweet to fanatically intolerant AhMADinejad and company? Jihad obsessed fundamentalist Islam trumps all, even those fighting feuding Muslim-style Hatfield-and-McCoy-like Shiites and Sunnis, thus a few billion petrodollars morphed to rials funneled towards fundamentalist Hamas Sunnis to purchase weapons of Fatah destruction, compliments of got-rocks fundamentalist Iranian Shiite oil tycoons, could be in the Persians' deck of kings and aces. Would Sharon pull his troops out of Judea and Samaria, leaving those enclaves ripe for jihad junky pickings, considering all this?

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, presumably carrying Sharon's baton, has little of the military strategist's instincts. A good coach changes game plans when warranted, as does a good leader. Per barrel oil prices have surged dramatically over the last year or so, as has the wealth of Jew/Israel-despising Middle Eastern regimes. Furthermore, one such regime Iran has suggested Israel be wiped off the map. Ceding land emboldens terrorists, casting an image of weakness to those that yearn for Israel's destruction. Hamas would once again loudly assume credit for Olmert's folly, if it is perpetrated, accept financing from Iran, buy bigger and better weapons, perhaps of the WMD variety, and attempt to use them against the perceived retreating Jewish State. In a Middle East jungle, weakness begets aggression. Sharon might have adopted a more prescient point of view, noticing among other things current unrelenting wanton missile attacks from Gaza into Israel, contemplated the error of his ways, and changed course. Then again, perhaps Sharon knew all along that Gaza would erupt in chaos if given the chance, thus presume world opinion would encourage him to maintain control over Judea and Samaria lest those enclaves too would become potential bastions of terrorism. We cannot be sure as to what the former Prime Minister of Israel was thinking when he gave away Gaza. However, it should be crystal clear that any more land giveaways would only bring more tsuris to an already beleaguered Jewish State. What might it take to convince the current Prime Minister that he must reverse direction; no longer offering justifiably secured Israeli land for in effect nothing at all? What might it take for but an ort of sanity to permeate the minds of Israel's current leaders?

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, May 26, 2006.

A close look at the addresses of President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert yesterday yields the following.

Bush addressed the goal,

"In 2002, I outlined my vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. Prime Minister Olmert told me that he and his government share this vision. The international community seeks to realize this goal to the road map, which calls for a comprehensive settlement that resolves all outstanding issues between Israelis and Palestinians."
So the Roadmap is a path to the "vision" and does not supplant it. That's good for Israel because the vision places high hurdles on the "Palestinians". But what this wonderful vision fails to make clear is that the green line is the intended border.
"While any final status agreement will be only achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes, and no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations on a final status agreement, the Prime Minister's ideas could be an important step toward the peace we both support."

Thus Olmert's convergence plan are now considered to be "ideas" only. One wonders why a final status agreement can "only be acheived on the basis of mutually agreed changes" as opposed to negotiations. Bush repeats the mantra "no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations". This was and is an outrageous imposition on Israel. To illustrate, when it comes to Iran, "all options are on the table". When it comes to Israel only one option is on the table. Israel must have the right to take steps to better her position while negotiations are ongoing and even more when they are not.

As for the Iranian bomb,

"We're determined that the Iranian regime must not gain nuclear weapons."

This is a very weak statement. A strong statement would have been, "under no conditions will the US permit Iran to gain nuclear weapons". It is little comfort, that in "the event of any attack on Israel, the United States will come to Israel's aid." What ever happened to "pre-emption"?

Olmert also referred to the "vision" as the basis for a settlement.

"The vision which you outlined in your historic speech of June 2002, of two democratic states living side-by-side in peace and security, is the basis of any progress towards a solution in this region."
Bush demanded, and Olmert agreed, to attempt negotiations before resorting to his ideas. but even then Olmert said,
"The implementation of these ideas would only be possible with the comprehensive support of the United States and the international community"

So clearly convergence is conditioned on support. Just as Bush is required to exhaust all possibilities for diplomacy to stop Iran before taking more aggressive action, so too must israel demonstrate that she has exhausted all possible diplomacy first. In both cases it is fair to say, Is vet du gournisht helphen or in English, "diplomacy doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell."

Furthermore, The Roadmap does not require negotiations until there is an end to violence etc. So why is Bush demanding negotiations now? Another crock.

Underlying all their remarks is the message, "Abbas, good; Hamas, bad." This is a crock, too. Nevertheless the US strategy continues to be based on the need for a "negotiating partner" rather then on the existence of one. Abbas and Fatah have done nothing to confirm that they are such a partner and they are not in power.

Another crock is to separate the people from their duly elected government.

"Our beef is not with the Palestinian people. Our beef is with the government that -- a group in the government that says they don't recognize Israel."

Bottom line is that there will be no convergence without international approval and no international approval without more diplomacy.

My take is that the international community will exact a heavy price for recognizing Olmert's proposed borders, should it decide to do so, and will insist on a quid pro quo for the "land grab". The idea that Israel can get more from negotiating with the US than with the Palestinians is another crock.

Friends of Israel must realize that the peace process and all negotiations with respect thereto lead only to one place, the Saudi Plan.

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 26, 2006.

Abbas discussed peace with the Nobel committee. He told them there is no military solution nor clash of civilizations. Favoring inter-faith dialogue, he wants to negotiate peace. As head of the PLO, which signed the previous agreements with Israel, he may conduct negotiations. He requests foreign arbitration, however, because, he said, otherwise Israel would make arbitrary decisions. Israel violates international law. It commits terrorism by using missiles to assassinate people, claiming civilian lives in the process.

There would be peace, if Israel would release all prisoners, adhere to UNO resolutions and signed agreements, and not withdraw unilaterally nor build settlements. UNO Resolution 194 would resolve the refugee problem, if followed.

He seeks a state on 22% of "historic Palestine." "Let us make Jerusalem, as we dreamed, the capital of two states, Palestine and Israel, open to all believers who can exercise their freedom of worship." But PM Netanyahu passed legislation that compelled the Arabs to flee Jerusalem, and change the Arab character of the city. Israel blocks many P.A. Arabs from working in Israel and denies the P.A. a port and airport. Israel thus keeps the P.A. economy down. Israeli actions produce Arab hatred, and Israeli strikes against the P.A. police prevented the P.A. from stanching Arab violence. Israel has many settlements in Gaza and is striving to keep 76% of Judea-Samaria (IMRA, 4/26).

The fundamental distortion in his presentation is to make the Arabs seem the victims. Ignoring the state of war that his side launched, he blames Israel for fighting back. The real problem besides Arab aggression is that the war drags on, because Israel does not fight to win and to win quickly.

His favorite Arab propaganda trick is to turn history on its head by truncating the last half-century and more. Then he claims that the Arabs merely are reacting to Israeli initiatives and hating Israel for them, in what he falsely describes as a territorial dispute. His Fatah and PLO Covenants and the Hamas Covenant make clear that the war is Islamist. The Arabs started terrorism decades before Israel, in self-defense, took over the Territories and turned to methods of anti-terrorism about which Abbas now complains. Indeed, it was Israel's peacefully intended offer of autonomy that enabled the Arabs to mount its escalating terrorism.

Such is that state of the world that the committee sat there and accepted his crock of false and misleading statements. I've explained many of these points before, but summarize them here, to show how much of a liar an Arab leader is, and how meekly or ignorantly the world hears him.

1. "No military solution"? There is no diplomatic solution, not to jihad. If Israel fought to win, it would solve the problem as far as the P.A. is concerned. To solve the problem with the surrounding countries would require reform of Islam.

2. No "clash of civilizations"? Iran declared a clash of civilizations. The Islamists declare jihad. Most Muslims are sympathetic, until the Islamists turn on them for insufficient zeal.

3. Inter-faith dialogue is the Muslim way of gaining respectability among infidels and putting them off guard.

4. Negotiate peace? He lacks authority to implement agreements. Arafat had the authority and violated them. Islam sanctions violations, not peace. Islam wants victory, not conflict resolution. Hence, Hizbullah contrived an excuse for continuing to wage war on Israel, even after Israel evacuated from southern Lebanon. UNO Resolution, negotiations, and withdrawals all make matters worse, because even if not biased, though they usually are, they help the jihadists.

5. The Arabs want foreign arbitration, because in the anti-Israel climate, foreign governments take the Arab side, however unjust and however harmful to themselves.

6. Israel does not violate international law. Missile attacks on terrorists are legal. That's war. Civilian casualties are by-products of the Arab war-crime of keeping their militias in civilian areas. Terrorism is aiming at civilians. Israel does not do that. The Arabs do violate international law, by committing terrorism and aggression.

7. Israel does adhere to signed agreements, but the Arabs breach them all, until Israel decides, upon occasion, that its one-sided compliance is unfair. The Arabs put deliberately false interpretations upon signed agreements, such as: (a) Claiming that a UNO Resolution requires total Israeli withdrawal, when the US that drafted the Resolution explained that its draft does not; (b) Ignoring the requirement that withdrawal be predicated upon peace; (c) Asserting that Olso forbids Jewish settlement-building, when it expressly permits it and the Palestine Mandate expressly requires it; and (d) Ignoring that 194 does not require refugee return. Abbas the supposed moderate demands refugee-return knowing that those enemies would destroy Jewish statehood from within.

8. There is no requirement to release Arab prisoners, not even at war's end. They are not prisoners of war, but war criminals. Half of the ones released resume terrorism. Better to keep them in prison.

9. Who dreamed of making Jerusalem also the capital of an Arab state? Not Israel but its enemies, using the notion to further undermine Zionism. When the city was divided, the Arab sector fired into the Jewish sector. Abbas citers freedom of religion asa false pretext for a land grab. Fact is, the Arabs deny freedom of religion and Israel grants Muslims and Christians freedom of religion within some limits for security. The Muslims have been destroying ancient Jewish artifacts on the Temple Mount and attack Jewish shrines and synagogues.

10. There is no "historical Palestine." Palestine just was a concept, not a governmental area until the Mandate. Judea-Samaria and Gaza are about 4% of the Palestine mandate, as of before Jordan and Israel gained independence. But the Arabs already have, in Jordan, 78% of the Mandate. If they gained that additional 4%, they would have 82%, leaving Israel only 18%. No parity, there. All told, the Arabs have about 500 times as much land as the Jews.

It is false to say that the Muslim Arabs want statehood over only Judea-Samaria and Gaza. They want sovereignty over Israel, too. Their Covenants reflect Arafat's strategy of conquering Israel in phases, using the Territories as a base for taking over Israel.

11. Israel chasing out Christians? Arabs? PM Netanyahu did not promote such legislation, and, in fact, the population of both has increased in Israel. The population of Arabs has increased in Jerusalem. The P.A., however, like Muslim states, has oppressed Christians and made many flee. The Christian population in Judea-Samaria is but a shadow of its former self. Abbas made a generalization without supporting specifics. He is covering up for ethnic cleansing by Muslims.

12. Jerusalem did not have a particularly Arab cast. It long was a Jewish city. Israel would be within its rights to keep it that way. It happens that Arab rulers repress minority cultures, Israel doesn't.

13. Yes, Israel bars many P.A. Arabs from working in Israel. That is its right; the P.A. Arabs have no right to work in Israel. When they are allowed to enter freely, they bring in terrorists among them. That Abbas failed to mention. By omitting Israel's reason -- Arab perfidy -- he hides Arab guilt and makes Israel seem guilty of arbitrarily imposing hardship upon the Arabs. The same is true about the port and seaport, after the Arabs smuggled weapons in even without those ports.

14. Israel was willing to do much for the P.A. economy, but the Arabs made war on Israel, thereby discouraging Israeli help, foreign investment, and domestic investment. The Arab rulers extorted, stole, monopolized, and failed to institute business law. Hence the Arabs stifled their own economy. Abbas became rich as a result of his position.

15. Israel produces Arab hatred? What about the P.A. media and curriculum of bigotry, calling for the murder of Christians, Americans, and Jews? One of the actions usually cited as producing Arab resentment is establishing checkpoints. If Israel didn't have them, terrorists would murder thousands more Israelis. The fault is the Arabs. Abbas was supposed to have eradicated terrorism, but he honored it, yet blames violence by Arabs on Israeli reaction to Arab violence.

16. Abbas claims that Israeli attacks on the P.A. police crippled its ability to fight terrorism. Nonsense. The P.A. still had 70,000 police. If properly paid and motivated, they could have eradicated Fatah and Hamas, but they were allies of those militias.

If I were the PM of Israel, I would have attacked Hamas more, but the point is, the P.A. police either were committing terrorism or fought against Israeli raids on terrorists. The P.A. never made an effort against terrorism. Arafat financed terrorism!

I checked the given date of the speech, and saw that it was 4/26/06, which is months after Israel evacuated from Gaza settlements that Abbas complains about. Obviously he is lying. It also is clear, both from plans that PM Olmert has alluded to and from the evacuation from northern Samaria, that Israel is striving to keep just a few percent of Judea-Samaria. Abbas' complaints are false, seeking to give an unfavorable impression about Israel and to make the Arabs seem the victims.

Abbas and his people are as deceitful and vicious as any ever. He and they should be international pariahs. They they are not, and that Israel is, demonstrate the pervasive power of antisemitism, ignorance, political correctness, mercantilism, and Western defeatism.


For 12 years, the P.A. Arabs have violated their peace agreements, and the US has subsidized them. They never had to face serious consequences for their war crimes. Finally, their election of a nakedly belligerent P.A. regime got some Western donors (whose contributions largely have been embezzled or diverted to war) to indicate they would withhold the funds until the Hamas regime dropped jihad. Hamas makes clear at every opportunity that it won't.

The West caved in. Not surprising, in view of its record of not holding Palestinian Arab war criminals accountable. Its rationalization that it is providing only humanitarian aid is a thin tissue. For one reason, many of the P.A. employees who would thereby get paid are the teachers who indoctrinate Arab children in hating Jews and Westerners (IMRA, 5/11 from ZOA).

The US boycotts other totalitarian regimes, why not this one?


Bahrain negotiated a free trade agreement with the US. An agreed-upon US condition was that the Arabs would close the anti-Israel boycott office and end the boycott, in favor of free trade. As the agreement is about to go into effect, the Arabs claim they are in process of closing the office, but one of their officials asserts they won't (IMRA, 5/11).

Why should closing an office take long? This is the usual Arab way of dissembling -- conflicting stories, stalling, and non-compliance. Their promises mean nothing. Their behavior is disgusting, but since the US winks at it, the US is contemptible -- pretending to have principles. If the US were serious, it would make its condition that the agreement does not take effect until Bahrain complies. Imagine how much simpler Israeli life would be, and how many fewer terrorist attacks, if Israel had not invited the PLO into the Territories to take over the Arab areas and had insisted that the Oslo accords hold only so long as the Arabs repress terrorism!


Iran's list of major Mideast problems did not include Israel. Israel needs to get the point across that the region has so many problems, that stability would not be enhanced by its making concessions to the Muslim fanatics. Those fanatics may divert their people from the problems by blaming Israel and making war on it (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 5/10).

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, May 25, 2006.

Make no mistake about it, it was a great speech. Olmert said all the politically correct things in just the right way. Assume for a moment that instead of doing so, Olmert spoke truth to power. That's the bomb I am speaking of. i

Members of Congress

We hold these truths to be self evident;

  • The Arabs have rejected the state of Israel for one hundred years and will continue to do so for another hundred years.

  • Judea and Samaria are Jewish lands pursuant to the Hebrew Bible, Jewish history, the League of Nations Palestine Mandate and by conquest.

  • Judea and Samaria are not "Palestinian" lands

  • The settlements are not illegal.

  • The occupation is not illegal

  • The "peace process" is a sham intended only to force Israel's capitulation.

  • The "peace process" has not advanced peace but has advanced war.

  • The "peace process" has resulted in many deaths and in the destabilization of the ME.

  • The US should support Israel's victory rather then its defeat.

  • The US is sacrificing Israel just as Britain and France sacrificed Checkslovakia seventy years earlier.

  • The vision of a Palestinian state living in peace with Israel is a pipe dream.

  • The assumption that there is sufficient land west of the Jordan to accommodate two states is without foundation.

  • The lion will only lie with the lamb only when the Messiah comes whether for the first or second time.

  • The Arabs in the territories when voting for Hamas were voting for the destruction of Israel.

  • The US is preventing Israel from defeating the terrorists.
Therefore, Israel
  • is revoking the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap.

  • will no longer participate in an internationally lead peace process

  • will provide the Arabs with autonomy only

  • will expel all terrorists and their sympathizers

  • will provide generous inducements to all other Arabs to leave the land of Israel

Only this will end the conflict and bring peace to the Land of Israel.

So I ask you, the Members of Congress, will you support Israel in the cause of peace. Or will you instead punish Israel for telling the truth.

Remember the words of our great rabbi, "The truth will make you free".

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Buddy Macy, May 25, 2006.

Please take 120 seconds out of your busy schedule and make this one call. I just did it myself. Call President Bush between 9 & 5 Eastern Time, at: 202-456-1111, and, when the operator personally answers, say, "Please tell Mr. Bush to release Jonathan Pollard NOW!" THAT'S IT!!! Thank you so much!!!

If you have never acted on one of my suggestions in the past, I beg of you to take action on this one; it is so simple to do. I am sending this email to nearly 2000 people. Imagine if all of you make the call, and send this message to all of the people on your email list. If the White House receives 10,000 phone calls in one day, demanding the release of this Jewish Martyr, he WILL be freed!! Please imagine yourself in his jail cell for one hour. He has been there for seven thousand, five hundred days! buddy macy

Jonathan Pollard is serving his 21st year of a life sentence in the U.S. for warning Israel about the build-up of unconventional weapons of war for use against Israel, and about enemy plans to destroy the Jewish state. Pollard's life sentence is the harshest sentence ever meted out by the U.S. for spying for an ally. Indeed, it is much harsher than the sentences meted out to most of those who have committed far more serious crimes by spying for enemies of the United States. Jonathan's speech was delivered today, Jerusalem Day, on his behalf. It follows:

My Brothers and Sisters, the whole House of Israel:

Over the last 21 years it has never been easy for me to get a message out from within the prison walls. Every such attempt diminishes the limited opportunity that I have for maintaining contact with the outside world.

That is why - right from the start of my incarceration - I have always deliberately avoided using the limited opportunities to communicate with the Israeli public to talk about my own private hell. I have always preferred to forego expressing my feelings of isolation, betrayal and abandonment; or speaking about my deteriorating health and the life -and-death nature of my daily existence. Instead, I chose to focus on the national aspects of my plight: the mitzvah of Pidyan Shvuyim and the moral obligation never to abandon a wounded soldier in the field.

However, time is running out, and I can no longer afford to continue in the same vein.

Very few prisoners survive 21 years under the conditions in which I have been held and continue to be held. Those Israeli officials, who have for years claimed to be using "quiet diplomacy" for my release, while waiting for time to take its own effect, never imagined that the "Pollard problem" would still be around after all this time. They never dreamed that I would refuse to give up and just die.

The support and encouragement which I have received over the years, first and foremost from my wife, Esther, and from my rabbi, HaRav Mordecai Eliyahu, shlita, and from all of the activists and supporters who work with them in the struggle for my release, is what has kept me alive and enabled me to go on.

The fact that I am still alive today is a complete miracle. My rabbi, Kavod HaRav Mordecai Eliyahu says that the reason I have survived miraculously from day to day is because the Shechinah is with me and has been accompanying me in prison throughout my long ordeal. The Rav says that by its actions the Government of Israel has not only abandoned and betrayed me, but it has also shown no mercy to the Shechinah[**] in captivity.

My brothers and sisters! I have been slowly bleeding to death before your very eyes for 21 years! My desperate situation, the result of the Government's treachery and abandonment, is a chillul HaShem that screams to the Heavens.

And where is the Nation? I cry out to you from the depths of my soul: Zion, hallo tishalee eht shlom assiraych?[*] Zion, won't you seek the welfare of your captives!

If Zion will not seek the welfare of her captives, it is not the personal problem of the captives. The problem rests entirely upon Zion and upon all who dwell in Zion.

I do not fear for my own fate. Whatever Heaven decrees for me I will accept with love. But I am filled with dread for the fate of the Nation which I so love. If the Nation continues to allow the Government to ignore the divine commandment: "Do not stand idly by your brother's blood," without crying out or lifting a finger to stop this terrible sin, I am afraid to even to think about what the consequences will be.

I do not know how much time is left. I only hope and pray with all my might, for the sake of the Nation of Israel, that we will all wake up and do what needs to be done, now, before it is too late!

With love of Israel,
Jonathan Pollard

FCI Butner
Butner, North Carolina.

*Translation of title: Zion won't you seek the welfare of your captives?
Title is from a famous poem of the same name, written by Yehudah Halevi, a Jewish physician, poet and philosopher, who lived in Toledo, Spain, circa 1085 -1141. The heart-rending phrase, "Zion, hallo tishalee eht shlom assiraych?" (Zion, won't you seek the welfare of your captives?) is the Israeli idiom for those held in captivity in foreign lands. This poem is the source of the modern-day concept "Prisoner of Zion."

** The Shechina: In simplest terms, the Shechina (n.f.) is the presence of G-d which dwells with Israel, offering comfort in sorrow and accompanying her in exile.

Contact Buddy Macy at vegibud@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, May 25, 2006.

Shalom everyone. Please read the following of my talk with Arlene Kushner, all of which are extremely important. If anyone has any suggestions or thoughts, especially with regards to Arlene Kushner's call to action (which is underlined), please share them, as we are all in this together! Tizku lemitzvos.

Arlene's email address is and her website address is www.ArlenefromIsrael.info


Lee Caplan: What's your reading on the meeting between Bush and Olmert yesterday?

Arlene Kushner: What to make of the meeting yesterday between President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert? There were press reports that focused on various aspects of what was said in their press conference or shared by diplomatic staff. The emphasis within these press reports varied, but tended to be upbeat. Bush, while hesitating to fully endorse Olmert's plan, seemed surprisingly positive, calling it "bold," and saying, it "could be an important step toward the peace we both support. I'm encouraged by his constructive efforts to find ways to move the peace process forward."

I read that, and I had one of my "HUH?" moments, which tend to come frequently these days. Bush has been advised by several sources -- including Jordan's King Hussein -- that Olmert's plan will destabilize the region and give terrorists a larger area within which to operate. This advances the peace process?

Of course, Bush qualified his statements by saying that a negotiated final status agreement would best serve the cause of peace. But, he conceded, it's difficult to negotiate such a settlement with Hamas in charge of the PA. And, if it turns out that negotiations are not possible (because Hamas won't abandon terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and accept all previous agreements), Olmert's "ideas could lead to a two-state solution."

Another "HUH?" Pulling back and giving land to Palestinians who won't abandon terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist or accept all previous agreements leads to a two-state solution?

Well, it turns out, unsurprisingly, that there's a lot of diplomatic double talk in all of this. There was a desire to make things positive and smooth and upbeat during Olmert's first visit. Certainly there could be no overt public tough talk.

However, what is clear -- which we knew going into this meeting -- is that Bush is signaling Olmert to try to negotiate seriously with Abbas. No one realistically thinks a full settlement will come tomorrow, if Olmert meets with Abbas, but, as a State Department spokesman said, "We think it's very useful to keep those channels of communication open."

I would guess that as long as there are "channels of communication" open then the U.S. is going to say hope isn't dead, there is a chance of negotiated settlement, and so the time for unilateral action is not yet.

Bush says that he will want to learn more about this plan in the months ahead before signing off on it. And, say diplomatic sources, Bush will be looking for an international consensus on this. According to the Jerusalem Post, "The U.S....does not want Olmert to push forward with his plan before it has a chance to gain support from European countries and from Israel's Arab neighbors [Jordan and Egypt]." Need I tell you what the chances are of the international community and Arab nations signing off on an Israeli plan that the Palestinians object to, and that Jordan and Egypt fear?

This may be Bush's out. Having gone it alone on Iraq and fared badly, he is unlikely to buck international consensus on this to support Olmert.

And there is yet more. President Bush, in his press conference with Olmert, said, "...any final status agreement will be only achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes, and no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations on a final status agreement..."

Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, explains this: "The United States won't stop Israel from bulldozing Jewish communities - but warns that just because Mr. Olmert bulldozes some communities doesn't mean Israel can keep the ones it doesn't bulldoze. That's up to the deal Israel ultimately strikes with the Palestinians."

Olmert originally said that Israel would unilaterally set borders if the Palestinians won't negotiate, and then hedged a bit, saying the lines would be very close to final borders.

Bush is saying, "No way."

Olmert has been saying that Jewish settlements that will be retained will be annexed and made part of Israel proper.

Bush is saying that this would "prejudice" later final status negotiations. The Palestinians aren't going to agree to Israel keeping anything over the pre-67 lines, and State Department policy supports this.

At the press conference -- see http://imra.org.il/story.php3?id=29378 -- Bush was asked by a journalist about major settlement blocs being annexed to Israel and whether he would support this.

His answer: "...refer to my April 14th, 2004 letter. I believed it when I wrote it, and I still believe it."

This is an extremely instructive answer. He is referring to the letter that PM Sharon returned with when the "disengagement" was being discussed. "You see!" he crowed then, "President Bush has given us the right to keep major settlement blocs. We have gained his support." It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now. A simple reading of that letter made it clear that (even though it would seem that demographic changes should influence the situation) the U.S. supports the right of the two parties to determine borders and will not interfere. But who read it? People believed Sharon.

The task that now falls to those of us on both sides of the Atlantic who understand the folly and the dangers of Olmert's plan is to make sure people are not taken in a second time. Olmert must not be given the opportunity to hype this visit and make it seem as if the president of the U.S. supports his intentions. Who is going to read the press conference text? Everyone must know Bush's real position. Everyone must be made to realize that even if Israel pulls back, further pullbacks will be demanded by the international community down the road. There will be no Israeli unilateral setting of borders with the Palestinians and no international recognition of Israeli annexation of any settlements. Giving up land now simply weakens us.

Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams and Assistance Secretary of State David Welch will be coming here next month to discuss the plan, and reportedly Secretary of State Rice, who has already done us damage with the Rafah agreement, is scheduled to be here in the fall.

For the record, the plan is apparently being renamed "realignment," because it sounds better. That's the key for Olmert, isn't it? Packaging what he intends to do so it is palatable for the people.

In a later conversation.

Lee Kaplan: What do we need to do to make sure that people are not taken in a second time?

Arlene Kushner: That is the key question, isn't it, Lee? For starters, we who write must make these matters clear. Communication on lists helps as well. Exposure, focus on the facts, as much as possible. What I wish for, here in Israel, is the small fortune that would be required to place ads in Hebrew in all the major papers responding on a regular basis to the lying claims Olmert is going to make. Know anyone there who has that small fortune and might be interested in investing it this way? Short of this, there are ways of getting information into the news without cost via press conferences by people important enough to make the news, and other techniques. We have to think creatively and dynamically. We cannot lose this time.

Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 25, 2006.

Your editorial, "A Viable Palestinian State" (NY Times, 5.25.06) speaks eloquently for the need to create a state for the Palestinians. But your assertion, couched in the language of advice to President Bush and PM Olmert, that "...there will not be peace in the Middle East unless the Palestinians have a say in creating a state that can function", is a sad testimony to your abysmal ignorance of the history and reality of the Arab-Israel conflict.

For the 27 years from June, 1967 to June, 1994, the West Bank and Gaza Strip experienced an amazingly successful expansion of economy, education, infrastructure, technical and medical advances, and democracy....under Israeli sovereignty. World Bank statistics show that the GDP of these territories grew between 6 and 13% per year during those 27 years, there was almost no unemployment as close to 300,000 Arabs crossed the "green line" daily to work in the Israeli economy, tourism skyrocketed, roads and sewerage and water supply and telephones and electricity were brought into the 20th century, the population more than tripled (from c. 950,000 in 1967 to more than 3,000,000 in 1994), infant mortality plummeted and life expectancy rose, and seven universities sprang up where only 3 teacher-training colleges had existed before.

Most of this unprecedented progress and prosperity was due to Israel's "Mini-Marshall plan". Israel poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in the hope that the economic progress and material well-being of the Arab residents would translate in to what we then called a "peace dividend"...the recognition that peace is better than war, and cooperation promises a better life and life-style for all of us and our children than does the endless relentless commitment to terrorism and confrontation.

It didn't work. When Arafat came to power, thanks to Oslo (9/13/1993), Israel's sovereignty over much of the West Bank and Gaza Strip came to an end; but all of this progress and prosperity came to a grinding halt and was quickly reversed. By 2004 the GDP of the West Bank was less than one-tenth of what it was ten years earlier. All thanks to Arafat and his terror war.

The prosperity and viability of these territories during the 27 years of Israeli sovereignty can be easily replicated no matter where, or how, the borders of the new state are determined; but only if and when the Arab leadership abandons violence, rejects terrorism, stops incitement, sits down to peaceful negotiations without pre-conditions, and commits to a future of peaceful cooperation with Israel and with Jordan.

Abbas has no power to do this. He cannot control his own government. He cannot stop Hamas' terrorists or even his own. He cannot deliver. So there is no point to negotiating with him.

Hamas is in control of the Palestinian Authority. Hamas can deliver. But Hamas will not negotiate with Israel. Hamas will not recognize Israel. Hamas will not stop the terror war until Israel is destroyed and its 5,400,000 Jews are dead.

So what is the point of pressuring Israel to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority?

Today, no matter what size or shape the future state of Palestine may be, and whether those dimensions are decided by Olmert unilaterally or via negotiations with some future Palestinian Authority leadership, the Palestinian state's viability will be determined by its leaders' commitment to peace and cooperation.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ruth Matar, May 25, 2006.
Dear Friends,

This morning I read the following front page headline in the Jerusalem Post: BUSH, CONGRESS APPLAUD WEST BANK PULLOUT PLAN

I literally wanted to cry! My native country is falling for this con-artist who went to Washington D.C. for the express purpose of pulling the wool over America's eyes with his "convergence plan". By the way, Ehud Olmert changes the name of his plan almost daily. First it is "convergence"; then it is "consolidation"; presently it is "realignment". He is like a vendor of snake oil in the Old American West, who is looking for a catchy label for his product.

The intent of Olmert's plan is the withdrawal of Israel from the heart of its own country; withdrawal from its inheritance and lands, that, in essence, endanger the very existence of the State of Israel.

Olmert's "Convergence Plan" will bring Hamas, Hizbullah, and Al-Quaeda, and in their wake, Iran--the true power behind these powers--to the very heart of Israel, inside Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel, and to the rest of the cities of this country. The "Convergence Plan" is in essence a plan for Israel's suicide.

Mister Olmert stops at nothing! He insists that he is following Sharon's plan to retreat from Judea and Samaria. This is an outright lie. But since Sharon is in an irreversible coma, he is not able to refute Olmert's declarations.

On the last visit which Ariel Sharon made to the United States, then Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom accompanied the Prime Minister. Silvan Shalom, in an article in today's Jerusalem Post denies that Olmert's "retreat plan" was "the Sharon way".

"Arik said that there would not be another disengagement AND PUBLICLY DENIED IT when Olmert spoke a year and a half ago of a second disengagement."


PRESIDENT BUSH: "I outlined my vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. Prime Minister Olmert told me that he and his government shared this vision."

[RM: What Olmert should have told President Bush is that the People of Israel do NOT share this "dream" of the creation of a second Palestinian state carved out of the Holy Land. In the historical perspective, the "Land of the Bible" is the birthright of the Jewish People as G-d promised to our forefathers.]

President Bush said that it is necessary to come up with a mechanism to get food and medicine and aid to the Palestinians and invited Ehud Olmert to comment on this.

OLMERT: "Thank you, Mr. President. Indeed, the government, Sunday, decided to spend NIS 50 million buying medical equipment--about $11 million--for the time being, to buy medical equipment and drugs needed for the hospitals in Gaza. And as I said during the cabinet meeting, we will spend any amount of money needed to save lives of innocent Palestinians suffering from the indifference of their government."

[RM: Olmert forgot to mention the Israeli colon cancer patients who are currently demonstrating in Jerusalem for drugs to be included in the government's health basket, which have until now been denied. They have been hunger striking and demonstrating outside the Knesset, demanding the National Government include lifesaving drugs in the national healthcare basket. The protestors told the media that the drugs that have the potential to save their lives cost tens of thousands of shekels monthly, and that they do not have the ability to acquire them privately, blaming the government for "signing their death sentences". The cancer patients announced that their demonstration is being joined by breast cancer and chronic asthma patients.

Ehud Olmert, charity begins at home! Why don't you concern yourself with saving the lives of innocent Jews suffering from the indifference of their government, since you are the Prime Minister of Israel?]


Suddenly Olmert loves to quote the Bible, something we have never heard from him before! "My parents came to the Holy Land following the verse in the Old Testament in the book of Second Samuel, 'I will appoint a place for My People Israel and I will plant them in the their own land and they will dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more.'"

[RM: Olmert has no shame whatsoever! He, together with his mentor Sharon, "disturbed" 9,000 Jews in Gush Katif by forcibly expelling them from their homes in the Holy Land. Some of these Jews, who only nine months ago were productive homeowners, with farms, businesses or employment, have now become homeless "refugees" still waiting for their compensation payment. Some have been paid a pittance advance money, which they are still using for food, rather than being able to save for a new dwelling place. Others have received nothing at all and have to rely on charity for food and clothing.]

OLMERT: "We owe a quiet and normal life to ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. After defending ourselves for almost 60 years against attacks, all our children should be allowed to live free of fear and terror."

[RM: Does Mr. Olmert think we are all mentally incapacitated? The Kassam rockets and the more dangerous Katusha rockets are increasingly raining down on southern Israel, and Ashkelon, with its essential installations of electricity plants and oil pipelines. Terror and suicide bombing has increased substantially since the disengagement from Gaza. A recent victim of terror is Daniel Cantor Wultz, a 16-year-old high school student from Florida, who came to spend Passover in Israel. Some people are surprised that Olmert invited the Wultz family to hear his address to Congress, since their son was a victim of the increased terror after the disengagement from Gaza.]

The megalomania of Ehud Olmert has no boundaries. On every possible occasion, he keeps repeating, almost like a mantra, "I WILL SET THE PERMANENT BOUNDARIES OF ISRAEL."

Ehud Olmert has put himself in direct opposition to the words of the G-d of Israel and the Bible:

HASHEM said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Raise now your eyes and look out from where you are: northward, southward, eastward and westward. For all the land that you see, to you will I give it and to your descendants forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth so that if one can count the dust of the earth, then your offspring, too, can be counted. Arise, walk about the land through its length and breadth! For to you I will give it. And Abram moved his tent and came and dwelled in the plains of Mamre, which are in Hebron; and he built there an altar to HASHEM." (Genesis: 13:14-18)

On that day HASHEM made the covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants have I given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates." (Genesis: 15:18)

"I will make you most exceedingly fruitful, and make nations of you; and kings shall descend from you. I will ratify My covenant between Me and you, and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an everlasting covenant, to be a G-d to you and to your offspring after you; and I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojourns - the whole of the land of Canaan - as an everlasting possession; and I shall be a G-d to them." (Genesis: 17:6-8)

Ehud Olmert, add the following scripture to your list of Bible quotations:

"You shall not move a boundary of your fellow, which the early ones marked out, in your inheritance that you shall inherit in the Land that HASHEM, your G-d, gives you to possess it." (Deut: 19:14)

With Blessings and Love for Israel,

Ruth Matar

PS: Dear Friends, it is very important that you pass this Letter from Jerusalem on to everybody you can think of. Especially to President Bush, your Senators and your Congressman.

In order to find out the names of the two Senators of your State, and the Congressman of your District, call the U.S. CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD: 202-224-3121

The telephone number of President Bush is: 202-456-1111 His fax number is: 202-456-2461

To Go To Top

Posted by Ragen, Naomi, May 25, 2006.


We live in strange times. An Israeli Prime Minister comes to America to ask American approval to throw thousands of Israelis from their homes, in order to hand the land over to her sworn enemies. Americans, who probably can't figure out what the heck is going on, and why an Israeli thinks this ridiculous idea is good for the country,are scratching their heads while calling it a "bold plan." Try "reckless," unthought-out", "stupid."

The "if-we-don't-have-a-peace-partner- then-we'll-have-to-insist-on-retreat mantra, currently in vogue among Israeli politicians, who puff out their chests when they say it, as if it's a threat to our enemies, instead of a wonderful reward, has to be the dumbest line our Foreign Ministry has ever tried to sell. But then, our Prime Minister was never a very bright man, but rather a shrewd, self-serving, unprincipled politician who was in the right place at the right time. He's like a car salesman going to sell the latest BMW to someone he knows loves BMW's, only buys BMW's, and wants another BMW. Selling another Israeli withdrawal to the Americans has to be the easiest task any Israeli Prime Minister ever had to "achieve." I hope Israel still has some real friends in Congress who will see through this sickening travesty of a foreign policy and resist.

Below, Caroline Glick describes all we have to lose by giving in to the slick campaign to pull the wool over our eyes once again. Her article appeared in The Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1148287842900) May. 22, 2006.

I'm afraid I'm no longer a good customer for the Israeli leftist-propaganda machine. I was there when Oslo was being sold. We all paid the price for our passivity and ignorance. And keep on paying.

Resist. Question Israeli spokesmen. Don't line up like ducks behind the Olmert machinery. Resist, resist, resist. In your synagogues. In your Jewish organizations. In your communities.

To support Israel, means to support all her people, her long-term needs, not the deluded government of the moment.


If all goes as planned, as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert meets today with US President George W. Bush in the White House, several thousand protesters from around the US and Canada will be across the Mall by the US Senate protesting Olmert's visit. These will not be the standard Israel haters from the Left or the Islamist crowd. They will be neither neo-Nazis nor Communists. Rather the planned protest is being organized by Israel's staunchest Jewish and Christian supporters.

The people getting on buses to travel to Washington to protest Olmert's visit believe that Olmert's planned withdrawal from some 95 percent of Judea and Samaria and partition of Jerusalem are suicidal for Israel and will have a devastating impact on US national security. As they note in their press release, Olmert "seeks to secure the approval of President Bush to carry out more Jewish expulsions and giving over of land to Hamas (a Teheran-sponsored terrorist group), actions that totally undermine America's war on terror."

Voices from inside of the Bush Administration claim that Olmert's planned withdrawal is "a done deal." The relevant administration officials argue there it would be futile for the US to register any objection to Olmert's plan because Olmert and his government are wholly committed to carrying it out.

But the "plan" is anything but a done deal. The mass expulsion of Israelis from their homes in Judea and Samaria has not begun. The security fence whose completion is supposed to precede the enactment of the mass expulsions is far from complete. Indeed its route has yet to be finalized. The IDF has made no plans of any kind for defending Israel from the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. Top level Jordanian government officials have voiced serious concern to US lawmakers, Israeli officials and the media about the ramifications of Olmert's plan for the survivability of the Hashemite regime. It is simply disingenuous to say that it is too late for the US to consider opposing Olmert's plan.

ASIDE FROM that, over the past 58 years, the US has never considered anything that Israel has done to be "a done deal" if it hasn't agreed that it should be a done deal. In 1956 for instance, Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula. Then prime minister David Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced joyously that Israel would never leave the Sinai. Washington had other ideas. Several days later, after some overtly hostile strong arming from then president Dwight D. Eisenhower and his advisors, Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced that Israel would be withdrawing from the Sinai forthwith.

In 1999, Israel finalized an agreement to sell three Phalcon spy planes to China. The Chinese started making their payments. Then president Bill Clinton summoned then prime minister Ehud Barak to the White House for urgent consultations the day before a planned visit to Jerusalem from China's leader, and Barak cancelled the deal. So there is no credibility to the claim that the US cannot stop an Israeli government from doing what it has its heart set on doing.

THE QUESTION is not whether the US can weigh in on the issue. The question is whether the US should intervene. To determine the answer to this question it is important to keep certain truths in mind. First, Olmert maintains that the election results that propelled him to the Prime Minister's Office were proof that he has public support for his planned withdrawal. Yet, as Hillel Halkin pointed out this month in Commentary, the elections were anything but a referendum regarding Olmert's plan. The election results, which gave Olmert's Kadima faction less than a quarter of the seats in the Knesset, were a sign that Israel's body politic is unraveling. The electorate's fragmentation was made clear both by record low voter turnout and by the dismemberment of the major parties like Likud and Labor and even Kadima to the benefit of sectoral parties like Shas, Yisrael Beitenu and the Pensioners Party. During the campaign Kadima registered its greatest losses of support after Olmert began discussing his plan to withdraw from Judea and Samaria.

Yet even if Olmert did not receive a mandate for his withdrawal plan from the Israeli voters, he is the legally elected prime minister. In the eyes of many of Israel's supporters in America, it is wrong for the US to second-guess the wisdom of the Israeli leadership. While in theory this position is correct, it comes apart at the seams when the ramifications of Olmert's plans for US national security are taken into account.

Knowledgeable sources in Washington policy circles maintain that in the two weeks preceding Olmert's visit to Washington, Israeli officials were asked to allay American concerns regarding the security consequences of Olmert's plan. Specifically, Israeli officials have been called upon to explain how Judea and Samaria will be prevented from following the model set in Gaza when Israel's retreat enabled the transformation of Gaza into a base for international terrorists along similar lines to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

Israel's military attache in Washington, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel was reportedly sent to the White House to dispel these concerns. It should be recalled that Harel commanded last summer's retreat from Gaza. Harel was lionized at the time by the Israeli media for successfully implementing the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Gaza while averting civil war.

Yet Harel has never been called to account for the fact that he made no plans for Israel to defend itself from the threats that - as foreseen - arose from Gaza and from the Sinai in the aftermath of the retreat. Because of his failure, IDF forces in the Southern Command were left without contingency plans for contending with the transformation of Gaza into a base for global jihad and without adequate means to secure Ashkelon and the other communities bordering Gaza from the daily missile, rocket and mortar attacks to which they have been subjected since the retreat.

This is relevant because Harel reportedly told his US interlocutors that they have no reason to worry about the consequences of Olmert's plan because it only involves the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Judea and Samaria. The IDF, he said will retain its current positions in the areas.

WHETHER OR not Harel realized it at the time, he was not being wholly truthful to his American audience. Even if the plan today is for the IDF to retain control of the areas in which the civilians are set to be expelled, and to retain their present deployments, any educated observer of Israel's political and cultural dynamics will attest that there is no way that this can happen.

If Olmert expels tens of thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes, he will destroy the entire domestic rationale for the IDF deployment. As was the case in Lebanon, radical leftists within Israel will rise up and demand a full retreat. For its part, the nationalist camp will become so alienated by the expulsions that in the best case scenario, its members will simply cease to identify with the state. They will not support any military activities in the heartland of Jewish civilization that the state ethnically cleansed of all Jewish presence.

Aside from this, whether the IDF remains or not, the Israeli destruction of Israeli towns and villages will be broadcast throughout the world and be celebrated - rightly - as a strategic victory of jihad. Zionism isn't about the IDF, it is about Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. Israeli destruction of Israeli villages in the Land of Israel is the death of Zionism and our enemies know it even if we insist on denying this basic truth.

AND SO we return to our starting point. Olmert will meet Bush today and present to him a plan that will unravel Israeli society, which was already dangerously fragmented by the withdrawal from Gaza.

He will present to him a plan that is based upon the anti-Semitic notion that Jews should be prohibited from living in certain places because they are Jews, and the perverse notion that a Palestinian state founded on the principle of lebensraum and racial purity because by definition no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine, will be capable of living at peace one day with the Jewish state.

Olmert will present a plan that provides a strategic victory to the forces of global jihad in a war they wage not only against Israel but against the US and the Western world as a whole because they will see Israel destroying itself under the gun of their terror and enabling the establishment of yet another base for global terrorists.

Given all this, the question of whether or not the US should object to Olmert's plan is superseded by the question of how the US should make its rejection of this plan known to Olmert and whether its objection should similarly be communicated to the Israeli public.

Any ambiguity on this issue to Olmert; any retreat behind disingenuous statements about "done deals," will be nothing less than the revocation of the cardinal US strategies for winning this war: the advance of liberal values and the denial of bases of operation to global terrorists.

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 Bryna Berch, May 25, 2006.

This is a news item from the Telegraph in England (www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/ opinion/2006/05/25/dl2502.xml).

A reader commented, "Abbas (Abu Mazen) did not lift a finger to make peace, or even carry out the first step of the "Road Map", when his Fateh movement wss in power. It is highly, highly unlikely that he could deliver any pact with Israel that the Palestinians would honor and stick to."

A second reader said, "Hitler too was democratically elected, and for most of the 1930s Britain was at the very forefront of those who appeased him. This was an appeasement that ultimately cost the lives of many millions of people including the great majority of Jews then living in Europe. Is the Telegraph now suggesting that the world appeases once again a group dedicated to the destruction of millions of Jews? Has the Daily Telegraph really learned nothing in the last sixty years?"

Another commented, "It is so rare to read a sensible article about Israel in the British or European media." (Or as sensible as Eurobia is likely to get. Appeasement by any other name is still appeasement. It never works.)

In their dealings with the Palestinians, the United States and Israel are engaged in a charade. During Ehud Olmert's first visit to Washington as prime minister, George W Bush reiterated his support for a two-state negotiated solution in accordance with the Middle East "road map".

He also praised his visitor's plans as "bold ideas" that could be an "important step" towards peace, should that process falter.

The reality is that the road map has been in tatters since it was first agreed by America, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations in 2003. Steps towards permanent borders have been taken by Israel on its own: the building of the barrier and the withdrawal last year from the Gaza Strip and four West Bank settlements.

Having assumed the leadership of Ariel Sharon's Kadima party, Mr Olmert has campaigned for a continuation of that unilateralism: pulling out of more West Bank settlements, but incorporating the larger ones within Israel, thereby imposing a border.

In the face of unremitting hostility by Hamas to the existence of a Jewish state, the prime minister has said he will attempt to negotiate with Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority.

But Mr Abbas, whose Fatah movement was defeated in parliamentary elections in January, is a busted flush, unable to deliver anything.

Unless Hamas radically changes its views, Mr Olmert will go through the motions of talking to the Palestinian president before proceeding unilaterally with his plans, which he hopes to complete within three to four years.

The prime minister realises the futility of talking to Mr Abbas, and so probably does Mr Bush. But his administration is tying itself in knots over how to deal with Hamas.

Unwilling to talk to a terrorist organisation, it is planning to channel funds to Mr Abbas to pay the security services and fund public works.

In an attempt to starve a democratically elected government, it is favouring the co-founder of a movement that has became a byword for corruption. Nothing is better calculated to boost support for Hamas in the Occupied Territories. The Islamist challenge is real, but does not justify policies that are just plain stupid.

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 25, 2006.

Israelis leaders anxiously look to Mahmoud Abbas as a potential peace partner, largely because of his moderate statements in English. However, his Arabic statements continue to show admiration for even the most depraved terrorists. Likewise, Abbas rejects terror for tactical reasons only -- not because it is immoral.

During a television interview this week, Abbas twice referred to those terrorists serving "tens of life sentences" in Israeli jails as "our heroes." The terrorists who are serving "tens of life sentences" are those arch terrorists who have personally killed tens of Israelis,, and are sentenced to one life sentence for each murder. These are the people whom Mahmoud Abbas calls "our heroes."

In the statement on PA TV about the jailed terrorists' recent attempts to bring peace between the Fatah and Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas expressed his satisfaction with the: "initiative of our brothers, our jailed heroes, who have presented a similar initiative [for dialogue] ... the initiative proves that these heroes, who are sentenced to tens of life sentences, feel too that the homeland is in danger..." -- [PA TV May 23, 2006]

As PMW has reported in the past, even in his so-called "condemnations" of terror attacks, Abbas has always been careful in Arabic not to condemn terror because it is evil or immoral. He has criticized suicide terror only because it hurts the PA cause, as he did after the December 2005 suicide attack that killed five in Netanya.

Read "PA on Terror: 'Condemns' on paper, praises in practice" at the PMW website.

PMW Comment:

Israeli and Western leaders are so eager to find a viable partner for peace that they often mistake Palestinian Authority leaders' "lip service" in English as statements of truly peaceful intentions. But as PMW has reported for the past decade, the only way to understand these leaders' real opinions is to pay attention to what they are telling their own people in Arabic. These are the only messages that count.

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 Emanuel A. Winston, May 25, 2006.

Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, with the not so subtle connivance of President George W. Bush, was not content with the debacle they brought to the Gaza Strip. They now wish to destroy Jerusalem by bringing the chaos of Gaza and Baghdad to Israel's Eternal Capital City. Olmert, playing the role of Machiavelli, urged Sharon to abandon Gaza and Northern Samaria for the self-serving advantages Olmert and Sharon said it would bring.

Here we find the other mirror image of Machiavelli, the Arabist State Department, whispering their pernicious hate-filled advice to the sophomoric boy President to sign on to another Gaza-like blunder in the "west bank". It wasn't enough to fail to pacify Iraq as the Iraqi people and the Mujahadeen (a mixture of terrorists for Islam) are killing American soldiers by road-side explosives and suicide bombs - with impunity. Now they wish to bring the same failed pacification to Israel!

It wasn't enough to attempt the pacification of Afghanistan which is failing as the Taliban radical Muslims mount resurgent attacks, killing Afghans, U.N. and American soldiers.

It wasn't enough for Ariel Sharon to (at first) successfully fight off the Arab Muslim Terrorists at the furthest reaches of Israel's minuscule land mass but, they had to bring the enemy closer by running out of Gush Katif/Gaza and then from Samaria.

What exactly did each of these men hope to gain by pretending they knew how to appease and pacify the Muslim Jihadists (fighters for Islam)?

We know President Bush is desperate to politically offset American losses in Iraq and Afghanistan by creating an illusion of successfully befriending the hostile Palestinians whose votes demonstrate that they prefer Hamas Terrorists as their nation builders.

We know that PM Olmert cares almost nothing for the Land of Israel, her Jewish history and the Jews' Right of Return.

We know he is has a reputation as a self-serving politician and lawyer, dedicated to his own pockets and the power he squeezes out of his position as Prime Minister. If ever there were two men who were willing to spit in the face of a G-d they either despise or simply don't believe in, it is Bush and Olmert. Even the earliest of Muslim scholars believed the Land was bequeathed to the Jews by G-d but, not Bush and Olmert.

Some believe, and with good reason, that the calamities which have cascaded down upon America are the fault of President Bush and his allegiance with his oily Arab Muslim friends - to the detriment of Israel.

Those Jews, now called Kadimites in the new Sharon/Olmert Party, have similarly called down upon the nation of Israel Katyusha Missiles and Kassem Rockets with an ever increasing range and accuracy, plus car bombs, drive-by and sniper shootings, suicide/homicide bombing with explosive belts worn by Muslim Arab Palestinians - and more. The Price Israel is going to pay will shock even the most radical Leftists, including the Kadimites.

But, Olmert, a small-minded, insignificant man wishes to be known for something bigger than he could ever be, even if it means sacrificing Jews he doesn't really care much for anyway.

In brief, two selfish political charlatans are perfectly willing to use an embattled nation IF they can gain advancement for themselves politically or for their historic legacies.

We all know many unethical politicians feed on their own people to gain political or monetary advantages. In this case the banquet will be the Israeli people and, of course, Jerusalem will be the featured entre√¬©.

Is there any doubt that Olmert and Bush will bring the chaos of today's Baghdad to Jerusalem? They are already preparing their denials of fault and carefully drafting excuses as to why it's best for all if Israel must suffer missiles, rockets and suicide/homicide bombings. As for Bush's pledges to protect Israel, you will note the absence of specificity.

Bush needs to improve his poll numbers and Olmert must get whatever financial rewards plus an historical change of reputation from low to high. So, both juggle with the safety of Israel at the top of their voices.

But in the end, both will be ignored by history - except for the endless trail of victims who will be the casualties of their pathetic ideas that failed.

Even Sharon, who had an earned reputation as a great warrior finally succumbed to the lure of being regarded by the world as a "peacemaker" who sacrificed his own people to grasp that elusive trophy of glory, gifted by the U.N., E.U., U.S. State Department and other notorious practitioners of Jew-hatred.

For me, I had prayed before Sharon has his first message to desist, that he would lie in his bed, staring at the ceiling and only be able to hear the news caused by his perfidy against the Jewish people.

As for Olmert and Bush, similarly may no man lift his hand against them but, let them inherit a like judgement for their planning to sell the Jewish people to the Ishmaelites. May they and all other Kadimites who hate the true Jewish people share the emptiness of Sharon's poor judgement.

If you don't believe that they hate their own people, then ask: "Why are they deliberately cutting the tiny state of Israel down to an even smaller size that will look vulnerable and attractive for the Muslims to attack?" Why, too, are they so desperate to bring the chaos of Baghdad to Jerusalem? And finally, why would Olmert compress the Jewish people of Israel into the smallest compressed Ghetto he could manage.

There is a belief among observant Jews that, should a man experience justifiable, long term pain before he dies, his time in Gehenna (Hell) will be somewhat lessened for the evil he did during his life. Clearly, there are many leaders and nations who failed the litmus test of how they treated the Jewish people who are now paying their debt and with much more to come.

So, let us set the penalties now so those who play carelessly with the lives of their own people, thinking there is no penalty, will not be so quick to throw them to the Muslim Arabs and Palestinian wolves.

I wonder how many millions of lives have been lost by arrogant, stupid leaders who believe they know best, merely because they have captured the levers of power in government. Rarely are they stopped in time before they have sacrificed the very lives of their own people. Occasionally, they were held accountable either by a victorious adversary or by their own people. One thinks of Mussolini hanging for his crimes strung up by his own people. Hitler died by his own hand while his collaborators were hung by the Nuremberg Tribunal. Hafez Al Assad died of cancer before he could be brought to man's justice. Saddam is now going through a trial for crimes against his own people and, no doubt, he will be (should be) hung by his own people. That indeed will be true justice. Dictatorial leaders invariably punish their people for daring to defy their insane orders. They tell their people, often by way of a corrupt court system slaved to their tyrannical rule, that they are teaching them a lesson in obedience - only they call it "the law".

One looks forward to the day when decent, truly law-abiding people will rise up and teach their arrogant tyrannical rulers a lesson.

But, why wait for the inevitable "big" lesson from on high to pronounce judgement on a travesty waiting to happen. There is already a delayed sentencing for what Sharon and Olmert have done to their own Jewish people in Gush Katif and the entire Southern Front which will soon be emptied of Jews, more Jews will be forced out by rockets and missiles from the Global Center for International Terrorism, created when Israel "ethnically cleansed" the Gaza Strip.

Remember that before the garush (evacuation) of 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from Gush Katif and Northern Samaria and destruction of their beautiful homes, farms, schools, synagogues, businesses, factories and even the cemeteries those 21 Jewish communities in Gaza were declared "at risk". Before his "ethnic cleansing" in August of 2005, Sharon had the Knesset vote that, instead of the 21 communities at risk, after the eviction 44 communities in the Negev would then be at risk. Sharon knew those in so-called "Israel proper" would come under fire but he put them at risk anyway. And so they are. Katyusha Missiles (Grad missiles from Russia by means of Iran) and "homemade" Kassem Rockets are falling on the Negev communities. The schools in Sderot were ordered by the Knesset to have their roofs reinforced with concrete - but, this was never accomplished. Only miracles have so far prevented deaths and dire injuries - so far.

The people of Israel should be furious and unforgiving and NOT ignore the dangerous criminal stupidity of Sharon, Olmert and the entire Cabinet who voted for this uprooting. Those responsible should (minimally) be charged for crimes against the Jewish people after having exposed these innocent people to the predictable missiles and rockets that are now falling on the South.

Why should the innocent, hard-working people of Israel pay this price when the shallow political dimwits have comfortable, safe dinners at home when they foisted this danger upon them with their frivolous decisions?

I have always believed that the Oslo Accords caused the subsequent 1500+ deaths and thousands of injuries - many maimed for life. Those who voted for Olso should have been held culpable and should be tried with penalties ranging from prison to a hanging offense as perpetrators of causing death.

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). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 25, 2006.

This is another Israeli case originally reported earlier, but which has since then come to trial, part of which my colleague attended. She also interviewed defense counsel. I added explanatory comments. This trial went on for about 3 years, with different appeals and legal work.

David Ha'ivri, a former American known as David Axelrod from Long Beach, L.I., was on trial for selling T-shirts with a picture of Rabbi Kahane on the front and a slogan on the back, "No Arabs, No Terror." Claiming the slogan means to kill all the Arabs, the prosecutor charged Ha'Ivri with "incitement" and racism against the Arabs. The Defense attorney David Heimowitz explained that if Americans were bombing buses, he would write, "No Americans, No terror." That would be a factual statement, not a call for murder, but the judge did not gasp that logic. My colleague perceived the trial as trying Rabbi Kahane from the grave. They said that his picture on the front of the shirt was a punch in the face to the Arabs and the slogan on the back was racist. Actually, the trial was political (ideological warfare carried on by politics). (If the courts really oppose bigotry, why aren't Arabs prosecuted for actually chanting "death to the Jews," which are not mere expression of sentiment but rabble-rousing words?)

Rabbi Kahane's son testified that his father taught him to love Jews, and didn't speak about killing or hating Arabs. Prof. Paul Eidelberg (whose book on democracy I found enlightening) offered his documents on democracy and freedom of expression. The judge would have accepted it, but the prosecutor rejected them. Since the official language of the country is Arabic or Hebrew, said she, the court must rejecting Prof. Eidelberg's lesson on freedom of speech, written in English. (In that politicized judiciary, judges often take their cues from prosecutors carrying out the government line, rather than seeking justice.)

What happened in the street? A policeman confiscated the shirts on Ben Yehuda St. from another person, not Ha'ivri. The owner was arrested, but not charged and soon freed. Meanwhile, the cop gave the sack of shrits to a second cop, who didn't know what was in it. This cop didn't remember or see if the rabbi's picture was on the back or front.

Meanwhile, where was Ha'vri? He was standing at a demonstration on Aggripas St., when the shirts were confiscated on Ben Yehuda St.! He was nowhere near the shirts. The police, however, sent him a letter to pick up the shirts. Ha'ivri came to the police station to get them. Well, if they weren't your shirts, the prosecutor said, why did you come to the police station? His answer was that the police asked him to come. The police had a letter ostensibly signed by him and bearing his identification number. Ha'ivri said, "Look at the signature! It isn't mine. I don't know who got my number. Someone else sent it in and you called, so I came."

