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

Posted by Isralert, November 30, 2003.

"November 29,2003

As you might have heard, I'm leaving the Guardian next year for the Times, having finally been convinced that my evil populist philistinism has no place in a publication read by so many all-round, top-drawer plaster saints. (Well, that and the massive wad they've waved at me.) Once there, I will compose as many love letters to the likes of Mr Murdoch and Pres Bush as my black little heart desires, leaving those who have always objected to my presence on such a fine liberal newspaper as this to read only writers they agree with, with no chance of spoiled digestion as the muesli goes down the wrong way if I so much as murmur about bringing back hanging. (Public.) Not only do I admire the Guardian, I also find it fun to read, which in a way is more of a compliment. But if there is one issue that has made me feel less loyal to my newspaper over the past year, it has been what I, as a non-Jew, perceive to be a quite striking bias against the state of Israel. Which, for all its faults, is the only country in that barren region that you or I, or any feminist, atheist, homosexual or trade unionist, could bear to live under.

I find this hard to accept because, crucially, I don't swallow the modern liberal line that anti-Zionism is entirely different from anti-semitism; the first good, the other bad. Judeophobia - as the brilliant collection of essays A New Antisemitism? Debating Judeophobia In 21st-Century Britain (axt.org.uk), published this year, points out - is a shape-shifting virus, as opposed to the straightforward stereotypical prejudice applied to other groups (Irish stupid, Japanese cruel, Germans humourless, etc). Jews historically have been blamed for everything we might disapprove of: they can be rabid revolutionaries, responsible for the might of the late Soviet empire, and the greediest of fat cats, enslaving the planet to the demands of international high finance. They are insular, cliquey and clannish, yet they worm their way into the highest positions of power in their adopted countries, changing their names and marrying Gentile women. They collectively possess a huge, slippery wealth that knows no boundaries - yet Israel is said to be an impoverished, lame-duck state, bleeding the west dry.

If you take into account the theory that Jews are responsible for everything nasty in the history of the world, and also the recent EU survey that found 60% of Europeans believe Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the world today (hmm, I must have missed all those rabbis telling their flocks to go out with bombs strapped to their bodies and blow up the nearest mosque), it's a short jump to reckoning that it was obviously a bloody good thing that the Nazis got rid of six million of the buggers. Perhaps this is why sales of Mein Kampf are so buoyant, from the Middle Eastern bazaars unto the Edgware Road, and why The Protocols of The Elders of Zion could be found for sale at the recent Anti-racism Congress in Durban.

The fact that many Gentiles and Arabs are rabidly Judeophobic, while many others are as horrified by Judeophobia as by any other type of racism, makes me believe that anti-semitism/Zionism is not a political position (otherwise the right and the left, the PLO and the KKK, would not be able to unite so uniquely in their hatred), but about how an individual feels about himself. I can't help noticing that, over the years, a disproportionate number of attractive, kind, clever people are drawn to Jews; those who express hostility to them, however, from Hitler to Hamza, are often as not repulsive freaks.

Think of famous anti-Zionist windbags - Redgrave, Highsmith, Galloway - and what dreary, dysfunctional, po-faced vanity confronts us. When we consider famous Jew-lovers, on the other hand - Marilyn, Ava, Liz, Felicity Kendal, me - what a sumptuous banquet of radiant humanity we look upon! How fitting that it was Richard Ingrams - Victor Meldrew without the animal magnetism - who this summer proclaimed in the Observer that he refuses to read letters from Jews about the Middle East, and that Jewish journalists should declare their racial origins when writing on this subject. Replying in another newspaper, Johann Hari suggested sarcastically that their bylines might be marked with a yellow star, and asked why Ingrams didn't want to know whether those writing on international conflicts were Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Hindu. The answer is obvious to me: poor Ingrams is a miserable, bitter, hypocritical cuckold, whose much younger girlfriend has written at length in the public arena of the boredom, misery and alcoholism to which living with him has led her, and whose trademark has long been a loathing for anyone who appears to get a kick out of life: the young, the prole, independent women. The Jews are in good company.

Judeophobia: where the political is personal, and the personal pretends to be political, and those swarthy/pallid/swotty/philistine/aggressive/ cowardly/comically bourgeois/filthy rich/delete-as-mood-takes-you bastards always get the girl. I'll return to this dirty little secret masquerading as a moral stance next week and, rest assured, it'll get much nastier. As the darling Jews themselves would say (annoyingly, but then, nobody's perfect), enjoy!

SAUDI COLUMNIST: 'We Have Bred Monsters... We Are the Problem and Not America'
Posted by MEMRI, November 30, 2003.

On November 30, 2003, Dr. Muhammad Talal Al-Rasheed, columnist for the English language daily The Saudi Gazette, wrote an article titled "Senseless Violence, Senseless Death." The article is in reaction to the murder of Saudi Prince Talal Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Rasheed of Hail by 'Islamists' in Algeria. The following are excerpts from the article: [1]

"...A few days back Prince Talal Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Rasheed of Hail was murdered in Algeria while on a camping trip. He was 40 years old and his son, Nawaf, 13 years old, was with him. At the time of this writing, we only know that the father was killed, while the son s condition is to be verified.

"It is easy to get on one s soap box and pontificate; to tell humanity that we suffer from terrorism too. That is too easy though; and perhaps too intellectually cowardly. Talal was a well-known poet in Saudi Arabia. He comes from a family that ruled Arabia long enough to be recorded in history. He was and will always be a beacon of Art, whatever that word means.

"Those who killed him are those who want the word silenced. The young man left it open whether he was with this or that, but he was adamant to tell all and sundry that to be is to talk and exchange. I grieve, I must admit, and am beyond reason because of the trauma of it all, but I do maintain a semblance of reason to see where all of this is leading.

"We have bred monsters. We alone are responsible for it. I have written as much before my personal tragedy and will continue to do so for as long as it takes. We are the problem and not America or the penguins of the North Pole or those who live in caves in Afghanistan. We are it, and those who cannot see this are the ones to blame.

"Castrated as we are, we look to America. Why? Because they went into Iraq and made a difference. Better or worse is another point. Once America has demonstrated its willingness to do something, the moral imperative is that it should not stop at the first station along the road. The majority of us are sick and tired of this carnage and President Bush, wrong on just about everything else, is right on this one. Does he have the (courage) to finish the job? I wonder.

"I don t think this will be published in the Arab News, as it should be. If not, I understand their point of view and their perpetual selectiveness. But one thing is sure, we are here to stay even if it takes giving our best to the madness of religion and the wrong of fanaticism. Nothing, but nothing, is worth the life of an innocent... may the Americans add Talal to their list of loved ones lost to the same indiscriminate madness that took 3,000 on a certain day in September."
[1] The Saudi Gazette, November 30, 2003.

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

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 30, 2003.


Muslim Arabs, presumably connected to Al Qaeda, have issued a proclamation which, in effect, tells the American government and the people that they will implement a Mega-Attack in 3 American cities. (1) It is not necessary to believe them as to specifics, since they could attack even one city and achieve their desired effect. Depending upon their weapon of choice, any city could sustain in excess of 100,000 casualties. That 'weapon of choice' could be an actual nuclear weapon - perhaps one of the 'Kegs' (suitcase nukes) purchased from rogue Russian officers or the ever-growing Russian Mafia. (2) The same could be said for Chemical or Biological (3) materials, which might have come from Iraqi, Syrian or Iranian stockpiles.

If there is what is called a "Mega-Attack" and thousands or even hundreds of thousands of Americans die, the U.S. government will be faced with a difficult choice. Since Terrorists cloak themselves with anonymity, we probably won't know which nation or which of their Terrorists groups are responsible. America should have issued a warning to all the Arab/Muslim nations, namely, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya, et al that, IF America is, indeed, hit again with a Mega-Attack, then all those nations' capitals would be obliterated within hours. This would give them a strong incentive to find their sleeper teams of Jihadists or prepare to disappear.

We Americans have only heard about the pathogens designed for mass extinction of a city or a nation. Once it starts, we will most likely be paralyzed with confusion. No doubt, martial law will be declared, the laws of the Constitution pushed aside and the U.S. Congress sequestered into a non-active body. (4) This will not, however, stop Terror inside our nation.

Perhaps we should recommend that the entire Muslim Arab Crescent be warned that they would be eliminated, since there is no way to separate the Islamists who fund and control the 'sleeper cells' planted in America within all the other Muslims who seem to be living peaceably - but, invariably cheer when America is successfully attacked by their co-religionists.

The nations of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya have ignored or participated with Terrorists for many years. We cannot democratize nations who seems to prefer dictators nor can we wait dozens of years, perhaps centuries for the Islamists to change their goals, namely ridding the world of what they call 'infidels' (non-believers in Islam). We have been at war with Islam - only we don't seem to know it - or, at least, we don't want to acknowledge it.

Should a Mega-Attack occur on American soil, we cannot resort to pin-point bombing on known targets with our intelligent missiles. We will be required to completely eliminate the leaders in their capitals and such missile fields and nuclear complexes so that the heads of the snakes are removed. That will not guarantee future safety but, it will cut off those who control and mastermind the 'sleeper cells' allowed into America by the Arabist U.S. State Department. The choice of living or dying en masse is a choice we must make before the fact.

Some will think this is a cruel and unfair judgment but they haven't yet experienced a vast wipe-out of American citizens - with the exception of 9/11. Even that has fled our consciousness as an act of brutal horror. Building memorials to the dead is something that the Jews have done through the centuries but, it is no comfort to the living who may be about to be slaughtered. The nations of Arabs, Muslims and radical Islamists have taught their children to be the future Terrorists and 'Shahids' (martyrs) for Islam. If releasing deadly toxins into an American city is consistent with these teachings and they have the technology to do so - that is what they will do.

I have little doubt that we must go through a Mega-Attack, killing massive numbers of Americans before we are motivated to act. Then we must act with instant retaliation to bring those nations who threatened our very existence back to the Stone Age where spears and rocks will be the only weapons they have available.

Nuclear or radio-active dirty bombs, biological pathogens that act as an incurable plague or Chemicals that sear the lungs and kill with a single droplet will no longer be in their reach. We do not have the manpower to police these nations as we are learning in Iraq so, therefore, their leadership and military must be destroyed in a single blow. Must we first experience death on a massive scale before we are ready to act? They have warned us. What are we waiting for?

PART 2. Following The Promised Mega-Attack. Blaming Someone - Anyone: The Jews

[This article is directed to the Jewish Leadership and Christian Friends of the Jewish People.]

We all expect a Mega-Attack by Muslim Terrorists. They promised it. They mean what they say and they say what they mean. It doesn't matter if the umbrella description is that of Al Qaeda or the numerous Terrorist Nations and Terrorist proxies who shelter under the one name, Al Qaeda. What matters is that Arab and non-Arab Muslims have stated repeatedly that they are going to attack America's population centers with weapons that cause death in Mega proportions.

The World Trade Center's Twin Towers were destroyed and the Pentagon was hit by 15 Saudis and 4 Egyptians who hijacked 3 planes simultaneously. (Where was the 3rd plane intended to crash? The White House? Its passengers prevented that and crashed it in Pennsylvania.)

The Arab propagandists tried to shift the blame to the Jews. They tried to hide under the concept that Arab Muslims were too backward to pull off such a well-coordinated attack. Therefore, according to the Arab media, it must have been those clever Jews who had manipulated the Saudi government and the Saudi Osama Bin Laden supporters of multi-millionaire to billionaire. To this day the ignorant Muslims in the streets believe what they were told, which in their twisted religion is any lie a Muslim tells them must be the truth.

They say, it must have been the Jews who manipulated the Egyptians through Hosni Mubarak to join the plot. The propaganda, some pre-prepared, some instant creations of the fertile Arab/Muslim mind, needed someone to blame other than themselves for the heinous attacks on America. Clearly, they feared a righteous backlash by the American Super-Power - which did come eventually. First Afghanistan, then Iraq with the President's pledge to War against Global Terrorism making Iran and Syria very nervous. (5)

To a minor degree, the anti-Jewish propaganda worked among the Arabs and such nations as France, Germany where there are swarms of Muslim immigrants beginning to reach a 'critical mass.' As Hitler's chief propagandist Goebbels said, "If the lie is big enough and repeated often enough, it will be believed."

So now we are on the threshold of a promised Mega-Attack by Muslims and various other Arab Terrorists. No doubt, their propaganda mechanism is working overtime to evolve the best plan, not only to kill Americans but to somehow shift the blame for their cruel assaults onto the Jews and the Jewish State of Israel.

In case, anyone has forgotten, Saudi Arabia employed several American PR firms to confuse and obfuscate the Saudi role in 9/11. Now, add to that a second assignment for the PR firms, namely to pre-plan a campaign to blame the Jews for the coming Mega-Attack. Under the Logan Act, Americans who do this can be sent to jail for subversion.

Most certainly, the Jewish leadership in Israel, America and the rest of the Diaspora will have no advance planning to meet or pre-empt this propaganda - despite being alerted to the possibilities. Surely, 2 or 3 weeks following the Mega-Attack, the Jewish leadership will start to babble denials to the well thought out Muslim/Arab charges.

The Arab/Muslim block in the U.N. will immediately call for an investigation - not of Arab nations who assisted in the planning but of the Jewish State of Israel. Never mind that what they say won't make sense or be able to withstand scrutiny. It will be the Hitler/Goebbels proven policy that, "If the lie is big enough and repeated often enough, it will be believed." But, sadly, giving Jewish leadership a 'heads-up' is like telling a 3 year old: "Don't do it again."

They will have some meetings and expressions of concern. They will establish a committee or two to study the matter. Those NOT allowed to be members of this committee will probably be the activists who forecast such problems and study solutions. Perhaps they'll employ a PR agency whose expertise is selling bourbon or diet drinks or assisting politicians in running for office. In other words, the Jewish leadership and organizations will do nothing in advance or useful because they feel comfortable they can talk their way out of trouble - after the fact.

Leaders of the AJCs, ADL, UJCs, Federations - Take notice! The Arab/Muslims will kill Americans and try to water down the inevitable backlash by blaming the Jews. Their main theme will be: "If it wasn't for Israel, we wouldn't have been forced to take the desperate act of killing Americans." You will counter that Islam is at war with America, with the intention of having the Saudi brand of Islam, called Wahhabbism, or the Taliban view of Islam take over the world. But, you will be too late. No one will be listening. They'll be dead, dying, wounded or attending Mega-funerals with furious Americans ready to blame anyone at whom authority figures point their fingers. In desperation, you will assemble a team of experts to counter their propaganda but, the first group you choose will be amateurs - in order to be politically acceptable to all Jewish organizations. That translates into failure to solve the problem.

Of course, a first string team of professionals could be already assembled but, as quivering Jewish institutions, you will not call them in until they push themselves to the forefront by necessity as happened in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. We Jews just act too late, too weakly and hope it will all go away by itself. It would appear that only the non-Jewish Jews of the Left have the conviction to join our enemies, de-Judaize Israel and generally show their negative strength.

Perhaps, not surprisingly, the anti-Jewish newspaper Ha'Aretz, well to the Left, has already started the effort to blame the Jews of Israel for the anti-Semitism that is rising up in America and Europe. In an article of November 28, by Eliahu Salpeter entitled: "The Jewish World: a Collective Punishment" (6), tells us that the new anti-Semitism starts with the Palestinian conflict. Clearly, as a thumping Leftist, this writer and this Leftist paper starts the ball rolling with a mea culpa by blaming Israel for the ramping up of anti-Semitism everywhere. He speaks of the 'poor' Muslims in France being so angry at not being absorbed by the French that they lash out at the Jews and Israel.

He further speaks of Muslim rage over what is happening in the 'territories' of Judea, Samaria and Gaza under what he calls Israeli 'occupation' and the tendency of Muslims to associate World Jewry with the Jewish State. Here we read from a Jew hater (self-hater) of the first order who is frothing at the mouth, trying to blame his co-religionists for the anti-Semitism in Europe, Africa and, for him, hopefully in America.

Ha'Aretz has always conveniently forgotten that the Jews are in the 'territories' because the Arab Muslims waged six unsuccessful wars to wipe out any vestige of Israel and all Jews therein. Those Jews in the villages, towns and cities of Yesha (Judea, Shomron and Aza) are Israel's first line of defense for the Jews of Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem - because if those pioneering Jews of Yesha are delegitimated or eliminated, then the Jews inside the Green Line have no legitimacy either and are next on the list for extermination.

Those familiar with the Dr. Suess book about the Sneetches, recall his parting line of the guy who took away all their money: "You can't teach a Sneetch." How appropriately that applies to today's Jewish self-anointed establishment!


1. "Mega-Terror Menaces on Three Continents" DEBKA-file-DEBKA-Net-Weekly Special Report Feb. 4, 2003 & "Al Qaeda Plans Something Big" by Kevin Johnson USA Today 11/27/03

2. "Seven Terror Nukes Already in U.S." http:/www.maranatharevival.net/Andtherewillbterrors.htm

3. "Al Qaeda Prepares Bio-Terror for US & Israel" DEBKA-Net-Weekly Jan. 4, 2003

4. "Gen. Tommy Franks: Martial Law will Replace Constitution After Next Terror Attack" Newsmax.com 11/21/03

5. "Scapegoating Israel - Part 2" HonestReporting.com September 21, 2001 & "Blaming Jews 101" by Prof. Edward Alexander FrontPageMagazine.com Nov. 11, 2003

6. "The Jewish World/ A Collective Punishment" by Eliahu Salpeter Ha'Aretz Nov. 28, 2003

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 30, 2003.

Events chase events. I wish we were Portugal. On Monday, some lunatics will sign the Geneva Initiative. If they got their wish, Israel will at best get another Oslo, and at worst, its total physical and spiritual annihilation. Here is an article by Charles Krauthammer, published by the Washington Post (Friday, November 28, 2003; Page A41) among others.

On Monday, a peace agreement will be signed by Israelis and Palestinians. This "Geneva accord" has gotten much attention. And the signing itself will be greeted with much hoopla. Journalists are being flown in from around the world by the Swiss government. Jimmy Carter will be heading a list of foreign dignitaries. The U.S. Embassy in Bern will be sending an observer.

This is all rather peculiar: The agreement is being signed not by Israeli and Palestinian officials, but by two people with no power.

On the Palestinian side, the negotiator is former information minister Yasser Abed Rabbo, who at least is said to have Yasser Arafat's ear. The Israeli side, however, is led by Yossi Beilin, a man whose political standing in his own country is so low that he failed to make it into Parliament. After helping bring his Labor Party to ruin, Beilin abandoned it for the far-left Meretz Party, which then did so badly in the last election that Beilin is now a private citizen.

There is a reason why he is one of Israel's most reviled and discredited politicians. He was the principal ideologue and architect behind the "peace" foisted on Israel in 1993. Those Oslo agreements have brought a decade of the worst terror in all Israeli history.

Now he is at it again. And Secretary of State Colin Powell has written a letter to Beilin and Rabbo expressing appreciation for their effort, and is now planning to meet with them.

This is scandalous. Israel is a democracy, and this agreement was negotiated in defiance of the democratically (and overwhelmingly) elected government of Israel. If a private U.S. citizen negotiated a treaty on his own, he could go to jail under the Logan Act. If an Israeli does it, he gets a pat on the back from the secretary of state.

Moreover, this "peace" is entirely hallucinatory. It is written as if Oslo never happened. The Palestinian side repeats solemn pledges to recognize Israel, renounce terror, end anti-Israel incitement, etc. - all promised in Oslo. These promises are today such a dead letter that the Palestinian side is openly bargaining these chits again, as if the Israelis have forgotten that in return for these pledges 10 years ago, Israel recognized the PLO, brought it out of Tunisian exile, established a Palestinian Authority, permitted it an army with 50,000 guns and invited the world to donate billions to this new Authority.

Arafat pocketed every Israeli concession, turned his territory into an armed camp and then launched a vicious terror war that has lasted more than three years and killed more than 1,000 Israelis. It is Lucy and the football all over again, and the same chorus of delusionals who so applauded Oslo - Jimmy Carter, Sandy Berger, Tom Friedman - is applauding again. This time, however, the Israeli surrender is so breathtaking it makes Oslo look rational.

A Palestinian state, of course. Evacuating every Jewish settlement in new Palestine, of course. Redividing Jerusalem, of course. But that is not enough. Beilin gives up the ultimate symbol of the Jewish connection and claim to the land, the center of the Jewish state for 1,000 years before the Roman destruction, the subject of Jewish longing in poetry and prayer for the 2,000 years since - the Temple Mount. And Beilin doesn't just give it up to, say, some neutral international authority. He gives it to sovereign Palestine. Jews will visit at Arab sufferance.

Not satisfied with having given up Israel's soul, Beilin gives up the body too. He not only returns Israel to its 1967 borders, arbitrary and indefensible, but he does so without any serious security safeguards.

Palestine promises to acquire and buy no more weapons than specified in some treaty annex. This is a joke. Oslo had similarly detailed limitations on Palestinian weaponry, and nobody even pretended to enforce them. Last year, a massive illegal boatload came in from Iran on the Karine A. What did the world do about it? Nothing.

Today, however, Israel still has control over Palestine's borders. Under Beilin, this ends. Palestine will be free to acquire as much lethal weaponry as it wants.

And on the critical question that even the most dovish Israelis insist on - that the Palestinians not have the right to flood Israel with Arab refugees - the agreement is utterly ambiguous. Third parties (including among others the irredeemably hostile Syria and its puppet Lebanon) are to suggest exactly how many Palestinians are to return to Israel, and the basis for the number Israel will be required to accept will be the mathematical average!

This is not a peace treaty, this is a suicide note - by a private citizen on behalf of a country that has utterly rejected him politically. That it should get any encouragement from the United States or from its secretary of state is a disgrace.

I HAVE KILLED MY JEW: Anti-Semitic murders hit Paris
Posted by Micki Lewis, November 30, 2003.
This article was written by Alyssa A. Lappen.

Alyssa Lappen has seared the conscience of everyone with this grisly piece on Jewish murders by Muslims in Paris, virtually unreported by major French press and the JTA. A cover up you say? Sweep the Jew hatred murders under the rug? Not for courageous Nidra Poller, the American Jewish ex-pat living in Paris. She jarred the audience at Harvard's Emerson Hall on Monday night at an event sponsored by the Harvard Friends of Israel and arranged by Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser of the David project (http://www.davidproject.org). Nidra's revelations were so stunning that it made the front pages of the Boston Jewish Advocate. Now with Alyssa Lappen's article the story of this grisly Jew hatred cover up will span the globe via the internet and maybe, just maybe, hit the JTA and other major wire services. Maybe a visit by the Israeli Ambassador in France to the Quai D' Orsay will follow. Maybe.

How did Nidra get to the US to tell this stunning story and more about the noxious Jew hatred environment in France and what Bat Ye'or calls EUrabia? Because of her translation work with Bat Ye'or on several opinion pieces and our own work with her on bringing the French film essay, Decryptage, to the US, that we showed in Fairfield/Bridgeport last month. We reached out for several groups in the US to provide Nidra a platform to discuss her important revelations. Our good friend Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser of the David project said: "they'd try," and hence the speaking engagement at Harvard's Emerson Hall on Monday night. Charles asked me when I approached him, "Could she speak?" Could she speak. Of course she can and will. She did phenomenally well and got the message across, accurately and cunningly in her guise as a charming grandmother.

Nidra's revelations were taped at the HFI stint, so perhaps the David project can make those available to those of you who want to see and hear Nidra's important message of the dark advent of EUrabia - a bastion of tolerated Muslim Jew hatred and feckless fawning French press and Interior ministry officials. If you thought the J'accuse of Emile Zola's that forced the pardon of wrongfully imprisoned French Jewish captain Alfred Dreyfus in Paris at the end of the 19th Century was something, Nidra has surpassed that with this important talk recorded for replay in America and the world.

After a European Union poll found that nearly 60% of Europeans consider Israel the greatest threat to world peace (http://www.christianmusictv.com/id302.htm), the British Broadcasting Corp. on November 26, asked if anti-Semitism (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3234264.stm) is really increasing. There was outrage and shock over the recent EU poll, observed Robert Wistrich, director of Jerusalem's Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of anti-Semitism. Many Israelis consider mainstream labeling of "Israel as a Nazi state" a sort of anti-Semitism.

But the BBC gave the final word to Vienna's Edward Serotta. "The increasingly shrill debate often paints the entire European continent as a cess-pool of hatred for Jews," griped the Central Europe Center for Research and Documentation director. "One prominent Jewish leader recently said the climate was just like 1933 - this is absolutely absurd."

Oh, really? Serotta made this bizarre claim precisely a week after two Paris Jews were brutally murdered and disfigured because they were Jewish. Not a single major French newspaper carried news of the grisly events. Le Monde, Figaro and Liberation remained deaf and dumb, according to Nidra Poller, an American expatriate living in Paris. The police warned one victim's family not to call the crime anti-Semitic, she said.

Sebastian Sellam, 23, was a popular disc jockey at a hot Parisian night club called Queen. At about 11:45 p.m. on Wednesday November 19, the young man known as DJ Lam C (a reverse play on his surname) left the apartment he shared with his parents in a modest building in of Paris 10th arrondissement near la Place Colonel Fabien, heading to work as usual. In the underground parking lot, a Muslim neighbor slit Sellam's throat twice. His face was completely mutilated with a fork. Even his eyes were gouged out.

Following the crime, Sellam's mother told Rosenpres reporter Alain Azria, the Muslim mounted the stairs, his hands still bloody, and announced his crime. "I have killed my Jew. I will go to heaven," he reportedly said. The alleged murderer's family was well known for its rabid anti-Semitism, Mrs. Sellam reported, a point that the victim's brother confirmed. Within the previous year, she said, the Sellams found a decapitated rooster outside their apartment door and the Mezzuza was ripped from their doorpost. Decapitating roosters is reportedly a traditional warning of impending murder.

The murder especially traumatized the Paris Jewish community since a second gruesome murder, also allegedly committed by a Muslim, occurred within two days. Chantal Piekolek, 53, was working in her Avenue de Clichy shoe store in the 19th arrondissement when Mohamed Ghrib, 37, stabbed her 27 times in the neck and chest. Piekolek's 10-year-old daughter hid in the basement storeroom beneath the shop with a girlfriend and heard the entire crime. There was no evidence of sexual assault, and the cash remained in the store register.

Yet after initially reporting the second case as an anti-Semitic crime, Guysen Israel News altered its story. The news service claimed that reports Piekolek was Jewish were mistaken. Several Paris reporters believe both crimes were anti-Semitic, says Poller.

A few days earlier, an anti-Semitic arson attack hit the Jewish Merkatz Hatorah boys' school on the outskirts of Paris. Prime-Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin afterwards said he hoped to identify those who carried out this shameful attack. (http://www.fire-magazine.com/shownews.asp?secid=8& pubid=13&nav=1&newstype=0&key=Keyword&page=2&newsid=6687)

But given the intense and worsening anti-Semitism in Europe and France, there seems little hope the French government will actually investigate the arson, much less prosecute the perpetrators if it finds them. After all, EU officials deny the severity of the problem and last week shelved an EU report on the subject (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/364930.html) for fear of antagonizing Muslims, who were behind many of the incidents examined. (http://www.uba.uva.nl/jb/object.cfm?objectid=026A7FE6 -B76F-4AA8-B7BF2553F62062ED)

When Poller left France on a speaking tour of the U.S. this month, she brought one week's news publications to read on her flight - two weekly magazines, three newspapers and a few other scholarly publications. All of them, she said, were "reeking with hatred [for Jews]." They also sympathized extensively with terrorists. "News reports are not factual. They are sermons,"Poller said. "One piece in a philosophical journal," she noted, "rambled on at length about le grandeur de Arafat, although he is personally responsible for more than 1,000 civilian murders."

As a consequence, French Jews live in terrible fear. The entire community is traumatized, Poller said. In Paris, a lot of the Jews already had to leave countries in North Africa. And now, they are told not to talk about anti-Semitism. And they are going to have to flee again. Last year, a rabbi in Poller's neighborhood was kidnapped and held hostage in a car for two hours. Another religious Jew was similarly kidnapped and a Jewish woman en route to pick up her husband from a local hospital was abused by her Muslim taxi driver.

EU officials may not want to admit it. But attacks on Jews have been mounting since the terrorist war on Israel began in September 2000. In the last year, however, anti-Semitic attacks in France have grown increasingly bold. "Many of the crimes are never even reported," Poller said. In January, Paris Rabbi Gabriel Farhi was attacked several times. (http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Printable.asp?ID=5524) In May 2002, a mysterious fire erupted at the Israeli embassy in Paris. (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200205/23/eng20020523_96337.shtml) In April 2002 alone, the French Interior Ministry recorded nearly 360 anti-Semitic crimes against Jews and Jewish institutions, according to Washington Times reporter Al Webb. [1]

Yes, we did burn down a synagogue, Frenchmen routinely admit, according to Poller. But how do we know this was anti-Semitic? "Sellam's murder was handled in much the same way," she said, "although 2,000 mourners attended the popular young disc jockey's funeral... Officials and news agencies tried to whitewash the anti-Semitic nature of the crime." "Sebastian was successful and his murderer was unsuccessful and jealous," she said they reported.

But something considerably darker than professional jealousy must be at work when a murderer completely mutilates his victim's face with a fork and gouges out his eyes or stabs a 53-year-old mother 27 times in the chest and neck.

Indeed, the same kind of denial dynamic seems to be at work in Piekolek's case. Guysen Israel initially reported that she was Jewish, but later altered its reports, according to Poller.

Meanwhile, in Germany, neo-Nazis were arrested in September for planning an arson attack on a Munich synagogue to commemorate Hitler's November 9 Kristallnacht of 1938, in which thousands of Jewish homes and shops were destroyed, hundreds murdered and thousands arrested and sent to concentration camps. (http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=1011072003)
[1] Al Webb, Synagogues Burn as Europe Rages, Washington Times, Apr. 23, 2003.

Posted by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff, November 30, 2003.

Jerusalem (jnewwire.com) - Israeli police effectively increased the level of religious discrimination being practiced against Jews at their holiest site Sunday with the announcement that, from now on, only three Jews will be permitted to visit the Temple Mount at any one time.

Israel has for a few months allowed Jews and Christians to access the site that the Bible says God calls His holy hill.

Due to the ever-present threat of Muslim violence, however, any Christians and Jews seeking to pray or worship the God of Israel up there risk being arrested and permanently banned from the site.

Off limits

Police officials announced Sunday they could no longer adequately protect large groups of Jews wishing to visit the Temple Mount, and would with immediate effect allow only three Jews at any one time onto the ancient hill, Arutz 7 reported.

Many Jews expressed outrage at the decision, saying the police had no problem maintaining order when over 150,000 Muslims attended Friday Ramadan prayers at the site.

Temple Mount activists chalked the decision up to ongoing "religious discrimination."

Internal Security Minister Tzahi Hanegbi ordered the Mount reopened to Jewish and Christian tourists in August after nearly three years of being off limits amid threats and demonstrations of Arab Muslim violence.

Religious intolerance

A ban against Christians and Jews praying on the place known in the Bible as God's Holy Hill remains in place, enforced by the Israeli police.

Over the past months, Muslim Waqf officials have tailed groups of Jews and Christians visiting the site in an attempt to make sure the "infidels" do not utter even quiet prayers to their God.

During the Feast of Tabernacles in October, one Christian leader called the official discrimination against the rights of Jews and Christians to worship their God on the hill a clear victory for Arab terror.