The prosecutor admitted she was not prepared by asserting she didn't know about the police report that the shirts were taken from another person, though the report was described in the documents given to her before trial. The police testimony did not add up to inculpate the accused. In America they would throw that case out, and defense counsel asked in vain that this case be dismissed. The prosecutor retorted that if Ha'ivri goes free with the slogan on the shirt, then Israeli is like Nazi Germany. (No, she is like the Nazis, in punishing innocent Jews.)

The judge said, "He may not be guilty of the Incitement charge, but he still may be guilty of something. I am charging him with something. I am charging him with 'Obstruction of Justice.'" That is for not asserting at the outset that he had not signed the petition to get back the shirts.

After postponements and appeals, a judge dropped the new charge but reinserted the original one of "incitement." Ha'ivri was sentenced to hard community service for 2 months with a two-month suspended sentence. He lives in Tapuach, from which he has to go quite a distance to fulfill the sentence and work all day lifting heavy boxes. Ha'ivri said that it would be easier in jail. (A suspended sentence gives the system a lever for intimidating protestors from persisting.)

In Israel, Jews are considered guilty without evidence, unless proved innocent. Their self-defense against Arab assailants and warning against Arab sedition are considered criminal! The justice system pretends that it is concerned to safeguard life, but it prosecutes Jews who shoot in the air, and not Arabs who attack them with rocks and threaten to mob them.

(If there were justice in Israel, prosecutor and judge would: (1) Recognize that the slogan was political and factual and not criminal; (2) Investigate how the police got the ID number of the defendant. This seems to be like another case of the secret service framing an nationalist Jew. It is a terrible subversion of democracy, when the secret service is out of democratic control like that; and (3) At least shift the prosecution to the one distributing the shirts, rather than blaming for it someone else.

At another incident, Ha'Ivri's daughter was in court, having been arrested at a demonstration for Israel to keep the Territories, which are in the Land of Israel. Mr. Ha'Ivri insisted on the right to speak with his daughter. Court police rushed into the room and beat him badly, until the judge demanded they cease.

Likewise, young Shimson Cytrin, indicted for attempted murder because he threw rocks back at Arabs who were not indicted but had thrown rocks at Jews, was sitting in court when his sister came to say something to him. Police pulled her away. Their father said, "Don't you dare touch my daughter." Security men came into the room and beat him until he had to be taken to the hospital. The family related this incident to my colleague.

The Arabs have a different attitude towards their daughters. If the daughter is merely suspected of having done something immoral, which may have been only kissing a man to whom she was not married, her parents or brother will stab her to death for "shaming the family." The murder doesn't shame the Arabs, it 'redeems' the family honor. Such a story was shown on Israeli TV news, recently. Those are the primitive, brutal, feuding Arabs with whom the Israeli leftists imagine they would make peace, if only the Jewish settlers wouldn't block the deal of a territorial give that the leftists suppose would bring the peace. But jihadists don't make peace, and Arabs don't keep agreements, as the dozen years of their violations of the Oslo Accords demonstrates. The Left would be wiser to think about how to win the war.

When anti-Zionists call Israel a fascist state, they are half right and half wrong. They are right that the government uses fascist tactics, but wrong that the Arabs are the victims of fascist tactics. It is more like Egypt, when it had Jews, for it beat them up and dispossessed them.

Much of the Western media is anti-Zionist. It looks for opportunities to criticize Israel. It does not criticize Israel, however, for persecuting Jews. What a reflection upon media for not being objective! If the NY Times were a decent newspaper, it would criticize these political persecutions, star-chamber trials, and wanton beating of dissidents. It would ask Israel why it doesn't order police to tell people who may be speaking out of order in court to sit down, then arrest them, and not to use force beyond what is necessary to arrest them. A country lacks justice when police feel free to punish dissidents brutally.


Speaking to a group of Muslim religious leaders, Pres. Katsav asked how come Israeli Jews contend that Islam does not sanctify blowing up buses of innocent people, but the Muslim leaders either fall silent or deny the contention (MEFNews, 5/8).

By now it should be clear that Muslim leaders sanctify terrorism and have a firm religious basis for doing so. It is futile and fatuous to appeal to humanitarian instincts in a religion that puts conquest first. The mass of Islamic officials, if not also of Muslims, apparently accepts any means of deceit and violence that advances the supremacy of Islam. They don't recognize international law, the rule of law, and Western ethics except to distort their meaning in attempts to appeal to Western good nature so as to lull its defenses.


The Fieldston School in Riverdale had scheduled a debate on the Arab-Israel conflict by two Muslims. One would argue that Israel should give up the Territories, and the other would argue that Israel should give up the ghost. The School called that balanced. Parents and alumni objected sufficiently to get the event canceled.

The School scheduled a new event, supposed to be more balanced. Pro-Israel speakers were restricted to side panels, but the main, school-wide forum featured Prof. Tony Judt, who opposes Jewish statehood, and Rashid Khalidi, who supports the Arab struggle against Israel. Again there were protests, but the School persisted.

The School has an agenda, an anti-Zionist one. Replacing Israel with an Arab state, however, means setting up an Islamist state. That hardly accords with the supposed ethical culture principles of Fieldston (Andrew Wolf, NY Sun, 5/9, p.3).

Some attendees thought the forum was fair, and that the panelists were scholarly. A parent said that Hamas acceded to power because some Jewish groups call any counter argument about the conflict antisemitic (Shlomo Greenwald, NY Sun, 5/10, p.3).

What could be sillier than to suppose that the Arab voters in the P.A. voted for Hamas because some Jewish groups call arguments against Zionism antisemitic! One wonders whether such people can recognize what is fair.

Leftist educators pursue their agenda regardless of facts and logic to the contrary, the failure of their theories, and other people's feelings, whether it is anti-Zionism or reading instruction by memorizing whole words. They are not democratic.


Iran has offered again to negotiate its nuclear development. UNO ambassador Bolton responded, "The Iranians are always interested in talking when the squeeze is put on them." The White House said the offer doesn't address international concerns (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 5/9, p.5). The Bush administration realizes that Muslim dictators stall for time. Kerry didn't, at least when the issues of Iraq and Iran came up during the election. He mistook negotiations and UNO proceedings for serious attempts to solve the problems.


For months, armed militiamen and clans clashed with each other in the P.A., injuring bystanders in the process. The media focused almost exclusively on injuries from Israeli counter-attacks against terrorism, professing great concern about those Arab casualties but not noticing the others. I've remarked about that inconsistency.

By mid-May, P.A. civil strife was featured in the NY Sun and NY Times. But the world has not yet washed its hands of such vile people.


A jury was deciding whether to apply the death penalty to Moussaoui, who confessed to being part of the 9/11 hijacking crew. They decided against it. They felt there were mitigating factors. One was his "unstable early childhood and dysfunctional family." Other people with poor home lives, however, do not become mass-murderers. His religion, however, encouraged him to do so (Cal Thomas, NY Sun, 5/9, Op.-Ed.).

I don't think he should be rewarded for having had a poor home life. Neither is it a mitigating factor, because it is not relevant to the crime, for which he is responsible, not his mother. A mitigating factor in, say, a robbery, would be if a robber administered first aid to a victim or returned his share of the loot.


The Arabs blame their problems on other people. The poverty in Gaza, however, is self-inflicted. The upper class has no sense of responsibility for the lower class, and no compassion for them. (Indeed, it exploits them, via monopolies.) It shucks that responsibility off onto UNRWA, to which the US has just doubled its contribution. The Arabs do not try to develop their economy. (They are not about development but about jihad. The Arabs refused Israeli help in development)

The P.A. also pretends it has no responsibility for its own people on the false grounds that it is occupied. What that has to do with it, is not explained. It got ridiculous when, from having a slight supervision over Gaza, Israel withdrew almost entirely, but the P.A. still calls itself occupied, as an excuse for lack of progress and as a means of continuing to denounce Israel and maintain a war footing against it. The excuse that poverty and occupation drives people to terrorism is false. The ones who exhort to terrorism are the professional clergy and government officials. The people who become terrorists mostly are educated and affluent. Terrorism began before Israel controlled the Territories. Unfortunately, the Arabs have persuaded the world otherwise (Middle East Forum news, 5/10).

How were the Arabs able to persuade the world of these canards? The media is not honest about it. Western education neglects or is politically correct about jihad, although jihad is the West's primary enemy. Partly, of course, Westerners and others are receptive to defamation of the Jewish people, constantly repeated.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Zeev Shemer, May 25, 2006.

25 years ago we discovered the one thing that Israeli officials and left-wing oriented Israeli citizens fear the most: Road Blocks.

Zu Artzeinu, was the group that started blocking roads through out the country. The group was lead by Moshe Feiglin (currently in the almost extinct Likud as a minority and outsider) and Shmuel Sacket (currently in the US raising funds for Feiglin). They were ferociously persecuted, incarcerated and harassed because they had discovered Israel's real weakness.

Much money and effort was put by Sharon and his cronies to make sure that the "leaders" of the right (the Orange fringe) would not allow their followers to commit to such a strategy. The Yesha Council (a bunch of corrupt self-appointed leaders of the settlement movement) made sure to indicate to the thousands of young activists to limit their actions to handing out orange stripes and literature but for no reason they were to block highways or major intersections.

So it was that when Sharon deployed his Kappo police to Gaza and northern Shomron, the Yesha leaders advised the 250,000 protestors that showed up at Kikar Rabin in Tel Aviv, to drive down to Gaza and persuade peacefully our troops to desist from expelling our Jewish brothers and sisters from their homes. Needless to say, Jews were stopped in places not even close to the communities they quickly destroyed. The youth was dispersed and lost, as they saw the destruction take place while their leaders (purposely) wasted time giving useless directions.

With 40,000 Jews, we could have brought Tel Aviv, Ramat Gan, Hertzlia, Ramat Aviv and Hod HaSharon to their knees. There would have not been a Disengagement. If no individual would have been able to go to work or get back home, every hour that Tel Aviv would have stood still it would have represented millions in economic losses and there would have been an immediate call to stop the Disengagement.

Before Zu Artzeinu, the people had an even more terrifying weapon: Rabbi Meir Kahane, a controversial right wing voice that through reason and logic, attracted hundreds of thousands of diverse Jews to the understanding that throwing the Arab out was the key to Jewish survival. After he was murdered, and after the subsequent murder of his son, the only weapon left is Road Blocks. They are terrified that someone will raise his voice and advocate such action against the supporters of national suicide. But they are not too worried, because they know they have the Yesha Council in their pocket, together with the sold-out Shas and their always loyal "mamlachti rabbis" (politically correct rabbis).

Feiglin, Sacket, Kleiner, Marzel, none of them will remind the people of the power they have. The Road Blocks that can stop Olmert will forever only be "if only we had..."

Zeev Shemer lives in Ramat HaGolan. Contact him at liviorosenberg@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, May 25, 2006.

"For all the morons out there who haven't figured this out for themselves. Olmert is destroying Israel -- he must go!"

The above line was the "subject field" in an email that I sent out to some of my lists yesterday. I received two objections (from about a thousand people) and many supporting emails. They both objected to my use of strong language (moron). The expected thing would be to apologise for such use. That is not the intention of this mail. I object to being blown up in my bed, or bus, or train, or anywhere else, or for that matter, to my friends being murdered by these modern monsters. As I continually tell my students at the U., Real Life is Tough! One person said that they stop listening when tough language is used. That is childish. Tough language is called for when tough subjects come up. Perhaps that is cultural. That is the culture that I live in. I do not think it is "coincidence" that I am writing this on Jerusalem Day.

The objection seems to be based upon the concept that this is an issue of a policy decision and that policy can be legitimately debated. If this is the case, then the use of strong language can be objectionable. This is not an issue of a legitimate policy decision. This is an issue of one of the most stupid concepts yet thought up. And, for this area of the world, that is really saying something.

I do apologise that this email is rather much longer than is my wont. Evidently, some people are either lacking basic information or need it to be shown to them in a manner that prevents them from continuing to ignore it. Real life is tough.

Albert Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. We have retreated from both Southern Lebanon and Gaza. In the former case, the retreat was done in the most cowardly manner, clearly showing Hezbollah that it was their victory and not our choice; even leaving some two billion dollars worth of military equipment in the field for their added prize. We now have some 12,000 Hezbollah rockets on our northern border. This has changed a tactical annoyance into an existential strategic threat.

In the case of Gaza, we knowingly expelled some 9000 citizens, with legally owned property, houses, businesses, social and religious infrastructure. It is to be emphasized that all of this was legally owned property, incontrovertible, even by our leftist-extremist court system that continually attempted to find excuses to make life difficult for law-abiding citizenry. Not a single family has yet to be accommodated in permanent housing, many are still out of gainful employment (ALL were gainfully employed previously), it has already cost the Israeli taxpayer almost twenty billions of sheqels, and NONE of them have yet to be fully compensated for their losses, nor is there any such intention. Legality of property was ignored.

In addition, while previously, the Egyptian government "allowed" smuggling via tunnels, now there is wholesale importation of major, long-range weapons systems. The Egyptian government views our weakness and has been assiduously working towards abrogation of the treaty preventing remilitarization of Sinai. There is constant smuggling of weapons, terrorist, drugs, prostitutes and etcetera over the Sinai border, in never heretofore quantities. Again, changing a minor tactical annoyance into a strategic necessity -- there is now a movement afoot to build yet another fence along the entire Israel-Egypt border, of hundreds of kilometres, at an enormous cost. (It will need to be much more than just a physical barrier as it is in desert and needs to be constantly patrolled, both on the ground and from the air.) Anyone of sense ought to know why it is important for Egypt to remilitarize Sinai, as they've spent tens of billions of dollars on arms for the past two decades. Hint: they do not need the weapons against Qaddafi?

Okay, let's presume the absurd and say this time, it'll be different, with a different result. Einstein was wrong. Let's examine this.

First the basic facts of the plan, what are we being asked to do? The idea is to 'converge' over 100,000 people into territory that it incontrovertibly Israeli. In so doing, we would be strengthening our holds, enhancing the Jewish-ness of the population and making Israel more defensible. This will cost between 100-200 billion sheqels (more than tens times the number of people, less than ten times the cost -- there is no reason why this should make sense). That cash does not exist, even if the US can be convinced to contribute to it.

Israel today is one of the most densely populated nations in the world, with a population density of 270 persons per square kilometre, as compared with Arab population density of 46. By the way, don't tell me about desert, 2/3 of Israel is desert.

The evacuated areas have about fifty percent of our water supply.

This will lengthen our eastern border by many hundreds of kilometres, making the path of the border very circuitous, and over terrain difficult to patrol.

On our eastern border today sits Jordan, the only Arab country with whom we have reasonable relations. They, of course, strongly object to this proposal, for obvious reasons. Hamas is already working very hard towards a crash of that regime, which is over 70% Palestinian. It is clear to anyone that this would spell a rapid demise of the Hashemite kingdom, putting Iran in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. This is not smart; this is not even foolish; THIS IS MORONIC! Not even a stupid person can justify support of this.

For the first time since the seventh century, the Persian Empire stretches from the Gulf to the Mediterranean -- they already control Syria and Lebanon, via their proxies, the Alawites and Hezbollah. For the first time since the ninth century, Sunni (Moslem Brotherhood) and Shi'a are uniting; not just common cause, but actual unity of action AND purpose, and by choice not conquering. The US military in Iraq will be faced with organized enemies on all sides. Israel will be faced with organized enemies of all sides (one of the results of the Six-Day War was to break the encirclement -- that is what we are being asked to return).

What are we offered in return for all this? In future negotiations, we'll have nothing to give. What will then be the Europeans' demands? They are already hinting that then they can demand controlled immigration (Aliyah). Obviously, the 'demography' bluff can't be used to justify this; even if it did exist (the Palestinian population figures are grossly inaccurate).

Okay, so you dislike my use of strong language. Fine, I dislike having my murderers supported by stupidity. I have yet to hear one, single argument which can be used to support this moronic idea. One person said, "Then, because they'll leave us no option, we can go to war with them. It's the only way to resolve the issue. Either they win, or we do." To be gentle, this is not the way real life works. A country is not a laboratory: either they win or we do. If they win, we are all dead -- get that? Dead, as in a second holocaust, a second six million dead! Just as the Arabs have stated, since Oslo. Get that? Either we win or we die -- there exists no third option. This stupid thinking is the same kind of stupidity that brought us 1429 dead since Oslo, with 29 dead in Lebanon, alone (by the way, not 3, as is promoted by the media). After this stupidity, the breadth of the country is 9 miles. What are the chances of our survival when our ENTIRE infrastructure is attackable from the sea?

Olmert's plan is a certain recipe for national disaster. You don't like me calling its supporters morons? Neither do I. Show me an option.

Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben-Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, May 25, 2006.

Information and quotes from various sources.

May 23, 2006, by an overwhelming vote of 361-37, the House of Representatives passed the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, H.R. 4681. The bill ends direct aid and contact with the Hamas-run Palestinian Authority until Hamas renounces violence, recognizes Israel's right to exist, and agrees to abide by all previous agreements.

"The bill preserves necessary humanitarian aid for the Palestinian people, while keeping American taxpayer dollars out of the hands of a government run by terrorists. Hamas is a terrorist organization, whose involvement in the governmental process has not altered its stated goal of destroying Israel."

Instead of using these last few months to work toward better relations with Israel, Hamas continues to reject Israel's right to exist and to endorse continued violence against the Israeli people. Hamas' newly appointed Foreign Minister stated in a recent interview that 'there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.'

A Hamas spokesperson endorsed a recent suicide bombing that killed nine Israelis, stating that terrorists have "every right" to carry out suicide bombings against the Israeli people. This legislation sets out a clear path for the Hamas government -- end your support for terrorism and recognize Israel's right to exist and you will be recognized as a legitimate member of the international community. But until those conditions are met, the United States will not allow American taxpayer dollars to be used to support or legitimize a terrorist-led Palestinian Authority.

Commended was the extraordinary work of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) who initiated the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. The bill is the farthest U.S. lawmakers have ever gone towards cutting off the Palestinian leadership from U.S. aid and restricting assistance through non-governmental organizations.

To voters curious as to Party affiliation of those that voted against the bill, the following information may be of interest:

Of the 37 that voted against the bill 31 were Democrats and only 6 Republicans.

The 37 are listed below:

Arizona: Kolbe (R), Grijalva (D)
California: Becerra (D), Capps(D), Eshoo(D), Farr (D), Lee (D), G. Miller (R), Stark (D)
Georgia: Marshall (D), McKinney (D)
Illinois: LaHood (R)
Hawaii: Abercrombie (D)
Massachusetts: Capuano (D), McGovern (D)
Maryland: Gilchrest (R)
Michigan: Conyers (D), Dingell (D), Kilpatrick (D)
Minnesota: McCollum (D)
New York: Hinchey (D), Vel√¬°zquez (D)
North Carolina: Jones (R), Price (D), Watt (D)
Ohio: Kaptur (D), Kucinich (D)
Oregon: Blumenauer (D), DeFazio (D)
Texas: Doggett (D), Paul (R), Thornberry (R)
Washington: McDermott (D)
West Virginia: Rahall (D)
Wisconsin: Moore (D), Obey (D)
Virginia: Moran (D)

Some names will immediately stick out for their long anti-Israel voting record - Cynthia McKinney (D), Conyers (D), Dingell (D), Kilpatrick (D), Kucinich (D), Rahall (D), Obey (D) and most of the others that I have neglected to mention.

Also of note is that of the 9 representatives who were present but elected to not vote, all were Democrats. The 9 are listed below:

California: Watson (D)
Illinois: Davis (D), Gutierrez (D), Jackson (D), Rush (D)
Indiana: Carson (D)
Missouri: Clay (D)
New Jersey: Payne (D)
Texas: E.B. Johnson (D)

Perhaps this information will be of some use when you are about to make political contributions or at your next visit to the voting booth?

Comment from reader:

Kucinich (D-OH) has a large Arab constituency and almost no Jews in his district, so his voting record should not be a surprise. He took over a seat previously help by Mary Rose OaKar, who went on to become president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee after being charged with seven federal felonies in a 1995 indictment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Fred Taub

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 Steven Plaut, May 25, 2006.

Quick! When does the ACLU NOT believe in free speech?
Answer: when it comes to criticism of the ACLU! The ACLU is instituting a gag order! Really!

Yes, the NY Times reports that the heads of the hyper-Left ACLU have gone on a jihad (or is it jughad?) against the rights of free speech of those critical of it!

It seems that the American Civil Liberties Union is weighing new standards that would discourage its board members from publicly criticizing the organization's policies and internal administration.

Where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting the fact of such disagreement," the committee that compiled the standards wrote in its proposals. "Directors should remember that there is always a material prospect that public airing of the disagreement will affect the A.C.L.U. adversely in terms of public support and fund-raising," the proposals state. Given the organization's longtime commitment to defending free speech, some former board members were shocked by the proposals.

Nat Hentoff, a writer and former A.C.L.U. board member, was incredulous. "You sure that didn't come out of Dick Cheney's office?" he asked.

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 Batya Medad, May 25, 2006.

Last night, close to midnight, I caught a bit of the TV news. A very excited guest-"expert" was raving about how marvelous Olmert was, because they clapped for him in Congress when he gave this speech. The "expert," who was jumping so, you'd think him drugged, kept saying that Olmert's policies make him an international statesmen, and everyone loves Olmert, since he's doing what they want.

Well, it reminds me of the girls who let the guys do "what they wanted," just to be popular. They would do absolutely anything, just so they'd be called again, to do it some more. Of course the entire school, both the boys and the girls, all laughed behind their backs. But "those girls" were oblivious to the ridicule and didn't care about the STD--Sexually Transmitted Diseases they were catching.

So when I hear or read the Israeli "spinners," political commentators, justifying the destruction of Jewish towns and the exiling of Israeli citizens just because it makes the world love us, it reminds me of the pathetic tramps and whores...

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 Barry Shaw, May 25, 2006.

TO: Editors


What type of journalistic standard is the BBC projecting when your reporter, Caroline Hawley, questions the arrest of a leading Hamas terrorist with the words "It is not clear why the (Israeli) army moved against Hamad".

In light of the fact that Hawley knew Ibrahim Hamad was directly responsible for the murder of seventy Israelis in repeated suicide and terror attacks against civilian targets in Israel, this was an inexcusable accusation against Israel, and one that requires Hawley to be strongly censured if not fired.

How dare your reporter put a personal statute of limitation on the arrest of murderers who deliberately target and kill innocent civilians. Or maybe, as she is the official spokesperson on the ground for the BBC, she is reflecting the official position of your organization?

As this is just one more example of the constant Israel-bashing so prevalent from the BBC you have become unable to divorce your staff from adopting a strongly anti-Israel position -- even when we are upholding the law by putting our soldiers at risk by going into terrorist-controlled Palestinian areas in an effort to bring murderous terrorists and criminals to justice.

According to the BBC, we are damned if we kill them, and we are damned if we bring them to justice.

This ongoing support of Palestinian terrorists by the BBC has to stop!

Barry Shaw is founder & chairman, the Netanya Terror Victims Organisation, in Netanya, Israel Contact him at netre@matav.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 24, 2006.

Thousands of street smart Jews and Christian Zionists protested PM Olmert's naive plan to divide Jerusalem and eliminate many of the Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria, creating a vacuum which is custom designed for Terrorists to occupy. Sadly, many of the primary Jewish organizations are repeating what frightened Jews of the 1930s and 40s did or didn't do when their leaders refused to confront their governments over the Genocide taking place in Europe. The Sha-Sha Jews, such as the AJCs, ADL, Conference of Presidents, National Council of Young Israel, Orthodox Union, etc. are not participating for all the wrong reason and are simply not to be relied upon. We must organize to protect ourselves as well as our brothers and sisters in Israel.

This article was written by Caroline Glick and appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1148287842900& pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

If all goes as planned, as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert meets today with US President George W. Bush in the White House, several thousand protesters from around the US and Canada will be across the Mall by the US Senate protesting Olmert's visit. These will not be the standard Israel haters from the Left or the Islamist crowd. They will be neither neo-Nazis nor Communists. Rather the planned protest is being organized by Israel's staunchest Jewish and Christian supporters.

The thousands of people who traveled by bus to Washington to protest Olmert's visit believe that Olmert's planned withdrawal from some 95 percent of Judea and Samaria and partition of Jerusalem are suicidal for Israel and will have a devastating impact on US national security. As they note in their press release, Olmert "seeks to secure the approval of President Bush to carry out more Jewish expulsions and giving over of land to Hamas (a Teheran-sponsored terrorist group), actions that totally undermine America's war on terror."

Voices from inside of the Bush Administration claim that Olmert's planned withdrawal is "a done deal." The relevant administration officials argue there it would be futile for the US to register any objection to Olmert's plan because Olmert and his government are wholly committed to carrying it out.

But the "plan" is anything but a done deal. The mass expulsion of Israelis from their homes in Judea and Samaria has not begun. The security fence whose completion is supposed to precede the enactment of the mass expulsions is far from complete. Indeed its route has yet to be finalized. The IDF has made no plans of any kind for defending Israel from the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. Top level Jordanian government officials have voiced serious concern to US lawmakers, Israeli officials and the media about the ramifications of Olmert's plan for the survivability of the Hashemite regime. It is simply disingenuous to say that it is too late for the US to consider opposing Olmert's plan.

Aside from that, over the past 58 years, the US has never considered anything that Israel has done to be "a done deal" if it hasn't agreed that it should be a done deal. In 1956 for instance, Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula. Then prime minister David Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced joyously that Israel would never leave the Sinai. Washington had other ideas. Several days later, after some overtly hostile strong arming from then president Dwight D. Eisenhower and his advisors, Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced that Israel would be withdrawing from the Sinai forthwith.

In 1999, Israel finalized an agreement to sell three Phalcon spy planes to China. The Chinese started making their payments. Then president Bill Clinton summoned then prime minister Ehud Barak to the White House for urgent consultations the day before a planned visit to Jerusalem from China's leader, and Barak cancelled the deal. So there is no credibility to the claim that the US cannot stop an Israeli government from doing what it has its heart set on doing.

THE QUESTION is not whether the US can weigh in on the issue. The question is whether the US should intervene. To determine the answer to this question it is important to keep certain truths in mind. First, Olmert maintains that the election results that propelled him to the Prime Minister's Office were proof that he has public support for his planned withdrawal. Yet, as Hillel Halkin pointed out this month in Commentary, the elections were anything but a referendum regarding Olmert's plan. The election results, which gave Olmert's Kadima faction less than a quarter of the seats in the Knesset, were a sign that Israel's body politic is unraveling. The electorate's fragmentation was made clear both by record low voter turnout and by the dismemberment of the major parties like Likud and Labor and even Kadima to the benefit of sectoral parties like Shas, Yisrael Beitenu and the Pensioners Party. During the campaign Kadima registered its greatest losses of support after Olmert began discussing his plan to withdraw from Judea and Samaria.

Yet even if Olmert did not receive a mandate for his withdrawal plan from the Israeli voters, he is the legally elected prime minister. In the eyes of many of Israel's supporters in America, it is wrong for the US to second-guess the wisdom of the Israeli leadership. While in theory this position is correct, it comes apart at the seams when the ramifications of Olmert's plans for US national security are taken into account.

Knowledgeable sources in Washington policy circles maintain that in the two weeks preceding Olmert's visit to Washington, Israeli officials were asked to allay American concerns regarding the security consequences of Olmert's plan. Specifically, Israeli officials have been called upon to explain how Judea and Samaria will be prevented from following the model set in Gaza when Israel's retreat enabled the transformation of Gaza into a base for international terrorists along similar lines to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

Israel's military attache in Washington, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel was reportedly sent to the White House to dispel these concerns. It should be recalled that Harel commanded last summer's retreat from Gaza. Harel was lionized at the time by the Israeli media for successfully implementing the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Gaza while averting civil war.

Yet Harel has never been called to account for the fact that he made no plans for Israel to defend itself from the threats that - as foreseen - arose from Gaza and from the Sinai in the aftermath of the retreat. Because of his failure, IDF forces in the Southern Command were left without contingency plans for contending with the transformation of Gaza into a base for global jihad and without adequate means to secure Ashkelon and the other communities bordering Gaza from the daily missile, rocket and mortar attacks to which they have been subjected since the retreat.

This is relevant because Harel reportedly told his US interlocutors that they have no reason to worry about the consequences of Olmert's plan because it only involves the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Judea and Samaria. The IDF, he said will retain its current positions in the areas.

WHETHER OR not Harel realized it at the time, he was not being wholly truthful to his American audience. Even if the plan today is for the IDF to retain control of the areas in which the civilians are set to be expelled, and to retain their present deployments, any educated observer of Israel's political and cultural dynamics will attest that there is no way that this can happen.

If Olmert expels tens of thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes, he will destroy the entire domestic rationale for the IDF deployment. As was the case in Lebanon, radical leftists within Israel will rise up and demand a full retreat. For its part, the nationalist camp will become so alienated by the expulsions that in the best case scenario, its members will simply cease to identify with the state. They will not support any military activities in the heartland of Jewish civilization that the state ethnically cleansed of all Jewish presence.

Aside from this, whether the IDF remains or not, the Israeli destruction of Israeli towns and villages will be broadcast throughout the world and be celebrated - rightly - as a strategic victory of jihad. Zionism isn't about the IDF, it is about Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. Israeli destruction of Israeli villages in the Land of Israel is the death of Zionism and our enemies know it even if we insist on denying this basic truth.

AND SO we return to our starting point. Olmert will meet Bush today and present to him a plan that will unravel Israeli society, which was already dangerously fragmented by the withdrawal from Gaza.

He will present to him a plan that is based upon the anti-Semitic notion that Jews should be prohibited from living in certain places because they are Jews, and the perverse notion that a Palestinian state founded on the principle of lebensraum and racial purity because by definition no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine, will be capable of living at peace one day with the Jewish state.

Olmert will present a plan that provides a strategic victory to the forces of global jihad in a war they wage not only against Israel but against the US and the Western world as a whole because they will see Israel destroying itself under the gun of their terror and enabling the establishment of yet another base for global terrorists.

Given all this, the question of whether or not the US should object to Olmert's plan is superseded by the question of how the US should make its rejection of this plan known to Olmert and whether its objection should similarly be communicated to the Israeli public.

Any ambiguity on this issue to Olmert; any retreat behind disingenuous statements about "done deals," will be nothing less than the revocation of the cardinal US strategies for winning this war: the advance of liberal values and the denial of bases of operation to global terrorists.

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). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 24, 2006.

Craig Gordon's "Bush praises Olmert but urges talks with Abbas" (SF Chron 5/24/06) does a good job of balancing Israeli input with Hamas assertions. But he does make two serious factual errors which skew the content and message of his article.

"...Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said..(that Hamas)..will continue a sixteen month cease fire and that Israel can enjoy a long-term truce if it withdraws from the West Bank and east Jerusalem..."

Mr. Gordon is right to note that this offer does not satify Israel or President Bush. But what he neglects to point out is :

a.) the the Hamas assertion about continuing the cease-fire is false. Hamas, while pretending to observe the cease fire of February, 2005, has guided, directed, funded, trained, armed, and sheltered the terrorists of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, el-Aqsa Martrys' brigade, Hezbolla and even el-Qaeda. Hamas, far from abiding by the cease fire, has sub-contracted its terrorism to kindred groups so that it can play "good cop - bad cop" with the West....and the West merrily buys in to the charade.

This cease fire is an excellent example of the hackneyed Palestinian joke: "What is a Palestinian cease-fire? The Israelis cease, and the Palestinians fire."

b.) the offer of a long-term truce in exchange for Israel's complete withdrawal to the '67 borders is unacceptable because the truce is a symbolic, verbal concession which can be easily reversed at any time; whereas Israel's full withdrawal is a very concrete concession, which cannot be reversed.

This offer is another example of the tried-and-true Palestinian strategy honed to perfection by master-terrorist Arafat: offer a meaningless verbal, symbolic concession and demand in exchange something concrete and costly and almost impossible to reverse except via full-scale war. Then, when Israel quite predictably rejects the offer, clamour and complain that Israel is a recalcitrant partner in negotiations. And watch western media just eat it up.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, May 24, 2006.

mishpachah@mac.com wrote:

Please read and send this to as many fellow Jews as possible. Please send "blind" copies, so that others' e-mail addresses are not given out against their will or preference. Thank you!


It takes only a few seconds to pick up the telephone and dial 202-456-1111. This is the White House Comment Line. It is open from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. Comments are taken by operators to be given to the President.

We are beseeching all Jews to call this line daily to seek immediate freedom for Jonathan Pollard. We are all commanded by

G-d not to stand by while our brothers blood is shed. It appears that Jonathan Pollard is slowly dying in prison. We are also commanded to help secure the release of our brothers and sisters in captivity. It is a great mitzvah to help secure Pollard's release.


Our plea is insufficient to compare to what Pollard himself has written. You can see the text of his letter to The Jewish People in Pollard's Yom Yerushalayim letter, by clicking on his website at: http://www.jonathanpollard.org. Further, on the home page of the website, you will find a wealth of information about the Jonathan Pollard case including many ways to help. You will also find a listing of Israeli and U.S. government officials, including your Congressmen and Senators, whom you can call, e-mail, fax and/or write. Pollard's address is also on the website in case you want to write to him.

Make the White House Comment Line a part of your daily routine: 202-456-1111. Both husbands and wives, and all children old enough to understand the basics of the Pollard case, should try to make this call every day, except, of course, on Shabbat or the other Jewish holy days.

We ask that you send this e-mail to as many fellow Jews as possible. We also ask that, as a courtesy to others, you send blind e-mails, so that others' e-mail addresses are not published at large, perhaps against their will or preference.

Last, but what should be first, is of course, to pray for Jonathan (Yehonatan ben Malka) and for his release and reunification with his wife Esther and for his return to to the Land of Israel.

Call Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 25, 2006.

If you, or anyone you know, gets to thinking that maybe "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter";

or that ...

Hamas or
Hezbollah or
Islamic Jihad or
the PFLP or
the DFLP or
the PFLP-GC or
the el-Aqsa martyrs' brigade or
tanzim or
force 17 or
Fatah or
Sayyif-Allah or
Jayyish-el-Jihad or
ansar-el-Islam or
Jama'at el-Islamiyyeh or
Hizb ut-tahrir or
el-Qaeda or
el-Qaeda-in-Iraq or
el-Ikhwan el-Muslemeen or......

......or any of the other scores of terrorist groups in the world [almost all of whom are Moslem, with almost all of the Moslem ones being Arab or led by Arabs]........

....... are really just popular liberation movements struggling desperately against some juggernaut oppressor (like Israel or the USA)....

....read Prof. Beres' article below, and attached.

If they intentionally target innocent civilians, children, toddlers, babies, pre-natals in utero, women, elderly, ill, crippled.....they are terrorists. It does not matter what their ideology, what their cause.

The ideologies are merely the convenient excuses by means of which psychotic mass murderers justify or lionize their own psychoses, white-wash or sterilize their mass murder, to gain the support of others who are not (yet) the target of their psychotic urges.

This is called "International terror law" and was written by Louis Rene Beres, who is the author of many books and articles dealing with terrorism and international law. This was in today's Washington Times.

From the standpoint of international law, there is little point to linguistic transformations of murder. Those who would identify the willful maiming and execution of noncombatants in the name of an abstract ideal are defiling legal rules. When Palestinian insurgents claim the legal right to use "any means necessary," they are flat out wrong. Even if their claims for "national self-determination" were supportable, there are always firm limits on permissible targets and levels of violence.

The limited rights of insurgency under international law do not include the use of nail-filled bombs dipped in rat poison. These rights can never supplant the rules of humanitarian international law. Nowhere is it written that there are political goals so worthy that they can allow the incineration of infants in cribs or the shooting of children at play.

Supporters of Palestinian terrorist violence against Israelis still argue that the ends justify the means. But the ends can never justify the means under conventional or customary international law. For more than 2,000 years, binding legal principles of world politics have stipulated that intentional forms of violence against the innocent are always prohibited.

Under law, one man's terrorist can never be another man's freedom fighter. Although fashionable to repeat at cocktail parties, this expression is merely an empty witticism. While it is true that certain insurgencies can be judged lawful, these permissible resorts to force must always conform to the laws of war. Even if Palestinian claims of a hostile "occupation" were reasonable, their corresponding claim of entitlement to oppose Israel "by any means necessary" would remain false.

National liberation movements that fail to meet the test of just means are never protected as lawful. Even if we were to accept the spurious argument that Hamas and its sister groups somehow meet the criteria of "national liberation," it is plain that they do not meet the standards of discrimination, proportionality and military necessity. These critical standards have been applied to insurgent organizations by the common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and by the two protocols to these conventions of 1977. They are also binding upon all combatants by virtue of broader customary and conventional international law, including Article 1 of the Preamble to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907. This rule, called the "Martens Clause," makes all persons responsible for the "laws of humanity" and the "dictates of public conscience."

Every use of force by insurgents must be judged twice, once with regard to the justness of the objective (in this case, a Palestinian state to be built explicitly upon the charred ruins of an ecstatically dismembered Israel) and once with regard to the justness of the means used toward that objective. Murderers of young children are never "freedom fighters." If they were entitled to such a designation, we would then have to concede that international law itself was nothing more than an authorization to commit evil in world affairs.

American and European supporters of Palestinian independence continue to presume a "two-state solution." For them, the new Arab state will simply coexist with the extant Jewish State. Significantly, this kindly presumption is dismissed everywhere in the Arab/Islamic world. The "Map of Palestine" at the official website of the Palestinian National Authority still includes all of Israel.

Terrorist crimes mandate universal cooperation in apprehension and punishment. As punishers of "grave breaches" under international law, all states are expected to search out and prosecute, or extradite, individual terrorist perpetrators. In no circumstances are any states permitted to characterize terrorists as "freedom fighters." This is emphatically true for the United States, which incorporates all international law as the "supreme law of the land" at Article 6 of the Constitution, and which was formed by the Founding Fathers according to the timeless principles of Blackstone's Commentaries and antecedent Natural Law.

As Americans, we have a genuine and historic obligation to avoid specious manipulations of law. Whether in New York or Tel Aviv, "freedom fighters" do not war against office workers, nursery schools, buses, flower markets or ice-cream parlors. Until we accept this most elementary human understanding for the Middle East, we will run the real risk of transforming ghoulish gangs into governments. And in time, these terrorists-turned-governments will likely have easy access to weapons of mass destruction.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 24, 2006.

1. So let us see if we have this straight.

No illegal Mexicans entering the US are committing mass murder nor suicide bombings. Yet it is reasonable for the US to wish to control access to its territory by erecting a sophisticated security fence.

But when Israel does it, it is a human rights violation and makes Israel an "apartheid state"...

Got it?
" Israel can't even get a fair hearing at the country's flagship university" by Matt Lebovic.
(www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/ CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3254473,00.html)
Matt Lebovic is a graduate student at Hebrew University's Rothberg International School. His "pro-Israel" blog can be read at http://mattlebovic.blogs.friendster.com

"What is a Jewish state, anyway?" my professor asked the class last week. "Is it like a Jewish chair? I mean, I know what a Jewish person is, but how can a state be Jewish?"

A few minutes later, the same professor compared Israel to apartheid South Africa, calling it a "fake democracy." Not for the first time at Hebrew University's Rothberg International School, I squirmed in my chair. Was this a course on Israeli politics, or a Hamas press conference?

David and Goliath

The following day, another professor of mine informed students that Israel has no reason to make its case in the international arena. "You look at the occupied territories and Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are David," the professor said. "Why bother trying to explain anything Israel does if this is all people see". The rhetorical question was followed by silence from the class.

My classmates, both Jewish and non-Jewish, come to Jerusalem from Argentina, Taiwan, and a score of countries in between. Prior to studies in Israel, many of them received information about Israel from biased CNN coverage and anti-Israel divestment and boycott movements back home. Some classmates. Questions early in the year shed light on their impressions of Israel.

"Did the Jews murder Arabs at Deir Yassin because they were hungry for blood, or was there an actual reason?" a young German woman asked the professor in my friend's Palestine 1948 class. "Since a Jew murdered Rabin, we can say Jews don't really want peace, right". asked a young man from Azerbaijan during an introductory class on Israeli history.

Balance needed

It's clear that some of my classmates would benefit from a balanced, multi-sided examination of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Many will leave Jerusalem to become journalists, diplomats and teachers around the world. Unfortunately, some will depart with the words of professors ringing in their ears: "Israel is a fake democracy. Israel is an apartheid state. Israel has no excuse for its actions vis-a-vis the Palestinians."

Not all professors at my school ignore historical and political context for Palestinian suffering and Israeli actions like the security fence. Some have impressed me and other "pro-Israel" classmates with their ability to distill the conflict's complexities and foster reasonable discussion of the issues.

Others, however, let their political beliefs determine classroom discourse, such as one professor's labeling the Israeli government a "colonialist regime" and another referring to an outspoken, kippah-clad student as "Lieberman".

Obviously, professors are entitled to their opinions, and to elucidate them in class; however, there is a line between political commentary and "Israel-bashing," as one classmate described some professors' behavior.

Special responsibility

Labeling Israel an aggressive "Goliath" victimizing the helpless Palestinian "David" distorts the conflict's true scope -- that of a tiny island of Jewish sovereignty surrounded by more than a few genocidal extremists. Like every democracy on Earth, Israel is flawed. Does this mean the Jewish state has no more intrinsic value than a "Jewish chair," as my professor implied?

I respect the academic freedom and vigorous discourse abundant at my school; however, the international division of Israel's flagship university bears a special responsibility to students and supporters. If Israel cannot receive a fair hearing in the hallowed halls of Mt. Scopus, where can it? 4. Getting the French Upset:
Letters To The Editor, Jewish Press
"Unfair Depiction"

Steven Plaut's description of France in his article "Le Bouffon Grandiose" (op-ed, May 5,) does not fit the facts.

First, actor Dieudonne's provocative remarks are his alone and he has been convicted and fined by a French court, on the basis of the Lellouche Act which is among the world's toughest legislation on hate speech and anti-Semitism.

Second, to claim that an individual's anti-Semitism reflects French society as a whole is unjust and wrong: According to a poll published in Maariv in September 2005, 82 percent of the French like the Jews, with France ranking second among countries expressing a positive opinion (after the Netherlands).

Anti-Semitism is in total contradiction with France's values. As President Jacques Chirac declared on Nov. 17, 2003, "When a Jew is attacked in France, it is an attack against the whole of France." The French Government has demonstrated its absolute determination to fight this scourge, and its efforts have been widely recognized by both the Israeli authorities and the national leaders of the American Jewish community. Its zero-tolerance policy has borne fruit: anti-Semitic acts in France declined 48 percent in 2005 compared with 2004.

Finally, Mr. Plaut's references to an "Islamic republic" in France are totally baseless. France is actively pursuing a strategy both to combat radical Islam and better integrate its Muslim community into the French society. France acted to stop the Eurosat satellite from rebroadcasting Al Manar channel programs to its territory and moved successfully to have Yahoo.fr filter Internet sites promoting hate and anti-Semitism.

Francois Delattre
Consul General of France

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 Simon McIlwaine, May 24, 2006.

From Anglicans for Israel:

We are pleased to announce that the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland has accepted a motion which calls upon the Foreign Secretary to use her influence both as the representative of Her Majesty's Government and in co-operation with her colleagues within the EU to encourage HAMAS to issue a statement accepting Israel's right to exist.

But there's more: the whole motion explicitly recognised Israel's right to security, rejected a boycott and called for economic engagement with both sides.

We congratulate the General Assembly for having the courage to stand against the militants and, naturally, we recommend that Anglicans seek to emulate the good sense displayed by the Church of Scotland.

Contact Simon McIlwaine by email at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk
Direct Tel is 020 8774 9522; Direct Fax 020 8680 7995.

To Go To Top

Posted by Anita Tucker, May 24, 2006.

Today the head of the board of the Netzer Hazani community in EIn tzurim, Monique Zarbiv, received a phone call from an admistrator of The Sela Commission (Minhelet) Motti Elimelech,that since he sees that our Netzer Hazani "disengaged" families are not yet moving into the caravillas as per the letter they had sent some of the families, he was sending a letter to the Kibbutz Ein Tzurim guesthouse and the Hafetz Haim guesthouse that The Sela commission was stopping all further funding to the guesthouse for the Netzer Hazani families. Our representative asked to receive this in writing.

This in fact is saying that since we will not move into the caravillas though they are not yet completed, some without water nor electricity,and though the site as a whole is far from completed, and though the site is very dangerous for the children as well as the ill and the elderly -- i.e., open sewage holes, protruding poles, piles of blocks, hills and ditches, obstacle courses, etc. etc. -- then we will be thrown into the street (this after nine months in the minimal old small rooms of the guesthouse, which we obviously anxiously await leaving -- however not to be thrown in the street).

If you care, please feel free to call Minhelet SELA and express you opinion to Motti Elimelech and whomever else there as to why it is taking them so long to complete the Ein Tzurim caravilla site completely as planned. If they don't complete site quickly, properly and safely there will be caring Jews from all over the country and the world working to publicize their incapabilities.


Anita Tucker is a farmer and grew formidable vegetables before she together with the other Jews of Gush Katif were kicked out of their homes and saw their greenhouses destroyed and/or vandelized by the Arabs. Contact her at tucker.anita@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 24, 2006.

A former colleague whose reports I find reliable has retired to Judea-Samaria. She is filling me in with news witnessed by herself or her neighbors. Much of it is not reported elsewhere or rarely so -- which, itself is a sad commentary about the dearth of reliable news in the supposed "information age." Her news is informed by insights from decades of Zionist activity and a non-conformist attitude.

She was among the traffic-blockers protesting against the expulsion of Jews from their houses in Gush Katif, Gaza. A policeman roughly tore her banner out of her hands, and threatened to "take care of her." (What, are police brutality and threats legal?) Fortunately for her but not for others, he turned to younger people to fling onto the pavement, hard. (Injuring instead of arresting means government policy is brutal aggression, not law-enforcement.)

The special anti-settler police corps went to Amona, after having tried to provoke violence in Hebron as if seeking a pretext to shoot some. The police walked through a group of Jews in Hebron, praying on the Sabbath, shoving them for no reason. The worshippers prudently did not react. Carnage avoided.

My colleague went to visit friends in Beit El. Her armed caravan hurried through some Arab towns. They were prepared to defend themselves. The government insists, however, that Jews under attack turn back. She considers that neurotic. (Many Israelis, including soldiers, fail to fire back until given permission by some politically correct commander. Others defend themselves but then are investigated for criminal sanctions. (Cowardice forfeits Arab respect and therefore encourages more Arab attacks.) The caravan suffered no attacks, but the roads are dangerous (partly because the government fails to demolish Arab houses illegally built too close to them).

The government of Israel responded to this menace by barring Jews from many of the roads, instead of removing the Arabs. "In Beit El the checkpoint was at the back entrance to keep Jews from leaving Beit El for Jerusalem on that road." "The road leading from Tekoa to Jerusalem is a closed Military Zone for Jews, and Arabs are allowed to travel the road." Again, it more than doubles the time for people from Tekoa to get to Jerusalem and cuts out the short cut to Efrat. A resident of Tekoa "told me that the road is not dangerous. Tekoa will be on the Arab side of the fence, and they want to make life hard for them and cut them off from Efrat and double the time to Jerusalem."

Restricting Jewish drivers isolates some Jewish towns, by making their commuting onerous. She observes that this outcome coincidentally, or is it coincidentally, makes it easier to pick off those towns and dispossess the Jews from each, one town at-a-time.

(The NY Times has articles about the hardships endured by P.A. Arabs. It ignores the hardships endured by Jews. The differences are that the Jews are innocent but the Times is anti-Zionist and practices advocacy journalism.?

(A few years ago, one read complaints about the bypass roads built for Jews. The complaint was that this discriminated against Arabs. The complaint was not so much asinine as biased, for it ignored the fact that Arab vehicles were used to commit terrorism against the Jews. Now that Jews are being denied the use of roads in favor of the Arabs, those same upholders of human rights are silent. Hypocrites!)


Fair reporters elicit the truth by interviewing both sides. Experience teaches, and Islamic philosophy holds, that the Arabs lie about the Arab-Israel conflict and the government of Israel lies against Israeli settlers. Sometimes right-wing news reports assert all sorts of drastic conclusions that I find the stories do not back up. Other interpretations may be possible. Sometimes they omit unfavorable things.

The news about Judea-Samaria in the NY Times generally omits bad news about the Arabs and favorable news about the settlers. In the NY Sun, the editorials and columnists are reliable in disputes between Israel and the Arabs, but not about the settlers. The Sun gets much of its foreign news from the Daily Telegraph and Associated Press, and one of its editors is Hillel Halkin, who favors abandonment without considering fairly in his columns the arguments against it.

The major media rely upon Arab handlers and reporters and upon police and official statements ranged against the settlers. It does not check with settlers. My former colleague is on the scene there, and explains what really goes on.

She reports, for example, that Arabs constantly dumped garbage in an Efrat security employee's yard. One day he saw them. He told them to stop. Three Arabs then came out of the truck and approached him. He called the head of security, and asked him to call the police. The telephone was busy. He took out a pistol and ordered them to halt. They came closer, whereupon he fired in the air. Then the police came, but arrested them. They told him that the Arabs had telephoned to complain that he attacked them. (The police usually take the word of Arabs over Jews, because they favor Arab settlers over Jewish settlers.) The police had not gotten the call from the head of security. They were going to put the victim on trial. The Arabs were laughing at him and at Israel. (The police ignored their mocking attitude about their trickery.)

The victim fortunately had witnesses, and the head of security backed him up. He was released. The Arabs went unpunished. (Ridiculous laws are enforced against Jews and necessary laws are not enforced against Arabs.)

Shimshon Cytrin, a Jew from Gush Katif, Gaza, is soon to be tried for attempted murder, for having thrown rocks at Arabs. The media did not photograph the Arabs throwing rocks, but waited until Jews retaliated. However, a Jewish girl was shown whose face the Arabs had smashed, earlier, with a rock. When an Arab was slightly hurt by a soldier's rifle butt, as both admitted the police arrested young Shimshon, without any evidence that any rock he threw had struck that Arab. They boy's family, not affluent, already has spent $40,000 on legal fees. Why no Arabs indicted?

A Jew was walking with his dog on the beach in Gaza, before withdrawal. Arabs came and threw rocks at the dog. The Jew fired into the air. The police arrested him for shooting an Arab in the leg. (If he had, it would have been justified, but Israel is not a country of law, common sense, or justice for settlers.) The allegedly wounded Arab was not found. Nor did the Arab doctor there treat one. The Arab complainant did not identify the accused. But the judge convicted the Jew and sentenced him to two years for "endangering life." While awaiting his appeal, he sits in jail. He's already spent eight months there. No habeas corpus or trial by jury, just pro-Arab prejudice.


After trading accusations of previous attacks, members of Fatah and Hamas opened fire on each other with automatic weapons. They wounded 11 people, of whom three were fellow gunmen and eight were civilians, including five children (IMRA, 5/9).

Wanton Arab violence does not produce international condemnation for shooting innocent civilians, including children, nor for terrorist movement among civilians. When Israelis shoot an Arab civilian incidentally in the course of self-defense against terrorism, it reaps international condemnation for harming innocent civilians. That is not a humanitarian response but a hypocritical and anti-Zionist one.


The Quakers, or Friends, have a philosophy of non-violence but a politics of leftist violence. They supported the leftist revolutionaries in Latin America but opposed the anti-leftist forces. The Abington Friends School in Jenkintown bans t-shirts that advertise for causes that embrace violence, such as Israeli Army symbols. On the other hand, the school does not ban t-shirts that publicize the violent Che Guevara. The Friends contradict themselves.

The Friends called exaggerated the reports of genocide in Cambodia, but used Saddam's exaggerated figures of children's deaths in Iraq (largely from Saddam having sold their food and medicine), ignored Saddam's murdering an even larger number, and mostly ignored the genocide in Sudan. It does protest vigorously against Israel's security fence, though the fence does reduce violence by terrorists.

The Friends issued a report calling for ending the Arab-Israel conflict. It failed to call for ending terrorism. Terrorism, the ultimate evil in violence, since it deliberately but randomly targets the innocent, should be the most denounced type of violence by a supposedly pacifistic organization. The Friends demand that the US stop subsidizing Iraq and that the US keep subsidizing the P.A., even as the P.A. declares war and lauds terrorism (MEFNews, 5/9 from Michael Rubin & Suzanne Gershowitz). Because the source's argumentation for other severe charges is not logical, I omitted them.


Annan started his UNO career as a reform candidate. He still is, though he has secured no major reforms and his regime is noted for corruption. The Secretary-General improperly defended an official accused of sexual harassment, until he had to try to get the accused official to resign. Annan's aide, brought in to reform the UNO, told the supposedly independent internal investigation agency to exonerate higher ups. He advised Annan to accept a $500,000 prize from Dubai, but told other staffers to refuse gifts for more than $250. Annan appointed one of those who helped him get that prize head of the UN Environmental program.

The problem with most reform proposals is that they would centralize power with the Secretary-General. With Annan there, what reform is it? (Benni Avni, NY Sun, 5/8, p.6).


A senior P.A. religious figure, Hamed Al-Tamimi, a member of the Supreme [Islamic] Judicial Council and the director of the Inter-Religion Dialogue Department, accused the YMCA of worshipping Satan. He accused Christian pro-Zionists and Jewish Zionists of hating Muslims and seeking to destroy Islam. His diatribe had other, similar defamation. Public prayers in the P.A. often call for the murder of Christians and Jews (Arutz-7, 5/8). Worship Satan? Is he crazy? Maybe not, but that is the level of Islamic discourse.

The YMCA in the P.A. has Muslims on its board, and far from hating, it offers charity to the Arabs there, non-denominatinally. The hatred that the Muslims impute to Christians and Jews, too many of whom are appeasement-minded towards the Muslims, does not exist. The hatred is Islam's and the defamation is part of their jihad, to rally their faithful to war. Christians and Jews should awake to the danger that Islam poses and to the need to fight against Islamism, if not also Islam.


Israeli Arabs want to parade in Lod to protest creation of the State of Israel as a catastrophe. They would carry banners of Hamas, which is in a terrorist war on Israel, and would urge the destruction of the Jewish state (Arutz-7, 5/8).

"When Israeli Arab MK Jamal Zahalka (National Democratic Assembly) was asked in a live interview broadcast on Israel Radio's ... news magazine today to relate to the question of loyalty to the State of Israel, Zahalka replied "we are loyal to values -- not institutions." (IMRA, 5/8.)

Translation: Israeli Arabs are loyal to Islam and not to their country. The Arabs don't put it baldly for Jews to hear and to become alerted to their Arabs being a fifth column. Arabs reply by saying what their people know is aggressive but na√¬Įve Westerners do not. The march is a rally for sedition. Get away with that, and they become bolder.


To strengthen the likelihood of his scheme for territorial abandonment passing in the Knesset, PM Olmert's party is granting more key committee seats to Arab Party MKs. The Arabs then would support the scheme. Right-wing MKs object to the resulting disproportionate representation conferred upon the Arabs (IMRA, 5/8).

Olmert is letting the country's enemies tip the balance on issues of national security. It indicates inability to persuade the country of his policy. His policy allies himself to those enemies. The Arabs complain about Israel being a Jewish state. Why are they complaining -- can't they see that the Left is dismantling that state?

The Left's strategy is elevating the Arabs into a gradual position of dominance. That would make the country untenable for the Left. But for now, it controls the country, and informed patriots are unable to stop it. Were normal Israeli Jews in control, they would stop kowtowing to the Arabs and start getting the Arabs out, in self-defense. The West must learn fast that it cannot co-exist with internal Arab populations, because the Arabs strive for dominance, are intolerant, and are deadly.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Alan Jay, May 23, 2006.

Did you know Ehud Olmert's "Convergence" plan:-

1. Places Tel Aviv and All Other Israeli Cities (except Haifa and Ashdod!) within Ketyusha Rocket Range (22km) from Israel's new border with Hamas;

2. Evacuates and destroys entire Jewish Cities, Towns, Villages, Yeshivas, Shuls, Schools, Businesses.... directly creating 70,000-90,000 Destitute Jewish Refugees;

3. Gives Hamas and Global Islamic Fundamentalism their greatest "victory" since 9/11.

4. Will NOT bring Israel either internationally recognized borders, nor any step towards Peace.

If this concerns you, join the new "United Orange" email list, by sending an email to:- unitedorange-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Contact the poster at alanjay7236@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professors for a Strong Israel, May 23, 2006.

Now that a suit has been filed opposing the upgrading of the College of Judea and Samaria to a university, Professors for a Strong Israel wishes to point out that the college in Ariel is, by any academic standards, the most highly qualified for this step among all colleges in Israel. The diversity of its faculties and departments and the quantity of research undertaken join with its sheer size in making it the largest college in the country. We urge that the process of turning it into a university be accelerated.

The political voices in opposition, which have no academic basis, should simply be ignored.

Contact Professors for a Strong Israel at 050-551 8940

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, May 23, 2006.

Is there going to be a Palestinian civil war? Probably not. But there is a major struggle going on that could be described as the biggest internal Palestinian conflict in memory, perhaps in history.

On one level, the battle is between Hamas and Fatah, between Islamism and nationalism. It is also a struggle between two groups each wanting the fruits of leadership: power, prestige, and money.

With the demise of unchallenged Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and--no less important--Fatah's inability to gain a state due to its own intransigence, the way was open for Hamas's rise. This trend was also made possible by Arafat's encouragement of anarchy and attempt to use Hamas for his own purposes. Of course, it can also be traced to Fatah's corruption and incompetence in running the Palestinian Authority (PA) for 12 years.

The turning point was Hamas's landslide victory in the January 25, 2006, election, partly due to Fatah's internal splits. Another factor was Fatah's incredible arrogance and inflexibility. It assumed that no one else could possibly lead the Palestinians. As Fatah's campaign manager told me before the balloting, "People will vote for Abu Mazen and everything will be okay."

Since then, power has been divided between Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazin), the PA's leader and self-styled president, and a Hamas-dominated parliament and cabinet. Abbas has unilaterally given himself control over borders, the media, and some security agencies. Hamas is fuming but cannot do much about this power grab. To make matters worse for Hamas, the 60,000-member PA bureaucracy, including security forces, is dominated by Fatah members.

International sanctions against giving money to the Hamas regime also hurt the Islamists. Yet the European Union had earlier stopped aid to the PA because of its financial irresponsibility. This kind of thing should be remembered in the face of a strong temptation to declare Fatah, as opposed to Hamas, the "good guys" or at least the lesser of two evils.

While Fatah is somewhat less horrible than Hamas--and of course there are some different views within the organization--it is Fatah's past incitement, terrorism, and refusal to make real peace that are at the root of the current situation. There is no reason to believe it would do better in future if restored to power.

There is much discussion on why Hamas won the elections. Some would say that Palestinians supported Hamas's program; others that voters were merely reacting against Fatah's corruption. Both points are valid but there is more to the story.

About half of Hamas's voters have shown they support its program. The other half has no problems with its views except that of Islamizing society. Yet regarding terrorism, Israel, peace, and general world view there is not a big difference between Fatah and Hamas, except on this issue.

What of the future?

First, can Fatah return to office? This is possible but far from certain. Not the slightest reform has taken place in Fatah nor has any of the leadership been replaced or the younger generation fully incorporated. Fatah, as was once said of France's reactionary Bourbon dynasty, has neither learned nor forgotten anything.

A Hamas-Fatah deal is also possible but not so likely. Any such arrangement would necessitate Fatah accepting the role of junior partner, which Hamas never did. Given the Fatah mindset this seems unlikely though some cadre may join Hamas out of their own views or opportunism. One reason for keeping up the pressure on the Hamas regime is to discourage such a rapprochement.

Second, how is Fatah competing with Hamas? Certainly, it is not doing so by laying out an alternative, moderate line. If Fatah so wished it could--an option available for a decade--urge an end to the eternal struggle and a compromise with Israel that would quickly win it a state and international support. While a few people in Fatah do think this way, Abbas among them to some extent, there is no sign that anyone is seriously considering such a strategy.

Instead, Fatah is competing by trying to prove that it is just as militant as the Islamists, including the escalation of its own attempts at terrorism. Since the election, Fatah statements and actions are more, rather than less, extreme.

Of course, Fatah can also hope that Western and Israeli pressures will bring down Hamas and simply hand it power once again. Fatah is encouraging its supporters to blame Hamas for the economic problems of the PA and to demonstrate demanding their pay. Equally, Fatah is resisting any moves by Hamas to take over the security forces and put its own people into the bureaucracy. This effort may even succeed. But such an outcome cannot be taken for granted.

Finally, will there be a civil war? Clearly, armed resistance to Hamas's encroachment on Fatah-controlled areas and institutions is happening periodically. Yet both sides are trying to avoid an all-out struggle. Continuing anarchy and periodic clashes seem more likely than full-scale battle.

It is important not to underestimate the staying power of either Hamas, Fatah, or the PA. The stakes are too high for both sides to give much ground. Equally, there is a deep-seated strategy of being willing to sacrifice the welfare of the Palestinian population in the fight against each other and Israel. Let them suffer, the activists and gunmen argue, and that suffering will force the West and Israel to ease the pressure and give into their demands without Palestinian concessions.

This seems a strange approach but it is one that the Palestinian movement has used for a half-century and does not seem to have yet transcended. On more than one occasion in the past it has even worked. Often, however, it has led to disaster. And in this case the latter outcome appears more likely. Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His co-authored book, Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography, (Oxford University Press) is now available in paperback and in Hebrew. His latest book, The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, was published by Wiley in September. Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Zalmi, May 23, 2006.

A television advertising campaign in the United States is reminding viewers of the costs of transferring territory to the Palestinian Authority.

The Center for Security Policy
(www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=today) is sponsoring the campaign, which targets Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's unilateral withdrawal plan. The ad, which is being broadcast on national television in the U.S, is timed to coincide with Olmert's visit to Washington.

The ad succinctly reviews the consequences for Israeli and U.S. interests if land is surrendered to terrorist control, as well as the past history of territorial concessions in southern Lebanon and Gaza.

Download the ad at

Contact Zalmi at zalmi@zalmi.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 23, 2006.

Dear Christian leaders,

The next time that you, or someone you know, sees some kinship between Israel and the formerly apartheid state of South Africa (as is often asserted by Arab propaganda), give them the following email.

If you want to find real apartheid today, real religious apartheid, look to Egypt....the 2nd most westernized and liberal of Arab countries.

And recall, too, that the punishment for selling land to Jews in Jordan is death. Jordan is the first most westernized and modern and liberal country in the Arab world (Lebanon used to be the most liberal, but not since it has been taken over by Syria and Hizbollah).

In Israel, whether you are a minority by virtue of your religion, your sexual preference, your gender, your national origin, or your race....it does not matter. You enjoy the democratic freedoms of a western state and benefit from government support and protection for that freedom despite your minority status.

There are problems in Israel...not unlike the problems of many western democratic modern liberal states. But there is no apartheid.

It is precisely because you will find real apartheid, real religious apartheid, in much of the Moslem world, and most of the Arab world, that Arab propaganda seeks to demonize Israel as an apartheid state.

They can't pretend that Arab states are liberal democracies with social and gender and religious equality. So they try to divert your attention to the sham accusations of non-existent apartheid in Israel.

Don't fall for it.

Read how the Copts (among the earliest Christians in the world) suffer in Egypt.

If you are concerned about Apartheid, speak out against Mubarrak's apartheid, and speak out on behalf of the oppressed and repressed Copts.

From: The Copts Digest (www.copts.com)
From: Digest Member
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 00:54:38 -0400
Subject: "Fix Double Standards at Home First"

President Hosni Mubarak opened the World Economic Forum in Sharm El Sheikh Saturday with a surprisingly tough speech. He implied the United States was running a foreign policy that promoted double standards on nuclear issues.

Mr. President, I am surprised that you are concerned about double standards and further astonished with your preaching of equality. On one hand it is good to hear that you have come to grips with the concept of double standards and have realized that such a concept exists. On the other hand, it is sad that your countryEs constitution, laws and almost every aspect of life in your country are founded on the very concept that you complain about.

While politicians and political analysts could differ on whether your foes are promoting double standards, the whole world, including the business men who were listening to you, can agree that double standards are entrenched in almost every aspect of life in your country b you probably do not see it but the whole world sees it.

You have a constitution for Muslims specifying Quran a source of legislation, but have no constitution for Christians.

You have laws restricting the building of churches but have no law that restricts building of mosques.

You have publicly funded universities, such as Al Azhar, that can be accessed only by Muslims but access to Christians is denied.

You have laws for freedom of travel for men and other laws restricting travel for women.

You have inheritance rules for men and different ones for women.

You have Ids issued to certain religions but cannot be issued for others, like Bahaiis.

And the list goes on but the air in your country is full of double standards

Mr. President, look around you... There was once a government called South Africa, following double standards and segregation like yours. That government is now history.

Mr. President, I plea to you, in the interest of saving from further deterioration what remains from the old reputation of the great nation of Egypt, that you refrain from educating the West and other civilizations about double standards. Before you endeavor discussing this subject with the educated world you may wish to fix double standards in your home first. And before pushing for peace negotiations for the Palestinians, bring peace in your home first.

(name withheld for personal security reasons)

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 23, 2006.

This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg. Contact him by email at eidelberg@foundation1.org It is the edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, which was broadcast on Israel National Radio, May 22, 2006.

Before discussing Judge Barak, let us review Israel's undemocratic method of appointing Supreme Court judges -- there's nothing like it in the democratic world.

The fifteen judges of the court are appointed by a nine-member committee consisting of three sitting justices, including the court president. Two are representatives of the Israel Bar Association. Two are cabinet ministers, including, the justice minister. Two are Knesset members, one representing the government coalition, the other representing the opposition. The committee's majority, therefore, is unelected. Moreover, the two Bar Association members are subject to pressure by the court president before whom they may argue cases. This also applies to the justice minister, who can also be manipulated by the court's president. And since the court's president handpicks the judges for every case, he can very much determine the selection of his own successor as well as the court's character as a whole.

So it's obvious that Israel's High Court of Justice is a self-perpetuating oligarchy. Indeed, it has been criticized by eminent Israelis across the political spectrum. But now let's discuss Judge Barak.

Barak professes and practices the dictum that "everything is justiciable." This means that every act of the Legislature and every act of the Executive is subject to judicial approval. This implies that the Supreme Court, of which Barak is the president, is the supreme law-giver of Israel, and that Barak himself is the self-crowned Monarch of this country!

A recent example of his audacity involves Israel's family reunification plan. Despite the war being waged by the Palestinian Authority against Israel, Barak has announced that the Court will nullify the law preventing Palestinian Arabs from gaining Israeli citizenship by marrying Israeli-Arabs -- this, despite his having been informed by the government that 20% of those who have received Israeli citizenship in the family reunification plan were involved in terrorist activity!

When Barak says "everything is justiciable," he thereby rejects government by the people, of the people, and for the people. He does so in the name of Israel's "enlightened population," by which he means Israel's ultra-secular minority. This minority is alienated from the Jewish heritage. The dictum "everything is justiciable" may then be applied to every law and precept of the Torah. The Barak Court is therefore the ultimate judge of what is good and bad, right and wrong, modest and immodest.

The Court therefore has the power to prescribe the morality or way of life of the Jewish people! Here are a few of the court's rulings which obviously contradict Judaism:

  • The Barak Court ruled that the Chief Rabbinate does not have final jurisdiction over conversions.

  • The Barak Court ruled that kibbutz shopping centers may remain open to the public on the Sabbath.

  • The Barak Court ordered the Interior Minister to recognize homosexual adoptions performed overseas, even though Israeli law does not recognize such adoptions.

  • The Barak Court ordered the Interior Ministry to register a lesbian couple as parents of a child.

  • The Barak Court nullified Knesset legislation permitting the Film Censorship Board to ban pornographic movies by ruling that nothing can actually be declared pornography, as one man's pornography is another man's art.

Barak's relativism is obvious. All lifestyles are morally equal. Notions of right and wrong, beautiful and ugly, are purely subjective. Barak has nonetheless said that no conflict exists between democracy and Judaism! Surely he is being disingenuous. He is employing the facade of democracy to cover his judicial agenda, to erase Judaism from the Land of Israel or transform Israel into "a state of its citizens." Here is further evidence:

  • The Barak Court ruled that land purchased by the Jewish National Fund for the purpose of Jewish settlement must be sold to Arabs on an equal footing.

  • The Barak Court ignored the Attorney General's decision to disqualify the Balad Party for violating Basic Law: The Knesset, which prohibits any party that negates the Jewish character of the State.

  • The Barak Court ruled against the IDF's decision to level certain Arab houses used by terrorists to murder Jews. One of those houses was used by the Arab terrorists that murdered Tali Hatuel and her four daughters.

  • The Barak Court substituted its own judgment for that of the Defense Ministry by ordering the latter to re-route various sections of the "security fence" to the disadvantage of Jews.

  • The Court ruled that Judea, Samaria and Gaza are "belligerent occupied territory."

These rulings have no basis in Israeli law. Barak's ruling that Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are "belligerent occupied territory" even contradicts the Supreme Court's own precedent. Since Jordan had no legal claim to Judea and Samaria, and since Egypt had no legal claim to Gaza, no country but Israel has a valid legal claim to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza according to objective international law.

Barak's ruling that Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are "occupied territory" provided the color of legality for Prime Minister Sharon's so-called Disengagement Plan. By implementing this plan, the government dispossessed and deported 8,000 Jews from Gaza and thereby violated Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. This same government, contrary to the warnings of Israel's highest military and intelligence officials turned this land over to Israel's implacable enemies, who have made Gaza the Mecca of international terrorism.

Judge Barak admitted that the expulsion of Jews from Gaza violated Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom, but that this was permissible since it was necessary for national security. But Barak surely knew that Israel's highest military and intelligence officials testified before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that withdrawal from Gaza (and northern Samaria) would undermine Israel's security. Barak's ruling about national security was a cover up for his anti-Jewish agenda.

Barak has been the spearhead of the Left's agenda to truncate not only the Land of Israel, but also the historic memory of the Jewish people which is bonded to Judea and Samaria and their centrality in the teachings of the prophets and sages of Israel. To rule that Judea is not part of Israel is to rule that eastern Jerusalem and the Temple Mount are not part of Israel. This is further evidence of Barak's attempt to eliminate Judaism from the Land of Israel.

One last word. The so-called "constitution by consensus" published by the Israel Democracy Institute, a leftwing organization, would "constitutionalize" the power of the Supreme Court at the expense of the Legislative and Executive branches and thereby perpetuate judicial despotism. It is a brazen attack on Israel's religious community and an audacious attempt to eliminate Judaism from the Land of Israel.

Contact the Ceders at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 23, 2006.

I am not surprized that the WCC slams Israel and blames Israel for all the ills of the Palestinian world. That is true to form.

What I find amazing is the degree to which the WCC can depart from rational thought and from observed reality in its condemanation of Israel.

This was written by George Conger, and it appeared in The Jerusalem Post May. 22, 2006 (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1148287842710& pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

My comments are IN CAPS, inside of the text below.

Israel bears the burden of responsibility for the present crisis in te Middle East, the World Council of Churches has announced, following a meeting of its Executive Committee in Geneva from May 16-19.



The Christian Left's leading ecumenical organization stated Israel's actions towards the Palestinians "cannot be justified morally, legally or even politically."


The failure "to comply with international law" had "pushed the situation on the ground to a point of no return," they concluded.


The WCC condemned the killing of innocent civilians by "both sides" in the conflict and called for the Palestinians to "maintain the existing one-party cease-fire toward Israel" and asked Israel to base its security on "the equitable negotiation of final borders" with its neighbors.


However, the present disparities between Israel and Palestine were "appalling," the WCC said.



"One side is positioning itself to unilaterally establish final borders on territory that belongs to the other side;



the other side is increasingly confined to the scattered enclaves that remain. On one side there is control of more and more land and water; on the other there are more and more families deprived of land and livelihoods.




On one side as many people as possible are being housed on occupied land; on the other side the toll mounts of refugees without homes or land. One side controls Jerusalem, a city shared by two peoples and three world religions; the other-Muslim and Christian-watches its demographic, commercial and religious presence wither in Jerusalem," the WCC said.








The WCC claimed a double standard was at work in the international community that favored Israel, saying, "The side set to keep its unlawful gains is garnering support from part of the international community. The side that, despairing at those unlawful gains, used legitimate elections to choose new leaders is being isolated and punished."



"Democracy must be protected where it is taking root," the WCC said, calling for a relaxation of American, British and EU sanctions against Hamas. "Peace must come soon or it may not come to either people for a long time," they concluded.






The WCC's Executive Committee called upon its 340 member churches in over 100 countries representing approximately 550 million Orthodox, Anglican and Protestant Christians to "share solidarity with people on both sides of the conflict," and to "use legitimate forms of pressure to promote a just peace and to end unlawful activities by Israelis or Palestinians."




It also asked its members to "find constructive ways to address threats experienced among the Jewish people, including the nature, prevalence and impact of racism in local, national and international contexts."


In March 2005, the WCC urged its member churches give "serious consideration" to pulling investments out of Israel and endorsed the 2004 decision by the Presbyterian Church of the United States to seek "phased selective divestment" from Israel. "This [Presbyterian] action is commendable in both method and manner, uses criteria rooted in faith and calls members to do the things that make for peace," the WCC said.


The Presbyterian Church will revisit its 2004 divestment decision next month at its 217th General Assembly in Birmingham, Alabama, in response to criticism that the divestment call was one-sided and ill-informed.


David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Judah Tzoref, May 23, 2006.
[Editor's note The British Academic Union NATFHE proposes to blacklist academics from two Israeli Universities. To read about it in Jeff Weintraub's article, "Academic Freedom Alert - Oppose The Blacklisting Of Israeli Academics," click here.

To counter the motion, some well-meaning Israelis have proposed a petition, which, unfortunately takes a tone illustrated by the following:

"We oppose the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and we oppose the daily violence that is necessary to sustain it; as we oppose campaigns to kill Israelis. We are for peace between Israel and Palestine on the basis of mutual recognition. But this boycott proposal would do more harm than good if the aim is to bolster the Israeli and Palestinian peace movements and move towards a peace agreement."
As others have noted, "The Unions don't want to boycott the israeli universities because of the so called israeli occupation, the Unions just want to boycott Israel herself just for existing." Unfortunately, as usual, we must not only fight the obvious enemy but also well-meaning Jewish mush-brains. The letter from Dr. Judah Tzoref below addresses this point.]

Have some people in the British academia completely lost their minds... shouldn't they once and for all dedicate their intellectual energy to the moral imperative of accounting for the notorious British atrocities during the Mandate in pre-state Israel... and what about the abandonment of the Balfour declaration, the unforgivable renunciation of the international commitment to the establishment of a Jewish National Home and the consequent rendering of the eventual Jewish state just another meager ghetto, this time in the very Jewish homeland.

Shame upon the gang of such "professors", so morbidly obsessed with malignant practices of their anti-Jewish brutality, hate and propaganda, the bottom line of which is just to blur any distinction between them and their anti-Semitic look-alikes throughout our history of persecution.

No manipulative "peace" aspiration and making have any right to compress the Jews once again into the erasable dimensions of a non-sustainable ghetto... and if such sensitive professors so fervently care for apartheid and racism, let them bear in mind the ethnic cleansing perpetrated last summer against Jews of the Northern Negev, and this is not the only manifestation of racism against Jews in their very homeland... free Israel from the rest of Arab occupation!

Judah Tzoref received his Ph.D. from Oxford University. He lives in Rehovot, Israel. Contact him at jtzcref@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 23, 2006.


The Prime Ministers of Israel decided upon withdrawal from the Territories without debate (and against professional advice). A debate would have brought out that the Gaza withdrawal proved a failure. "It would also raise the likelihood that an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria will cause an inflow of terrorists and missiles that will place all of Israel's major cities as well as its major highways, seaports and Ben-Gurion Airport within missile range from Hizbullah forces in Lebanon and Palestinian forces in Gaza, Judea and Samaria."

Such a withdrawal also would let the P.A. Islamists team up with counterparts in Jordan and take over that country. US supply of its forces in Iraq, via Jordan, would have to be re-routed through the Persian Gulf, where Iran could make trouble. Judea-Samaria would host training bases for terrorists planning to fight against the US in Iraq. The retreat would be such a victory for jihad, whose proponents claim with logic that their terrorism brought it about, that thousands of Muslims would join the jihad. (Thus surrendering to Islamists increases terrorism, whereas fighting them to a standstill does not.) By weakening itself, an ally of the US, Israel would be weakening the US directly and also in the world's perception of US strength).

When PM Olmert comes to Washington, he will elicit support for his scheme. He would be asked why the US should support a scheme that facilitates international jihad (IMRA, 5/6 from Caroline Glick).

The US wouldn't pay for the scheme, but probably would encourage him to pursue it, because contrary to what Caroline Glick avers, US foreign policy is not based upon US national interests but on perceived special interests, prejudices, ignorance, and stupidity. The State Dept. hates Israel more than it cares about the long-range US national security. US security needs a strong Israel and a weak P.A. The US probably would hint that it would recognize the borders he sets. After he withdraws, it would demur. (That was the way the US dealt with Sharon, before the Gaza withdrawal.)


NY Sun columnist Youssef Ibrahim claims that new laws redefining freedom of speech and "militancy" (obsequious euphemism for terrorism) enable Western countries to threaten internal Muslim communities with what amounts to martial law. New restrictions of visas keep Muslims from immigrating. Hundreds of terrorists are imprisoned under sedition and hate laws. European Muslims are laying low. Some have asked radical preachers to go home. Muslim preachers are required to undergo re-education. More than half a dozen countries allow the government to de-naturalize Muslims.

Almost all Al Qaeda leaders are dead, jailed, or hiding. They can't use cell phones, faxes, or the Internet, without risk. Hence they cannot run an effective jihad. Muslim governments, having found themselves targeted by terrorists, are cracking down on the terrorists. Arab banks refuse to rout Arab League money to Hamas, because doing so would jeopardize their ties with Western banks. Islamists mostly are fighting fellow Muslims, not the West. Usually, this does not disturb oil exports (1/8, p.1)

I think celebration is premature. It is good that the West is reconsidering self-defense, but political correctness remains strong. The new laws are sporadic. As for the long run, the high Muslim birth rate and the declining European one are ominous.


Syria wants to convene an international conference to define the difference between terrorism and national resistance. But there is a definition of terrorism, and it has no relation to national resistance. Terrorism is improper means in warfare. National resistance is a reason for warfare. Under international law, the principle is that improper means of warfare are improper regardless of the stated reason for the war.

That's simple. Why call a conference? To redefine the terms so as to stand the existing definitions, ethics, and international law on its head. The Arabs know that contemporary governments are either afraid of them, obsequious for their business, or against Israel. The "international community" has little decent impulse. It can be depended upon to disregard legal and ethical principles and propose what is politically correct.

The Muslim Arabs have been denying the obvious and making false claims about terminology and the meaning of UNO Resolutions and treaties for years. Thus they claim that: (1) An advisory UNO Resolution on refugees is mandatory; (2) The Resolution calling for Israeli withdrawals from territory means from all the territory; (3) The Resolution suggesting that one means of solution is for "refugee" return is the only means; (4) Israel is violating certain Resolutions, although those Resolutions require the Arabs to make peace, in order for Israel to have to do certain things; (5) Any descendant of a Palestinian Arab refugee is a refugee, unlike the definition of other refugees, and with UNO help, they claim that any Arab who had arrived shortly before the war is a refugee, and they gave refugee status to Arabs living in their own homes, and they fail to turn in ration cards for deceased refugees; and (6) Israeli counter-attacking in self-defense is aggression.

The Muslim Arabs want to impose their own definition, so as to legalize their bigoted aggression and war crimes and to criminalize Israeli and American defense against them. They would falsely claim that Israel is occupying Arab territory (it is not Arab and Israel is not occupying sovereign territory) and that the US is occupying an Arab country (which it no longer is, now that Iraq has an independent government, thanks to the US liberating Iraq from tyranny). They would declare that the rebels in Iraq and the Arabs in the Territories are waging a legitimate war of national resistance, although it is religious aggression that they are pursuing. They would define any means of "national resistance" permissible, and any other terrorism as terrorism.

This is a cynical exercise by Syria. It may get away with it, because the overly liberal, politically correct, human rights organizations have persuaded the world that masses of governments confer legitimacy upon propositions. It is a case of situational ethics in the service of oppression aided by so-called humanitarian organizations overcoming the eternal ethics of Western civilizations (that the West needs constant reminders of, itself).

Now we can see why the US, which fostered many international agreement, finds them getting out of control and an oppressive infringement upon its sovereignty. The US is reluctant to recognize the International Criminal Court, because it cannot depend upon that Court being judicious. It would be political. Since the US has become a scapegoat almost as much as Israel, the US must guard its sovereign rights. The US sometimes is the only force for decency. Unfortunately, its sometimes unclean hands confuse people about when it is being decent, and they may listen to the Arabs, whose jihad is indecent.


In many respects, the US is treated as a pariah, as Israel is treated. Feeling the injustice of this, the US should bear more sympathy for Israel, a similar victim of prejudice. Having many enemies in common, the US should stand more with Israel.

The US often is accused of needing to have an enemy to focus on, therefore making false accusations. The real US problem is its reluctance to perceive hostility, as with the WWII Axis and the USSR. Generally, the accusation applies more aptly to the dictatorial enemies of the US, who need to divert attention from their own failure. How did the US come to have enemies? The main ways of acquiring enemies are by one's own choice and by their choice. The main ways of treating enemies are by competition, by conquest and then relinquishing control, and by extermination.

In modern times, the US usually acquires enemies by their choice. The US does not seek to exterminate them. Its totalitarian enemies seek to extinguish at least its culture of freedom. The accusation against the US is mainly false.

An exception in US policy is on Israel. The US pretends to be its friend but its policy is to undermine it. This hurts the long-term US national security.

Oh, people tell us, terrorism against the US and international dislike for the US government are produced by unstinting US support for Israel. Thus the US pretense of being friendly towards Israel, expressed in words as being a staunch friend and ally or as being even-handed, which are contradictory, is taken as unstinting support. So much for words, now for deeds. The US demands that Israel not defend fully against its deadly enemies whom the US aids, and the US tries to get Israel to relinquish to those enemies strategic territory that would provide secure borders and water supply. How ironic that the US harms Israel, but gets blamed for protecting it. It isn't fair that Israel gets blamed for harming America's reputation, for Israel does nothing wrong to warrant that. Israel deserves credit for the tremendous assistance it has rendered the US, more than have most of America's other allies combined.

This complaint that Muslim hostility towards the US is the result of US policy towards Israel is false. The Arabs state it because: (1) They prefer an excuse to the truth that would reflect on them or attract hostility towards them; and (2) Because they state it, they believe it. With the Arabs, accusations are self-fulfilling. Whatever the slander by Arabs, other Arabs believe it and probably the slanderers come to believe it, as well.

Europeans, many of whom have their own prideful and pitiful jealousies of the US, hatred of Jews, and appeasement of the Arabs, take Arab accusations at face value. Their shallow approach to this issue fails to analyze the policies and determine their validity. They don't have the facts about the issues and do not realize how poorly their biased, censored, and ignorant media prepare them to judge. They judge nevertheless. Meanwhile, their own civilization is submerging under Islam. They condemn the US, the only force that may rescue them, unless they wake up. There are some signs that they are waking up.

Sharing some of Europe's ignorance, biases, and prejudices, the State Dept. is unable to do the right thing: stand with Israel proudly, explain why, and earn international respect for taking a principled stand.


To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, May 23, 2006.

American Jewry has very little going for it today. Intermarriage is at epidemic rates, assimilation is rampant in all segments of the Jewish community, the quantity and quality of Jewish education is very low and the most common attitude to Jewish identity is indifference. However, the one consistent merit American Jewry has had over the generations has been Tzadakah. This has been true both on a personal level and on a community level. The charity American Jews gave kept alive the Jews of Eastern Europe during the Czarist persecutions at the end of the 19th century and continued through two world wars, the reestablishment of Israel, the rescue of millions of Jews in Europe, the Middle East, Russia and Africa and has built or rebuilt thousands of educational institutions in Israel. The list is long, diversified and impressive.

Unfortunately this merit of Tzadakah seems to be on the wane.

This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in www.World Net Daily.com today.

JERUSALEM -- Mainstream American Jewish organizations largely have refused to aid the thousands of Jews evacuated last summer from the Gaza Strip, the majority of whom are unemployed and have yet to find permanent housing, WND has learned.

Leaders from Gush Katif, the former Jewish communities of Gaza, said a series of direct petitions to significant U.S. Jewish organizations in recent months have been fruitless. They outlined a "humanitarian crisis" among the expellees.

"With few exceptions, we have received almost no help from the mainstream Jewish American groups, which grant billions of dollars" said Dror Vanunu, a former Gaza resident and the international coordinator for the Gush Katif Committee, a major charity organization representing the Gaza Jewish refugees.

Refugees 'in desperate need'

Israel in August evacuated its nearly 10,000 Jewish citizens from Gaza. Successive Israeli governments over the years had urged thousands of Israelis to move to Gaza and build communities there. Israel promised the expelled residents compensation packages and aid, much of which -- none months later -- has yet to arrive.

A status report released last week by the Gush Katif Committee found only 58 percent of expelled Gaza Jews were granted compensation for their homes guaranteed by the Israeli government. Only 26 percent of businessmen received housing compensation, and among farmers, only 5 percent.

The Israeli government pledged it would provide temporary housing solutions for all expelled Gush Katif residents. But 200 of the approximately 1,750 former Gush Katif families are living in university dormitories, motels and guest houses. Most families now reside in the Israeli Negev desert in small-government-built prefabricated "trailer villas." Residents there live mostly in crowded conditions, in many cases lacking enough bedroom space to accommodate their families.

"You can punch through my wall," a resident of Nitzan, the largest Gush Katif trailer community, told WND. "My friends come to visit me in coffee shops because there is not enough room in my living room for them to be comfortable."

Several residents said electricity and running water in their trailer communities is sparse.

Prior to their evacuation from Gaza, the vast majority of Gush Katif residents lived in large homes in landscaped communities. Many were farmers, tending to the area's famous, technologically advanced greenhouses that supplied Israel with much of its produce. The Gush Katif unemployment rate was less than 1 percent.

Now, 50 percent of Gaza's Jewish refugees are unemployed, and only 21 percent of former Gush Katif businesses have re-opened.

Residents of the Negev trailer camps mostly are former farmers, many of whom now say they are not sure what they will do.

"The land is much different here than what Gush Katif farmers are used to," explained Anita Tucker, one of the pioneer farmers of Katif. "Most of the techniques used in the greenhouses in Gaza were specific to the land and environment. Now farmers will have to develop new ways for these new lands and the different kind of soil."

According to the most recent Gush Katif status report, many of the Jewish children expelled from Gaza suffer from a full range of traumatic and post-traumatic stress symptoms, including anxiety, depression, regressive behavior, general behavioral problems, lack of concentration and difficulty coping with new or challenging situations.

Yet many refugee sites lack youth counselors and activity centers. Budgets for youth programs expired in March.

"The situation is extremely grave," said Vanunu. "It is at emergency status in many cases."

Almost no assistance for the former Gush Katif residents has been offered by any mainstream American Jewish organization, most of which publicly supported the Gaza withdrawal.

Many U.S. Jewish charities are associated with Jewish federations. They reportedly grant more than $3 billion per year.

Jewish federation leader quits in protest

Until he resigned in February, New Jersey resident Buddy Macy served as a member of the board of trustees and a recording secretary for the Jewish Federation of Greater Clifton-Passaic in New Jersey which belongs to the United Jewish Communities charity network, the most financially endowed Jewish charity group in the U.S.

The UJC reportedly raised over $850 million last year. It is known to set the tone for thousands of Jewish charity organizations nationwide.

Macy told WND he quit his position after more than 25 years of service to protest the UJC's refusal to initiate a campaign fund to help the Gaza Jewish refugees.

"There are thousands of Jews in dire need and the UJC and other mainstream groups with huge endowments are deliberately ignoring the crisis. The situation is absolutely unacceptable," Macy said.

In an e-mail to UJC President Howard Rieger that has been widely circulated among Jewish circles on the Internet, Macy called the UJC leadership "heartless with regard to the Jews who live and lived in Judea, Samaria and Gaza."

In an e-mail reply also widely circulated after it was posted by Macy, Rieger retorted, "I am not heartless. Read many of the comments which I have made publically [sic] on this subject. On the impact that dislocation has on individuals. And I have visited many of those who are now living in the Sinai and feel genuine concern for their plight."

Former Gaza Jewish residents do not live in the Sinai, which is located in Egypt.

Rieger in the e-mail went on to blame the Gaza Jewish refugees for their current situation:

"I do believe that in the end that the priority must be the rule of law," he said. "That many of those who found themselves without assistance after having to be uprooted also refused to engage with the system which was offering compensation."

The vast majority -- 1,450 of Katif's 1,800 families -- did not apply for government compensation ahead of Israel's August evacuation deadline, some stating they feared if the withdrawal were allowed to be implemented in Gaza, it would lead to other evacuations in Judea, Samaria and parts of Jerusalem.

After the Gaza withdrawal, the Israeli government reoffered aid packages and said all residents would be fully compensated.

Almost all Gush Katif families applied.

Rieger was unavailable for comment. His spokesman, Glenn Rosencrantz, did not return several messages left by WND at his office and on his cell phone the past few days.

Jewish leaders refuse aid efforts

Macy listed other major Jewish American leaders he charged have been refusing to aid Gush Katif expellees, including Israel Policy Forum President Seymour Reich, World Jewish Congress President Edgar Bronfman, Anti-Defamation League Director Abe Foxman and Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

While the situation regarding expelled Gush Katif residents has been publicly looming, Macy points out Jewish leaders Hoenlein and Foxman recently initiated a large charity effort to aid Israeli Arabs.

Macy also cited private Jewish philanthropists who provide large sums to mainstream organizations, including American Jewish magnates Ron Lauder, S. Daniel Abraham, Sam Halpern, Joseph Wilf, Charles Bronfman, and Matthew Bronfman, for helping set the tone for the Jewish groups. The philanthropists have been aiding efforts to build the Israeli Negev desert. Macy stated the individuals are closely linked to Israel's economy and to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who is looking to push through a withdrawal from most of Judea and Samaria, which is expected to bring an influx of new residents to the Negev.

Some small groups offer assistance

The Gush Katif Committee's Vanunu said he briefed the UJC, the Conference of Presidents and other mainstream American Jewish organizations about the status of the expelled Jewish residents and that little aid was forthcoming.

Hoenlein of the Conference told WND his organization has been pressing the Israeli government for more assistance and more effective outreach toward former Gaza Jews.

Vanunu said one UJC-linked federation in Texas made donations for scholarships for expelled Jewish children, and another local group provided funds to an employment office in a regional site housing former Gaza Jewish residents. The Jewish National Fund, which leads efforts to populate the Negev, has offered select assistance programs to Negev-based refugees.

"Unfortunately, there has been no real response from any of the main groups," Vanunu said.

Some smaller American Jewish organizations have been helping. The National Council of Young Israel, an American synagogue organization, provided funds for specific campaigns under the leadership of the Council's executive vice president, Pesach Lerner.

Vanunu said mainstream Canadian groups and philanthropists, largely located in Toronto, have been providing aid.

"The Toronto community has been enormously receptive," he said. "I would really like to apply that model to the American organizations."

'Time to put politics aside and help our own people'

Young Israel's Lerner last September led a fact-finding commission to Israel to assess the situation among the former Gaza Jewish residents. He authored a letter urging American Jewish groups to help the expellees.

"The mainstream groups are not responding," Lerner told WND. "They supported the Gaza evacuation. So they are not going to turn around now and offer assistance to the expelled Jewish residents."

Lerner said the mainstream American Jewish groups may be reluctant to provide aid in light of their stated support for Olmert's Judea and Samaria withdrawal.

"If it is highlighted the Gush Katif refugees are not taken care of nine months later, it will look terrible for the chance that any Judea and Samaria residents will be compensated," said Lerner. "We're talking about 10 times the people."

"I hope they come to see things differently," he continued. "There is a Jewish humanitarian crisis. It's time to put politics aside and help our own people."

Vanunu said while he suspected politics might be at play, the Israeli government is also to blame. He said government officials told American Jewish leaders prior to the Gaza evacuation their assistance was not necessary.

"Israeli leaders announced that they had everything under control," Vanunu said. "That all the Gush Katif residents would be taken care of. Unfortunately today almost everyone realizes that is not a reality."

Said Lerner, "I hope the mainstream groups come to see things differently. There is a Jewish humanitarian crisis. It's time to put politics aside and help our own people."

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 Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 22, 2006.

Zion, Hallo Tishalee Eht Shlom Assiraych?* Jonathan Pollard's speech was written for presentation at the Yom Yerushalayim Ceremony at the Kotel 25 May 2006 (Jerusalem Day). It will be presented simultaneously at other Yom Yerushalayim festivities throughout the country.

My Brothers and Sisters, the whole House of Israel:

Over the last 21 years it has never been easy for me to get a message out from within the prison walls. Every such attempt diminishes the limited opportunity that I have for maintaining contact with the outside world.

That is why - right from the start of my incarceration - I have always deliberately avoided using the limited opportunities to communicate with the Israeli public to talk about my own private hell. I have always preferred to forego expressing my feelings of isolation, betrayal and abandonment; or speaking about my deteriorating health and the life -and-death nature of my daily existence. Instead, I chose to focus on the national aspects of my plight: the mitzvah of Pidyan Shvuyim and the moral obligation never to abandon a wounded soldier in the field.

However, time is running out, and I can no longer afford to continue in the same vein.

Very few prisoners survive 21 years under the conditions in which I have been held and continue to be held. Those Israeli officials, who have for years claimed to be using "quiet diplomacy" for my release, while waiting for time to take its own effect, never imagined that the "Pollard problem" would still be around after all this time. They never dreamed that I would refuse to give up and just die.

The support and encouragement which I have received over the years, first and foremost from my wife, Esther, and from my rabbi, HaRav Mordecai Eliyahu, shlita, and from all of the activists and supporters who work with them in the struggle for my release, is what has kept me alive and enabled me to go on.

The fact that I am still alive today is a complete miracle. My rabbi, Kavod HaRav Mordecai Eliyahu says that the reason I have survived miraculously from day to day is because the Shechinah is with me and has been accompanying me in prison throughout my long ordeal. The Rav says that by its actions the Government of Israel has not only abandoned and betrayed me, but it has also shown no mercy to the Shechinah** in captivity.

My brothers and sisters! I have been slowly bleeding to death before your very eyes for 21 years! My desperate situation, the result of the Government's treachery and abandonment, is a chillul HaShem that screams to the Heavens.

And where is the Nation?

I cry out to you from the depths of my soul: Zion, hallo tishalee eht shlom assiraych? Zion, won't you seek the welfare of your captives!

If Zion will not seek the welfare of her captives, it is not the personal problem of the captives. The problem rests entirely upon Zion and upon all who dwell in Zion.

I do not fear for my own fate. Whatever Heaven decrees for me I will accept with love. But I am filled with dread for the fate of the Nation which I so love. If the Nation continues to allow the Government to ignore the divine commandment: "Do not stand idly by your brother's blood," without crying out or lifting a finger to stop this terrible sin, I am afraid to even to think about what the consequences will be.

I do not know how much time is left. I only hope and pray with all my might, for the sake of the Nation of Israel, that we will all wake up and do what needs to be done, now, before it is too late!

With love of Israel,
Jonathan Pollard
FCI Butner
Butner, North Carolina.

*Translation of title: "Zion won't you seek the welfare of your captives?" Title is from a famous poem of the same name, written by Yehudah Halevi, a Jewish physician, poet and philosopher, who lived in Toledo, Spain, circa 1085 -1141. The heart-rending phrase, "Zion, hallo tishalee eht shlom assiraych?" (Zion, won't you seek the welfare of your captives?) is the Israeli idiom for those held in captivity in foreign lands. This poem is the source of the modern-day concept "Prisoner of Zion."

** The Shechina: In simplest terms, the Shechina (n.f.) is the presence of G-d which dwells with Israel, offering comfort in sorrow and accompanying her in exile.

Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard at Justice4JP@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 22, 2006.

An article from the Sunday Times of London. Remember this the next time some Islamic spokesperson speaks about the "depravity" of the West.... Unbelieveable.

It is from yesterday's the Sunday Times, of London (www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2190424,00.html) It is called "Reunited: boys saved from slavers,"and was written by Marie Colvin, Lahore.

A SENIOR member of an Islamic organisation linked to Al-Qaeda is funding his activities through the kidnapping of Christian children who are sold into slavery in Pakistan.

The Sunday Times has established that Gul Khan, a wealthy militant who uses the base of Jamaat-ud Daawa (JUD) near Lahore, is behind a cruel trade in boys aged six to 12.

They are abducted from remote Christian villages in the Punjab and fetch nearly ¬¬£1,000 each from buyers who consign them to a life of misery in domestic servitude or in the sex trade.

Khan was exposed in a sting organised by American and Pakistani missionaries who decided to save 20 such boys and return them to their homes. Using a secret camera, they filmed him accepting $28,500 (¬¬£15,000) from a Pakistani missionary posing as a businessman who said he wanted to set up an operation in which the boys would beg for cash on the streets.

Khan was observed driving from the meeting with a knapsack full of cash to the JUD headquarters at Muridke, near Lahore.

The base was funded by Osama Bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda leader, in the late 1990s and the JUD's assets were frozen last month by the US Treasury after it was designated a terrorist organisation.

The US State Department declared the JUD a front for another organisation, Lashkar-i-Toiba, a terrorist group banned in Pakistan which joined with Al-Qaeda in an attempt to assassinate President Pervez Musharraf in 2003.

Khan, who regularly stays at the JUD's base, broke his promise to hand over the 20 boys on receipt of the cash and took the Pakistani missionary's assistant hostage while he checked that the dollars were genuine.

The boys were eventually freed in a dishevelled and malnourished state after being locked in a room for five months during which they suffered frequent beatings.

Last week I accompanied six of the boys on journeys of up to 15 hours to their homes, where they were greeted with astonishment and jubilation by families who had given them up for dead.

The mother of Akash Aziz, who was kidnapped as he played with his friends after school, was so astonished that she could barely move or speak at first.

The undercover missionaries have demanded the prosecution of Khan and an investigation into his work for the JUD, which claims to have created a "pure Islamic environment" at Muridke.

Hafez Muhamed Sayeed, its leader, was accused of inciting riots in Pakistan this year with speeches denouncing western "depravity" after a Danish newspaper published cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. For more articles,please visit my Web page at: http://www.NaomiRagen.co

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, May 22, 2006.

1. Tariq Ramadan's "Center" involved in terrorism

You may recall how the Marxist seditious Kroc Institute at Notre Dame "University" tried to host Tariq Ramadan as its "visiting scholar" at the "University" a while back. Ramadan is a vile anti-Semite and pro-terror Islamofascist, with personal ties to al-Qaeda. In the end, the US refused to grant him a visa and so Kroc and Notre Dame had to go hunting for other terrorists to host. The ACLU is helping him appeal that decision. What a shock.

Well, now the Militant Islam Monitor blog reveals that Muslims at the Saudi-funded Geneva Islamic Center, run by Ramadan and his family, plotted to shoot down an El Al civilian plane last week.

It has now been publicized that an unnamed Islamic terror gang planned to fire an RPG missile at a plane as it took off from the Geneva airport. The Swiss agents first learned of the terrorists' plans five months ago. An undercover agent inside Ramadan's Islamic Center in Geneva became friendly with several immigrants from Arab countries, and they told him of their intentions. The terrorists had planned to flee to Iraq after the attack. Phone taps on the terrorists revealed that the terrorists planned to smuggle an RPG rocket from Russia and fire it at the plane.

Perhaps Notre Dame can host Osama himself next year?

2. Le Phooh
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/20052006/323/ french-rudest-most-boring-people-earth-british-poll.html

"French are rudest, most boring people on earth: British poll"
Saturday May 20, 08:17 AM

LONDON (AFP) - The French have been voted the world's most unfriendly nation by a landslide in a new British poll published. They were also voted the most boring and most ungenerous.

A decisive 46 percent of the 6,000 people surveyed by travellers' website Where Are You Now (WAYN) said the French were the most unfriendly nation people on the planet, British newspapers reported.

The Germans have no to reason to celebrate the damning verdict. They came second on all three counts.

WAYN's French founder, Jerome Touze, told the papers he had been stunned by the thumping condemnation of his compatriots and sought to blame it on Gallic love-struck sulking.

"I had no idea that the French would emerge as such an unfriendly country," he said.

"I think our romantic 'moodiness' is misunderstood and I will be sure to pass on the message to my family and friends back in France to be a bit more cheerful to tourists in the future."

Italy was voted the world's most cultured nation with the best cuisine, while the United States was named the most unstylish with the worst food.

The British did not feature in the top 10 of any of the categories.

"The British fit in nowhere -- good or bad. It appears that we are so completely average that the voters did not include us in any category," the tabloid Daily Express commented.

"And to our shame, four percent of respondents -- all British of course -- said they would only talk to other Britons when they are abroad."

This unwillingness to talk to the locals appears to go hand in hand with respondents' perceptions of foreigners.

While most said Spain was the foreign country where they would most like to live, they said the Spaniards were nearly as unfriendly and ungenerous as the French.

To add insult to injury, British newspaper The Daily Telegraph put the boot in on Saturday by saying in an editorial that the French stank.

"The French may like to think that Chanel No 5 is their scent but we all know that garlic and stale Gitanes are much more representative."

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, May 22, 2006.


Pres. Bush garnered much applause during his speech at the American Jewish Committee's centennial celebration. He said all they wanted to hear. The US stands by Israel against Iran, and would not cooperate with the Hamas government of the P.A.. But those are vague generalities.

What he didn't say was that the US still donates to organizations in the P.A. that work against Israel and even the US. Helping them eases the financial obligation of the Hamas government. He also did not mention that, when he stands with Israel against Iran, he demands that Israel not fire back against Hamas' Hizbullah puppets in Lebanon and not send troops into the P.A. to put down the rocket-launching against Israel. He insists that Israel withdraw from P.A. cities and not erect checkpoints that can stop terrorism. The thrust of US policy long has been to turn the Territories over to the Arabs, meaning they would be turned into launching sites for war on Israel, and Israel would lack secure borders there.

Equally embarrassing as Bush's murderous policies and dissembling about it was the audience of my fellow Jews applauding his pretense of friendship for the Jewish state he is doing so much to get attacked, whittled down, and annihilated.


PM Olmert argues that since isolated Jewish communities are outnumbered by Arabs in their sector of Judea-Samaria, those Jewish communities must be abandoned for their own security and to keep a Jewish majority in Israel.

If Olmert were a proper Zionist and fair, he could conclude that since this is the Jewish homeland, then some of the Arab communities should be evacuated and that Israeli policy would be to make Arab settlement in Judea-Samaria non-viable.

His argument is a pretext for abandoning more than isolated communities. He would evacuate major Jewish towns, too. He may even evacuate all of them, but his program is divide and conquer, so he does not mention the full extent of his program. Such demagoguery works, as did Richard Nixon's claim to have a secret plan for ending the Vietnam War. Voters should not endorse politicians whose plans are secret, as, really, is Olmert's. Like Sharon, Olmert keeps changing what he proposes as the supposedly secure (but actually insecure) borders.


IMRA interviews many politicians. Recently IMRA interviewed a Member of Knesset who is on the Yesha Council. IMRA asked repeatedly whether, if the government makes an agreement transferring control of Hebron to the P.A., and knowing that the Muslims intend to forbid Jewish worship at the Cave of the Patriarchs there, Judaism's second holiest site, would that MK vote against it. Like the other politicians, that MK evaded the question repeatedly. He would not commit himself to the principle. Has Israel no politicians of principle? They let the PM scheme until he destroys the principle.


It must be difficult to get a good night's sleep in the P.A.. Someone set off an explosive charge against the door of a second person, a member of the security forces, again at 3 a.m. (IMRA, 5/4).

Now that Israel is not involved in the daily shooting and bombing at the P.A., the worldwide humanitarian organizations have no complaint. Shows how shallow is their concern about those poor Palestinian Arabs.

The NY Times continues its sympathetic coverage of the "poor Arabs," but if the truth were told, they would not be seen as people to sympathize with. "Poor Arabs"? Despicable would be more like it. They constantly engage in violent clan, political, and economic rivalry. They extort rather than export. If that truth were told by the major media, perhaps governments would be more willing to let Israel fight the P.A. than to led the P.A. fight Israel.


Arabs who sell real estate to Jews in the Territories, and who don't emigrate to safety, are tortured and murdered by fellow Arabs. Therefore, negotiations are difficult, expensive, painstaking, and secret. Naturally, the sale is denied by the Arab ex-landlord, if identified and he didn't emigrate, as many do.

That is what happened at a property in Hebron. As soon as Jews moved in and started cleaning up, Israeli police and troops arrived and harassed them. The Jewish owners, however, produced all the required documentation (which in bureaucratic Israel is substantial). The police backed off.

Then Jews acquired another house in Hebron. Immediately, without any reason to suspect foul play the Prime Minister and Defense Minister declared their opposition to it. Hence it is not a legal matter but a political one (and the foul play is theirs). A commander harangued the owners, repeatedly asserting that they "got away with it before," but this time he would "get them." As before, however, the owners produced all the legal papers certifying their rights to the property. Unlike last time, the police declared the documents forged, without having investigated. The police were relying upon the Arab landlord's self-serving claim, not on reviewing the documents. They have no basis for their claim. The government is seeking illegally to deprive people of their lawfully obtained property. The owners are petitioning the Supreme Court for redress (IMRA, 5/4). Unfortunately, the Court usually is part of Israel's leftist, anti-Zionist cabal. It, too, rules on the basis of ideology, not on the basis of law.

Sure enough, the Court ruled against the Jews. (Its reason was not stated in the news brief.) No Jewish property is secure in Israel. Even before the forced evacuation, the police took off their name tags and harassed the Jews, as by barring the entry of food. (Isn't that a fascist tactic?) But a Labor MK said this would return law and order to Judea-Samaria (Arutz-7) where the Arabs have thousands of illegal buildings that Israel condones).


Like a dance, the P.A. and Israel have choreographed this step and counter-step: (1) P.A. Arabs fire rockets at Israel every day, from populated areas and areas that the government of Israel abandoned and expelled the Jews from; and (2) The IDF responds with artillery shells fired at vacant areas, lest it hit civilians. The Israeli response is not returning fire.

The solution is for the Army to recapture Gaza and prevent its country from being fired upon. It doesn't. Why not? Probably it doesn't because that would admit that it never should have abandoned the area to that predicted assault, in the first place. Governments dread admitting mistakes, especially deadly ones (Arutz-7, 4/25 from former Defense Min. Moshe Ahrens).

Mr. Ahrens is not wrong, but I think the problem lays deeper. The problem is part of the Jewish neurosis of appeasement -- appeasement of the US, appeasement of the Arabs, failing to study the issues but predetermining one's response ideologically and so ignoring the religious cause of the Arab war on Israel, coming to agree with antisemitic accusations against Zionism, and in general supposing that if Israel were "nicer" to the Arabs, the Arabs would respond like normal human beings (instead of like exploitative fanatics). There also are factors of extortion of corrupt Israelis and perhaps other holds that the US, which demands withdrawal, has over Israel. There also is the hatred that secular Israelis have for religious Jews, of whom many have settled in Judea-Samaria. The Left always was paranoid about the Right and fascistic (really, more Bolshevik) in its ways of dealing with opposition, to the extent it could get away with it.


Every year, the IDF escorts Jews into Shechem, which under foreign rule is called Nablus, to visit the tombs of Joshua and Caleb. The pair were the reputed dissenting spies who reported favorable on the viability of life in the Land of Canaan, and were the military commanders who led the Hebrews into the Promised Land (Arutz-7, 4/25).


The IDF has changed its recruiting standards. It will admit violent youth, who "need a second chance," and it will bar right-wing youth who might protest against Israeli withdrawals. In other words, the Israeli army is preparing for war on Jews. Parents of normal youngsters might not like their children to be forced to serve with violent youths armed by the government and who formerly would have been weeded out as unfit. (Sorry, forgot source.) This is a political test for military service -- undemocratic.


Syria has encroached on Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, and set up fortified checkpoints. Lebanese officials will question Syria about it (IMRA, 5/6).

Encroachment is as Arab as shish-kabob.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Anbar, Ph.D., May 21, 2006.

Enclosed is my rebuttal of an article that appeared in Friday's Ha'aretz. This article is so outrageous that it prompted me to write a detailed response. I know that Ha'aretz will never publish my rebuttal which is not "politically correct." I also do not believe that I will convince Tony Karon, its outspoken revolutionary author, to change his distorted views on Zionism, Judaism and Israel. However, the arguments presented in this poisonous widely distributed essay must be refuted as soon as possible for the benefit of the Jewish and Christian communities, especially for the benefit of na√¬Įve readers who might take Karon's articulate words at face value.

The provocative arguments in Tony Karon's essay "How Jewish is Israel?" (Haaretz, May 19, 2006), call for a prompt response. On superficial reading, this essay sounds like a run of the mill ultra-liberal political statement, but on second reading one finds it to be a vitriolic attack on Judaism. It is possible that the Editor of Haaretz did not realize the rancorous implications of this essay before endorsing its publication.

Karon touches on profound issues such as the meaning of being a Jew, or a Zionist, of nationality as compared to nationalism, of misojudaism (anti-Semitism), and the roots of the Arab-Jewish conflict, all with amazing superficiality and perhaps even with malice. He seems to believe that universalism and humanism, which happen to be offsprings of Judaism, have obviated all the overwhelming issues cited above.

The only point on which I agree with Karon is that Israel (i.e., the modern State of Israel with an overwhelming Jewish majority) is not, and cannot be today the source of Jewish Identity. A point that has been the declared position of A.B. Yehoshua's, with whom also I strongly disagree.

However, this is just a minor point in Tony Karon's assault on Zionism. Zionism, i.e., the urge to regain political independence in the ancient historical homeland of the Jewish people, is undoubtedly a ajor source of Jewish identity. Zionism is rooted in the Bible and has been interwoven with Jewish thought ever since. It is an integral part of Jewish poetic liturgy and of the messianic idea that was borrowed later by Christianity.

It stands to simple logic that the Jewish Diaspora, glorified by Karon, is a meaningless concept without Zionism, just as the Armenian or Tibetan diasporas are meaningless without Armenia or Tibet, respectively. Diaspora means scattering -- scattering from where? This simple notion seems to have escaped Tony Karon. I wish he had read "Do they understand what Zionism is all about?" in my book "Israel and its Future." Karon's sweeping statements that "Before the Holocaust, Zionism had been a minority tendency among Western Jews, and scarcely existed among those living in the Muslim world" is patently untrue.

The concept of Jewish nationhood has not been invented in the 19th Century, as claimed in Karon's essay. Would he have remembered history, he would have realized that any nationality evolves together with the perception of its history. The Bible is a manifestation of Jewish, and later of Christian historical perspectives. The Bible is not a lesser manifestation of Jewish national historical perspective than the writings of Tukidides or Tacitus were manifestations of Greek or Roman nationhood, respectively. "Bnei Yisrael" or "Am Yisrael," i.e., The "People of Israel," is an ancient tenet of nationhood of the Jewish people. Moreover, the Islamic "Umma," which now threatens our civilization, is a religion-driven, exaggerated perception of nationhood that turned into violent nationalism. It is a concept that had been borrowed from the Bible to become utterly distorted and abused.

Karon's idealized antinational universalism "scorning national boundaries", advocated primarily by some Jewish secular intellectuals, contradicts human social behavior as well as history. Supranational universalism, caricatured by the nationalistically-driven UN, is likely to be as short-lived as Zamenhof's Esperanto, the "universal" language that ignored the existence of non-Western cultures, or Marx's universal communism that has ignored basic economics (two other inventions of naive Jewish intellectuals).

The lack of historical perspective or flagrant denial of history is reflected in Karon's claim that the State of Israel was established as a consequence of the Holocaust "at the expense of another people." Let me first remind Mr. Karon that hundreds of thousands of Jews lived in the Land of Israel a long time before the Holocaust. The political independence of the Jewish state from the British Mandate paralleled the political independence of other British and French neighboring colonial territories in the Middle East, including Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Cyprus, Iraq and Egypt. Any historian will tell you that with or without the UN, Great Britain would not have retained its colonial rule of the Land of Israel. The Arab propaganda claim, supported by Karon, that the Jewish State was "created" by the UN (by a mistake that must be reversed!) is a historic fallacy.

Moreover, the UN 1947 resolution to "establish" the State of Israel on just a small part of the original territory assigned under a British Mandate to the Jewish people by the League of Nations in 1920, was an attempt to neutralize opposition of the Arabs who continued to defy international law by their invasion of May 1948. The UN recognition of all other states, cited above, was virtually automatic, i.e., nobody gives the UN credit for their establishment.

The Islamic assault on Israel is not a unique phenomenon. Turkey's invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the PLO-Syrian invasion of Lebanon in 1975 were other examples of Islamic aggression against countries in the Middle East under non-Islamic rule. I wonder how these highly relevant recent historical events could have been missed by Tony Karon. How does he reconcile and accept Islamic unmitigated universal aggression in his borderless universalism? Why does he single out Jewish defensive response to Islamic aggression as unethical?

One should feel free to criticize the policies of the State of Israel, but one must not question the legitimacy of its very existence, as implied by Karon. The existence of a Jewish independent state in the ancient Jewish homeland cannot be denied by any Islamic foe or leftist ideologue, just as is the case with France, Greece or Ireland (even before the latter gained political independence).

As for Karon's statement: "the expense of another people," it is not clear which nation he refers to. Is it the Arab nation? Or is it the artificial "Palestinian nation" created after 1948 by the Arab league - the umbrella political organization of the Arab nation - as a tool to dislodge the Jews from the Middle East? For the sake of historical accuracy, it must be repeated here that the "Palestinian nation," which is probably the entity Mr. Karon is referring to, has no history, no distinct language, literature, religion or other distinctive cultural features (minimal requirements defining any nation) prior to its artificial creation by Arab political leadership in reaction to the massive return of Jews to their homeland.

Following Mr. Karon's reasoning the call for political independence by the Kurds, Maronites, Copts, Berbers, Druz, Armenians, Assyrians, or any other minority in the Arab empire should be perceived to be at "the expense of another people." According to Mr. Karon the Arab nation seems to be immune to political national aspirations of its oppressed minorities. The State of Israel, which he accuses of being a colonial oppressor, is the only non-Arab, non-Muslim entity that established political independence within the Arab multi-state empire. This is Israel's major political problem. One wonder if Mr. Karon, who has been ignoring so many historical facts, is an avowed Arab sympathizer or perhaps a Jew hater? I am afraid that the latter is correct, as attested by his anti-Zionist stance.

It is virtually impossible to separate Zionism, in its broader sense (having nothing to do with politics of the Jewish state), from Judaism. Zionism implies the urge for Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel, emanated from Zion, i.e., Jerusalem, the ancient Davidic capital. Even members of Neturei Karta ("Guardians of the City"), the messianic ultra-orthodox Jewish sect in Jerusalem who disavow a mundane Jewish state, waiting for the coming of the Messiah, are essentially ardent Zionists -- the Messiah being the descendent of King David who will rule in Jerusalem at the End of Days. This is also true of Christians who believe in the second coming of the Messiah, a descendent of the House of David, to the holy City of Jerusalem -- they too are implicitly Zionists. Furthermore, sovereignty implies nationalism, which so much despised by Karon. By considering Zionism to be a transient phenomenon in Jewish history he manifests blind hatred or utter ignorance. Consequently, as an anti-Zionist universalist, Tony Karon must be classified as a hater of Judaism.

Mr. Karon declares himself to be a "rootless cosmopolitan" Jew. His demonstrable disregard for history and historical perspective, makes him an eccentric self-hating Jew. Misojudaism is not limited to non-Jews, as demonstrated by Noam Chomsky. Misojudaism predated Christianity but was adopted by it, precipitating the Holocaust. However, today the standard bearers of misojudaism, in a addition to secular, liberal universalists such as Tony Karon, are the Muslims.