Holy to Jews & Christians

Jews regard the Temple Mount as their holiest site, the place the Bible says God chose to place His name, and location of the two temples of the Lord.

Bible-believers note that God Himself designated the site as holy, and that Jesus regarded the temple in His day as His "Father's house," even though a bloodthirsty king, Herod the Great, had built it.

Millions of Christians and Jews share the belief that the Messiah will one day rule and reign over the earth from the Temple Mount.

Islam's fraudulent claim

While Muslims claim the Temple Mount to be the third holiest site in Islam, Mohammed, the founder of their faith never visited it, and Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Koran.

Nonetheless, after taking control of the mount in the 1967 Six Day War, Israel agreed to leave the running of the site in Muslim hands.

Today, daily Muslim prayers repeatedly sound across the city from minarets on the mount, as muezzins declare in the four mosques located there that their god is greater than the God of Israel. Sermons taught in the mosques atop the mountain call for the total annihilation of the Jewish people.

Posted by Leo Rennert, November 30, 2003.

Media reports, in their usual effort to simplify complex matters, indicate that Yossi Beilin's Geneva Accord would force the Palestinians to give up the "right of return" - a major demand of Israel in any real final-status negotiation. Unfortunately, THIS IS NOT TRUE (even though some of the terrorist groups seem or pretend to believe it).

If you look up the actual text of the Accord, the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to Israel proper is treated in very rubbery fashion - an elastic open-ended formula that could leave it up to the eye of each beholder. Israel could interpret it one way, the Palestinians in a totally different way. And, voila, with some kind of verbal gymnastics, you guarantee peace!

The Accord states that Palestinian refugees will be given a choice of staying in current host countries, relocating in a Palestinian state, moving to other countries that might take them AND RETURNING TO ISRAEL. So the issue is not whether there is a "right of return" to Israel. The accord says there is (it even refers to UN General Assembly Resolution 194 which Palestinians and Arabs have used for a long time as the basis of their legal claim to return to Israel.) The only issue is how many refugees Israel would have to accept. And, at that point, the Accord gets very interesting - and totally self-contradictory.

In one clause, it states that repatriation of Palestinian refugees will be at the sovereign discretion of Israel (that would seem to give Israel an ironclad veto). But hold on; that's not so. The Accord also provides for the establishment of an International Commission which will have "full and exclusive" jurdisdiction to administer the refugee-repatriation program. And who will serve on this commission? Besides the immediate parties, there will be the usual Israeli "friends" - Russia, the EU, the UN, UNWRA and EVERY ARAB COUNTRY WHICH NOW HAS PALESTINIAN REFUGEES. Plus any other members that might be added to this roster. Once the commission is formed, each member will toss into a hat the number of refugees Israel should admit. In turn, Israel must consider in making up its mind about how many refugees it will admit the AVERAGE OF THE REFUGEE NUMBERS SUBMITTED BY ALL COMMISSION MEMBERS. So if Syria, Lebanon, Egypt each call for Israel to accept several million refugees, the AVERAGE NUMBER could easily go through the roof.

Legally, the Accord does not resolve the basic question: Does Israel's "sovereign discretion" trump the commission "full and exclusive jurisdiction?" Who would have the final say? THE ACCORD DOESN'T SAY.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 30, 2003.

Dear friends,

Yesterday was a very good day for truth, honesty and courage. The Toledo Blade published an excellent article by Jack Kelly [See below: "The Root of All Evil?" November 29]. The Guardian in London published two (yes, TWO) superb articles on the subject: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1094325,00.html  and the following article, written by Emanuele Ottolenghi: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1095694,00.html

Is it a sign that some are beginning to realize that the world and the media have gone too far? I sincerely hope so. Let us wait and see to what blossoms these buds of justice will develop. Your Truth Provider,

Is there a link between the way Israel's case is presented and anti-semitism? Israel's advocates protest that behind criticisms of Israel there sometimes lurks a more sinister agenda, dangerously bordering on anti-semitism. Critics vehemently disagree. In their view, public attacks on Israel are neither misplaced nor the source of anti-Jewish sentiment: Israel's behaviour is reprehensible and so are those Jews who defend it.

Jewish defenders of Israel are then depicted by their critics as seeking an excuse to justify Israel, projecting Jewish paranoia and displaying a "typical" Jewish trait of "sticking together," even in defending the morally indefensible. Israel's advocates deserve the hostility they get, the argument goes; it is they who should engage in soul-searching.

There is no doubt that recent anti-semitism is linked to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And it is equally without doubt that Israeli policies sometimes deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong, or even remotely anti-semitic, in disapproving of Israeli policies. Nevertheless, this debate - with its insistence that there is a distinction between anti-semitism and anti-Zionism - misses the crucial point of contention. Israel's advocates do not want to gag critics by brandishing the bogeyman of anti-semitism: rather, they are concerned about the form the criticism takes.

If Israel's critics are truly opposed to anti-semitism, they should not repeat traditional anti-semitic themes under the anti-Israel banner. When such themes - the Jewish conspiracy to rule the world, linking Jews with money and media, the hooked-nose stingy Jew, the blood libel, disparaging use of Jewish symbols, or traditional Christian anti-Jewish imagery - are used to describe Israel's actions, concern should be voiced. Labour MP Tam Dalyell decried the influence of "a Jewish cabal" on British foreign policy-making; an Italian cartoonist last year depicted the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem as an attempt to kill Jesus "again." Is it necessary to evoke the Jewish conspiracy or depict Israelis as Christ-killers to denounce Israeli policies?

The fact that accusations of anti-semitism are dismissed as paranoia, even when anti-semitic imagery is at work, is a subterfuge. Israel deserves to be judged by the same standards adopted for others, not by the standards of utopia. Singling out Israel for an impossibly high standard not applied to any other country begs the question: why such different treatment?

Despite piqued disclaimers, some of Israel's critics use anti-semitic stereotypes. In fact, their disclaimers frequently offer a mask of respectability to otherwise socially unacceptable anti-semitism. Many equate Israel to Nazism, claiming that "yesterday's victims are today's perpetrators": last year, Louis de Berni?res wrote in the Independent that "Israel has been adopting tactics which are reminiscent of the Nazis". This equation between victims and murderers denies the Holocaust. Worse still, it provides its retroactive justification: if Jews turned out to be so evil, perhaps they deserved what they got. Others speak of Zionist conspiracies to dominate the media, manipulate American foreign policy, rule the world and oppress the Arabs. By describing Israel as the root of all evil, they provide the linguistic mandate and the moral justification to destroy it. And by using anti-semitic instruments to achieve this goal, they give away their true anti-semitic face.

There is of course the open question of whether this applies to anti-Zionism. It is one thing to object to the consequences of Zionism, to suggest that the historical cost of its realisation was too high, or to claim that Jews are better off as a scattered, stateless minority. This is a serious argument, based on interests, moral claims, and an interpretation of history. But this is not anti-Zionism. To oppose Zionism in its essence and to refuse to accept its political offspring, Israel, as a legitimate entity, entails more. Zionism comprises a belief that Jews are a nation, and as such are entitled to self-determination as all other nations are.

It could be suggested that nationalism is a pernicious force. In which case one should oppose Palestinian nationalism as well. It could even be argued that though both claims are true and noble, it would have been better to pursue Jewish national rights elsewhere. But negating Zionism, by claiming that Zionism equals racism, goes further and denies the Jews the right to identify, understand and imagine themselves - and consequently behave as - a nation. Anti-Zionists deny Jews a right that they all too readily bestow on others, first of all Palestinians.

Were you outraged when Golda Meir claimed there were no Palestinians? You should be equally outraged at the insinuation that Jews are not a nation. Those who denounce Zionism sometimes explain Israel's policies as a product of its Jewish essence. In their view, not only should Israel act differently, it should cease being a Jewish state. Anti-Zionists are prepared to treat Jews equally and fight anti-semitic prejudice only if Jews give up their distinctiveness as a nation: Jews as a nation deserve no sympathy and no rights, Jews as individuals are worthy of both. Supporters of this view love Jews, but not when Jews assert their national rights. Jews condemning Israel and rejecting Zionism earn their praise. Denouncing Israel becomes a passport to full integration. Noam Chomsky and his imitators are the new heroes, their Jewish pride and identity expressed solely through their shame for Israel's existence. Zionist Jews earn no respect, sympathy or protection. It is their expression of Jewish identity through identification with Israel that is under attack.

The argument that it is Israel's behaviour, and Jewish support for it, that invite prejudice sounds hollow at best and sinister at worst. That argument means that sympathy for Jews is conditional on the political views they espouse. This is hardly an expression of tolerance. It singles Jews out. It is anti-semitism.

Zionism reversed Jewish historical passivity to persecution and asserted the Jewish right to self-determination and independent survival. This is why anti-Zionists see it as a perversion of Jewish humanism. Zionism entails the difficulty of dealing with sometimes impossible moral dilemmas, which traditional Jewish passivity in the wake of historical persecution had never faced. By negating Zionism, the anti-semite is arguing that the Jew must always be the victim, for victims do no wrong and deserve our sympathy and support.

Israel errs like all other nations: it is normal. What anti-Zionists find so obscene is that Israel is neither martyr nor saint. Their outrage refuses legitimacy to a people's national liberation movement. Israel's stubborn refusal to comply with the invitation to commit national suicide and thereby regain a supposedly lost moral ground draws condemnation. Jews now have the right to self-determination, and that is what the anti-semite dislikes so much.

Emanuele Ottolenghi is the Leone Ginzburg Fellow in Israel Studies at the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies and the Middle East Centre at St Antony's College, Oxford.

Posted by Ken Heller, November 30, 2003.

This comes from IMRA which writes: "These draft resolutions represent a dangerous assertion that the terms outlined in the Geneva Accord and other private initiatives actually effectively address the requirements for peace.

The Geneva Accord, and for that matter, the other initiatives, are not "peace" documents. They are various withdrawal schemes under which Israel forfeits its sovereign right as well as ability to defend itself. It forfeits its right to defend itself to a group of third parties. It creates an untenable situation on the ground by providing for Israeli withdrawals to indefensible borders facing a sovereign Palestinian state.

All these initiatives are based on the dogmatic assertion that all the Arabs want is for Israel to withdraw to the '67 border. But withdrawal to the '67 lines won't insure Israel peace for generations.

That's not what the Palestinians in particular and the Arabs in general say in their mosques, in their schools or broadcast on their airwaves. And their leaders excuse whatever arrangements they make with the Jews by citing the Hudaibiyah model according to which one enters into a temporary treaty with an enemy until the enemy can be defeated.

In truth, even if the Arabs entered into a peace treaty with Israel in good faith this would in no way assure peace for an Israel in indefensible borders. Leaders don't always send their nations off to war because of a genuine irreconcilable gripe against their neighbor - they can do it to serve domestic and other interests. And when one considers that there is no certainty who or what will be ruling Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt in five years, let alone decades from now, the last thing a prudent Israel can afford to do is turn itself into an easy target."


Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding fighting terror and embracing efforts to achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace. (Introduced in Senate) http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:1:./temp/~c1085ING9Z::

1st Session
S. RES. 276

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding fighting terror and embracing efforts to achieve Israeli -Palestinian peace .


November 25, 2003

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. NELSON of Florida, Mr. LEAHY, and Mr. LAUTENBERG) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations


Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding fighting terror and embracing efforts to achieve Israeli -Palestinian peace .

Whereas ending the violence and terror that have devastated Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza since September 2000 is in the vital interests of the United States, Israel, and the Palestinians;

Whereas ongoing Israeli -Palestinian conflict strengthens extremists and opponents of peace throughout the region, including those who seek to undermine efforts by the United States to stabilize Iraq and those who want to see conflict spread to other nations in the region;

Whereas more than 3 years of violence, terror, and escalating military engagement have demonstrated that military means alone will not solve the Israeli -Palestinian conflict;

Whereas despite mutual mistrust, anger, and pain, courageous and credible Israelis and Palestinians have come together in a private capacity to develop serious model peace initiatives, like the People's Voice Initiative, One Voice, and the Geneva Accord;

Whereas those initiatives, and other similar private efforts, are founded on the determination of Israelis and Palestinians to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict and to live in peaceful coexistence, mutual dignity, and security, based on a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace and achieving historic reconciliation;

Whereas those initiatives demonstrate that both Israelis and Palestinians have a partner for peace , that both peoples want to end the current vicious stalemate, and that both peoples are prepared to make necessary compromises in order to achieve peace;

Whereas each of the private initiatives addresses the fundamental requirements of both peoples, including preservation of the Jewish, democratic nature of Israel with secure and defensible borders and the creation of a viable Palestinian state; and Whereas such peace initiatives demonstrate that there are solutions to the conflict and present precious opportunities to end the violence and restart fruitful peace negotiations: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate--

(1) applauds the courage and vision of Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to conceive pragmatic, serious plans for achieving peace;

(2) calls on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to capitalize on the opportunity offered by these peace initiatives; and

(3) urges the President of the United States to encourage and embrace all serious efforts to move away from violent military stalemate toward achieving Israeli -Palestinian peace .


Supporting the vision of Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to conceive pragmatic, serious plans for achieving peace , and for other purposes.



November 21, 2003

Mr. ISSA (for himself, Mr. FILNER, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. BALLENGER, Mrs. BONO, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. HOUGHTON, Mr. TERRY, Mr. SMITH of Michigan, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. PITTS, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. GILLMOR, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. REYES, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. RAHALL, and Mr. BLUMENAUER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations RESOLUTION

Supporting the vision of Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to conceive pragmatic, serious plans for achieving peace , and for other purposes.

Whereas ending the violence and terror that have devastated Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza since September 2000, is in the vital interest of Israel, the Palestinians, and the United States;

Whereas ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict strengthens extremists and opponents of peace throughout the region, including those who seek to undermine efforts by the United States to stabilize Iraq and those who wish to see conflict spread to other nations in the region;

Whereas more than 3 years of violence, terror, and escalating military conflict have demonstrated that military means alone will not solve the Israeli -Palestinian conflict;

Whereas obligations under the peace plan known as the `road map' have not been met by Israeli and Palestinian leaders and no viable political alternatives have emerged;

Whereas despite mutual mistrust, anger, and pain, courageous and credible Israelis and Palestinians have come together in a private capacity to develop serious model peace initiatives, like the People's Voice Initiative and the Geneva Initiative;

Whereas those initiatives and other similar private efforts are founded on the determination of Israelis and Palestinians to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict and to live in peaceful coexistence, mutual dignity, and security, based on a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace;

Whereas those initiatives demonstrate that both Israelis and Palestinians want to end the current vicious stalemate, and that both peoples are prepared to make compromises in order to achieve peace;

Whereas the Geneva Initiative offers a detailed framework that addresses the fundamental requirements of both peoples, including preservation of the Jewish, democratic nature of Israel with secure and defensible borders, and the creation of a viable Palestinian state; and

Whereas such peace initiatives present precious opportunities to end the violence and restart fruitful peace negotiations: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) applauds the courage and vision of Israelis and Palestinians who are working together to conceive pragmatic, serious plans for achieving peace;

(2) calls on Israeli and Palestinian leaders to capitalize on the opportunities offered by these peace initiatives; and

(3) urges the President to embrace and encourage all serious efforts to move away from violent military stalemate toward achieving Israeli -Palestinian peace.

IMRA - INDEPENDENT MEDIA REVIEW ANALYSIS - tracks the media, polls and events of importance in the Middle East. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, November 30, 2003.

James Woolsey, former head of the CIA, spoke to a Jewish audience at York University in Toronto and said that Europe's increasing anti-Semitism is "its first breath of totalitarianism." This article is a writeup of Mr. Woolsey's speech by Joseph Brean of the National Post in Canada.

Add to this the fact that the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) has refused to release their report on anti-Semitism because they feel the report's (accurate) pointing the finger at Muslims and pro-Palestinians as being the perpetrators of most of the attacks on Jews and synagogues was "inflammatory."

TORONTO - In their growing resentment of Jews, Europe's media and cultural elite have breathed "the first breath of totalitarianism," a former CIA director said yesterday.

Jews are history's great champions of the rule of law, James Woolsey said, so much so that they have come to embody it. He said intolerance of Jews, therefore, is a first step toward dictatorial rule - a hallmark of the world's most oppressive societies.

Reaching back into the dusty history of the Sinai peninsula to explain the current rash of school torchings and racist graffiti in Europe, Mr. Woolsey said modern Europe resents Jews for holding strong to the ideal that timeless rules trump temporary rulers.

"People hate Jews to very much the degree that they have come to realize that this notion of the rule of law is something that came to the world something between three and four millennia ago in the Sinai desert. The idea that the government is above the ruler, and that rulers, whether it's King David or anyone else, are to be held to account by the people, by great prophets, by whomever - that notion essentially came out of the Sinai desert," Mr. Woolsey told a predominantly Jewish audience yesterday at York University.

In their dietary restrictions and dress, he said Jews have always promoted the primacy of the law over the leader. "That notion is the biggest threat to totalitarians.

"So once you begin to dabble with the idea that you want to bully people, that you want to order them around, that you want them to do what you say, you very frequently start to drift into anti-Semitism," he said. "I think that is what is happening in some of the cultural elites in Europe."

Among Europe's right-wing fringes, violence and vandalism against Jews has reached dangerous levels rarely seen since before the Second World War, leading Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon to call anti-Semitism "fundamental" to the European outlook.

Mr. Woolsey, CIA director under former U.S. President Bill Clinton, said, "Once anti-Semitism raises its head, the rest of us who don't want to live with a foot on the back of our necks are likely to be the next targets."

Posted by Angela Bertz, November 29, 2003.

Keith Samuelson forwarded a letter from one of his students, Kristen Williams. She wrote this essay, calling it A Heart For Israel.

Death, destruction and despair, these are the images constantly portrayed through the media about a small country called Israel. For decades, Israel has been making headlines with its political unrest and civil violence. But on Friday afternoon three young Israelis helped to brighten our perspective. The group, appropriately titled "Israel at Heart," gave us a true vision of daily life in Israel. Through sharing their personal experiences and thoughts, they helped send a message of hope and peace for the nation covered in much controversy.

Three university students - Keren, age 24, Chanan, age 26, and Meir, age 25, as members of "Israel at Heart," travel around the world helping people to dispel the negative assumptions made about their country. Their message is that Israel is truly a beautiful place and not a gigantic war zone. Since Israel's inception as a nation, it has been in constant conflict with the neighboring Palestinians. This conflict often results in violence and terrorist attacks within Israel. These three young people helped explain the conflict and made it very clear that the Israeli people are fighting only to defend themselves. They all believe that the Palestinians should be given their own land and state that their country is peacefully trying to strike a compromise. Chanan is quick to stress that their issues are with the Palestinian leaders and terrorist organizations, not with the individual people. In fact, Israeli and Palestinian civilians sometimes form friendships.

The trio also helped to sort out some negative stereotypes made about Israel, such as mandatory military service. Presently, when a young person finishes high school they must give service to the Israeli military (the IDF); three years for men and two years for women. While they do not get paid for their service, young Israelis view their time in the IDF not as a chore but as a responsibility. They are there to help protect the land that they love. Although there is no penalty for not giving service, it is frowned upon. Not everyone who serves in the IDF deals with actual combat - for every soldier in the field there are another eight working behind the scenes. Therefore they can accommodate a person's specific interests. Keren, for example, worked with human resources in an office.

The IDF is somewhat of a social thing, everyone does it and therefore it is a way to stay connected with friends from high school. In terms of everyday life, Keren states that they are "basically normal." Israelis still go to school and clubs and enjoy as free a life as young people in the western world, but they have to be more aware of their environment. Bag checks are routine when entering buildings and security guards are dispensed throughout the cities to help ensure public safety.

The three claim that the situation is far more frightening when looking in from the outside. They are not scared to be in public places, just more alert and aware of their surroundings. "If you see a man on the bus wearing a thick black coat in the middle of August, you start to feel uneasy," says Keren, "but this is not a daily sighting." Seeing soldiers in the streets is not a scary thing because they too were all soldiers at one time. They know that all extra security measures taken by the country are done so to ensure the safety of the people. Israel and its people are striving for a more peaceful existence but in the mean time, Israelis are experiencing normal and enjoyable lives. They are certainly not "pro-war" and truly believe that a peaceful compromise is the answer to their problems. Keren, Chanan and Meir love their country and do exceptional job of displaying their message to others. The three sincerely have a "Heart for Israel."

Several people who received a copy of the letter thought it was wonderful, that it was "written with so much insight and empathy," that it "brought a ray of hope and understanding in spite of negative media," and that the Israeli students brought a "perspective of Israel that one does not often hear."

I did not agree. I wrote this to the people who had so praised the Israeli students.

I agree in principle with this message and I applaud Kristen and these young Israelis on their initiative.

However I am very sorry to say that I do think that these youngsters are extremely naive.

In Israel we have had to watch, more times than we care to remember, Palestinian mothers shrieking for joy as she receives her check for $10,000; her reward for handing over her child to evil organizations like Hamas. For months they will brainwash this ghoul into believing that his glory will come only in his death. This person will live and breathe evil, he will be told of the great honour he will reap on his society and the 72 beautiful virgins that await him in Paradise.

His ultimate moment will come as an explosive belt is strapped round him, often packed with nails and shrapnel. He will have been instructed to get on a crowded bus, or go into a crowded restaurant, often packed with children in Israel. He will detonate his heinous belt killing indiscriminately and destroying innocent lives.

These incidences are not rare or isolated.

As Israel are scraping their dead children of the sidewalk we have to watch crowds of Palestinians swarm onto streets whooping for joy, throwing sweets to their children and letting off fireworks. They are celebrating the murder, death, carnage and misery they have caused to innocent people in Israel.

The Palestinian population is deliberately kept in blind ignorance and poverty by their own leadership. They are deceived, lied to and their children suffer the worst form of child abuse, of any children on this planet. For this I pity them! However as humans and to whatever level of education we reach, either formally or otherwise, we all have the innate ability to think, understand and to ultimately know the difference between right and wrong.

This is not a normal society! It is a people who have become both demonic and dehumanized. We cannot sit by and make excuses for that and pretend they are blameless. I find this totally unacceptable. Even a mother in the animal kingdom has a natural inborn instinct to protect her young, even at the expense of losing her own life in the process.

If this society has lost even that instinct, then sadly it is extremely naive to say, we have no grievances with them.

Best regards

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 29, 2003.

This time, The Toledo Blade decided to tell us the truth. The simple, straight, honest truth. Jack Kelly did it again. On a day like this I wish The Blade was published worldwide. Thank you Jack Kelly. Thank you The Blade. This article must be read by all.

"Today, we can say these little people are the root of all evil," said Mikis Theodorakis of the Jews. The composer of the music for Zorba the Greek was flanked by two Greek cabinet ministers when he made this statement on Nov. 4 at a public event in Greece. Neither took issue with what he said.

Mr. Theodorakis has lots of company in his anti-Semitism. (In the uproar following his statement, he claimed that he was speaking of the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon, not all Jews.) In a recent poll conducted by the European Union, 59 percent of respondents said Israel is the greatest threat to peace in the world. More than Iran. More than Iraq. More than North Korea.

Palestinians are the world's favorite underdogs, beloved of liberals in North America, European politicians of every stripe, and Islamo-fascists the world over.

A factual case for Palestinian persecution is hard to make. They have their own statelet and would have their own state if only they were willing to forgo murdering Israelis. Arabs living in Israel have rights and liberties Arabs in Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia can only dream of.

There has never been an Arab state called Palestine. Prior to 1967, Palestinians were either Jordanians or Egyptians. They are ethnically, culturally, religiously, and linguistically indistinguishable from their Arab neighbors.

Kurds would seem a more logical candidate among Muslims for the world's sympathy. Kurds have a different ethnicity, a different language, a different cultural tradition from the Arabs and Turks who have oppressed them for lo these many centuries.

But the number of the world's opinion leaders who give a damn about the Kurds wouldn't fill a telephone booth. Palestinians are loved because they are the only people on the planet who can, with any degree of plausibility, claim to be oppressed by Jews.

Hatred of the Jews has been the most durable political idea of the last 2,000 years. Jews have been hated by Christians and Muslims, by fascists and communists, by Europeans and Arabs, and Africans and Asians. Jews are hated by illiterate peasants and by college professors. Jews are hated by people who think they are better than Jews, and by people who fear they are inferior to them. Jews were hated when they had no state, and because they now have one.

It's hard to understand why.

Hitler wasn't Jewish. Neither was Stalin or Mao or Pol Pot or Idi Amin. Saddam Hussein isn't Jewish. Neither is Osama bin Laden or Kim Jong Il or Fidel Castro. Attila the Hun wasn't Jewish. Neither were Caligula or Genghis Khan or Ivan the Terrible. There have been a lot of mass murderers in the last 2,000 years. None have been Jewish.

Jews didn't start World Wars I or II, or the Korean War, or the Vietnam War. Jews weren't responsible for starvation in the Ukraine in the 1930s, or genocide in Rwanda in the 1990s. It wasn't Jews who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, or who put nerve gas in Tokyo's subways.

Yet Mikis Theodorakis can say "these little people are the root of all evil," and few will contradict him.

Of the world's 6.3 billion people, only 12 million are Jewish. By contrast, there are nearly 1.3 billion Muslims, who rule 57 countries that contain most of the world's oil reserves.

Yet Mahathir Mohammed, the "moderate" Muslim leader who just retired as prime minister of Malaysia, can claim that "Jews rule the world by proxy," and few will contradict him.

Iran is building a nuclear weapon - for the expressed purpose of annihilating Israel. Other Muslim nations applaud the effort, while most Europeans look the other way. Jews are hated in the world today to a degree not seen since the Nazis goose-stepped onto the world stage. All that stands between the Jews and another Holocaust is the United States of America.

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, November 29, 2003.

Many, many years ago there was an American radio program designed especially for children. It was called "Let's Pretend." This program has been resurrected in Israel. In fact, Israel now boasts several versions of this program. Their producers vie with each other to see which can attract the largest number of children. Their common theme is peace, and they only differ as to how to make peace between Jews and Arabs. Let's call their producers the "Let's Pretenders."

The latest Let's Pretenders consist of various Likud Knesset members and settlement leaders. Unlike other Let's Pretenders - for example, the Beilin Pretenders, the Ayalon Pretenders, and the Sharon Pretenders, all of which imagine a peace-loving Palestinian state these latest Let's Pretenders offer children the delightful fiction of a bi-national state. They prompt these children to imagine a "West Bank" and Gaza divided into ten cantons or districts. Each canton, they say, will receive parliamentary representation according to factors other than population - as in the United States Senate. And they would have children - Jewish and Arab children - to pretend that this cuddly arrangement will ensure a permanent Jewish majority west of the Jordan River.

The President of this projected bi-national state would be Jewish while its Vice-President would be an Arab. How cozy, how charming - a plot bound to delight a childish audience. Of course, this plot may not go over very well among Arab children. Especially those whose parents harbor the goal of a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan to the Mediterranean - yes, and who have instilled in their children the desire to kill and die for such a state.

It seems that the programs of all these Let's Pretenders lack verisimilitude - are so far removed from reality that only infants would be amused by them. But perhaps we are wrong. Perhaps Israel has become an Infantocracy! Perhaps the programs of these the Let's Pretenders are indicative of a progressive disintegration of the Jewish State - of intellectual - moral decay and political anarchy. Perhaps this is why the Sharon Pretenders, having no realistic plan or no Jewish goal - can only imagine another hudna.

Well, Let's Pretend. Let's offer an alternative to a bi-national state, namely, a tri-national state based on the Let's Pretend mentality of Shimon Peres. Let this tri-national state consist of three autonomous groups: Jews, Israelis, and Arabs. It must therefore have a trilateral Executive consisting of a representative from each group. It must also have a tri-cameral legislature consisting of a Jewish branch, an Israeli branch, and an Arab branch. Should jurisdictional disputes and legislative grid-lock occur, these will be referred to a trinitarian Supreme Court consisting of three Rabbis (one Orthodox, one Conservative, and one Reform), three Atheists (one heterosexual, one homosexual, and one transvestite), and three Muslims (one Sunni, one Shi'ite, and one Sufi).

Let's name this tri-national state "Pluriland." Come to think of it, the name pretty much describes the present State of Israel.

Posted by Charles Schiro, November 28, 2003.

I am a Non-Jewish American Citizen. As I read about the constant suffering your people are exposed to, almost on a daily basis, I am beginning to wonder if the human race has evolved beyond being a primative savage. I wish that your nation could follow the example of Jordan and simply export all of the Palestinian people to their Arab cousins. Palestinians forget that their grandfathers sold much of the land that they now claim to the Jews, when the United Nations established Israel. I am not a ultra-right Christian zealot who thinks biblical revelations dictate modern day outcomes. I am simply a citizen of the world who thinks the Jewish people are getting short changed in their aspirations to have their own secure peaceful nation.

Mr. Schiro lives in Carmichael, California. This letter appeared in the Jerusalem Post Letters, November 27, 2003.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 28, 2003.

Well, the US has announced that it is going to deduct from its aid package to Israel any money spent on "settlements," which in the view of Foggy Bottom includes constructing Israel's security fence, designed to prevent Palestinian Nazis from murdering Jewish children. That is ALSO a violation of "Palestinian rights," namely the right to murder Jews.

Now offsetting funds for things you do not like is an interesting idea. Have you noticed that the US has not offset from any of the funds it ladles out to the PLO anything due to the PLO murdering Jews or violating each and every punctuation mark in the Oslo Accords?

And while we are at it, I have another suggestion. The heads of two Israeli universities are cited in today's Haaretz (Hebrew University and the University of Haifa), where they complain that Jewish donors from around the world have been threatening the universities that they will withhold donations as long as these schools continue to hire and promote and grant tenure to academic traitors, and quite a few have actually done so. The universities have a long history of hiring incompetent leftists with laughable academic records as acts of solidarity by other campus leftists. The more radical of the tenured extremists are openly anti-Semitic, openly call for Israel to be destroyed, or openly call on anti-Semites from around the world to boycott Israeli universities. The university heads explicitly cited Ilan Pappe, from Haifa U., and Tania Reinhart, from Tel Aviv U., as extremists working with international boycotters of Israeli schools.

Now first of all, I would like to congratulate all of you who have sent letters to heads of Israeli universities denouncing the tenured traitors and threatening to withhold donations as long as the schools make a mockery out of academic standards when hiring and promoting anti-Israel leftist extremists. Clearly, you are having an effect. Those who have not yet written might consider doing so.

But an idea just as promising is to write the Minister of Education (Limor Livnat) and the Minister of Finance (Bibi Netanyahu) and demand that the same budget offset idea the Yanks are implementing now for "settlements" be applied to Israeli universities by the Israeli government. The national budget allotment to each university or college (maybe 70% of the university budgets come from the taxpayer) should be lowered by the same amount that each school spends on the salaries of leftist anti-Israel extremists and tenured traitors, shekel for shekel. THAT should get their attention!

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, November 28, 2003.

I am amazed again how everybody wants to evacuate Israelis - Jews - this is a sweet word to avoid the reality word: "DEPORTATION OF JEWS AGAIN." This sounds again as we Jews are having some terminal illness that cannot be treated. So we need to be evacuated. And Jews don't scream?

This sounds so very familiar. I remember the slogan "Jews go to Palestine." Now it's "Jews out of Palestine." Now the Arabs steal that British Mandate term: "Palestine." Since it is obvious they cannot steal the words "JEWS and Israel" for themselves:

How come we have NO GOVERNMENT talking about EVACUATING ARABS for a change? How come? This is a continuation from the 30's to appease ARABS on the backs of the Jews and Israel's blood.

WHY NOT EVACUATE ARABS TO JORDAN, which is a Palestinian State - a state carved out of Palestine and where the majority of citizens call themselves Palestinian.

It is amazing how we are all again concerned to help the PA and their economic situation. If they would not perform constant terrorism - and if Arafat would not steal their money but let them have the funds due to them - then there would be NO economic problem. Israel/Jews being destroyed and dismantled won't help their economic situation. This would be a funny saga if it wouldn't be so very sad indeed. This makes a sick world even sicker. I WANT TO HEAR YOUR VOICES.

This article was written by Janine Zacharia, and appeared in the Jerusalem Post.

A US academic center, which receives $1.5 million in Pentagon funding annually to encourage Middle East dialogue, recently assembled a group of Israelis and Palestinians, and quietly drafted a plan for resurrecting the Bush administration's road map, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's financier, Muhammad Rashid, was among the group.

The plan - the latest in a series of grassroots initiatives - emerged from a two-day conference November 7-8 at Jordan's Dead Sea Marriott.

It was organized by UCLA's Ronald W. Burkle Center for International Relations, which designs projects to maintain dialogue between parties when official negotiations break down.

The Bush administration has sharply criticized PA financial irregularities.

PA legislators have claimed that Rashid, who now lives in Cairo, is holding at least $200 million for Arafat in a secret bank account. PA Finance Minister Salaam Fayad is reportedly looking into Rashid's management of PA funds.

Rashid and Abed Alloun, former chief of staff to ex-Gaza Strip Preventive security service chief Muhammad Dahlan, represented the PA at the conference, according to a list of participants attached to the plan, which was circulated within the Bush administration.

The Israeli participants included Labor MK Ephraim Sneh, former Foreign Ministry and Mossad official David Kimche, and Haaretz defense analyst Ze'ev Schiff. Prof. Steven Spiegel, of the Burkle Center, who is also a consultant to the left-leaning Israel Policy Forum, organized the effort.

Seymour Reich, an IPF board member, said the group was not associated with the effort.

Spiegel did not respond to calls and e-mails seeking comment.

Two people close to him said funding for the conference and the paper it produced was not drawn from the annual US allocation, but from another source.

The Pentagon-backed National Defense University's Near East-South Asia Center for Strategic Studies is overseeing the contract with the Burkle Center.

Its Track Two Mideast Program has been funded by the US since the mid-1990s.

Rep. Howard Berman (D-California) said he has routinely ensured funding for the initiative, which appears as a line-item in the Defense Department budget.

"When the multilateral [negotiations] collapsed in the Oslo years, Steve Spiegel came up with the idea of trying to put together people from Israel, the Arab countries, and the United States on an informal basis because of the political issues and the absence of diplomatic relations," Berman said.

Sneh is due here Tuesday to meet with senior US officials, sources familiar with his itinerary said.

It was not immediately clear if Sneh was coming to help promote the plan.

A US official said Spiegel had tried earlier this month to arrange meetings for the group, including Sneh and Rashid. The trip never materialized.

An executive summary of the plan reads, "This document was prepared by a group of Israelis and Palestinians who are committed to focusing on the immediate and present ways of restoring the cease-fire and resurrecting the road map. In this purpose, it differs markedly from other recent private Israeli-Palestinian efforts that focused on a permanent settlement."

The primary recommendations include: An indefinite cease-fire between the PA and Israel, which would be monitored by a US-Israel-Palestinian trilateral committee.

This differs from previous short-lived cease-fires, which were between the PA and terrorist groups and did not involve Israel.

Future construction of the security fence should be "basically along the Green Line."

A Middle East association on terrorism, consisting of the US, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, the PA, and the Iraqi Governing Council, should be established, with a headquarters in Cairo.

As a corridor between phase I and phase II of the road map, a pilot program should be implemented in the Gaza Strip, which would be based upon the evacuation of Israeli communities following the achievement of a period of stabilization and full cessation of terrorist attacks.

A three-stage economic road map is presented to help improve the economic situation in the PA.

As part of the cease-fire phase, the PA would "take practical steps" to prevent Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, and other groups from carrying out attacks, dismantle illegal militias, close weapons workshops, and curb weapons smuggling.

Israel would be encouraged to release more Palestinian prisoners, lift roadblocks, increase the number of Palestinian work permits to 50,000, and dismantle illegal outposts.

Israel should accelerate the transfer of collected duties to the PA, and the international community should devise an emergency fund of about $1 billion for the Palestinians.

The plan calls on Egypt and Jordan to immediately return their ambassadors to Israel, and on Morocco, Tunisia, and Qatar to initiate the resumption of diplomatic ties, which halted with the outbreak of violence in September 2000.

The Gaza pilot project is included in an addendum called the "Road Map Reinforcement Package."

It is "premised on nine months of the cessation of hostilities and terror in and from Gaza. Based on the termination of violence, the Israeli government will evacuate the Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and the Iraeli troops which protect them."

It includes a package of security, economic, and other measures designed to "energize the road map and give it concrete shape" and to be implemented in three phases over 12 months.

The drafters of the plan write that this one would be more likely to succeed than previous initiatives, because it is "underpinned by a regional association to address the problems of terror," Israel would be included in the cease-fire, and it involves a trilateral monitoring committee.

The plans is only now starting to circulate within the administration, and it is not yet clear if officials will adopt its recommendations.

Secretary of State Colin Powell has praised other so-called Track Two initiatives, including the Geneva Accord to be signed on Monday.

He is likely to meet with its drafters, Yossi Beilin and Yasser Abed Rabbo, next week.

Both he and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz have also spoken warmly of another grassroots peace initiative led by former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon and Palestinian academic Sari Nusseibeh.

But administration officials have continued to insist that the road map is the only peace plan it is endorsing at this time.

THE JEWISH PEOPLE: A Family Under Stress
Posted by IsrAlert, November 28, 2003.

This is Jerusalem Insights #438 from Shorashim of the Old City (http://www.shorashim.net). It was written by Moshe Kempinski.

It has been many years since I have worked as a family therapist, but my experiences of those years have impacted on me till this day.It is therefore intriguing to me that many of the feelings that come over me today as I read the newspapers and listen to the news are so reminiscent of those that I experienced as a therapist with those families. I am again experiencing some of the same feelings of pain that I felt as I sat there watching a family yearning to love and be loved, but find themselves blocked by sibling rivalry and mistrust. The same frustration and sadness arises in me as I watch different segments of our society struggling with the same dilemnas.

In many ways the Jewish people resemble an extended family system. They seem to undergo the same rivalries, the same stress and the same desperate yearning for parental and peer approval. There are members of the family who revel in the seeming exclusive relationship they have with their father, while looking in disdain at what appears to be the faulty parental relationship of their siblings. There are others that struggle for independance from their parents and find a need to do so in a passionate and extreme form of differentiation. There are members of the family that have lost the ability to relate to each other because each attempt at discourse is fraught with preconceived assumptions of intent.

And then there is always the acting-out child. The one that in his or her behaviour is simply playing out the inner tensions and fears of the entire family system.

Every one of those descriptions clearly depict the convoluted relationships in the extended family called the Jewish people. An extended family with one more stressful piece of luggage.

Several years ago, during the heyday of the Oslo Peace Accords, an Eretz Israel activist, Dr. Gary Quinn, a Jerusalem psychiatrist posited a fascinating theory. He suggested that the Jewish people throughout their history in exile have exhibited the symptoms of abused children. That theory rang true then and continues to resonate within me as history continues to unfold.

Children after many tragic years of abuse begin to assume that they are the problem. They assume that the pain they have endured is a result of something that they have done. The solution in their mind, would neccessarily involve a serious attempt at denying their own identity. It would be assumed by them that if they were able to hide their identity and become less of who they were, then perhaps they wouldn't be hated by those around them.

Such has been the history of the Jewish people in exile and regrettably, more recently in Israel. Jews have assumed that the solution to the hatred they have encountered would be to minimize their Jewishness and deny their unique destiny. Such was the case in Europe and in America as Jews assumed that assimilation and universalism would be a bulwark against hatred and persecution.

For a period during the first years of the state, Israel and Israeli Jews seemed to stand against the trend. Though struggling with the meaning and relevance of faith these young Jewish pioneers were attempting to shake off the shackles and trauma of the abuse and the hatred of the nations. But living a life that has cut itself off from faith and Divine destiny has exacted a toll on a significant portion of Israel's secular population. Facing the onslaught of a vicious world media, a hating European Union and an unsympathetic American State Department has shaken the self assurance that was the hallmark of the early Israeli pioneers.

This can be the only possible explanation for the antics of Yossi Beillin and his friends with their Geneva accord. The same would be true of Ami Ayalon and his plan concocted with Sari Nusseibah.

The perpetrators of such ill conceived plans are not neccessarily bad people, but they are clearly tired people.

They are people, who disconnected with the heart of faith that beats faintly in their chests, begin to exhibit the symptoms of abused children. They assume guilt and blame and deny their own truth. When such self destructivness is combined with inflated egos and arrogance then they become not only self destructive but also dangerous for every other member of the extended family.

Israel is at a difficult and dangerous crossroad. It will need great faith and courage to struggle through the days ahead. But after the struggle and the pain we will make it through.

Posted by Judy Balint, November 28, 2003.

This was written by Stuart Pilichowski, an American who made aliyah. He lives in Mevasseret Tzion

Four years ago I began writing about my experiences making Aliyah to Israel.

Four years.

After a year or so the Intifada broke out and my whimsical tales of life in Israel became a bit more serious; perhaps a tad more cynical. I began thinking a lot more seriously about Jewish destiny.

Four years.

I guess you can call me an expert. Ha! I just returned from a business trip to the US. A project we had been working on for about six months for a rather large American business enterprise was incredibly successful. Our clients were bowing down and prostrating themselves at my feet. I was King. One fellow mentioned that they couldn't continue effectively and profitably without our presence. "Yeah, ya better not step in front of any buses," one said. Quickly the team head cut in and said, "Ha! You better not GET ON any buses!"

Ladi da? Isn't life a riot?


You think Israeli's are bad when it comes to parking? Spending Shabbat in NJ I drove my car to shul Friday afternoon. I parked near the Rabbi's car in front of his house. It's a rather large home, and so what if instead of a front lawn he has a front parking lot? Some of us have lawns and a spot for one or two cars and some have only a side lawn and spots for tens of cars.

So I go into the house and wish Shabbat Shalom to the Rebbetzin. She looks frazzled and asks if I can drive some soup over to someone not feeling well. Sure. I grab the soup pot and head for my car. Wouldn't ya know it? I'm blocked in. No way out!

But the obvious occurs to me: I'll drive right over the side lawn. Big deal. Vrooooom vroom. Mission accomplished. Soup delivered.

Of course, on my way back the spot is still blocked. What to do? Where to park? Simple: just drive right back over the lawn into my spot!

It was worth coming from Israel to NJ for Shabbat and driving across the lawn just to see the expressions on people's faces. I can still hear them saying, "Crazy Israeli!"


Hadas, an associate in my office, begged me to bring back crib sheets and a bumper pad from a factory I was visiting on Thursday. Her sister was about to give birth and she desperately needed the gifts on Thursday. I really didn't understand why it couldn't wait a day or two when it might be more convenient. But my policy is not to ask too many questions. If I can do the favor as requested, why not? So I shelpped the stuff on the train from Nahariya to Tel Aviv.

Hadas met me at the train station and with the brightest smile ever told me her sister just gave birth to a healthy bouncing baby boy. Everyone was ecstatic. He was her parent's first grandchild. So I said, "I guess everyone's going to rush over to the hospital to see the baby, right?"

Here comes the zinger: Her parents are getting on a flight asap to Hong Kong. That's where the baby was born. Their kids are working for an Israeli company in their Far Eastern office.


While in the States traveling from NJ to Wisconsin my airline had "randomly" designated me for an extra special security search. No big deal. I'm easy to get along with.

I just don't understand why my business associate traveling with me, who claims Jordanian citizenship and was recently visiting family in Saudi Arabia, just zipped right through every security check with a sly smile as I stood there taking off my shoes and belt.


On my El Al flight to Israel I sat near a couple from Philly. We began talking and I discovered they had met many years ago as students at Hebrew U. He had concentrated his efforts on learning to speak Arabic. He felt that peace was soon at hand and we needed to be able to talk in each other's languages. Soon enough he realized that especially with the collapse of the Oslo Accords he might have a better chance of finding a cure for cancer than realizing his dream of peace in the region. So today he's an oncologist.


Thanks to everyone for your comments and constructive insights over the years. Keep 'em coming.

Shabbat Shalom. Pray for Strength and Peace

Judy Balint is the author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times." (Gefen,2002). She and others of the Jerusalem Diaries group are recording their experiences living in Israel.

Posted by Leo Rennert, November 28, 2003.

Please send immediate protest letters to senators who are sponsoring a congressional resolution urging President Bush to adopt and promote Yossi Beilin's so-called Geneva Peace Accords (a misnomer if there ever was one). According to Haaretz, sponsors include Dianne Feinstein of California, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, John McCain of Arizona and Pat Leahy of Vermont.

Beilin's purported peace plan, which is receiving wide praise from all the usual blame-everything-on-Israel crowd (Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, the Europeans, the State Department, etc.), would seriously undermine Israeli security interests and reward past and future Palestinian terrorism with statehood along lines that even the Ehud Barak-Bill Clinton offers of 2000-2001 didn't envisage. (Barak has come out against the plan; Peres has declined to join in).

Here are some of the utterly mischievous and injurious elements of the plan:

Without any real safeguards against terrorism, it would give Palestinians a state in the West Bank, Gaza, east Jerusalem, more than half of the Old City of Jerusalem, including Palestinian sovereignty over the entire Temple Mount. And it would fudge the "right of return." It is not Oslo-lite; it is Oslo-plus as far as a sellout of Israel is concerned.

Arguments against the Beilin plan:

1. Beilin, as a private citizen, has no standing to negotiate a separate peace with the Palestinians. If he did this in the United States, he would be prosecuted under the Logan Act.

2. Beilin was thoroughly repudiated by the Israeli electorate and BY HIS OWN PARTY. He joined Meretz and still lost his Knesset seat.

3. Beilin has never abandoned the dreams and illusions of Oslo, including total trust in Arafat. Having ushered in a bloody 10-year cycle of terrorism which has cost Israel dearly, he wants not only to repeat the same mistake but compound it. The guy's misguided ego knows no bounds.

4. Aside from undermining Israel's negotiating leverage with the Palestinians, Beilin's plan is essentially anti-democratic. It disregards the clearly expressed wishes of a great majority of Israel's electorate and seeks to substitute an elitist scheme to erase the mandate of the ballot box.

5. The Beilin plan would make mincemeat of President Bush's road map (supposedly cosponsored by the UN, the EU and Russia who are now blithely switching horses and going over to Beilin.) The road map envisages an eventual end to the conflict in careful stages, starting with a permanent, verifable end to Palestinian terrorism along with a freeze on Israeli settlements and gradual withdrawal of Israel forces in concert with progress in ending the violence. As careful confidence-building measures take hold, AT THE END of the process would be DIRECT NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN ISRAEL AND THE PALESTINIANS on final-status issues like borders, Jerusalem and refugees. The Beilin plan thus stands the road map on its head by putting FINAL STATUS FIRST and it does this as an IMPOSED FIAT by outsiders - not a political agreement between the two parties arrived at after negotiations not dictated by the likes of Beilin or Kofi Annan or Tony Blair or the Swiss Government, which is bankrolling the international PR campaign in support of the Beilin plan.

6. How Bush can allow Colin Powell to meet with Beilin and his Palestinian counterpart to bless their endeavor without realizing that his own secretary of state is knifing him in the back is beyond comprehension.

DO NOT LET THE NEW YORK TIMES OR COLIN POWELL (or Michael Lerner for that matter) pull the wool over your eyes. The Beilin plan is a dagger pointed at Israel.

Shalom. Leo

Posted by ICEJ Staff, November 27, 2003.

Geneva authors warn Qurei not to meet with Sharon The initiators of the "Geneva Accord" have pressured Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei not to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon prior to the launch of their campaign to promote the deal at a signing ceremony in Switzerland on December 1, the London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat reported Wednesday.

According to Palestinian sources quoted, Qurei agreed to the request and is hoping that his repeated postponement of the scheduled talks will lead to a softening of Israel's formal negotiating position, along the lines of the unofficial plan.

Despite claims by former American Middle East mediator Dennis Ross in the Washington Post on Wednesday that there is a "common perception" by all parties in the region "that now may be a new moment to produce a more enduring cease-fire and the resumption of a peace process," Qurei believes the delay serves his interests.

The frustration in Jerusalem is evident. Speaking to Knesset members Monday, Sharon warned that there was a limit to his patience before his offer of "unilateral concessions," designed to foster an eventual peace settlement, became "unilateral steps" taken purely in the interest of the State of Israel. "I am against drawing timetables but there is a limit to our patience. Time is not unlimited; our patience is," Sharon cautioned.

Meanwhile, Israeli President Moshe Katsav granted an audience to Yossi Beilin, Yasser Abed Rabbo and other leading Geneva proponents on Wednesday, but criticized the Palestinian representatives for not dealing directly with Sharon. The meeting evidences that Beilin and Abed Rabbo have crossed over from the world of dialogue to outright diplomatic intervention, a move that follows the French and Belgian financed mass-mailing of 2 million copies of the Geneva document to every Israeli household this week. The move is aimed at creating public approval of the freelance peace deal - a deal that some European nations are attempting to persuade the EU to formally adopt. Beilin, a former Israeli justice minister, and former PA cabinet minister Abed Rabbo presented the permanent-status Israeli-Palestinian settlement following two years of talks kept secret from the Israeli government.

Sharon responded angrily when news of the talks was made public, accusing un-elected members of the Israeli left of seeking to undermine his government during a "time of war." The Palestinian government has expressed qualified support of the document.

Yasser Arafat, who according to his military advisor was informed in advance of the meetings and received regular updates throughout, recently insisted, "Our policy is not to prevent any attempt to arrive at the 'peace of the brave' that I achieved with my late partner Rabin."

In a media campaign to solicit the support of the Palestinian people, the director of the PA Information Ministry's Department of Israel Affairs wrote in the PA daily Al-Ayyam, "What is important in this framework is for the circles of the Israeli left to circulate the agreement broadly among Israeli public opinion and focus on a change in government in Israel as what will lead to a real, viable and just peace."

Indeed, after yesterday's meeting with President Katsav, Palestinian participant Hatem Abdel Kader bluntly insisted to The Jerusalem Post that the whole purpose of the current diplomatic drive is to "dismantle the political infrastructure of Sharon's government. Sharon is talking about dismantling our Palestinian groups and factions, and we are seeking in response to dismantle his political infrastructure. We want to bring down the Sharon government."

Unlike the one page "Peoples' Voice" peace petition authored by former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon and leading Palestinian academic Sari Nusseibeh in July, which puts forth a general statement of principles with the details to be negotiated, the Geneva Initiative provides detailed arrangements that, nevertheless, are open to widely differing interpretations.

While Beilin has told the Israelis that the deal will lead to a permanent end of the conflict and of Palestinian terrorism and includes recognition of the State of Israel and renunciation of the so-called Palestinian "right of return," his opposite numbers have told the Arabic-speaking media the opposite. The Palestinians argue with some justification that the agreement ensures them sovereignty over the entire Temple Mount, above and beneath, and will allow a limited right of return to Israel based upon a non-negotiable quota based on the number of refugees accepted by a third country.

With the document's failure to insist on Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, even after achieving statehood themselves broadly along the lines of the pre-1967 borders, many Israelis believe the formula is tantamount to the back-door destruction of a Jewish Israel. Such views are only confirmed by the document's guarantee that all refugees will be compensated for all the damages supposedly caused by Israel, material and emotional, no matter whether they settle in Israel proper, in evacuated Jewish settlements in the newly established Palestine, or in a third country.

No cost estimate is included in the document, leading some Israelis to fear that should Geneva's refugee "solution" fail to destroy Israel demographically, it may yet do so economically.

The ICEJ News Service is a project of the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, which was established "as practical expression of the desire of believers throughout the world to bless and comfort Zion." Their website address is http://www.icej.org

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 27, 2003.

You know how the fundamentalist Left in Israel has been whining that all those evil "settlers" have been chopping down trees belonging to Palestinians, especially when they are near the perimeters of settlements and so can serve as cover for terrorists? Where the same lefties emoting over the rights of trees never quite work up any sobs for Jewish children murdered by terrorists? Well Suhprize suhprize!

Left-wing activist Arik Asherman admits that he knows of incidents in which Arabs cut down their own olive trees in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) in order to later blame the Jewish residents and thus benefit from a "propaganda" victory. So says Aviad Visouly, head of the Haifa/Northern branch of the Land of Israel Organization, in a letter to the Samaria/Judea Police Department.

Visouly, who has been looking into allegations that the most recent case of alleged olive-tree cutting was perpetrated by those who would disparage the Jewish residents, presented the police with a series of 15 pointed questions on the case. One of them pertains to the fact that Fawzi Hassan Hussein, who filed a police complaint against the destruction of his trees, said he does not even own the cut-down orchard, but rather another one near Yitzhar.

Fawzi also told Visouly that the PA's agriculture department pays the damages for cut-down trees from money arriving from Saudi Arabia.

Posted by Judy Lash Balint, November 27, 2003.

International Solidarity Movement (ISM) member Radhika Sainath is getting ready to leave Israel in a few days. But before she goes she's decided to slap Israel with a $4,000 lawsuit.

The tactics of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and its supporters get more bizarre and brazen every day.

On Thanksgiving Day, Thursday, November 27, Sainath filed suit in Tel Aviv against the State of Israel for alleged unlawful imprisonment, negligence and breach of obligations. The $4,000 is for 'mental trauma and agony' she claims to have suffered at the hands of Israeli authorities during her 30 hour detention.

The legal action arises out of the arrest of Radhika and eight of her buddies when they joined a group of Palestinian Arabs protesting the construction of Israel's anti-terrorist wall last November near the Arab settlement of Jayyous.

Sainath had only recently arrived in the country on a tourist visa when she was arrested. Since then, she's been in and out of Israel four times as each three month tourist visa expires.

Sainath says she suffered no particular harassment at Ben Gurion airport on any of her re-entries after her arrest (try entering the US on a foreign passport after you've spent time in a US jail).

Sainath, an Orange County, California resident and former union organizer, keeps coming back here to get into trouble. On September 5 at Faroun, Sainath and her comrades tried to shake down the gate in the anti-terror fence. Last May she was arrested in Tulkarm for interfering with Israeli Army pursuit of terrorists in the town.

In a May 11, 2003 Palestine Solidarity report of that incident, Sainath makes wild unsubstantiated accusations against Israeli soldiers. They 'used a father and his small children as human shields,' she relates. Sainath was threatened with deportation after that arrest but Israeli attorney Shammai Leibowitz came to the rescue and successfully prevented her from having to leave the country.

Leibowitz is also handling Sainath's current suit against the Israeli government.

He, by the way, was the member of terrorist Marwan Barghouti's defense team who likened his client to Moses and the Israeli State Prosecution to Pharoah.

In an interview last May, Sainath told me that one of her main goals was to help people detained by the Israeli Army get through checkpoints. When I asked how the ISM knew who they were enabling to pass through the checkpoints, she looked stunned and said she didn't know. "In Tulkarm people who are wanted by the army aren't going to attempt to walk through a checkpoint. Anyway, it's not our job to check to see if someone's carrying explosives or not."

Sainath says her US passport was stolen here last year and she had to go to the US embassy in Tel Aviv to get it renewed. "I encountered a lot of difficulties because almost everyone who works there is an Israeli-American. They're all Israelis with US passports. It didn't seem like they'd be helpful?" To someone with her political views, she implied.

Still, she did get her passport and she did gain entry several times into Israel. And she did spend by her own admission, more than ten months out of the past year here in Israel trying to prevent Israel from carrying out its anti-terror mission.

She's lucky she got off with 30 hours in an Israeli jail.

It's bad enough that Israeli authorities kept on letting her back in the country to take part in activities that endanger all Israelis, let's hope that the Israeli government doesn't now give her a farewell present of $4,000 as well.

Posted by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff, November 27, 2003.

Jerusalem (jnewwire.com) - Israeli Ambassador to the UN Dan Gillerman was forced to withdraw his nation's first draft resolution in 27 years after a majority of the world body's member states rejected the idea of protecting Israeli children from acts of terrorism.

"The voice of the immoral majority was once again heard loud and clear," Gillerman told the UN Third (Humanitarian, Social and Cultural) Committee Wednesday, after failing to garner enough support to secure a General Assembly vote on the draft.

Opposition to the resolution was led by Israel's neighboring peace partner, Egypt.

Protect our children

The Israeli resolution was introduced in early November following a string of Palestinian terrorist attacks in which children were maimed and killed. The motion called for the protection of Israeli children from Palestinian terrorism - which often purposely targets buses, cafes and discos filled with Jewish youth.

At the time, Israeli officials said the resolution would test whether or not the UN was prepared to forego its traditional bias against the Jewish state.

The test was successful.

Israeli children not deemed worthy

On November 6, the UN Third Committee approved a nearly identical Egyptian-sponsored resolution demanding protection for Palestinian children from "Israeli aggression."

But with Israeli children identified as the victims, Egypt would be having none of it.

Gillerman was forced to withdraw the draft after a group of nations belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement, led by Egypt, insisted on including amendments that would have transformed the document into an anti-Israel resolution, The Jerusalem Post reported.

The changes were to include altering all references to "Israeli children" to read "Middle Eastern children," and inserting harsh condemnation of Israeli "military assaults," "occupation" and "excessive use of force" before any mention of Arab terrorism.

The group of nations also wanted to change the draft's title from "The situation of and assistance to Israeli children" to "The situation of and assistance to children in the Middle East region."

Had Israel not withdrawn the resolution, the amendments were sure to pass considering the NAM's majority status at the UN.

"It [is] very clear that the UN General Assembly is an unreliable and biased body with no international integrity. The message sent today by the UN Third Committee to Israeli children is that your lives are worth less than Palestinian children," Gillerman said after pulling the resolution.

A legacy of bias

Nearly two-thirds of all General Assembly and Security Council resolutions passed since the UN's birth in 1945 have been directed against Israel.

Likewise, Israel is the only UN member nation that is not allowed to hold a seat on the Security Council.

Israel's only other attempt to pass a UN resolution came in 1976. That draft, too, was withdrawn after Syria tied its approval to Israeli negotiations with the PLO terrorist organization.

Commentators on the overt double standard have noted that even in a democratic setting, a corrupt, immoral majority can still behave like an unjust tyrant.

Jerusalem Newswire, in its own words, "is a Gentile-run newsgathering and dissemination service based out of Jerusalem, Israel, that exists to provide users with the top daily news stories culled from a wide variety of Internet sources." Its website address is http://www.jnewswire.com

NEW PALESTINIAN MINISTER OF JUSTICE: Incites to Murder Israelis and to Hate Americans
Posted by Itamar Marcus, November 27, 2003.

Nahidh Muneer Al-Ris, the new Palestinian Minister of Justice, has a long record of hateful incitement, including incitement to murder Israelis through suicide terrorism. He distorts Jewish history in order to deny Israel's right to exist, and de-legitimizes Israel's existence as a state with expressions like the "occupation" 50 years ago. In addition he has a history of hateful incitement towards the US and its political and Christian leaders. Bush and Rumsfeld, he calls "bloodthirsty beasts" and he repeatedly libels American Evangelical Christians, attributing to them deep hatred of Muslims. In addition, Al-Ris recently participated in a ceremony in a summer camp - named for a 17- year-old girl suicide bomber. PMW will continue to monitor the actions and behavior of the new Justice Minister, to determine to what degree his behavior as Justice Minister reflects his hate beliefs.

It is noteworthy that an individual with such outspoken hatred of the US has been appointed to such a senior PA position. While his hatred of the US certainly follows the official PA ideology, which even promoted murder of US soldiers in Iraq through its controlled media, senior PA officials are usually more discreet. As a rule, Ministers do not express American hatred publicly, so as not to endanger US political and financial support. It is thus surprising that the new PM, Ahmad Qarie, chose such an outspoken terror supporter and America hater for a senior position in his cabinet. It may be that the PA has learned that in spite of US and Israeli verbal demands to stop incitement, US and Israeli policy has been to ignore incitement, in all policy decisions towards the PA.

The following are some of the recent opinions of PA Justice Minister, Al-Ris, in his own words:

On support of suicide terrorism:

"The Palestinian Arab nation, and its vanguard the Shahada-Seekers,*** are not terrorists in any way." [***lit: Death for Allah- Seekers, PA term of honor for suicide terrorists] [Al Hayat Al Jadida June 16, 2003]

On Palestinian support for suicide terror:

"Most [Palestinians] understand that the Shahada-Seekers and the uprising fighters preserve honor for everyone ... the public is convinced that uprising fighters are the most just and the farthest from corruption. Only a minority believes that the fighters should be restrained, for fear of provoking the rage of Sharon..." [Al Hayat Al Jadida June 16, 2003]

On erasing Jewish history in Israel:

Israelis have no history in the Land - because they are " Khazars, who are not connected to the land but to the words of the Torah". [Al Hayat Al Jadida June 16, 2003]

On the illegitimacy of Israel:

"... during the occupation of Palestine 50 years ago..." [Ed: Israel's creation as a state is stigmatized as if it is an "occupation". [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Aug, 4 2003]

On US President Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld:

"[They] are human beings whose ambitions have turned them into bloodthirsty beasts." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida Nov. 3, 2003]

On the US involvement in Iraq:

"They are fighting a cruel war". [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida Nov. 3, 2003]

On US Christian leadership:

"Pat Robertson is one of the main figures of the most extremist Evangelistic Zionists." [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Aug, 4 2003]

"Publications in the US about the Second Coming of Jesus gained wide distribution and they describe a terrifying Armageddon... total destruction. As for Jesus and his followers, God will raise them above the clouds... While their pagan enemies (who fundamentalist evangelist Zionist supporters interpret as Moslems) will drown in a lake of fire and brimstone...These Zionist supporters give a modern interpretation and interpret it [the fire and brimstone] as atomic bombs to be thrown on Moslems." [Citing a book in Al Hayat Al Jadida, Aug, 4 2003]

On US political leadership:

"President Harry Truman was considered one of the most Zionist American Presidents."
"President Jimmy Carter was faithful to the Zionist vision".
"Nixon was an American President who believed in Zionism, and he defined the Jews working in the White House as pigs... He was the one who said concerning the Reagan-Gorbachev summit: "Russia and America must cooperate in order to strike Islamic fundamentalism (!)"
"Bush, the father, was the 6th American Zionist President... and he is one of Pat Robertson's followers."
"In the chain of Zionist American Presidents the last U.S. President Bill Clinton is included... [Clinton] also emphasized that his Pastor predicted that he would rule America and charged him with [care for] the Jewish State, because with its blessing he shall win..." [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Aug, 4 2003]

Participating in an event encouraging children to aspire to Shahada - heroic Death for Allah: "Dr. Ahmad Al-Yaziji, Under Secretary in the Ministry Youth and Sport, participated in the closing ceremony of the **Ayyat Al-Akhras [summer] camp for children. [The camp was] organized by the Shabibah organization of the Fatah... the number of participants was 150 boys and girls, ages 9 to15. Participants in the ceremony... included Nahid Al-Ris..." [**Ayat Al-Akhras, a girl of age 17, was the youngest woman suicide bomber.] [Al Quds Aug. 14, 2003]

Posted by Isralert, November 26, 2003.