The Arab Israeli conflict is not a manifestation of anti-imperialism, as stated by Karon, but of Islamic misojudaism. Islamic misojudaism is rooted in the Qur'an where Jews are described as subhuman beings - descendents of apes and pigs. It is rooted in and modeled after the atrocious assaults of Mohammad on Jewish tribes in the Arabian Peninsula. Mohammad succeeded to eradiate all the Jews of Arabia and this tradition is driving the current Arab assault on Israeli Jews. Mohammad used deceit and treachery to defeat and conquer his Jewish victims, and this Islamic tradition is being followed today religiously (in both meanings of the word).

There exists the notion that one must distinguish between motivations of secular and religious Muslims. However, just as medieval Christian misojudaism was deeply impregnated in secular German culture, leading to the Nazi Holocaust, vicious hatred of "infidels" is ingrained also in secular Muslims. This hatred has been manifested by the "secular" Muslim Turks in the atrocious massacre of the Armenians, in the brutal expulsion of the Greek Orthodox Christians from Asia Minor, and in the systematic destruction of Christian cultural vestiges in the Turkish controlled region of Cyprus.

Some Israeli politicians have been ignoring this fact when dealing with the secular PLO, whom they believed to be free of malignant religious prejudice. While they must have been bitterly disappointed when secular Yasser Arafat appeared on Arab TV screaming Jihad, Jihad, Jihid they continue to delude themselves believing that an amiable political agreement between an Israeli peace-loving government and the militant Arabs is possible. Karon seems to imply that Israel must surrender its Jewish nationalistic Zionist identity before Muslim aggression might subside. Karon seems to be more realistic in this case. But this might also mean the death of Israel as we know it.

I must now dispute Karon's challenge of the ethical conduct of Israeli Jews. He must refer to the protective restrictions imposed on Arabs in the "disputed territories," captured from Jordan in the 1967 war, following the continuous Arab bloody terror that targeted the Jewish civilian population. The declared aims of this terror, explicitly stated in the Charters of the PLO and Hamas, is to dislodge the Jews from their homeland. That aggressive policy is based on the Islamic conquest of the land of Israel in the 7th Century and the Islamic religious premise that once a territory is conquered by Muslims it becomes Islamic land for perpetuity. However, this Islamic premise does not obligate Jews who are the original owner of the land. Jews are not bound by Islamic religious premises. It is hard to understand why active resistance to murderous assault should be considered unethical.

What would Tony Karon have done had he lived in a country where Muslim Arabs were incited by their clergy to mercilessly massacre innocent helpless Jews, as they did in 1920, 1921, 1929, 1935 to 1939 and then from 1949 up to date. In pacifist India people hunt down and kill blood-thirsty killer tigers; why should Arab terrorists who target defenseless women and children be treated differently? Could any ethical consideration justify giving up vigilance, risking exposure of one's loved ones to merciless fanatic, religion-driven murderers? Would it not be unethical to allow murders of Jewish babies (officially declared by Muslim terrorist organizations to be legitimate targets of Islamic terrorism) to take place unhindered or unpunished?

Tony Karon is a non-believer, so he cannot tell us that he expects God to protect him from harm while trying not to inconvenience potential killers. I wonder how he would exercise pacifist ethics if misojudaic hoodlums broke into his home in New York City.

Karon cites Hillel's Golden Rule: "That which is hateful unto yourself, do not do unto others" (which he does not apply Muslims) but forgets another famous Jewish saying: "Do not judge your friend until you are in his place".

Jewish ethics value human life whereas Islamic ethics glorify death, especially if it leads to killing of infidels. Jews will therefore compromise and even surrender to avoid death. It boil down to the sanctity of life versus the sanctity of death. Muslims consider this Jewish ethical premise a weakness to be exploited in their attempt to dislodge the Jews from their homeland. This is what motivates Islamic terrorism. Yet Karon criticizes Israelis for unethical conduct in their existential struggle, while closing his eyes to the barbaric ethics of their murderous adversaries. Again, hatred of Jews surpasses fairness.

Finally, I must challenge Karon's notion that Jewish intellect can flourish only in a Diaspora. The scientific and technological achievements of Israeli Jews in less than 60 years, which have exceeded by far those of any other country of its size, using any objective criteria, demonstrate the superiority of intrinsic creativity embedded in Jewish culture (not in Jewish biological ethnicity!!!). Jewish creativity has been interwoven with Zionism which, to the chagrin of Tony Karon, is going to survive as long as Judaism does.

I will not attempt to psychoanalyze Karon's anti-Zionist motivation, which probably has been formulated by his South African experience. In spite of his articulate writing style and political savvy he has failed to realize the intrinsic difference between the materialism-driven immigration of his parents or grandparents from Eastern Europe to colonial South Africa, and the ideology-motivated immigration of his Jewish uncles and aunts to the ancient Jewish homeland (See "We are not Colonialists" in my book). This is the personal tragedy of this Jew-hating Jew. However, it is easier for me to understand the motivation of Tony Karon than that of the Israeli Avraham Burg (see my "An open letter to MK Avraham Burg" in my book), who was lengthily cited by Karon. Burg is typical of misojudaic Israelis whose animosity to Zionism surpasses their apprehension of the mortal dangers of Islamism.

Contact Michael Anbar by email at amara@adelphia.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Schneider, May 21, 2006.

The email below was posted on a UK near-equivalent of the raananalist. If you are able to help please contact Ofra Gilinsky directly, either by email to ofra.gilinsky@sjberwin.com or by telephone. Thanks David Schneider (London)

"Does anyone know a Rabbi Bernard Geffen in Israel?

He is thought possibly to have been originally from Hastings,UK. His brother Michael is not well and in a hospital in Cambridge. Any help in locating Rabbi Geffen would be much appreciated.

The Cambridge & Suffolk Jewish Community has been asked to pay a pastoral visit to Michael but need more details. Shavua Tov, Ofra Gilinsky [Ofra.Gilinsky@sjberwin.com] +44-1223-354-825"

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 21, 2006.

This was written by David Bedein, Bureau Chief Israel Resource News Agency in Jerusalem, Israel (www.ibtn.org.il).

To advocate absolute power of the majority would be to promote the crime of Athenian democracy, where the minority would often be put to death, in what Prof. Yaakov Talmon describes in the modern era as "totalitarian democracy".

In the words of Hebrew University Law Prof Eliav Schochtmnan, whose speciality is human rights and civil liberties, "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights", to which Israel is a signatory, was written to constrain leaders like Ariel Sharon". (Press briefing at Beit Agron, April 30th, 2004, two days before the Likud referendeum rejected Sharon's polciy to bulldoze and exile entire communities - a referendum which Sharon chose to ignore)

Indeed, in the spirit of such an oppressive policy, Israel's supreme court decided that the government's oppressive policies overrode Israel's basic law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which protects human rights and civil liberties.

US Jews must ask themselves is whether they would also support a democratic decision to bulldoze and exile Arab communities - since polls show that more than 2/3 of the Israeli electorate would support such a move.

The current concept of democracy in Israel cannot go unchallenged.

Contact the Ceders at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah 15, May 21, 2006.

1. Israel became a state circa 1030 B.C., more than two millennia before Islam.

2. Arabs from Israel first began to be called "Palestinians" in 1967 by Yasser Arafat and other Arab leaders, two decades after modern Israeli statehood.

3. After conquering the land in about 1250 B.C., Jews ruled it for more than 1,300 years and have maintained a continuous presence there for 3,300 years.

4. For over 3,000 years, Jerusalem was the Jewish capital. It was never the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even under Jordanian rule, (East) Jerusalem was not made the capital, and no Arab leader came to visit it.

5. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in the Bible, but not once is it mentioned in the Qur'an.

6. King David founded Jerusalem; Mohammed never set foot in it.

7. Jews pray facing Jerusalem; Muslims face Mecca. If they are between the two cities, Muslims pray facing Mecca, with their backs to Jerusalem.

8. In 1948, Arab leaders urged their people to leave, promising to cleanse the land of Jewish presence -- some 70% of them fled without ever being ordered by Israel to leave, most of those without ever having seen an Israeli soldier.

9. Virtually the entire Jewish population of Muslim countries had to flee as the result of violence and pogroms.

10. Some 650,000 Arabs left Israel in 1948, while about 850,000 Jews were forced to leave Muslim countries.

11. In spite of the vast territories at their disposal, Arab refugees from Palestine were deliberately prevented from assimilating into their host countries. Of 100 million refugees following World War II, they are the only group to have never integrated with their coreligionists. Most of the Jewish refugees from Europe and Arab lands were settled in Israel, a country no larger than New Jersey.

12. There are 22 Arab countries (with 800 times the land mass of Israel), not counting the Palestinian territories. There is only one Jewish state. Arabs started all five wars against Israel, and lost every one of them.

13. The Fatah and Hamas constitutions still call for the destruction of Israel. Israel has agreed under several proposals to cede most of the West Bank and all of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority, and even supported the arming of its police force after the Oslo Accords in 1993.

14. During the Jordanian occupation, Jewish holy sites were vandalized and were off limits to Jews. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian holy sites are accessible to all faiths and maintained in good order at Israel's expense.

15. Out of 175 United Nations Security Council resolutions up to 1990, 97 were against Israel; out of 690 General Assembly resolutions, 429 were against Israel;

16. The U.N. was silent when the Jordanians destroyed 58 synagogues in the old city of Jerusalem. It remained silent while Jordan systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, and it remained silent when Jordan enforced apartheid laws preventing Jews from accessing the Temple Mount and Western Wall (Kotel).

Contact Avodah 15 at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lynn Thomas, May 21, 2006.

Dear Friends,

I just created this petition for the president of Columbia University entitled:

"Dismiss Professor Joseph Massad"

hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service, at: http://www.Petitiononline.com/Lt052106/

If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and consider signing it yourself.

Best wishes,

Lynn Thomas

PS: And please pass this along to all those you know who support Israel and its right to exist as a nation. Ask them to read the petition and sign it by clicking here.

Contact Lynn Thomas as lynntms@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Shifra Shomron, May 21, 2006.

A parody of "The Walrus and the Carpenter" from Alice in Wonderland.

The sun was shining on the Wall,
Shining with all his might:
He did his very best to make
The big stones strong and bright --
And this was odd, because it was
The middle of the night.

The Wall was old as old could be,
The hills were dry as dry.
You could not see a cloud, because
No cloud was in the sky:
No doves were flying overhead --
There were no doves to fly.

The Old Man and the Boy
Were walking close at hand:
They wept like anything to see
The Arabs in the land:
'If they were only moved away,'
They said, 'it would be grand!'

'If seven planes and seven ships
Moved them for half a year,
Do you suppose,' the Boy said,
We would still know fear?'
'I doubt it,' said the Old Man,
And shed a happy tear.

'The time has come,' the Old Man said,
'To talk of many things:
Of foes -- and woes -- and destroyed homes --
Of redemption -- and kings --
And why the leadership is bad --
And how the Levites sing.

'O Jews, come and walk with us!'
The Old Man did call.
'An urgent walk, an urgent talk,
Along the ancient Wall:
We cannot do it by ourselves;
I'm old and he is small.'

Then many Jews looked at him,
But never a word they said:
They slowly closed their eyes,
And shook their weary heads --
Meaning to say they did not choose
To leave their comfy beds.

But some young Jews hurried up,
All eager for the feat:
Their peyot were long, their faith was strong,
They danced to the beat --
And this was odd, because, you know,
They faced the burning heat.

Some more Jews followed them,
And yet another four,
And quick and fast they came at last,
And more, and more, and more --
To rebuild the Temple behind the Wall,
The prophecy of yore. --

Shifra Shomron is 19 years old. She is a refugee from Gush Katif, and now lives in a caravella in Nitzan.

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Zwick, May 21, 2006.

This article is called "Aainst the odds, devotees fight to save Yiddish?" and is from the Associated Press May 21, 2006. It is archived at web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Culture/8513.htm

For Barney Sidler and his fellow inmates at the Buchenwald concentration camp, misery and death were everyday features of life.

So was Yiddish, the language of prewar European Jews that scholars say was another, if lesser known, victim of the Holocaust.

Nearly all Buchenwald's prisoners spoke the Germanic language, which dates back to the 11th century displacement of Jews in Europe, said Sidler, who recalls the words of encouragement inmates would whisper in Yiddish amid the horror.

"People would say to each other, 'Zorg zihk nihst. Got vet undz helf' - which means, 'Don't worry. Got will help us,"' said Sidler, 73.

Most of the 6 million Jews killed by the Nazis hailed from the Yiddish-speaking heart of Eastern Europe, where Nazis also pillaged and burned the close-knit Jewish shtetls, or villages - similar to ones portrayed in the musical "Fiddler on the Roof."

"Yiddish speakers fared especially poorly because their language was, to the Nazi ear, a debased, corrupted version of the language of the (German) Fatherland," wrote Miriam Weinstein in her recent book "Yiddish: A Nation of Words."

"Because almost no one but Jews spoke the language, Yiddish became an easy marker for enemies looking to root them out," she wrote.

The Nazis gutted prewar Yiddish culture and hence decimated the main wellspring of Jewish culture for centuries, according to leading Yiddish scholar Dovid Katz.

"The idea that Hitler failed to annihilate much of the European Jewish civilization is soothing self-deception," said Katz, head of the Vilnius Yiddish Institute in Lithuania, a prewar hub of Yiddish arts and learning.

That Yiddish civilization evolved over a millennium as Jews sought to escape persecution by first settling German areas in central Europe, then by moving eastward to Poland, Lithuania and other regions nearby in the 14th century.

Yiddish began as a fusion of medieval German with Hebrew and Aramaic - languages Jews spoke before dispersing from areas in and around what is now Israel. As they moved into Eastern Europe, Yiddish also picked up Polish and Russian words.

Early detractors, who sometimes included Jews themselves, would deride Yiddish as a hodgepodge dialect with little merit as a language in its own right.

But by 1900, Yiddish was widely favored by Jewish writers. Ultimate acknowledgment of its merits came in 1978, when Yiddish-language writer Isaac Bashevis Singer won the Nobel prize for literature.

In his acceptance speech, Singer sounded a hopeful note.

"Yiddish has not yet said its last word," he said. "It contains treasures that have not been revealed to the eyes of the world."

But as elderly Holocaust survivors die, an irreplaceable link to Yiddish language and culture is being broken, Yiddish enthusiasts say.

The number of non-orthodox Yiddish speakers, most of whom are Holocaust survivors, has fallen below 500,000 worldwide and will "soon collapse altogether," Katz said. "It is a devastating time. ... For us, it is the secondary Holocaust effect."

Sidler, who was just 12 when U.S. troops liberated the camp in 1945, strikes a pessimistic chord about the chances of Yiddish surviving as he knew it.

"I still speak Yiddish to my sisters and cousins," said Sidler, who moved to the Chicago area after the war. "But in another few years, it'll be nonexistent, I fear."

Some facts about Yiddish

- Among words English borrowed from Yiddish are "shtick," "klutz," "schmooze" and "schmaltzy."

- To speak "Yiddish" literally means to speak "Jewish"; "yid" means "Jew" in Yiddish.

- Prominent Yiddish-speakers from the 20th century include big band leader Benny Goodman, and novelists Isaac Bashevis Singer and Saul Bellow.

- After the founding of Israel in 1948, its leaders chose Hebrew over Yiddish as the new Jewish state's national language; many leaders argued that Yiddish was tainted by its association with the Holocaust and repression of Jews in Europe.

- High birth rates among Hasidic Jews suggest the ranks of the Yiddish-speaking orthodox, already at over 250,000 in the United States, could boom to several million by the end of the century. But Hasidics tend to shun the secular world, including nonreligious Yiddish literature, theater and music.


Itche Goldberg and Jason Rubin are separated in age by 82 years, but they're linked by a common passion for an ancient Jewish language that threatens to slip into obscurity.

The life of 102-year-old Goldberg spans the recent decline of Yiddish to its heyday early last century when about 13 million Jews - or some 70 percent of Jews worldwide - spoke the lilting language that gave English words like "chutzpah" and "schmo."

Rubin, a 20-year-old student of Yiddish, embodies the hope that somehow, some way, the language can survive now that there are fewer than 2 million speakers.

"You can't possibly see a future Jewish life with the disappearance of a 1,000-year-old language and with it a 1,000-year-old culture," says Goldberg, a top Yiddish scholar since the 1930s, by phone from his New York home. "Somehow it has to be there."

Ensuring the language and culture Jews brought from Eastern Europe is there for posterity is the goal of devotees across the nation, some of whom hold summer camps while others stage theatrical shows in a bid to turn people on to Yiddish.

Revival bands perform traditional Yiddish klezmer music - a kind of Jewish jazz - with the same aim. And one New York group trying to pique interest among children recently published "Di Kats Der Payats" - better known as Dr. Seuss' "The Cat in the Hat."

Others, like Rubin, contribute to the cause by putting in hard hours to learn the hybrid of German and Hebrew. After two years studying it at the University of Chicago, Rubin, whose grandparents spoke Yiddish, is now close to fluent.

"I almost felt I was cheated by not knowing Yiddish growing up," says Rubin, who squeezes in Yiddish studies between premed classes. "My appreciation of Jewish culture has increased tenfold by learning it."

Preserving Yiddish in its full glory will be a mammoth task. So much is already lost.

From his downtown office atop the Board of Trade building, Jake Morowitz can see what's been lost in Chicago, which once boasted 200,000 Yiddish speakers.

In clear view to the southwest is Maxwell Street - once the hub of Chicago's bustling Jewish district. Until 40 years ago, shoppers still haggled in Yiddish over unfixed prices in the street's open-air market.

Today, there's virtually nothing left of the old Maxwell Street. Most original Jewish families have long since moved to the suburbs, and large swaths of the district were bulldozed in the 1960s to make room for a new University of Illinois campus.

No more than 5,000 Jews still speak Yiddish in and around Chicago today, says Morowitz, head of the YIVO Society, which promotes Yiddish in the area.

Yiddish has lost ground in New York, too. After World War II, several hundred thousand people spoke Yiddish in the city, the de facto capital of Yiddish in North America. Now, around 100,000 do.

New York's Yiddish-language Forward newspaper reflects the decline. Its circulation was around 275,000 before the war; today, it's around 3,000.

And where there were scores of Yiddish theaters in New York, just one is left - the Folksbiene. These days, it displays subtitles in English at most performances.

One last bastion of Yiddish is the ultra-orthodox Hasidic community, which employs the language to insulate members from outside influences and hedge against assimilation.

So numerous are the ultra-orthodox in parts of Brooklyn that some ATMs offer the option of conducting transactions in Yiddish.

"In our world, Yiddish is flourishing," says the dean of a Yiddish-language Hasidic school in Chicago, Rabbi Moshe Unger - dressed in black garb, a wide-brimmed felt hat at his side.

But there's a catch to Hasidics' love of Yiddish: Since they shun the secular world, their affection doesn't extend to nonreligious Yiddish literature, theater and music.

"We don't have time for that," Unger says, adding flatly that "the loss of Yiddish outside the orthodox community is not a concern of ours."

For many, though, maintaining the rich secular traditions of Yiddish is vital.

Goldberg has devoted his adult life to secular Yiddish culture, editing a Yiddish literary magazine well past his 100th birthday.

Most of Goldberg's contemporaries have long since died.

"We see before our eyes (the number of Yiddish masters) go from ten to five, from five to one and on to approach zero," leading Yiddish scholar Dovid Katz said in an e-mail. "This explains why we take the death of even 90-year-olds so badly."

Still, some young people are starting to take up the Yiddish banner, according to Morowitz.

Yiddish was once associated with bitter memories of the Holocaust, whose victims were mostly Yiddish speakers, he said. Israel's decision to adopt Hebrew as its state language also caused many Jews to shirk from Yiddish.

"When Jewish immigrants came here, they wanted to put that old ghetto life behind them," Morowitz says. "But young Jews today are no longer embarrassed by the language. There is a new influx of Jews wanting to learn Yiddish."

Morowitz, despite his optimism, strikes a realistic note about the future of Yiddish.

"We don't have any illusions about Jewish people starting to speak Yiddish to each other again," he says. "But young Jews can learn something of the language and learn to appreciate it more, and so appreciate why we are who we are."

Asked what he'd say to young Jews who haven't embraced Yiddish as wholeheartedly as Rubin - who says he intends to teach his own children Yiddish one day - Goldberg's answer is part plea, part admonishment.

There's also a hint of sadness in his voice.

"I would probably look at them and say, 'Go back, look at your heritage,"' he says. "'It's your own, it's inside you. You can't leave it behind.'"

On the Net:
YIVO Institute for Jewish Research: http://www.yivoinstitute.org
The Vilnius Yiddish Institute: http://www.judaicvilnius.com
The Maxwell Street Klezmer Band: http://www.klezmerband.com

Contact Israel Zwick at israel.zwick@earthlink.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Hebron Organization, May 21, 2006.

The following is a speech delivered by Hebron resident, Mrs. Miriam Grabovsky, last night (Saturday, May 20) in Fairlawn, N.J. The Grabovsky family was expelled from their home in Mitzpe Shalhevet in Hebron in January and for a second time, from Beit Shapira, two weeks ago.

Moving into Beit Shapira The expulsion from Beit Shapira

What does it mean to be a Jew today in Eretz Yisrael? It means to walk with your head high, even when you don't have any strength left. It means to go shopping, even when you are afraid, it means to vote even when there isn't anyone to vote for. To be a Jew today in Eretz Yisrael is to wake up every morning, each day, with a new goal, to see with your own eyes today's miracles. To be a Jew today in Eretz Yisrael means to live the impossible, every single day, and to know that our existence really is a miracle.

To be a Jew in Hebron is to live as close as is possible to the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, and to absorb from them, every day, new strength. To be a Jew in Hebron is to experience exactly what is happening all over Eretz Yisrael, in micro proportions. To understand what it means to be few against many, and to comprehend and witness Divine intervention. To be a Jew in Hebron is, by definition, mesirut nefesh, full, one hundred percent dedication, imbued with joy. It is to feel authentic pride at the fact that we are a free people in our land; a free people in our land without question marks. To continue to try and progress, even when success is not readily visible, and to understand that trying too, has value and significance.

To be a mother in Hebron is pure, infinite faith that this is the way to raise children. To know and remember that the fundamental requirement is never to fear, ever. To be a mother in Hebron is to know that our prayers arise via Ma'arat HaMachpela, and continue north to Bethlehem, and that the prayers of four mothers escort our prayers to the Holy Throne. To be a mother in Hebron is to be a soldier without a uniform, but to always be present at the front.

I, Miriam Grabovsky, married to Yair, mother of Shachar, Amiad and Shilo, am a resident of Hebron now for almost 5 years. We arrived in Hebron as a young couple a link in a chain of activists, building Hebron. We moved into the old Arab market: three walls, no electricity or water. It wasn't so simple, but we knew we weren't alone. Am Yisrael is with us. Slowly the building progressed, a floor, electricity, water, and even an additional room. We knew, all the time, that an axe was being held above our necks -- that the danger of expulsion was real. Why bother, perhaps the time had come to give up, to go elsewhere? Why expend so much energy? But no! We may not succeed, success is not always in our hands, but we must not give up. We must continue, with courage, forward.

Unfortunately, four months ago, it happened and we were evicted from our home, the home we so loved, the home where our three children were born. What can you say to children when they are expelled from their home? How do you smile at a four year old when they ask, "Emma, why are you crying?" And most importantly, how can you think about progress, building your life in Eretz Yisrael, when events make it so difficult?

One week passed, then another, we worshiped at the Ma'ara, and were refreshed with new strength. Yes, we can lift our heads high and smile. The road to progress has not come to a dead end. We don't have the luxury to despair.

And then, a new offer: a new building, another piece of Jewish Eretz Yisrael in our possession. Thank G-d for the opportunity to reach this wonderful occasion!

Darkness falls, the entire community is on standby, ready and raring to go. Hidden smiles and a lot of questions. Really, a new building? After Gush Katif? After Amona? After the Mitzpe Shalhevet neighborhood, the old Arab market, here in Hebron? After all this, a new light shining?

In we went. Mud, filth, mounds of garbage and with that, tons of happiness, immeasurable. Again, no water or electricity, but, who cares? Pesach, Seder night, the Festival of liberation! But no, another trial, how much are we really ready to sacrifice for Eretz Yisrael? One week and another and another, and then? the expulsion begins, for the second time in just over three months. The troops arrive, a night of waiting, and then, it's over. Only questions and pain remain.

But we will not let despair confuse our aims. Am Yisrael is in the midst of a process of geula, of redemption. We don't know how HaShem will bring the final redemption. But the way He chooses, we will be there to participate, from here, from this world, from Eretz Yisrael, from Hebron. All our existence in HaAretz is miraculous. G-d initiates and we are here to do our part. The redemption will continue, one way or another. The real question is: Where will we be? Will we be faithful participants of G-d's Will, each doing whatever they can, or will we be busy trying to convince HaShem to do it our way? As Mordechai said to Esther, "If you keep silent at this time, then relief and deliverance will arise to the Jews from another place, but you and your father's house will perish;."

Here, in Hebron, we have chosen to actively participate in the process of redemption. Even if they expel us another ten times, will we return, again and again, 100 times over.

The source of our strength and our privilege to participate, to build, stems from Am Yisrael, from everyone, wherever they are. Such actions are comprised on different levels: the planning stage, the financial stage, and many other phases. Each and every Jew must accept some responsibility, each according to his ability. When we entered Beit Shapira, and many visitors arrived, we felt the strength of Am Yisrael, the unity, the division of labor. I invite you and beseech you: Come to Eretz Yisrael, come to Hebron. Tour the city, worship at Ma'arat HaMachpela. In Shir HaShirim, the Song of songs, we read how G-d is compared to a man, and Am Yisrael to a loving woman. He calls her, "Open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled; for my head is filled with dew, my locks with the drops of the night.' The woman is too lazy to arise from her bed: I have already undressed, how will I again dress? I washed my feet, how will I again muddy them?"

For fifty eight years He is calling us: He created a state, an army which defeated all Arab armies much larger than ours, He created many communities, yeshivot, educational institutions. We only have to get up and open the door?

May it be His Will that the city of the Patriarchs will continue, together will all Eretz Yisrael, to be the desired 'open door', and that we will be privileged to a a total and complete redemption, speedily, in our days, Amen!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 21, 2006.

What impact has the Holocaust on the human soul? The genocide of non-Arab Black Africans in the Darfur region of oil-rich Sudan, perpetrated by murderous Muslim Arab outlaws bearing the moniker jangaweeds empowered at the behest of a sadistic Sudanese Muslim Arab government, sanctimoniously given ever-increasing amounts of lip service by an oil-dependent world, continues unabated. This ongoing genocidal atrocity alas does not sufficiently stir more recent blighted memories of other African atrocities, including a not so distance Rwandan genocide, or other late twentieth century instances of subhuman behavior throughout the planet to prompt an immediate substantive military response. Yet, much of the civilized world passionately focuses on an Israeli/Palestinian conflict, mostly sympathizing with perceived abused Arabs. Indeed, Muslim Arabs are responsible for a very large portion of today's human misery, yet Jews/Israelis who mostly endeavor to do the right thing albeit they do not supply industrial nations with oil, get the planetary evil eye. What impact has the Holocaust on the human soul, indeed, when a collective selective disdain for Jewish descendants of century twenty's defining scourge even overrides the essence of "Never Again", allowing Black Africans out of sight out of mind to be continually tortured, raped, and murdered by filthy Arabs, while the planet's military might dithers and "politically correct" pro-Palestinian popinjays, especially in Europe, incessantly blast the Jewish homeland Israel more so than even those murderous Muslim Arab jangaweed and sponsoring Muslim Arab Sudanese sadists in Khartoum? Would it be a stretch for the overall subconscious imagination of a racist-inclined cult of humans, some being planetary movers and shakers, when confronted with the Darfur slaughter, to truly view hapless Black Africans as non-entities or perhaps Jewish surrogates, even deserving of their fate in the maniacal mind's eye of the most tainted? Such a rationalization would allow them to trump genocide with fossil fuel contracts controlled by the sadistic racist Arab ruling class of Sudan.

The Nazification of Israeli's intrepid fighting force, in the mindless goose-stepping eye of pro-Palestinian warped pundits and their anti-Semitic muddled minions, speaks volumes in explaining their collective insensitivity towards today's most salient continuing tragedy in Darfur. Such emotionally diseased Jew-haters refuse to comprehend the true nature of the racist genocidal Arian Nazi or the similarly racist genocidal Muslim Arab, thus blithely, blindly, and in fact bizarrely accuse the actual descendents of the victims of an Arian genocidal Nazi mindset as tantamount to those brutal barbarian murderers themselves. Even the stark nature of Darfur's genocide, seemingly obvious by facts on the ground, will not leap ahead of such intense Jew-loathing on racist mankind's skewed short list of humane imperatives. Anti-Semitism uber alles! Those blinded by their obsession of prosecuting thus truly persecuting, in their possessed brains, the perceived "outrageous" Israeli Jew as well as the collective Jew have little outrage left for the Muslim Arab murderers in Darfur. Besides, industrial nations need Sudan's oil, thus movers and shakers with strictly materialistic malignant bottom lines, bereft of soul, do not wish to ruffle the robes of Muslim Arab Khartoum caricatures of the devil incarnate, spindly talons affixed to their ever-precious fossil fuel faucets.

Worldwide anti-Semitism accurately reflects the state of mankind's morally challenged persona, unfettered by instinctive shame. Indeed, the human species exponentially advances in technological achievement, especially in weapon's technology, yet remains at the beast level in moral maturity. Furthermore, intelligent man's unwillingness to internalize the lesson of the Holocaust concurrently parallels an unwillingness to respect his one home in the universe. These morally related issues are indeed the bane of his existence. He wantonly burns fossil fuel, thus glaciers melt while his collective heart and soul continues to remain ever frozen. Disrespecting the Jew; ignoring the murder, torture, and rape of hapless victims within his species; disrespecting his one home in the universe; are conditions that must soon be reversed if he is to thrive as Earth's dominant life form. If the essential lesson of the Holocaust is not soon absorbed within man's afflicted mind, he will soon grimly reap those earned catastrophic consequences born of his imperfect evolution.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nadia Matar, May 21, 2006.

A few days ago former Chief of the General Staff Moshe (Bugy) Yaalon addressed the conference of the Zionist Organization of America in New York. Speaking before an audience of about 500 people, he finally broke his silence and said what we have already known for quite some time: "The Israeli leadership sells the public illusions concerning its political plans and concerning the defense of their security." Yaalon attacked the disengagement from Gaza and northern Samaria: "What we did in the disengagement was to leave for the next generation an inheritance of dealing with Palestinians who believe that terror pays, and that the Israelis run and break under pressure." Yaalon also attacked the establishment of the "security" fence and said: "The best defense is a good offense, not a fence. [...] The best way to deal with terrorists is to kill them in their beds."

Unfortunately, Yaalon is not in a position of power, while those running the country today continue the plan of folding and surrender - plans that include the further deportation of Jews, the destruction of settlements, and the handing over of portions of the homeland to the enemy. The government tries to sell all these plans under the illusion - or, to be more precise, under the fraud - of "security," when it is precisely the opposite that is the case. Olmert's plan for the "elimination of Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria" constitutes a tangible threat to the continued existence of the State of Israel. The security situation is clear: if the retreat from Gaza brought the Katushas of the Hamas to the Negev and Ashkelon, anyone with any sense realizes that a retreat from Judea and Samaria will bring the war to Jerusalem and Gush Dan.

From the moral-ideological aspect, as well, Olmert's plan threatens the State of Israel: the non-Jews will tell us, and rightly so, that they learned from the Judgment of Solomon: If you willingly relinquish the heart of your homeland, Judea and Samaria and half of Jerusalem, then what moral right do you have for your continued existence as a Jewish state in Tel Aviv (Sheikh Munis), Beersheva, and Haifa? The struggle for the rescue of the settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is therefore a struggle for the rescue of the continued existence of the State of Israel, both from the security aspect, and, mainly, from the moral-ideological aspect. Let us state this simply: without Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, Israel has no moral right, or possibility, to exist.

The rescue of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza therefore entails a very great responsibility, that requires the full mobilization of the entire public that is loyal to its land and its heritage. Unfortunately, however, after the destruction of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, a considerable portion of the national public is in despair, with the feeling that "there is nothing to be done." A great majority of our public has ceased to be involved in any public activity, and they are occupied solely with their private lives. Although this public is aware of the dangers, it does not feel that it is capable of changing anything, and so it continues with routine matters and prays that the Holy One, blessed be He, will somehow cancel the decrees. Some black humor that I heard goes as follows: "Let's hope that Iran drops an atomic bomb on us, and then there won't be any deportation." A considerable part of the veteran activist public is engaged in things that are important in their own right, such as aid to our brethren the deportees, or the dissemination of "sparks of Yiddishkeit" among our assimilated brethren, but some of these activists, as well, have given up on the struggle for Eretz Israel.

I wish to turn to the entire wonderful national public and cry out: The struggle has just begun! If we learn from the mistakes of the past summer and act differently, we have the ability to change, and even cancel, the terrible decrees that threaten us all. Olmert's government is a very unstable government, that consists of people who hate each other, and the only glue that holds them together is their hatred of anything that smells "Jewish" and their pathological lust to eliminate the entire Jewish settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria. If we awake from our coma and begin to act - these activities will, with God's help, bear fruit.History shows that it is much easier to deport a depressed and despairing public than one that teems with life.

The first thing we must do is a mental switch. We have to understand that last summer was not a struggle. Last summer the official leaders of our settlements, Moetzet Yesha (the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza) and certain rabbis - who are dependent on the government for their livelihood and budgets - conducted an emotional protest, nothing more. They never intended to wage a real struggle; it is not logical that someone who receives a salary and budgets from the government will stand up and fight it, in order to defeat it! But if we regard Olmert's plan as a "national crime," then we will understand that we must conduct a struggle, and not a protest. Don't get me wrong: when I say "struggle" as an alternative to protest, I am not talking about violence against people, but mass refusal to obey orders and nonviolent civil disobedience, just as the citizens of the Ukraine did less than two years ago in order to depose their corrupt government. These methods of struggle were opposed by our mamlakhti'im (state-oriented) "leaders" (Moetzet Yesha and certain rabbis), and therefore did not come to pass. This time, we must find leadership - not necessarily organized, but local leaders everywhere, who are not dependent on government budgets, and they must already act, now.

What do I mean? Just as the government is not waiting for D-Day (Destruction Day) to perpetrate all at once the entire crime of deportation that it calls "convergence," but is constructing the plan bit by bit, by "converging" us behind fences, checkpoints, and walls, by distributing racist car stickers to Jews, by closing roads to Jews ... and thereby puts us to sleep and accustoms us to be submissive and weak - we, too, cannot wait for D-Day before we act. We must awaken now and begin to act against every little thing that is part of the "convergence" plan. This is the reason, for example, why the loyalists of Erets Israel, the youth of Erets Israel and the action committees of the Judea communities,organized the march against the terrible traffic jams at the entrance to Jerusalem from Judea and Samaria. [For those who do not know: for the past 2 months, Jews living in Judea & Samaria who drive to 'little Israel" have to wait for hours at the checkpoint. The security forces claim the long waits are "security-related". We do not believe that. N.M.]

We're not buying the tranquilizers that the heads of the local councils are trying to sell us, as if the delays at the checkpoints are for "security reasons." We have a government that is spreading the fraud that the entire settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza must be eliminated for "security reasons." (As proof, see the speech by Olmert on the day he was sworn in as Prime Minister.) So, of course, the government will say that the delays are for "security." It doesn't have an answer as to why there were no traffic jams before now, not even during the time of the horrible terror attacks of the second intifada. It is truly chilling to think that the Jew-haters in Europe once justified the elimination of Jews as a step "for Europe's security" - and now Israel has a Prime Minister who says that the elimination of the Jewish settlement undertaking in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza is "for Israel's security"!

We have to think for ourselves and understand that this is a comprehensive program for the closure of the "Gush Etzion ghetto," the "Samaria ghetto," the "Benjamin ghetto," the "Hebron Hills ghetto," and so on. Whoever does not act in protest, already in the early stages of the "convergence into ghettos" plan, is as if aiding the government in advancing its crime.

Our precious youth has understood this for quite some time. This why the Land of Israel Youth movement is constantly organizing activities under the heading "Instead of Destruction - Expansion." Going forth on marches beyond the fences, the establishment of meahazim (outpost settlements) on the hilltops, the building of Eretz Israel with our own two hands, all are counteractions to the governmental attempts to subdue us and "converge" us into ghettos before their elimination. The youth understood that the more we engage in activities for the rescue of Eretz Israel, we will change our frame of mind from despair and depression to a spirit of struggle and self-sacrifice. Now it's the turn of the adults to organize and join these activities.

When Buggy Yaalon finally opened his mouth at that conference, he said: "We must advance the legitimacy of the Zionist narrative." To put this simply, as I understand his words, he is telling us: The time has come to shout from the treetops: "All of Eretz Israel belongs to us, and we will fight for our right to live, to dwell, to go everywhere in Eretz Israel!"

At the present time, action committees for adults are being organized, once again, in all the settlements. Join them, and together - youth and adults, all who are faithful to all of Eretz Israel - we will succeed, with God's help, and by the merit of these activities, we will ensure that D-Day will never come.

I will conclude with a short story: in 1995, Jay Shapiro, sent me a copy of a book that he wrote containing articles warning of the dangers of the Oslo accords. In the book, entitled The Israeli Government and the Boiled Lobster, he writes about how important it is for us to be smarter than the poor lobster.

People abroad who don't eat kosher know that in order to cook a lobster, it has to be cooked in boiling water. But if it's thrown into the boiling water while still alive, it is liable to jump out of the pot and even to pinch the chef. The chefs realized that they had to outwit it. So they take the lobster and put it in a pot of cold water (where it feels at home), light a small flame, the water slowly comes to a pleasant temperature, the lobster lets his guard down, falls asleep,- and then the flame is turned up, the lobster can no longer escape, and is cooked.

Unfortunately, the poison chefs of the disengagement and the conversion have already begun to put a part of us into the pot. The "fence" is being built before our eyes. The plans to eliminate our settlements are cooking. An ill wind is blowing in Olmert's kitchen. But this does not mean that we must be overcome by despair and fall asleep. To the contrary! It is now, specifically, before the flame is lit, now is the time to awaken, to organize, to cry out, to kick, to leave our routine, so that we will cause this terrible cooking pot to be unstable on the fire and fall, and then the chef will not be able to continue with his scheme.

Yes, now is the time for the lobster to awaken, to jump from the pot, and even to pinch the Chef!

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. Or write an email to wfit2@womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Reify, May 21, 2006.

It occurs to me, that everything the public voted against, and found wanting, ever since the Oslo peace process began has born fruit. Meaning the plans and wishes of the likes of Beilin, Peres and the left elite, has been, and continues to be, the way this place is run.

Those at the helm are considered rightist or centrists, but in each administration the man sitting next to the PM, is Peres, and he has a lot of foreign financial support, and power, behind him.

So, as happens a lot in politics, the masses, or "sheeple", are being duped. All of the existing problems, and direction this people are being forced to accept, have been bad policy, bad strategy, and bad management. Many lives have been sacrificed, and we find ouselves drawn into the worst of all worlds by being involved in a war of attrition, which is almost impossible to win. The enemy strikes and immediately goes infront of the media crying foul when we strike back. So not only do they seem to become more bold in their actions, but are getting world wide support for their terrorism while we are made fools of, and made to look like the aggressor.

The "left" will never learn from their mistakes, and the "sheeple" will have no way of fighting this disaster.

Much could have been done from the beginning, but wasn't. The longer we wait the more difficult it will be to win this war. When will we learn from past mistakes, and history?

Sad, Bad, Mad mad world...!!!

Contact reify by mail at freify@netvision.net.il or visit his site -- http://freify.blog.co.uk/ -- to look at fascinating photography.

To Go To Top

Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 21, 2006.

This article was written by Jeff Jacoby and it appeared on Town Hall May 18, 2006
(www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/ )jeffjacoby/2006/05/18/197805.html. Jeff Jacoby is an Op-Ed writer for the Boston Globe, a radio political commentator, and a contributing columnist for Townhall.com.

When Ahmed Mansour learned that a lawsuit had been filed against him by the Islamic Society of Boston, he had one urgent question: "Will they put me in jail?"

The answer was no -- in America, people don't go to prison for publicly expressing their views, or for encouraging the government to review questionable public transactions. But Mansour had good reason to worry. He had learned the hard way that Muslim reformers who speak out against Islamist fanaticism and religious dictatorship can indeed end up in prison -- or worse. It had happened to him in his native Egypt, which he fled in 2001 after receiving death threats. He was grateful that the United States had granted him asylum, enabling him to go on promoting his vision of a progressive Islam in which human rights and democratic values would be protected. But would he now have to fight in America the same kind of persecution he experienced in Egypt?

Mansour is just one of many people and organizations being sued for defamation by the Islamic Society of Boston, which accuses them all of conspiring to deny freedom of worship to Boston-area Muslims. In fact, the defendants -- who include journalists, a terrorism expert, and the founder of the American Anti-Slavery Group, plus the Episcopalian lay minister and the Jewish attorney who together with Mansour formed the interfaith Citizens for Peace and Tolerance in 2004 -- appear to be guilty of nothing more than voicing concerns about the ISB's construction of a large mosque in the Boston neighborhood of Roxbury.

More than a few unsettling questions have been raised about the ISB and its mosque project. For example:

* Why did city officials provide the land for the mosque for just $175,000, when the parcel was publicly valued at $400,000? And where did that $400,000 figure come from, when the land's market value had earlier been assessed at $2 million?

* What is the Islamic Society's relationship to Yusef al-Qaradawi, a radical Islamist who praises suicide terrorism and endorses the killing of Americans in Iraq? For several years the ISB listed him as a trustee, though now it says that was an "administrative oversight." Was it also an oversight when a videotaped message of support from Qaradawi, who is banned from the United States, was played at an ISB fund-raiser in 2002?

* After it was reported that another trustee, Walid Fitaihi, had written that Jews are "murderers of the prophets" who will be punished for "oppression, murder, and rape of the worshipers of Allah," why did the ISB drag its heels for seven months before unequivocally repudiating his words?

But if anything should raise eyebrows, it is the decision of the Islamic Society to pursue Mansour for his comments about the ISB at a press conference in 2004. He had gone to pray at the ISB's current mosque in Cambridge, and described at the press conference what he had observed: "I am here to testify that this radical culture is here, inside this society," he said. He had seen "Arabic-language newsletters filled with hatred against the United States." Books and videos in the mosque's library promoted "fanatical beliefs that insult other people's religions." A religious man who prays five times daily, he stressed that he was "not against the mosque. ... I'm against extremists."

If Mansour doesn't have the credentials to form such opinions, it would be hard to say who does.

He holds three degrees from Cairo's Al-Azhar, the foremost religious university in the Islamic world, where he was appointed a professor of Muslim history in 1980. He would probably be there still if his scholarship hadn't gotten in the way. The deeper Mansour delved into the history of Islam, the clearer it became to him that the faith had been perverted into a "false doctrine of hate" -- a doctrine that has been spread across much of the Muslim world and that has fueled great cruelty and bloodshed.

His mounting opposition to Wahhabist radicalism drew the wrath of the powerful Al-Azhar sheiks, who removed him from his classroom and put him on trial in a religious court. For two years, he says, he was pressured to recant. In 1987 he was fired. Then the Egyptian government imprisoned him for two months.

Undeterred, Mansour continued to write and speak out against radical Islam. He has authored 24 books and more than 500 articles, many of them denouncing as heretical any Muslim creeds that "persecute and kill peaceful humans and violate their human rights." The real infidels, he has argued, are those who share "the traits of Osama bin Laden and his followers." Before fleeing for his life, he worked with Egypt's leading human-rights activists, promoting democratic values, funneling assistance to persecuted Christians, and advocating for the reform of religious education.

And this is the Islamic Society of Boston's idea of an anti-Muslim conspirator? Then what, one wonders, is its idea of Islam?

Contact the Ceders at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 21, 2006.

The term "orthodox" is of Greek origin and is derived from two Greek words: orthos, meaning "true," "correct," "straight" (think of "orthopedics"), and doxa, meaning "opinion."

1. To describe any Jew as "orthodox" is to say, in effect, that he has true or correct opinions.

2. Hence, to call any Jew "ultra-orthodox" is absurd.

3. Now, since the opinions of orthodox Jews are, by definition, true, the opinions of non-orthodox Jews are, by definition, untrue.

4. Of course, we all know that non-orthodox Jews reject many of the opinions of orthodox Jews. Which means they reject many true opinions regarding the Torah, for example: how Jewish men and women should conduct their lives as individuals; how parents should educate their children; how they should relate to non-Jews; how they should relate to Israel and to G-d.

5. But since non-orthodox Jews regard many of the opinions of orthodox Jews as untrue, then they should not call orthodox Jews "orthodox" but "non-orthodox" (or "semi-orthodox"). Conversely, since non-orthodox Jews regard their own opinions as true or correct, they should call themselves "orthodox" Jews!

6. But this last point poses a difficulty. You see, a great variety of non-orthodox Jewish movements exist, such as Reform, Conservative, Progressive, Reconstructionist--and even varieties of these varieties, such as Gay, Lesbian, and Secular Humanism. Now, many of the opinions of these non-orthodox Jewish movements not only contradict each other, but they change from time to time, and from place to place, and of course from individual to individual. Hence none of these non-orthodox movements can logically call themselves True or "orthodox" (as suggested at the end of point 5 above).

7. Since none of these non-orthodox Jewish movements are True, their leaders advocate "religious pluralism." But "religious pluralism" is itself an opinion. So that if no opinion regarding Judaism is True, neither is "pluralism."

8. Accordingly, non-orthodox Jews must continue to call orthodox Jews "orthodox." They must continue to imply that the opinions of orthodox Jews are true or correct or straight, while implying that their own (non-orthodox) opinions are false, incorrect, or crooked. Nor is this all.

9. By definition, various non-orthodox rabbis get paid for teaching non-orthodox or false opinions. Which means that these are "twisted" in thought as well as in deed, for they make other people believe in, and live by, false or twisted opinions?

10. Of course, non-orthodox rabbis do not believe that the opinions they teach are false. They regard them as true. But we have already seen that non-orthodox opinions are, by definition, untrue. Hence it would be more accurate or more honest for these non-orthodox rabbis to say that their opinions are "convenient" or "useful." And, of course, when their opinions cease to be convenient or useful, they change them.

11. But now we must ask: convenient or useful to whom? To the non-orthodox rabbi? To the majority of his or her congregation, or to the most powerful or richest members of his or her congregation? Who decides which opinions are "convenient" or "useful"? The Jews themselves, or the social forces or non-Jewish influences around them?

12. What ever the case, because of all this Jewish "pluralism," various Jews call for Jewish "unity." But how can there be unity or logical consistency between those who have true and false opinions? How can one compromise between correct and incorrect opinions? How can one be a "little pregnant"?

13. Besides, those who call for Jewish unity presuppose that Jewish unity is "good." But this, too, is an opinion (as much so as "pluralism"). Logically, the diverse Jewish movements cannot advocate Jewish unity except with respect to opinions they may have in common. For example, all Jews are concerned about the physical safety of their children. To this end they may combine, say to promote safe neighborhoods. But many non-Jews are concerned about this sort of thing.

14. Hence, without denying the value of Jewish unity for promoting non-controversial causes, the idea itself is superficial when divorced from basic doctrinal truths. This brings us back to orthodox and non-orthodox opinions.

15. The greatest Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, made a distinction between "opinion" and "knowledge." A person might have a true opinion without understanding the grounds of his opinion. Such a person lacked knowledge.

16. Which suggests that a person may be an orthodox Jew and yet lack profound knowledge of the Torah. Hence the need for yeshivot or Jewish academies: to ascend from true opinions to knowledge and thereby to promote the all-embracing way of life of the Torah.

17. Only by showing that the Torah is the paradigm of knowledge and the Tree of Life can Jews achieve true unity.

18. Only then will the dichotomy of orthodox and non-orthodox Jews disappear along with the basis of this parody.

Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 19, 2006.

This article was written by Sarah Honig and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961370854&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

You bet your bottom dollar convicted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui was right when he crowed (after having just escaped the death sentence): "America you lost, I won." He may seem nuts to forward-thinking Americans but his horse-sense - barbaric though it be - is the sort by which al-Qaida, Hamas, et al. devise their rules of war - the very war they impose on broadminded sorts like us.

Our choice is either to confront them on their battlefield or perish while deluding ourselves that genteel persuasion can moderate the world's Moussaouis. Their savage rationale - like it or not - is what the liberal West must contend with. Moussaoui was jubilant because the jury that spared his life demonstrated the failure to recognize the new conventions of combat.

From his vantage point the jurors were suckers when they regarded him as a common criminal rather than a warrior enemy and when they factored personal extenuating circumstances into their sentencing logic. Nothing here was personal, not the degree of culpability, nor the indiscriminate targeting of victims. Treating war as felony is a potentially fatal denial of reality.

THIS IS just one more presentation in the decent democracies' theater of the absurd. Consider this - Moussaoui was sentenced to as long a term as Jonathan Pollard, who has already served 21 years of his life sentence in a maximum-security US penal facility.

It's inculcated into us that the punishment must fit the crime. So how is it that Moussaoui, who could have prevented the massacre of 3,000 innocents, is to do the same time as Pollard, who according to available information leaked classified material to America's ally (Israel) about an enemy's (Iraq's) genocidal preparations against it?

American counter-espionage incontrovertibly apprehended bigger and more ferocious fish than Pollard - ones who had done their country real damage, unlike Pollard. Yet by comparison the truly dangerous agents weren't treated anywhere as harshly as the one who was on the same side as America and sought to expose the very Iraqi WMDs that the current Washington administration was purportedly after.

Pollard and Moussaoui essentially participated in the same conflict - Pollard on the Free World's side and Moussaoui on the side of Islamic Jihadism. The American legal system failed to identify Moussaoui as the combatant he is, just as it refused to admit that Pollard wasn't inimical to American security. With such underlying cognitive malfunction, no wonder there's no differentiation in penalty.

The preposterousness of it all, moreover, has bred a situation in which no leniency was shown Pollard but lots was extended to Moussaoui. Remember the ancient Jewish adage? "He who is merciful to the cruel is bound to be cruel to the merciful."

Mind you, this is no cause for Israelis to deride American judicial foolishness. At least, as the injustice to Pollard evinces, the American penalty phase can be inflexibly stern. Moussaoui may end up rotting in Colorado's federal "Supermax," where he'll be kept in solitary, deprived of any contact other than with guards and officials. There will be no visitors - no family, friends or spiritual mentors. Nobody. The plan is to cut Moussaoui off from the world and make him a nonentity.

NO WAY would he have been treated as severely in an Israeli Supermax. Just see how Fatah-Tanzim terror kingpin Marwan Barghouti actively conducts business via his very comfortable Israeli prison quarters, where he formulates - in concert with Hamas inmates - terms of surrender dictated jointly to Israel.

Just the other day the convicted murderer, serving five life terms plus 40 years, granted yet another interview from behind bars, this time telling the Lebanese al-Shiraa weekly that the PA's Hamas overlords must continue fighting Israel until it submits to their "sacred Right of Return" - code terminology for overrunning Israel with millions of hostile Arabs, thereby terminating its existence as a Jewish state.

Like Moussaoui, Barghouti was tried as a criminal and given all the breaks of ordinary due process. Like Moussaoui, he exploited the courtroom for propaganda antics. As in America, the press here hung on his every utterance and amplified it. But it's highly unlikely that Moussaoui will be able to run Barghouti-like for elected office from his American cell, issue operative commands and become a political headliner.

Israeli prisons are indeed unique. Not only do the most dangerous terrorists therein get hold of phones, but recently Hamas overtly conducted a mass rally in a southern Israeli maximum-security penitentiary, where scores of convicts congregated in the courtyard, which they festooned with Hamas Islamic-green banners and Palestinian flags.

A stage and speakers' rostrum were erected. The backdrop decor was a giant collage, displaying the Hamas emblem, portraits of Hamas leaders, slogans calling for Jihad against Israel and pictures of RPGs underscored by the motto "we'll continue." White plastic chairs were neatly arranged for the "audience," who cheered the invective hurled at the Zionist state and freely photographed the occasion - all under the disinterested eyes of passive Israeli wardens. The snapshots are available for viewing on the Web.

Terrorist lifers in Israel don't expect to end their existence in captivity.

They bank on Israel's gullibility and its revolving-door wrongheadedness, which has already released some of the world's worst villains regardless of what Israeli judges meted out.

Indeed word is that, among its recent harebrained inanities, Israel is doing its darndest to rid itself of the voluble Barghouti and has already twice (unsuccessfully thus far) badgered the Americans that he be exchanged for... Pollard! Pollard is deeply offended by Israel's insulting equation. Barghouti swaggers on insolently.

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at Justice4JP@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Bedein, May 19, 2006.

I am writing from Washington, after two days of intense meetings with key people.

Please write to protest Olmert's plan to give away Samaria and Judea (the "West Bank"). Send E-mails to: President@whitehouse.gov; comments@whitehouse.gov; Vice.President@whitehouse.gov; First.Lady@whitehouse.gov; Secretary@state.gov The place to fax is the National Security Council at the White House. 202 456 9040.

The message should be that Olmert's proposed uniteral retreat (do not use the word "convergence", which would give credibility to Olmert's plan) represents a security danger to Israel and to the West and that it would be perceived by the world as yet another victory for Radical Islam over the West. Sentiments for our communities in Judea and Samaria do not influence anyone. Do not repeat the mistake of "love Katif and the Shomron". Leave emotionalism at home.

Remember: Retreat threatens Tel Aviv AND the West.

This next is a report from a US Security Think Tank. It rejects Olmert's Unilateral Retreat Policy.

A U.S. security think-tank has urged President George Bush to reject an Israeli government plan for a unilateral withdrawal from 90 percent of the West Bank.

The report by the Washington-based Center for Security Policy, regarded as close to the Defense Department, warned that the plan prepared by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert would destabilize the Middle East and threaten U.S. interests in Iraq and Jordan. The report said the West Bank would quickly come under the control of Iran and other U.S. adversaries.

"Although an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the dismantlement of Israeli communities there seems consonant with traditional American policies in the Middle East, in light of the radicalization of Palestinian society, as evidenced by Hamas' electoral victory in January 2006, it is unclear how an Israeli withdrawal today will align with U.S. national security interests and goals," the report, entitled "Ehud Olmert's "Convergence" Plan for the West Bank and U.S. Middle East Policy," said.

"Unfortunately, it seems evident that an Israeli retreat from the West Bank will empower the terror supporting, anti-American de facto Palestinian state and will create a new base for global terrorism."

The report's author, Caroline Glick, an Israeli-based journalist, recommended that Bush reject Olmert's plan during their meeting scheduled for May 23 in Washington. Ms. Glick, a research fellow at the Center for Security Policy, said Olmert's plan was based on the unilateral pullout from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank in September 2005, which transformed the areas into Iranian- dominated launching pads for attacks against Israel and the United States.

"In light of all this," the report said, "the Bush administration and the congressional leadership would be well-advised to refuse Olmert's requests for U.S. support for his convergence plan while backing alternative policy options that will serve to strengthen U.S. allies in the Global War on Terror, while weakening those opposed to U.S. efforts."

The report marked an effort by Republican Party conservatives, who include leading members of the House and Senate, to oppose Olmert's plan. Conservative supporters of Israel, including the Christian Right, did not lobby against U.S. support for Israel's decision to withdraw from the Gaza Strip in 2005.

The center said another Israeli unilateral withdrawal would destabilize Israel and Jordan as well as hamper U.S. efforts to maintain military equipment in those countries. Ms. Glick said U.S. forces and equipment would be prevented from traveling from Israel through the West Bank toward Jordan and Iraq.

"An Israeli retreat from the West Bank would enable the terror forces combating the U.S. in Iraq to establish training bases and political indoctrination centers in the West Bank," the report said. "Such bases would operationally link the Palestinian campaign against Israel with the terror war against the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq and their Iraqi allies."

David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 19, 2006.

In case any of you, or anyone you know, is bewildered or angered by my accusations that the New York Times is not an objective source of news about Israel and the Arab world, I recommend the article below.

We learned ex-post facto that the NY Times callously and criminally betrayed its readers, and European Jewry, and the USA in general, in the late 1930s and early 40s, when it intentionally buried/hid/distorted news of the rise and threat of the Nazi party in Germany. For more on that, read the new book "Buried in the Times" (I forgot the author), and Robert Kohn's, "Journalistic Fraud: The New York Times". For general coverage of this and related issues about our media, see Elliot Kramer's "Complicity".

The Times is doing the same thing today. It is betraying its American and world-wide readership (NB! re international: the International Herald Tribune is now owned by the NY Times), American Jewry, and Israel with its skewed and selective coverage of the Arab-Israel conflict.

It is also betraying the victims of the Darfur and South Sudan genocides by not identifying the real criminals: the Arab government of Sudan and its supporters among other Arab governments and leaders (like Osama bin Laden) in the Arab world.

And by means of the same methods, it is also betraying, in my opinion (I know some disagree vehemently), the American people with its skewed and politically driven (anti-Bush anti-Republican) coverage of Iraq and other aspects of World War 4.

Will we be around 15 years from now to hear the same kind of recant and mea culpa that we heard from the Ochs and Salzman families in the mid-1950s (about their betrayal of European Jewry in the 40s); or will the Times' (witting or unwitting) complicity and collusion with Arab forces that are driving both the Jihad against Israel and the Jihad against the USA result in a victory for the Jihadists which will render such considerations meaningless in a new post-Jihad world where Moslem supremacy has made "Islam uber alles"?

This article is called "Darfur, Arab Genocide and The New York Times." It was written by Kenneth Levin and it appeared today in www.FrontPageMagazine.com. Kenneth Levin is a psychiatrist and historian and author of The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege.

In contrast to the several very dubious high-profile choices of the Pulitzer committee for this year's awards, Nicholas Kristof's prize in recognition of his coverage for the New York Times of the Sudanese government's genocidal campaign against the people of Darfur seems uncontroversial and well deserved. But Kristof, and the Times' editors, have consistently failed to cover a key element of the story.