The destructive plan to establish a palestinian state in Eretz Yisrael is acquiescence to terror, abandonment of our homeland, and a grave danger for Israel. Programs including "administrative self-rule" to Arabs living in Yesha, leading to abandonment of parts of the homeland are also very dangerous.

Consequently, we warn, we assert, we declare: Eretz Yisrael is the homeland of the Jewish people - it is ours, exclusively. The land was bequeathed to the Jewish people by the Creator of the Universe, in its entirety, it was and always will be, our only homeland. The Jewish people are not conquerors of their own land, rather are the single lawful sovereign within it. After two thousand years we have returned to resettle the land, all parts of it. The whole land must fall under the full sovereignty of the State of Israel and be open to Jewish settlement, which will continue and expand, with G-d's help, in accordance with the historic-Divine return to Zion. We totally reject any agreement to partition the Land; "an area" for Jews, and "autonomy," or "self-rule" for the Arabs. Just as we returned home, to Beit El, to Shilo, to Hebron, - we will return, with G-d's help, to Shechem, Beit Lechem, and to all regions of the Land. We are faithful to all of Eretz Yisrael, our eternal homeland, as written by Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook, of blessed memory, about similar plans: "We will not betray, we will not renounce responsibility, G-d forbid, of our faithful representative mission, of all our people and all our land, by diminishing our total rule over it, by granting "autonomy" within it, which is null and void, unacceptable and non-existent." All talk of fragmented "shalom" within the context of "autonomy" in the very essence of the land of our existence, the land of our fathers, Avraham, Yitzhak and Ya'akov, is null and void, and is none other than treason and relinquishment of the responsibility of our historic duty and mission, with the Divine return to Zion. As with all deplorable ideas, such thoughts will not transpire, neither retroactively nor in the future. All talk or contemplation of such ideas is an historic disgrace. This land, promised to us, through the pure progression of generations, and the commanded precept to rule over it in its entirety, exists for eternity and will stand and exist, in its absolute completeness and our revival within it."

The vision of the complete Eretz Yisrael remains alive. It's faithful supporters will not slumber and will not fail - "We will be strong and strengthened for our people and for the cities of our L-rd."


Rabbi Haim Druckman
Rabbi Tziv Tau
Rabbi Dov Lior
Rabbi Shlomo Aviner
Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu
Rabbi Elyakim Levanon
Rabbi Daniel Shilo
Rabbi Eli Sedan
Rabbi Moshe Bleicher
Rabbi Yigal Kamintzky
Shevach Stern, Chairman, Likud Values Forum
Rabbi Haim Ganz
Rabbi Yossi Rodrigez
Rabbi Rafi Peretz
Professor Hillel Weiss
Ohad Kamin
Palmach Ze'evi
Yael Ze'evi
Yehudit Dasberg
Benny Katzover
Rabbi Mordechai (Moti) Elon
Rabbi David Chai HaCohen
Rabbi Ariel Sternberg
Yossi ben AharonAryeh
StavHagi ben Artzi
Noam ArnonFormer
MK Moshe Peled Ya'akov Katz (Keztela)
Rabbi Menachem Felix
Mateh Ma'amatz
Matot Arim
Nashim b'Yarok (Women in Green)

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 26, 2003.
"Our planet is now home to more than 6 billion people - with a projected 50% increase in the next fifty years. The rate at which we consume and degrade natural resources jeopardizes the health of the planet and threatens the availability of clean water for generations to come."...Sierra Club

Almost all of the Earth's ills can be blamed on humans and overpopulation. Whether it is water pollution, air pollution, deforestation, disappearing animal species, or newly emergent plagues, all are a direct cause of human interaction with the planet. This was recognized several decades ago and international population control was encouraged. Even such communities who traditionally espoused large families as a way of spreading their influence, realized the folly of such policy when faced with the global crises we are now enduring. China and India are two examples of countries with vigorous birth limitation policies.

Population and birth statistics are represented in many different ways. Various official statistics on world population and projected world population can be seen by country, by race, or by religion. When looking at projected figures for population in the next few years, it is obvious that the planet is reaching critical mass (if it hasn't reached it already). Yet if one looks at population due to birth increases by country or race, there is no one group that is obviously or overwhelmingly contributing to this deadly, selfish, and expansionist policy. Until one looks at the statistics according to religion.

Then it becomes very obvious that many in Islam encourage breeding for political gain without regard to the effects on the environment or the welfare of the planet. (Lest some people look at population increases and point to some countries such as the United States as having increasing populations, such manipulation of statistics is in error. While America may show a growing population, further scrutiny reveals it to be caused by immigration, while the actual overall birthrate has fallen.)

According to Britain's Daily Mirror, in an article by Ameen Izzadeen, "Political Islam dreams of a pan Islamic nation. It tries to achieve this goal by military or political means. Almost all Islamic groups across the globe believe in this principle..." The current Islamic policy that has become mainstream includes both war (jihad to some) and population inundation to achieve a pan Islamic planet.

To understand how this can occur, one must understand the decentralized and essentially unorganized way in which Islam functions. Unlike the Catholic church, or Buddhism (to name but two religions), there is no supreme Muslim Council making unilateral decisions for Muslims world-wide. An Imam from a tiny village in Bangladesh can issue a fatwa (ruling) and it can carry as much weight and influence as, say, Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, who is the former Imam of Rome, and secretary general of the Italian Muslim Association. Unfortunately for the planet, the goals of global domination that were once embraced by only the most fringe elements of Islam have now become mainstream; the more "moderate" Muslims now advocate reproducing at an alarming rate as a "peaceful" method of conquest.

According to a UN publication, "Water Management in Islam," "...in the Middle East and North Africa, water is rapidly becoming the key development issue. The region has one of the highest population growth rates in the world and scarce natural water supplies." This publication, while discussing water management, quietly places the blame of the water crisis directly on Islam's reproductive rates.

Another factor contributing to this is misplaced "Political Correctness." Whether out of fear of violence or lack of oil, or even misguided politeness, it has now become almost taboo to criticize anything Islamic, even when such criticism is warranted. Make no mistake, my criticisms aren't against Islam, merely against current policies espoused by some people of Islam in the name of that religion. Even China, with its expansionist ways, realized the folly of it's "conquest through population" policy.

Identifying where population and birthrate increases are occurring is but the first step in solving the problem. The next step is to limit birthrates to a point where they will not overtax the planet's resources. The world body must unite to apply stringent and even harsh measures to reign in those groups with out-of-control breeding policies and populations, lest they overwhelm the planet and make it an unlivable, barren wasteland.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 26, 2003.

Israel boycotts high officials who work with Arafat. EU Foreign Min. Javier Solana "insisted that Arafat is not an obstacle to peace, but part of the process and a necessary component to future talks." (Arutz-7, 11/19.)

What "process?" Is not that "process" failing? Surely the man who started the current war for jihad "an obstacle to peace?" Why conduct future talks him, after he violated all his agreements? If Foreign Min. Solana were not such a dishonest appeaser of the Arabs, his arguments would be stupid rather than evil.

Israel makes exceptions to that boycott and other resolutions that destroy and mock its own moral stance. In this instance, it deals with Arafat's lieutenants and with lower level European bureaucrats who deal with Arafat. The world does not take Israeli protests and principles seriously, when Israel, itself, bypasses them with rationalizations.

Israel is making a strategic blunder in focusing on Arafat. His whole culture, people, and successors are obstacles to peace. Somebody had to become the Arabs' leader. It hardly mattered that it was he. No Arab leader should be negotiated with and given the means for making more warfare. The Arabs should be defeated. The ones in the Jewish homeland, at least west of the Jordan R., should be uprooted and dispersed.

Posted by Barry Rubin, November 26, 2003.

"I'm shocked, shocked, to see gambling going on!" says the French police Captain Renard in the film "Casablanca."

Unfortunately, the croupier picked that moment to come up with a thick wad of banknotes and handed them to him. "Your winnings, sir," he explained.

That's how I feel about the sudden discovery of many politicians and journalists in Europe and some other places that anti-Semitism has become a problem in the world and that terrorism is a bad thing.

Better than nothing, I suppose, but where do they think all this hatred and incitement has come from?

Why do 59 percent of Europeans think that Israel is the world's leading threat to peace with the United States a close second?

Answer: Simple. They read the newspapers, watch television news, and listen to their political leaders.

Let me suggest an optimistic assessment: maybe a turning point is coming. The highest validation anyone can have in the world today is to be a victim. It reminds me of the famous cartoon right after the 1967 war when the character representing Israel apologized for winning?

This is the third wave of slander, hatred, and outright lying about Israel which followed key events in the last 20 years. Each time, the situation has lasted about three years. Each time it seemed that this firestorm of criticism would never end. But each time it did.

The first round was between 1982 and 1984, triggered by the Israeli attack on Lebanon. The next came from the end of 1987 to around the middle of 1990, begun with the first Palestinian intifada. And the current third one dates from the start of the second intifada in late 2000.

In each case, Israeli forces were portrayed as aggressive and Israel was said to be the factor blocking peace. This was at least understandable in the first two instances even if it was unfair. But how could it take place after Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered so much through the Camp David summit and the Clinton plan?

The answer to that question lies outside this column's borders but again the point is that these periods have a definite duration. With growing details of Yasir Arafat's misappropriation of Palestinian Authority money as well as his subversion of two prime ministers in a row, perhaps skepticism about his peacemaking credentials is growing.

As terrorism continues to grow internationally with every Jew as a target and people actually have to see the anti-Semitism they have unleashed, a "new" victim is added to the world's list. And if Israelis and Jews are going to be regarded as victims this means they are "good" again.

Think about this theory as events unfold.

Another new factor on the scene is Abu Alla's government. As everyone knows - well perhaps everyone except large segments of the Western media, academia, and governments - this regime is totally under Arafat's thumb. Still, the smallest and most cynical hint of flexibility from Arafat sends the world into shivers of hope that peace is around the corner. Maybe they are right: the PA security forces actually arrested one person accused of terrorism last week.

But this does not mean the United States or Israel accepts this notion. Clearly, they are going to give Abu Alla a chance to show if he can do something to tamp down on the violence. They are making it clear that rewards will be available (U.S. money; fewer Israeli roadblocks as well as troop withdrawals) if he does anything constructive. This does not mean they are ready to deal with Arafat or believe the peace process is about to go into high gear.

Yet expectations are low. Arafat's first step was to unfreeze the accounts of Hamas, arguing this was an incentive for them to stop fighting. But since they don't want to stop fighting they will probably use the money to accelerate their attacks. Abu Alla makes it clear that he will only try to talk the extremists into being peaceful but won't actually take such drastic measures as throwing them into prison, taking away their guns, or castigating them in the Palestinian media.

About the maximum that might be achieved by such methods would be to direct all attacks against soldiers and settlers in the territories rather than civilians inside Israel. And even this goal would be more likely achieved by the effectiveness of Israeli security than by the efforts of the Palestinian Authority.

His other idea is a "brilliant" renovation of the roadmap. Forget about stopping terrorism, he suggests, let's just go directly to establishing a Palestinian state. By this point, though, even Yossi Beilin is running out of things to give away without bothering to ask the permission of Israel's people or elected government.

If Abu Alla has not shown results within two months, presumably, we will revert to the current policy situation, make no mistake.

Still, the fighting may be winding down as the Palestinians become exhausted and out of funds. Even the terrorists may want a break for a while.

Two optimistic statements in one column! In the Middle East that is the prelude to being completely wrong. And unfortunately that might apply to Europe as well. Last week has brought the news that the EU has suppressed a report on anti-Semitism because it dared suggested that Arab and Muslim immigrants in European countries were carrying out attacks on Jews.

To make matters worse, from the EU point of view, some anti-Israel acts were defined as anti-Semitism. This is an interesting innovation. For many years, we have been told that not all anti-Israel actions are anti-Semitic. Now the EU has gone one step further and explained that anti-Israel attacks cannot possibly be anti-Semitism.

Then I'd tell you about the fact that a cartoon showing Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon eating Palestinian babies won the award as best British cartoon of the year. But that might spoil the mood of optimism.

Barry Rubin is co-editor with Judith Colp Rubin of Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography, published by Oxford University Press.

Posted by Michael Freund, November 26, 2003.

The countdown has begun.

In remarks made over the weekend, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his aides offered a series of thinly veiled threats, suggesting that within six months, the government may move to uproot Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza as part of a package of unilateral Israeli steps in the territories.

And so, within the next 180 days, Yasser Arafat may at last see his dream come true, as the government of the State of Israel does what Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad could not: force Jews out of their ancestral homeland.

Don't be fooled by the media's attempts to soften or mitigate the gravity of what's at stake. They speak of "evacuating" settlements, as though it were some type of emergency rescue operation, along the lines of California residents being moved out of the way to avoid forest fires.

But this is no accidental blaze - this is arson, plain and simple. The forcible expulsion of Jews from their homes would constitute an unabashed assault on the fundamental principles of Zionism. It would be a betrayal of two millennia of Jewish hopes and yearning, and a victory for our unmitigated foes.

It is simply unthinkable that a Jewish government in the Land of Israel would fire up the bulldozers, tear down Jewish dwellings, rip Jewish children away from their homes and sever them from their national patrimony.

Leave aside the political aspects of the decision, and focus for a moment on the morality of it. By what right does a government, any government, assert for itself the power to eject hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of citizens from their homes?

The Jewish residents of the territories purchased land, built houses, tended gardens and opened businesses with the full backing of successive Israeli governments, Labor and Likud alike. They have raised children and grandchildren, two new generations of Israelis who grew up clambering among the hills of Samaria, hiking through the deserts of Judea, or jogging along the beaches of Gaza.

Does any human power truly have the moral authority to destroy so many people's lives out of political expediency?

Let's sharpen the point one step further: to suggest that a group of people have no right to live in a certain area because of who they are is commonly known as racism or segregation. Consequently, to assert that Arabs should not be allowed to live in Haifa, or African-Americans in New York, or Catholics in Northern Ireland, is to advocate a form of racial or religious discrimination which the Western world no longer tolerates.

Why, then, is barring Jews from living in a certain area because they are Jews any less offensive or hateful?

Indeed, on March 13, 1994, the Israeli Cabinet outlawed the Kach and Kahane Chai movements because they called for the expulsion of Arabs from their homes. At a press conference held to explain the decision, Attorney-General Michael Ben-Yair said that the groups' aim was to "harm the Arab population living in the Land of Israel and bring about the eviction of this population from the land."

Fair enough. As a democracy, Israel is obliged to protect all of its citizens, regardless of their beliefs. But why is there a double standard when it comes to Jews? Why is calling for "the eviction of this population from the land" a criminal offense only when the subject follows the laws of Muhammad and not Moses?

Even from a diplomatic point of view, Sharon's proposal defies comprehension.

His "logic", if one can call it that, is said to be as follows: he will attempt to restart negotiations with the new Palestinian premier, Abu Alaa, in the hopes of reaching some sort of interim deal.

If, however, the talks should fail, then Israel will carry out a series of unilateral moves, essentially giving up territory and getting nothing in return. p> In other words, Sharon is telling the Palestinians that they had better talk with us to get what they want, or else we will just have to give it to them anyway.

"It is clear that in the end we will not be sitting in all the locations where we are now situated," Sharon told the cabinet this past Sunday.

Confused? You are not the only one.

But even if you think that Jewish settlements should be uprooted for the sake of protecting the rest of the country, think again. Many of Israel's leading military men have come out against such a plan.

Even decorated general and former Labor Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who was ready to give away the store at Camp David in the summer of 2000, recently asserted that there should be no talk of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.

Speaking to his party's Young Guard on July 14, 2003, Barak said, "We need to reach a comprehensive solution and not to deal with evacuation. You have to be really moonstruck to go to Gaza at a time like this and explain to the residents why they have to leave."

And, just last year, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Ya'alon was asked in a newspaper interview if "any move involving unilateral withdrawal before the confrontation is resolved and before the violence ends is dangerous." His answer: "Of course. That would give a push to the struggle against us. Even if tactically it appears right to withdraw from here or from there, from the strategic perspective, it is different."

Asked whether he thought withdrawing from Jewish settlements "would be a mistake with potentially catastrophic implications" given ongoing Palestinian terrorism, Ya'alon's reply was equally blunt: "Of course... any such departure under terrorism and violence will strengthen the path of terrorism and violence. It will endanger us." (Ha'aretz, August 30, 2002)

Nevertheless, although Palestinian terrorism has yet to climax, Sharon appears ready to withdraw, in an act that can at best be described as "premature evacuation." Like his Labor predecessors, Sharon seems willing to transfer tangible assets to the Palestinians in exchange for little more than empty promises and tired rhetoric.

Ironically enough, then, the Jewish settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria and Gaza managed to survive Yitzhak Rabin's premiership, Shimon Peres' brief tenure at the helm, and even Ehud Barak's term of office, despite their desire to bring it to an end.

Sadly, the question now is whether it can endure Ariel Sharon as well.

Posted by Linda Olmert, November 26, 2003.

Italian Deputy Premier Gianfranco Fini visited israel, and the visit sparked off a heated debate. (Is there any other kind in Israel?)

"Yossi Sarid's vote is clear. The Meretz MK boycotted his Knesset committee's meeting with Fini, saying, "I have no intention of participating in ceremonies for vindicating fascist, neo-fascist, or anti-Semitic inequities." Yossi Beilin expressed similar vehemence about the visit."

This was reported on Israeli radio all day yesterday. Is this chutzpah, and they think that we are all stupid? Or are these two so involved in their machinations that they have no self awareness.

They hug and kiss Arafat. Would anyone question his hatred of Jews. Is a discussion of his political performance necassary: the man is a dictator and a despot. They hugged and kissed Abu Mazen, a published Holocaust denier. And exactly who was Beilin meeting with in Geneva?

What do Sarid and Beilin REALLY have against Italian Deputy Premier Gianfranco Fini? Maybe it is the very fact that he is "...becoming a powerful voice against anti-Semitism and in support of Israel"

This was in the Jerusalem Post, November 24, 2003.

Italian Deputy Premier Gianfranco Fini heads the National Alliance, his country's post-Fascist party. What should we care about more: his pro-Fascist past or his pro-Israel present?

Yossi Sarid's vote is clear. The Meretz MK boycotted his Knesset committee's meeting with Fini, saying, "I have no intention of participating in ceremonies for vindicating fascist, neo-fascist, or anti-Semitic inequities." Yossi Beilin expressed similar vehemence about the visit.

From this we are presumably to understand that not only is Fini tainted with fascism, but so is the Sharon government for graciously hosting him. Is this fair and wise, or partisan and defamatory? What constitutes repentance in the political sphere?

First, a sharp distinction should be made between politicians and parties that are adopting fascist sympathies for political gain, and those who are moving away from an appeal to racism, anti-Semitism, or extreme nationalism. Austria's Joerg Haider, for example, was deservedly ostracized for gravitating toward neo-fascism by issuing barely coded anti-Semitic and xenophobic references.

But Fini seems to be an example of the opposite: a political leader who is determinedly transforming a neo-Fascist party into a democratic one. In a 1994 interview with La Stampa, Fini called Mussolini "the greatest statesman of the century."

Since then, however, he has withdrawn this statement and argued that Italians must take responsibility for Mussolini's crimes, including the deportation of Jews to concentration camps.

In 1999 Fini visited Auschwitz, and later voted for a law creating a national Holocaust memorial day. In 2002 he called on Italians to apologize to the Jewish people for the race laws passed by Mussolini. And just last week, he dismissed a member of his party for circulating a video that praised a convicted Nazi war criminal.

While visiting Yad Vashem yesterday, Fini continued on this path of repentance. "We have to condemn the shameful chapters in the history of our people and to try to understand why complacency, collaboration, and fear caused no reaction from many Italians in 1938 to the disgraceful, fascist race laws," he said.

"We have to do this not only to settle accounts with the past, but to prepare for the future. We have to do this so it is clear to all today, in 2003, with the racism and anti-Semitism, so no one can say: 'I am not connected, it has nothing to do with me, it is not my place to respond.'"

Fini is now considered one of the more pro-Israel politicians in Europe. As Avi Pazner, a former ambassador to Rome, put it, "Fini has traveled a long way [and] shows great awareness of the Jewish people and the State of Israel."

What is wrong with a former Fascist sympathizer making an about face, not only about his own national legacy, but becoming a powerful voice against anti-Semitism and in support of Israel?

Our tradition not only believes in the possibility of repentance, but that rejecting sincere and meaningful repentance is itself a sin.

The question, then, is whether Fini is sincere. Israel should avoid playing into the hands of those who want our stamp of legitimacy without truly facing their past support for fascism or Jew-hatred. Yet we must also be open to those who truly eschew hatred and wish to join the broad stream of liberal democratic politics. The evidence suggests that Fini is in the latter camp.

Indeed, creating more such converts should be the objective of international campaigns to denounce neo-fascism. Then too, our own Left would do well to more vocally denounce the virulent anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism that has infected the European Left. Who in Europe is now at the forefront of portraying Israel as a colonial implant with no right to exist? The anti-Semites of the extreme Right and Left join forces in tarring Israel as a fascist state, but on which side of the spectrum have such notions infiltrated closer to the mainstream?

The European countries and parties that are most supportive of the US are also, not surprisingly, most supportive of Israel and are considered to be on the Right for doing so.

We should be encouraging extremists on both ends of the spectrum, in light of the new post-9/11 world, to rethink, repent, and to join the fight against the Islamic variant of fascism that threatens

Posted by Morris Amitay, November 25, 2003.

With the accumulation of years it is easy to become cynical. But with age there should also be greater wisdom. Unfortunately, there are too many instances which demonstrate that advanced age does not necessarily bring wisdom. Here in Washington, it is said that in the U.S. Congress, with its seniority system, age is often equated with wisdom - with senility regarded as absolute genius! But whatever one's chronological age, valuable lessons can and should be learned from hard-earned experience. Sadly, when it comes to dealing with the realities of the Middle East, there are still too many well-meaning souls who have been around long enough to know better. They seem either to have been unable to absorb any useful lessons or simply refuse to accept unpalatable facts. We are referring here to Yossi Beilin and his so-called Geneva Accord, and, to a lesser extent, Ami Ayalon's 'declaration of principles'. What we are really witnessing here is Yogi Berra's 'deja vu all over again' as we are being urged to repeat the past.

This calls to mind the humorous film of a decade ago starring Bill Murray called 'Groundhog Day'. Each morning Murray would awake to the same exact day on the calendar as the day before. He would have to meet the same people and go through the same motions. Murray, however, escaped this time warp by learning from the experiences of the previous day. For the Swiss-financed rogue peace negotiators, time also must stand still. They have apparently learned nothing from broken Palestinian promises, an ongoing strategy of terrorism, and the destructive role of Yasser Arafat.

What Israel is really being offered now by the Palestinians in charge is not a peace plan but a re-run of past tactics - beginning with - 'Return of the Hudna'. Whether it is due to fatigue, naivete, or desperation - or perhaps a combination of all three - the rogue peace planners persist in operating on the same flawed premise - viz. that all the Palestinians want is to live in peace side by side with Israel. For Beilin & Co. hope springs eternal, as each day brings the dawn of a new day to make peace. These misguided souls refuse to abandon their belief in the honorable motives and trustworthiness of Palestinian leadership. They still attribute their own good intentions and desires for peace and reconciliation to those whose ultimate - and often publicly stated goal is nothing less than the eventual destruction of the Jewish state.

But no mind. The self-appointed negotiators feel they know better than the people of Israel who have twice now gone to the polls to repudiate this march of folly. Their mantra, to paraphrase Pogo, must be - 'How can we be wrong - when we are so sincere?' Or, to borrow from another comic strip, we pose the question - how many times does Lucy have to pull the football away from Charlie Brown's foot before he finally gives up trying to kick it? There are some people it seems, who simply refuse to be confused by the facts or by reality. While some may call them dreamers, at this point, that is too charitable a description.

How can the Beilins, Peres', and Ayalons seriously believe that the significant concessions they are offering will be accepted in good faith and lead to peace? The Oslo experience should have taught them that further concessions have only whetted the appetite. Given the track record of unfulfilled pledges, resort to terrorism, and incitement, is it rational to believe that the current Palestinian leadership will be happy with a truncated, demilitarized state? Will greater courtesy extended at checkpoints designed to foil suicide bombers change the mindset of a generation nurtured on Jew-hatred? What is preferable - 'humiliated' Palestinians or dead Israelis?

One may believe in the virtue of compromise, but it does not necessarily mean that your adversary shares this same belief. In America and in the West, if you have a dispute with your neighbor you can accept the decision of a court recognized by both of you, or you can negotiate a compromise that both sides accept. But this solution does not apply to Israel's neighbors who have a completely different set of values and methods of resolving disputes - not to mention adherence to a religion with a built in bias against non-believers. Israel can afford to set a wonderful example of generosity only at its peril. Being 'a light unto the nations' is a splendid goal, but not if there are still nations out there committed to extinguishing your lights - permanently. With all of its attention to details - the 'Geneva Accord' poses unacceptable risks to Israel's security and sovereignty, and thus, will never gain wide support in Israel. The intellectual brilliance of Yossi Beilin and European support can never match the common sense of the Israeli people.

For Israelis, dealing with reality means having to continue the struggle to endure and mourn even more victims of terrorism. But the alternative is an infinitely worse outcome. No responsible Israeli leader can risk satisfying Arab demands now in the hope that this will bring the end of their demands. History, logic and bitter experience dictate otherwise.

Those of my generation who witnessed the murder of European Jewry, the birth of Israel, and all of its wars and struggle to survive should have learned the lessons of Oslo. Those now seeking to revisit this same old territory have learned nothing despite their noble intentions.

Morrie Amitay is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (washingtonpac.com).

Posted by David Bedein, November 25, 2003.

Numerous statements have been issued from the office of Beilin's Geneva Initiative in Tel Aviv which claimed that Beilin's initiative was financed by private Jewish contributors.

However, one of the architects of the Geneva Initiative, Dr. Stephen Cohen, introducing himself as a paid advisor to the US State Department, spoke at a conference of the Brit Tzedek V'Shalom conference in Boston on November 19th, in which he stated that the funder of the Geneva Iniative was the Swiss Government. Cohen stated in answer to a question in the audience that he did not know of any major Jewish contributors to the Geneva Initiative.

On Monday, November 24th, the Geneva Initiative organizers offered to fly journalists to cover the event in Geneva on subsidized round trip chartered flight for the price of $150. (Our news agency is paying $871 each for two reporters to have two round-trip tickets to cover the event) The spokesperson of the Geneva Initiative told reporters that the flight was subsidized by the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue, a Geneva-based Non- Governmental organization (www.hdcentre.org).

When asked if this Center was financed by the Swiss Government, the Geneva Initiative Spokesperson said that she did not know. When she was asked if they had an office in Israel, she said that she did not know. They were not listed in Israel. The spokesperson for the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center in Ramallah, was kind enough to provide the contact information Center's office in the Palestinian Authority. They did not know anything about their involvement with the journalist flight arrangement.

At the office of the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue in Geneva, their spokesperson was asked as to whether their programs were financed by the Swiss government.

The spokesperson said that some of their programs and projects were indeed financed by the Swiss government.

The Center spokesperson was then asked as to whether the flight for the journalists on Monday sponsored by their agency was financed by the Swiss government.

The answer was: "What flight"?

The Center spokesperson was rather surprised, and wondered if the agency that he worked for had not informed its spokesman of its activities. The Center spokesman checked and called back to say that his agency was not in any way, shape or form involved in the subsidy or organization of the journalist's flight to cover the Geneva Initiative.

The Center spokesman suggested to call the Swiss government spokesman. The Swiss government spokesman was not ready to say anything on the subject, saying that all this would be discussed in a press conference tomorrow.

I called back to the Beilin Geneva Iniative Office to ask why they had said that the Center for Humanitarian Dialogue was subsidizing the flight when the Center's spokesperson said that the Center had nothing to do with the flight.

It took two hours for the spokesperson of The Beilin Geneva Initiative to get back to me with an answer that it was the Swiss government which is subsidizing the flight for journalists.

It would seem highly unusual for a foreign government to finance the activities of another government's opposition event.

It is even more unusual for a foreign government to PAY for reporters to cover such an event.

So much for the notion that private Jewish contributors are behind the Beilin Geneva initiative.

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 25, 2003.

We have learned that nothing is as dangerous as a politician who has reached the top of his particular career and is threatened with rejection by the public.

The two politicians I have in mind are President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Each is on the edge of a political disaster of his own choosing but, in many ways, they are each linked to the other. Both are trapped in a corner and desperate to escape.

PM Sharon came to office on his record in a landslide vote as a General who was well known for defending the nation in Six Wars and the Terror in between. Then he became a political figure and his previous straight-forward values seemed to change. He cut off all his previous friends and contacts who had worked hard to put him in office. As I said, he became a politician and is now desperate to retain the office he had finally won.

President Bush is facing his own dilemma in an election coming Fall 2004 - which, at first, looked like a guaranteed shoe-in. But now, with the body bags of American soldiers moving steadily toward the number of 500 - coupled with a downward spiral of the economy, he, too, is desperate to retain office.

Clearly, sacrificing an ally, Israel, on the chance that his Road Map will look successful is one of his choices. Both Sharon and Bush seem ready to do desperate things to win the prize of office. Desperate men see things differently. Their value systems are those of addicts who have overdosed on the glories of office.

Ariel Sharon gives every appearance that he is ready to sacrifice large parts of the historic ancient ancestral homeland of Eretz Yisrael, the roots of the Jewish State of Israel. He seems ready to abandon the sovereignty and the security of the Jewish nation to satisfy the demands of President Bush to keep to the Road Map Bush proposed. The State Department redesigned it - with the rest of the Quartet (the U.N., E.U. and Russia) - so that, if it were ever really enacted, its parameters would totally destroy the Jewish State.

One sleeper in the planning stages for years is a European Rapid Deployment (or Response) Force led by France, Britain and Germany - with the U.N.'s blessings. As I have pointed out several times (1) over the past 3 years, such a Force would first be headed toward the Middle East under the guise of a "Peace-Keeping Mission". Expect this Force to begin as a modest 1500 but to rapidly escalate to some 60,000 as planned earlier by the E.U. This may be Israel's first defensive battle with Europe in the near future. (2)

I recall when Sharon, in a rare moment of political honest moral clarity, stated plainly: "Israel will NOT be the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia sacrifice to the Arabs". This drew an angry response from Bush and the State Department because that was exactly what was planned to happen. Many of the nations who had tried to appease Adolph Hitler's Nazi Fascism by giving him the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia are now the same nations who are preparing to trade Israel for a brief peace with the world of Islamic-Fascism,

The nations of Europe, particularly France, England and Germany are in an agonizing panic because of the flood of unruly Muslims immigrants into their countries, many of whom are Jihadists pressing these nations to accommodate strict Muslim Shariah Koranic laws - or else! They too are desperate and are grasping at the straws of appeasement by trying to sacrifice the Jewish State of Israel. The Sudetenland formula is definitely in play.

To further illustrate the hypocrisy of this short-sighted policy, Bush is upping the pressure on Sharon to cease building the security barrier which has proven its effectiveness in blocking most Terrorists trying to enter Israel from Gaza.

Concurrently, Bush, as a matter of comparison through the Patriot Act for Homeland Security, is further tightening American borders, scooping up illegal Muslim aliens through the National Immigration Agency and deporting them back to their countries of origin. Here again, the threats to cut loan guarantees have been made unless Israel allows Arab Palestinians into Israel, opening the checkpoints - even as Bush increases the security checkpoints in Iraq.

Arik Sharon has accepted the onerous terms of the Road Map as it has been re-designed by the U.S. State Department and the Quartet - dropping his government's numerous legitimate objections. But, Yassir Arafat and his interconnected Terrorist organizations detonated any rational basis for accepting the Road Map. In effect, the Road Map has not only failed but was actually never begun, because its first clause demanded that Arafat demolish his Terror infrastructure, collect his army's illegal weapons and cease Terror attacks.

Later, Abu Mazen, Arafat's first PM appointee, refused to engage the Terrorists and now Arafat's second PM appointee, Ahmed Qureia (aka Abu Ala), has plainly stated that he will make no attempt to disarm any of the Terrorist organizations. Meanwhile, Arafat's second proxy, Qureia, has cancelled a meeting with Sharon, demanding that Sharon pre-agree to release of Terrorist prisoners, removal of key checkpoints, etc. Qureia, on the directions from Arafat, acts as if he believes Bush is sufficiently desperate to agree with Qureia's terms.

Sharon, in what looks like abject obsequiousness to Bush's unreasonable demands, continued to speak of the Road Map and its necessary "painful concessions" as if it was still alive and operational. Well, folks, the Road Map by the Quartet is dead and buried along with the countless "sacrifices for peace," all the innocent men, women and especially the children who have been murdered by fire, bombs, truck and car bombs, road-mines, firebombs and guns given by Peres to Arafat.

To Bush it's imperative that his Road Map was not viewed as a failure by the American electorate. Moreover, the White House was already in a panic as orders (which leaked to the public) went out from Arafat's Murata HQ in Ram'Allah to continue Terror operations full tilt.

Arafat first appointed Mahmoud Abbas (ala Abu Mazen) as Prime Minister of the 'Palestinian Authority' in deference to pressure from the White House. Abu Mazen could not force Arafat to release his grip on the 14 or so Security Forces who were also Arafat's Terrorist arm, intended to keep operational contacts with the other Terrorist groups operating primarily in Gaza. Those would include but not be limited to Al Aksa, Tanzim, Hamas, Hezb'Allah and many believe also Al Qaeda.

President Bush desperately needed some sort of Middle East claim of success as Iraq and Afghanistan became an albatross around the President's neck. Even his War on Global Terrorism was not entirely successful - as yet. (Note! In this writer's opinion Bush did the right thing in declaring the War against Global Terrorism.) However, he is doing the wrong thing by offering a different policy for stopping Arab Palestinian Terrorists who continue to attack Israel.

At the same time, PM Sharon was facing similar desperate times. The Terrorists kept coming while he was receiving considerable pressure from the White House and State Department to reduce his military response to incoming Terror. Israel's successful interdiction of Terrorists through their aggressive IDF military force irritated the Arab nations, the U.S. State Department, the E.U. and the U.N.

The need to put a good face on the failed Road Map was imperative for the President coming into the 2004 elections. But, despite Israel's anti-Terror actions, the Jews of Israel were still being murdered and they looked to Sharon to intensify his War Against Terror. Sharon, still trying to please Bush, has just announced that he will unilaterally follow the Road Map, notwithstanding the on-going Terror which has infuriated members of his own Party and Cabinet - as well as the people of Israel.

The public threats to Sharon from the White House/State Department were 'polite' and seemingly understanding of Israel's difficult situation as suicide bombers blew up restaurants, buses with children and shoppers as their main targets. Each suicide event brought a public statement from the Bush Administration, expressing condolences and speeches about the need to aggressively confront Terror.

But, their 'back channel' (i.e., non-public) threats were more mean-spirited. Loan guarantees were stalled; contracts were threatened with cancellations; intelligence would be cut off; spare parts for U.S.-made aircraft would be slowed down or stopped; aviation fuel supplies would be shut off - along with the spare parts which might ground much of the Israeli Air Force. The State Department, writing the Bush foreign policy, has pulled out every threat possible to make Sharon fall into line - despite daily Terror attacks, deaths and grievous injuries.

Since the signing of Oslo September 13, 1993, more than 1500 Jews (including at least 43 Americans) have been slaughtered with tens of thousands more wounded - many maimed for life - including too many children.

Avi Dichter, Director of the Shin Bet (Israel's Secret Service) said that in the last 6 weeks alone, 14 suicide bombings were foiled and the number of Terror alerts has increased recently from some 30 per day to 50 per day.

Israel, in the meantime, was aiding American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan with Intelligence, methods of fighting Terrorists, including the training of American Forces with intercity warfare and the re-fitting of American ships at Israeli ports. (Israel was of substantial assistance to American Forces, offering aerial protection during the 6 month mobilization before the first Gulf War, key intelligence, and training - all vital services which were not acknowledged by then President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker.)

There was more but that should give you the picture of the pressure put upon Israel.

As the Bush/Quartet Road Map was looking like a great liability to the President, another initiative began which would move the Road Map off of Bush's political plate and over to the U.N. Bush would then be removed from the Road Map debacle and the dirty work of compromising Israel's security and sovereignty would be done by the U.N., the E.U., and the rest of the Quartet.

This scheme, in many ways, was coupled with what is now called the "Geneva Initiative or Accords". This newest suicide pact was first started in Britain 2 years ago as a document of appeasement to the Arabs, to be closely monitored by the E.U. who actually funded the planning by illegal, self-appointed representatives of the Israeli government, Yossi Beilin, Avraham Burg, Avrum Mitzna - all Labor Party politicians rejected by the Israeli people - and Yasser Abd Rabbo also illegally representing the Arab Palestinians. Shimon Peres acted as the guiding 'elder' statesman - as he did in shaping the Oslo Accords. In effect, 'Geneva' followed the same secret' format of failed Oslo - only this time there were the fingerprints of the President and State Department. Even Paul Wolfowitz, bowing to Bush Administration pressures, suddenly found the 'Geneva' document very interesting and acceptable. (I hope he proves me wrong about him.)

So now, Israel is faced with the double threat of both the Road Map and the Geneva Accords converging, which will transfer the controlling power back to the United Nations, as recently submitted by the Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite Sharon's personal appeal NOT to involve the U.N. Within the Geneva Accords (a 112 page document recently mailed to all Israelis - paid for by the E.U.) is an even more hostile version of capitulation than the failed Oslo Accords. The Geneva Accords are supposed to be signed on December 1st by what can only be called the "Sudeten Conspirators".

The Beilin-European Geneva Initiative minimally called for the division of Jerusalem, the abandonment of the entire territories of YESHA and the transfer of at least 220,000 Jewish citizens, the evacuation of the Jordan Valley - considered an irreplaceable natural barrier to invading Arab nations from the East, the Judean/Samarian Water Aquifer that rests under the hills and supplies 30% of Israel's water, the release of thousands of convicted Terrorists ready to renew their Terrorist activities - and much more. (As an aside, Bush complained bitterly about Saddam's release of convicted criminals who have now joined with other Terrorists, both Iraqi and other nationalities, to kill American soldiers.)

Ariel Sharon gives every indication that he is preparing to compromise Israel's security and sovereignty - as Josephus did when he went over to the Romans. (Again, I hope he proves me wrong.) It is inconceivable that Sharon, the Warrior 'par excellence,' now an elder statesman, will betray the trust of the Jewish nation, merely to keep the power of his position. Clearly, with the influence of his Leftist sons, he has deluded himself that creating another Arab Palestinian State is good for the Jewish nation - despite ongoing Terrorism and more promised. Various Terrorist groups have stated plainly that, with or without another Arab Palestinian State, they'll continue their war until Israel ceases to exist, whether it takes 100 or 1000 years. Remember, Islam's written aim for Global Domination is preached by the Mullahs in every Arab/Muslim nation. Everything Sharon now says is suspect and considered a 'trial balloon' to test the political atmosphere. The questions that swirl in his head are by their nature, unanswerable. If he moves to please Bush to help his image for the 2004 elections, will Bush be grateful? Probably not. Once he is elected to a second term, he won't need to be 'nice' to the Jewish State to pander to those States needed for their Jewish majorities in electoral votes.

If Sharon creates another Arab State of Palestine by forcibly removing the settlements, will the Jewish people be grateful - particularly if there is more Terror? Of course not.

The follow-on question is: Would the Palestinian Authority or Arab Palestinians be grateful? Unlikely and more likely to copy the Iraqi model of ingratitude as they kill Americans with their new freedoms.

Will whatever he does allow him to remain as Prime Minister or will he be forced to leave in permanent disgrace?

Is Sharon relying upon the idea that the Left, that is, Peres, Beilin, Sarid, Burg, Lapid and the Europeans will want to keep him in office with the belief that only Sharon of the Likud (and the Commander who dismantled Yamit) could possibly dare to use the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) to force out the settlers of YESHA - just like they cut down their radio station Arutz 7, the only free radio voice in Israel?

It would seem prudent NOT to wait for Sharon to make up his mind as to whether he is the old Sharon or Josephus. It would be better to democratically change governments now and allow Sharon to retire in dignity.

Two Desperate Politicians, trapped by circumstance, cannot be trusted to make rational decisions for the safety and sovereignty of their nations but, only for themselves - regardless of who must be sacrificed.


1. "European Union Want to Use NATO Against Israel" by Emanuel A. Winston 8/27/03

"E.U.- Rapid Deployment Force Aimed at Israel" by Emanuel A. Winston 12/22/02

2. "Blair, Chirac Unite on Peacekeeper Plan" by Ed Johnson AP CHICAGO TRIBUNE 11/24/03

3. "Palestinian Official Delays 1st Meeting with Sharon" by Evan Osnos CHICAGO TRIBUNE 11/24/03

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 25, 2003.

There is something sickening about the Israeli government's habit of releasing Arab terrorists from prision while harassing activist Jews who live in Yesha with administrative detention. The Arabs won't be brought back to prison until after they murder again and/or aid and abet other terrorists and after they have heir day in court. The Jews are detained on 'suspicion' (no open accusation), released from detention and then detained again WITH NO TRIAL. The Government won't put the Jews on trial - they have no case. Right now Noam Federman is detained in Ashmoret Prison, said to be the harshest security jail in Israel. The Hebron Community reports that

"He [Federman] is continuing a hunger strike [it's now nearly six weeks]... He is not allowed visitors, telephone calls and remains caged ing a tiny cell in the same wing with Arab terrorists and convicts infected with AIDS.

"This afternoon [November 23] Arab Knesset member Dehamshe arrived at the prison to visit Lebanese terrorist Mustepha Dhirani, whose cell is adjacent to Federman's. According to the Kol Rina news agency, Federman cursed and spit at Dehamshe, calling him a 'fifth column.'"

Federman is right. Several Knesset members have complained that cell phones are smuggled to the Arab prisoners by Arab visitors like Dehamshe, who have immunity against search. They can help kill Jews while in prison.

Federman's administrative detention order keeps him in prison for six months. However it can easily be renewed.

This is what you can do:

1.  Sign the online petition for Noam Federman. CLICK HERE

2.  Write and/or call:

Ariel Sharon: 02-5664838 or heb@pmo.gov.il
Zachi Hanegbi: 02-5308039 or zhanegbi@knesset.gov.il
Uzi Landau: ulandau@knesset.gov.il
Shaul Mofaz Tel: 03-6976663. Fax: 03-6976218. smofaz@knesset.gov.il  and  sar@mod.gov.il

Comtacting Mofaz is particularly important. Elisheva Federman pointed out in Arutz-7 that Defense Minister Mofaz has the authority to overrule the GSS and (at least) relocate Federman to another prison and grant him normal prisoners' rights.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 24, 2003.

Sadat wasn't a lover of peace. He signed a treaty in order to get territory from Israel and money from the US. Since the Arabs have a different standard of truth and justice from the West, the peace is not solid and it is reversible. It may be reversed even after a quarter of a century of adherence to it. (See refutation, below.)

Egypt has not reconciled with Israel. It still considers Israel as the enemy and its rival for regional hegemony and a competitor "for the benefits of peace." Pres. Mubarak boycotts Israel. He has frozen bilateral ties of tourism, commerce, and industry. He encourages other Arabs to do likewise. He does not want other Arab states to make peace with Israel, lest Egypt lose importance in Washington as a diplomatic mediator. While exploiting such status with the US, Egypt actually is the patron of the P.A., and warned Arafat that he would be considered a traitor if he accepted Pres. Clinton's proposals.

Whereas Western intellectuals usually support change and universal peace, Egyptian and most Arab intellectuals oppose peace with Israel. Although Mubarak might not attack Israel, he has built up an army with which his successor might. This successor might do so, in order to appease the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood has been radicalizing Egypt's middle class.

Lacking the technological infrastructure for completing in the global market, Egyptians doesn't benefit from globalization and US-style capitalism. They think that globalization may erode their cultural and religious identities. Thanks to the downturn in the global economy, they earn less from the drop in tourism, oil prices, Canal revenues, and remittances from Egyptian workers abroad. The Egyptian economy is lagging. Egypt fears losing status. The only avenue in which Egypt has progressed is militarily, thanks to US aid. US military aid does not keep Egypt from war.

When Egypt concludes that its expectations from peace did not materialize, it may revert to war. Israel ought to be planning for that war, but it is not. To the contrary, some Israeli leaders praise Egypt's regional importance (Dan Eldar, MEFnews, 11/17, e-mail from Middle E. Qtly., Fall 2003) and contributions to peace diplomacy, even though that diplomacy is entirely anti-Israel and stiffens PLO resistance to making peace.

By freezing those ties, Egypt violated the treaty. Egypt also militarized the Sinai more than the treaty authorized. It also allows arms smuggling into Gaza. Why, then, did Mr. Eldar maintain that Egypt adhered to the treaty? There is a reluctance to face hard truths, isn't there?

Posted by David Bedein, November 24, 2003.

Last Wednesday, President George W. Bush, addressing a crowded press conference in London in the presence of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, called on Israel to stop what he termed the "daily humiliation" of Palestinian Arabs at checkpoints where IDF troops and Israeli police conduct security searches of Palestinian Arabs before they can enter Israeli cities.

I asked a U.S. consular official in Jerusalem why Bush would claim that Israel was subjecting Arabs to humiliation at checkpoints. The U.S. consular official took offense at the very question. "I think that it is obvious that if my staffers from Bethlehem are made to wait an inordinate amount of time in their cars at the checkpoint, then that would be a clear matter of humiliation," he retorted.

The U.S. consular official went on to say that his staffers had clear IDs as to who they are and where they worked. Since Bethlehem is well known for spawning industries that produce countless counterfeit documents, I asked the consular official if it was not understandable that Israeli security officials be extra careful in examining all identification, as an added measure of caution, before allowing vehicles to pass into the nation's capital.

The U.S. consular official took even greater offense at that question, indicating that he hoped I would not write about this issue. I could only take that as a blessing to explore the matter further. What was of particular concern was that the U.S. consular official did not seem to be aware of what had transpired on Tuesday at one of the checkpoints between Jerusalem and Bethlehem.

The incident took place at 6 o'clock Tuesday morning at the checkpoint near Beit Jalla, just south of the tunnel road that goes through Beit Jalla into Jerusalem. The sun had just risen. A Palestinian Arab from Bethlehem, who looked familiar to the young IDF troops at the checkpoint, proceeded to get out of his car with a prayer blanket. This was the last week of Ramadan, and the young, devout-looking man made a hand signal that he wanted to pray. The IDF troops at the checkpoint afforded him the opportunity to pray and did not conduct a security search of his vehicle nor his person. The man then knelt to the ground, spread out his prayer blanket, and proceeded to pull out an AK-47 and murder two young IDF troops at point blank range. Moshe Belsky, age 23, who was speaking on his cell phone with his mother, and Shaul Lahav, age 20, the checkpoint commander, were killed instantly.

The killer then hopped into his car and sped back to Bethlehem, where he donned his uniform as an officer in the Palestinian Authority police force. The news media overseas only reported that two Israeli soldiers had been killed at the entrance to the Jerusalem tunnel by a "militant." Arafat's Fateh Tanzim took credit for the murder on the official PBC Voice of Palestine radio.

Israel had granted the PA the use of Israeli radio air waves in 1993 and still does so in order to foster a "voice of peace" for the PLO. The message communicated on the Voice of Palestine over the past ten years has hardly been a "a voice of peace."

I met Shaul Lahav on the day before his death. I had stopped by the checkpoint for a few minutes with tourists from the U.S., and they were pleased to meet Shaul, because he knew English. His parents had moved to Israel at roughly the time that I had moved to Israel, in the early 1970's. He was the oldest son in the family, their first "sabra," and was almost the same age as my oldest son (who just turned 21 and also serves in an IDF combat unit). Shaul interrupted his conversation with us at the checkpoint to receive a call from his girlfriend from his Kibbutz. Shaul might have married, raised a family and led a happy life. At the age of 20, everything is just ahead of you. What can be more of a "humiliation?" A young man cut down by the PLO in the prime of his life or the enforcement of strict security measures so the PLO does not murder another young man in the same exact place?

Other examples of alleged Palestinian "daily humiliation" at the hands of the IDF, duly reported to the U.S. consulate, are the IDF's strict searches of Palestinian Red Crescent ambulances. People tend to forget that the Red Crescent is run by Fatchi Arafat, Yasser Arafat's brother, and that the IDF has reported numerous instances in which the Red Crescent ambulances were used to smuggle armed terrorists and weapons in a terror campaign that has seen 20,000 armed attacks in Israel in three years.

Most recently, Jerusalem's Alternative Information Center, funded through the Ford Foundation and the New Israel Fund, and run by self-proclaimed Trotskyite Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, provided a film for the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem. The film documented the "humiliation" Arabs in East Jerusalem must endure at these security checks. It depicted an iron gate that Arabs have to go through for security checks that lead into the East Jerusalem offices of the Israel Ministry of Interior and the Israel Ministry of National Insurance. Both of these offices provide vital health, education, registration and welfare aid to the local population.

What the Alternative Information Center film "forgot" to illustrate was that the iron gate and the severe security restrictions on entering Israeli government offices in East Jerusalem did not exist until three years ago. That's when Aish Kodesh Gilmore, a part time Israeli security guard, was shot in the neck and killed by an officer in Arafat's Fateh Tanzim militia. The Fateh Tanzim issued an immediate press release to the media, praising the murder of Aish Kodesh Gilmore, the same as was done after Shaul's murder.

I knew this young man, Aish, whose unusual name stuck with me. He was named for a Rabbi known as the Aish Kodesh - A Rabbi in the Warsaw Ghetto during World War II. His weekly stenciled prayer sheets and Bible commentaries kept up the spirits of the starving Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto throughout their ordeal - until Aish Kodesh was himself banished from Warsaw. (He later perished from famine.) Aish Kodesh's writings were found preserved in a jar after World War II and were of great inspiration to the musically inclined Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach, who was the Rabbi of Colorado-born Reuvein Gilmore.

Reuvein Gilmore later became one of the founders of the Moddiin collective community that Rabbi Carlebach's students pioneered just north of Jerusalem. Inspired by Rabbi Carlebach's stories of the Aish Kodesh, Reuvein gave the name of his little boy Aish Kodesh. I remember him well as a little fellow with long blonde curls, who would sit on Rabbi Carlebach's knees and listen as the Rabbi played songs of hope and Hassidic inspiration on his guitar. I had lost contact with Aish Kodesh, until I heard of his murder. I interviewed his young widow, shortly after the tragedy.

When I went to interview Zahava Gilmore, Aish Kodesh's widow, just one month after he was murdered in his role as a security guard in East Jerusalem, the person who ran to greet me at the door was Talia, Aish Kodesh's orphaned three-year-old daughter. Zahava explained that Talia always runs to the door, expecting her father to come home. If that is not the ultimate of humilation, what is?

Aish Kodesh's widow remarked that Aish was proud of the special role he performed in helping the people of East Jerusalem get the government benefits that they deserved.

You sometimes have to ask over and over and over: Which is the greater "humiliation": a young man cut down by the PLO in the prime of his life, or the enforcement of strict security measures so that the PLO does not murder another young man in that exact same place?

President Bush must be understand that the staff of the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem may need to take some lessons on the meaning of "humiliation" during a time of war. U.S. troops are busy learning the lesson of constant terrorist harassment the hard way in Iraq.

After all, Bagdad and Basra are not very far from Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Shaul and Aish Kodesh were no different than American boys serving their country against a lifelong sponsor of terrorists. And Moshe Belsky's mother feels the pain as much as any dead soldier's mother - maybe more so, since she was speaking to him at the moment of his murder.

President Bush should know well that Israel deserves the right to protect its sons at the checkpoints. Ask the mothers of Shaul, Moshe and Aish Kodesh.

A security check is not humiliation. It is protection.

David Bedein is the bureau chief of the Israel Resource News Agency, located at the Beit Agron International Press Center in Jerusalem.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 24, 2003.

Dear friends,

For me, the most painful aspect of the present Intifadah, in addition to the casualties, are Israelis and Jews who choose to conduct a war against the policies of Israel in the arena of the international media and public opinion. Individuals and organization that are engaged in such activities are nothing less than 5th column in the heart of our nation.

I am not aware of any such phenomenon among other nations in times of war, certainly not among our enemies.

We are being attacked on two fronts: by our enemies who seek to destroy us and by those among us who join and assist them. In my vocabulary, they are called traitors.

By now, you must be familiar with the insightful writings of my friend Robert Vincent. I am proud to bring you another brilliant article by him on this painful subject.

Your Truth Provider, Yuval.

It is most depressing to be doing whatever we can in our little corner of the globe to win the 'battle of the western front' against the anti-Semitic media/academia axis, and at the same time, have former Israeli government officials delivering boxes of shells at the doorsteps of our enemies.

Of course, no one can expect that a people whose heritage is rooted in democracy will agree on every issue. But for Jews to be supportive of Israel is not asking our ethnic brethren to march in lockstep, any more than it requires that anyone who is vocal in this way must automatically pick up and live there.

It is really no different than when Loretta Swit ("Hot Lips Houlihan" of M.A.S.H. fame, and American of Polish extraction) lobbied the U.S. government to provide aid to Poland in the wake of the victory of the Solidarity movement there. No one questioned her loyalty as an American. I'm sure she did not immerse herself in Polish politics in any detail. She simply wanted the best for the land of her ancestors, the country she identied with in that context, in a manner that all Americans, a nation of immigrants, takes for granted.

Poland, I'm sure, is not a perfect country. Neither is Greece, Mexico, Korea, Ireland, England, nor Germany. Yet Americans of these ethnicities have no self-consciousness whatever of openly and positively identifying with their respective roots. For some Diaspora Jews to loudly proclaim "Israel does not represent all Jews" because they don't happen to like Sharon or this policy or that policy is nonsensical. Of course Israel does not represent us in the way that our Congressman does... but whatever the government, it represents our heritage as a people. And last time I checked, they are among America's staunchest allies, so what is there to be self-conscious or embarrassed about? Do we not have the very same right as all of our fellow Americans to celebrate the nation state that is the modern expression of a heritage that dates back millennia?

And if we express grave concern at Israel's plight... is this in any way different from what, for example, Greek-Americans would do if Greece were threatened with annihilation by Turkey?

Those of our community who would deny and even slander the very concept of Israel do not even deserve to be debated as equals. These "Judenrats" only deserve our collective and terse rebukes. At the end of the day, they are only trying to "cut a deal" with our enemies in the hopes of "better treatment"... but history records that the literal Judenrats went to the gas chambers as surely as anyone, only a little bit later when they were no longer "of use." And if it is not craven cowardice that is their primary motivation, then it is some mistaken sense of "moral superiority," as though Jews should be above inflicting suffering on anyone, even if it is in self-defense. Perhaps their interpretation of our being the "Chosen People" is along the lines of the "Chosen Eternal Martyrs"... well that is their choice, but not with the blood of MY family, friends, or community.

For my part, I will leave such arguments and proclamations over the meaning of the phrase "Chosen People" to others. Chosen or not, we are A PEOPLE. And like ANY OTHER PEOPLE, we deserve to live, to prosper by our labors, and to have a community, a history, a heritage, and to be allowed to live in peace... and where that last matter fails, TO DEFEND OURSELVES.

In his day, a lot of people of conservative political persuasion resented FDR, some even thought him something of a dictator, a demagogue. But few Americans indeed doubted the right and need of our country to defend itself, nor did anyone even dare question our very right to exist as a nation based on any perceived disagreeable aspects of his leadership. Indeed, what country has ever had its very right to exist brought into question merely by the quirks of a particular leader or political party, much less some of the horrific acts carried out by other countries? Does anyone question China's right to exist over her shameful treatment of Tibet, for instance?

To those who read this and agree with me, let us start with one resolution. We may begin by not even deigning to explain Israel's "right to exist." Mr. Dershowitz's laudable efforts notwithstanding, I for one am sick and tired of anyone feeling that they have to "make a case" for Israel. Does anyone have to "make a case" for Japan? For Italy? For the Central African Republic? Let us stop with this. We don't have to "justify Israel." Anyone who asks this of us is by definition an anti-Jewish bigot, or if Jewish themselves, a contemptible Judenrat; we will not convince them anyway, so why bother to try?

To the genuinely curious, we instead need to draw attention to the sharp contrasts between Israel and her adversaries, and in doing so, apply the same moral yardstick to all parties concerned. For no matter what transgressions Israel is guilty of, even the blind can see that by any measure, her enemies are far, far worse. The majority of our countrymen here in America are aware of this, I'm sure, despite the best efforts of academia and some elements of the media to persuade them otherwise. In Europe, the situation is obviously worse.

But even the Europeans, along with all peoples of the developed democratic first world, must in the end realize that the Islamic fundamentaist movement is aimed against them as well. Israel is on the front lines of a struggle that involves them just as surely, and handing the Jews over to the Arabs will make the Europeans no safer than Germany's neighbors were sixty years ago, despite Germany having their concentration camps swamped with Jewish victims. This must be the second argument we must ceaselessly stress as a community.

All wars are won by the aggregate results of innumerable small unit actions. But no war is won without unity of purpose, a clear understanding of one's adversary, and a coordinated battle plan. All these are issues that must be acted upon NOW.

Robert Vincent lives in Toledo, OH and has a Masters in International Relations and is currently pursuing a MBA. He writes that his interest is in "America's ongoing efforts to eliminate the threat posed by Islamic fundamentalist-inspired terrorism, and the Arab-Israeli conflict (both of which I view as essentially different fronts of the same war)."

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 24, 2003.

This comes from the DEBKA file (http://www2.debka.com/index.php).

Monday, November 24, Al Qaeda marked Eid al Fitr, the festival closing the Muslim festival of Ramadan, with a dramatic warning. DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources reports that a message published over al Qaeda's electronic channels and websites declared that the countdown has begun for the biggest operation ever carried out in the United States. "The big blow will fall very shortly. It will consist of a series of surprise attacks that will cut America off from communication with its armies in Muslim countries." The reference is clearly to US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The largest number, around 115,000 soldiers, is present in Iraq.

Muslims living in the United States are urged to "take advantage of the short time left" to escape the country and harm's way.

Some of the messages say that a new Osama bin Laden videotape will soon be out. It will also carry statements by al Qaeda members who executed the last suicide attacks in Saudi Arabia and adherents who died in clashes with Saudi security. They will be shown describing how they were prepared for action. Bin Laden will intersperse these cuts with comments explaining the selection of Saudi targets.

DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report that some of the new messages are signed by Abu Assam al Yamani, who also threatens to murder Abdul Rahman Rashid, editor of the Saudi London-based paper Sharq al Awsat. Al Yamani says the al Qaeda passed sentence of death against the editor because he not only met President George W. Bush in the British capital last week but interviewed him and appeared with the president in a joint photo.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 24, 2003.

Mofaz is willing to have us pay a big price for peace. Why? Why do I have to "pay" anything at all? I have never initiated a war against the Arabs. I have never terrorized them. I have never caused them extensive economic damage. So why do I have to pay?

When I say that one can not trust the Leftists with public responsibility because they are deranged, it is exactly this type of thinking I am referring to. If Mofaz is looking for someone to pay the price of peace, let him look to the Arabs. Let them pay and pay a very high price.

This item appeared in Arutz Sheva (http://www.israelnationalnews.com)

Mofaz: Israel Willing to Pay a Big Price for Peace.
Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz stated Israel is willing to pay a big price to live in peace with her neighbors but would not be willing to compromise in the war against terror. The defense minister added the new PA government of PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala) must begin fulfilling its responsibility of eliminating terrorism.

Mr. Mofaz made his remarks during an event hosted for bereaved families.

Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, November 23, 2003.

When the French government could no longer keep silent about the rise of anti-Semitic violence in the country, President Jacques Chirac issued a statement. "When a Jew is attacked in France, it is all France in its entirety that is attacked," he said.

Chief Rabbi Joseph Sitruk of France also issued a statement: "I ask young Jews to be alert, to avoid walking alone, to avoid wearing the yarmulke in the street or in the subway and consequently becoming targets for potential assailants."

Here we go again: the French sound heroic as usual; and the Jews, also as usual, remain prosaically pragmatic. Nevertheless, my sympathies go to the Jews. First, they know what France does when it is attacked: it surrenders; and only a very stupid Jew may hope for something good to come out of that. Second, President Chirac's gasconade implied neither risks nor obligations; the French are the undisputed best at making empty words resonate. The rabbi, on the other hand, clearly implied that French Jews shouldn't rely on their government for protection, which was dangerous: President Chirac could easily countermand the rabbi's gentle advice by ordering French Jews to wear distinct identifying signs - yellow stars, for example. Something like that has already happened on French soil - coincidentally, while all France was attacked in its entirety by Germans. This time - thank goodness! - there was no official reaction to the rabbi's dangerous blunder, but French Jews should know from two thousand years of experience they are not going to be as lucky every time.

Half a century ago, while Europe was healing the terrible wounds of World War II, the most puzzling question about the recent past was, how could Germany, a country that had given the world so many philosophers, scientists, poets, musicians, produce Nazism? Today, we are asking a similar question: how could Europe, the birthplace of humanism, a continent that for centuries remained the heart of Judeo-Christian civilization, become a hotbed of the most virulent anti-Semitism since the defeat of Nazism?

The Financial Times, reported by the American Jewish Committee (http://www.ajc.org/InTheMedia/PressReleases.asp?did=984") may have provided a hint by reporting on November 22 that the Vienna-based European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia decided not to publish a report on European anti-Semitism because the study found that Muslim and pro-Palestinian groups were behind many recent anti-Semitic incidents. Neither the results of the study nor the decision to sweep them under the rug can be regarded as unexpected. Obviously, blaming Islam alone for European anti-Semitism would be wrong. In order to survive, a seed must fall onto fertile soil, and this is exactly what Muslim mass migration has found in Europe.

A reader wrote to me once: "If no one had decided to fight against Hitler, then it would seem that a world run by Hitler would be a good place." Apparently, this point of view is highly popular in Europe where bloodless jihad meets absolutely no resistance from the natives.