A recurrent theme in Kristof's articles is the world's failure to do enough to end the slaughter in Darfur, and he particularly targets President Bush for criticism. He has on occasion also mentioned the "international community" and has referred by name to several nations and world leaders other than the President that could do more. But a key factor in the impunity with which the Arab government of Sudan has been able to pursue its campaign of rape and mass murder in Darfur has been the virtually universal support it receives from the rest of the Arab world, and on this Kristof has been essentially silent. (He did break this silence in five sentences in the penultimate of some 40 op-eds addressing Darfur that he published from March, 2004 through April, 2006; but that article is focused on China's shameful role in Darfur.)

Other Arab nations not only defend Sudan's government but actively lobby for it in world bodies and have successfully enlisted fellow Muslim states and additional allies to do the same. The travesty of Sudan being elected to the United Nations' human rights commission is just one demonstration of that support. Blocking of greater UN efforts to aid the people of Darfur is another.

The impact of this support goes beyond international bodies. Many nations are reluctant to confront the Arab world in its backing of Sudan, and this has been a major factor in European foot-dragging on the Darfur issue. Even American policy is sensitive to Arab opinion and potential problems with being seen as attacking another Arab regime as the nation continues to pursue the difficult struggle in Iraq.

But this crucial factor in the world's response to the Darfur crisis has, with the one recent exception noted, been absent from Kristof's reporting. The extent and impact of Arab support for Sudan's crimes in Darfur are also absent from the rest of the Times.

When the Arab League held its annual summit in Khartoum in late March, the Times published two stories on the proceedings. Neither made any mention of Darfur and no editorial addressed the significance, or questioned the propriety, of Arab foreign ministers choosing Sudan's capital as their venue. A Times editorial on Darfur published on April 13 ("Fiddling While Darfur Burns") takes the United Nations to task for "dawdling" and complains of UN Security Council members "China, Qatar, Ghana and Tanzania, that continue to give diplomatic cover to Sudan," but says nothing of the cover given by the Arab League and its membership.

This silence on the Arab world's support for Sudan's genocidal regime is part of a broader picture. While the Times did provide some coverage of Saddam Hussein's murder of up to 200,000 Kurds in the late 1980's, it again ignored the theme of broad Arab support for Saddam's program of Arabizing northern Iraq. The Times largely failed to cover Sudan's on and off again genocidal campaign against Christian and animist blacks in the south of the country that claimed about two million lives, and of course ignored as well Arab support for Sudan's policies in the south.

The Times prides itself in being a "liberal" newspaper, but it has also consistently ignored liberal voices in the Arab world that have sought to address that world's genocidal attitudes toward religious and ethnic minorities in its midst.

Tunisian human rights activist Muhammed Bechri, writing in December, 2004, noted that, "A deafening silence [has been] observed throughout the Arab world on the horrendous crime being committed by [its] fellow Arabs in Sudan." Bechri goes on: "the Arab silence [can] only be explained once we understand the true nature of the twin fascisms of Islamism and pan-Arabism that continue to wreak havoc on Arab land," the former inculcating murderous attitudes and promoting genocidal policies toward non-Muslims, the latter doing the same with regard to Muslim but non-Arab populations in the Arab world - such as the Kurds and the blacks of Darfur.

Bechri also observes that popular support in the Arab world for its twin fascisms is bolstered by "the fact that the voices of the Arab human rights community remain of little influence due to lack of access to the official media." He could have added that those voices and their perspectives also lack access to key Western media, including the New York Times.

In addition to ignoring the significance of broad Arab opinion on acts of genocide within the Arab world, the Times has also largely failed to cover related stories, such as the pressures on Christian communities in virtually all Arab states and the flight of Christians from those nations, and the forced Arabization campaign that has been waged for decades against the large Berber community - Muslim, but not Arab - of Algeria. Another related story untold by the Times is the murderous, indeed genocidal, hatred of Jews promoted for decades by Arab regimes, both religious and secular, in media, mosques and schools.

Bernard Lewis, the West's premier scholar of Middle East studies, wrote in 1986, regarding Jew-hatred in the Arab world, "The volume of anti-Semitic books and articles published, the size and number of editions and impressions, the eminence and authority of those who write, publish, and sponsor them, their place in school and college curricula, their role in the mass media, would all seem to suggest that classical anti-Semitism is an essential part of Arab intellectual life at the present time -- almost as much as happened in Nazi Germany."

But again, despite the Times extensive coverage, in news reports and editorials, of Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict, the newspaper is virtually silent on this aspect of the story.

No doubt this reflects Times biases on the subject. The Times prefers to depict the conflict as mainly a dispute over territory, with Israeli territorial concessions the key to resolution. Acknowledging the genocidal attitudes toward Jews rampant in the Arab world and promoted by Arab governments would cast doubt on this depiction.

Indeed, covering the murderous Arab attitudes, and sympathy for genocidal campaigns, toward other ethnic and religious minorities living amidst the Arab world - minorities that do not enjoy sovereignty or even autonomy and are not engaged in border disputes with surrounding Arab populations - would render even less plausible the Times' slanting of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and this very likely figures in the Times failure to cover those other stories.

With regard to Israel, the Times not only ignores Arab hate-mongering but ridicules Israel for making an issue of it. In October, 2000, for example, a month after Arafat launched a terror war against Israel, the official Palestinian Authority television station broadcast a sermon by Sheik Ahmed Halabaya in which the sheik declared:

"Whether Likud or Labor, Jews are Jews... They are terrorists. They are the ones who must be butchered and killed, as Allah the almighty says: Fight them; Allah will torture them at your hands, and will humiliate them... Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews, and those Americans who are like them..."

In an article published eleven days later, Times reporter William Orme notes Israeli claims of the PA's using its official media for incitement, and the slant of his story is clearly to make Israel's complaints look unfounded and ridiculous. He writes at one point: "Israelis cite as one egregious example a televised sermon... 'Whether Likud or Labor, Jews are Jews,' proclaimed Sheik Ahmad Abu Halabaya... " That is all Orme says of the sermon; nothing about Halabaya's exhortations to butcher Jews wherever one finds them, nothing about his assertions that all of Israel belongs to the Arabs, nothing about his invoking of Allah as calling for the torture and murder of Jews.

Again, it is very likely that the Times' sins of omission regarding Arab incitement of murder and genocide toward Jews, its distortion of this crucial element of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the service of its own slant on the crux of the conflict and the path to resolution, has figured in its silence on murderous Arab attitudes toward other religious and ethnic minorities in the Middle East and north Africa. To report honestly on those attitudes and their practical consequences would inevitably call into doubt the paper's editorial views regarding Israel and the Palestinians.

But, in any case, that silence on Arab attitudes does cast its shadow over coverage of other conflicts in the Arab world, distorting representation of the nature and dynamics of those conflicts. More particularly, it taints the Times' reporting and editorializing on the genocide in Darfur, including Nicholas Kristof's Pulitzer prize-winning coverage.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Larry Rued, May 19, 2006.

As an elder in the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA), I wholeheartedly agree with James Rudin's comment: "It was the culmination of decades - not years, but decades - of hostility toward Israel and Zionism, not by the rank-and-file members of these churches, but by some of the leadership," said Rabbi A. James Rudin, senior interreligious adviser for the American Jewish Committee, where he staffed the interfaith department for 38 years." The extensive research done by myself and other laity in the PCUSA confirms our leadership has spent millions of dollars in nuturing networks hostile to Israel.

Unfortunately, most Members in the Pews of the mainline protestant churches, even today, remain unaware of what their leadership has been doing. Can I ask for your help in getting the word out to these uninformed?

My fellow PCUSA elder, Will Spotts, has prepared an analysis of the 34 overtures that will be debated at the upcoming General Assembly.
(http://blog.pcusaelders.org/index.php?title= divestment_overtures&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1) The vast majority of those overtures oppose divestment.

This article is called "Divestment roils Jewish-Presbyterian ties," and was written by Rachel Pomerance - JTA News Service. It appeared today in the Florida Jewish News

ATLANTA, May 11 (JTA) - As Presbyterians across America gear up for their biennial assembly next month, the legacy of the last such meeting is still roiling the Jewish community and the church's own members.

Two years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA passed a resolution calling for "phased, selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel."

Those who long have followed Jewish-Protestant relations weren't surprised.

"It was the culmination of decades - not years, but decades - of hostility toward Israel and Zionism, not by the rank-and-file members of these churches, but by some of the leadership," said Rabbi A. James Rudin, senior interreligious adviser for the American Jewish Committee, where he staffed the interfaith department for 38 years.

The passion ignited by the divestment resolution at the last General Assembly is likely to erupt again at the June 15-22 meeting in Birmingham, Ala.

What happens there will have a lasting impact on the already strained relationship between Jews and the entire Protestant community. The estimated 3 million Presbyterians in the United States influence the other white mainline Protestant churches in this country, whose members number more than 20 million.

Presbyterians are considered the "conscience" and reason of the Protestant community, serving as something of a "swing vote," Rudin said.

Indeed, after the Presbyterians' 2004 resolution on divestment, several other Protestant communities took up the issue. The Methodists decided to study their options; the United Church of Christ, also known as the Congregationalists, endorsed divestment but did not create a process to enact it; the Episcopalians considered but rejected divestment; and the Lutherans rejected a divestment resolution, and instead passed a resolution to invest in cooperative ventures between Israelis and Palestinians.

What will happen in Birmingham is anyone's guess, though both Presbyterian and Jewish officials predict that no immediate action on divestment will be taken.

According to Ethan Felson, associate executive director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, "the prevailing wisdom" is that a recommendation proposed by the General Assembly committee to appoint a committee for continued debate on divestment, without halting the divestment process, will pass.

Soon after the resolution was passed, the group's committee charged with assessing the church's stock portfolio for potential divestment expanded the criteria of companies to include companies that support Israel's presence in the West Bank; its separation barrier; settlement building and violence to either party in the conflict.

The committee is still in its investigative stages. It has already begun initial talks with three of the five companies in question. The Presbyterian Church says it has targeted the following companies for these reasons:

* Caterpillar, because the Israeli military uses its equipment to demolish Palestinian homes and construct roads for Israeli settlers in "the occupied territories";

* Citigroup, due to charges that it has transferred funds to Palestinian terrorist groups;

* ITT Industries, for supplying communication devices to the Israeli military used in "the occupied territories";

* Motorola, because it also supplies the Israeli military with communication devices, and takes "advantage of the Israeli government policy of delaying or prohibiting the importation of modern equipment into Palestine"; and

* United Technologies, for providing helicopters to the Israeli military that have been used in attacks against suspected Palestinian terrorists.

More than $65 million is at stake - the combined shares of Presbyterian Church stock in the aforementioned companies. The MRTI committee has made no requests for action by the companies, said a church press officer. The meetings were about "fact finding" and "information sharing," she said.

The more immediate question is whether the church will continue to go down the divestment path or reverse course.

To some extent, the issue can be viewed as a struggle between the denomination's ministers and laity. According to an internal Presbyterian USA poll taken in November 2004, more laity - some 42 percent of members and 46 percent of elders - oppose divestment, compared with 28 percent of members and 30 percent of elders which favor it. Meanwhile, pastors favor divestment by 48 percent to 43 percent and specialized clergy favor it by 64 percent to 24 percent.

Furthermore, the church said that the poll showed that "despite widespread media attention," most Presbyterian laity were not even aware of the decision of the 216th General Assembly to "begin a process of phased, selective divestment" of companies profiting from the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

But it would be hard to imagine that anyone heading to Birmingham could miss the subject, given the sheer number of overtures, or proposals, on divestment submitted to the church by regional presbyteries for the upcoming assembly.

Nearly one-fifth of the 137 proposals to be considered at the assembly address divestment. Some want to press forward with the divestment process, many others aim to rescind the original resolution and express serious concern about the damage the issue has done to Jewish-Presbyterian relations and the church's reputation.

The overtures come before a committee, which will condense them into a single resolution or propose an alternative to present to the assembly.

Some 3,000 clergy and lay people are expected at the assembly. Of these, 534 individuals - half clergy, half laity, are eligible to vote on the overtures.

Given the wave of overtures to reject divestment, "one would hope they would see that as the will of the people," said the Rev. John Wimberly, pastor of Western Presbyterian Church in Washington.

Wimberly is on the steering committee of Presbyterians Concerned for Jewish and Christian Relations, a group that has pushed hard to further overtures against divestment.

However, "this issue has become the 'in' issue," Wimberly said. "It's the issue of the left today in the Presbyterian Church and it gains a kind of life of its own."

Asked about the issue by JTA, Clifton Kirkpatrick, chief ecclesiastical officer of the Presbyterian Church, said it has been "very painful that in our effort to secure peace and justice for all," the church has hurt members of the Jewish community, for which the church has "deep respect." The Presbyterian Church is committed to both good interfaith relations with Jews and Muslims while pursuing :peace and justice in the Middle East."

Some devoted to Jewish-Christian relations have made overturning divestment a priority. They include the National Christian Leadership Conference for Israel, a network that long has worked with Jewish and Christian supporters to promote Israel's cause.

The group is hosting a May 18 conference on divestment at the Central Presbyterian Church in New York City and coordinating a Presbyterian mission to Israel later this month.

There's "a real groundswell of opposition that's occurred within the church, and it's very widespread," said Jim Roberts, a Presbyterian from San Diego, who heads a committee of volunteers and a Web site called "End Divestment Now."

Roberts' group argues that divestment is rooted in bias and flawed theology, and considers the divestment push a breach of the church's principles of fairness and bottom-up governance.

Insiders say several sources gave rise to the 2004 divestment resolution and the pro-Palestinian feelings among many Presbyterians.

For one, Palestinian Christians have deeply influenced the church by framing the Israeli-Palestinian issue in terms of "liberation theology," portraying the Palestinians as powerless victims who must be freed from their ostensible oppressors, the Israelis.

The most influential group espousing this platform is the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem, which sponsors conferences around the world and speakers at Christian gatherings, and advocates divestment from Israel.

Jewish groups, and many Christians, call Sabeel a corrupting influence.

Christians for Fair Witness in the Middle East holds news conferences about Sabeel nearly every time the group holds a meeting in America, said the Rev. Roy W. Howard, an executive committee member who is pastor of Saint Mark Presbyterian Church in Rockville, Md.

According to Howard, Sabeel is ambiguous about Israel's very right to exist: Its devotees speak about a "Greater Palestine" in which there is no Jewish state, he said.

The Rev. Richard Toll, chairman of Friends of Sabeel North America, calls these charges a distortion.

"There has never been a call for the destruction of Israel or anything like that at all," he said. Leaders of mainstream Jewish groups are often invited, but don't respond, he said.

San Francisco, a presbytery that has presented an overture affirming divestment, was influenced less by Sabeel than by Presbyterians who visited Palestinian areas, said the Rev. Will McGarvey, pastor of the Community Presbyterian Church, who will present San Francisco's proposal at the assembly.

Divestment is a last resort in a process that encourages corporations first to act more justly, McGarvey said. Though it may seem one-sided, "there's only one side that has power right now, and that is the" Israel Defense Forces, he said.

Jewish officials in San Francisco felt insulted that the local presbytery never informed them of its overture.

"That's awful hurtful," said Jonathan Bernstein, director of the Anti-Defamation League's Central Pacific Region. "I feel like they didn't really learn a lesson" from the uproar over the 2004 resolution about the need to inform Jewish colleagues about their actions.

It also hasn't been easy for Jay Tcath, vice president of the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago and director of its Jewish Community Relations Council.

He has limited his interaction with the local presbytery since the fall of 2004 because the group delayed addressing the divestment resolution. Instead, he turned his attention to individual churches in the area, which he said are more open to dialogue on the issue.

"Friends don't allow slanders to stand against other friends," he said.

Matters worsened when the Chicago presbytery's Middle East task force met with leaders of the radical fundamentalist group Hezbollah in Lebanon last fall.

It was smoother in Atlanta, where Jewish officials got early word of an overture for divestment because of their strong interfaith relationships. They successfully called for its withdrawal in favor of broadened dialogue.

Jewish-Presbyterian dialogue on the grass-roots level has intensified since the divestment resolution passed in 2004.

Shari Dollinger, a former interreligious affairs officer for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, launched the Coalition for Responsible Peace in the Middle East after witnessing the heavily pro-Palestinian current at the United Church of Christ's July 2005 General Synod in Atlanta.

The coalition, whose founding members include The David Project, American Jewish Congress and Stand with Us, is using a grass-roots approach, disseminating information to Jewish and non-Jewish groups at pro-divestment gatherings and on its Web site, http://www.c4rpme.org.

But some say Presbyterian leaders have sidelined Jewish voices on divestment.

It's "downright embarrassing that the Presbyterians have not made certain that they have multiple points of views and interpretations of what's going on," said Christopher Leighton, director of the Baltimore-based Institute for Christian and Jewish Studies.

Leighton cited a conference on divestment last year in Louisville, Ky., site of the church's national headquarters. The Baltimore delegation walked out because of the lopsided pro-Palestinian representation.

"It was an appalling example of having a foregone conclusion that you want to trumpet and so you know where you want people to end up before they even start out," he said. "It seems to me that that's symptomatic of how our leadership has handled this."

Some Jewish officials suggest the church is again stacking the deck. The day before this year's General Assembly, for example, the church has scheduled a Middle East forum with three representatives -- a Palestinian Christian, an American Muslim and an American Jew, Mark Pelavin, associate director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. Why, anti-divestment forces wonder, is there no Israeli represented?

Many Presbyterians "have been listening to the message that they have heard from their Jewish brothers and sisters, but there are still very powerful, intransigent leaders who believe that they are serving their community by lifting up Palestinians and beating up on Israel, and that's sad," said Rabbi Gary Bretton-Granatoor, the ADL's director of interfaith affairs.

"In the last two years, what has also shocked many people involved in this ongoing dialogue is that all too often when the phrase 'occupation' is used, many believe that they are not referring to 1967 but 1948" - in other words, a rejection of Israel's existence.

Kirkpatrick, the Presbyterian chief ecclesiastical officer, rejects that charge.

"It has been the core commitment of every Presbyterian leader I know" to ensure "peace and justice for both Palestinians and Israelis," he said.

For now, there is plenty of debate on all sides of the issue. And many are just plain confused. Presbyterians may need to "wait for the dust to settle before we can make any real determination of the appropriate way to enhance relations between Israelis and Palestinians," Leighton said.

Contact Larry Rued at LRued@tampabay.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Bernice Lipkin, May 19, 2006.


14:03 May 19, '06 / 21 Iyar 5766
by Hillel Fendel

A massive pro-Israel, anti-withdrawal rally will be held in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, coinciding with PM Olmert's request for billions of dollars to aid the retreat.

The protestors will urge U.S. President Bush not to provide aide for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert unilateral retreat plan, which has been condemned on both sides of the political spectrum. Sponsored by B'Nai Elim, AFSI, and other groups, the Washington rally is scheduled for Tuesday, May 23rd at 12:00 noon in Taft Park adjacent to the Capitol Building.

B'Nai Elim announces that Olmert "plans to speak before Congress in order to ask for approximately $10 billion in loan guarantees to implement his plans to force Jews off their lands in Judea and Samaria. Another deportation/ethnic cleansing scheme? Never Again! ... It is important to make Mr. Olmert aware that we do not accept his parceling away of any Israeli land to the Pan-Arab/Palestinians. After the Gaza/Gush Katif fiasco, there can be no more pullouts. There can be no more land grabs by the Islamists who wish to 'Wipe out the infidels to the last.' ... It is imperative that every Zionist help in keeping Israel safe and whole!"

Information about buses leaving from New York, New Jersey and Connecticut can be had by writing to rafvrab@att.net or rafvrab@gmail.com. From elsewhere in the country, write to jonsilverman2002@yahoo.com

Organizer Jonathan Silverman says,

"The Prime Minister seeks to secure the approval of President Bush to carry out more Jewish expulsions and giveaways of land to Hamas (a Tehran-sponsored terrorist group) - actions that totally undermine America's war on terror. 'All it takes for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing.' We cannot afford to remain silent!"

Those who cannot attend are asked to call the White House and register their opinions about the plan. For particulars, see http://mattot-arim.blogspot.com/
















Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is coming to Washington D.C. next week to ask Congress and Pres. Bush for enough money and moral support to expel 80,000 Jews from Samaria and Judea (the West Bank).

Many of us feel this is a terrible idea. We want to demonstrate our disapproval, our outrage that the Israeli government is treating its Jewish citizens so shabbily, and our concern that Olmert is putting Israel in jeopardy.

Jonathan Silverman (jonsilverman2002@yahoo.com; 718 304 3193) initiated a call for a rally and it struck a chord. The upshot is there will be a grassroots rally at

the U.S. Capitol Building in Taft Park
(near Senate Russell Bldg)
50 Constitution Avenue N.W. (at 1st Street)
Washington DC
Tuesday May 23, 2006 at 12 noon
Metro Stop: Union Station on the Red Line. 4 block walk

I am writing you to help us let people know about this rally. Some people have already made arrangements to come in from out of town. Obviously, the more people show up, the more our disapproval of Olmert's Convergence Plan will register with the Bush Administration.

We hope you publish this information on your website and send it to your email lists.

What will expelling Jews from the West Bank accomplish? The Gaza disengagement debacle suggests that:

  • Hamas and Al-Qaeda will take over the territory. As in Gaza, they will have the freedom to import war material and to put together missiles and explosives. And they will be even closer to their Israeli targets.

  • The Arabs will be sitting on top of Israel's aquifer and thus controlling a critical component of Israel's water supply. Some say Israel's eventual desalination project will be a substitute -- but that is a pipe dream.

The Israeli Government botched the resettlement of the 8,000 Jews of Gush Katif, Gaza. Some 9 months after they were kicked out of their homes and farms and orchards, some are still homeless and most are living in tents and ramshackle temporary trailers. More than 40% percent have not been compensated for their homes that were destroyed. Most of the business owners and farmers have not received any payment. A vibrant and patriotic group that once contributed substantially to Israel's economy is now dispirited and traumatized and a drain on Israel's economy.

Now Olmert's government is proposing to transfer at least 10 times as many Jews. If he succeeds, both Israel and America will be the losers. At best it weakens Israel militarily and demoralizes its citizens, making them easy prey for their enemies. At worst, it is suicidal. And America loses its only reliable ally in the Middle East. The only winners will be the Arab terrorists now in control of Gaza.

If you can't come to the rally, please write President Bush and ask him to oppose Olmert's dangerous scheme. The American people can not be a party to this insanity. U.S. citizens can call the White House at 202-456-1111; you will be asked what state you are from. Faxes can be sent to 202-456-2461, and emails can be sent to

Thank you


Bernice Lipkin
Editor, www.Think-Israel.org

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 19, 2006.

The article below neglects to mention Australia, which is also suffering an epidemic of rapes by Moslem men against non-Moslem women (and sometimes under-age girls).

Note the attitute of some Moslem leaders:

Copenhagen Mufti Declares Women who Refuse to Wear Headscarves are "Asking for Rape"; and this from the spiritual leader of Denmark's Moslems who was so obsessed with the slight done to Islam by the Danish cartoons that he promoted a world-wide Jihad that killed dozens, did hundreds of millions of dollars of damage, and still threatens genocide to Danes.

As is the case with dhimmitude and Jihad, rape in the context of Islamofascist Moslem thought is another right that the Moslem male acrues to himself by virtue of being male and Moslem. Not all Moslems feel this way, of course; but those who do use Islam to justify their crime; and those that don't are mostly silent.

Islamic leadership in Europe (and Australia) supports the rape epidemic by pressuring authorities to be more sensitive to the cultural differences that motivate the Moslem males. Hence gang rapists freed in Germany and Norway.

This is from "Pan-European Arab Muslim Gang Rape Epidemic," on the Iris Organization website,


Today's news from Germany buries the fact that the gang rapists of a 13 year-old were likely Arab Muslim immigrants:

Shock in Berlin as Suspected Rapists Freed
(www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp? subchannel_id=26&story_id=30050&RSS).

Nowhere is the news reported that this is part of a gang rape epidemic sweeping areas with high Arab Muslim immigration.

As is the case with young Arab Muslims throughout the West, teenage (Moslem) girls are generally forbidden to go out, leaving separatist gangs of predatory Arab Muslim males with highly misogynist attitudes. Harassment of females has therefore exploded throughout the West, most shockingly demonstrated in the recent phenomenon of gang rape for sport. Listed below is the evidence.

While these cases are primarily not related to the core group of committed Islamists within Arab Muslim immigrant populations, there is some "trickle-down" of attitudes so it is also worth noting the rape aspects of Jihad ideology as well: "The Rape Jihad,"


Racial Gang rape: Another Diversity Disaster

...in more cosmopolitan centers like Paris and Australia, the game is blossoming. It consists in the ritual gang rape of white women by non-white immigrants... The ritual is known as a "tournante," meaning "Take your turn."

See also: "France Takes on Plague of Sexual 'Rite'"


The Australian Sun-Herald reports that police data show that some 70 racially motivated rapes of young white girls, one as young as 13, by Middle Eastern immigrants have taken place in the last two years.

See also: Racial Gang-Rape: The Sequel


Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway

...doubling of the number of reported rapes by ambush in 2004, following what was already a decade of steadily increasing numbers of sexual crimes.

...The figures have nearly doubled in the last ten years: 467 rapes against children under the age of 15 were reported in 2004 compared with 258 in 1995.


Rape charges in the capital are spiraling upwards, 40 percent higher from 1999 to 2000 and up 13 percent so far this year. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen of Oslo's Vice, Robbery and Violent crime division says the statistics are surprising - the rising number of rape cases and the link to ethnic background are both clear trends...


Alarmed at last week's police statistics, which revealed that in 68% of all rapes committed this year the perpetrator was from an ethnic minority, leading Muslim organisations have now formed an alliance to fight the ever-growing problem of young second and third-generation immigrants involved in rape cases against young Danish girls.

See also: "Copenhagen Mufti Declares Women who Refuse to Wear Headscarves are "Asking for Rape."

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Peck, May 19, 2006.

I just received this from one of the publishers that prints my columns. I couldn't understand why, over the past two weeks the number of sites that popped up when my name was clicked on has dwindled from 50,000 to around 18,000. I even called Google and questioned why I was losing my sites so rapidly. They weren't able to help me. However, now that I received this email from the publisher, it makes sense. They have labled me a Hate Speech writer. Obviously because of the column that was in his publication.. "How Has Islam Enriched Your Life." Is the beginning of something that is very dangerous. I intend to write a column about this, but wanted to rush this bit of info right out to you. It is NEWS...Please respond ASAP and let me know your feelings about this and suggestions as to how to handle it.

Arlene Peck

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Salvato [mailto:fsalvato@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 10:26 AM
To: Arlene Peck; Barbara Stock
Cc: imani@newmediajournal.us
Subject: FW: [#58423255] Google News

The New Media Journal has been dropped by Google News and the Google search engine because of complaints made to them about "hate speech pieces" that they considered your opinion-pieces to be.

This puts a HUGE dent into The New Media Journal's ability to disseminate information.

I would hope that you would be pro-active in trying to rectfy this situation as it has everything to do with my livelihood.

I have enclosed the termination notice below

Frank Salvato
Managing Editor
The New Media Journal

-----Original Message-----
From: Google Help [mailto:source-suggestions@google.com]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:56 AM
To: NewMediaJournal.us
Subject: [#58423255] Google News

Hi Frank,

Thanks for writing. We received numerous reports about hate content on your site, and after reviewing these reports, decided to remove your site from Google News. We do not allow articles and sources expressly promoting hate speech viewpoints in Google News (although referencing hate speech for commentary and analysis is acceptable).

For example, a number of the complaints we looked at on your site were found to be hate content:


We hope this helps you understand our position.

The Google Team

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 Steven Plaut, May 19, 2006.

The ISM or "International Solidarity Movement" (ISM REALLY stands for "I Support Murderers") is a pro-terror extremist group devoted to endorsing and promoting Palestinian violence against Jews. ISM terrorhoids routinely enter Israel under false pretenses and then collaborate with terrorists. They also participate in violent attacks on Israel's "Security Wall" and the police and soldiers defending it. They oppose the wall because they favor mass murders and genocidal atrocities against jews by Palestinians, and the wall makes such crimes more difficult.

In the past, Arab bombers from Britain entered Israel under the guise of being "activists", members of or hosted by the ISM. Two of these "guests" of the ISM murdered several people when they blew up a popular Tel Aviv bar three years ago.

Last week yet another British Arab "activist" was arrested after entering Israel for purposes of engaging in terrorism. Ayash Ali was arrested eight days ago, but news of the arrest was only released on Thursday. The arrest took place in the territories in cooperation with a special police force, and the man was taken in for interrogation by the Shin Bet. Karen Kaufman, spokeswoman for the British Embassy in Israel, told The Associated Press that Ayash Ali was arrested on May 9, and British diplomats have had access to him in custody and have attended remand hearings.

In April 2003, British national Asif Muhammad Hanif blew himself up in the Mike's Place pub on the Tel Aviv promenade. Three people were murdered in the bombing. A second British man, Omar Khan Sharrif, accompanied Hanif. The men were sent by Hamas, and both were dispatched as suicide bombers. Both had been hosted and featured at ISM events just before the murders.

They had succeeded in entering the country through their British passports, evidently with ISM help, but Sharif failed to detonate his explosives belt. He escaped and apparently tried to flee by way of the sea. His body was washed up on the Tel Aviv beach a number of weeks later.

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, May 19, 2006.


A sergeant being awarded for bravery refused to shake the hand of the Chief of Staff. His commander later interrogated him about it, asked him in vain to apologize, then dismissed him from the battalion. The Army considered the youth's behavior political and therefore against the rules. The youth's family points out that he wasn't ordered to shake hands. It considers his ostracizing the Chief of Staff brash, but the Chief's ostracizing him as over-regimentation. It defeats the purpose of encouraging fighters of valor (IMRA, 5/5).

Ordinarily, dismissal might seem merely an over-reaction, though not significant. Under the Sharon-Olmert regime, however, it reflects the transformation of the Army into a tool of oppression of Jews.

What decent Israeli would want to shake hands with the head of an army that dispossesses Jews from their property and lets it be stolen or vandalized, and that in the process of dispossession, doesn't just arrest resistors but beats them up badly, including non-violent resistors, some of whom indicated they would leave the scene if given a chance? The Israeli Army has become fascist. The police have a unit that specializes in brutality against Jews.

The Army is hypocritical to object to the soldier's expressing his political views, if they were political rather than an ethical compunction against brutality. The Army has been thoroughly politicized. It advances leftist officers more than, say, religious ones, regardless of merit. Chiefs of Staff often contradict their military principles when they prepare to enter politics. To please the Labor Party, they turn towards appeasement.

The Army also imposes political programs upon its compulsory audience. Therefore, the Army doesn't object to a soldier's expressing a political view so much as to his view not being theirs.


The EU has investigated P.A. corruption in the use of foreign aid. It has stopped donating funds directly to the P.A.. Experiencing Islamic terrorism itself, it has become more understanding of Israel's legitimate need to fight against terrorism.

On the other hand, the EU (like the US) still donates funds to private organizations in the P.A. and radical Israeli groups that work to defame Israel and impede its self-defense. Among those groups are Machsom Watch (which harasses Israeli soldiers at checkpoints and encourages Arab defiance of them) and ICAHD, the Israel Committee Against House Demolitions (meaning against demolishing houses built illegally by Arabs, a means of jihad). These NGOs don't promote a civil society but uncivil war. ICAHD works with opponents of Jewish statehood to divest from Israel. The EU claims this one-sidedness in jihad is a peace project, but it seeks to influence public opinion in what it calls a democracy. That is not a proper use of its own tax revenues. Some of the EU officials behind the donations realize that their beneficiaries seek to undermine Israel's existence (IMRA, 5/5 from Gerald Steinberg). Like water, antisemitism or appeasement of Muslim Arabs, blocked from one path, carves another channel.


Lebanon is a country but not a nation. There is no Lebanese nationality. The population consists of mutually suspicious major blocs of Sunnis, Shiites, Druse, Maronites, and other Christians. Some of the blocs have militias. Iran has forces there, too.

When Lebanon was stabile, it became an international banking center and resort. Upon fleeing to Lebanon, the PLO tipped the balance of contending ethnic groups, and civil war began. Syria seized the opportunity to restore order and grab power. It sent in a million Syrian colonists.

The Lebanese forced the Syrian troops out, but cannot get the Syrian secret police out or oust the Lebanese politicians owned by Syria. Neither can they agree on how to run the country. They let Hizbullah keep its arms and risk war with Israel.

What kind of people are the Lebanese? Apparently if kept in check, they can prosper, but if not, they would tear each other to pieces. They could not endure a winner-take-all democracy. I've met some Armenians (Christians) from Lebanon and Iran, and they were among the finest persons I know, but the mass of Christians sorely needs a unifying nationalism. I hope that Lebanese nationalism will not develop by concentrating on making Israel an external foe to unify against.


The Rabin Center focused on healing the rift between secular and religious and Right and Left, until Yuli Tamir took it over. She ended the mediation and rubbed salt into the wound, so people should constantly think of Rabin's assassination and be angry with the Right and religious, whom she claims brought it on. (That is false, for it either was the leftist government or an individual). She wants to reap ideological hay out of it.

Now Tamir is Minister of Education. She admits wanting to bring politics into education. This would not be the first time, for Rabin let the schools become indoctrination centers in behalf of the "peace process" (phony appeasement of the belligerent Arabs). She would have the children "prepared" for abandonment of Judea-Samaria. That really means the schools would indoctrinate in behalf of it (IMRA, 5/5) and in Israeli style democracy, that means repressing dissenters. This violates officially stated policy.


Olmert has stopped claiming that withdrawal would spare troops diverted to defend Judea-Samaria or would save money. Few troops are diverted and the budget for Judea-Samaria is a fraction of the cost of withdrawal (and of the costs of fighting the greater terrorism to result from withdrawal, and to fight it from outside the P.A.). He claims it is to keep the Arabs from voting for Knesset, but that is no reason to rush into a dubious adventure now. They can vote for the P.A., as they do, now.

One cannot accept the rationalizations offered for the policy. Nobody knows Olmert's real reason. Is it to keep his Party of appeasement-mindedness united? (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 5/5). Why appeasement-minded? Neurosis or corruption.


My Israeli TV correspondent turned on her television set and saw a pogrom. It took her a moment to realize that this was occurring in our era and in Israel, supposedly a Jewish state. "I watched in ANGER, as thousands of policemen (Yassamnikim unit) with batons, helmets and face shields, riding very tall imported German horses, ran into the crowd of youngsters and beat them viciously and repeatedly on their heads with batons. I watched the blood pouring down the faces of these teenagers. I watched with my BLOOD BOILING, as they broke into homes where teenagers were sitting on the floor, with linked arms and singing, and started beating them on their heads with clubs, until blood flowed and still continued smashing skulls. I watched as police threw our youth out of the windows head first. I saw blood running down the face of MK Effie Eitam who was beaten on the head and thrown to the ground by a horse. I saw MK Aryeh Eldad standing with a broken arm and was treated by our medical team on the spot. I saw rocks flying and horses with blindfolded eyes racing into the crowd and people lying under horses' hoofs. I saw beautiful homes being demolished."

"Most of the teenagers were hospitalized by bad head injuries. The following days, much video footage and reports from teenagers were seen and heard. Boys were grabbed by testicles, and received repeated blows to testicles, thus many were crushed. This can cause sterilization. A teenage girl was seen on video crying and pleading with the police to stop beating her as she was leaving on her own. The video showed the beating continued with her jacket and blouse raised and her bare back getting blows. A girl reported that she was smashed on the head repeatedly and then the baton came down on her left eye as she was crawling to the door. The beating continued until she passed out and woke up still lying by the door with blurred vision. Many teenagers had serious eye injuries. Many stomach injuries. One boy said that five police beat him at one time to all parts of his body. The Director of the Crises Center for Religious Women has confirmed that the office has received reports from girls of sexual harassment and sexual abuse. Many girls told me that they were called whores and told that they enjoyed being touched. These officers had thick Russian accents. Some more serious molestation took place as reported by B'Sheva weekly. The thick Russian accent of many police was also verified by Eliahu Leven in an interview by Russian language's TV in Israel."

"On the eve of the Amona pogrom, Olmert and the heads of the police and army said, 'You have clubs, and you have helmets. You'll know what to do.' Michal Raz, a nurse living in Amona, said she saw and clearly heard a commander briefing about 60 helmeted policemen and saying. 'Your mission is to open as many girls heads as you can.' Orders were received to 'smash and break hands and legs.'" (Hence the government imported Russian antisemites.)

"Olmert and his hand-picked henchmen hate religious Jews, hate the land which they want to turn over to hostile enemies and in short -- hate G-d. Their fight is with G-d, which is being done through believing Jews. Never did the Yassamnikim treat Arab rioters, Arab terrorists, Arabs living in their illegally built buildings, as they did the Jews of Amona."

Amazingly, the youth refuse to give in. For that, they are called fanatics, but what is the anti-Jewish government? The government claims it wants Jews secure. Not that way!

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Andras Bereny, May 19, 2006.

I was thinking (overnight) of a "funny" scenario. Imagine that as a result of the Sharon/Peres/Olmert anti-Semitic policies the Jews of Judea and Samaria in fear of deportation would declare in mass that they don't consider themselves Israelis and restituted their citizenships. (There is a simple form to fill out in this effect at a government office) At this point Yesha Jews would become either stateless refugees eligible for assistance (from UNRWA?) or citizens of their former host states, eligible for their (diplomatic) assistance. How would a situation like this evolve? Where would it lead to? Would Olmert and the Israeli anti-Jewish establishment survive the storm? Would the Jewish Autonomy get EU and US aid to pay the wages of the (Jewish) security force?

Stavo giusto pensando stanotte di uno scenario "divertente". Immaginate una situazione per cui gli ebrei di Judea e Samaria, (i c.d. coloni) per non essere deportati dalle loro case, si restituessero la loro cittadinanza israeliana. Questa è una semplice formalità burocratica che si può fare negli uffici governativi. A questo punto gli ebrei di Yesh (di Judea e di Samaria, ad esclusione di Gaza, perché già pulita di ebrei) diventerebbero o rifugiati senza nazionalità e dunque con diritto di assistenza (da UNWRA?) o cittadini dei loro rispettivi paesi ospitanti d'origine, sempre con diritto d'assistenza (diplomatica). Come potrebbe svilupparsi una situazione del genere? Dove ci condurrebbe? Potrebbe Olmert e l'establishment anti-ebraico israeliano sopravvivere la confusione? L'Autonomia Ebraica, come quella Araba, riceverebbe milioni e milioni di dollari e di euro per finanziare i salari dei servizi di sicurezza (ebraici)?

Andras Bereny
Kfar Tapuah

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, May 19, 2006.

We've come a long way in Iraq from when there were assertions the democratically-elected government would recognize Israel. Today, they are acting like a normal Arab country. I'm so glad we are sacrificing young lives and draining our treasury to make Iraq democratic. Just think, in a couple more years, they'll be best friends with Iran and a stronghold of Arab-style democracy, complete with beheadings, suicide bombers and women shrink-wrapped in schmattas.

This was written by Michael Freund and appeared today in The Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961373594& pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

The US-backed Iraqi government sent an official representative to this week's meeting of the Arab League Boycott Office in Damascus, The Jerusalem Post has learned, prompting criticism from members of Congress and the Bush administration.

Liaison officers from 14 countries met for four days this week to discuss ways of intensifying the Arab embargo against Israel. Among those taking part were delegates from several ostensible US allies, such as Iraq, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait.

Tom Casey, a spokesman for the US State Department, told the Post that Washington was unhappy with Baghdad's action.

"We are disappointed by the decision of the Iraqi government to attend this meeting, and will be noting our concerns with Iraqi officials," he said. "We have raised this issue with Iraqi officials in the past and expect to raise it with them again."

"The US position on the Arab League boycott is well known," Casey noted, adding that "perpetuation of the Arab League boycott does greatest harm to those who participate in it by hampering their efforts to develop their economies."

Members of Congress were also critical of the Iraqi move.

Rep. Paul Ryan, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, told the Post that "the US government has been very successful in negotiating the cancellation of Israeli boycotts from many countries throughout the Arab world. This would appear to be a big step in the wrong direction on the part of the new Iraqi government."

Ryan, a Republican, said he expected Washington to bring the matter up with Baghdad. "We should make our position clear, just like we do with every other Arab government," he said.

Contacted by phone, a spokesman for the Iraqi embassy in London declined to comment.

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Kapen, May 18, 2006.

Whereas in the State of Israel the aspect of Shavuot as Hag Ha'Bikurim-Festival of the First Fruits is being observed, the festival when the Jewish People in the Land of Israel was commanded to bring to the Beit Ha'Mikdash the first produce from his field, his garden or his livestock, in the Diaspora, where the commandment of bringing the first produce obviously didn't apply whether in the time of the Beit Ma'Mikdash or any other time, the emphasis is on celebrating the other aspect of the Shavuot, this of Hag Matan Torah- the Festival of the Giving of the Torah.

In our own synagogue as in most others, no difference the denomination, the congregants meet at the night prior to Shavuot in order to listen to marathon lectures on the various aspects of the Torah and other Jewish topic till dawn in what is being called: Tikkun Leil Shavuot.

Perhaps the only place on earth where the two aspects of Shavuot are being celebrated is the religious kibbutz in Israel whereby the the bimah as well as as the entire synagogue and Hadar Okhel (dining Hall) are being decorated with greenery and also, the kibbutz members and holiday guests convene in the synagogue to listen to Torah lecture throughout the night. A decade ago I was fortunate to celebrate these two aspects of Shavuot when I visited Religious Kibbutz "Shluhot" In the Beit Shean Valley and this was indeed a memorable event. But even there, the aspect of Shavuot as Hag Ha'Bikurim is all but symbolic in the absence of the Beit Ha'Mikdash to bring the first produce to the Kohanim.

Actually, this gap regarding the celebration of Shavuot which exist between Israel and its diaspora is emblematic of the widening gap between the Jews of the State of Israel and the Jewish Community of the Diaspora, a gap which recently was made obvious with the strong words uttered by famous Israeli author A.B. Yehoshua in a Jewish conference attended by both Israelis and Jews from the Jewish Dispora, words which strongly angered the latter and not without reason. But even if the famous author was right from his own vantage point as an Israeli, he failed or refused to understand the importance of the two communities and the measure of their mutual dependency. The wise thing is to understand that the existence of a Jewish community in the Diaspora is a fait accompli and that it is as important to the Jews of the State of Israel as the other way around and that these two communities complete one another and little more of what is called: Yiddiskeit would harm the Israelis because being Israelis without the affinity to their Jewish roots in the Galut, characteristic of Israelis like A.B. Yehushua makes a mockery of Israel's designation of the Jewish State.

Contact Rachel Kapen at skapen285466MI@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 18, 2006.

If Ehud Olmart truly believes that sojourning to Washington in a few days, persuading U.S. President Bush and Congress to grant Israel money for purposes of evicting and reassigning 80,000 of its citizens from Judea and Samaria to enclaves not of their choosing, will in anyway promote the interests of the Jewish State, this Prime Manipulator needs a check up from the neck up. Israel has no business soliciting money from any nation, including its formidable ally America! Period! Begging for bucks makes that beggar country a protectorate, in effect a servant of its financier. Israel needs no boss telling it what to do. The nation Olmert was elected to serve judiciously, not harm perniciously, has a thriving first world technologically dynamic economy and needs no charity. Indeed, Diaspora Jews of means worldwide can contribute funds to their potential homeland if ever they were needed. Israel should trade with and strategize with the United States on an even playing field, as partners and allies. The relationship should be mutually respectful. Each nation must support its own interests. That cannot be done when one nation gives charity to the other.

Furthermore, Olmert has no business ceding Israeli land to terrorists! Judea and Samaria were properly secured by Israel in 1967 as a consequence of vanquishing hostile Arabs intent on annihilating the Jewish State. Judea, Samaria, east Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and erstwhile Gaza are and were intrinsic parts of sovereign Israel, much like the American Southwest (formally sovereign Mexico) is part of today's U.S.A. Arabs residing on such Israeli land (alas, except for the ceded Gaza), believing they are citizens of their Koran, must pledge their allegiance to the State of Israel, renounce those thugs that threaten harm to Israel, or leave! For Olmert and his cadre of minions to unilaterally offer most of this land to so-called Palestinian Arabs is treasonous! The Gaza 9,000 still reel from their unconscionable forced eviction, both economically and spiritually. Israeli citizens living in Judea and Samaria observe this, and will not go peacefully! The soul of Israel will be irreversibly tarnished if Olmert perpetrates his wretched policy. Arab terrorists will rejoice, Hamas will take all the credit for the despicable act, and violence against a perceived weakened Israel will increase, not decrease.

So what must sane supporters of Israel do? Olmert, abetted by his Kadima party, does not have the power of a Sharon thus cannot consummate his folly without acquiescence by a majority of the Israeli Knesset. A boulder rolling down a mountain surely can create a landslide with enough momentum. The Israeli public must be educated and motivated swiftly, must contact their representatives, and reverse the madness. American Jews must be educated and motivated swiftly, must contact their Congressional representatives and President Bush, and convince their government not to underwrite the madness. If Israel is to be saved from grimly reaping the fruits of insanity, supporters of Israel must act now!

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Marion D.S. Dreyfus, May 18, 2006.

To: editors at USA Today

In a powerful, to-be-released film on the killing of Senator Robert Kennedy, called "Bobby," Democratic hopeful for the President of the US, the film brings up what many have forgotten--including the former President, Jimmy Carter, as manifested in his fact-unencumbered op-ed.

Sirhan Sirhan, who unequivocally shot Robert Kennedy as well as six other innocents unlucky enough to be within proximity of his pistol on 6 June 1968, was an Islamist devotee--one of the earliest, so that one often fails to make the threaded continuum between him and El Said Nossair, who in the early 1990's shot dead Rabbi Meir Kahane as he sermonized to an audience in New York's Summit Hotel, and the hijacking of planes and ships at sea by other death-besotted Islamists. These were joined by the fanatics who killed hundreds in the embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya, the bombing of the SS Cole, killing 17 and wounding 37; and the tourist massacre in Bali (again, which I barely missed), which had no ostensible 'reason;' save the butchery of dozens of beer-toting Aussie nightclub goers and a few local Indonesian unlucky. These were mostly misperceived, too, as oddments, another one-off, by the largely deliberately clueless police. They almost dismissed the first bombing of the World Trade Center, and the myriad smaller acts of murder such as the Lockerbie plane explosion of 1995 (an airplane I was myself to have taken but at the last minute changed my plans).

My litany is an illustration of how challenged this witheringly uninformed past chief executive is about the 'causes' of the rabidity seen on the Arab/Muslim 'side.' None of these were umbilically connected, as Carter alleges repeatedly, to Israel and Jews--although his and his family's enmity to Israel is so well-known that his brother's being on the payroll of an arch-terror country hardly raised an eyebrow, and Carter's own frequent fuelling of animus by misquoting facts on the ground to disadvantage Israel does not have the same power to shock it once did.

Still, the editorial vetting process at your end should have exposed via elementary fact-checking the numerous factual, statistical, geographic and alas even spiritual errors deliberately inflicted on your national readership. I am greatly surprised you failed to give his tissue of trumpery even the lightest dusting for distortion, exaggeration, and outright arrogation of false facts with full knowledge.

One eagerly awaits such time as his errors in plain air are grievous enough to let the public at large dismiss whatever he says as the burblings of a senescent peanut farmer who overstepped.

I am dismayed at your coverage.

Contact Marion Dreyfus at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 18, 2006.

1. Israel's anti-democratic "judicial activists" continue their campaign to impose judicial tyranny on Israel.

No sooner does Israel's Supreme Court affirm by a narrow majority the right of Israel top prevent unlimited award of citizenship to West Bank and Gaza residents claiming to be married to Israeli Arabs, when Israel's Chief Justice, the guru of judicial activism, breaks into new territory. Having long maintained that it is the right of unelected judges to veto laws passed by elected representatives of the people, having long insisted than unelected judges may invent "laws" and rights" opposed by the legislature, Chief Justice Aharon Barak, who was in the minority on the recent Supreme Court ruling, now is insisting that the majority opinion of Supreme Court justices also is not worth diddly. At least not when the majority rule in opposition to Barak's personality prejudices!

Yesterday Barak distributred his own private opinion (which Barak generally confuses with Israeli law) that the ruling upholding teh right of Israel to refuse citizenship to West Bank and Gaza Arabs claiming to be marries to Israeli Arabs will soon have to be overturned as violating Israel's "Basic Laws". But it does not violate Israel's "Basic Laws", and in any case Israel's "Basic Laws" are simply laws, passed by the legislature, the same legislature that passed the law controlling citizenship!

Barak announced that if the Knesset dares to act as the sovereign legislature and extends the citizenship law of which Aharon Barak disapproves, then he will personally see to it that the Supreme Court vetoes the law. Except that Israel's Supreme Court has no constitutional authority whatsoever to veto any law passed by the Knesset! (see http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/717223.html)

Meanwhile, in another court ruling, this time by Jerusalem Magistrates Court, it was decided NOT to prosecute two violent anti-Israel leftist extremists for attacking police and soldiers during "protests" against Israel's security fence. The protesters oppose the Wall because they want terrorists to murder lots of Jews and the wall makes that more difficult. Two extremists were to face indictment: anti-Israel pro-terror extremists Jonathan Falk and Moshe Snitz (see
www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml? sw=snitz&itemNo=717498)

The court in effect ruled that attacking police is just legitimate free speech and expression.

Meanwhile, in an uncharacteristic move, Haaretz runs a politically incorrect non-leftist guest Op-Ed column by a law student named Yaniv Roznai. He supports the court decision that upheld Israel's law restricting citizenship to West Bank Arabs claiming to be married to Israeli Arabs. Indeed, he argues it is not only democratic but is perfectly consistent with international law, which endorses the right of countries to restrict access to their territory to residents of belligerent states and areas.

2. "Wrong on Libya"
By Mohamed Eljahmi

The State Department has announced that the U.S. would establish full diplomatic relations with Libya and remove it from the terror list. The impetus for the decision is to create a model to change the behavior of Iran, North Korea and Syria. The decision is a mistake, because the Libyan government has suspended but not renounced terrorism to achieve political gains. Libya is not Iran. Moammar Gadhafi rules supreme and oppresses his people. Libya has neither a civil society nor political institutions. Col. Gadhafi dominates every facet of political and economic life and continues to justify his past use of terrorism. His son Saif, heir-apparent, has merely said that terrorism is no longer useful, because Libya and America are at peace: "We used terrorism as tactics, for bargaining." What then happens if it is no longer convenient for Libya's leadership to ally with Washington?

In April, former Liberian dictator Charles Taylor arrived in The Hague to stand trial for crimes against humanity. Col. Gadhafi was his chief supporter. Mr. Taylor is being tried for his role in the Sierra Leone civil war. The Special Court's indictment was instructive: "Taylor received military training in Libya from representatives of ... Muammar al-Qadhafi. While in Libya the accused met and made common cause with [Sierra Leonean rebel leader] Foday Saybana Sankoh." Col. Gadhafi's facilitation of the meeting contributed to the loss of 75,000 lives.

Col. Gadhafi's chief victims, though, are Libyans. In February, he orchestrated a rally to protest the Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. An ensuing riot destroyed the Italian consulate in Benghazi. His security forces shot and killed 11 people. A subsequent sweep landed a few hundred people in prison. Children as young as 13 disappeared.

My brother, Fathi, is another victim of the regime. He may face the death penalty because he met with a U.S. official and called for free speech and democracy. Fathi is held in a secret facility. He suffers from hypertension, diabetes and a heart condition. He is not receiving proper medical care and is mostly cut off from his family. He isn't the only one: Last year, police kidnapped journalist Daif Al-Ghazal after he wrote articles critical of the regime. His mutilated body was found in Benghazi the next month.

The State Department's decision undermines U.S. credibility. Realists say the administration is sending a positive message to the Arab world that it will reward good behavior in the war on terror. What despots hear, though, is that lip-service will obviate the need to reform or respect human rights. Re-establishing relations with Col. Gadhafi is not a victory and it may very well be a defeat unless Washington begins full-court pressure to force political change in Libya.

Mr. Eljahmi is a Libyan-American activist whose brother, Fathi Eljahmi, is imprisoned in Libya for speaking out in favor of political reform.

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 British Israel Group, May 18, 2006.

This article was written by Daniel Hannan and appeared yesterday in Telegraph.co.uk.

It is, even by Brussels standards, an odd decision. The EU is to resume its subventions to the Palestinian Authority (PA) - despite having recently passed a series of laws against financing terrorism, and despite the fact that Hamas, which runs the PA, is on its own list of designated terrorist organisations.

Eurocrats are aware of the awkwardness, and are trying to find a way to stay within the letter of the rules, perhaps by funnelling the donations through NGOs. But it is hard to see how this would work: most of the EU's money goes on salaries for Palestinian officials, and Hamas has swollen the state payroll with its militants, paying their wages while they serve their sentences in Israeli jails.

Even if a way could be found to circumvent Hamas, the very fact of pumping more money into the Occupied Territories will make terrorism more likely. Palestinians are already, by some measure, the largest per capita recipients of overseas aid in the world. Yet the level of violence in Gaza and the West Bank has risen in proportion to the amount of assistance received.

When Hamas was elected earlier this year, the EU brushed aside American objections and handed over 120 million euros. Palestinians responded by ransacking EU diplomatic missions and kidnapping European citizens. But the EU is less interested in the practical consequences of its subsidies than in the message they send. By firehosing cash at the PA, Europeans signal their opposition to Washington, suck up to their Muslim voters and, above all, vent their dislike of Israel.

The Jewish state represents the supreme vindication of the national principle: that is, the desire of every people to have their own country. For 2,000 years, Jews were stateless and scattered, but they never lost their aspiration for a national home. The EU, by contrast, is founded in the belief that national loyalties are artificial, transient and ultimately discreditable. Simply by existing, Israel challenges the main assumption on which European integration is based.

To be fair, Eurocrats also think they can smother Palestinian terrorism under a landslide of euros. This aim is tacitly backed by many in Tel Aviv. An Israeli official told me, on condition of anonymity: "None of our politicians can argue for giving money to Palestine while Hamas is in charge. But we don't want people to go hungry and fall into the hands of the jihadists. So if you guys can figure out how to get the money to ordinary Palestinians, you'll be doing us a favour."

This sounds reasonable, but it is based on a false premise, namely that political violence is caused by economic deprivation. This notion derives ultimately from Marx and, like many of his ideas, it looks plausible on the page, but turns out not to be true.

Most of the world's revolutions have taken place, not at times of rising poverty, but at times of rising wealth and aspirations. Put bluntly, people who are worried about food and shelter have little time to go on demos. It is when they have time to sit and brood that their thoughts turn to bloodshed.

An unconditional welfare state is thus the perfect terrorist habitat. Think of the two London Tube bombers who had been living on income support and housing benefit. Had this option been closed, perhaps they might have found jobs, and so been too busy to work themselves into a suicidal rage.

Sean O'Callaghan, the former IRA volunteer, recalls talking to the republican leader Brian Keenan. "The Brits are very clever," Keenan told him. "The only thing they don't get is the Fenian thing. We speak their language, are the same skin colour, live in their council houses, take their dole and still hate them." But might it not be precisely because of the council houses and the dole that they hate us? It is one thing to have a quarrel with another people; quite another to have to crawl to your enemies for charity.

The EU, as the largest overseas donor to the PA, has created a subsidy-based society, as sulky, lethargic and corrupt as any on earth. But it doesn't have to be this way. Palestinians are a naturally enterprising people who, in other Arab states, often form the professional and administrative class.

They have the winning combination of cheap labour and an educated workforce, but lack access to world markets. Israel, like any besieged nation, prioritises the safety of its own citizens and so seeks to limit the traffic in and out of the Occupied Territories. Palestinians thus find their external borders closed, and their roads often blocked by checkpoints.

Easing these restrictions would not solve everything. Trade and investment would not, in themselves, end a conflict with ethnic, religious and territorial dimensions. But a capitalist Palestine, in which citizens looked to themselves rather than to the state, would be more stable. Its propertied classes would have a stake in civil order. Its businessmen would have an incentive to remain on cordial terms with their customers, including those in Israel.

None of this will happen, however, as long as Palestinians remain trapped in the squalor of dependency. The EU, in its well-intentioned but doltish way, is fuelling the conflict.

Contact The British Israel Group by email at britsr@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 18, 2006.


Alicia Colon of the New York Sun worked hard to reach where she is today, but has not forgotten her origin and the values derived from it. Having old-fashioned (eternal) values, her columns represent honest opinion rather than politically correct ones. She brings common sense to an issue, and breaks issues down to their elements. After reading an article of hers, many other journalists' sophistication seems forced, hers, natural. Whether I agree with her on particular issues, I respect her sincerity and find her stimulating. She brings up many issues that are neglected and challenges many popularly accepted solutions. She gives us a second chance. I think her columns warrant review by policy-makers.

In a recent article, Mrs. Colon noted the Democrats' mockery of Pres. Bush's policy of war in Iraq. She asked, how would his critics deal with global jihad? In other words, those noisy barrels are themselves empty. Hers is a good question. It's one I will stop some of the complainants short with. They might respond that they would work with the UNO. But that would be begging the question, for it was the UNO that authorized the war and the failure of the UNO that left the vacuum to be filled by the US.

There are some fine journalists, but Alicia Colon is special.


First the P.A. proposed to integrate Fatah terrorists into the P.A. forces. Now the Druse leader in Lebanon contends that Hizbullah has no justification for fighting against Israel, inasmuch as Israel has evacuated from all Lebanese territory. He proposes that Hizbullah be disbanded and its men integrated into the Lebanese Army, so as to control terrorism there.

Would that control terrorism or give the terrorists an opportunity for taking over the official Army? In any case, it keeps terrorists under arms. They could commit terrorism off-duty. Many P.A. police did.

The Bush Administration did not object to the P.A. proposal, though it would have legitimized some of the most vicious war criminals. Indeed, the Administration had suggested unifying the P.A. police forces, which would unify the P.A. war on Israel.


People read the UNO Charter, and think it states the organization's purpose. In real life, it has many purposes, for its members have many purposes. The Secretariat seems to have as its purpose organizational empire building and making money for its officials.

The US sometimes pursues narrow self-interest, but often does wish to solve international problems. Many other states, however, wish to use the UN to block problem-solving or to help spread certain problems. The Arabs use it to foster jihad and smear Israel. China uses it to block action against its oil suppliers. Russia uses it to block action against its customers. Russia and sometimes France use it to frustrate the US. These are childish approaches, but such are the ways of the world.


The Committee to Protect Journalists listed the 10 most censored countries as: N. Korea, Burma, Turkmenistan, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Eritrea, Cuba, Uzbekistan, Syria, and Belarus. The criteria are: "state control of all media, the existence of formal censorship regulations, the use by the state of violence, imprisonment and harassment against journalists, jamming of foreign news broadcasts, and restrictions on private Internet access."

The media has a cynical disregard for the people's welfare, and covers up for disasters. There is not much tolerance in those countries for dissidence. In Cuba, the government turns mobs on any dissenting journalists, confining them to their houses. (IMRA, 5/2).

Helpful would be another type of rating that would indicate how many of the almost 200 countries in this world are heavily censored. Are the next 10 most censored countries almost as censored as the first 10? How much concern should there be for our own countries?

I think that the US and Israel are censored. Israel fits some of the criteria, above. The State of Israel controls the broadcast media, keeping non-leftists out. The newspapers are primarily leftist, too, keeping most right-wing or nationalist dissent out. Both countries' governments try to manipulate the news and punish journalists who speak out. The US government stops inviting critics to sources of news. In Israel, reporters witnessing police brutality are themselves brutalized and their cameras confiscated. In the US, many newspapers practice advocacy journalism.

Both those countries are home to political correctness. Certain points of view are taboo, to an extent. Thus there is a US national pretense that Islam is a peaceful religion. This pretense is headed by a President whose critics call him stupid but are careful not to specifically include that pretense as an example of his stupidity. Professors have been fired for being critical of Islamism. There are other kinds of political correctness, too. In Israel, as in Europe, there are laws against "racism" and "incitement," that are misused to curb critics of racist Muslims who incite to riot.


Using data from the National Counterterrorism Center, the State Dept. issued a report of countries that support terrorism. Among them was S. Arabia, which sends funds to Hamas. The State Dept., however, did not put that country on its listed of proscribed countries that subsidize or support terrorism. Rather, the US provides S. Arabia with security support (IMRA, 5/1).

It's easy to criticize S. Arabia and the US government for coddling it. It is difficult, however, to propose a better US policy. If we undermine the rotten Muslim regimes, worse Islamists may take them over. It is easy to demand that democrats be given leave to contest for office. It is difficult to identify who are democrats and to know that they would win elections rather than the Islamists, better organized and more ruthless.

That stated, the US could bar ostensibly charitable donations from S. Arabia (and UAE) that really go to terrorist fronts, to install Islamist imams in mosques, or to subvert American universities. The US could conserve fuel, so that S. Arabia would have less money to finance terrorism. We could stop selling our superior airplanes to that country. We could help Israel strengthen Israel, the better to stand off jihad, as by letting it displace the Arabs in the territories and Israel and by not arming Egypt.


Islam got its original start when its opposition was the Roman and Persian empires, exhausted from warring on each other. (Now Islam has another spurt of success, when its opposition is the politically correct US and the anti-Christian, anti-Western, European pacifists.)

Appeasing Islam, Western historians tend to downplay the intolerance of Islam and its proclivity for imperialism. The deception is the easier practiced for Islam having been largely kept down during the colonial era. It wasn't a religion of peace, but it had no outlet for war. Now it does. And so it fights wherever sufficient numbers of Muslims come into contact with infidels: Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, India, Thailand, Philippines, and Indonesia (and Europe).

Tolerance? Harmless cartoons lead to large-scale Muslim riots and death. But Muslim artillery deliberately blasting ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan does not produce Buddhist riots.

An example of Islamic tolerance usually cited is that of Maimonides finding sanctuary in N. Africa. What the apologists for Islam fail to point out is that he fled from Muslim rule in Spain. The Mughal empire had a tolerant period, but it always was imperialist. Imperialism was not just a Western policy. This is brought up in Efraim Karsh's new book, Islamic Imperialism: A History (Edward N. Luttwak, NY Sun, 5/3, p.13).


Britain made all sorts of apologies for Islam, and allowed Islamists to operate there. The police thought they had an unwritten deal. They tolerate Islamists and let them partake of British welfare benefits, and the Islamists would leave their hosts alone. Islamists operating and trained in Britain did fan out and commit crimes in other countries, such as the US. The rest of the world should hold Britain accountable for criminal negligence.

Then the Islamists bombed London trains. The supposed gentlemen's agreement was a deal with the devil. Nevertheless, the police and government failed to change their policy, although other Western governments urged them to. Britain continued to grant sanctuary to political exiles, without distinguishing between innocent and menacing exiles. It continued to deem any criticism of Islam as prejudiced.

This defensive reaction was learned from Prof. Edward Said. The bigoted Said used to make grievous but false accusations, and then denounce his critics as Western bigots. But his charges were false (as was his autobiography). He never acknowledged his historical errors (Fred Siegel, NY Sun, 5/3, p.13).

France also thought it had such a deal with the Muslims. So did other European countries. They didn't, either. When the Muslims feel emboldened, they will attack. The West should stand together, instead of letting it get picked off one country after another, as it did in the face of the Nazis.


By publicly embracing Iraqi leaders, the US taints their independence, and they lose status to insurgency. Daniel Pipes proposes letting Iraq sink or swim. The US military could protect Iraq from major attack, but otherwise the US should let it govern itself. (NY Sun, 5/2, p.6).

He is right. His is an old observation about the State Dept.. It embarrasses itself constantly, except in Israel, whose people like America so much that they don't realize that the State Dept. does not return the favor. State Dept. interference is not in the interest of the US or of Israel but of "foggy bottom" prejudices.

The embracing of favored local leaders in Iraq has become a game of revolving chairs, as one leader trips or is tripped, and another emerges as the favorite. The State Dept. constantly interferes, though it guesses wrongly and the country lurches from bad to worse. Just as Israelis don't have the sense to resent US interference, the State Dept. doesn't have the sense to stop interfering, at least in Iraq. Its interference has brought the pro-Iranians and the Islamists out on top, and State should have known better. Failures in Iraq are laid at Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld's door, but it is the fault of the State Dept., the President, and the American Establishment's hubris in thinking it knows best for everybody else.


Egyptian government TV has been running a series in the P.A.. The series blames most of the world's problems on the US, as the alleged leader of world imperialism. Israel is presented negatively, too, among other things, as the party responsible for destroying the World Trade Center. The US is accused of having made war on Iraq in order to steal its oil (none of which it has taken). Thus Egypt diverts attention from the failures of Arab governments by blaming the US for their ills. Egypt teaches Arabs to hate the US, and concludes that only terrorism can defeat the US, which it likens to the Crusaders of old. First, the US started against the American Indians, now it is branching out abroad.

Ironically, Egypt receives the second highest amount of US subsidy. The US also subsidizes organizations in the P.A. that promote anti-Americanism (IMRA, 5/3 from Palestinian Media Watch). Egypt has made war for imperial ambition.

See what I mean, that the State Dept., indeed, the whole US government, does not know what it is doing? The Arabs are not as stupid for biting the hand that feeds them, as is the hand that feeds those biting it.


Americans are willing to put up with some inconvenience, necessary to detect terrorists. Republicans praise Pres. Bush for the absence of another 9/11. However, the federal effort against terrorism is dubious. Shipments are not inspected. Bureaucracy reigns.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Saperstein, May 17, 2006.

We went to the bonfires. It was Lag B'Omer, the 33rd day of the counting of the 49 days of the Omer, the period between Passover when we became a nation and Shavuoth when we received the Torah, our five books of laws, of ethics, tales of our fathers, mothers and great leaders who brought our religion to the world.

We celebrate Lag B'Omer to mark the end of the deadly plague that decimated the students of Rabbi Akiva, our greatest of Torah sages. Some historians maintain that it was not plague but rather the Roman soldiers who slaughtered the students who fought valiantly to save the land of Israel from Roman conquest.

Today our people are still reeling from shock that a Jewish government set its own forces to remove Jews from the land of Israel.

We, the homeless of Gush Katif living in temporary quarters in Nitzan, sat in groups around bonfires. Our children roasted hot dogs, potatoes and marshmallows in the fires. Avi Piamenta, a gifted singer and flautist, entertained us and exhorted us to dance. Like others we moved from bonfire to bonfire, reminiscing of our hotel experiences, reminding each other that friends were still in limbo in hotels and guest houses as their caravillas were not yet ready for occupancy. We did not dance.

Children consumed ice-pops, cotton candy and popcorn as they had in Neve Dekalim. The scene was eerie. We are the same people doing the same things we had done last year at the community bonfire in Neve Dekalim. But this year... this year we were changed. The community has dwindled. Some friends and neighbors live elsewhere. The smiles are forced but the hugs are genuine. Our common experience has drawn us closer. We are family.

I meandered between the groups. Moshe sat and watched the fires. I met friends who had come from the caravillas in Ein Tzurim to visit us. We shared sighs. I met Dana and bemoaned that I would not be buying my grandchildren's cute first grade school supplies at her now-destroyed shop.

The bonfires slowly turned the logs to cinders. We drank tea with our friends and slowly returned to our caravilla. Another light fixture has fallen and is dangling on bits of wire. My flute teacher, Alexei, now comes to my home to give me lessons. Tonight we resume art lessons with our teacher, Benny. Our lives have changed yet small parts have returned. But it is not Gush Katif.

Like the students of Rabbi Akiva we fought valiantly to save our small part of Eretz Yisrael. We, too, lost the fight. And we, too, went into exile.


OPERATION DIGNITY continues to aid families in need and those moving into caravillas in various locations.

Send contributions earmarked for OPERATION DIGNITY to

Central Fund for Israel
Rehov Hagoel 13
Efrat 90435
Earmarked: Band-Aid Fund


Central Fund for Israel
attention: Arthur Marcus
Marcus Bros. Textiles
980 Sixth Avenue
New York, NY 10018 USA
Earmarked: Band-Aid Fund

Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe lived in Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif, Gaza, Israel. She was a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council. Her recent book, "Eviction: A Gush Katif Viewpoint", with photos by Moti Sender can be ordered from www.pavilionpress.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Ben Ariel, May 17, 2006.

The Toledo Blade were truly "One of America's Great Newspapers" it would never run a Reuters' picture with the deceptive caption -- "Protecting Palestinian Children" -- which they did today, while ignorantly editorializing about Hamas elsewhere, expecting the leopard to change its spots. The byline underscores the chutzpah of The Toledo Blade to mislead readers that Jewish "settlers" (prejudicial term meant to demonize the Jews and evoke negative images rather than reflect the hard-working members of the Jewish pioneering communities built on biblical lands) had clashed with the "children" and now the army must protect the "children," as if they were innocent lambs rather than ticking time bombs sent by beasts.

Could these be the same children that are raised in a poisonous environment of murderous hatred, where their twisted parents encourage them to become suicide bombers and lament when they commit mass murder against Israeli men, women, children and babies in strollers, that they didn't have more children to offer to Allah against the Jewish Israelis as martyrs? Such children blowing themselves to bits definitely bears witness to the insanity the Nazi-Muslims are afflicted with (by the jinn of jihad) and how irresponsible and negligent their perverse parents prove themselves to be.

Are these the same children we regularly see on television taunting Israeli soldiers, playing with fire, throwing rocks and insults with no parents around to protect them and keep them safe from harm and far away and at home like normal people? Why doesn't The Toledo Blade report on Hamas hate-comics for kids?

The (Muslim) Blade has perpetuated the BIG LIE, the Luciferian myth of the persecuted "Palestinians." The (Muslim) Blade aids and abets terrorism, hiding behind "Palestinian" children, rather than honestly report that it is Jewish children who need protecting from such Fatah fodder who blow up Israeli buses, Israeli cafes and Israeli malls. However, Israel would do well to take such "Palestinian" children into "protective custody" and remove them to the safe-keeping of their ancestral Arab countries of origin. Meir Kahane was right: "They must go!"

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 Shaul and Aviva Ceder, May 17, 2006.

This was written by Dennis Prager and appeared yesterday in Jewish World Review (www.JewishWorldReview.com).

Some recent news items about Jews aiding enemies of the Jews:

Last week, professor Noam Chomsky went to Lebanon to speak at the headquarters of Hezbollah. As described by the BBC, not a media friend of Israel, "Hezbollah's political rhetoric has centered on calls for the destruction of the state of Israel," and Hezbollah has been "synonymous with terror, suicide bombings and kidnappings." The terror group's views on the need to annihilate the Jewish state are identical to those of Hamas and Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Chomsky announced his support for Hezbollah and its need to be militarily strong.

Also last week, an ultra-Orthodox rabbi from Vienna, a member of a [tiny and powerless] Jewish sect [that has been condemned by the entire fervently-religious world] called Neturei Karta, went to Stockholm to meet with a Palestinian Hamas official to help raise funds for Hamas. Hamas is, of course, dedicated to annihilating Israel, as is Neturei Karta, an Orthodox Jewish fringe group that believes no Jewish state should exist unless founded by G-d. It therefore supports Palestinian and other Muslim groups that murder Jews in Israel.

In March, a group of five Neturei Karta rabbis from Britain and the United States went to Tehran to lend their support to the Iranian regime in its calls for the annihilation of Israel. The group said nothing about the Iranian regime's repeated denials that there was a Holocaust.

This week, the University of California at Irvine Muslim Student Union is sponsoring a series of lectures under the heading, "Holocaust in the Holy Land" and "Israel: The Fourth Reich." Featuring activists committed to Israel's destruction, its lead speaker is a Jew named Norman Finkelstein, a professor who devotes his life to attacking Jewish communities and Israel. Also appearing is Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss from the above-mentioned Neturei Karta.

Tony Judt, a widely published New York University professor, recently wrote that "Israel, in short, is an anachronism," and should therefore cease to exist. The Jews of Israel should live under Arab/Muslim rule. Note that of all the countries of the world, Judt -- who the Jewish newspaper The Forward identified as "raised in the heavily Jewish East End section of London by a mother whose parents had immigrated from Russia and a Belgian father who descended from a line of Lithuanian rabbis" -- has advocated the disappearance of one country, the Jewish one. Why, for example, does Judt not write that Pakistan, a Muslim state carved out of India, is an "anachronism"?

Jews siding with the Jews' enemies or even actually fomenting Jew-hatred has a history that long predates Chomsky, Finkelstein, leftist Jewish professors and the Neturei Karta. Karl Marx, though baptized a Christian, was the grandson of two Orthodox rabbis but wrote one of the most anti-Semitic tracts of the 19th century, "On the Jewish Question." In it he wrote, among other anti-Semitic charges, that "Money is the jealous god of Israel, beside which no other god may exist."

How is one to explain these Jews who work to hurt Jews?

I think the primary explanations are psychological. As I wrote in a previous column, it is almost impossible to overstate the pathological effects of thousands of years of murder of Jews -- culminating in the Nazi Holocaust, when nearly all Jews on the European continent were murdered -- have had on most Jews.

It is not coincidental that Norman Finkelstein's parents went through the Holocaust or that Yisroel Dovid Weiss's grandparents were murdered in the Holocaust. But even Jews who lost no relatives in the Holocaust fear another outbreak of anti-Jewish violence, and given the Nazi-like anti-Semitism in the Muslim world today, that is not exactly paranoia.

One way to deal with this is to side with the enemy. Consciously or not, the Jew who sides with those dedicated to murdering Jews feels that he will be spared. He becomes the "good Jew" in the anti-Semites' eyes. How else to explain the visit of a Jew named Noam Chomsky to Lebanon to support Hezbollah or the fact that Chomsky wrote the foreword to a French book denying the Holocaust? How else to explain Norman Finkelstein telling cheering German audiences that the Jewish state is morally the same as the Nazis? How else to explain rabbis visiting Tehran to extol the Holocaust-denying regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran that seeks to exterminate Israel?

The other psychological explanation is related. The Jew -- specifically the radical Jew -- who sympathizes with Jew-haters wishes to announce to the world that he is not really like other Jews. While the other Jews are moored in provincial Jewish ethnic or religious identity, he is a world citizen who no more identifies with the Jews' fate than with the fate of Iroquois Indians.

The prevalence of Jew-hating Jews would be no more than an interesting study of psychopathology were it not for one additional fact: All these [born-]Jews (except for the fringe Neturei Karta rabbis) also hate America. And they do the same damage to this country -- aiding the enemies of America just as they do the enemies of the Jews.

Contact the Ceders at ceder@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, May 17, 2006.

From the moment of recognising the right of Jewish people to live on the land of their ancestors, the international community, represented by the League of Nations and the United Nations, have made all possible efforts to deny the Jewish people this right. Led and controlled by the Great Britain and France, those institutions rubberstamped and authorised the greatest legalised robbery in modern history. Any conceivable shady and disgusting deal was made to prevent the creation of the state of Israel on Eretz Israel (Land of Israel)!

The Palestine Mandate. July 24, 1922.

In July 1922, the League of Nations entrusted the Great Britain with The Palestine Mandate. Recognizing "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine," Great Britain was called upon to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine - Eretz Israel (Land of Israel).

Preamble. Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people...

Article 2. The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble...

Article 5. The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power...

Three months later, in order to obtain full control over Suez canal, the Great Britain made a deal with the Hashemite Kingdom, Egypt and France. The trans-Jordan (77% of the Mandate) was given to the king's brother in exchange for the Sinai, which was given to Egypt. The Golan Heights (5% of the Palestinian Mandate) was ceded to the French-controlled Syrian Mandate. This robbery was legalised immediately by the puppet of the Great Britain and France, the League of Nations! It was a clear violation of the Article 5 of the Palestinian Mandate. Our 'friends' are still quite generous with giving away the Jewish land!

Between 1922 and 1948, Jews were not allows to move and live in the Trans-Jordan, but Great Britain and the Arab sheikhs facilitated the transfer of ten of thousands of Muslims to the Western side of the Palestinian Mandate. They were brought by truck loads from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Egypt to the remaining part of the Mandate. At the same time, the immigration of the Jews was restricted and continuously hindered by Great Britain, the governing authority.

At the end, in it's 'generosity', the United Nation divided the remaining 18% of the Palestinian Mandate into a maze of six ugly triangles. Three of them were given to Jews, Jerusalem was not included! It was 'internationalized'.

The Jewish people have been systematically robbed by the International community of their land rights. Our rights and inspirations have been ignored and crushed by the cruelty of International anti-Semitism! Why do Jewish leaders subscribe to the anti-Israel lies of our enemies? Why are Israeli political leaders not demanding the return of the Jewish land? We have all legal, historical, moral and spiritual rights to reclaim the Palestine Mandated lands as - Eretz Israel!

Olmert plans to speak before Congress and is going to ask for loan guarantees to implement another deportation of Jews from their lands in Judea and Samaria. Money must be used to encourage Arab enemies to leave the Jewish land! - US have informed Israel not to beg for funding Deportation of Jews. Even US does not want to be a part of this ludicrous Treachery.

Food for Thought

I agree with PLO and Hamas that Jordan is Palestine - the Jewish Palestine. There are 60 Muslim states, including 21 Arab ones, excluding Jordan.

Israel Transfers Funds to PA. In the shadow of the decision of the Quartet forum to establish an international mechanism to infuse humanitarian funds into the PA, Israel has decided to follow with a transfer of NIS 50 million ($11 million). In addition, Peretz has also indicated he may relax restrictions at border crossings between Israel and Gaza (No wonder every one thinks that Israel is always 'joking'!)

U.N. Concerned. Geir Pederson, the U.N. secretary general's representative in Lebanon expressed the United Nations' "concern at the recent increase in violations by Israeli aircraft of Lebanese airspace" and called on Israel to stop all such flights. (UN is not at all concerned about Hezbollah's hostile actions against Israel!)

Our Enemies Must Pay their Bills. Israeli company Dor-Alon had cut its supplies to the PA due to millions of dollars of unpaid bills - $28.9 million. (How about unpaid water and electricity bills? They hate and kill us, but we give them a 'free ride'!)

Hamas Asked for Fighters and Money. "We ask all the people in surrounding Arab countries, the Muslim world and everyone who wants to support us to send weapons, money and men," the Hamas' political leader, Khaled Meshaal, said Wednesday in a speech in Qatar. (IDF also should help Hamas and send some bullets and rockets toward Hamas leadership and its terror loving thugs!)

Quote of the Week:

"No Jew has the right to yield the rights of the Jewish people in Israel. No Jew has the authority to do so. No Jewish body has the authority to do so. Not even the entire Jewish people alive today have the right to yield any part of Israel." By David Ben-Gurion

"Stop listening to teaching that contradicts what you know is right" - Proverb 19:27

"To be or Not to be" - the Israel Style. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said last Wednesday no deadline has been set for implementation of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's unilateral withdrawal plan. Justice Minister Haim Ramon said there is. (It is easy to control and deceive the public in the present climate of uncertainty!)

Hundreds Millions Spend on Guns. Last week military sources reveal Hamas executed the biggest arms transaction in its history - $250,000 cash deal with Sinai arms smugglers. (Western countries are looking for 'Creative', means -- hidden ways -- to aid PA) The United Nations, U.S., European Union and Russia agreed to provide direct aid to Palestinians, bypassing their Hamas-controlled government (It did not take long! They have put money into just another pocket of the same suit!)

Hebron Eviction just a Test. Ehud Olmert's government has come through its first trial of strength with Jewish settlers after the police forcibly evicted three families and 27 young supporters squatting in the West Bank town of Hebron. The police deployed 700 men and women, backed by a cordon of 1,000 soldiers to keep out settler reinforcements. (Who are the enemies, Ehud?)

Israeli Company for $4 Billion. American billionaire Warren Buffett of Omaha, Nebraska purchased 80% of the Iscar Metalworking Companies (IMC), owned by the Wertheimer family, for four billion dollars. The deal makes the Wertheimer family the wealthiest in Israel. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert welcomed the purchase. (Strangely, such a huge deal was not scrutinised and immediately was 'welcomed'. The deal was announced the next day after Olmert's government officially took the power.)

Comments on Comments:

"The right of existence of the state of Israel must never be questioned," -- German chancellor Angela Merkel
The existence is not enough! We want all our land back, respect and equality, as granted to any other country.

Saving the Enemies. A Hamas plot to assassinate PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has been thwarted after he was tipped off by Israeli intelligence. Hamas' military wing, the Iz a-Din al-Qassem, had planned to kill Abbas at his office in Gaza. At least 3 Palestinian gunmen were killed in the worst outbreak of Hamas-Fatah infighting last week. (We should let them reduce the number of the Jewish enemies by killing each other.)

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict - independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@mail2world.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 17, 2006.

The email below is anecdotal. It is from a contact out-of-state. I cannot verify it. But it fits into a pattern that I, and many others working in the area of Israel advocacy, have experienced.

Notice that the student went to a 'revision' class in American history. The focus was on American "imperialism". Notice too that her answer is sponteneous and sincere.

Arab propaganda, the "Arab narrative" about Israel and Jews, and the anti-Semitism of the American far Left....they are winning the battle for the next generation's hearts and minds when it comes to Jews and Israel.

The pattern is clear and simple.

De-legitimize Israel.

Then show the control that Israel has over American government and media and economy and finance via American Jews loyal to Israel (aka neo-cons), per Walt and Mearsheimer.

That way you de-legitimize American Jews. Since they control the strings of government and finance, and they bend the policy of the American government away from bona fide American interests and toward Israeli/Jewish interests; therefore they are disloyal, even traitorous, to the USA.

What's next?

Well, if we follow the pattern of Arab anti-Jewish diatribes in the Moslem world, the next step is to de-humanize the Jews. Jews are descendents of pigs and apes. They are demonic. They suck blood, Moslem blood. They must be exterminated as a benefit to the world. Killing Jews pleases Allah.

When Hitler de-humanized the Jews, it was the preparatory step before the gas chambers.

Dear XXXX,

My son is currently at university. Yesterday he received the message (below) from a fellow student. They are understandably shocked at the sentiments expressed. I have his permission to forward the message so that people are aware of what is happening in our universities.

This is his letter:

Wanted to share with you a momentous event of my day...

I went along to a revision class on American foreign policy at the history department this afternoon.

We began looking at U.S. Imperialism from 1898. Moving onto to WWI and the inter-war years, we arrived at WWII.

The professor began: "If anyone could tell me some of the fundamental reasons which might explain the US decision to enter WWII, either long- term or short-term factors."

At which point one girl put up her hand and offered the following: "I suppose a fundamental cause, if not the primary cause would be the presence of Jewish organisations and lobby groups exercising diproportionate influence over the White House, placing pressure on the President to send American soldiers into battle. Jewish interest groups controlling the government consciously advanced Jewish interests over the American tradition of isolation."

At this point the professor burst out laughing: "That might be an interesting conspiracy theory, but I think Nazi Germany's aggressive statements of intent, public pressure at home might be a better place to start."

This is a 2nd year history student planning to answer an examination question on the motivations behind American entry into WWII.


Notice that she offers her answer in class to the professor (and the rest of the class) without hesitation or doubt. For her, the Jewish "cabal" runs the world. It is not an issue for debate, or something about which there may be some doubt. For her, it is reality. And, she assumes, it is so obvious that it will be reality too for all to whom she expounds it.

Happily in this case, the professor de-legitimized her answer and moved on.

She is a sophomore. This year's sophomore is next year's Senator.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 17, 2006.


No, not "divide and conquer" the Arabs, but "divide and conquer" the settlers. Now the government has decided to divide the Ariel bloc, in its fence-and-retain mapping. Residents find this further evidence that the government touting of its retaining settlement blocs is false. Rather, the government is making them untenable by splitting them up and exposing them to Arab depredation. The government is bringing the borders back to the pre-war, Green Line, hoping to hide behind a fence (IMRA, 4/30).

There would be a million Arabs on the Israeli side of the fence. What about them, into whose residential areas police fear to enter, and whose government is hostile towards Zionism and Judaism?


The major crossing point for food between Gaza and Israel, the Karni Crossing, closes when Israel learns of Arab plans to attack there. Recently, Israel apprehended three trucks of terrorists, arms, and explosives, moving towards such an attack. The men were under command of PFLP. They were armed, trained, and supervised, however, by Hamas. Hamas also sponsored another group's assassination of a security chief related to Arafat Thus, while Hamas proclaims it is in a truce with Israel, it sponsors terrorism against Israel and against rival groups (IMRA, 5/1).

Hamas threatens to end its truce unless Israel makes some concessions to it. But the truce is phony. Earlier, we reported that Hamas gave its missiles to other groups, to launch against Israel, then says, as if innocent, that its men did not fire them.


In Washington D.C., many prominent agitators for war on Sudan protest against the US war on Iraq. They want the US to overthrown the genocidal Sudan regime, but object to its having overthrown the genocidal Saddam regime (NY Sun, 4/30).

What is the difference between the two types of genocide? Could it be, as conservatives suspect, because the war on Iraq is meant to enhance US security?


Amnon Rubinstein, president of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel, thinks that Europe is rescinding its multicultural kowtowing to Islam. He cites these examples: (1) Britain upheld a school ban on Muslim dress as consistent with freedom of religion; (2) Holland and Denmark tightened immigration laws, and some EU countries demand that immigrants prove their acceptance of Western values; (3) The Archbishop of York called multiculturalism un-English; (4) A BBC news-reader said the London subway bombing shows up multiculturalism; (5) The head of the British commission for Racial Equality said multiculturalism is obsolete, teach Shakespeare(; (6) Congress punishes female genital mutilation). Not all cultures are equal; some are too abusive to be accepted (NY Sun, 5/1, Op.-Ed.). The opposite trend is continuing at the same time. Will Western culture be upheld and restored in time and without itself becoming abusive?


Sen. McCain wants to micromanage US policy on the Arab-Israel conflict, bring in James Baker or Brent Scowcroft to run it, and expects Arab states to help in making peace. He thinks that Abbas is "a good man" but weak. Both sides should make step-by-step concessions, but in general Israel should retreat to the Green Line left as the armistice from the 1967 war (IMRA, 5/1). What is sacred about an armistice line?

The State Dept. mismanages US policy on the Arab-Israel conflict, terrorism, etc.. Therefore, a President should clean out the State Dept., bring in a wise trustee, and micromanage foreign affairs. But such a President would have to understand the issues and pick a decent and intelligent advisor. Sen. McCain's statements reveal himself as leaving much to be desired in that regard.

Baker and Scowcroft are hostile to Israel and therefore to US interests. Their policies failed. McCain does not understand that the Arabs want not just more land but to rule if not kill more infidels. He'd fail, too, as the non-thinking Establishment usually does.


Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney's April "Report to New York" expresses her views on four key issues in the introduction, and then polls constituents on those and other issues. For example, "While we wait for a clear strategy form the administration with regard to the situation in Iraq, several in Congress, including Rep. John Murtha, have articulated sensible policies for withdrawing our troops from Iraq, which I support." Her questionnaire put it like this: "Since the president declared 'Mission Accomplished' in May 2003, we have lost more than 2,000 of our troops in the Iraq War. It's evident that the public and Congress were not given the full picture in the lead-up to the war. Do you support Rep. John Murtha's plan to withdraw American troops from Iraq as soon as we are capable of doing so? Yes, No, Undecided."

The introduction evaluates the economy this way: "Due to this administration's lack of fiscal discipline, it has run up record debts and deficits over the past few years. This is a serious problem that could jeopardize our economy for years to come." Questionnaire: "The federal government's debt limit was recently increased to $8.96 trillion -- it has been raised $3.01 trillion since 2001. The federal government ran a deficit of $319 billion for fiscal year 2005, five years after running a record surplus. Do you think the Bush administration's economic policies have caused these problems"?

Question #1: "The administration is trying to cut costs by closing veterans health centers around the country, including one or both of the Veterans Hospitals in Manhattan and Brooklyn. The Manhattan location has six Centers of Excellence and the only prosthetic lab in the Northeast. Do you think it makes sense to close these veterans hospitals"

My comments: (1) Many questions are slanted or are preceded by a tendentious introduction; (2) Questions are asked without giving the other side -- for instance, we don't hear the rationale for closing the hospitals; and (3) Both parties in Congress passed the budget and pressed for more spending; she blames the President for what her colleagues shared in. This is a push poll. It is not valid.


Ariel Sharon's advisor, Dov Weissglas is the new chair of the Bezeq communications monopoly, heavily regulated by the government he participated in. IMRA comments that this is another instance of the alliance between the 18 business families that own most of Israeli "private" industry and the government that regulates them (5/3).

Democracy in Israel may be said to consist of the people choosing from among the representatives of big business.

Mr. Weissglas was the P.A.'s lawyer while officially representing Israel in negotiations with the P.A.. It is an unpatriotic conflict of interest. A predecessor of his did the same. Peres and the Sharons have investments in the P.A. and in the so-called peace process.

Corruption that involves just a percentage is crooked but only of economic harm. Corruption that involves selling out one's country, as Peres and the Sharons do, is far worse. Their fellow Israelis keep getting killed, because those corrupt politicians make money from the enemy. Those politicians lack religious or nationalist ties.


Pollard petitioned the Supreme Court of Israel to bar Rafi Eitan from the Cabinet as unfit. He was the key person who kept Pollard in the US, when already suspected of spying, who barred Pollard from entering the Israeli embassy for asylum, who let false accusations be made against Pollard, who let his man be thought a rogue rather than an agent, and who in failing to protect Israel's agent proved himself unfit to protect the country as a whole. Pollard accuses Eitan of failing to return to the US a secret document that might satisfy the US that all the purloined documents had been returned, and might enable them to close the case and release Pollard. Instead, he let Pollard be the scapegoat and stay in prison (IMRA, 5/2).

If he had returned the document, some of the anger by the US intelligence services would have been dissipated. Therefore, not returning it was harmful to Israel. If he had disproved some of the false accusations against Pollard, the infamy of the case would have been reduced. Perhaps he was protecting higher-ups. But if he had given Pollard refuge, there would have been a crisis in US-Israel relations.


When Chief of Staff Halutz ran the Air Force, he considered a near miss as if a hit (for the damage and risk from it). Now he implies that the near misses by missiles landing around the fuel depots, which, when they did strike, would kill many Israelis, are not consequential. He implies it by arguing that Israelis are safer now, because since the abandonment of Gaza, none have been killed by attacks from Gaza. Besides, he argues, they were fired on by mortars, before. Yes, but that earlier danger occurred because the military was not allowed to pursue the terrorists. As he puts it, the rocket landings on Gaza don't matter until they succeed, though a hit is only a matter of time. He has acquired the short-sighted military perspective of politicians. That is typical of Israeli military brass when considering switching over to politics (IMRA, 5/2).

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jack Golbert, May 17, 2006.

This is from David Bedein of Israel Resource ((http://Israelbehindthenews.com). I remember that he did indeed report, in 1993, that Peres had made a commitment to abandon Judea and Samaria and that it was confirmed by his assistant at the time, Yossi Beilin. As he says, no one believed it. Too off the wall. Too hysterical. Obviously the ranting of a right wing loony. Well, it is true and it was true then. It seemed loony because the "mainstream" media (true meaning: tame media) did not report it or even speculate on it. Today they are silent, as if it were of no moment. Not newsworthy. "All the news that fits, we print." This doesn't fit the party line. Reporting this would be inconvenient. It might cause dissention in the ranks. How many times have we been told that a vigorous and diverse press is absolutely essential to the survival of democracy? Explain to me how Israel is a democracy.


While here in Canada, I asked a colleague to cover Peres's presentation in Toronto, where he promises withdrawal, no matter what, from Judea and Samaria, within the year. He made this statement in the presence of Monica's friend, to whom he had given this same commitment in 1993.

My colleague got it into the nfc.co.il website. while no other Israeli media is reporting it.

It was Peres who made the commitment to the US Administration during summer 1993 for a complete relinquishment of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan from Israeli sovereignty - as confirmed by Beilin, his deputy, on December 8th, 1993 in a tape recorded press conference and as confirmed by Steve Rodan in the Jerusalem Post on December 10th 1993. After that, our agency distributed the Beilin statement under "poodle productions" for all to hear.

No one believed this at the time. Now the time has come to believe and to act accordingly.

The theme has to be: withdrawal a threat to Gush Dan and to the rest of Israel - not only to the people who live in Judea and Samaria and...the Golan.


Professor Ya'akov Golbert is a Director, The New Jewish Agency for the Reconstruction of Eretz Yisrael.

To Go To Top

Posted by Batya Medad, May 17, 2006.

It's up to us, ladies!

More and more, when I'm trying to get some real opposition to Olmert's Resettlement Plan to exile us, G-d forbid!, and hand over our precious Land to the Arab terrorists, I've been discovering that the only people with the faith, strength and confidence to fight are my fellow females.

No such thing as "by chance," I ran into a friend yesterday in the bus station, and after talking a bit, kvetching, ranting etc about the horrendously dangerous state the State of Israel and People of Israel are in, we also came to that singular conclusion that we ladies must take charge of saving our Nation.

All of the early stages of "settlement" were made possible because of strong idealistic women. No yishuv could have survived if the women hadn't succeeded in running homes without proper running water, phones, electricity etc. Technology has developed so rapidly, it's hard to remember what life was like pre-cell phones. Just over twenty years ago, phone lines were still hard to get out here, and many communities were on generator supplied electricity. When we came to Shiloh, the water was literally trucked in, and remember that diapers was laundered in those days, not purchased! As if there were local stores then...

Hundreds of women, whether on hilltops or in downtown Hebron, braved tough conditions to establish Jewish communities in our Homeland. And today, it is again up to us to preserve these homes!

Join our struggle for the survival of our state, Land and People!!

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, May 16, 2006.

There is a certain grim attitude that hangs over the nation of Israel due to many factors. The leading indicator is that there is no leadership which elevates pride in the nation.

Ehud Olmert may be Prime Minister but, unlike Ariel Sharon, he is well-recognized as a man of few ethics and definitely not a role model for the younger, middle aged or elderly Israeli people. Olmert is merely looked upon as one who must be dealt with as if Israel's life-and-death issues were being decided upon in an Arab 'shuk' (market).

One bargains with Olmert to get a financial reward or possibly a position in government. The Jewish nation doesn't look to him as if he is a man capable of facing the closing circle of Arabs with courage, skill and a modicum of cleverness. We have already seen him treat the problem of security by appointing a Labor Party hack, Amir Peretz, as Defense Minister. Peretz has zero experience in fighting wars except as a union organizer who would take the nation out on strike when the country was suffering in critical points of time. Amir Peretz is NOT a Defense Minister who the military will look to for guidance.

The Knesset (Parliament) similarly has such problems, pretending that their mere presence is offering guidance to the Nation. While there are always a few people of quality who are actually competent, most Knesset members spend their time gossiping in the Knesset dining room or on personal projects. The Knesset members stay closed and comfortable in their own private affairs. They very rarely go out into the field to visit trouble spots lest someone ask them to actually do something constructive. They hardly ever pay a condolence visit to bring the country's support to a bereaved family. In brief, they are a useless lot but, a perfect companion to a useless government.

Worse yet, they agreed to the Sharon/Olmert Expulsion-Exile from Gush Katif/Gaza with no preparation or followup to assist the 10,000 Jewish men, women and children torn away from their homes, jobs, farms, schools, synagogues and even cemeteries. Where are the members of Knesset now that these 10,000 good, hard-working Jews are without income, jobs or homes? Where else but in the Knesset dining room, feeding and discussing avoidance of responsibility?

Even worse to come is Olmert's threatened "Convergence" - Exile, to take at least another 60,000 to 250,000 Jewish men, women and children from their homes. The Knesset is primed with just those members who are likely to vote for this crime against our humanity.

Mostly the Knesset members strive for media interviews, hoping their words of 'wisdom' will make it into one of the Hebrew Leftist papers. Such dedicated public servants and problem solvers such as Uzi Landau, are no longer there simply because the Likud Party under Netanyahu and Silvan Shalom lost in the elections.

Clearly, the people are disheartened and drifted over to the vague promises of a new party, Kadima, floating on the memory of Arik Sharon when he was a great warrior before he gave up vital parts of the country which he had helped to build.

Olmert claimed that the recent Knesset election vote was a mandate when it wasn't because he (his Kadima Party) received so few seats. Olmert also claimed this thin vote was a referendum on his policies when he virtually offered no definitive policies prior to his election.

The Sharon-Olmert flight from Gaza has turned into a growing nightmare as improved Kassam Rockets and Katyusha Missiles like the Russian Grad Missiles are being launched with impunity into Israeli cities, towns and villages. The deadly missiles are aimed at the country's vital electric power station and fuel tank farm in Ashkelon. I suspect that only when one of those tanks are hit and a poison cloud drifts North over Tel Aviv will the nation reach a sufficient level of shock to eject what may be the most incompetent government Israel has ever had.

Regrettably, the Jews of Israel have grown so accustomed to being hit by Terrorists - roadside bombing, suicide/homicide bombing, sniper shooting ambushes, thousands of Kassam Rockets, Katyusha Missiles - that when fewer than 10 Jews are killed, it makes little impression. I suspect that only when there are, G-d forbid, 50 or 100 deaths will there be an adrenalin rush and the government's long sleep will be ended.

Who might be qualified to come to the rescue now that Arik Sharon is no longer able to act the great general. There has been talk of Gen. (Ret.) Moshe (Boogi) Allon, former Chief of Staff rising to this challenge. Although he known as a political Leftist, he never let that interfere with his capability of running the military.

There is also credible talk of President Moshe Katzav as a possible candidate to lead and revive the Likud Party. He would replace both Bibi Netanyahu and Silvan Shalom if they would step aside with some grace (not likely). President Katzav has shown himself to be an ethical President and is generally liked by the people and respected by influentials abroad.

Israel desperately needs a radical clean-up and clean-out of her entire political system. This may not happen until there is a saturation missile attack, demonstrating that the Government from the PM through the Knesset and the politically-driven top officer corps in the Army and Police are all simply incapable of governing the nation - let alone protecting her.

If the future of Israel is dependent upon PM Olmert, the Kadimites, the radical Left-leaning Supreme Court of Aharon Barak, a Police Department turned rogue and extremely political and a sluggish Knesset there will be no future. The valiant IDF (Israel Defense Forces) are chasing after Arab Muslim Terrorists while ordered to remove good patriotic Jews from their homes and thus have been prevented from training vigorously and arming prodigiously to face the accumulating Arab Muslim coalitions and defiantly putting the Terrorists down - then there might be a future for the Jewish State of Israel.

Of course, there is always the remote possibility that the people will recognize their peril in time and rise up to throw the rascals 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). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Shmuel Sackett, May 16, 2006.
Iyar 5766 (May, 2006)

For 2,000 years, while stuck in the exile, Jews prayed towards Jerusalem. These prayers were not merely in the direction of Jerusalem... they were about Jerusalem. Every Jew dreamt of the day when he would return to the holy city.

More than just mentioning Jerusalem in his prayers three times a day, the Jew of old was totally immersed in the thought that one day -- very soon -- the dark and bitter punishment would end and he would dance in the streets of Jerusalem. What joy that brought him! The mere mention of the word "Jerusalem" would bring a smile to his lips!

Unfortunately, however, for the overwhelming majority of Jews, this dream did not become a reality and the exile was not only where they lived, but also where they died. Throughout Jewish history, most Jews never even saw a picture of Jerusalem, let alone the real thing. But they never stopped dreaming...

How things have changed! Woe unto us that we do not share the dreams of our holy grandparents. While it is true that we still face Jerusalem in our synagogues and private prayers, the dream of living there has ended. Yes, we visit Jerusalem and touch the holy Wall but we also visit Orlando and touch Mickey. Yes, our children study there for a year, as long as they know how important it is to come home for Pesach and especially when the year is up. "Harvard and NYU will not wait", we tell our children as we comfort them by adding, "Don't worry, you can go back for winter vacation."

Compare these modern day thoughts and actions to G-d's archenemy, the Arabs. They fight for Jerusalem. Every word out of their mouths is about Jerusalem. Even though they know that Jerusalem is not even mentioned one time in the entire Koran (as compared to over 700 times in the Bible!) they talk about living there, building there, growing there and worshipping their false prophet there. Even more than that; they are prepared to die for Jerusalem!

For these murderers, Jerusalem is not something to negotiate. They will never relinquish their false claim that Jerusalem is one of Islam's holiest cities. They are so committed and dedicated to winning this struggle that every Israeli government, IDF general and police chief is scared to death about confronting or even provoking them. Building in East Jerusalem has tripled in the last 5 years and 90% of this has been done illegally. As Jews apply for permits to hang mailboxes outside their doors (yes, I am serious) Arabs build 10 family homes in the Old City and populate them with terrorists.

What has happened to us? A better question might be; When did this happen to us? When did we stop dreaming like Jews? When did we sell our birthright for a bowl of lentil soup? For 2,000 years our grandparents longed for the holy city and never made it. Today, even though three simple clicks on the internet can get you a ticket... we don't do it. Instead, it is our bitter enemy, Yishmael, who seeks to claim the inheritance he was never given.

The source of our new and un-Jewish thinking can be traced to a weird and unique punishment that has befallen the Jewish People since World War II. Most Jews see it as a blessing but I am certain it is a curse? one of the worst we have ever experienced as a people. That punishment is called, "wealth". While many of our brothers and sisters are struggling financially, most Jews today in the Western world have more money than ever before. Needless to say, money can be a wonderful thing. Tremendous amounts of good can -- and is -- being done with these resources.

The problem, however, is that affluence can also be a curse. Excessive money breeds excessive dreams. Playing golf in Boca Raton, skiing in Switzerland, cruises to Alaska (with great chazzonim!) and glatt kosher Club Med vacations become within our reach, so why not get them? The Wall in Jerusalem is important, but we can now also visit the Great Wall of China! The mountains of the Shomron are beautiful but for a few bucks, or a swipe of one of our ten credit cards, we can see the mountains of Sweden as well. Pesach in Israel is gorgeous but so is Pesach in Puerto Rico where exclusive chefs prepare non-gebrokhts pizza and lasagna. Amazing!!!

Our grandparents barely had money for clothing. Buying new shoes was a rare treat that brought tears to the eyes of Jewish children. Today?? New shoes make you cry? Even cell phone bills don't make anyone cry anymore! The curse of wealth in today's Jewish world has gotten so out of hand that we have been transformed into a new and different creature.

The Arabs in Israel do not have this wealth. For many years I wondered why the trillionaire Sheiks in Saudi Arabia didn't share their wealth with their "poor and oppressed" brothers. Now I know. This money would have ruined them! Had these Sheiks sent their spare billions to the Arabs in Israel, they too would have become "Westernized" and stopped dreaming about holy cities. Instead, the Sheiks keep the money for themselves, travel around the world, buy luxurious diamonds, eat in the fanciest restaurants, just like... You get the point.

So what can be done? Are we doomed forever with our punishment of Las Vegas vacations, fur coats and boat shopping? No! Our holy Rabbis have told us that G-d never gives us a test we cannot pass and this is no exception! The first thing we must do is to acknowledge and admit that this is indeed a punishment. That will be very hard for most people but it is a prerequisite for solving the problem. I am not saying that we should immediately run to our bank, withdraw all the cash and burn it. Rather, we should admit the painful truth that the more money we get, the more distant we grow from our ancestors.

Instead of using that money to bring us closer to the ultimate dream of living in Jerusalem, we are using it to propel us even further away! That money is helping us dig in way too deep in the exile. Our houses are getting larger, our driveways are filling up with bigger SUV's and the Jerusalem we see in our rear view mirror is getting smaller and smaller.

The first thing I urge you to do is buy an apartment in Jerusalem. Old city, new city, Nachlaot, Rechavia, Ramot, Har Nof... it doesn't matter at all. Get yourself a piece of property in Jerusalem. This instantly makes Jerusalem a part of your life! I guarantee that once you own this real estate, you will travel to Israel a lot more frequently. You will smile every time you mention the word "Jerusalem" in your prayers since it will no longer be just a word but an actual part of your life!

Think of the tears of joy your great-grandparents will shed in the heavens as they see a child of theirs bring their unfulfilled dream to fruition. Think of our father Isaac who will see descendants of his -- and not Yishmael's -- buying land and building the holy city. Finally, think of the King of Kings as He watches His children use the money He has bestowed upon them for good, productive things as opposed to many of the silly items being purchased today.

Dearest friends; we have all sung the words, "If I forget thee oh Jerusalem... The time has come to stop singing and start acting. Make Jerusalem a part of your life and in the merit of that action may G-d turn our prayer, "Next Year in Jerusalem" into a reality for Jews across the globe!

If you take this article seriously and are interested in learning more about purchasing property in Jerusalem or elsewhere in Israel, contact our real estate experts at: jerusalem@jewishisrael.org for information and advice (free).

Shmuel Sackett is International Director, Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), which is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Buddy Macy, May 16, 2006.

This essay was written by Steve Feldman, who wrote,"Wrote this Wednesday, spur of the moment, inspired by Jerry Verlin of the terrific "Brith Sholom Media Watch."

As surely as the swallows will return to San Juan Capistrano and the sun will rise in the east, newspapers and television throughout the world will have stories in the next few days about the "tragedy" or "catastrophe" that happened 58 years ago on May 14.

Do yourself a favor and do not pull a brain muscle attempting to recall what disaster may have taken place on that spring day. There was no hurricane, no earthquake, no train wreck or building collapse. There wasn't even a flood (in the usual sense).

No, May 14, 1948 marked the day that a people gained independence in their homeland --a place where they have lived continuously for 3,500 years -- after surviving the Roman conquest, expulsion from England, the Spanish Inquisition, the Nazi Holocaust and a thousand other attempts to eliminate the Jewish people.

The Jewish people finally were granted control of their own destiny and have their own nation again after being stateless for nearly 2,000 years. Israel was re-established on a little speck of land awarded to the Jewish people by the British (The Balfour Declaration of 1917), who controlled the territory; sanctioned by the United Nations (originally by the League of Nations in 1922); and recognized immediately by the United States, the Soviet Union and other nations.

It was a dream come true in the eyes of most reasonable people.

But not everyone was happy about this turn of events. While those who would be the leaders of the re-created State of Israel were planning how to co-exist with the Arabs who lived among them, the Muslims -- not content with the 21 Middle East nations they controlled and had an overwhelming majority in, could not tolerate a nation of Jews who controlled their own destiny in their midst.

This is the "catastrophe" or "tragedy" which the Palestinian-Arabs and other Muslims refer to as al-Nakba that you will be reading and hearing about in newspapers, TV and the Web these days: that Jews dare to have a place of their own in the Middle East and live in freedom. The Arabs claimed they were expelled from "their" lands, but the facts remain that it never was "their" land and they were never expelled.

That there is a Jewish and democratic nation of Israel quite literally is against their religion (at least as it is largely interpreted and practiced) and the Koran.

As Edward Luttwak, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted in a recent New York Sun article "Three Myths About Islam," "... under all known schools of Muslim law, Christians and Jews are only allowed to survive as dhimmis, of protected subjects, under a long list of deliberately humiliating restrictions, obligations, and prohibitions. Some are obsolete - they had to pay a head tax, they were not allowed to ride horses as opposed to humble donkeys, and many more - but others remain in force."

Imagine, then, the humiliation among Muslims that Jews dare own land, control their own destiny and have a treasury and an army.

So, on May 15, 1948, rather than roll out the welcome wagon, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria sent their armies to invade Israel. Despite the huge odds against her, Israel prevailed. Israel had to fight again in 1956 when she had a casus belli (just cause) to defend against Egypt, Syria and Jordan after they signed a tripartate military alliance and Egypt kept ships from or bound for Israel from traversing the Suez Canal And 11 years later when the Egyptians and Jordanians allowed terrorists to cross their borders and strike Israel, while Syria repeatedly bombarded Israel with artillery fire and Egypt amassed troops in the Sinai, Israel had to stand up to the threats again.

Israel, the victim of these attacks and the victor in subsequent wars, offered peace and territory to the defeated and aggressor Arab nations. But the Arabs responded with their famous pronouncement: "no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel and no recognition of Israel."

In 1973, the Arab nations attacked again, this time on Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. Again, miraculously, Israel triumphed.

Since then, the Arabs, mostly via the Palestinian-Arab terror war funded and sanctioned by a host of Muslim nations, have continued to try to annihilate Israel by murdering and butchering Israeli civilians scores at a time in a steady stream of homicide bombings and more recently, missile attacks. This despite the fact that Israel has given the Palestinian-Arabs autonomy, offered them some 95 percent of the territory they claim they wanted (including all of the Gaza Strip in 2005) and other concessions.

The killing spree by Muslims continues. So does the incitement and the threats of even more murder and barbarism against Jews. Hundreds of millions of Muslims live in the Middle East on more than 99 percent of the land. But they want it all.

So pay no attention to their myths and fabrications about the alleged injustice they "suffered" upon Israel's re-establishment. The continuing persecution of the Jews is the real tragedy that should be recalled every May 14: That a tiny minority of people cannot live in peace on a little speck of their historic and legitimate homeland after 58 years.

Contact Buddy Macy at vegibud@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 16, 2006.


No longer having troops patrol in Gaza, but under daily and increasing attack by rockets from Gaza, Israeli aircraft fires a few missiles a week at terrorists' cars, as it had done in past years. Every such attack, the P.A. and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights describes as an 'Israeli escalation' (IMRA, 4/27).

It isn't an escalation. But the increasing number of rocket attacks, attacks that were not made perhaps a year ago, are escalation. The Center for Human Rights does not seem to object to them nor admit they are an escalation.


Spain's former Prime Minister Aznar believes that NATO successfully faced down the threat from Communism. The alliance now should turn to the current major threat to the world, Islamist jihad and proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction. The enemy has declared war. NATO should respond, as its major current mission.

To meet the new threat, NATO must reorganize. It should not limit membership geographically, since the menace to it is not geographic but global. Therefore, Israel, Australia, and Japan should be invited to join it. Israeli membership is vital.

NATO needs to face enemies both domestically and from abroad (IMRA, 4/27).

I agree with the new focus of NATO, but Communists still run China and Russia. Let us not forget about them.

NATO is in danger of collapse, as its native birth rate declines and its Muslim population inclines. PM Aznar should have warned Europe to expel Muslims and either raise families or import Christians.


The US report on international trade barriers discusses the Arab boycott of Israel, but ignores the Pakistani boycott of Israel. Neither does the US trade representative to Pakistan discuss that country's boycott. Some Members of Congress think the issue should be in publications and discussions (IMRA, 4/27).

It certainly should be reported. Whether the US should demand its end is a separate subject. The underlying question is whether Pakistan still can be saved from Islamism. How would US pressure against the boycott affect that question?


Secular Jewry claims that the ultra-Orthodox absorb tax revenues disproportionately. Actually: (1) Many rich ones settled in Israel; (2) They pay for much of their schooling; (3) Secular education enjoys special subsidies not counted in the claims; and (4) The large number of drug addicts mostly are secular, and cost society greatly. The ultra-Orthodox may be subsidizing the secularists (Winston Mid East Analysis, 4/27).


Higher oil prices enable the Arabs to buy more food? Clothing? Shelter? Birth control? No, more arms. Syria is replenishing its air force and augmenting its missile force.

Israeli veteran officers who advocate relinquishing the Golan Heights, on the grounds that Syria is weak, mistakenly assume that the military balance of power never shifts (IMRA, 4/28). Military balance is temporary, but territorial concession is permanent.

Besides failing the security test, ceding the Golan fails to: defeat jihad, provide strategic depth, safeguard Israel's water supply, and defend Jewish rights. The Golan is part of the traditional Land of Israel, and was acquired legally. Territorial concessions strengthen the morale and persistence of jihadists.


It should be obvious by now that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Once it had them, it would use them for war and intimidation. On the other hand, Iran is a former and natural ally of the US and is in a strategic position. The US could help protect Iran from Russia, and a moderate Iran could help stabilize the Gulf.

The Red Guards operate many illegal businesses. Adding about 30% to the average cost of goods and services, the Islamists seem to be twice as corrupt as the monarchy. The present regime of Islamism slights the traditional cultures of the country, only half of which is Persian. Most of the people reject the regime also for its extremism and persecutions. They admire America. If the regime were overthrown, it is not likely to be replaced with a similar imperialist menace. Therefore, if the regime can be changed, that would be preferable to military action against it.

We should be leery of bombing a country whose people are particularly friendly towards the US. The regime wants us to bomb it, in order to attract nationalist fervor to its side. We may have time to assist in overthrowing the regime, because the regime is inefficient in nuclear development, as many pro-Americans inform our government in detail. It is those details that would enable the US to bomb the nuclear facilities to good effect, when we must. Meanwhile, we should work on overthrowing that regime that already is fighting us in Iraq, via proxies (Edward N Luttwak, Commentary, 5/2006, p.23).


The US and Israel have pretended that the Arab-Israel conflict is separate from global jihad. Recent announcements from al-Qaida about working with Hamas and its finally targeting Egypt, Jordan, and Israel make clear that it all is one war. Thanks to Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, al-Qaida now has a place to make its headquarters! The government that just withdrew from Gaza is reluctant to return its forces to Gaza, leaving al-Qaida a safe haven. Thus the forces of international jihad now fight against Israel via Palestinian Arabs. The masters of the jihadists are foreigners, not concerned with local issues. Against these forces, Israeli talk of further withdrawals and hiding behind a fence is ludicrous. Israel needs to devise new tactics (IMRA, 4/28 from Caroline Glick).


"There are dozens of 'ungovernable' areas in France: Muslim-dominated suburbs, mainly, where the writ of French law does not run and into which the French police do not go. Similar extraterritorial enclaves, in which shari'a law is enforced by local Muslim clerics, can be found in other European countries." These are their stories: Muslims send many of their children to their homelands for education (and indoctrination); they practice "honor killings;" European welfare systems subsidize the fifth column; Islamic criminals are treated delicately but their critics have to live under guard; native cultural activities and symbols are being eliminated to please Muslims.

"In Malmo Sweden, the country's third-largest city, rapes, robberies, school-burnings, 'honor' killings, and anti-Semitic agitation got so out of hand that large numbers of native Swedes reportedly moved out; the government blamed Malmo's problems instead on Swedish racism, and chastised those who had wrongly conceived of integration" as integrating the immigrants into native society (George Weigel, Commentary, 5/2006, p.32). Sweden blames the Muslims' victims, as it does in the Arab-Israel conflict.

Europeans had better learn to stand up to political correctness and defend their own culture. Secularists think they are gaining a great victory over the declining and relatively benign European forces of Christianity, but they meekly cede the arena to Islam, which is rising and malign. The secularists are abandoning their modern culture and importing a primitive one.


Sweden barred Israel from an air force exercise for allegedly not being peace-seeking. Sweden indicated it would grant visas to Islamists (IMRA, 4/28).

Islamists are, by definition, not peace-seeking. Israel, the repeated victim of Arab aggression, has signed a number of peace agreements. The Swedes are nuts.


British taxpayers subsidize madrassas in Britain, which partly are under control of Iran and whose students are supposed to spend three years in Iran. Many Islamic schools in the West have links to terrorism. (Even if they had no links, they preach the philosophy of jihad.) Such schools teach the duty to fight against Christians and Jews. The schools are taking a literal reading of the Koran that most Muslims do not. Even Muslims are alarmed by the extremism their children are taught. When the government was notified about a school's teaching that non-Muslims are unclean like pigs and dogs, it declined to take action, because, it claimed, no significant harm ensues. But the harm is that the enemy uses our own money to build its infrastructure in our midst (Pipes #669, 4/28).

Criticize Islam in Europe, and risk prosecution. No penalty for criticizing Christianity.

The way a virus operates is by capturing a cell membrane and utilizing the cell to reproduce itself. How like the British madrassas!


Illegal Irish immigrants are furious at Rep. Peter King. For many years, Rep. King championed Irish causes. Now he is sponsoring a bill that would declare illegal immigration not just a misdemeanor but a felony and would imprison those who assist people to enter or stay illegally. They consider that a betrayal.

Rep. King replies that they seem to think he should make an exception for them. He said, "If it's wrong for a Muslim to be living illegally on Atlantic Ave., you can't make a distinction between that and an Irish person." (Daniella Gerson, NY Sun, 4/28, p.3.)