At first glance, the statistics of the Islamic takeover look rather unimpressive. According to the 2003 edition of the World Factbook, the Muslim populations of France (http://www.bartleby.com/151/fr.html), England (http://www.bartleby.com/151/uk.html) and Germany (http://www.bartleby.com/151/gm.html) constitute 5-10%, 4%, and 3.7%, respectively. However, these percentages do not reflect the degree of influence exerted by the Muslim community on the host countries. After all, if Jews, whose share in the world population constitutes approximately one quarter of one per cent, can rule the world, 3% of Muslims can easily destroy Europe. Here's what a reader from Denmark (http://www.bartleby.com/151/da.html, 2% Muslims) wrote to me:

"A Danish paper Weekendavisen wrote an article about the life of a bunch of students at a multicultural school in Copenhagen. The Danish children were told that they should learn from the values of the Muslim community and stop being so Danish.

"The paper did not report this as an aberration, but rather as a manifestation of the prevalent attitude. Therefore, there is no reason to doubt that the Danish are indeed going to stop being so Danish - inevitably, forever."

My correspondent concludes: "We will not survive this." Sadly, he is right. According to a recently published report, 20 years from now, the majority of children in the Netherlands (http://www.bartleby.com/151/nl.html, 4.4% Muslims) will be Muslim.

It is not purely coincidental that Europe, under the influence of Muslims, has become not only anti-Semitic but virulently anti-American as well. People who so vehemently protest everything the United States and Israel do, keep conspicuously silent about terrorist acts even when their victims are non-Jewish Europeans. There is a clear political agenda underneath their selective pacifism, and that agenda perfectly matches the goals of the European front of jihad. The invasion has barely begun, but the still modest percentages of Muslim population in European countries obscure the fact that the change which has already happened in Europe is as irreversible as death.

While screaming hysterically about American imperialism and dangers of a "Greater Israel", the Muslim world is quietly expanding into Europe, turning it into a province of the future caliphate. The enormity of that development is such that even September 11 looks like a mere tactical diversion compared to it. Ironically, terrorism is rather detrimental to the goals of the international Islamic conspiracy to take over the world. It would have been easier for them to simply take advantage of the lax immigration laws, move in peacefully, and gradually replace the local population, utilizing their far superior fertility. But that would probably eliminate all of the fun from the conquest.

The United States seems to be in a better shape than Europe - until you make a wrong turn somewhere in Brooklyn or Philadelphia and suddenly find yourself in a place where stores display signs in Arabic and women carefully hide their hair under ugly headscarves. You realize that the place makes you feel uncomfortable. You forcefully remind yourself that this is your country and decide to make a point of stopping at a small grocery store you are passing; you could add some extra spice to the lamb stew you are planning to cook tomorrow. The grocer's politeness is impeccable, even if a bit terse, and you are ready to assume that his hostility is a figment of your imagination. While he is counting your change, you ask him about the posters that cover the walls of his little store depicting young men and a few women with solemn faces, armed with Kalashnikovs and small books that you assume to be copies of the Koran. The grocer helpfully explains that the young people on the posters are heroes who martyred themselves for the cause. You quickly translate his words into plain English: this is a tribute to suicide bombers, the mass murderers of Jews. This is an outrage, but what can you do? This is a free country, and the First Amendment equally protects friend and foe. Your lamb stew tomorrow may turn out to be a bit bland.

A letter from another reader vividly explains what makes this invasion not only possible but successful:

"I live in a mid-size city in the middle of the United States. Muslims have a mosque on our main street. They have purchased a large section of farmland and are planning to build a mosque that will accommodate thousands of worshippers. Where corn and soybeans have grown for hundreds of years, now the Muslim faith will flourish. When farmers whose families have tilled those lands for generations attended a town meeting and expressed concern over what was being planned, they were called racists and bigots. The city embraces this Muslim diversity in our midst. They turn a blind eye to reason. It is not politically correct to wonder how it is that within a very few short years our city and many of the cities surrounding our area now are home to thousands of Muslims. If I wrote a letter such as this to our local newspaper, I would receive hateful responses."

On November 22, the New York Times (http://nytimes.com/2003/11/22/politics/22REGI.html) happily informed its readers that the Homeland Security Department had decided to stop a program that required thousands of Arab and Muslim men to register with immigration authorities after September 11. According to the article, of the 85 thousand of Arab and Muslim visitors who registered at the INS offices and tens of thousands more screened at the airports and border crossings, only 11 were found to have ties with terrorism - a purely negligible number. Of course, it would be prudent to assume that a few of our uninvited guests managed to avoid detection either by failing to register in accordance to the law or by merely slipping through the net. Let's for the sake of the argument assume there were just 8 of them - another negligible number. This brings the total number of terrorists among the many (too many!) Muslim foreigners in the United States to roughly 19. What possible harm could come from 19 Arabs?

Let's be honest with ourselves: American response to the ongoing Islamic invasion is more shameful than the French response to Nazi occupation: at least there was some organized resistance in France. I can't express it better than a friend did in his letter to me:

"I believe we are losing this war every single second and we will keep losing until we create a situation for them that will be intolerable. But we have nice lives here even in today's economy, and we don't want to die and I will not want my son to go to war, and when my son is my age, 2/3 of the US population will be Muslims. And why do I even need to analyze why they do it? Do you care why termites are eating your house? You just call the exterminators, and they come and kill them, and so should we. And then there is another side to this catastrophe. A couple of weeks after 9/11, I went to pick up my son from the NYU dorms. The posters on the walls in his building were mourning for the lost lives. There was not a sign of anger. Were there any burning houses in Paterson where they openly came out cheering and praising Allah? The two wars, in Afghanistan and in Iraq, I think are useless, even though I support them. What should've been done, would be something after which that whole region (except for Israel, and maybe Turkey) would look like the surface of the moon. And screw the UN, because most of them have already been taken by Arabs."


Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 23, 2003.

Do words really matter? When it comes to Jews, I don't think so.

I have been writing about Terror, war and geo-politics as they apply to the Jewish State for over 30 years. I also have received tonnage of information, opinions, research papers and books. I know in my guts that words are irrelevant to most in order to prove the justice of the Jewish claim of sovereignty in their own ancient ancestral homeland - simply because our adversaries and friends who become adversaries - D-o N-o-t C-a-r-e. They are not ashamed or embarrassed at being caught and exposed as anti-Semites. History is replete with nations betraying each other but, none so continually perfidious as the betrayal of the Jews. When others issue words against the Jews, then the words don't count.

How many times has Yassir Arafat been sourced as the core planner for hundreds of Terrorist attacks? How many Americans is he responsible for having killed? The follow-on exposure meant nothing to either the Europeans or the Arabists in the State Department as the money kept flowing into his killing machine. We are just now in the process of batting our eyes in supposed wonderment about Iran?s long term plan to acquire nuclear weapons. We pretend surprise about Iran's nuclear program - just as we shut our eyes to Pakistan's developing nuclear weapons, using money from a host of Arab nations who wanted an Islamic Bomb. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Iraq all paid the money and expected operational nukes in return.

I recall writing about 4 to 6 tactical nuclear weapons being sold to Iran out of East Germany when the Soviet Union collapsed. However, an immediate story floated in American papers assured us all that there were no missing nukes and, if there were, Iran didn't have them. I would presume this was courtesy of the CIA or State dis-information assurance squad. It seems clear that various Departments at State and the Intelligence Agencies knew very well that Iran was spending a lot of money to develop a nuclear capability since the fall of the Soviet Union. The East Germans were broke, with no money coming from the Soviet Union, so they were selling everything they owned - uniforms, rifles, tanks and tactical nukes.

Words would have mattered to the American people and perhaps the U.S. Congress, then just maybe something would have been done about it IF it became public knowledge. When Israel brought her complaints of her Intel on Iran's nuclear program, it was dismissed out of hand. Words were irrelevant coming from the Jewish State. This was frequently repeated through the years. When Israel spoke about Egypt or Saudi acquisition of long range missiles from North Korea or China, the words were totally ignored. The same when Israel warned about Syria's chemical weapons' programs. Even Israel's more recent warnings about the possibility that Terrorists could likely commit such an attack as 9/11 was dismissed by American Intelligence.

During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Gen. Ariel Sharon's Army had encircled Egypt's Third Army and was forced by America to release them. Egypt agreed to leave the Sinai demilitarized, free of any war materials, an agreement co-signed by the U.S. Shortly after Israel's withdrawal and the brokered agreements were signed, Egypt moved up their SAM ground-to-air missile batteries into the Sinai. Israel protested to the State Department, providing aerial photos to prove Egypt had broken the agreement. Israel's words, backed up with irrefutable proof meant absolutely nothing to the State Department or the U.S. Government generally.

Agreements with the Jewish State were irrelevant because America was courting Egypt to replace Iran as her 'cop on the block' to protect or occupy Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Oil States. Egypt (in my opinion) was slated to occupy Saudi Arabia in America's interests should Syria, Iraq, Iran (or other hostile countries) move to take over the Saudi oil fields. Imagine, Egypt - a military colossus with $50 Billion in free U.S. military equipment (paid for by American taxpayers) - also controlling the vast Saudi armory. It would then become a threat to the entire Middle East.

We Jews are known as the People of the Book which generally refers to the Laws of Torah. But, we also have a predilection to document history, write copiously and argue every point until the point is worn away. We Jews do have a genetic national memory par excellence but unfortunately, we also tend to ignore our own history vis a vis our numerous self-declared adversaries. As a result, we keep thinking that, if we offer sufficient proof as to the wrongs done to us, our adversaries (the anti-Semites of the world) will quit the field in shame.

I am reminded of the plunder of Jewish assets during WW2 by the Germans and Europeans. They stole factories, bank deposits, jewelry, paintings, homes, even extracting gold from the teeth of their victims to be melted down and fenced off by the Swiss to other world banks for the cash liquidity needed to keep Germany's war machine lasting longer.

After WW2, Jews attempted - in words - to reclaim their properties which were confiscated by the Germans, Europeans and even the Russians who confiscated what the Germans had stolen. There was deep reluctance to compensate survivors although Germany, in some embarrassment, did finally make some reparation payments. The French, like Jacques Chirac, when he was Mayor of Paris, still had stolen Jewish owned paintings hanging on the walls of his office and home. The Jews tried to use words to reclaim even a fragment of what was theirs and yet were met with words to the effect that the Jews were greedy money grubbers and had no right to ask 'good' Germans, French and Swiss to return the loot.

These were the words of the low nations who trafficked in gold teeth, museum quality paintings, factories built by the Jews, homes with all their furnishings -even insurance policies were denied to beneficiary survivors. The laws spelled out in the legal words of the nations were suspended for the Jews while the pretense of fair justice was reserved only for all others.

Words have meaning when you are the bully carrying the stick. Words from the victim are virtually meaningless - except perhaps in an advanced civilization where the rule of law is equally applied where the greedy, the unethical, the cruel have no more to say and no more power than those whom they would make their victims.

The small tribe of Abraham was chosen to carry G-d's message (words of Torah) to large and powerful nations. They managed to bring the One G-d into the minds of man but, have not yet managed to infuse the Laws that G-d offered to man. Most men hated the laws of restriction; they hated what they were obligated to do and, above all, they hated the messenger and witness to their refusal to upgrade their level of humanity. The rest of the world reluctantly accepted the idea of the One G-d and managed to blend in old, acceptable pagan ritual - even modifying G-d's Laws to bypass the rigorous demand of the 10 Commandments and the 613 rules of behavior taught by G-d and practiced by the Jews. None of the words were to be modified, changed in any way but, most men ignored this specific instruction and did change His Words.

It wasn't by accident that G-d selected a small tribe of Hebrews to carry His Word. Clearly, the powerful nations, like Egypt who had strong, priestly cults with many gods would never accept One G-d - let alone give up their priestly powers. Even after G-d, through Moses, devastated the land and killed the first born Egyptians, they would not abandon their death cult gods and all their other gods. No nations on earth were ready to accept the difficult task of speaking for the One and Only G-d - except for a small tribe of Hebrews.

Even today, the nations of the world refuse to accept the message of One G-d through the Jewish tribe but, insist on their versions of G-d and the pathways to His Court. If they, indeed, accepted the One G-d with no creative variations, then they would have accepted the Laws of Torah. They would have reached out to the Jews and taken them by the hand and said: "Teach me what G-d taught you."

We Jews are seemingly always surprised when our well-documented bill of particulars is ignored or simply disputed as to its accuracy with no supreme earthly judge to rule that we are right and they are wrong. Many religiously observant Jews believe that a truly Supreme G-d will be the final arbiter and our antagonists will get their just deserts.

Unfortunately, we live on this planet in human form and we Jews, indeed, do bleed when stabbed. Our wall of defensive words do not and have not ever stopped our assailants. Killing and persecution continues apace against the Jewish people, sometimes less or more but always there. Presently, hatred has ramped up as the nations reach out for someone to blame, someone to take the pain away which their greedy leaders have imposed on their nations. We Jews are those selected "someones".

The Jewish people were chosen as G-d's messengers for many things, in addition to alerting the planet Earth that there was only One Supreme Being. The Jews additionally brought knowledge in Law to be fairly administered by incorruptible judges. They brought remarkable breakthroughs in medicine and technology. Music was a passion for them and so great virtuosos as violinists, pianists, cellists, conductors entertained us. The greedy and corrupt resentfully accepted these gifts, wanting even more but, hated the Jews nevertheless.

But, hatred could not obscure the fact that the Jewish people were G-d's chosen messengers and teachers of His Laws. For this, they would not be forgiven and thus our 'war of words' seems mostly useless. We have been pleading for centuries with the Church to reverse their teaching of hatred to spare our lives but, our words fell on deaf ears. Clearly, these words do not protect us. The best we can do is to circle the wagons and fight off the pagan haters until perhaps, one day they mature as humans and beg forgiveness from the One G-d. Fighting back is being done to some extent in Israel although the nations are doing their best to lull the Jews into a state of acceptance so the Arabs can be satisfied with a victory in blood.

The West presumes that IF the Arabs win such a victory to eliminate the Jewish enemy (who has humiliated them by defeating their armies in six wars), the Arab Muslims will quietly recede into their backward culture. Their Mullahs scream out their hatred in words, telling the Muslims to kill the Jews and all non-Muslims. After the Muslims have been pacified with a bloody victory, the West hopes that they may go back to business as usual and Islam will no longer be a threat to the West or the planet at large. Here again, the words of warning by the Jews will be ignored merely as self-serving and having nothing to do with the rest of the world. The World is now paying the price as Islamic Terror sweeps around the planet like a wind of poison.

For them, "words" are irrelevant except those they conjure up to justify their actions. Words for them is how they feel at any given moment which can be changed in a heart beat and, what's more, believed as the new truth.

We, in the West, believe in words, agreements, contracts as binding. They do not and, although we see through experience that no agreement is scared, we continue to make agreements with them. They break their word at will and we (to include the foolish Jews) accept the new set of words even as the ashes of the last broken agreement are still smoldering. The nations can accept false words and survive but, the small Jewish State and the minuscule number of Jews left on this planet cannot.

My pen aches to enumerate the assurances given to Israel in good faith by well-meaning friends only to have them disavowed when their economic interests are at stake. The assurances and commitments given to Israel in trade for dangerous concessions to the Arabs and Europeans are nothing more than a trail of bones.

As a practical matter, Israel has to bend to the wishes of powerful friends even when they know the words of commitment will vanish quickly. There will come a time when Israel will realize that they can no longer accept words of assurance and draw a line in the sand.

However, in the interim, I - among other Jews and Christian Zionists - will continue to use words in the hope that the nations will turn from their terrorist, uncivilized ways and accept an unalterable law of conduct.

Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, November 23, 2003.

A new old syndrome is catching on worldwide. The broad scientific term is "Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD.)" OCD has become all the rage on psychiatric couches and in mental institutions. Yet for 4000 years, there has been a similar disorder affecting a large part of humanity called "Obsessive-Compulsive Judaism (OCJ)."

Psychiatrists tell us that people become obsessed with an idea which they believe to be the "absolute" truth. Scientists who study the mind have proven that obsessive/compulsive individuals therefore "believe" that something is true which may be true or false, although they become totally preoccupied with its validity. "My hands are always dirty" makes individuals obsess on cleanliness, ultimately resulting in a continuous hand washing cycle.

Why are 1.2 billion Muslims obsessed with the idea of "this tiny group of Jews is always dirty" syndrome? Why is David Duke's website and virtually all of his writings about the Jews? Why is the KKK obsessed with Jewish thoughts? Why is the former Malaysian prime minister virtually addicted to blaming Jews, in a country that is Judenrein and where 95% of Malaysians never even saw a real live Jew? Freud would have a great time with these head problems. However, his research would have most likely been dismissed as just another Jewish attempt to control "our" minds.

Amazingly, the common link throughout history of those with the "OCJ disorder" is that they are all sick, vile, evil people. When studied seriously, the entire illness does not make any sense. This obsession with Jews dominating everything from politics to business to deciding on the next war to the reason that the Arab/Muslim world has failed drastically has become great folk lore.

Within the past 60 years, OCJ has spread from Nazi Germany to The Middle East into Europe to most recently, college campuses and other leftist laboratories worldwide. The ultimate question is, "Why haven't antisemites become obsessed with other competing religions which are much larger and more direct competition?" The answer is actually quite simple and stems from an important sentence in The New Testament. "Those who bless the Jews will be blessed and those who curse the Jews will be cursed." Anyone who believes in this statement will take the road of religious American Christians. It is no wonder that America has become the most "blessed" country in the history of the world.

Thomas Jefferson said that "America is the new Israel" and he wanted to make the US symbol, a logo of the Jewish exodus from Egypt.

And which nations are the most cursed today? Obviously the Arab and Muslim world, even with all their oil wells! However, for those who believe that Judaism is a religion of infidels, why shouldn't they simply ignore Judaism's foolish adherents?

If a religion formed around Elvis Presley or the belief in aliens from outer space, non-believers would laugh and not pay any attention to such utter nonsense. So why are Jews taken so seriously if their religion is thought to be fraudulent by others? The amazing answer is that most of the non-Jewish world "knows for certain" that Judaism is true and many in Europe, Asia and The Middle East are quite upset with that frightening realization. In contrast, it is a large portion of Jews who unfortunately have doubts about the truth behind Judaism. Something seems to be wrong with this picture.

The real cause of Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism is that its adherents have major doubts about the validity of their own religion. That is why there is so much hatred toward Jews and Christians coming from Imams and Ayatollahs in mosques. They see a system of Christianity in America for which God blessed a great country with everything, including incredible power, strength and influence. Even worse, they see a system in their own back yard, The Middle East, where a country with no natural resources and just a few million Jews has surpassed every single Arab and Muslim nation. Here is God acting in our world and they are not receiving their fair share. Quite upsetting, to say the least.

Religious figures in the Islamic world cannot announce to followers, "Look at the success of Islam in our world. Pray to Allah for thanks." Instead, they say that, "Judaism and Christianity have stolen our successes. So let's destroy the infidels."

OCD means that one's brain has gotten stuck on a particular thought and just cannot let go. Since 998 out of every 1000 people are not Jewish, it would seem that a large number of very foolish people are both obsessive and compulsive with OCJ, relating to this miniscule, trivial group. Perhaps this idea even extends to the Hitlerian obsessive contamination problem which forbade swimming with or even touching Jews. Might this be the reason that Jews were thrown out of so many Arab countries?

With over 50% of UN General Assembly resolutions condemning Israel, not North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Iran, Libya or Iraq, one cannot say that it is simply all of the things that Israel may have done.

When people hate or feel threatened about a belief system, it can only mean one thing. It threatens their own system and in all likelihood, renders it somewhat invalid.

The idea of Jewish Choseness has always been looked upon as arrogant and conceited. The truth is that America has taken on the role of sharing Choseness from God with the Jews. No wonder there are protests in Great Britain today. No wonder President Bush's effigy has been burned in almost every Arab and Muslim country. No wonder a large part of Europe has criticized America for bringing down another evil dictator. It's a new disease: Obsessive-Compulsive America (OCA).

Posted by David Wilder, November 23, 2003.

I planned on writing today about one of the most extraordinary Shabbatot I've ever experienced. After all, it's not every week you participate in a Hebron Shabbat together with another 25,000 Jews. Friday night it was virtually impossible to get into Ma'arat HaMachpela - The Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs. It was simply packed. There wasn?t room to move inside. And outside, in the courtyard, thousands of people participated in Shabbat evening prayers. It was a sight to behold.

So too, Saturday. Thousands upon thousands of people walking the streets, visiting the different neighborhoods - it was really unbelievable.

However, current events will not let me dwell on the wonders of this past Shabbat in Hebron. There are other matters which are more pressing.

While in the United States, I heard rumors that Ariel Sharon was planning another landmark address, Hertzelia II, as it was called. During the first Hertzelia speech, in December 2002, Sharon officially accepted the ideas behind the Roadmap, culminating in a fully sovereign palestinian state. Realizing that the palestinian terrorist authority does not have the desire or ability to fulfill even the most minimum requirements in order to convince a majority of Israelis to back this arrangement, Sharon is planning the next stage in his farcical premiership. This is being labeled Hertzelia Two. This morning it hit the headlines.

According to media reports, Sharon is fed up with the current deadlock and is looking for a way out. He promised Israelis peace and security and hasn't yet been able to deliver the goods. Without a 'peace partner' it's difficult to negotiate. So, Sharon has decided to go it alone. Latest accounts say that Sharon is planning a unilateral withdrawal of Israeli forces to the vicinity of the new 'wall' (which seems to be known to some as the Messiah in disguise). This unilateral withdrawal includes the destruction of 'isolated settlements,' most probably in Gaza - like Netzarim, Morag, and Kfar Darom. However other communities in Yesha have not been ruled out. Jews evicted from their homes are to be transferred to new settlements, this time in the Negev.

Other communities are scheduled to be 'moved,' creating 'settlement blocks.'

This is, in brief, what has been floating around today.

Now, it's important to understand why Ariel Sharon is even considering such measures:

1.  Ariel Sharon is facing massive legal problems in Israel. He is likely on the verge of being indicted for illegal financial dealings, some of which concern campaign funding, illicit loans, and possible bribery. Should he be indicted, Sharon will have to resign. But Sharon knows that the left understands that they will never be able to evict Jews from Yesha - only a 'right-wing' bulldozer like Ariel Sharon, who was responsible for much of the development of Judea, Samaria and Gaza will be able to take it apart. He has experience - he did it in Sinai. Sharon also knows that the decisions taken concerning his future political life and tenure in the Prime Minister's residence lie in the hands of the left. In other words, if he is a 'good boy' and practices what they preach, they will, more than likely, leave him alone. In other words, he will trade Eretz Yisrael for political survival.

2.  Reason number two: George Bush and the White House. Ariel Sharon knows that George Bush is a good friend of Israel. All things considered, he's probably the best friend Israel has had in the White House in decades. He also knows that George W. is in trouble. Iraq, dead American soldiers, and continuing world terror is ruffling feathers. The elections, a year away, are already catching headlines. The campaign has begun. Sharon also knows that the democratic alternatives to Bush spell catastrophe for Israel. So, Sharon is interested not only in saving himself; he's also interested in saving George W's skin. So, he is willing to trade pieces of Eretz Yisrael for Bush.

3.  Reason number three: Yossi Beilin, Shimon Peres and Geneva. The 'Geneva Accords' initiated by Yossi Beilin are covered with the fingerprints of several well known players. First on the list is Shimon Peres, who was Yossi Beilin's teacher. The first big Peres production, 'Oslo' was such a hit, that he decided to produce a follow-up. Not being able to sponsor a 'by-pass' plan to a government which he still hopes to sit in, Peres assisted Beilin into Geneva, another cataclysmic suicide plan for the State of Israel. Geneva includes the worst of the worst-case scenarios conjured up since the commencement of Oslo, leaving Israel as a virtual nonentity.

Another player in the Geneva fiasco is undoubtedly the European Union. Last week Beilin and Company put two million copies of the Geneva Accords into the Israeli mail. Do you have any idea how much it costs to print up and send two million copies of anything? I don't have exact costs, but it is a tremendous amount of money. I am certain that the financial backer of this escapade is the EU. I might also surmise that the EU is receiving a great deal of that money from another power broker - very likely Saudi Arabia. So from the Saudis to the Europeans to Beilin. What a team.

But please, do not underestimate these players. The Geneva Accords are exerting overwhelming pressure on Ariel Sharon. These accords are being backed by world media. Foreign governments are starting to get involved, viewing them as an alternative to the dying roadmap. And in Israel, again, the left is initiating something solid, as opposed to the waffling of the other side, whoever they are. Sharon remembers only too well the pressures that brought Ehud Barak's cowardly flight from Lebanon. He knows that the name of the game is not to sit on the fence; rather it is to grab onto something solid and pave the way. It makes no difference which direction the path goes in - to heaven or to hell. What is important is to offer an alternative. And that is what Sharon is doing.

Ariel Sharon has not despaired of several dreams: He still wants to dispel the 'war-monger' image he picked up during the Lebanese War in the 1980s. He would also like to be remembered as a statesman and as the 'great peacemaker.' And last, but not least, he would like another term in the office of the Prime Minister, despite his age (and seemingly deteriorating mental health).

All of this adds up to transferring Jews, destroying communities, and abandoning Eretz Yisrael.

The big question is, of course, what we can do to prevent this madness. There are no easy answers. We have to make a lot of noise, and let this government know that the People of Israel will not allow Ariel Sharon or anyone else to chop up Eretz Yisrael, we will not allow appeasement to terrorists, and we will not commit communal suicide. The very fact that these ideas are being floated around have already caused immense damage to Israel.

The idea of withdrawal at all, but especially in the middle of a war, is unthinkable. This is exactly what our enemy wants and we must not give it to him. Withdrawal is surrender, and surrender we will not. Our flag is blue and white, and that blue makes all the difference in the world. Abandonment and transfer of Jews from Yesha is tantamount to the removal of blue from our flag.

Israel must not wave a white flag.

With blessings from Hebron.

David Wilder is spokesman for the Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute to the Jews of Hebron at their website (http://www.hebron.org.il/contrib.htm) or by writing to: The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB 105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron Israel 90100 (hebron@hebron.org.il). Or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Avenue, Brooklyn NY 111230 (hebronfund@aol.com). They need your support.

Posted by Isralert, November 21, 2003.

This is the third in a series of 25 informational and educational ads from the Hatikvah Educational Foundation. Contact them by email by writing to yoramtex@netvision.net.il


1948-1992: Israeli Prime Ministers, often, defied heavy US pressure, transforming Israel into a role-model of defiance of pressure and terror. They expanded, dramatically, strategic cooperation with the US.

1992-2003: Israeli Prime Ministers have succumbed to moderate US pressure, thus relegating Israel into a role-model of restraint and submission to pressure. They have gained acceptance, while dropping in strategic respect.


*1948/9: The US pressured Ben Gurion (military embargo, threats of economic sanctions and assessment of a Jewish massacre) to refrain from declaration of independence, withdraw from the Negev, internationalize Jerusalem, absorb and compensate Palestinian refugees. B.G. defied the pressure, with a meager 600,000 Jews (5.25MN in 2003), a $50MN economy ($100BN in 2003), no military (one of the world finest in 2003), without AIPAC and an unprecedently supportive Christian Right (in 2003). B.G. transformed Israel from a weakling to a deterring entity.

*1967: The US, the USSR and the UN pressured Eshkol to refrain from a pre-emptive strike and from reuniting Jerusalem, threatening to isolate Israel and support Egypt. France (#1 supplier of arms) imposed a military embargo. Eshkol defied the pressure, transforming Israel from a strategic liability to an asset.

*1981: The US, USSR, Europe and the UN threatened Begin with military and economic sanctions, lest he bomb Iraq's nuclear reactor. The heads of Israel's Mossad and military intelligence opposed the bombing. Begin defied the pressure, the reactor was destroyed, the US imposed a military embargo and Israel was declared a rogue regime. However, in the long-run, Israel's strategic role was enhanced dramatically and the first US-Israel strategic agreement was signed in November 1981.


US-Israel relations do not evolve around the narrow axis of the Arab-Israeli conflict, but rather around the wider conflict of shared values, joint interests and mutual threats.

*1983: A US-Israel strategic accord was concluded in spite of severe tension over the war in Lebanon and the outright rejection - by Israel - of the Reagan Plan. Israel was essential in face of mutual threats - Islamic terrorists (300 GIs murdered in Beirut), Syria and the USSR (Israel downed - in one battle - 80 Syrian Migs and destroyed advanced Soviet surface-to-air missile systems).

*1988: The most substantial US-Israel strategic agreement was signed in April 1988, at the height of the controversial Intifadah, due to Israel's increasing role as an ally in face of mutual threats (Islamic terrorism, USSR, Iran and ballistic missiles).

*1990/91: An unprecedented expansion of strategic cooperation was led by Congress, despite the Bush-Baker Administration. It reflected Congressional appreciation of Israel's growing strategic role in the aftermath of the demise of the USSR.


Never has Israel enjoyed a wider base of support in the US: the post-9/11 state of mind, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the daily anti-US Arab terror in Iraq, the unprecedented support by conservatives and the Christian Right, a hawkish Congress, a supportive religious President, anti-Oslo and anti-appeasement Vice President and Secretary of Defense. Would Israel be able to leverage that support in order to advance long-term strategic goals, even at the expense of short-term tension, as it was until 1992?

Posted by Prof. Paul Eidelberg, November 21, 2003.

Most commentators on Israel have been afflicted by a syndrome, one they share with every Israeli government whether led by the Labor Party or by the Likud. I call this the PIE or Politics-Is-Everything Syndrome. The PIE Syndrome is rooted in the alluring and simplistic idea that Israel's problems can be overcome by politics in general, and by correct political analysis in particular.

Any appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, the PIE governments of Israel have available a more or less correct political analysis of their country's most pressing and persistent problem - the implacable hostility of Israel's Arab neighbors. How could they possibly ignore or minimize such hostility when Israel's own Arab citizens are exempt from military service precisely because of their enmity toward the Jewish State? Even Shimon Peres knows this.

Never mind his inane vision of a  New Middle East." Idiocy has overtaken this "Machiavellian Dove" - the soubriquet of Peres's mentor, the late Professor Yehoshafat Harkabi. To be sure, those who don the mantle of peace as a means of attaining political power often succumb to fatuity. Bear in mind that Mr. Peres was a Labor hawk before his party needed the Arab vote to gain power. (That's what "Machiavellian Doves" and Oslo are all about, as the present writer revealed ten years ago.)

One does not have to be a Ph.D. in political science to offer Israeli prime ministers correct political analysis regarding PLO chief Yasser Arafat, the godfather of international terrorism. Was it a lack of correct political analysis that prompted Messrs. Rabin, Peres, Netanyahu, Barak, and Sharon to release and arm tens of thousands of PLO jihadists to provide for Israel's security? Of course not! Only fools or madmen would do such a thing. Fools or madmen, however, are immune to correct political analysis. That being the case, is it not folly to offer fools or madmen correct political analysis? But if it is folly to offer fools or madmen correct political analysis, then there must be something incorrect about correct political analysis!

Consider PM Ariel Sharon, who continues to release jihadists to obtain peace and security for the Jews of Israel. Like his four predecessors, Mr. Sharon is suffering from the PIE Syndrome - some might say MIM: Metaphysically Induced Madness. This is the madness of which the Prophet Isaiah speaks, the madness of Jews who remove G-d from the domain of statecraft, of Jews who believe in PIE, that politics is sufficient for Israel's salvation. Therein is the fallacy of correct political analysis.