The ethics of those Irish reflect their economic need. They are ungrateful to their champion. It was one thing to help Irish causes when they were legal, but another when they break American law or harm the country King represents. He was helping them when they were deserving, not simply because they are Irish.

Rep. King's ethics are understandable but have been overtaken by events. This is wartime. The enemy is: (1) Definitely Islamists; and (2) Probably Muslims in general. Therefore, there is justification and need to differentiate between them and other immigrants. Whatever is decided about other immigrants, Islamists must be expelled and barred. We would be wise to do the same for Muslims in general, for they are the source of Islamists and in general they sympathize with, and are part of, the global Islamic jihad. Would-be destroyers of our country should not be welcomed by it.

Of course, that still leaves no free entry for Irish illegals -- the Irish would be part of the non-Muslim immigration dealt with as less of a threat to national security.


Barry Chamish pointed out that PM Sharon didn't just die, he was killed. He called it murder; others would call it malpractice. Mr. Chamish feels at least partly vindicated by the doctors' confession that they administered dangerous medicine to him, which their profession knows, under the conditions of his leaving the hospital, was life-threatening.

The other suspicious circumstance, that most people won't think of, because to them it is unthinkable, is that Peres dispatched the same bodyguard to Sharon in time for him to die, as he did for Rabin (Chamish, 4/29).

In both cases, the guard delayed getting the stricken Prime Minister to the hospital.


We've known that Mr. Kushner regretted the formation of a Jewish state. Turns out, he is an activist belonging to anti-Zionist and even Communist, antisemitic organizations. He and his organizations speak like Arab propagandists, accusing Israel of "systematically" erasing (the fabricated) Palestinian nationality and of being brutal towards the Arabs (who are brutal towards the Jews). They urge divestment from Israel (4/29). Israel upholeds the fraudulent claim of Palestinian nationality.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Shifra Shomron, May 16, 2006.

The night was cold and I stared into the brilliant fire. Warmth spreads over me; fire, family, friends, food? this was the first holiday this year that hadn't been dampened by the dour drench of Disengagement.

Lag B'Omer is a special holiday; it brings us back to the elementary foundations of our life. Family and friends, we gather together on a cold night around a warm fire, and, between the chicken and the potatoes, we discuss freedom. We discuss Bar Kochva's glorious revolt; the splendid fact that famous Torah scholar Rabbi Akiva and his many students joined the fight, and the tragic failure of the revolution -- including the deaths of 24,000 students-warriors. And though the revolution ended with a Roman victory; Jews killed, Jews exiled, Temple still not rebuilt? Lag B'Omer is a joyous holiday. We stop grieving for the fallen, and instead find courage and joy in the life that they led and in the ideals they fought for -- leading a Torah life in a sovereign Jewish state.

Lag B'Omer is a joyous holiday because in the end they won, we won -- for Rome has vanished, yet the Jewish nation is very much alive. The Jewish nation is back in the Holy Land; blundering and sinning like only the Jewish nation can, Temple still not rebuilt, yet very much alive and with the sweet ability to bring the redemption!

My brothers and I play our recorders. The sweet wistful notes join the stars in heaven. We ignore the cars rushing on the street behind us, and the many lights flickering on the busy road before us. Instead we concentrate on the pleasant, welcome atmosphere we've created. We also concentrate on the golden glow which is steadily, persistently, warming our bones and our souls. They both need to be warmed.

Lag B'Omer. The holiday which marks the day on which 24,000 scholar-soldiers ceased to die. The holiday commemorating Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, who preferred life in a cave while existing solely on carobs and water, than falsely praise Roman abominations in the Holy Land.

When we have such bright figures to show us the way, how can we fail to light a fire in the darkness?!

Shifra Shomron is a refugee from Gush Katif. She and her family live in the Nitzan Caravilla Site, awaiting permanent housing. Contact her at shifra@eimail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ayn Rand Institute, May 16, 2006.

IRVINE, CA -- "The United States, Israel and the European Union should not resume financial aid to the Palestinians," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute.

Through the years, Western governments have given billions of dollars to the Palestinians and their leaders. This drain on Western wealth has been used to promote anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism in Palestinian schools, mosques and media--and to finance suicide bombings in Israeli streets, restaurants and malls. It is disgraceful that Western aid has helped create a terrorist culture and maintain a terrorist regime.

The election victory of Hamas--an Islamic terrorist group committed to the destruction of Israel--further demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians deserve no aid or sympathy. They should be left to suffer the consequences of electing terrorists to rule them.

Dr. Yaron Brook is executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute and a recognized Middle-East expert who has written and lectured on a variety of Middle-East issues. Dr. Brook has served in the Israeli Army Intelligence and has discussed the Israeli-Arab conflict and the war on Islamic totalitarianism on hundreds of radio and TV programs, including FOX News (The O'Reilly Factor, Your World with Neil Cavuto, At Large with Geraldo Rivera), CNN's Talkback Live, CNBC's Closing Bell and On the Money, and a C-SPAN panel of experts on terrorism.

To Go To Top

Posted by Batya Medad, May 16, 2006.

A few years ago, dear friends of ours from our Betar days, Phyllis and Yitzchak Heimowitz, discovered the hard way that the army doesn't give any emotional support to fiances and serious girlfriends of soldiers killed during army service. To correct this failing Phyllis established an organization to help those bereaved women. It is now officially recognized by the Israeli Army, and they work together.

The other night, there was a TV program about it, and I asked my husband to record it for me, which he did. Yesterday I watched it, and realized that my husband had also recorded the show immediately after it. I continued watching. The announcer introduced the subject which was about a farming village in the Galilee which was destroyed during the Israeli War of Independence. The Haganah refused to send reinforcements to protect it, because there were Betarim there. Interesting that the announcer used the term "Betarim," rather than Etzel, which was the term used in the actual film. He could not have had known that Phyllis and Yitz were also Betarim. There was no connection between the two subjects, just a coincidence that they were broadcast the same evening, one after the other.

It was Mishmar HaYarden which was an "independent" agricultural community that "dared" to absorb a unit of Etzel members during the '48 War (the Hagana even once stopped a group with reinforcements from reaching it). As the film shows, the community was literally stolen from the original residents who returned only a year or so later, after being held POWs in Damascus. The land went to Kibbutz Gadot and another moshav. (thanks, Wink)

I am still "reeling" from the horrible story, another example of the hatred of the Israeli Left towards other Israelis. It's totally consistent with the disgraceful period of the "Sezon," when the Haganah handed over names of Etzel and members to the British for them to arrest. And of course the incompresensible attack by the Haganah's Palmach on the Altalena, which had the arms and the manpower to free Jerusalem from the Arabs.

And it continues today, when Jewish communities are destroyed and our precious Land is given to our enemies, called "Disengagement" and "Convergence." And it doesn't help for Jews to be able to prove ownership as we saw in Amona and Hebron.

Last night I saw friends who live in Hebron and told them the story. One of them had read about it and told me that one of the families whose home was taken from him in Mishmar Hayarden has the same last name as one of the families recently thrown out the that Jewish-owned house in Hebron.

No novelist could write it any better...

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 Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 16, 2006.
This article was written by Dan Izenberg and JPost staff and it appeared today in The Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961352568&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

Pensioners Minister Rafi Eitan said on Tuesday that a discreet course of action was necessary to secure the release of Jonathan Pollard, imprisoned in the United States for selling US military secrets to Israel, and refused to sign a petition circulated among MKs demanding that Pollard be let out.

NU-NRP MK Uri Ariel initiated the petition, which has thus far been signed by some 60 MKs from various factions. The document will be submitted to US President George W. Bush via Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who plans to visit Washington next week, Israel Radio reported.

Two weeks ago, Jonathan and Esther Pollard charged in a petition to the High Court of Justice on Monday that Eitan is in possession of a secret document which could gain Pollard's release from prison were he to hand it over to the Americans.

According to the petition, filed by attorneys Nitzana Darshan-Leitner and Larry Dub, the document includes a list of all the classified documents that Pollard handed over to Israel in 1984 and 1985. Darshan-Leitner and Dub called on the High Court of Justice to nullify the provision in the coalition agreement between Kadima and Gil according to which Eitan will serve as a cabinet minister.

Eitan was in charge of a spy operation called Lekem, which enlisted Pollard, then working for the US Navy. Pollard provided information on the deployment of Arab military forces and many other classified information taken from US military intelligence. He was arrested by the FBI on November 21, 1985 and sentenced to life imprisonment.

'Even today, Eitan refuses to help Pollard,' the lawyers wrote. 'For 21 years he has refused to hand over to the Americans or the proper authorities in the Israeli government a document that is in his sole possession and regarding which he holds the only copy, and which the prime minister could use to save Pollard.'


Kol Yisrael Interview: Esther Pollard Responds to Eitan Refusal to Sign Pollard Petition

This was written by Azzam Azzam to Ehud Olmert

Honorable Prime Minister,

According to media reports, it is anticipated that you will be meeting with the president of the United States, George Bush, next week.

As one who well knows what it means to languish unjustly in prison for many long years, I am appealing to you to bring to President Bush an appeal from the Nation of Israel to grant clemency to Jonathan Pollard as a gesture to the former Prime Minister, Mr. Ariel Sharon.

In securing my release Arik showed the Israeli public, and indeed the world, that the State of Israel does neglect and abandon its citizens in their hour of need. I believe that if Arik were able to express his feelings and his thoughts this is the request he would ask you to bring to Bush on his behalf. I am certain that Bush's great regard for Arik and for you who are following in his path, will be expressed in a positive response to this request.

As you know, Pollard has spent 21 years in prison for espionage on behalf of an ally of the USA. He continues to serve even when who have spied for allies of the US at that time and indeed even most of those who spied enemies of the US have long since gone free.

I, along with the rest of the citizens of Israel, pray for your overall success, and in particular with regard to this issue.

With blessings,
Azzam Azzam
Kfar MaJar
POB 39
Israel 14930

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at Justice4JP@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, May 16, 2006.

As you may or may not know, our dear friend Judy Feld Carr is the extraordinary Toronto woman who single-handedly, and at great risk to her life, brought 3,500 Jews out of Syria in a secret operation that spanned more than 20 years. Judy and her husband, Donald, their son Gary and daughter-in-law, Melissa, are now asking for a small favour from friends and friends of friends. We think it's so little to ask, and we're sure you will, too.

Judy and Donald's 4 year-old granddaughter, Reagan, has cancer. Like her grandmother, Reagan, too, is extraordinary and brave, and is at the half-way point in fighting the cancer with a chemo regime that, when completed, will have lasted 2 1/2 years. Reagan is a finalist in a contest run by FLAVORx, a company that flavors the medicines that children like Reagan have to take. The contest is to choose a child to appear in the company's ads. Reagan would dearly love to win, but she'll need as many votes as she can get. So please read the e-mail below from her parents, Gary and Melissa Feld, on how to vote for her, or click on www.flavorx.com/human/superkid_vote.asp. It's simple, and won't take you more than a minute to complete.

Please feel free to pass this on to your friends and family. Judy has done so much for so many in our community, and now we can do this small but important thing for her sweet grandchild.

Let's help Reagan win!

From Reagan's Website

This is our website dedicated to help everyone stay informed about Reagan's treatment. On January 20th, 2005 (a month before her 3rd birthday) Reagan was diagnosed with ALL -- high risk with cancer in her spine. We are now halfway through treatment!! Please sign Reagan's Guestbook and let her know that you visited. She loves reading the messages with us!!


Shirley and Les.

Read Reagan's story at

Have a nice day

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 Ariel Natan Pasko, May 16, 2006.

Many Israeli Jews celebrated Israeli Independence Day (according to the Hebrew calendar) not long ago. Many more Israeli Jews had fun a couple of weeks later, on Lag B'Omer, while thousands of Israel's Arab citizens decried the "Nakba" (The Catastrophe), namely the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 (according to the general calendar) with a day of mourning among Israel's Arab community. That says everything...

So while the Jews were happy and dancing, first on Independence Day, then on the anniversary of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochi's death (over 300,000 near his grave in Meron alone), the Arabs were crying over the tragedies that befell them. Isn't that just the way it should be?

Well, Happy Nakba Day!

For example in Lod, a Jewish city with Arabs living there, over 1,500 Arabs attended a "Nakba Day" rally. So did some Arab Knesset members, such as Azmi Bishara. "This is a day of mourning for the Palestinian people," MK Jamal Zahalka said. "Lod is a special place for us, because it is here that the massacre [?] of 1948 took place at the Great Mosque, and that is why the city has become a symbol for us. Our message is that we will never forget and never forgive for what happened. We have come here to say that the Arab population will remain in Lod forever."

Several major attacks by Arab forces occurred in the Lod area during Israel's War of Independence. Lod and Ramle were counter-attacked by the IDF because they were on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road and convoys attempting to resupply and reinforce Jerusalem had to travel through the streets of the two towns, routinely under fire. The IDF could not afford to allow Jerusalem to be cut off from the rest of the country.

Yitzhak Rabin, then a commander involved in the operation, later said he agreed with Ben-Gurion's order to expel the Arabs of Ramle and Lod. The Arabs in Lod were "armed and hostile," Rabin said, presenting a danger, and they had to be driven away. Fighting with Arab gunmen took place, but no massacre occurred, the enemy during wartime was dealt a heavy blow.

Lod is a town where till this day; the Arab population has been consistently harassing the Jewish population. See my article, "The Jewish Struggle Against Arabs in Israel".

"This is our memorial day," National Democratic Assembly member Gabi Tanus said in Lod. "It is more important to us than the Holocaust is to the Jewish nation."

Notice the Arabs suffered more than the Jews did from the Holocaust...

Happy Nakba day!

Lag B'Omer by the way, also marks the end of a period of deaths, of thousands of Rabbi Akiva's students. Tradition tells us that 24,000 died during a plague. Rabbi Akiva was an arms smuggler during Bar Kochba's revolt against the Roman occupation of Judea (according to Maimonides). Others surmise, they died in the battles to liberate Judea from the Roman occupation. Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochi (one of Rabbi Akiva's top students), was forced to flee for his life and hide in a cave. There, he and his son studied Torah night and day for 13 years, till the "secrets of creation" were revealed to him. His teachings were later written down as "The Zohar," the Book of Splendor, the "Bible" of Jewish Mysticism.

So just as the Jews of Judea fought and gained independence from the "super-power of their time" the Roman Empire, for 3 and a half years, Modern Israel finally gained independence, over 1,800 years later.

And the Arabs? They sit and weep, just as Jews did for those intervening 1,800 years. The only difference is that the Arabs are a recent settler population, who came to the Land of Israel only in the last hundred years or so, and have no real connection to this place, in spite of their weeping (and terrorism). See my article, "Who is a Palestinian Refugee".

Notice they are not mourning the loss of the 1967 territories, but all of "Palestine". Coming up in a little over a week is Jerusalem Day. Jews the world over will celebrate the liberation of Eastern Jerusalem, with it's Temple Mount and Western Wall. Hebron, Judea, Samaria, and the Golan Heights were all delivered out of the hands of the Arab occupiers and into the hands of their rightful Jewish owners.

Israeli Arabs were never a happy bunch even though they have full civil equality. But in recent years, there has been growing active involvement from their community with "Palestinian" terrorists from the Palestinian Authority. Combined with their recent (since Oslo) vocal repudiation of Israeli Independence Day as their "Catastrophe;" it has been proven to many Israeli Jews, what they always suspected, Israeli Arabs are not trustworthy.

According to the Israel Democracy Institute's recent study, the "2006 Democracy Index," only 14% feel that relations between Jews and Arabs are good in Israel and 62% of Israelis would like to see the government actively encourage Arabs to leave Israel through financial incentives (the poll includes Israeli Arabs, so the figure for Israeli Jews must be even higher).

Professor Asher Arian (who conducted the survey), said he was not surprised by the support expressed for encouraging the Arabs to leave. "This has been a stable sentiment in the Israeli Jewish public for many years," he said. "The public is both cynical and very Zionist." He pointed out that if the survey were carried out right after a terrorist attack, the numbers would have been even higher in support of encouraging Arabs to leave.

The Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research of Tel Aviv University, found in their latest, "Peace Index: March 2006" (conducted on April 3-4, 2006, after the Israeli elections), a clear majority of Jews are against expelling more Jewish "settlers" from their homes. When questioned whether Israel should act unilaterally to set its final borders (Olmert's Convergence/Expulsion Plan) or continue the existing situation (leave the Jewish settlements alone) and wait until conditions are ripe for renewing contacts with the PA, 44% said they were for maintaining the status quo, whereas only 41% favored acting unilaterally to expel Jews from their homes. Don't forget this poll too included about 20% Arab respondents.

Maybe Israel will one day soon, decide to solve its "Arab security and demographic problem," the way most Jews in Israel would it like to, not by expelling Jews from parts of their ancestral homeland, but by removing "the thorns in our side," (Numbers 33:55).

I just want to wish all of Israel's "good Arab citizens," Happy Nakba Day!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Steve Katz, May 15, 2006.

The alternative to Olmert's policy of retreating from Jewish land is a hard line stance that will help Israel fight its enemies instead of Olmert's plan that will demoralize and bankrupt Israel (See Sever Plocker's article below). This alternative:

  • recognizes that appeasement as a policy does not now, never has and never will work,

  • understands that the Arab Muslims are not now nor have they ever been interested in peace,

  • protects Israeli citizens against attacks from its enemies, both within the country and outside it,

  • promotes the fact that the security of Israel is more important than the ulterior motive misguided opinions of the EU, the United Nations, (certainly) the Arab world and (even) the United States.

  • cuts off ALL funding of the (misnamed) Palestinians, since they have shown very little if any ability to build an infrastructure in deference to buying more weapons to destroy Israel.

  • will choose to promote business with nations other than the USA and stop allowing the USA to dictate with whom Israel can do business. Fact: Israel was coerced into cancelling VERY lucrative and VERY large contracts with both China and Venezuela because the US said so. The deals would have given Israel some degree of independence from the US and would have bolstered the Israeli economy.

  • recognizes that the leftists and the (so-called) academics are more interested in destroying the religious sectors of Israel than they are about protecting the country. They would prefer that Israel be a secular society with the preposterous assumption that this will dissuade the Arab Muslims from continuing their ongoing war.

In contrast, Olmert's retreat plan

  • is NOT in consensus in Israel: Only about 15% of Israeli's voted for the plan (a record low of 62% of Israelis voted, of whom less than 1/4 voted for Olmert.

  • Olmert's retreat plan will make internationally important religious sites -- Hebron, Shilo, Beth-El -- both unsafe and Judenrein.

  • will forcibly deport at least 60,000 Jews. If not stopped, one man's panic could play havoc with the lives of the half million Jews who live in Samaria, Judea and eastern Jerusalem.

Have I given you enough food for thought? If not, I can provide additional details.

"Israeli public will have to pay," by Sever Plocker, Ynet,

As with Gaza pullout, taxpayers will shoulder burden for future West Bank move

The eviction of some 1,500 families from the Gaza Strip last summer has so far cost the country NIS 8.5 billion (about USD 1.8 billion). NIS 2.5 billion (about USD 532 million) of that is intended to cover military costs, the rest for civilian costs.

Ehud Olmert's "convergence" plan could affect 20,000 families, or about 90,000 residents of Judea and Samaria. Some will be moved to within the 1967 border; others to "consensus" settlement blocs. What does this massive program mean in economic terms?

If we take the evacuation-compensation model, the State of Israel will be required to pay 20,000 evicted families direct compensation, at a cost of about NIS 66 billion (about USD 14 billion). And if we use Gaza as an example, temporary housing, moving costs and new infrastructure will cost an additional NIS 13 million (about USD 2.7 million).

The Ministry of Defense estimates that a unilateral disengagement from Judea and Samaria will cost the army about NIS 16 billion (about USD 3.4 billion).

And so initial estimates of a second disengagement program stand at about NIS 95 billion, or USD 20 billion. Put differently: 17 percent of the entire output of the State of Israel.

But that's not the whole story. Far from it.

Additional costs

Most Gaza residents were able to be moved to existing settlements within the green line. Only a few were placed in the new housing project at Nitzanim. Thus, the country saved on the environmental and infrastructure costs bound up with establishing new cities and neighborhoods.

But to accommodate 90,000 settlers, evicted and bitter, the investment of public money in building new towns, cities and villages will be very high.

And who will worry about employing thousands of evacuees from Judea and Samaria? Where will they find jobs? Many of them will simply become a burden on the public purse.

In conclusion: The economic cost of Ehud Olmert's proposed "convergence" plan is NIS 120 billion. That's USD 25 billion, folks.

Twenty-five billion dollars, without taking into account problems such as underestimations, bottlenecks in carrying out the program, the fact that there is no national consensus for such a move, and other problems.

To compare: The entire 2006 budget, without repaying debts, is NIS 230 billion (about USD 49 billion). The defense budget is NIS 46 billion (about USD 9.8 billion). The four-year budget for the war on poverty is NIS 9 billion (about USD 1.9 billion).

A unilateral pullout will cost NIS 120 billion. Who's gonna pay it? Who's gonna pay?

U.S. won't help

Not the Americans, that's for sure. For the Gaza pullout Israel asked the Bush administration for USD 2 billion in aid to build new IDF bases and to invest in developing the Negev and Galilee regions (in order to not have to ask for money to compensate settlers). We got nothing. Not one cent.

The fact that Israeli tax payers were forced to shoulder the entire NIS 8.5 billion (about USD 1.8 billion) price tag for the Gaza pullout bodes extremely poorly for the notion that any American administration will foot the bill for another unilateral move.

This plan, as it has been presented by the acting prime minister, includes the annexation of a fair amount of Palestinian land. It is impossible to see any U.S. government aiding a move that would include an un-agreed upon annexation of settlement blocs. They haven't even agreed to finance one single kilometer of the West Bank separation fence.

Credit for disengagement

Perhaps Israel could finance West Bank disengagement with foreign credit? No way.

Foreign investors will only fund those national projects that will yield a positive economic benefit.

This is how Israel, for example, was able to gather USD 9 billion to absorb new immigrants from the former Soviet Union. The Russian aliyah made the Israeli market flourish, spurred growth and exports and was a central factor in the growth of the hi-tech industry. It was a worthwhile investment.

The withdrawal from Judea and Samaria, and moving the settlers from place to place will not raise the potential for growth in Israel, and would not be considered an investment in research and development or creative assets.

There is no reason to expect favorable credit terms from international finance institutions such as the World Bank. Israel, as far as the World Bank is concerned, is a developed country with no rights to discount financing.

And the World Bank is even more limited than the U.S. government with regard to political games.

World Jewry

Okay, then, what about Diaspora Jews? Maybe the Jewish Agency will undertake an emergency fund raising drive for the "convergence" plan?

But even if we assume that world Jewry would dig deep into their pockets to finance the second disengagement, even in the absence of a clear national consensus in Israel. How much could they reasonably be expected to give? A billion dollars? Two billion?

There is only one chance for American and/or international aid for removing settlements and setting borders in Judea and Samaria. As we found out during the Camp David summit in July, 2000 between President Bill Clinton, Ehud Olmert and Yasser Arafat, Washington is prepared to dole out funds generously (at that time, discussions revolved around the number USD 20 billion) for an "end of the conflict" agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, on condition that other countries also chip in to help out both Israel and the Palestinians.

Such aid, however, is dependent on having a partner. And to create a partner, there must be dialogue. For dialogue, there must be some formal arrangement. Unilateralism won't cut it, even if the world views it positively.

The Americans' refusal to give financial aid for the Gaza move, a pullout President Bush and Congress praised, teaches us that we'd better not count on foreign funding for future unilateral pullouts.

We'll pay

We will have to pay. In order to finance the second disengagement out of our own pockets, each family in Israel will be forced to pony up NIS 70,000, or USD 15,000, over the course of three-to-four years. Olmert says his government will unilaterally set Israel's final borders.

How do you give NIS 70,000 to the Finance Ministry? Either by raising taxes or by issuing bonds. Neither option is particularly heartwarming.

Using bonds to raise money from the public is not a recommended from the point of view of economics. It's expensive for the government, nebulous for citizens and strikes a blow at the standing and grading of the economy and stock market.

Israeli governments have not used interest bonds since the failed "Peace for the Galilee Bonds."

But higher taxes are also no great solution: An additional NIS 40 billion (about USD 8.5 billion) in taxes per year for three years means a very sharp rise in personal interest tax rates (the PR slogan could be "reevaluating taxes to set our borders") and other, indirect taxes such as petrol taxes.

A comparison

In terms of total cost to the economy, financing the disengagement/convergence plan is of the same scale as West Germany's annexation of East Germany. There are two differences, however, neither one in our favor: Germany is a lot richer than Israel, and there was no debate amongst the German nation about the need to annex the eastern part of the country.

Nobody knows how much the Israeli public has invested to this point in building settlements. This is an economic secret that cannot be deciphered.

On the other hand, the cost of withdrawal is clear and open. In economic terms, this is called a "dead burden." Israeli citizens who will be required to pay higher taxes, lower their standards of living, tighten their belts and forget about social programs such as the war on poverty or education reform -- the burden will be very much alive. Alive and painful.

Contact Steve Katz at skatz80817@rcn.com

To Go To Top

Posted by B. Lemkin, May 15, 2006.

I just heard an ironic old recording of Ted Koppel's "Nightline" show featuring Rabbi Meir Kahane, ztz"l and Ehud Olmert. It can be found at the following link which also features an interesting debate between Rabbi Kahane and Alan Dershowitz.

Contact B. Lemkin at lemkin@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 15, 2006.

Scott Wilson's "Israelis Kill Islamic Jihad Leader in Arrest Attempt" (Washington Post, 5.15.06) devotes almost all of its text to the issue of the Israeli law that limits the ability of Israeli citizens to bring into the country spouses from an enemy population. His treatment of this issue is heavily biased toward highlighting the suffering it causes to the Israeli Arab citizens and their would-be spouses from among the Palestinians.

He neglects to note that this law was promulgated only after Israel discovered that some Israeli Arab women were intentionally arranging marriages with Palestinian terrorists. The instant citizenship that such a marriage bequeathed (under previous law) granted the terrorist an Israeli ID card, a legal Israeli address, and Israeli license plates. Thus equipped, the terrorist could travel untrammeled throughout Israel and past road blocks, to plant bombs, perpetrate drive-by shootings and sniper attacks, and assist in the planning and execution of suicide bombings. And 26 did exactly that, killing dozens.

Wilson fails to note that Israel is at war. Arafat and Hamas declared war on Israel and have maintained an on-going almost daily onslaught of terror attacks since 9/29/2000. In the context of war, one must decide where one wants the casualties.

With this new law, the casualties are those unfortunate Israeli Arabs who will be unable to bring into Israel their beloved from among the Palestinians. Without this law, the casualties are likely to be the dozens or hundreds of Israelis killed by the terrorists who get Israeli ID via their fake marriage with an Israeli Arab accomplice.

There is no country in the world that does not limit immigration and set priorities in accordance with its needs. Immigration laws in many countries make it difficult for foreign partners of citizens to receive citizenship, and they combat fictitious marriages.

Israel has the same right to protect its citizenry as countries far less imperiled, like Denmark or Holland. Realizing that if present immigration trends continue unchecked, Copenhagen will become a city with a Muslim majority in two decades, this liberal Scandinavian state instituted severe limitations on the entry of foreign spouses who marry Danish citizens. Similar get-tough legislation has been enacted in Holland.

So while the new law does infringe upon the rights of Israeli Arab citizens, the risk of facilitating terror activities creates a far, far greater imperative.

Why didn't Wilson mention that?

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, May 15, 2006.

This was written by Joseph Farah and appeared today in World Net Daily (WND). He is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His latest book is "Taking America Back." He also edits the weekly online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.

WASHINGTON -- I have a reputation as one of Israel's staunchest supporters. That reputation is due to several factors:

  • As an American journalist of Arabic heritage, I have done my best over the last 20 years to shatter the myths surrounding the Arab-Israeli conflict -- misperceptions based largely on effective lies, purposeful distortions and relentless propaganda efforts by Arab and Muslim regimes and their apologists among haters of America and Israel throughout the world.

  • As a freedom-loving Christian American journalist who had the opportunity to put my own boots on the ground in the Middle East, it is obvious that the Arab and Muslim world is dominated by tyranny, fascism and anti-Semitism -- hardly a world we should want to see expanded.

  • As a journalist, I found that Israel was the only country in the Middle East that respected the free press. This again became obvious recently to us at WND when our own Jerusalem bureau chief, Aaron Klein, was prevented from traveling to Syria because he is Jewish.

  • The Jews, a people who have survived the deaths of many empires that tried to destroy them -- including but not limited to the Egyptians, Romans, Babylonians, Persians -- have only one homeland, Israel, continuously occupied by them for 4,000 years and never a nation-state belonging to any others.

Yet, despite all this, I am through defending Israel -- at least the regime currently in power in Jerusalem, this useless coalition seemingly hell-bent on committing national suicide.

Next week, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a man I once considered, like his predecessor, Ariel Sharon, a reasonable, rational, level-headed defender of his country, is set to visit Washington with his hand out.

He is asking for an initial commitment of up to $10 billion in direct U.S. aid to implement his plan for national retreat, appeasement of the global jihad and a new sellout of more than 200,000 Israeli civilians who have made their homes in historically Jewish lands in Judea and Samaria at the behest and recommendation of earlier Israeli governments.

Olmert is coming here to seek administration and congressional support for a new round of "disengagement" -- this time from 90-95 percent of what we often call "the West Bank" and even including large sections of the city of Jerusalem, once regarded as the eternal capital of the Jewish people.

He does this fully knowing that last summer's evacuation of the Gaza Strip has been an unmitigated disaster for the Jewish people, Western Civilization and freedom in general, as the terrorists from Hamas -- kissing cousins of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida and Iran's Hezbollah organization -- now control the territory and more than ever threaten the lives of Israeli citizens.

He does this fully knowing that Hamas is preparing to establish a Taliban-like state through the Palestinian Authority -- including the new territories ethnically cleansed of Jews.

He does this fully knowing that these newly abandoned lands will be, like Gaza, used as terrorist staging grounds and forward operating bases that will threaten not only Israel but neighboring Jordan and Lebanon as well and, eventually, liberated Iraq.

So I'm through making excuses for Israel. I'm through trying to understand the incomprehensible moves of a self-flagellating nation. I'm through trying to point out the moral rightness of a state and a people who themselves fail to discern right from wrong.

Like Jesus 2,000 years ago, I look at Jerusalem today and I weep.

I know I speak for many Jews and Christians throughout the world who see Israel's surrender as a cowardly betrayal, a sign that the Jewish state puts more faith in Washington and "international diplomacy" than in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Israel has made the mistake many times throughout history of turning away from their God. Israel has made the mistake many times throughout history of putting faith in kings and men over the promises of Heaven. Israel has made the mistake many times throughout history of compromise with its ruthless enemies who seek not only the destruction of the Jews but the oppression of their own people.

Enough of "land for peace." It has never worked -- not in Israel's history, nor in any other nation's history. Enough of retreat. Enough of unilateral withdrawals. Enough of staged surrender. Enough of the appeasement with evil. Enough of the madness.

Compromise with evil is evil. And that's what Israel is doing. As for me and my house, I will not be a part of it. I will continue to serve the Lord and pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

One thing is for certain. That peace will not come under the leadership of men like Ehud Olmert and Ariel Sharon. If the Israeli people want to disengage, it should be from so-called "leaders" like this -- "leaders" in the image, likeness and tradition of Neville Chamberlain.

SPECIAL OFFER: If you want to understand the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Joseph Farah recommends Joan Peters' "From Time Immemorial." Take advantage of this offer by clicking here.

Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 15, 2006.

Every year, as the date of Israel's Independence (May 15) approaches, Palestinian Authority TV broadcasts numerous programs and video clips to mourn Israel's creation -- what they call the "Nakba," the catastrophe. The recurring themes are the denial of Israel's right to exist and the call for the undoing of "the catastrophe" - a euphemism for Israel's destruction.

This year's recurring clip shows the map of Israel -- entitled "Palestine" - scrolling slowly down the screen. The date 1948 - the year of Israel's establishment - repeatedly appears on the screen, behind bars.

At the end of the clip an old woman is shown, while the words on the screen read: "Palestine is the land of my forefathers. LEAVE IT."

To view this clip, go to

It is important to note that this clip, calling for Israel's destruction, has been broadcast almost daily in recent weeks on PA TV - which is still run and totally controlled by the office of Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas, not by Hamas.

Non-recognition of Israel's right to exist has been a cornerstone of PA ideology, shared by both the PLO-Fatah faction and by Hamas, and expressed in Arabic by both groups. The only substantive difference between the two groups on this issue has been the fact that Fatah has professed to recognize Israel in its English messages, while Hamas has refused to accept Israel in either its English or its Arabic statements.

Please feel free to forward this bulletin, crediting Palestinian Media Watch

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, May 15, 2006.


One of the arguments against various anti-terrorist measures is that we should not become oppressive and vicious like our enemies. This argument has become a clich√¬©. It is used routinely, as if applicable universally. It is not. We should take care not to avoid measures merely because our enemies use them.

Some measures may be more excessive than efficient, or may pose more of a threat to Americans than to terrorists. Those measures should be avoided. Other measures may do the reverse, and therefore are needed. Each must be weighed on its own merits.

Pres. Bush has explained that in wartime, the President normally exercises greater powers. True. The luxury of peacetime standards must not be maintained at the risk of national security. If conquered, then indeed we would become like our enemies, if we even survive.

Unfortunately, many of the powers that Pres. Bush requests are not related to the terrorism they are supposed to intercept or would not accomplish what they are touted for. Democrats suppose this is a deliberate mis-labeling and a grab for power. Perhaps, but all modern Presidents seek to expand their power and most proposed laws do not address precisely what they are supposed to remedy.

Another difficulty with these powers is that they would tend more to be permanent than in earlier conflicts. That is because, unless we double or triple our armed forces, and war on all the centers of Islamism in swift succession, terrorism would be menacing for decades.


The US and Israel have made their security dependent upon Muslims. Didn't work. The US-sponsored mutual defense treaty with Iraq and other Muslim states collapsed. The US invested in the Shah, who was toppled. The US depended upon Pakistan to funnel aid to Afghan rebels. The money went exclusively to jihadists, who then turned global and attacked elsewhere. Israel let security rest in the hands of the PLO, which fostered terrorism. Israel let Egypt supervise the border with Gaza, and terrorists and arms flowed freely into Gaza for use against Israel.

One would suppose that the US and Israel would have learned from those mistakes. They didn't. The US has built the Egyptian military into a major force, hoping it would protect S. Arabia, although Egypt had ambitions to seize S. Arabia. The US knows that Egypt wants to attack Israel. Increasingly unsteady, Egypt is liable to be overthrown by the Islamists. Its army would be used against Western interests. Some Israelis think they might hand off Judea-Samaria to Jordan, but Jordan is hostile now and unstable, too. The proposal to turn to Jordan is like that of children who, tired out from thinking, propose solutions that are farcical.


The biased Harvard diatribe against Israel claimed that the US has given Israel "unwavering support." ZOA listed refutations of that claim:

1. During Israel's first two wars, the US embargoed arms sales to it.

2. After years of attacks from the Sinai, Israel conquered the Sinai in 1956, and eradicated the terrorist bases. The US made Israel withdraw without any peace agreement.

3. When Egypt blockaded Israel, the US broke its promise to ensure free passage.

4. The US supported Security Council ceasefire resolutions that prevented Israel from winning the Six-Day War more completely.

5. The US pressured Israel into ending the 1973 war prematurely, preventing decisive victory. The US did increase aid to Israel, but this merely made up for loss of revenues by the withdrawal from the Sinai at US demand.

6. The US voted for Resolutions condemning Israel's annexation of eastern Jerusalem and calling on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon, from which major terrorist operations were launched against Israel.

7. US condemned Israel's necessary destruction of Saddam's first nuclear reactor.

8. US pressured Israel to cede land by withholding jets, but sold S. Arabia AWACs.

9. US withheld loan guarantees, to pressure Israel for letting Jews build in Yesha.

10. US pressed Israel to release imprisoned P.A. terrorists but ignored P.A. violations.

11. US criticizes as excessive and provocative Israeli defense against terrorism, such as roadblocks, targeting terrorists, withholding revenues, and frontal assaults, means that the US, itself, uses.

12. The US demands that Israel negotiate and make concessions, without the P.A. ending terrorism.

13. US insisted that Israel accept the Road Map, despite grave Israeli objection.

14. US illegally used waivers to defer relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem (Dr. Daniel Mandel & Morton Klein of ZOA in Jewish Press, 4/5/06).

This US opposition to legitimate Israeli claims and security needs and upholding of Arab aggression cuts through almost all US Administrations, because the State Dept. remains anti-Zionist. ZOA could have stated more of the State machinations, such as its attempt to abort Israel's birth and then to rescind statehood and giving Egypt a $60 billion army trained to attack Israel. One wonders what support US Administrations do give Israel. The subsidy is Congress' idea. The UNO resolutions that the US vetoes or abstains on would be too biased to get away with voting for.


Joining with Arabs, some post-Zionist professors at Tel Aviv U. expressed solidarity with Iran against "American imperialism." The professors were concerned that the University's new Center for Iranian studies would falsely accuse Iran of terrorism and antisemitism. (Falsely? And what about Iranian/Islamic imperialism?)

The protestors also had sig ns with the names of Arabs recently killed by Israeli retaliation, but not of Israelis killed by Arabs. They tried to prevent a former Defense Minister from speaking against Iran. They called him a war criminal for fighting terrorism, and threatened to have him prosecuted (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/25).

To the Far Left, Israeli self-defense is improper. Ask the President of Iran what, if Israel surrendered, he would do with the Far Left. A truthful answer might open their eyes.


Iran has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, if the US attacks Iran. The Center for Strategic and Intl. Studies, however, denies that Iran has the means to do it. The Center asserts that the US has the means to stop it, anyway (IMRA, 4/25).


Jordanian security forces accused five P.A. legislators of arranging or assisting Hamas in bringing weapons into Jordan (IMRA, 4/25). Jordan found out that the terrorists were close to launching attacks in Jordan! (IMRA, 4/26.)

That's what Islamist terrorists do. Countries that cooperate with them, as Jordan was doing in a limited way, eventually pay a price.


A group of people wanted to join the Kadima Party. They were told they would not be put high enough on the list of Knesset candidates to guarantee election, under the system of proportional representation. They formed their own party, the Pensioners' Party, and did not tell the public that they really were a wing of Kadima. They received a large protest vote against Kadima. After the election, they coalesced with the Kadima Party (IMRA, 4/26).


PM Olmert still is premising his withdrawals on demographic grounds, although the demographic fear was debunked and his withdrawals are not relevant to it (IMRA, 4/26).


Again the US has stated that it would not regard the "permanent borders" to which PM Olmert would withdraw as permanent but as the start of negotiations (IMRA, 4/26). It means negotiating without bargaining chips.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Marcel Cousineau, May 15, 2006.

A nice letter to President Bush, from Deborah B., Concerned American (citizen@netvision.net.il)

Dear President Bush,

Prime Minister Olmert's retreat plan is an existential danger to Israel, the Middle East and the world. It will strengthen the world axis of Mideast terror and make Israel a defense burden instead of a defense asset.


Deborah Brightly,
Concerned American citizen"

The agenda that Olmert follows is the Bush plan for a Palestinian state on land cleansed of all Jews.

President Bush's vision,dream of a Palestinian state is what the pawn Olmert is working under.

The weak pawn of Israel goes to one of the most powerful men on earth to confirm the false peace agreement we know as the Bush Road Map.

What incredible stupidity to write to the wolf who divides Israel for help. How can you be so blind?

Olmert is just the latest puppet of this wolf who rewards Palestinian terrorism while saying he fights terrorism.

Why are so many of you so easily deceived and assuming that your letter writing will accomplish anything now when it has never accomplished anything. Only Hashem will save Israel from her enemies! Marcel

Contact Marcel Cousineau by email at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com or visit his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah 15, May 15, 2006.

This was written by Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent and is archived at www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/716146.html

Former Military Intelligence chief Aharon Ze'evi warned Monday morning of an impending world jihad "tsunami" that he said may soon descend on the entire Middle East.

Ze'evi, speaking at a Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies conference in Tel Aviv University, said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinijad has been overheard promising the "end of history in two or three years."

Ze'evi recommended that the Iranian threats be taken seriously, saying that Tehran will soon have nuclear warhead compatible surface-to-surface missiles with a range of 5,000 kilometers, putting Europe within striking distance.

Ze'evi also warned that Israel should not rule out the possibility of a conventional war against Islamic militants.

Ze'evi said he foresees this war breaking out on Israel's northern frontier, against Syria and Hezbollah.

Emphasizing the radicalization of Islamic militancy, Ze'evi cited recent changes in the objectives of major militant organizations, which have recently begun targeting sites in Arab countries.

"We are seeing attacks carried out in Amman, Dahab and Sharm el-Sheikh," said Ze'evi.

He cited the increased accessibility of Internet in the Arab world as facilitating the process, saying, "Today, anyone who is interested can learn how to blow up a bomb."

Major General (Res.) Ze'evi stepped down as chief of Military Intelligence about four months ago, and was replaced by Major General Amos Yadlin.

Contact Avodah 15 at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Frankfurter, May 15, 2006.

Dear Friends,

The Funding for Peace Coalition just posted a summary of the Palestinian Authority accounts for the three calendar years 2003 - 2005. Except for the most, well, accounting types among us, that sounds pretty boring. In fact, the introductory notes make some interesting reading. And then it degenerates pretty quickly into eye-glazing tables of numbers.

But, being a boring CPA by trade, I forced myself into a little look. And being a masochist, whether it's accounts or a pay slip, the first thing I review is income taxes. After all, practically everything there is to know about tax in the Palestinian Authority - who pays and how much - is unknown. So I tried to figure it out from the published accounts; and here's what I turned up.

From what I could see, Al Capone probably looks down on his prot√¬©g√¬©es in the Palestinian kleptocracy with pride - and a little jealousy. Chicago simply didn't provide the same opportunities as down-town Ramallah.

Overall, the PA tax regime is relatively favourable, although income taxes cut in at the first shekel. The minimum personal tax rate is 5%. The corporate tax rate is the same as the highest personal tax rate - 20%. For salary earners, tax is deducted at source. Total reported income tax collections for the full three years was a mere $173 million. That includes amounts collected by Israel on behalf of the PA. This means that (at a 5% - 20% marginal rate) total taxable income for three years for the whole PA was between $865 million and $3,465 million.

Don't fall asleep quite yet - lets see how that adds up first! Let's assume that the PA knows how to deduct taxes from its own employees, and that UNWRA, being a law abiding organisation, deducts taxes too. PA salaries were reported at $2,552 million for the three years and UNWRA salaries in the West bank and Gaza run at about $600 million for three years - that means that not a single other person or company in the whole Palestinian Authority earned a single shekel of taxable income. Not bad considering some of the fancy cars, houses, cell phones, shopping malls and other attractions one hears are used by the upper classes of Ramallah and Gaza.

In common with kleptocrats throughout history, the Palestinian elite have clearly preferred that their awesome wealth - the fortune generated by skimming international donor generosity - remain tax-free. But in the world of organised crime, it's known that, when freshly laundered assets are re-invested, some token tax is paid. But from these accounts, it's clear the Palestinian elite lack the elementary courtesy to pay modest taxes on 'legitimate' income earned from their ill-gotten gains.

So when Bassam al-Shaqaa, a former mayor of Nablus went to the streets collecting donations for Hamas from the local population and said "These donations are our way of telling the world that we can live without them, and our children are paying what the Europeans should be paying," I guess he was right. Europeans know they really should shut their mouths, close their eyes, and hand over their taxes so they can be duly passed along to the Palestinians.

One of my correspondents pointed out that it's time I came up with some positive suggestions for change, instead of always moaning. So here's one which might also increase the gainful employment of my fellow accountants. Let the PA announce a 90 day tax amnesty. Palestinians of all walks of life will then be granted the opportunity to file/update their tax returns for the past 5 years. They will be free to pay any errors or oversights without penalty. And while they're busy doing this, the PA leadership will use those 90 days to do something constructive with the 10,000 security staff identified by the International Monetary Fund as "non-performing". The PA can re-train them for new duties in the PA's new, greatly-expanded tax collection department. This could be a very short training course - these people already have the tools of trade and are highly motivated and experienced in extracting due payment from their own Palestinian populance.

Apart from solving some regional problems, the Frankfurter Plan will have the added benefit that the Hamas regime can stop its unseemly begging in the streets, taking women's jewelry and expropriating their poor little children's inheritances to fund the new Hamas regime. Not to mention your taxes.

David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East. To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/

To Go To Top

Posted by Morton A. Klein, May 15, 2006.

New York - A few days ago, the former Israel Defense Force (IDF) Chief of Staff, Lieutenant-General Moshe Ya'alon, laid out an impressive case in an address to the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) about the perils of a Palestinian state, further concessions to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the need for Israel to have a clear victory against Palestinian terrorism.

Speaking to an overflow crowd of over 500 people at Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan, Ya'alon explained from his 37 years' military experience, especially his term as Chief of Staff (2002-2005) in which the IDF greatly reduced Palestinian terrorism, why he, a former kibbutznik from the Labor movement who had initially supported the Oslo process, completely changed his mind.

As a senior military figure during the Oslo process, Ya'alon said that it became obvious to him by 1995 that Yasser Arafat and the PA, instead of preparing Palestinian society for peace and reconciliation, were indoctrinating it with murderous hatred and glorifying jihad and suicide terrorism. As he puts it, "I needed no sophisticated intelligence to reach this conclusion - I only had to look at their textbooks, posters and so on. We should not be surprised, but we ignored it. In 1999, I was commander of Central Command and I said then that we would face a war with Arafat in 2000. I knew it when Barak said that he would have a settlement with Arafat within 15 months, which meant by September 2000. Israel and the West were surprised."

Ya'alon believes that Israel started to win the war on the PA by methodically cutting down the terrorists and taking the war to them but then lost many of the gains it had made. He speaks of Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 and especially the clearing out of Jenin as "a very necessary operation." The result was that the terrorist organizations, including Hamas, were on the run. But the announcement in December 2003 that Israel would unilaterally withdraw from Gaza and northern Samaria changed all that. Hamas and others concluded that their terrorist campaign was working, that no concessions had to be made and that more terrorism would bring about more unilateral withdrawals from Israel.

Ya'alon stressed that the Israelis withdrawal from Gaza was a major factor in the Hamas election victory because it was perceived as surrender to Islamic terrorism. "What we are doing is leaving a legacy for the next generation who will deal with Palestinians who believe that terrorism pays, that Israel cuts and runs under pressure," Ya'alon explained. He added that Israel is in a "war" not merely dealing with an uprising.

Worse, Israel left Gaza saying it would fiercely retaliate against continued terrorism launched from there, but did not. Ya'alon said that "After the Gaza withdrawal, I would have recommended after the first Qassem rocket fired into Israel that there should have been a strong and immediate retaliation." But Israel did not follow this path. Instead, Israel is following the path of facilitating the creation of a Palestinian state.

"The establishment of a Palestinian state," says Ya'alon, "will lead, at some stage, to war. Such a war can be dangerous to the State of Israel. The idea that a Palestinian state will achieve stability is disconnected from reality and dangerous." He said that the Israelis must maintain a military presence in Judea and Samaria as long as the Palestinians refuse to make a serious peace deal, and that "Israel must brand into the Palestinians consciousness" that terror will bring them no benefits.

In line with that, Ya'alon calls for a proactive anti-terrorist campaign. "The best defense is a good offense, not a fence. The best way to deal with terrorists is to arrest them or kill them in their beds. Without dealing with the roots, we can cut down the weeds - to deal with the roots would be to force them to reform their education and culture. I am not sure we will succeed but we should be under no pressure to make any concessions until this changes."

Ya'alon therefore emphasizes that, "The two-state solution has failed and to my mind is now irrelevant. In Israel we must consolidate our Jewish Zionist narrative. Without believing in our case, there is no way to convince someone else. Even before the Hamas victory, a two-state solution was a mistaken fantasy - now it's even more irrelevant. The Palestinians knew exactly who Hamas was when they voted for them." Ya'alon also pointedly states, "If we couldn't tame and change Arafat, we can't tame and change Hamas. [But] if we're in Judea and Samaria we can thwart the terrorism from there." It is for this reason that Ya'alon calls Israeli leaders who call for more unilateral concessions as "confused" and offering the Israeli public "illusions."

Ya'alon concluded by saying that "we don't need Chamberlains, we need Churchills" who offer realism and optimism, warning of "blood, toil, tears and sweat" but also the prospect of ultimate victory. "We are flooded with lies, manipulated by Al Qaeda, but most prominently by the Palestinians"' says Ya'alon who urges Israel and the West to cease preferring "to be confused, to ignore reality" by adopting the "moral clarity" to see that the "from the dawn of Zionism until this day, the source of all terrorist attacks has been the refusal of the Arab world to recognize Israel's existence. Until this changes we will remain the target of violent terrorist activity. The '67 borders are neither a solution to rocket attacks, suicide bombs nor to more conventional forms of warfare.

Iran sees us withdrawing from Gaza, Hamas is elected, they see US trouble in Iraq and because they do not pay price for financing, supporting and encouraging terrorism, they continue. As long as they see our appeasement policy, they will continue."

Israel is proposing to give away 95% of Judea and Samaria and declare borders. The US has already said it will not accept these borders unless the PA does, and the PA says it won't. Therefore, if Israel goes through with this huge withdrawal, it would face the horrifying dilemma of having given away all the leverage it must maintain to resolve issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, demilitarization, etc. and finding itself in the predicament of having nothing left to offer.

Morton A. Klein is National President of the Zionist Organization of America. Their website address is http:// www.zoa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by The Reality Show, May 15, 2006.

From the Independent
(http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article484122.ece) "'Racist' marriage law upheld by Israel Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

Israel's High Court has narrowly upheld a law denying Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza married to Israeli citizens the right to live in the country with their spouses."

How dare the Independent lie again?

Is there any restricting law between marrying a Jew and an Arab in Israel? Of course not!

Is "palestinian" Arab, as opposed to Israeli Arab with no restriction, really a "racist" issue or a security liability???

First time that I hear that anti Terror measures are "racist"?

While Arabs inside Israel or Arabs under "palestinian" Hamas Terror authoirity are the same Arab race, Arabs inside Israel not only enjoy equal rights with Israel but are even preferred in Israeli courts over Israeli Jews. Does the "independent" bother to mention that?

Then again, no Jew is ever allowed, even as to live in real racist "palestinian" Arabia.

Any chance the "independent" would talk about it?

This LYING title is not only a lie on Israel's total democracy & 100% EQUALITY even with regards to its Arab citizens but on top of everything it is a blatant part of its racism campaign against Israel, not to mention it's ignoring the 100% racism on the Arab side without any security concerns as a reason.

Is the "independent" inventing a new "race" called Arabs with a "palestinian" passport seperately from Arabs with an Israeli passport?

That's actually real racism from the "independent"!

email the Independent at: newseditor@independent.co.uk, foreigneditor@independent.co.uk

Contact The Reality Show at therealityshow@mail.com or go to their website: http://lightonthings.blogspot.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Steven Carol, May 14, 2006.

In his recent letter to President George W. Bush, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated, "Throughout history, many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times." He was referring to Israel and it should come as no surprise that through his statement, he was continuing his on-going messianic quest to wipe Israel off the map by denying Jewish history, including the Holocaust, and the Jewish presence in the Middle East since Biblical times. Yet, Ahmadinejad's reference in the letter was 100% correct! Ahmadinejad just got the name of the "country" wrong, he was describing the planned second Arab state of "Palestine."

There never was an independent state of "Palestine." In its modern usage, that term was a fabrication of the Arab League after the 1948 re-establishment of the State of Israel. After the first Arab war against Israel, the identity retained by the great majority of Arab refugees was not as "Palestinians" but rather as inhabitants of Haifa, Acre, Jaffa, and other towns and villages from which they came. There was no sense of a separate "Palestinian Arab" nationality or identity.

Under the British Mandate of Palestine, the "Palestinians" included Arabs, Jews, Samaritans, the Druze, and Circassians. None of these peoples could correctly claim to be "the" Palestinians. In fact during World War II, the Palestinian Jews who fought with Allied forces were regarded more as Palestinians than any other group.

This concept of a separate Arab Palestinian people and a separate Arab Palestinian state was created by the Arab states and has been propagandized, financed, and otherwise supported by Arab countries all through the 1950s, with its leading advocate being Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. It was at his bidding that the first Arab Summit conference was held in Egypt in January 1964, where a "Palestine Liberation Organization" was created. That was a full three and a half years before the Six Day War of 1967 and the Israeli acquisition of the disputed territories of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. The Palestinian Arabs never had or claimed to have a "Palestinian" homeland until after the 1967 war.

The Arab Palestinians are not a distinct people. One important benchmark of nationhood must be the degree of difference from its neighbors, and the need for a state to protect that uniqueness. Palestinian Arabs speak the same dialect of Arabic, share the same Islamic faith, have the same family structure, customs, dress, food, music and social values as is found in Jordan and Syria. This brings us back to the fact that they already have a state. In March 1921, the British partitioned the Mandate of Palestine, the first partition of Palestine. They cut away 76.9% of its territory and created an Arab state, at first called Trans-Jordan and later renamed Jordan. Its first King, Abdullah I, wanted to call it the Arab Kingdom of Palestine, but his British advisers recommended otherwise since it carried an imperialist connotation. Jordan's population today is over 70% Palestinian. The Arab people already have self-determination as expressed in 21 sovereign states. Now they insist on a 22nd state -- a second "Palestinian" state. Throughout the history of the conflict the majority of Arabs and Muslims have not tolerated, will not accept, let alone live in peace, with one Jewish state in the Middle East.

Thus Iranian President Ahmadinejad was correct in his statement to President Bush, he just got the name of the country in question wrong.

Contact Dr. Steve Carol at drhistory@cox.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 14, 2006.

The visit to the U.S. by PM Ehud Olmert finds that he is carrying a lot of excess baggage. Apparently, the U.S. State Department has been busy cutting deals with Olmert to give President George Bush a seeming win for his "Road Map" plan. The 'Win' will come on the bones of Israeli vulnerability and will be unlikely to raise the Bush poll numbers - now below 30.

Olmert is to visit Bush like a carpet-bagger, with each trading whatever or whoever they are prepared to sell out. Bush and the Arabist State Department wants a contiguous State of Palestine from Gaza, through the 'west bank' with a connection to the Golan Heights.

This despite the now incontrovertible knowledge that the Palestinians and other Terrorists will fill the void offered by PM Olmert and enlarging the scope of the Jihad (Islamic war). Bush is desperate for anything that even vaguely looks like good news - even if it puts Israel over the threshold of probable assault. However, the Bush Conservative base core is eroding rapidly, based on illegal immigration, gas prices rising and supporting the division of Jerusalem - his base of the Christian Right will leave the Republican Party en masse.

In typical back room dealing, Olmert brings Jerusalem and the 'west bank' as his personal contribution to the deal. I wonder what the going market price is for selling out a nation nowadays - given the fact that what he is selling doesn't even belong to him?

So what will Bush offer in return to Olmert for selling out the Jews of Judea, Samaria, the Golan and Jerusalem? Since this is like a black market theft of an ancient antiquity to a private collector, the price is negotiable. Olmert may expect anywhere from $10 to $20 Billion dollars for his sell-out. On the Bush side the payout would have to be split up in different obscure packages so the price doesn't look too high and Congress would not balk. Perhaps it will be part cash, part equipment and part loan guarantees none of which will sit well with the American public.

Be assured that this negotiation has been in process long before Sharon and Olmert sold Gaza out and now Olmert's gang moves on to the 'west bank' and Jerusalem. Sharon and Olmert expected American cash for their perfidy in Gush Katif/Gaza. But now there a growing operational Super Base in Gaza for Global Terror which is growing but no money is forthcoming for the 10,000 Jewish men, women and children whose homes, farms, schools, synagogues, businesses, factories and even cemeteries were stolen from them when they were evicted by Sharon and Olmert. They still have to pay mortgages on their homes and businesses while the Kadimites continue, the original scam of NOT paying the evacuees.

Bush has first hand knowledge that you cannot make a deal with Muslims and expect them to keep it. He is seeing America being hammered in Iraq where Iraqi soldiers and police take their American pay-checks to supposedly represent the Iraqi government during the day and become marauders at night. In brief, Bush and the Arabist State Department know that, like Gaza, the 'West Bank' will become Hamas-land, replete with the Terror of Bagdad. But, not to worry, because Bush will have retired to his ranch in Texas, out of the line of public opinion.

As for Olmert, this one small man will have betrayed the nation for whatever it brings him and he too will exit the public scene with the usual no expectation to be held accountable.

In the meantime, Bush has put up considerable U.S. Dollars to employ Arafat's notorious Force 17 to surround and protect Abu Mazen against assassination. Do you remember Force 17? They have a history as "Killers, Incorporated" and Bush is paying them with U.S. tax dollars.

Abu Mazen has long ago become nothing more than a useless figurehead. But, the pretense must go on! The only loyalty he inspires is through Arafat's 60,000 man left-over army who expects an American weekly employment check. If that stops, the mirage of loyalty disappears.

Bush and the State Department needs him alive long enough for Olmert to turn over the 'west bank' and Jerusalem, so it looks official (something like a Middle East Sudetenland). Both Bush and Olmert will deny fault when (not if) the tonnage of missiles and other explosives starts to be launched from the then West Bank controlled by the Muslim Palestinians Terrorists. All of this must be completed and in the box before the end of this Presidential term.

The lid on this sewer is being lifted and the stench is drifting over Washington and Israel.

Jordan and Egypt are already objecting to this plan. Not because they want to protect Israel but because each knows that a contiguous armed Palestinian State from Gaza through the 'West Bank' will cause the fall of their governments. The Saudis too will fall while the Arabist State Department goes into deep mourning for their part in the coming fiasco.

King Abdullah of Jordan is already fighting off Al Qaeda and Hamas as they bring weapons into Jordan for a coup d'etat. In Egypt, President Mubarak is fighting a holding war against the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. Have you noticed the spate of attacks in Jordan and Egypt against the soft targets of resort hotels? Be assured that they know their untrustworthy Muslim Arab Palestinian neighbors and understand they will (or already have) joined local Terrorists to overthrow their respective governments. In the meantime, President Hosni Mubarak is still playing both sides by allowing arms, explosives and terrorists into Gaza from the Sinai.