Let me not be misunderstood. I am not opposed to correct political analysis, and I esteem those who offer it. Indeed, my Sadat's Strategy (1978) was perhaps the first book-length political analysis of Anwar Sadat's ulterior and deadly motives for making peace with Israel. Even before the book was written I personally warned Mr. Begin on the eve of his going to Camp David that Sadat was making "peace" to truncate Israel and thereby hasten its demise. This was and remains correct political analysis. That's not enough! Israel's government has an abundance of evidence showing that Egypt remains committed to Israel's destruction and is arming (and arms the PLO) for that purpose. The correct political analysis which I (and of course others) repeatedly offered was of no avail because Israeli governments suffer from the PIE Syndrome. When Politics Is Everything, more precisely, when politics in the Land of Israel is not subordinated to Torah, politics becomes a terminal disease. The Land of Israel will spew Jews out unless they transcend politics, and this they can only do by having a Torah oriented government. All other attitudes and conclusions have proven futile.

Hence I urge political analysts friendly to Israel to reexamine your premises regarding this supposed-to-be Jewish State. Israel has been retreating and retreating despite correct political analysis - and not because your political analyses have been ignored, as you may want to believe. Like all governments of Israel, your analyses ignore the G-d of Israel, which is why correct political analysis, though important, is inadequate and even misleading. We must transcend the PIE Syndrome.

Posted by Jerusalem Prayer Team, November 21, 2003.

Speaking in London on Wednesday, President Bush said, "Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and not prejudice final negotiations with the placement of walls and fences."

Happy Thanksgiving! It's time to carve up the turkey. It is, however, customary to kill the bird and drain its lifeblood before serving it. I find it strangely coincidental that every time Tony Blair is in trouble over the Iraq war, Bush runs to the rescue by donating Israel's lifeblood!

This happened in the Azores on March 17, 2003 as the drums of war were beating, and again at Camp David on March 26, 2003, seven days into the war. When Prime Minister Tony Blair linked his support for the Iraq war with U.S. support for the Road Map, it became very apparent that Israel would have to pay the appeasement bill - like it or not.

The absurdity of it all is that Arafat (the godfather of world terrorism) spit in Clinton's and Barak's faces when Israel was willing to split the turkey down the middle by playing the terrorism card yet again. He spit in Bush's face after the President flew to the Middle East for a summit in Aqaba, Jordan to embrace Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas.

On June 3 when it appeared the war in Iraq was over, Bush hosted the heads of state from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Bahrain in Egypt. Secretary of State Colin Powell summarized the purpose of the meeting: "The meeting is important to make sure that the Arab leadership is behind and supportive of the Road Map..."

The following day, Bush kept his word to Tony Blair when he met with Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and PA Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas to urge acceptance of the Road Map. Arafat, meanwhile, spent the entire summer initiating a plague of suicide bombings and undermining Abbas, who was ultimately forced to resign.

Now, six months have gone by. Apparently, Saddam is still alive, and no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Terrorists from all over the world are pouring into Iraq like water over Niagara Falls. Four hundred American soldiers have been killed since June. The month of November has been the worst; the downing of three Blackhawk helicopters claimed the lives of 23 U.S. soldiers.

What in the world has Israel to do with Tony Blair? Everything, in a liberal, pro-Muslim Europe that wants oil, not Israel! Before the war began, President Bush built the case with Tony Blair that Britain and America had to "go it alone"...that the U.N. could not be trusted to be a partner in the process.

Why, now, did Bush support Russia's resolution to turn a failed Road Map over to the U.N. Security Council? This is the governing body that equates Zionism with racism, and who's Human Rights Commission proclaims that the Palestinians can use "every available means to defend themselves against occupation" - a clever endorsement of suicide bombings. (At the time, the Human Rights Commission was chaired by another "peace-loving" Islamic nation - Libya.)

Simply put, Blair needs Bush's support to remain Prime Minister, and Jewish blood is cheap...especially in Europe. Six million Jews found that out during the Holocaust. Even then, America was more than willing to institute the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and closed her borders to Jewish refugees who were in grave danger of being dragged to the ovens.

Accommodation gets people killed in the Middle East. It is a signal to terrorist cartels that crime pays, so why not kill Jews. It seems Jewish blood is the only thing that anti-Semitic Muslims want, anyway. They are, as it is preached in anti-Semitic circles, the reason for all of the troubles in the world, and therefore, expendable.

The National Security Council (whose members include Syria, a terrorist state) recently voted unanimously for a Russian-backed resolution on the Road Map. That same evening, a series was aired at 9:30 PM on Al-Manar, Hizbollah television. The series is based on Hitler's final-solution book, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Episode 20 of the series depicts Jews murdering a Christian boy to drain his blood to make Passover Matzah. It makes one sick to watch this theater of the absurd and festival of hypocrisy.

The OPEC cartel, which has no money or land problems, has used the Palestinians as pawns for decades. It has fueled and fed a refugee crisis, then blamed it on Israel. The Egyptian-born billionaire, Yasser Arafat, president of a state that harbors, supports and aids terrorists, must be laughing uncontrollably! He will, indeed, have a Happy Thanksgiving! This is just more evidence that terrorism can achieve significant political goals.

Why has Bush given Saudi Arabia a free pass? Saudi Arabia, a major member of OPEC, persists in funding and exporting Wahabism - the extreme brand of Islam that has been labeled a "strategic threat" to the U.S. war on terror. Michael Young, chair of the State Department's Commission on International Religious Freedom said Thursday, "It (Wahabism) is an ideology that is incompatible with the war on terrorism." One would think that Saudi Arabia would be at the top of the President's list - not the Road Map that forces Israel to accept yet another terrorist state on her borders (thus rewarding terrorism!)

The Bible says, "I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee." The liberals are paranoid that George W. Bush, with his strong faith in God and belief in the Bible, will become their greatest nightmare. It seems they have nothing to fear.

Posted by Jack De Lowe, November 21, 2003.

I think the author has taken his case to an extreme, but it is interesting to see that a Muslim (albeit a non-Arab/Iranian Muslim) is opposed to more Muslim immigration and his reasoning. This was written by Ruslan Tokhchukov and published in the Seattle Times.

I am the Muslim to ban more Muslims.

I am the immigrant to end all immigration. While I came from a different country myself (I am originally from a Muslim minority in Russia), 9/11 had turned me into a staunch foe of any continued immigration. All the worst Arab terrorists, including the 9/11 hijackers, came from so-called "friendly" Arab countries, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Many others came by way of two ostensibly friendly Anglo countries, Britain and Canada, prompting some in the FBI to nickname them "Londonistan" and "Canadistan."

I am the Muslim to ban any more Muslims from coming to this country.

Our media's mantra that "the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving, law-abiding people" is nothing but politically correct blah, blah, blah. As a Muslim, I wish it were true, but it is not. Islam has been hijacked by the Arab and Iranian terrorists and turned into a suicidal-homicidal-genocidal hate cult which is now spreading like a plague throughout the Muslim world. The sad truth is that hundreds of millions have been now infected with this spiritual disease, and at least half of Muslims arriving to this country are actual or potential terrorists, terrorist supporters or sympathizers.

Unless and until all Muslim countries are liberated from terrorism as Afghanistan was, and are transformed into tolerant, civilized, enlightened societies, not one Muslim should be allowed to our country on a tourist, student, or any other visa. And if this deprives the centers of anti-American activism known as college campuses of their Arab cash cows who pay the whole tuition up front, tough.

We are in a fight for survival, so we better start acting like it.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 21, 2003.

Is anyone really surprised that the only rational, objective voice in the cacophony of Oslo yahoos is a Torah Jew? This piece in Arutz Sheva is about Ex-IDF intelligence chief Amidror. He makes sense.

Ex-IDF Intelligence Chief Makes Case Against Geneva Plan Gen. Yaakov Amidror, a religious Jew who headed IDF Military Intelligence, condemned the Geneva plan in yesterday's edition of Haaretz. He noted a number of dangerous concessions proposed by Yossi Beilin and the other Israelis who helped formulate the plan, including the ceding of the Temple Mount, which he said clearly indicates that the "Jewish nation is giving up on the center of its national identity, and giving it to its competitors who claim ownership of the land."

Amidror also bemoaned the willingness to give up almost all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, especially the Ariel area, which "greatly increases the number of Israelis that will have to be evacuated or expelled from their homes... and leaves [Israel's] central region exposed to every threat." The ex-intelligence chief wrote that the "unspoken" concession is that of "any security arrangements," noting that the two "isolated and worthless warning stations" called for by the Geneva plan are but a "wretched remnant of Yitzchak Rabin's demand for a military border on the Jordan River," and that the defense arrangements are even worse than those the PA agreed to during the Barak period.

Other points raised by Amidror:

* All of Israel's security demands have been traded for a foreign military force and declarations of cooperation.
* No Israeli force in the Jordan Valley or along Egyptian border to prevent terrorist infiltrations, or at crossings or seaports to prevent arms smuggling.
* No Israeli rights to act against terrorists.
* If the agreement falls apart, Israel will be in a much worse position than at present: "Those who wrote the Geneva plan did not learn a thing from Oslo, such as the need to ask what happens if the dream of peace turns out to be a nightmare."
* Israel is at the mercy of international arbitrators regarding the number of Arab "refugees" who may "return" to Israel.
* An Israeli promise to memorialize the Arab villages that existed before 1948 - "unbelievable," Amidror writes.
* The plan obligates Israel to withdraw even if Palestinian terrorism continues.
* Israel recognizes PA water rights, but not vice-versa.
* The PA is granted a territorial corridor between Judea and Gaza, via which it can transport tanks - "and in such a case Israel can - only complain."

The Geneva plan even allows for "Special Cemetery Arrangements" enabling Palestinian access to a cemetery in the German Colony neighborhood of western Jerusalem, on the central thoroughfare Emek Refaim St. Ten weeks ago, a Palestinian terrorist blew himself up at a cafe on Emek Refaim St.; among the seven murdered victims were Dr. David Appelbaum and his daughter Nava, 20, who was to be married the next night.

In the meantime, however, the Supreme Court has nullified the ban by Israel's two broadcasting authorities on commercials on behalf of the Geneva document. Supreme Court President Aharon Barak headed a three-judge panel ruled in favor of the Geneva plan initiators and against the regulations disallowing commercials on political issues.

Posted by Herbert B. Sunshine, November 21, 2003.
Four former heads of Israel's Secret Service, once sworn to protect and serve the State of Israel, have published a plan for its demise.

It seems that Jews must be evicted from the Biblical lands of Judea and Samaria in order (in their words) to "preserve the the Jewish majority" of Israel. If a sane mind can conceive the meaning of this, apparently, once half of our Lands have been surrendered, and more than l50,000 Jews abandoned to the "mercies" of murderers, then what's left of Israel (for the time being) will contain more Jews than Arab citizens. Of course, the plan does not speak of removing Arab citizens from Israel to "preserve the Jewish majority."

The four Wise Men additionlly recommend "administrative detention" for a number of Jewish citizens to intimidate the rest should they fail to accept the blessings of eviction and transfer.

To even suggest that Arab murderers (even those convicted of murder) should be removed from Israel and returned to their birthplaces in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, or even to the conquered Jewish lands, would result in indictment and certain conviction for the undefined "crime" of "racism." No believer in the sacredness of secularism has ever been charged with "racism" for advocating the transfer of Jews. No believer in Bolshevism, posing as a "democrat" has ever been indicted for the violation of the civil and human rights of Jews.

So we have the fiction that Israel is a "democratic state." We are worshippers at the shrine of the Shabak, protectors of our "security" and our territorial integrity. We, the misled sheep of Israel, awarded 40 Knesset seats to a weakling who promised us a "palestinian state."

And we, the brainwashed electorate, failed to give even one Knesset seat to Baruch Marzel or to Paul Eidelberg, religious Zionists and patriots, who promised to surrender "not one inch" of of our Holy land.

So too, a Jewish defender of Jewish rights, Noam Federman, an attorney, who instructed Jews of the law, when they are arrested for political beliefs, now rots in a prison for Arabs. He was taken while arguing an appeal in Court, jailed, without charge, without bail and without the right to counsel for n indefinite period of time. Incredibly the British law which applied when Britain suppressed the Jews under the Mandate, is now used by Jews sagainst Jews who differ with the government.

Zionism is the ingathering of Jews to Eretz; not their expulsion to "palestine." Security consists of defensible borders; not the surrender of the heartland to insatiable enemies. Democracy is government for, by and of the people, not the perpetuation of a ruling class and an underclass; a privileged class which makes the rules without the advice or consent of the rest of us.

No Court, no legislator or executive controls the mind boggling arrogance of those who would make private foreign policy the policy of the State. The rejected Oslo, Wye and Tenet plans have arisen as the living abortion, Geneva.

Where is the wisdom of the Sages of Israel? Where is the truth and timeless guidance of the Torah of Israel and where is the plain common sense of Jews whose brains have produced the major achievements of the Western world? The People of the Eternal God, the God who invented Justice, can yet fashion a State that will be a "light" and not a Memorial Candle to the world.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 21, 2003.

Israel's Supreme Court has taken yet another step towards fulfilling its agenda of imposing leftist fundamentalism on Israel. The Court has just ordered the Israel Broadcasting Authority to broadcast propaganda in favor of the treasonous "peace plans" of Yossi Beilin and Ami Ayalon.

Lest you think this is simply an application of free speech in a democracy, let us note that the TV station and radio stations operated by the IBA are non-commercial state-owned stations that do not HAVE any commercial advertisements. While they are allowed to broadcast "public interest messages," usually things like short sound bites asking people to contribute to the Cancer Fund or to save water or similar things, they explicitly are supposed to be prohibited from airing political commentary as ads.

But evidently the Supreme Court judicial tyrants of the Fundamentalist Left do NOT see anything political or controversial about the airing of ads endorsing the treasonous "peace initiatives" of non-elected persons who do not represent the country nor even their own party. In other words, ads promoting leftist ideology are not political at all, just promoting peace, and so must be aired.

What would be political, you ask? Well, things like ads suggesting that Oslo had been a tragic mistake, or ads suggesting Israel should use force against Palestinian barbarism, or reading the Rabin quote below, or reading the wrong parts from the Bible. THOSE would be political and controversial and so would be prohibited.

Let us note that just a few months back the Court supported the IBA in banning ads asking people to recite Psalms from the Bible!

Here is the news item about the decision. It is called "High Court nixes IBA ban on Geneva Accord, People's Voice" by Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent.

The High Court of Justice on Wednesday morning overturned a decision by the Israel Broadcasting Authority and the Second Broadcasting Authority to ban commercials promoting unofficial peace plans.

A three-justice panel headed by Supreme Court President Aharon Barak heard the petitions filed by the brokers of the People's Voice, an Israeli-Palestinian civil initiative established by Ami Ayalon and Sari Nusseibeh and aimed at promoting peace between the two sides, and the initiators of the Geneva Accords.

The legal battle had become a fight in principle to annul regulations pertaining to the broadcasting of advertisements dealing with political disputes.

The petition filed by the initiators of the Geneva Accords deals with the IBA's refusal to air commercials notifying the public of the start of a campaign to distribute copies of the agreement in mail boxes around the country.

Some 1.5 million copies of the Geneva Accords were sent out Sunday to addresses countrywide, with another 1.5 million copies to follow in the coming days.

The copy mailed to the home of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has yet to reach its destination, after the security guards outside the Prime Minister's Residence refused to accept the envelope delivered by Yossi Beilin and MKs Haim Oron (Meretz) and Yuli Tamir (Labor). Over the past few days, the Geneva Accords initiators have requested a meeting with Sharon, but have yet to receive a response.

Also Sunday, Beilin, Oron and Labor MKs Avraham Burg and Amram Mitzna presented the Geneva Accords at a meeting of the Kibbutz Movement's secretariat. A unanimous decision to adopt and support the agreement followed the meeting.

The Kibbutz Movement also called on its members at kibbutzim around the country to promote and help to drum up support for the Geneva Accords as an important alternative to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Posted by Arthur Cohn, November 20, 2003.

Yasser Arafat is the one who gains the most from the so-called Geneva peace plan. The State of Israel is its prime loser.

During the last few months, and especially after the acceptance of the road map, Arafat was urged to finally take concrete and serious steps against terror. Has he done anything to fulfil his obligations? What is happening now, in reality, is exactly the opposite: while he and his accomplices continue to praise suicide bombers as martyrs, they are hailed as partners for peace.

Yossi Beilin and his friends ignored, during the Oslo years, all signs of Palestinian refusal to honor their commitments. Arafat never used the word peace in Arabic; he said explicitly (Johannesburg, Stockholm) that Mohammed himself did not honor agreements. He educated a new generation to hatred of Israel and the Jew; and he misused enormous amounts of funds from many sources - funds that were meant as a contribution to the well-being of the Palestinians - for the creation of a terror infrastructure. He and his followers have learnt that regardless of their breaches of promises and agreements, nothing will happen. In fact, they are soon even rewarded, despite their frightening disregard of formal understandings. Even the terrorists who killed dozens of Israeli civilians in Israel - against the explicit agreement in the Oslo treaty - are to be freed in the framework of a new proposed agreement. It is almost an invitation to terrorize Israel now, with release sure to follow.

Arafat was urged to introduce democratisation of his government. Now, he can show the world how the democracy of the State of Israel works. The very same public figures who lost in three different elections (Burg against Ben Eliezer, Mitzna against Sharon, while Beilin was not even elected to the Knesset) are negotiating a peace plan. And the government of Switzerland - a proud democracy on its own - supports this totally undemocratic process financially and politically, thus willfully bypassing the democratically elected Israeli government.

Arafat rejected all peace proposals and never made any concrete counter offer. Instead, in reaction to the far-reaching Ehud Barak/Bill Clinton proposals, he started the second genocide-terror Intifada. Now, again, Israeli politicians have made new proposals. Of course, Arafat doesn't officially endorse them. He just looks on, while official government sources in Israel reject them and, as a result thereof, are accused by the Arab countries, the UN and the EU of undermining the peace process. Again, Israel is the bad guy, accused of unbearable stubbornness.

The Israeli society, which was united in its stand against the arch-terrorist Arafat, is being divided again because of different reactions to the Geneva document. In the war against inhuman terror ("Kill the Jews wherever you find them."), the Geneva plan succeeded to divide the Israelis and weaken their strength. Another success of Arafat, who built his strategy on the inner decay of Israel.

Arafat always described Israel as the last colonial power. He denied the historic roots of Israel in this area and ignored even the deep connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem. Now it is suggested that the Jews give up all their rights to the holiest site of their tradition, the Temple Mount, which was, for thousands of years, the center of their prayers and longings. Let us remember: Anwar Sadat prayed in Jerusalem towards Mecca, while Jews around the world are always Jerusalem-oriented.

Now, for the first time in history, Israel is requested by Israelis to give up willingly their rights in the heart of Jerusalem, the basis of their Zionism, thus justifying Arafat's claim; he has historic bonds with Jerusalem, while Israel and the Jews are colonialists.

There is an additional irony in the Geneva proposal, in that Jewish worship in holy places will again depend on the Palestinians. Don't we know how they respect religious rights? From 1948 until 1967, we didn't even get access to the Wailing Wall (despite Arab commitments). And who doesn't remember what happened since Oslo to the synagogue of Jericho and the tomb of Joseph in Nablus?

The proposed plan includes - so we are told - a formal retreat from the Palestinians' right to return. However, there is no such clear paragraph in the agreement (Palestinian participants denied such an understanding).

Tens of thousands of refugees will have to be absorbed by Israel. The moral responsibility of Israel for the refugee problem is not waived. As usual, in such Beilin documents, this very central issue is dealt with in an unclear and ambiguous manner, posing a frightening danger to any true understanding in the future.

What an irony: Israel has to retreat from its historic places (like Hevron, where Jews have always lived) and make the Palestinian State judenrein, while Israel with its one million Palestinian Arabs has to absorb many more.

The new plan will automatically become the basis for further negotiations; like the Barak plan, which was the starting point of the present Beilin initiative.

The expectation of the Palestinians in regard to a peace agreement with Israel are increasing in a dangerous manner with every peace proposal of this kind. Who is the Palestinian leader of the future who can bargain for less than what irresponsible Israeli politicians agreed to in this Geneva document?

Consequently, the Geneva document is not bringing peace closer but just the opposite: Peace is being put off to a very distant future!

Arthur Cohn is an international film producer whose productions include "The Garden of the Finzi-Continis," "Central Station," and "One Day in September." This article was published in Arutz Sheva (http:/www.IsraelNationalNews.com) today.

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 20, 2003.

Israeli leaders recently pledged to help strengthen new "Palestinian" Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei by making bolder and more comprehensive gestures towards peace. Leading Israeli officials have intimated that Israeli PM Ariel Sharon is willing to make even greater concessions to bolster Qurei and the peace process that he had during Mahmoud Abbas' term, including ending all military activity against Arab terrorists. Sharon has even stated that he is prepared to accept a ceasefire, despite the fact that terrorist organizations are likely to use it to perpetuate their attacks on Israelis. - JTA

Voice of Judea Commentary:  It's becoming difficult to open the newspaper and not find at least one story about how the Israeli government is bending over backwards to appease the latest Arab nazi in power. How did Israel go this low? How did Israel get to the point were it allows itself to manipulated by foreign governments and allow terrorist organizations to operate freely in the country, all because the Arabs decided to call one of their Jew-haters a prime minister and let him smile for the cameras?

The whole purpose of Zionism and of the Jewish state was to end this kind of powerlessness and to enable the Jewish people to stand up to petty thugs like Qurei and to stand strong in the face of political bullying from leaders like Bush. Today's news shows clearly that Israel has strayed far from the Zionist ideal, one which demands self respect and justice, and does not tolerate the appeasement tactics of today's pathetic Israeli leaders.

Posted by Honest Reporting Staff, November 20, 2003.

Today's coordinated bombings against British targets in Istanbul, occurring just days after the dual bombings of Istanbul synagogues, make the Islamic terrorist message brutally clear - their targets are the Jewish people and Western democratic civilization. What most Americans recognized after 9/11, Europeans are now also beginning to see: radical Islamists threaten every Western citizen, and Israel is merely a convenient front line for their battle.

Given this, HonestReporting is concerned about the re-emergence of a trend we witnessed after 9/11 - the media's shift of focus away from this stark reality, and onto Israeli policy as a scapegoat for Islamic terrorism. Recent examples:

(1) The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, on the Istanbul synagogue bombings: "[T]he reaction of Arabs, Muslims and others to Israeli actions in the West Bank and Gaza is spilling over into anti-Semitism and violence directed against Jewish populations normally living in peace in countries like Turkey...The United States could help by returning to a credible policy of seeking a two-state solution for the Israelis and Palestinians."

Comments to: editor@post-gazette.com

(2) In Germany, Wolfgang Guenter Lerch wrote in "Frankfurter Allgemeine: "The criminal attacks on two synagogues in Istanbul were mainly directed against Israel...Even secular Turks are dismayed when they see what is happening in the Israeli occupied Palestinian territories."

(3) Lerch is just one step short of the Egyptian newspaper, Al Wafd: "Why do we not say that the attack was plotted in order to improve Israel's image in the EU after the recent poll that showed it as the primary threat to global peace? Why do we exclude Turkish Jews as perpetrators?"

(4) K Gajendra Singh, India's former ambassador to Turkey, writes in the Asian Times: "Many Turkish experts suspect that the twin bombings were a warning to Turkey, one of the few Muslim countries to have ties with Israel...The blasts could be an act of revenge for the daily killings of Palestinians and the Israelis building a much-opposed wall that encroaches on Palestinian land."

This media trend recasts the radical Islamic war against the Jewish people and the West as something else entirely - an Israeli-specific disaster that now everyone's suffering from.

Coverage of President Bush's powerful speech on Tuesday in London further illustrates the problem. Bush, after pointed reference to the pre-WWII failure to confront Nazi tyranny, called for democratic reform in the Mideast:

"As we work on the details of peace, we must look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a viable Palestinian democracy. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate and profit from corruption, and maintain their ties to terrorist groups...The long-suffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true leaders, capable of creating and governing a Palestinian states...Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause. And Europe's leaders - and all leaders - should strongly oppose anti-Semitism, which poisons public debates over the future of the Middle East."

Though Bush himself called Palestinian reform "the heart of the matter" and warned of the dangerous new wave of anti-Semitism, these Reuters' headlines focused instead on Israeli policy:

  • "Israel Defiant Over Barrier After Bush Criticism"
  • "Bush Urges Israel Not to Prejudice Peace Talks"
  • "Israel Spurns Bush Call Over West Bank Fence"

Comments to Reuters: editor@reuters.com

As the radical Islamic war against the innocent tragically expands, HonestReporting encourages subscribers to monitor your local media to ensure that Israel does not again emerge as a scapegoat for mass terror, and that the Western resolve to fight the terrorists themselves receives accurate coverage.

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, November 20, 2003.

This is Gary M. Cooperberg's response to the Bush and Blair press conference. Mr. Cooperberg lives in Kiryat Arba-Hebron.

I could not help but think of Tony and George as two muppets, dancing together and entertaining their audience.

They stand united in their resolve to fight terror until it is defeated.

Tony stated that there can be no compromise. He pointed out that we are all subject to terror, whether in Britain, the USA, Turkey or Palestine.

I am surprised he didn't refer to the USA as "the colonies."

Could it be that his Freudian slip betrays the fact that he truly doesn't recognize Israel as a sovereign state?

How can he and Bush talk about fighting terror without compromise while simultaneously telling Israel that it must bow to terror by stopping to build its homeland and giving in to the demands of the PLO?

The fact that Moslems were also victims of these terrorist attacks in no way changes the reality that the attacks themselves were motivated by fanatic Islamic beliefs.

We all should have learned by now that, for Islamic fanatics, Moslem life takes second seat to the goal of destroying all obstacles to Islam.

Mr. Bush was asked if he believes that Moslems worship the same G-d as do Christians. He stated that he did. Perhaps his reply was politically expedient.

But it was wrong.

The war he is fighting is not against "terror."

It is not against those who "hate freedom."

It is a fight against those who deny the Living G-d of Israel.

My Bible and the one George Bush reads both clearly state that it is G-d's Will to return the people of Israel to the Land of Israel in fulfillment of His eternal covenant with our Father, Abraham.

Yet, Mr. Bush had no problem telling the world that "There is no choice. The Holy Land must be divided."

There is no choice?

Does the President of the United States really think that he can issue decrees that cancel Divine Promises as stated in his own Bible?

The real reason terror is running rampant in our world today is precisely because Bush and other world leaders refuse to recognize G-d.

Israel and the Jewish People exist for the sole purpose of showing the entire world that G-d does exist. That is why, despite her tiny size and bumbling leadership, the Jewish State was reborn and continues to defy logic by not only continuing to exist, despite all obstacles, but to grow and thrive as well.

The Jewish People has always been burdened with the obligation to bring the message of G-d to all the nations of the world. That we have sought to escape our obligations is the main reason for our suffering throughout the ages.

Yet our destiny cannot be thwarted, even if we try to avoid it. Peace cannot and will not result from spitting in the face of G-d by trying to nullify His Redemption.

The Jewish State was resurrected to set into motion the beginning of the process of Divine Redemption. This process cannot be stopped or even slowed down.

All who interfere will bring tragedy upon their own heads. It is precisely because the governmental leadership in Israel seeks peace by defying Jewish obligations that we suffer from terror here in Israel. And it is precisely because George Bush calls for a PLO state on Jewish Land that America is now in grave danger.

George Bush may be a patriotic American.

But he would do well to reflect on the fact that the original patriots were also G-d fearing men.

Freedom is not genuine unless it reflects obedience to our Creator.

Opposing Biblical destiny is the chief obstacle to freedom and redemption. Only when Bush and Blair and other world leaders recognize this fact and act upon it will we be able to defeat terror.

All nations who stand in the way of the G-dly process will perish by the Hand of G-d.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 20, 2003.

Why do many American Jewish conservatives favor Pres. Bush's policy on Israel, asked a reader. He finds the Bush policy "atrocious."

My short answer is because they are American, Jewish, and conservative. Of course, that is a generalization. It certainly does not apply to that reader. Now what does it mean?

Americans largely are uninformed about the Arab-Israel conflict. High schools don't bother much with that topic. Colleges, especially those with Gulf-funded Middle East Studies, bother too much, with misinformation, disinformation, and ignorance. The media either is obsessed with politically correct or anti-Zionist advocacy journalism or neglects this topic.

The Jewish people should have educated themselves about this topic. They do not act collectively enough. In addition, they, themselves are divided about it. The Right defends Israel by asserting Jewish rights and denouncing Arab aggression. Appeasement-minded Jews defend Israel by advocating Arab rights but asserting that Israel does not violate them, Israel is not so bad.

The appeasement-minded give away half of the Jews' case. That grants the Arabs a powerful standing in attacking the other half. The Right, by denying Arab territorial rights, would retain the Jews' territorial standing.

The Jews being inquired about take their conservatism more as an ideology or a political commitment than as an economic program or even philosophy. Their primary loyalty should be to their country and nationality, and they think it is. Unfortunately, ideological and political blinders obscure the harm that Bush policies do to the Jewish nationality and (domestically as well, to) the United States. They think that they must go along with Bush on his foreign policy, because they go along with him on his domestic policy.

Have they examined his domestic policy? Since he calls himself conservative, conservatives support him. He Is no conservative. He is a reactionary, restoring he reign of the robber barons and the era of excessive government control over individual liberties and the environmental spoliation of our continent.

The problem with my fellow Jews is their neurosis, developed over centuries of powerlessness in countries run by a hostile majority. The Jewish reaction, perhaps needed to survive in the era before genocide, was to seek the approval of the powers that be. I have to admit that when a gentile politician pats those Jews on the head for serving his goals instead of their interests, they are so pleased that they fail to notice he is kicking them in the behind.

Pres. Bush masterfully plays upon that neurosis, in his meetings with Jewish leaders. He evades their penetrating questions. Most guests fail to ask many or to persist. They leave the meeting with positive feelings, though they let their people down. They are afraid to sound the alarm about Bush's anti-Zionist policies. His couple of good speeches mask from them his many contradictory actions that advance terrorist murder of Israelis. They are not alarmed.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 20, 2003.

Letter to the Prime Minister of Turkey from Shimon Peres, Peacemaker at Large:

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

My heartfelt sympathies to you and the Turkish people for the Istanbul unrest this week.

But we must really speak about how to deal with the atrocities and protests, including the attacks on Istanbul, by these misunderstood Islamic activists. Mister Prime Minister, I have a great deal of experience in dealing successfully with terrorism and this is why I wish to come to your rescue.

The first thing you must realize is that one can only make peace with one's enemies. With one's friends there is no need to make peace. There is no military solution to the problems of terrorism, and this is why you must seek a diplomatic solution. No Justice, No Peace, as they say. You must invite the leaders of this Islamic organization to Occupied Constantinople to meet with you and perhaps tour the Suleyman Mosque. You must learn to feel their pain and understand their needs. You must offer to turn a third of Anatolia over to them so that these stateless Moslems can have their OWN state. The Kurds and Anatolian Armenians need new states as well.

You must meet the demands of the bombers nearly in full. In addition, you must offer them Internet web services and five-star tourist hotels in exchange for their promising to abandon violence. That is how we turned Yasser Arafat into a peace partner. You see, military force serves no role any more. It is passe. It is archaic. Today, economic interests dominate the world and the Islamist activists of the earth will surely make peace in exchange for some profits from participating in global trade.