So far in Israel, good intelligence and military patrolling the outer perimeters of the State have kept down the attacks on soft targets like the Shalom Towers in Tel Aviv. If Olmert and Peres get their way, those patrols and checkpoints will be withdrawn, but, thanks to Sharon and Olmert, missiles are being launched from Gaza to Ashkelon where a major power plant and fuel depots are located. If ever there was a prima facie case of treason, this is it.

Would you be surprised to know that since the Sharon/Olmert blunder in Gush Katif/Gaza, over 500 missiles, Kassams and Katyushas, have been launched into Israel from Gaza. The Government's ordered response was to shoot artillery at empty fields and buildings.

Will being godfather to a Terrorist State of Muslim Palestinians leave Bush the legacy he wants? I don't think so. Perhaps the usurious oil cash tax on Americans will be sufficient compensation for this oil family. Presidents are insulated forever from past mistakes and live high on the hog, no matter what they have done.

As for Israel, can you think of one political crook of rank who has gone to jail for crimes against the nation and the Jewish people? (Don't count Omri Sharon - given the short prison sentence he has yet to serve - if he ever serves).

Watch the coming show in Washington as the Bush Administration feeds one-liners to the Media of how he and Olmert are bringing democracy and peace to the enlightened Palestinians and Hamas. The present slogan is "We must provide humanitarian aid to Abu Mazen so his Terrorists won't riot. Envelopes filled with cash are already being slipped to Abu Mazen and Ehud Olmert which is filling the pockets of those Kadima Cabinet members - always there when the price is right. One doesn't have to be a gypsy fortune teller to read these tea leaves - besides - these leaves are hemlock.

It is always possible that the President may see the error of his ways, send the Prime Minister Olmert packing and call off the dangerously flawed 'Road Map' scam to include cancelling the plans to empty the 'west bank' and continue the payments to Fatah and Hamas.

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). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 14, 2006.

1. A Cure for "Racism"

Moonbats, Inc. this weekend, including Israel's own Leftists for Auto-Annihilation, are attacking Israel for "racism" after its Supreme Court upheld a law that refuses automatic citizenship to West Bank or Gaza Palestinian Arabs who marry or "marry" Israeli Arabs. They are screaming that denial of the right of the Israeli spouse to obtain automatic citizenship for the Palestinian spouse constitutes "racism".

Oh yeah? Well, need we remind you that even foreign spouses of Americans do not get automatic US citizenship, nor even automatic residence rights. And ditto for many European countries.

And since when is it the entitlement of married couples composed of Israeli and Palestinian Arabs to live together as a couple in Israel? Huh? They can only be "united" in Israel?

Here is a BETTER solution to this supposed "Racism": let them go live as a couple in the West Bank or in Gaza of in Syria or in Lebanon! How come it is only in the direction of Israel that such couples can move to be "united"? Israel will not stop them from moving to Nablus or Jericho or Ramallah!! In fact, Israel's stopping them from living together in Jordan or Lebanon - now THAT would be racism!

2. The Wall Street Journal mocks "Rabbi" Mikey Lerner from Tikkun at http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110008368

'When it comes to religious tone-deafness, of course, Mr. McCain has plenty of competition. A spate of books, including "Thy Kingdom Come: An Evangelical's Lament," "The Left Hand of God" and my favorite, "Jesus Rode a Donkey," explicitly state that Democrats made a mistake by offending religious folks in 2004. Now they want to show how a good Christian should be a good leftist.

'"Please help me build an alternative to the Religious Right--before it's too late!" That was the subject line of an email from Rabbi Michael Lerner, the editor of Tikkun magazine and onetime adviser to Hillary Clinton, advertising his new "Network of Spiritual Progressives." Like his colleague Jim Wallis, the evangelical editor of Sojourners magazine, Rabbi Lerner has an agenda that sounds suspiciously identical to that of the Democratic Party. OK, it's actually sillier. Aside from wanting to pull out of Iraq immediately, raise taxes and increase government-funded social services, Rabbi Lerner wants to "seek a New Bottom Line in the Western world so that institutions get judged ... [by] the extent to which they maximize love and caring."

'No doubt there are people who agree with the pacifist-socialist sentiments of Messrs. Lerner and Wallis--even, suggests Mr. Green, a few evangelicals. But they are already voting for Democrats. And so, presumably, are the other spiritual progressives: mainline Protestants, Reform Jews, Buddhists and "humanists." Of the ones who are not, one might wonder: Where do you find them?

'Today, it is a mark of the spiritual liberal not to be bound by such conventions as regular attendance at a house of worship. But where do you think Karl Rove went looking for his "moral values" voters in the last election? Here's a hint: He didn't go door to door.

'In the past month, we have witnessed the passing of the Rev. William Sloane Coffin and Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, both men who were not only active in politics but steeped in their faith. In fact, they had pulpits. Today's religious left likes to invoke these names to show that liberalism has an honorable religious history. But it's a long way from the civil-rights movement to the "New Bottom Line." Especially if you're riding a donkey.'

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 Lee Caplan, May 14, 2006.

This comes from Jonathan Silverman who is organizing a rally in Washington when Olmert comes. Contact him at jonsilverman2002@yahoo.com

There is a HUGE RALLY to take place in DC to protest unilateral expulsions during Olmerts visit. As Marvin Belsky so eloquently put it: "...silence in the face of Olmert appeasement and accomodating the Israel oligarchy is not possible for anyone concerned with Israel and the US."

The rally will accomplish three things 1)get our cause into mainstream American media 2)give strength to the brave Jewish fighters resisting the expulsions in Israel 3)Show that the voice of American Jewry will not be hijacked by leftist organizations who speak in our name.

It is worth noting this is rally is occurring at an opportune time for broadcasting our cause vis-a-vis White House politics.

As neatly summarized by Ted Belman in his recent article, '...the Kadima strategy of convergence or consolidation is all but relegated to the dust bin. The EU is on record of opposing it and the US has not encouraged it. Neither wants Israel to make unilateral moves."

And according to recent and poignant DebkaFile exclusive because a report from two high ranking US officials painting the Israeli government "ill-informed and unfocused" on Iran nukes and "not on top of the methods" of Iranian financing of its nuclear and terrorism sponsoring activities"... including the radical Hizballah and Palestinian Hamas", makes it difficult for Olmert to get approval. As presented by Debka:

....of the subjects Olmert proposes to raise with US leaders....He also hopes to gain approval for his "convergence plan" for West Bank settlements...

The low performance grade the two officials awarded does not bode well for the new Israeli prime minister's chances of achieving a good rapport and cooperation with the Bush administration on any of these key issues.

Furthermore, brought to my attention by Daniel Pipes weblog, Geostrategy-Direct stated the Bush administration (in contrast to the State Department) harbors mixed feelings for Olmert. There is quiet concern "...over the image of Israel as a country ready to withdraw in the face of terrorism."

"Israel screwed us up with its unilateral withdrawal plan because this is what is expected of us in Iraq," a senior Bush aide said in a recent private conversation with a Republican House member. "But we can't be seen as intervening."

One of the things our rally will do is give Bush and his top aides and strategists a push in the right direction.

Before the forced deportation of the Gush Katif Jews took place, alongside the destruction of their homes, livelihood,and giving away their land, perhaps.... possibly..., just maybe..., it was apparent only to analysts and foreign policy-buffs how terrible and disasterous is such a course. But for anyone, absolutely anyone, right now to push for more unilateral Jewish expulsions... is beyond the pale. A desire for more unilateral expulsion should be documented and publicised as pathological and a mental illness.

No country has ever did to its citizens what Israel did and will do to more of to theirs. Never in history have we encountered Jews not interested in self-preservation. Never does one have a country give away it's land to the enemy of an ally; Never in history has their been so many obvious reasons to jump to action.

If there is a point to be made, the rally will be the place to make it.

Like when call went out to scramble reinforcements for nine houses in Amona, the call goes out here: email, phone, walk to a community center, get your organization on the boat, old-school it with door to door, whatever your method, and bring as many people as you can. Let's get done what needs to be done.

The rally is set for the 23rd in front of Capitol Hill.
Questions, comments, suggestions-- shoot them right over.
This is going to be as awesome as we want to make it.


Jonathan Silverman
Assistant Rally-in-DC Coordinator,

To Go To Top

Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, May 14, 2006.

The new Israeli government, led by PM Ehud Olmert, is a government made up of mostly extreme leftist, non-leaders; ministers and MK's who have no Jewish pride and no loyalty to our heritage and our promised Biblical homeland. The only glue that keeps this government together is their hatred towards any proud Jew and their pathological yearning to destroy the entire settlement enterprise in Judea & Samaria.

After the Gush Katif & Northern Shomron's destruction by the Sharon government, many dear Jews in the national camp have become depressed, pessimistic and even hopeless, thinking there is nothing to do to thwart the evil decrees.

Women in Green totally disagree with this fatalistic attitude. We believe we must learn from the mistakes made by our own camp this past summer. We must learn not to follow blindly people and Rabbis who pretend to be our "leaders" but in reality have made deals behind our backs with the expulsion authorities. See for instance the latest revelations on the Yesha Council.

We also must think and discuss why, this past summer, not enough soldiers refused the order of the uprooting. We must work harder to teach our children & grandchildren in the army not to take to the political brainwashing, and not to become robots that carry out any order. Our children must be taught daily that the Torah is above all and any law whose purpose is to harm the Land of Israel and give it away to the enemy, must be disobeyed.

But most importantly, we must learn not to quietly accept decrees meant to crush us. History shows that it is far easier to expel a diminished, weakened, ghettoized and demoralized population than a growing, vibrant and confident one.

The first action we must take to fight the government's plans is a mental one. We must tell ourselves and our family and friends, in Israel and abroad, that this time,if the government wants to uproot settlements in Judea & Samaria, we will not behave passively and nicely. We must broadcast the clear message that we will defend our right to travel, to walk and to live in our own homeland, the entire land of Israel. This must be done not on D-day but already now.

We must broadcast the clear message that Olmert's plan is a crime against the entire Jewish people in its homeland. The Olmert expulsion plan of "consolidating" Israel back to the 1967 suicidal borders is a crime that endangers not only the settlement movement but the entire existence of the state of Israel. From a security point of view it is clear: If leaving Gaza created a Hamas terror state attacking, daily, the Jews of the Negev and Ashkelon- Abandoning Judea & Samaria will bring that war to Jerusalem and Central Israel. Our struggle, therefore, for the survival of the entire settlement movement, is a struggle for the very physical survival of the Jewish state of israel.

From a moral-ideological point of view: if we keep quiet and let this government give away our Biblical Homeland, Hebron, Shilo, Bet-El, Tekoa, Nablus, East Jerusalem.....what is our moral right to live in Tel Aviv, Natanya and Beersheva?

Like with the famous story with King Solomon and the baby- The world will rightly say: if you willingly gave away part of your homeland- it must really not be yours!

In Summary:

the situation is difficult but it is in our power to act and please G-d change evil decrees. The more we act, the more we strengthen our own camp, the more we convince the citizens of Israel and the world that we intend to fight for our homeland!

Women in Green is closely in touch with all those who really want to act and make a difference. Together we have planned different activities for the future.

The first important activity is strengthening the "outposts".

The first crime this government wants to commit is to uproot over a hundred communities in Judea & Samaria, falsely identified as "illegal outposts". Women in Green want to show everybody that those "outposts" are flourishing Jewish communities, no different than the bigger cities in the area- populated by proud pioneers. Those communities need our unconditional support.

Women in Green is therefore starting a series of almost weekly inspiration trips to those communities. We urge you to join us and see for yourselves. Please reserve your seats on the bus as soon as possible for we only have one bus per trip.


JUNE 14,2006 at 10:30 am, Shalom Court in Jerusalem

the beginning of the trial of the State of Israel against Nadia Matar (Arising out of a letter Nadia sent to Jonathan Bassi wherein she is accused of "insulting a public official")

You are all invited to come and show support in this extremely important case involving the freedom to criticize public officials for their actions.

To read the letter Nadia wrote and to sign the petition please on click here.

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. Or write an email to wfit2@womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by George K. Bernstein, May 14, 2006.

I sent the following letter to President Bush today. I urge all of you to send similar letters before our government folds to the Quartet.

Dear Mr. President:

It is gratifying that our Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, says that the United States has not agreed to the "Quartet's" scheme to indirectly aid Hamas by funneling money to the Palestinian Arabs. Money is fungible and any amount that Hamas does not have to spend for so-called social programs will be used to fund terror.

I have never understood the sympathy shown for the "plight" of the Palestinian Arabs as a result of the civilized world's reaction to their Hamas government. They voted for Hamas, knowing that its platform was the destruction of Israel and that it considered the US its enemy. If a Hamas government means that those who elected it will suffer because of that election, so be it.

We didn't beat our breasts when we killed German and Japanese civilians during bombing raids during World War II. We had a war to win and Germany and Japan were our enemy. The Palestinian Arabs elected Hamas, which is no less an enemy of the United States, as well as of Israel. Let the Palestinian Arabs pay the price for their choice of government.

Contact George Bernstein at gkblaw@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 12, 2006.

In a world afflicted by the insidious pandemic of blatant as well as subtle anti-Semitism, all ethnic humans of good conscience immune to this scourge must come together and craft a rational strategy. Consistent with that noble aim, supporting the Jewish homeland Israel is imperative! Rampant bias toward Israel runs amuck. The manipulation of language within the media and in everyday conversation is an effective method enabling the tentacles of that bias to penetrate through every nation on this planet including Israel itself. For example, terms such as "occupier" and "settler", in common usage, purvey a deceptive image concerning the state of affairs in lands of disputed sovereignty; Judea, Samaria, and east Jerusalem. Occupy, per the American Heritage Dictionary, is defined "to seize possession of and maintain control over by or as if by conquest." Settlers are similarly defined as colonists of a new region. Facts on the ground in the disputed territories, land justifiably secured by Israel in 1967 as a consequence of vanquishing Arab aggressors intent on annihilating the Jewish State, suggest otherwise. Israeli troops are indeed deployed to protect a minority population of Jewish citizens, living suburban lives with modern conveniences, from hostile Arab neighbors. If such Jews were allowed to live in peace, there would be no need for such troops. The Jewish military reacts to Arab aggression; they do not maintain or wish to maintain control of an Arab populace. If militant Arabs would not attack Jews, there would be no checkpoints nor a need to monitor the flow of traffic in and out of the disputed territories. These facts would be obvious if fair reporting ruled the day, and if the pandemic of anti-Semitism was somehow eradicated.

The roots of anti-Semitism historically extend to the birth of Judaism, culminating in a twentieth century Holocaust beyond human comprehension. Yet, today's Arab fundamentalist nazis as well as other low life are not moved. Sadly, even much of the civilized world refuses to acknowledge its complicity in perpetuating anti-Semitic rhetoric, perhaps out of ignorance, perhaps out of a culturally programmed subtle hatred of the Jew. If the systematic slaughter of six million Jews could not soften humanity, could not compel world leaders to perhaps sympathize with and indeed support the Jewish homeland's dilemma, cut Israel some slack, is there any hope for the soul of such a cold-hearted species? The very fact that this tolerant democratic tiny nation of Israel, less than two tenths of one per cent as large as all surrounding mostly intolerant autocratic Middle Eastern Muslim regimes, thrives in the most bizarrely chaotic region of the world, producing state of the art technology dwarfing all recent achievements of its oil-rich but unproductive neighbors, is beyond amazing and should be admired planet wide. Alas, that is not the case.

Yet it makes no sense to lament over reality. Jews and by extension Israel drew a less than propitious hand in the grand scheme of evolving humanity: no aces or picture cards but enough threes, sevens, and eights to survive in a world without a heart. Above all, the State of Israel must not cede another inch of its justifiably extended territory to those that will only salivate for more and more until the Jewish State is but a memory. Supporters of this maligned nation and the people it represents must ever exhibit strength, never compromising to elements with insidious agendas. Declare robustly that Judea, Samaria, and the Golan Heights (perhaps someday a reacquired Gaza as well) are part of sovereign Israel, will forever be stewarded by Israel, and all of Jerusalem will forever be the capital of Israel. Declare that all Arabs living within such enclaves must pledge a solemn allegiance to the State of Israel, renounce publicly all those who would do harm to Israel, or leave! In a chronically anti-Semitic unjust world, Israel must stand tall and never bend to its sworn enemies. There is no other rational option.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 12, 2006.

Something of a dire nature has been developing for some time in Israel. It's not that governments are expected to run smoothly but, in Israel's case, successive governments have taken on the profile of a dysfunctional family.

For example, one of the primary directives of all Israeli governments has been the ability to defend the Jewish nation against her hostile neighbors. Why then would now PM Ehud Olmert appoint a man to the post of Defense Minister whose qualifications are less than zero. Amir Peretz was merely a tank maintenance mechanic, a job usually reserved for those considered unfit for combat or leadership roles. (No insult intended to tank mechanics who do play a vital part in keep Israel's excellent armor up and rolling.) But, such a man is hardly qualified to be Defense Minister in later life. Nor has his role as Labor Party leader, who used his position to bring the nation's workforce to a standstill with numerous work strikes, qualify him for being Defense Minister - but the reverse.

The real culprit was PM Olmert himself who is not qualified, given his past history of merely being a behind-the-scenes lawyer and an unflattering manipulator who used his successive government positions to advance his personal "good" fortune.

A just-released annual State Comptroller's report, accusing PM Olmert of gross corruption. The Comptroller's report also cites Police and Civil Service employment practices.

State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss details how Olmert, while under Ariel Sharon, chaired the Israel Land Council as Minister of Industry and Trade, used his authority in the questionable sale of properties at the Jaffa Port. Mandatory bidding was ignored and property estimates at $13.5 Million dollars was sold for $2.3 Million Dollars. The idea of conflict-of-interest never entered the mind of Olmert or, if it did, it was ignored.

Olmert was merely a lowly 'go-fer' when in the Army, hardly qualifying him as a future leader of an embattled nation. He has gathered around him a collection of similarly dis-functional Cabinet with many presently under police investigation for misuse of their position and money when in government posts.

Regrettably, the Police Department have become so politicized under various governments that the Police are no longer looked upon as fair and balanced authorities. They often keep investigations going for 6 or more years and when they wish to apply pressure to a certain politician or General, they suddenly activate the file.

(If this reminds you of J. Edgar Hoover's secret files on U.S. Congressmen used as an instrument of blackmail to force compliance, you would be right.)

Should Arik Sharon wake up from his coma, he could be faced with serious charges of using his various positions prior to and later as Prime Minister in personal gain.

The Olmert conglomeration of inept appointees defies descriptive words of "crisis in government". From Olmert on down to whatever party hack could threaten to withhold their support, they were offered position and funds to go along with Olmert's "Convergence" Doctrine.

It appears that every department that makes up the rule and function of running the nation is merely a political reward given over to a party hack. This particular government under Olmert called Kadima may be the most incompetent, dysfunctional government Israel has ever had.

Recall that Olmert was one of the key advisors to Sharon who advised abandoning Gush Katif in Gaza, despite warnings from the General Staff and top Security officials that Gaza would shortly become a global operational base for International Terrorism. Olmert's unwise counsel was the result of a man who had not a clue as to what he was advising or what the results would be. As predicted, Gaza has indeed become a staging area/training ground for Terrorists and a launching pad for Kassam Rockets and Katyusha Missiles. Olmert was NOT held to account and slipped past being held culpable for this disaster that is growing exponentially.

Now Olmert, along with his entourage of dysfunctional accomplices, wishes to duplicate his Gaza blunder in the much larger areas of Judea and Samaria. This, of courese, ties into the Bush "Road Map" and what Bush demands. Under a series of governments, the party hacks ran the affairs of government to suit their own purposes and line their own pockets. Vital and important and important projects for the nation were shunted aside as the politicians fed like pigs at the public trough. The former radio station now website, Arutz 7 points out that there should have been seven desalination plants up and running by now but, only one has been built.

Despite the ever-present threat of long-term drought on a Biblical level, these past governments (including Sharon and now Olmert) simply ignored the problem in deference to their more personal gains and status.

I will add to this criminal stupidity, the plan of Olmert to turn over the Judean and Samarian mountain hills, under which lies the irreplaceable aquifer that furnishes the coastal plain with 30% of its water. So - when does mere greed, avarice, and even stupidity cross the threshold into criminal negligence - even treason? RIGHT NOW!

Under the earlier Olso Accords signed September 13, 1993 and then the Gush Katif blunder, weapons flowed in abundance into Gaza and the 7 cities of Nablus, Tulkarem, Jenin, Qalqilya, Ram'Allah, Bethlehem, Gaza and Jericho, turned over to the control of Yassir Arafat, head of the new Palestinian Authority. The new Defense Minister Amir Peretz declares he will instead instruct the army to attack the Jews in Judea and Samaria. As Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says repeatedly in his Muslim "Mein Kampf" that he will destroy Israel and wipe it off the map. Peretz and Olmert focus on driving the best and most patriotic off the Land. Ahmadinejad now moves toward nuclear-tipped missiles to do the job while these incompetents fiddle.

Olmert is now coming to America May 23rd to get money and Bush approval to further weaken the Jewish State of Israel, divide Jerusalem and roust the Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria.

Recall how the German Nazis used to shout at the Jews; "Raus! Raus!" as they forced them out of their homes. Olmert is not preparing to face the rise of fanatic "Jihadists" (fighters for Islam) either inside of Israel or outside of her borders. The Army Generals are fearful of losing their jobs if they defy Olmert so the IDF soldiers are not being trained either to fight a war or even to believe in what they are fighting for. Instead, this doctrine is being molded to fit the Bush "Road Map" to establish the Palestinian State so a victory of sorts can be claimed as the Bush Legacy.

If the present Israeli government doesn't care, why should the Army? If ever there was a time for a new law, allowing (or mandating) a full military Tribunal and subsequent courts martial for a government, that time is now. Israel cannot afford a government that has turned into an asylum for the most dysfunctional of its people. This is a fight to the death and not an opportunity for corrupt politicians to play "Let's Make A Deal!"

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). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Shaw, May 12, 2006.

Have you heard about Najass? I suggest you learn to understand it.

Najass is, in Islam, something unclean. It is used, generally, against anyone who is a Non Muslim. Such a person is considered an untouchable. In short, someone to be detested.

An extension of this is to hate anyone who is Najass, especially is that person can be identified as belonging to another religion.

From that staring point, it is easy to justify suspicion, hatred, even violent action and murder against someone considered as Najass.

Hatred of Christians can be justified as them being described as Crusaders, or worse.

Hatred of Jews can be justified by quoting portions of the Koran and by imams calling Jews "pigs and monkeys'.

Such Najass attitudes in Islam has modern day resonance. Their violence against non Muslims can be reasoned as religious instruction. Yet, any response is readily interpreted as an insult or attack against Islam. Hence, the cycle of violence, and the justification for its intensification.

It all stems from Najass. Devout Muslims, steeped in Islamic teaching and principles, adopt a superior attitude that allows them to justify anything.

Umm Nidal is a member of the Hamas-led Palestinian parliament. This devout Muslim lady has glorified the death of her four sons to the extent that she is a living folk hero for Palestinians and radical Muslims everywhere.

The fact that her four sons were fanatical suicide bombers who murdered scores of innocent Israelis is justified and applauded by her religion.

Najass leads people like the religiously fanatical leader of Iran who, while denying the Holocaust, predicts the annihilation of the Jewish people in Israel as a god-given event.

Najass leads fanatics to fly planes into buildings, to butcher little children with ecstatic pleasure, to blow up Teenagers in pizza parlours, while screaming 'Allah Akbar!" "God is Great!"

This Najass, hatred of the non believer, causes so-called moderate Muslims to remain silent while these outrages are perpetrated by their co-religionists in London., Madrid, Bali, Amman, Cairo, and in the Sinai.

Najass, however, enables them to take to the streets to join the mass demonstrations against cartoons, America, Israel, or anything non Islamic.

This is at the core of the cycle of violence that is shaking our world. Supporters of Islam may claim that they are merely responding to oppression and to insults against their religion by a corrupt and threatening West, and Israel.

They may further claim, together with their non Muslim supporters, that American and British foreign policy, and Israeli actions, that is the cause of the conflict.

This is incorrect. It is false.

The root cause is the awakening of an Islam that follows the creed of Najass. There is a gathering Islamic storm that desires to restore the world to their ideology by removing anything that is considered Najass from their presence. This train of thought will not tolerate anything that challenges them and, By extension, anything done to remove the Najass from their world is tolerable and justified.

The only outcome, for them, is a worldwide Islamic caliphate, even if one method to achieve this (according to the mad leader of Iran) is a nuclear Armageddon.

Contact Barry Shaw at netre@matav.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah 15, May 12, 2006.
This was written by Colin Nickerson and appeared in the Boston Globe.

Later this month, after years of pressure from Holocaust scholars, Jewish groups, and the U.S. government, the immense terror trove at the Red Cross's International Tracing Service are expected to be opened to historians and other researchers for the first time. "In the concentration camps, unlike the extermination camps, everything was carefully recorded," said archive manager Udo Jost.

A cardboard-covered composition book, of the type that schoolchildren use for handwriting practice, describes the special killing of 300 prisoners at Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria on April 20, 1942, to mark the Fuehrer's birthday. The execution list runs for pages, each individual receiving a single line - name, birthdate, place of birth, inmate number, and cause of death, which for each was a single bullet to the base of the skull. The birthday celebration murders started at 11:20 a.m. 11:22 - Neck shot. 11:24 - Neck shot. 11:26 - Neck shot. (Boston Globe)

Contact Avodah 15 at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard A. Hellman, May 12, 2006.

Shabbat Shalom, Friends!

Thank you for considering actions to urge all your contacts, Today through June 15, to Ramp up the numbers of calls to White House to move our U.S. Ambassador to Jerusalem! Even 30 calls a day will put this in the top ten issues at the White House, and 100 or more will really light up the boards!

Please call on everyone you know to call the White House at 202-456-1111 (best); fax 202-456-2461, or email president @whitehouse.gov

And have them all call their senators and representatives, even at their local district offices, to tell them to get moving on a bill, resolution or letter to the President indicating that they were serious about moving our ambassador to Jerusalem when they passed the '95 law, and that they expect him to do it now.

Urge Pres. Bush

* To keep his 2000 campaign promise to move embassy "as a first order of business";
* To obey the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act that requires this move;
* To end the historically unique discrimination against Israel in not recognizing her capital, while we have recognized even the capitals even of enemy states; and instead
* To treat Israel as the real friend and ally that she is today, regardless of what may happen to Jerusalem in the future.
* To avoid setting a new record on June 15, by breaking his tie with Clinton at ten six-month extensions of the 1996 legal deadline each;
* To be like Truman when he recognized Israel against State Department arguments May 14, 1948,
* To avoid building a new embassy now since we have existing buildings in Jerusalem; and
* To recall his own statements expressing doubts his 2002 "two state vision" is likely to be realized on his watch, and thus should not be seen as a prelude to this move of our ambassador.

Press Release


The June 15th 2006 deadline for moving our US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem is fast approaching.

The 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act states that the US Embassy should be there, and President Bush promised in his 2000 campaign to put it there "as a first order of business."

Instead, Dick Hellman, President of CIPAC (Christians' Israel Public Action Campaign) recently wrote President Bush, urging him to follow through NOW, pointing out that he was at this point tied with former President Clinton for having taken 10 six-month extensions under this act, delaying this move.

He further wrote:

"No other nation ever made Israel its capital. The Koran makes no mention of Jerusalem.

We Christians have no earthly capital. (but) The Jewish scriptures mention Jerusalem 600 times (!).

"At heart, this involves recognizing the City of David and of the Great King. Psalms 137:5-6 warns of stark consequences for ignoring Jerusalem's centrality:

"If I forget thee, oh Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its ability. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy."

"Therefore, unless you order the US Ambassador in Israel to make Jerusalem his official location (employing one of our existing buildings for now), we will ask Congress to delete your authority to take more extensions of this recognition of Israel's capital.

"Since we believe that you are a man of your word, we expect you to keep your promise and place our Ambassador in Jerusalem, where he belongs, before June 15, 2006.

"Respectfully yours, with our prayers for you and yours,

Richard A Hellman

Please contact Mr.. Hellman at 202-234-3600 or 202-425-4009 to interview.

For Mr. Hellman:

Bob Highland
Public Relations Director
Christians' Israel Public Action Campaign


March 15, 2006

Dear Mr. President:

We urge you to move our U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem now, instead of taking an 11th six-month extension in mid-June - and thereby breaking the unenviable record you share with your predecessor, Bill Clinton, who took 10 extensions as you now have done.

Not only does the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act state that the U.S. Embassy should be in Jerusalem, but also you promised in your 2000 Campaign to move our Embassy up to Jerusalem "as a first order of business."

As we have written to you, and I am sure you recognize, no other nation or people has the biblical, historical and moral rights to Jerusalem as a Capital that Israel has. No other nation ever made Israel its capital. The Koran makes no mention of Jerusalem. We Christians have no earthly capital. The Jewish Scriptures mention Jerusalem 600 times.

At heart this involves recognizing the City of David and of the Great King. Psalms 137:5-6 warns of stark consequences for ignoring Jerusalem's centrality: "If I forget thee, oh Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its ability. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy."

Therefore, unless you order the U.S. Ambassador in Israel to make Jerusalem his official location (employing one of our existing buildings for now), we will ask Congress to delete your authority to take more extensions of this recognition of Israel's capital.

Since we believe that you are a man of your word, we expect you to keep your promise and place our Ambassador in Jerusalem, where he belongs, before June 15, 2006.

Respectfully yours, with our prayers for you and yours, as a first order of business."

Richard A. Hellman

Cc. All CIPAC members and other friends of Israel: please email, fax, telephone, write the President; copy your U.S. Senators and Representatives (for details on how to do this, see www.cipaconline.org), and send us copies

Contact Richard Hellman at hellman@cipaconline.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Angela Bertz, May 12, 2006.

The small town of Soham sits in low lying countryside in the English county of Cambridgeshire. The town is greatly overshadowed by the nearby market town of Newmarket, world famous for horse racing and the distinguished university town of Cambridge.

On August 4th 2002 Sky News, would give Soham and the horrible story that unfolded that day its almost undivided attention. Camera crews focused almost 24/7 on two missing ten year old schoolgirls, Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells.

At 6.45 am (British time) as Jessica and Holly still slept peacefully in their beds Jihad Hamadeh, a resident of the Palestinian town of Jenin detonated a bomb on an Israeli bus, traveling between Haifa and Safed. Nine people were killed instantly and 50 more were wounded. Hamadeh had been dispatched by Hamas and aided and abetted by two Israeli Arab citizens, who were able to use their knowledge and freedom of movement in Israel to find a suitable target.

At 9.45 am as Jessica and Holly would probably have been enjoying a family breakfast a Palestinian gunman opened fire on a telecommunications truck parked on the border of Jerusalem's old city. Two people were killed and 17 more were wounded. The Fatah al-Aqsa Brigade, closely associated with Yasser Arafat claimed responsibility for the attack.

In Israel as 11 dead bodies were being identified and 70 more were being treated for their injuries Jessica and Holly's day was developing in a leisurely manner. Just before noon Jessica headed for Holly's nearby house to give her a necklace she had bought on a Menorca holiday. The girls spent some time playing on the computer, stopping to eat sandwiches and to pop out for about 20 minutes to buy some sweets at the nearby sports center. Just after 5 pm the two girls, who were avid Manchester United fans posed for a picture wearing the vivid bright red strip of their favourite team. They ate a barbecue dinner shortly afterwards and at about 18.15 the parents heard the girls chatter in Holly's bedroom before they went out. Their parents would never see them alive again.

At just after 18.30 two witnesses reported seeing the girls walking linked arm in arm and heading down a footpath. It would have brought them right past the house where the school caretaker Ian Huntley lived. The girls were never seen again and never returned home. At 21.45 the police were summoned.

An hour later a three year old girl in Israel watched as Palestinian gunmen opened fire on their car, killing her father and pregnant mother. For the second time that day a group affiliated with Arafat's Fatah group claimed responsibility. The little girl was injured.

Two weeks later on August 17th the bodies of Jessica and Holly were found in a nearby ditch. After an investigation Ian Huntley was charged with their murder. He was sentenced to a life behind bars in a high security prison and his house was demolished.

On May 27th, almost a year after the AUT's unsuccessful attempt to boycott Israel's Universities, the NATFHE, who are the largest trade union and professional association for lecturers, trainers, researchers and managers working in higher education throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland are poised to recommend passing the same motion. Almost 67,000 Palestinian terrorism apologists are set to fall back on the usual twilight zone mentality, affecting most of world when it comes to the poor Palestinians. The NATFHE it seems are just another pathetic organization getting on the ever fashionable, always believable and never contested Palestinian propaganda bandwagon.

Maybe the NATFHE should equate the same policies they use to ridicule a sovereign state, forced by reality and not by design to target those that seek their destruction to the horrible events in Soham.

If this was the case Ian Huntley would have killed the little girls as part of an armed resistance. He would have considered their presence on the footpath leading to his door as occupied territory. He would have set the border of his make believe domain to include his garden, and the soon to be incorporated British Isles. There would be no historical facts to back his claim, but a few crocodile tears in front of the worlds press would soon get you all the sympathy you need. Throw in some tales of starvation and half a dozen Sue Blackwell's who are able to base everything on fictional historical inaccuracy and you would soon be able to pull the wool over most of the worlds eyes. The Palestinians can be thanked for perfecting that art to perfection.

The press would have reacted with pity and empathy for the two little girls, but only for about 5 minutes before turning their attention back to Huntley and his desperate struggle.

There would be almost daily pictures of Huntley posing in front of his front gate weeping and talking of his humiliation every time he is forced to go through it. He would talk of the former caretakers and how they have now formed a resistance movement to combat the unfair treatment they now face at the hands of the British. He would be careful to never mention the excellent care he received in one of their hospitals a couple of years ago. He would not mention the electricity and water they supply to him 24/7.

Soham schools will be boycotted by other schools. The children will become pariahs, unable to compete in any area school event. Encouraged by Huntley they will burn British flags and dream of the day when they can defend their newly invented homeland.

Finally armed British forces poised on nearby roof tops will uncover information that leads them to capturing and charging Huntley with Jessica and Holly's murder. His sentencing to life imprisonment will send senses reeling, with many calling, not only for his release but to make him Prime Minister of the newly appointed state of Soham.

Before this happens some useful idiot and Rachel Corrie clone will throw herself in front of a bulldozer trying to prevent British forces from destroying the home where the two little girls were murdered. Huntley will be referred to as a desperate and lowly caretaker, who chose the only way he had to fight back the savage crimes the British had inflicted on his homeland.

The scenario is farcical beyond belief; however this is more or less what the NATFHE have based their boycott of Israel on. If the press and most world leaders are to be believed, Israel's targeted killings of the monsters that actively promote and dispatch people to Israel to murder and maim are seen as an affront to human dignity. Checkpoints that now cause delays are considered a humiliation. Searching a Palestinian ambulance is criminal. The wall that Israel has now built to deter the terrorists from entering has received criticism from around the world. The extra 20 minutes it now takes a Palestinian farmer to reach his field is more important than the scores of Israeli lives it now saves. Demolishing homes that have been used by terrorists or for smuggling weapons has reached the corridors of the United Nations and Amnesty International, who have constantly condemned not the Palestinians, but Israel.

The imprisonment of Ian Huntley saw justice being served for the crime he committed. If Israel's policies, which are so troubling for the NATFHE could have prevented even one of the 13 deaths on that same day, then what right does this organization have to sit as judge, jury and prosecutor on policies that have proven to save lives.

Policies, especially ones instigated by a government and designed to appeal to the masses can take years before they become a way of life for the people. Israel, since its establishment has lived in the shadow of a dozen countries that seek to destroy it. Never in its short history has it ever adopted policies of hatred, but has constantly sought ways to bridge the sometimes insurmountable gaps with it neighbours especially the Palestinians. These have included the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from jails, to allowing hundreds of Palestinians to take advantage of free healthcare facilities in its hospitals. These are not widely reported as they would be counter productive to all the pathetic apologists that seek to paint Israel in a demonic light, while turning a blind eye to hate incitement policies adopted by the Palestinians, which have yet to see the light of day at the end of any UN Resolution.

Palestinian policy, which has for years stirred the population into a frenzy of hatred against Israel and cruelly demonized a whole generation of its children could have presented itself in no more damning light than on PA TV on April 10 of this year. A young girl read out part of a poem as part of Palestinian Children's day.

"Even if all the Jews arrived (in Israel) seeking refuge with the monkeys [as Jews are commonly called]... we will never accept compensation for our land. There is no substitute for Jerusalem!... Our death is like life, My homeland is the invaders' grave... I will walk 1000 miles even if I die in it as a Martyr..."

The NATFHE needs to ask itself if Jessica and Holly could ever have related to such twisted and ugly sentiments. They were sweet little girls enjoying an innocent childhood and like more than 120 Israeli children killed by Palestinians lived in a world far removed from such vile hatred.

What is even more appalling is that the audience that applauded this young girl was no other than PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and several PA officials. These are the same people that have since the death of Arafat demanded endless unconditional concessions, many detrimental to Israel own security. The whole world, including the AUT and NATFHE have the audacity to single out Israel with its blatantly one sided hypocrisy, judging its policies to protect its own children, not against one to many Ian Huntley's but against millions of Palestinians as deserving of an academic boycott.

You really do have to live in the twilight zone to be able to do that.

Contact Angela Bertz at angela03@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 12, 2006.


The U.S. has an inconsistent record on terrorism. It often fails to recognize who are terrorists and whom among Muslims it should work with. One example is the Fulbright scholarship. Some are awarded to terrorists. Daniel Pipes exposed one tied to Hamas. Another was exposed in a book.

These scholars got invited into the US, one to teach, the other to work in a Congressional office! (Pipes #667, 4/23.)


Indignant over the media's fear of publicizing the Danish cartoons about Muhammad, a professor at a Christian college, Belmont U. at Nashville, put one of his own onto his website. He didn't publicize it; he forgot it; others noticed. As a result, the University and he parted ways. Daniel Pipes sees each capitulation to Islam as bringing more imposition of Sharia (Pipes #678, 4/24). The cartoon depicted Muhammad victimizing innocent civilians, as history records he did.


Iran's supreme leader told the head of Sudan that Iran would share nuclear technology with it. Iran's chief negotiator said that if Iran's facilities are attacked, Iran would rebuild them in hidden places (NY Times, 4/26, A6).

The world's tepid response to Iran's approaching nuclear capability and its threats to launch a nuclear war of genocide encourages the Islamists and indicates a weakness in the rest of the world that they will exploit (IMRA, 4/24 from Israeli Pres. Katsav).

We must not allow nuclear weapons to be possessed by rogue states whose irresponsibility extends to jihad and genocide.

Hitler moved against the Jews with confidence that the rest of the world didn't care. He also exploited the hesitancy by the other developed nations to challenge his imperialism.


Gerald Steinberg itemizes difficulties it would take considerable time for Iran to overcome, before it can make nuclear weapons. He thinks Iran is bluffing, to discourage sanctions. Same goes for its supposed tests of potent new conventional weapons, meant to discourage military intervention. The boasting is done to cover up weakness. In that case, suggests Mr. Steinberg, impose sanctions and prevent Iran from going nuclear. Sanctions should be tried, without giving up the right to attack. Sanctions could make the regime more unpopular (IMRA, 4/24). If he is wrong, we may be killed.


Daniel Pipes offered Israelis some advice for defeating the Arab jihad against it, so they give up their goal of destroying Israel. The English-language Israeli papers rejected the advice. They needn't have gotten exercised over it, he suggests, since the government obviously is not interested in winning the war. He cited as evidence the government retaliation against Hamas for a recent terrorist attack that Hamas praised and encourages.

The government rescinded the Jerusalem residency permits of four Hamas members of the P.A. legislature. As a result, the four no longer would receive Israeli national insurance benefits and the right to travel throughout Israel. They are considering appealing to the Israeli courts, which usually are sympathetic to Arab claims for citizenship rights. The courts might ask the government how it justifies rescinding their residency permits for being terrorists and not arresting them for being terrorists.

Remarked Pipes: (1) Good question by the courts; (2) Note that terrorists exploit the Israeli judiciary against national security; and (3) What dire punishment if Hamas members lost Jerusalem bus passes and day care center privileges! (Pipes #667, 4/23.)

The news and the remarks bring out what unpatriotic, foolish, defeatists Israeli leaders are. They tie one hand behind their backs.

They also have a dishonest way of conducting their efforts, more to deceive their own people than to demoralize the enemy. When they decide to strike at terrorist infrastructure, they have a target handy. This indicates to me that they have a list ready in advance. If they were sincerely at war against the Arabs instead of against their own people, they would attack every target on that list at once, and not have lists of un-attacked targets.

Isn't it obvious that Israel should arrest all known members of terrorist organizations residing in Jerusalem (and the rest of Israel), as well as rescind their residency (and that of their families)? I think that all active terrorists should be executed, but that would take some doing not to cause more problems for Israel with the hypocritically "humane."


Russia launched a satellite for Israel to be used to monitor Iran's nuclear activities (NY Times, 4/26, A6).

Since Russia is behind Iran's nuclear activities, and since it still takes the Arab side in the Arab-Israel conflict, Israel would be foolish to depend on Russian help against Iran. However, the satellite was Israeli and Russia just launched it, so Russia probably did not have an opportunity to tamper with the satellite.

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 richardshulman5@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Paula Stern, May 12, 2006.

Beyond the land of the Uninformed and the Perplexed, even beyond the cities and towns of the Misguided, lies the land of the Fools and the Idiots. The Uninformed wonder about the price of bread, where the next bomb will go off, but of those who have no home, of those who have been crushed by our government, they know not, and sometimes care not.

The Perplexed stare at the happenings of our country and wonder how it all went wrong. It seems so obvious, they say to themselves, so clear. A roadmap that leads nowhere cannot be followed; negotiations and talks with only one side in attendance is doomed to fail. A nation that does not put the needs of its own people above those of its enemies will not long be among the nations of the world.

The Misguided do not ponder the ineffectiveness of Olmert, the contradictions, the absurdities. The world is not simple for the Misguided. They lend their voice to one plan, only to find they are not happy with the results. Wasn't disengagement supposed to end these rocket attacks?

Shouldn't the government have known that withdrawing from northern Gaza would simply bring the rockets raining down on Ashkelon? Don't we have enough internal strife and poverty? The Misguided must have tremendous faith in the Divine to accept these contradictions. If they believe in Olmert and Kadima, and yet don't have this deep faith, they would be Idiots.

The confusion of the Misguided encourages the Fools. Fools believe in ideas without explanation or reason. The Arabs say they want land and so let's give them land, say the Fools. Won't they then give us peace?

The Arabs say that if we don't ease the closure, they will send suicide bombers. The world hears the cries of the Palestinian and so the Foolish leaders ease the closure, but the suicide bombers come anyway. Show restraint, says the world, and the Fools listen.

The Palestinians elect a terrorist organization to represent them before the nations of the world. The world says they will not send Hamas aid, not finance their war against Israel. But the world buckles, as we all expected. Would Israel stand alone against a terrorist government that vows our destruction? Apparently not. The latest news is that the Fools in our government have agreed to transfer $50 million dollars. Tomorrow's security realities mean nothing to them. They focus only on today. What will the world think today? This is the way of Fools.

Inevitably, the smartest of the Fools are the Idiots. Only idiots could have thought up a plan called "unilateral disengagement"; and only the Fools and the Misguided could have thought it would work. When suggested by the right; it was called "transfer". Call it "Disengagement" instead of "transfer"; move Jews instead of Arabs, and the Idiots succeeded in destroying beautiful and vibrant communities, getting Jewish synagogues desecrated, Israelis made homeless and jobless and those rockets keep falling day after day after day.

And now, we see the greatest of all farces is upon us. The situation continues get worse; the rockets fall closer and closer to their intended target (the Ashkelon power plant). All say it is only a matter of time before one of those rockets hits it or something even worse. Even the Idiots understand that tragedy is, at all time, only a few meters in any direction, a question of timing and location. Will it be the power plant -- or will it be a school?

The IDF and the security forces rush to destroy nine Jewish houses on a hilltop or evacuate three Israeli families from a building in Hebron, all while bombs blow up in Tel Aviv. To me, this is all a clear sign that the Idiots have been replaced by Blooming Idiots, so much more foolish and evil than the mere Idiots.

Only a Blooming Idiot would have failed to understand the basic physics of an evacuation. What is moved from one place, must have another place to which it will be moved. Since we were not under any joint agreement (the definition of unilateral "disengagement"), couldn't Lachish/Egoz and other neighborhoods have been developed and THEN Gaza emptied? Were we so anxious to have the rockets reaching Ashkelon that we couldn't at least see to our own?

Only Blooming Idiots would glory in the claim that SELA had managed to compensate 80% of the refugees, some eight months after the expulsion. The money should have been handed to them before they're homes were even destroyed. There is no justification for the State holding onto the money for eight long months while these people were homeless. Absolutely no pride can be taken in the fact that 20% remain without compensation.

Only a Blooming Idiot would spread barbed wire around thousands of Jews (in Kfar Maimon); or send soldiers dressed in black uniforms to forcibly evict Jews from their homes.

Only a Blooming Idiot would send police in black uniforms against Israeli civilians (again) to Amona and Hebron. With the evidence of brutality and excessive violence before them in the numbers of wounded and the widely publicized pictures, only a Blooming Idiot would say, "The police should be congratulated for carrying out the mission." (Public Security Minister Gideon Ezra).

Only a Blooming Idiot would have underestimated the pain and anger of the Orange youth. Instead of seeking to ease the pain by discussion and compassion, the army and government continue to resort to isolation, condemnation and ridicule. Blooming Idiots abound.

Only a Blooming Idiot would take a tin hut and call it a "Caravilla" and only the Misguided could nod their heads and believe the government had taken care of the refugees from Gush Katif, Northern Gaza and Northern Shomron.

And finally, only a Blooming Idiot would throw an excellent soldier out of the army because he refused to shake the hand of the man responsible for making his family homeless. Other men might offer words of comfort or explanation. Others might respect that the soldier had given the required respect with the customary salute he offered to his "superior" officer and left it at that.

Only the worst of the Blooming Idiots would decide that his personal ego was more important than the needs and feelings of a young man who has suffered, lost his home and a family member and simply can't, simply can't shake that Idiot's hand.

But time and reality are the enemies of the Idiots and the Fools. Human nature will reveal the Blooming Idiots and the Fools for what they are. A survey recently published in the Israeli media showed that almost two out of every three Israelis believe that Israel should encourage Arabs to leave the country. Israelis are no longer willing to be fooled into accepting endless violence, incitement and attacks.

If you want to live in our country, you must accept the democratic nation we have created. If the Arabs cannot cease the incitement, the attacks, the endless hatred, they should leave and go to any one of twenty-two Arab nations willing to offer them the repressive, male-dominated, non-democratic, and violent government they seem to prefer.

Israel is our land, granted to us almost before time began. Modern history and the United Nations only verified what Jews have known for all time. This land is ours to love and settle, to cherish above all others. Only here are we home; we have no other country, no other land. If the Arabs want to share our home, they can only do so by respecting our right to be here as well. The Idiots and Fools can do all they want; they will never change this fact.

Contact Paula Stern at paula@writepoint.com or visit her website: www.paulasays.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Frankfurter, May 12, 2006.

Our friend, Arnold Roth, has created a new blog, specifically to de-bunk the media image that Hamas or the PA is sticking to some sort of unilaterally decared cease-fire.


Scroll through it. Worth a read and regular visits.


David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East. To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/

To Go To Top

Posted by Jeff Weintraub, May 11, 2006.

You may recall that about a year ago the Association of University Teachers (AUT) in Britain voted to institute a blacklist of academics from two Israeli universities, Haifa and Bar-Ilan, with an exemption for those who expressed approved political views. (This was misleadingly described as a "boycott," but the accurate term for this practice is an academic blacklist.) These measures were intended as a first step toward a comprehensive blacklist of Israeli academics.

The AUT blacklist was publicly condemned by several major academic and scholarly associations as a violation of the basic principles of academic freedom and open intellectual exchange. These included American Association of University Professors (AAUP), the Middle East Studies Association (MESA), the American Political Science Association (APSA), the New York Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. A petition I circulated to Oppose the Blacklist of Israeli Academics was signed by over 5,000 people from around the world, including a large number of prominent scholars. After several weeks of further debate, the blacklist was repealed by the AUT membership.

Now this stupid and pernicious idea is being resurrected by members of the other major British academic union, the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE). A blacklist proposal has been introduced to be considered at NATFHE's national conference on May 27-29. In this case, the blacklist would apply to all Israeli academics, but would be applied in a more underhanded and unaccountable manner. The proposal itself is framed in coded and disingenuous language, but the intent is to endorse a blacklist without exposing NATFHE to possible legal action:

Conference notes continuing Israeli apartheid policies, including construction of the exclusion wall, and discriminatory educational practices. It recalls its motion of solidarity last year for the AUT resolution to exercise moral and professional responsibility.

Conference instructs the NEC to facilitate meetings in each university and college, and to circulate information to Branches, offering to fund the speakers' travel costs.

Conference invites members to consider their own responsibility for ensuring equity and non-discrimination in contacts with Israeli educational institutions or individuals and to consider the appropriateness of a boycott of those that do not publicly dissociate themselves from such policies.

For further information, see "Academic blacklist season again?" (jeffweintraub.blogspot.com/2006/05/academic-blacklist-season-again.htmland) and "NATFHE: Chuck out 198C!" by Jon Pike (www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=410#). To quote Jon Pike

It is clear that the proposers of 198C think that it is appropriate to cut off links with Israeli individuals, but they dont, yet again, have the guts to say so. It is clear, once again, that the proposers of 198C think it is appropriate to introduce a McCarthyism test (public disassociation from 'apartheid policies') as a precondition to ordinary academic interchange. And, once again, this runs flat up against a concern with academic freedom. And it is clear that they want to endorse a private, covert, boycott.

Let's be stone cold clear about this: what the proposers of this resolution want is union endorsement for actions that are, in effect, anti-Semitic. They aim to endorse the actions of Mona Baker, who sacked members of the editorial board of her journal because they were affiliated to Israeli Universities. We know that Mona Baker's policy is, in effect, anti-Semitic: she doesn't want to have contact with any individuals who are affiliated with Israeli institutions, and those people will largely be Jews. And we know, of course, that Mona Baker thinks these actions are 'appropriate' (and, when criticised, complains bitterly about the Jewish press). We know, too that concerned supporters of Palestinian rights like Prof. Judith Butler clearly distance themselves from Baker. Yet the South East region of Natfhe want their union to endorse Baker-type actions.

The gutlessness is extraordinary. We know that the proposers of the resolution want a full-on official boycott of all Israeli institutions, and we know that they daren't subject their argument for this to democratic or legal scrutiny. These bold advocates of united collective action retreat to advocacy of covert individual discriminatory acts.

And there is much more wrong with this resolution. It gets its history wrong. Natfhe did not 'pass a motion of solidarity last year for the AUT resolution to exercise moral and professional responsibility'.

There was no such thing as an AUT resolution to exercise moral and professional responsibility. (But the suggestion that there was, is interesting. It's clear that the proposers think that being morally responsibility equals being in favour of a boycott. What a crass view!)

There were three AUT boycott resolutions. NATFHE passed a rather silly resolution defending AUT's right to pass resolutions -- a right that was never in doubt. The boycott resolutions were overturned by the AUT membership. Is South East region of Natfhe in solidarity with the AUT members who voted overwhelmingly against the boycott? Or does it pick and choose which AUT branches it is in solidarity with? (In the South East, is it in solidarity with Sussex University AUT, which opposed the boycott, just up the road from Tom Hickey of the SWP and South East Natfhe?)

This is a move by an unrepresentative group in Natfhe to reopen the boycott debate in a dishonest and disingenuous way. The attempt comes just as Natfhe and the AUT (my union) are engaged in a joint industrial dispute over pay, and as we move towards merger.

A PETITION to oppose this new blacklist proposal is being circulated by Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME). It is described below. If you are an academic, a graduate student, or a scholar of any other kind, please sign it.

Yours for academic freedom,
Jeff Weintraub

From the weblog of Norman Geras (www.Normblog.com)
May 11, 2006

Oppose the blacklisting of Israeli academics

There's an appeal here from Scholars WorldWide to members of NATFHE:

We, the undersigned faculty members from around the world, urge the Members and Board of the British National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education to oppose any resolution coming to the floor for a vote and/or defeat all resolutions that should be voted upon that would boycott scholars and faculty from Israeli academic institutions at the annual meeting of NATHFE, May 27-29, 2006[.]

Academic boycott actions are antithetical not only to the principles of academic freedom, but also to the quest for peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Academics often have the knowledge and skills specifically needed for conflict resolution, and can work with colleagues and policy makers from opposing sides on developing equitable solutions to complex problems. Boycotting would deprive the world of the potential contributions of Israeli scholars in these and other humanitarian efforts and would confer no benefit to the Palestinian people.

Those who perpetuate and participate in such boycotts are separating themselves from the academic community as opposed to bringing it together to work for peace and support academic freedom.

We urge our colleagues in the United Kingdom to withdraw or defeat these resolutions and we pledge ourselves to encourage our colleagues from around the world to oppose this boycott action.

Please click here to sign this petition if you're eligible to do so. A US colleague also writes to suggest that those who have affiliations with Israeli universities should, as a protest against all boycott efforts, make sure to include these affiliations in their email addresses. (Thanks: HG.)

Contact Jeff Weintraub at aweintra@sas.upenn.edu.

To Go To Top

Posted by Anita Tucker, May 11, 2006.

This is the official Prime Minister's media report:

Shalom, Anita Tucker

Over 80% of Gaza evacuees maintain communities
(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister's Office Director-General Ilan Cohen and Disengagement Authority (Sela) Director Yonatan Basi yesterday (Wednesday, 10 May 2006) convened all the professional elements who participated in implementing the Disengagement Plan for a staff discussion to summarize the process.

The following issues were discussed: Preparations by government ministries and the security establishment on civilian issues; the advance legislative process; the stages of the evacuation; permanent and temporary housing; coordination among the various relevant bodies; the need for oversight of the process and the need for checks and balances vs the government's need for flexibility of action; how the government can deal with a lack of cooperation by residents and with uncertainty; and coordination between the Disengagement Authority and the other government and security establishment bodies.

It was reported that over 80% of the families have maintained their communal frameworks. It was emphasized that the challenge now facing the government is to lead these communities to permanent housing, while maintaining their community frameworks. In the past seven months, approximately 1,200 new housing units have been built for evacuees at 24 sites throughout the country. More than 3,500 claims for compensation have been dealt with; most families have received full compensation. The Ministerial Committee on Assisting the Residents of the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria made over 130 decisions that were carried out in full.

Cohen and Basi instructed the professional elements to continue investigating matters in depth in order to submit the necessary lessons to the decision-makers.

Note how the PM media office play with the words and numbers to mislead the reader and thus cause blatant lies to appear as the truth without actually lying outright.

1. It says the meeting was convened to "summarize the process" - not to summarize the process up until now. This infers the process is basically over and now we have to begin planning for the new process for new "converged process" DPs.

2. "convened all the professional elements who participated in implementing the Disengagement Plan for a staff discussion to summarize the process." -- i.e.They hint that they are summarizing in order to plan for future so this report infers that the lack of planning for GK people was because of the residents "lack of cooperation" and the "uncertainty" of needs as a result. This is a blatant lie -but it hints that in the future if gov't doesn't plan properly it will also be because of "uncertainty" of needs -- so don't blame the gov't next time either.

3. It says "It was reported that over 80% of the families have maintained their communal frameworks" but it doesn't say that this is in spite of the fact that the gov't made no preparation to prepare for communities and that the gov't did all it could to prevent the communities from staying whole and finding communal solutions. Report doesn't mention that each original community of 21 communities of GK (except for one) is now thanks to the government's help divided into two, three or more splinters and are struggling to keep these sub-communities together in spite of all gov't efforts otherwise. However, it is true that "over 80% of the families have maintained their communal frameworks, but not exactly as shortened in heading of report that "Over 80% of Gaza evacuees maintain communities" which in this case is a very unclear generalization.

4. "In the past seven months, approximately 1,200 new housing units have been built for evacuees at 24 sites throughout the country. " ...1200 new permanent housing units or temporary caravillas? This is very not clear? Only we know it is caravillas -- and though they were "built", it took ages before they could be livable.

5. "More than 3,500 claims for compensation have been dealt with;" not clear -- 3500 out of 3500 -- or perhaps the truth -- 3500 out of at least 11,000 potential claims (approx.9000+ residents claims for years lived there + approx. 1500 for homes + approx. 650 for businesses. That means less than a third have been "dealt with" not necessarily resolved and paid. "Dealt with might mean that the paper was moved from one desk to next..."

6. "most families have received full compensation..." Most of which families? Do they mean most of the families representing the 3500 claims mentioned -- which could mean "most" is 1751 out of 11,000 + potential claims for compensations. Perhaps they mean most of 11,000 --- I doubt that!!.

7. "The Ministerial Committee on Assisting the Residents of the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria made over 130 decisions that were carried out in full" Not too clear what this tell about the true situation.

8. "in order to submit the necessary lessons to the decision-makers" -- sure sounds like someone is planning to do these cruelties to new people.

Anita Tucker is a farmer and grew formidable vegetables before she together with the other Jews of Gush Katif were kicked out of their homes and saw their greenhouses destroyed and/or vandelized by the Arabs.

To Go To Top

Posted by Laureen Moe, May 11, 2006.

Merla Watson said of this recording: "This is heart-rending - I sobbed all the way through this historical rending of Israel's national anthem."

This is a remarkable recording from the Bergen-Belsen Death Camp of liberated inmates singing "Hatikvah." This recording is a piece of history and makes the connection between the loss of the 6 million and the burning desire for the creation of a Jewish State, as we celebrate Israel's 58th birthday. JLTV's commitment is to Never Forget, Never Again, the title of one of our regular TV programs. Go to: http://www.israelreporter.com/files/radio/BergenBelsenHatikva.mp

Contact Laureen Moe at