The attacks on Istanbul came because you have been insufficiently sensitive in understanding the needs of Moslem fundamentalists. You took their rhetoric at face value, whereas we in Israel know that all this rhetoric is empty and in fact these people simply want peace. Sure, they praise Hitler and celebrate atrocities, but what is it that they REALLY want? You must negotiate even while under attack; conditioning negotiations on an end to violence is a no-win situation. It will simply extend the bloodshed! I am pretty sure Ami Ayalon and Yossi Beilin would be willing to meet the bombers on your behalf to strike a deal.

You have been trying to rule over others and failed to be sensitive to The Other. You have illegal settlements that you have yet to remove from the Alexandretta area that you have stolen from Syria, and the Edirne enclave that rightfully belongs to Greece. And you have never admitted that the Serbs and Slavs and Greeks and Romanians suffered from being occupied by you, nor have you comepnsated them for their sufferings.

You must put your own house in order, and eliminate inequality and injustice inside Istanbul, and then the terrorists will no longer target you.

The key is to build a New Middle East, one in which everyone is so busy with the important matter of development tourism and investments and hi-technology that they have no time to pursue violence. The era of war is finished.

Moreover, if you strike at the perpetrators of the Istanbul unrest/protests and their supporters, you will simply extend and enlarge the cycle of violence. Your bombs will no doubt injure some innocent children and civilians alongside any terrorist activists you strike, and that will simply enrage the rest of the world and make the victims seek revenge. Your bombing of these militants and activists will cause them to hate the Turks and it will drive your separatists to embrace terrorism. Moreover, if you refuse to negotiate with the Moslem activists and militants, then their leader will be toppled and a really violent militant and fanatic will take his place. In that case, you will have lost the window of opportunity to make peace. Begin by declaring a unilateral ceasefire!

Mister Prime Minister, blessed is the peacemaker. The entire world will support you and congratulate you if you respond to these horrific attacks by disarming Anatolia and opening dialogue with the terror activists. All we are saying is give peace a chance. Yitzhak Rabin would have approved. Yes, chaver, what you need is shalom, salaam, peace. You will be cheered and awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in recognition.

End the cycle of violence. Show restraint. Forgo the juvenile impulse to avenge.

Follow my example! Provide the Istanbul bombers with anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, so that they can battle against the true radicals and fanatics. And they will do so with no ACLU or Supreme Court to restrain them. Invite in the ISM to serve as human shields for the bombers.

Demonstrate your humanity by paying pensions to any widows and orphans of the terrorists who blew up the car bombs.

Mister Prime Minister, the proof is in the pudding. My own peace policies have eliminated war and bloodshed and terror from the Middle East. We no longer have terrorists to deal with in the Levant, only peace partners. If you follow in my footsteps, you can achieve the same lofty goals.

Peacefully yours,

Shimon Peres, Peacemaker-at-Large

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, November 20, 2003.

I've been thinking about writing this for a long time. I recently wrote an open letter to your Secretary of State and sent him his own personal copy as well. I was subsequently contacted by a retired State Department official - so the message got through. That official complained that my comments were misdirected, for the buck stops, as President Truman said, with you.

Mr. President, I greatly appreciate the leadership you have shown since tragedy befell our country on 9/11 a few years back when America got a taste - big time - of what Israel faces daily. While this wasn't the first time we had been victimized this way, September 11th will always be remembered as the day in which we all received an everlasting rude reawakening.

I've debated with myself about how to word this: Should I simply sing praises to your name and actions, or should I relay to the President of my country the true feelings and anxieties of my heart? Since I have been in the process of revising my own thinking - at least to some extent - regarding both my previous positions and about you yourself - I reluctantly opted for the latter. So, here it goes.

I must be honest. I did not vote for you. I have an extensive background in science, history, and Middle Eastern Affairs. So I worry about our country's continuing addiction to fossil fuels for all sorts of reasons. I remain very nervous about your family's and friends' close connections to the oil industry, an industry which, for well over half a century, has been - putting it nicely and perhaps the understatement of the century - no friend of Israel and/or Jews (or, in reality, anyone else but itself).

I remember your Dad's venomous reaction when Israel launched its surgical strike which destroyed Saddam's Osirik nuclear reactor. Where would Iran, which fought a long and costly war with Iraq, our own country, and others have been years later in Desert Storm and afterwards had Israel not done this?

I recall your Dad's two best buddies while in office, the "Zionism equals racism" Governor John Sununu, and " _ _ _ _ the Jews, they don't vote for us anyway" James Baker.

And then there were far more troubling, published accounts which I will not delve into for the sake of not embarrassing you here. They are detailed, documented, and extremely disturbing, to say the least. So please understand that it is not for nothing that many in the Jewish community have not been among your most enthusiastic past supporters. The problem goes beyond just the usual explanations of the Jews' liberal, democratic tendencies.

I remember too well our abandonment of a much abused and brave people, the Kurds. They had been promised independence after World War I, but they were sacrificed instead on the altar of British petroleum politics and Arab nationalism. Those same multinational oil interests, which worked so hard to try to convince President Truman to not allow the rebirth of Israel, succeeded in aborting the one best chance some 30 million native, non-Arab Kurds ever had at achieving independence. Arab Iraq emerged instead.

Listening to your Dad's call for their revolt against Saddam decades later - and then watching him stand by and do nothing while they were first gassed and then again later slaughtered - was too much to bear. The "no fly" zones we later set up as an afterthought won't bring back the scores of thousands of these people who were maimed and killed both immediately and in subsequent years due to the lingering effects of the gassing. And all because they trusted in America and the American President.

Unfortunately, this was not the first time we abandoned them. We pulled the rug out from under Mullah Mustafa Barzani as soon as the Shah made a temporary peace with Iraq in 1975, resulting in tens of thousands of Kurdish deaths then as well. What's even worse, it now looks like we're planning to abuse these people yet again in our current pipedreams about the future of an egalitarian federalist Iraq. While you continue to press ahead for the creation of a 23rd Arab state, you will hear and speak nothing about a roadmap for Kurdistan. President Woodrow Wilson did after World War I. The difficulties you and your State Department cite regarding this matter are certainly no more problematic or complicated than the prospects of Arafatian leopard state changing its spots. So why does justice for Arabs apparently take precedence before all others in these regards for you folks? Our country is too great to be stained by such hypocritical behavior, double standards, and actions.

There are other reasons for my feelings of uneasiness as well, but let's just end this part here. I fear I have disturbed you enough with my candor for now.

Having said all of the above, I must now tell you that I would vote for you in a heartbeat if elections were held tomorrow. And don't let foolish remarks by amnesiacs about weapons of mass destruction bother you. Just ask the Kurds if Saddam had them. You did the right thing in Iraq. And those expecting a "cure" over night are idiots.

Sometimes a leader arises at a given time for a specific reason or reasons. And sometimes the acorn can and does fall far enough from the oak tree.

Harry Truman bucked the pressure from Big Oil, its Arabist buddies at the State Department, and elsewhere when he recognized the rebirth of the sole state of the Jews - the phoenix arising from the ashes of Auschwitz and the frightened mellahs of the Middle East. The archives have been open now for decades and show that raw anti-Semitism played its active role here as well. But Truman knew that if any people ever needed the protection of its own nation state - regardless of how imperfect all such endeavors are doomed to be - surely it was the Jews.

Perhaps at no time since those days leading up to May 14-15, 1948 were the decisions of an American President regarding the Middle East potentially so important as they are today.

President Johnson declared America "neutral" when Israel was blockaded at the Straits of Tiran and Egypt's Nasser expelled the U.N. peacekeeping force and replaced it - right up to Israel's doorstep - with 100,000 troops, tanks, planes, etc. of his own on the eve of the Six Day War. Hindsight is indeed the best sight. But no one knew then that grossly outmanned, surrounded, and outgunned Israel would pull a rabbit from out of its hat.

Eleven years earlier, President Eisenhower simply expected that Israel would continue to tolerate being terrorized by fedayeen using Syria, Egypt, and elsewhere as bases. And it was also expected to put up with an earlier blockade at the Straits as well. When Israel struck out in 1956, it faced a very hostile reaction from Ike and his Secretary of State, Dulles. Now, in 2003, an Egypt supposedly "at peace" with Israel, still allows arms and murderers to be smuggled through tunnels into Gaza while receiving billions of dollars in American aid and America's best armaments.

Ironically, one may point to anti-Semitic President Nixon's resupply of Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur War as a crucial moment in in Jewish history. But this too was not without its down sides - not the least being reports that his Jewish Secretary of State, Kissinger, deliberately delayed the resupply for about two weeks so that Israel would "bleed a little more" so its victory wouldn't be too similar to 1967 and it would thus be, supposedly, more pliable later on in negotiations.

President Clinton pushed Israel beyond the limits of sanity and reasonable compromise at Camp David 2000 and Taba. A much debated U.N. Resolution #242 declared in the wake of the '67 War that Israel was entitled to "secure and recognized borders" to replace those suicidal armistice lines imposed upon it at the close of hostilities in 1949. Among other things, those lines made Israel a mere 9-miles wide at its waist. And yet, Israel was expected to forsake this at Taba.

While other nations (including our own) have conquered, manipulated, and/or taken over territories thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own national security interests, Israel was expected to forsake even minimal territorial adjustments to give it some semblance of a strategic buffer. Israel was pressured to make one-sided concessions to a PLO which was willing to settle for nothing less than Israel's virtual suicide. After returning to its 9-mile wide existence, Israel was then also expected to take in millions of real or alleged Arab refugees so that the Jews would be overwhelmed in their sole microscopic state. Forget the fact that one half of Israel's Jews were themselves refugees from Arab/Muslim lands. Mr. President, please keep all of this in mind when you continue to discuss the path of Israel's security fence.

So that brings us up to your presidency. Clearly, you're still under pressure from those same old oil influences. We really do need to work on alternatives to this - beyond simply raping the last pristine areas of our own country to squeeze out more oil profits. Cars elsewhere have been running on pure ethanol made from vegetation for decades, and Henry Ford ran his Model Ts on them as well. Why did I have to purchase my 50 mpg, super low emission, safe and roomy hybrid gas/electric vehicle from Japan?

Returning to the Middle East, you do seem to have a deeper grasp of some of the core Middle Eastern issues than I had originally given you credit for.

So far, you have largely resisted the hypocrites in Europe, who have incinerated tens of thousands when engaged in their own less-than-perfect battles, and I believe that you have also come to see that treating Israel like other so-called "friends" treated Czechoslovakia in 1938 will hurt us - not help us - not to mention the moral repugnance of the thought. Please don't cave into them now on Arab-Israeli issues to gain their support for your policies in Iraq.

I believe in your heart of hearts that you understand that Israel truly longs for an honorable peace with its enemies - but one which will still allow it to be a viable state on the morrow. What's lacking is a partner on the other side whose thinking is on the same wavelength. Arabs offer only a temporary "Trojan Horse" (their own words) hudna to gain tangibles from Israel on the ground while still retaining their destruction-in-stages goals towards the Jewish State. And you know this.

You have resisted our own perpetual Arabists at Foggy Bottom. And you've done all of this knowing that most Jews didn't vote for you. Your Dad's buddy, Baker, was right. But I would disagree with the conclusions he drew from this.

Mr. President, I believe that you have also come to realize an unfortunate truism: The enemies Israel is fighting are not ultimately concerned about how big Israel is - but that Israel is.

There is now no doubt in my mind. Forgive me for sounding a bit melodramatic, but I truly believe that you were needed at the helm of our great nation during these trying and momentous times. You have quieted many of my stated and unstated fears - at least in regards to foreign policy. Stay true to your heart, don't get sidetracked. I believe it is a good one.

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 20, 2003.

One has to wonder why, if the Palestinian Arabs want their own country so much, they have repeatedly turned down opportunities to have one. The reasons they give for not accepting statehood always has something to do with the statehood being offered is not as much as they want, even when it is 99% of what they have requested. Therefore, one may reasonably assume that Arafat & Co. really don't want a sovereign nation.

So one must ask why being in limbo is of benefit to Arafat and then figure out a way to deprive him of this. Basically, the advantages come down to impunity, lack of responsibility, a parasitic existence, and money.

Because the Palestinian Arabs are not a sovereign nation, they cannot be signatories to any international law and are thus exempt. This means that their jihad training camps for 5-year olds is untouchably outside the International Law on Abuse of the Child. As is teaching hatred of Jews. As is encouraging children to go into areas of military operations and throw rocks. As is using children, and even babies' strollers and cribs to hide explosives.

Because the Palestinian Arabs are not a sovereign nation, they are parasitically dependent upon the largesse and good will of others for their existence. They do not have to promote a viable economy, public services, or jobs. All they have to do is riot and murder enough and the world comes rushing in with food, billions of dollars, housing, and health assistance. Meanwhile, the world puts pressure on Israel, the Palestinian Arab's sworn enemy, to provide them with job opportunities and electricity.

This in and of itself is an absurdity. Did anyone require the Allies of WWII to provide the German people with job opportunities and electricity? Is the US required to open it borders to Mexicans, tear down its fences, and provide Mexico with utilities? Of course not. And the US is not the declared target of annihilation that Israel is to the Palestinian Arabs.

The Palestinian Arabs also have impunity when it comes to murder and war. Nowhere in the annuls of history has any country borne such a sustained and prolonged attack as Israel and not fought back with extreme prejudice. The reason? Because the world consensus is that a group of people without an official country cannot possibly have an army and for Israel to attack them full scale would be considered a crime against humanity. Arafat is wily enough to know that tens of thousands of well-trained, well paid, well-equipped terrorists can operate as an army, yet with impunity, as long as he doesn't have an official country.

Even when there is an "official" truce, the Palestinians can and do continue their attacks with impunity from international sanctions. They use their lack of sovereignty as an excuse. It has become a mantra. "It's not our fault. We cannot control everyone if we don't have a country and therefore an official police force."

So here is my suggestion. Israel declares the Palestinian Arabs a sovereign nation on all of the land they now occupy. BUT, Israel also declares that this is not necessarily the final borders or agreements. These can be negotiated. However, the Palestinian Arabs have now gained their own country and have lost nothing. They can have a national anthem, issue currency and stamps and apply for a seat at the UN.

And once the Palestinians have their own country, Israel will no longer be responsible for them. And at the same time, the Palestinian Arabs will suddenly become wholly responsible for their economy, their utilities, their public assistance, their housing, and especially their behavior. This means that when the next Kassam rocket, homicide bomber or shooting attack comes from the new country of Palestinian Arabs and is directed at Israeli territory and/or citizens, Israel will now be able to consider it an official act of war and thus have a green light to wipe them out.

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 19, 2003.
US President George Bush has called upon Israel to cease all construction in Yesha (Judea, Samaria & Gaza) communities, dismantle illegal outposts and to stop degrading the 'Palestinian people.'"

Voice of Judea Commentary:  Cute George. On the same day that America is dropping tons of bombs on Iraq, showing ultimate sensitivity, he calls upon Israel to conduct more acts of love and kindness to the poor "Palestinians." A day after a "Palestinian" terrorist snuck up to a Israeli checkpoint, brutally murdering 2 Israeli soldiers, President Bush urges Israel to permit non-degrading freedom of movement for Arabs at Israeli checkpoints. Perhaps Bush is unaware of the fact that thousands of Arab terrorists seek to pass through roadblocks with bombs and guns to murder Jews. The roadblocks and checkpoints are there so that Israel could detect the bombs and the guns before they are smuggled into major Israeli cities.

If Israel expels the hostile Arab population they will not need to "degrade" the Arabs at checkpoints.

Posted by Itamar Marcus, November 19, 2003.

"The Diaspora" [Al-Shatat], is a Syrian produced series aired on Al-Manar, Hizbollah TV, nightly at 9:30. The series covers the period of the Zionist movement, and is based on the traditional anti-Semitic libels found in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Zionist Jews are said to rule the world with sophisticated plots, among them causing the Communist revolution in Russia, directing World War One and more. The Jews are described as greedy and bloodthirsty, interested only in power, and world domination from the Land of Israel, called "Palestine."

A video-clip taken from episode 20, Nov. 18, 2003 can be viewed on our website: http://wwww.pmw.org.il. The Jewish leadership initiates the murder of a Christian boy to drain his blood for Passover Matzah, which is then eaten on Passover.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 19, 2003.

Leadership in a war on terrorism should mean rallying public opinion, as well as raising armies. Pres. Bush should be rallying the world against jihad. Unfortunately, he hobbles himself, first by his ties to the Saudi enemy, and second by his pandering to US Muslims and political correctness about them. Democracies are weakened by the voting presence, and fundraising ability, of the enemy. Hence, Pres. Bush does not declare who the enemy is nor define victory.

Posted by David Frankfurter, November 19, 2003.

Dear Friends,

Horror stories abound of honour killings, accused 'collaborators' dragged into the street and shot (one even happened during his trial!), trumped up accusations to appropriate property. I usually don't circulate them because they don't add much constructive to the discussion, and don't contribute to peace.

The attached story, however, shook me deeply, and I share it with you for no better reason than to explain why I would be fearful of any 'one-state solution.' It was written by Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson and is archived at www.realcities.com/mie/k/washington/news/world/7255549.htm, November 14, 2003, Knight Ridder newspapers.

I have said before, when faced with accusations of criminal actions by Israelis, that a society should not be judged by an isolated crime, but rather by how that society relates to that crime and deals with it. Read this article twice. The second time, try to disconnect from the strange mother and family and think about the townsfolk, the society, and the court's consideration of 'mitigating circumstances' which reduced the mother's sentence. Consider that this mother is currently at home, lovingly tending to those of her children who are alive. She is not in jail. Where I come from, these 'mitigating circumstances' would call for either an automatic life sentence or a psychiatric ward.

Then read it again, and note that somehow Israel is to blame.

With apologies for sharing this grisly one with you,

ABU QASH, West Bank: Rofayda Qaoud - raped by her brothers and impregnated - refused to commit suicide, her mother recalls, even after she bought the unwed teenager a razor with which to slit her wrists. So Amira Abu Hanhan Qaoud says she did what she believes any good Palestinian parent would: restored her family's "honor" through murder.

Armed with a plastic bag, razor and wooden stick, Qaoud entered her sleeping daughter's room last Jan. 27. "Tonight you die, Rofayda," she told the girl, before wrapping the bag tightly around her head. Next, Qaoud sliced Rofayda's wrists, ignoring her muffled pleas of "No, mother, no!" After her daughter went limp, Qaoud struck her in the head with the stick.

Killing her sixth-born child took 20 minutes, Qaoud tells a visitor through a stream of tears and cigarettes that she smokes in rapid succession. "She killed me before I killed her," says the 43-year-old mother of nine. "I had to protect my children. This is the only way I could protect my family's honor."

The guilty brothers are in jail.

Qaoud's confessed crime, for which she must appear before a three-judge panel on Dec. 3, is one repeated almost weekly among Palestinians living in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Israel. Female virtue and virginity define a family's reputation in Arab cultures, so it's women who are punished if that reputation is perceived as sullied.

Victims' rights groups say the number of "honor crimes" appears to be climbing, but at the same time, getting little attention. Israelis and Palestinians are too busy with political and military issues to notice what they dismiss as domestic disputes, says Suad Abu-Dayyeh, who works for the Women's Center for Legal Aid and Counseling in East Jerusalem.

Poverty and war have exacerbated the problem, says Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, a social work and criminology professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and an expert on violence against women.

"Men do not have any power except over women," she says.

Police in Israel investigated at least 18 honor killings in the past three years.

Palestinian police reported 31 cases in 2002 - up from five during the first half of 1999 - the last time such incidents were counted before the current Palestinian uprising began, according to the center's study.

But the number of killings is likely higher, given that Palestinian police investigate only crimes that have been reported, said Yousef Tarifi, the Ramallah prosecutor assigned to Qaoud's case. Shalhoub-Kevorkian says her past research showed the likely number to be 15 times higher than the number of reported cases.

Legal authority on the West Bank has been weakened by Israel's military crackdown, and the growing influence of militant Islamic factions has led clans to dole out their own justice. "In this chaotic situation, every man who thinks he knows a little bit of the Quran thinks honor issues are supposed to be resolved by killing," says Shalhoub-Kevorkian, who adds that leading Muslim clerics in Jerusalem and Jordan have denounced such killings.

Qaoud says her husband, Abdul Rahim, 52, told her the Quran forbade such killings. But neither his pleas nor those of Palestinian crisis counselors swayed her. "Why did she accept what happened to her?" Qaoud asks. "Even a wife can tell her husband 'no.' "

According to court records, Rofayda was raped by her brothers, Fahdi, 22, and Ali, 20, in a bedroom they shared in the family's three-room house. On Nov. 26, 2002, doctors at a nearby hospital who were treating Rofayda for an injured leg discovered she was eight months pregnant.

Palestinian authorities whisked her off to a women's shelter in Bethlehem, where she gave birth to a healthy boy on Dec. 23. He has since been adopted by another Palestinian family, court records show.

Rofayda, meanwhile, wanted to return to her parents in the Ramallah suburb of Abu Qash. Ramallah Gov. Mustafa Isa called a meeting with the family and village elders, demanding they pledge in writing not to harm the girl. "He asked me if everyone in the family and the village would promise not to bother this girl, but I told him I couldn't give him a guarantee," Abu Qash Mayor Faik Shalout says.

Rofayda returned home in late January without notifying the authorities.

The shame was unbearable, Qaoud said. Relatives and friends refused to speak to her family. Her elder daughters' husbands wouldn't allow them to visit because Rofayda had returned home.

On Jan. 27, Rofayda sent word that she was in danger to crisis counselors at Abu-Dayyeh's center in East Jerusalem. They, in turn, called Palestinian police in Ramallah, who have jurisdiction over Abu Qash. The police said they couldn't get to the Qaoud home because of Israeli checkpoints.

Qaoud, meanwhile, sent her husband, who suffers from heart disease, to a doctor in the nearby village of Bir Zeit. Her three youngest children went to a cousin's house.

At 11:30 p.m. she killed Rofayda, court records show. Tarifi says he's convinced Qaoud had an accomplice, but Qaoud insists she acted alone.

Qaoud turned herself in and, after four months in jail, was released pending the resolution of her case.

While honor killings committed in the heat of the moment - for example, by a husband who catches his wife in bed with another man - generally carry a six-month to one-year jail term, Qaoud will likely be sentenced to three to five years in prison, Tarifi says. The fact she is a mother who was trying to protect her family's honor mitigates the crime of premeditated murder, which is punishable by death under Palestinian law, he adds.

The brothers are serving minimum 10-year sentences in a Palestinian jail in the West Bank city of Jericho for statutory rape of a relative, Tarifi says.

No trace of Rofayda or her brothers remains in the family home. Qaoud says she ripped up all of their photographs and burned their clothes. The bedroom in which she killed her daughter is now a storeroom.

Erasing the memories is harder, she admits. She eases her pain by doting on her three children still living at home, especially the youngest, Fatima, 9, whom she lavishes with kisses. The children say they've forgiven Qaoud and return her affection.

"My mother did this because she does not want us to be punished by people," Fatima explains with a shy smile. Leaning into Qaoud's arms, the little girl adds: "I love my mother much more now than before."

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 19, 2003.

There are now in fact not one but two treasonous private "peace initiatives" being promoted by the Israeli fundamentalist Left, somewhat comically competing against one another. There is the Beilin Geneva Misunderstandings, which is being bulk mailed to Israeli households this week in defiance of a proposal last week by the Consumers Union to prohibit junk mail. And the there is the "initiative" by ex-spook Ami Ayalon, who once headed Israeli intelligence services (never mind the oxymoron in that term) and before that was Navy Commandant, together with a PLO terrorist.

This past weekend, Yediot, the largest Israeli daily, carried a group interview with four of the ex-heads of the intelligence agencies, Ami Ayalon and three others. All four are fundamentalist leftists and all four endorsed Ayalon's "initiative." My guess is that if there ever really will be a state of Palestine, it will issue stamps with the mugs of the four ex-spooks who served Palestinian interests so faithfully.

Now future historians are going to have a great deal of difficulty in explaining how Israel could possibly have been overcome with mass stupidity to the extent that it has been, or how Israel could still have been pursuing accords and deals with the PLO ten years after Oslo.

A large part of the answer will have to do with the complete failure of Israeli intelligence services to provide intelligence and to fulfill their assigned role. Instead, the intelligence services have long been dominated by leftists and Peres poodles repeating the mindless political mantras of Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin. From the very start of Oslo, the intelligence services refused to examine the question of what the PLO's intentions were, what its agenda was, whether it was going to comply with Oslo. The intelligence services simply accepted Peres' assurances that the PLO was truly interested in peace and so the "peace partner" role assigned the PLO by the Left was its only working axiom. At the start of Oslo, the intelligence agencies disbanded their networks of informers among the Palestinians and turned them over to the tender mercies of the PLO, which murdered and tortured them. Israel's left denounced these informers, who had saved many a Jewish life, as "traitors to their own people." (Can you imagine Americans in 1945 denouncing as traitors to their own people those Germans who had served as informants for Allied forces and helped defeat the Reich?)

In part, the problem is the same as the problem of leftist domination of the senior military ranks in general in Israel. Because senior brass retire in their 40s and need to be set up for a cushy second career, they are dependent on the politicians and so have toed the leftist line to assure their good graces with the political Left. After all, Labor has run the government more often than Likud, and in any case the main goal of the Likud, whenever it has been in office, has always been to help the Labor Party get re-elected. (Just look at the decision this week by the Likud government to prosecute the owners of the Arutz7 "pirate" radio station and to seek to sentence them to very long periods in prison.)

The intelligence services have also long been Beilinized. A rare exception was General Yaakov Amidror, a religious Jew who ran military intelligence till he had his career blocked by the political establishment. He was not only skeptical of Oslo. He has a guest Op-Ed in Haaretz (Nov 19, 2003) denouncing the Beilin Misunderstandings. He states that under Beilin's plan, the PLO will be able to move tank columns across the Negev with no possibility by Israel to stop them. The Jerusalem Post reported Friday that Beilin had promised the PLO the "German Colony" neighborhood in New or Western Jerusalem, not only all of East Jerusalem. (For Hebrew readers, the full article by Amidror is at http://www.haaretz.co.il.)

Amidror, as I say, is a very rare exception to the rule of leftist fundamentalists running Israeli intelligence. If that sounds strange to you, by the way, take a look at Prof. Angelo Codevilla's seminal book on how leftism dominates the CIA (www.fetchbook.info/search_0743244842/tab_editions.html). Codevilla is one of the great minds in the United States today.

As I say, the four ex-intelligence buffoons gave a long interview for weekend Yediot, and the only thing of value from that interview is a vivid image of why Israel has been pushed to the brink of destruction. If such people direct Israeli intelligence services, the country will not survive.

Last evening the TV documentary show by Ilana Dayan showed a long video tape taken of the "negotiations" between the team of mindless leftists accompanying Yossi Beilin to Geneva and the PLO terrorhoids. The tape spoke for itself and wisely Dayan just let it run and let people make up their own minds. It might have been entitled How Learning-Disabled Kindergarten Children from a kibbutz Can Negotiate a Peace Settlement.

After the tape, Dayan interviewed one of the leftist fundamentalist ex-spooks. Here are some citations from that, as they appear in today's Haaretz:

Ex-Shin Bet chief: no choice but to trust the Palestinians Avraham Shalom, the Shin Bet chief forced to resign in the 1980s because of the Bus 300 affair, made an unprecedented TV appearance Tuesday evening to tell Channel Two's Ilana Dayan that "if we can't learn to trust one another, there will only be chaos here and nobody will be able to live here."

Shalom, who gave his first newspaper interview last weekend together with three other former Shin Bet chiefs, announcing in Yedioth Ahronoth that he was signing the Ayalon-Nusseibeh petition, and warning that Israel's "humiliation" of the Palestinians was no way to fight terror, told Dayan that he was motivated to speak out because of "the events and situation."

He said he is worried about what is happening to Israel as a "conquering occupying nation. We've become professional occupiers, not paying any attention to what is happening to the other side. I'm not talking about the war on terror. I am talking about how we treat the other side."

He said that "of course we should arrest the terrorists, but there's no reason to make people strip at a checkpoint and there's no reason to stop an ambulance carrying a pregnant woman about to give birth."

...Asked if he believes the Palestinians enough to strike a deal with them, Shalom said "We're two peoples living on the same land and if we can't learn to trust one another, there will only be chaos here and nobody will be able to live here."

(Actually, that is not an accurate citation. I heard the interview and he said "I have to believe in the peaceful intentions of the PLO because, if not, there will be no one to make peace with." Welcome to the Israeli University of Duh.

No doubt Neville Chamberlain said the same thing about Hitler.

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 18, 2003.

The G.A. (General Assembly) of the UJC (United Jewish Communities) was put to the test of courage - and they failed - miserably. Shame has once again marked the head of most American Jewry or, at least, their so-called self-appointed leaders. 6,000 and more participants, including 4,300 from North America and more than 2,000 from Israel were attending.

As Prime Minister Ariel Sharon addressed a packed auditorium of Diaspora Jews who flew in for the GA at Binyanei HaUmah (Jerusalem's Convention Center), supporters of Jonathan Pollard strongly interrupted him twice - demanding that he make a sincere effort to free Pollard. They were trying to send a loud message to U.S. Jewry and the Israeli government to take action for Pollard's release. Just days ago a U.S. District Court rejected Pollards request for re-sentencing or, for that matter, a fair hearing with the heretofore secret Weinberger memorandum unwrapped from its 19 years of secrecy.

At least 15 activist demonstrators - many of whom are themselves immigrants from America - chanted: "Bring Pollard Home Now!" The calls brought the Sharon's speech to a halt and the giant video screen image of Sharon was changed to one of the activists holding Pollard placards and calling on the Jewish leaders to break their 18 year impotent silence.

For their protest, security personnel beat them, applied choke-hold (known to kill) and they were also beaten by GA attendees who were embarrassed and, therefore, angry at this demand.

It was reported that the Director General of the GA, Doron Krakow expressed his disappointment that this protest would disrupt their evening of solidarity and undermine the spirit of the GA. How sad that, after 18 years of unjust imprisonment, the issue of Jonathan Pollard spoiled their lovely evening.

You should be glad to know that the expelled protesters were warmly greeted by the 2,000 people who participated in a Pollard rally outside the Binyanei HaUmah Convention Center who were holding a rally after a full day of events on Jonathan's behalf. Rabbi Shlomo Aviner told them that those who are not concerned with freeing Pollard do not know the meaning of being Jewish. One of the protesters, Avi Hyman, lamented the treatment they had received but vowed not to be deterred. "We received an overwhelmingly negative response from those claiming to represent North American Jewry but, we know that many Jews indeed heard our cry. We would gladly undergo much more of such atrocious treatment in order to bring the day when our brother Jonathan is freed from prison even a little bit closer." The day began with a rabbinical gathering in Yeshivat HaKotel, followed by a massive rally prayer service at the Western Wall and a march to Binyanei Ha'Umah.

Well, there you have it. Jews generally, except for the courageous few, rarely protest mistreatment for other Jews least they themselves become targets for anti-Semitism. Regrettably, these are reminiscent of those same type of perfidious American Jews during WWII who refused to speak out about the butchery taking place across Europe, lest they themselves become the target of the Nazis? anti-Semitism. Granted, there were more than a handful of anti-Semites in the Roosevelt Administration but, the shame of "Shut Up Jews!" is indelibly imprinted on our history.

Jews, except for some, are not known for their courage in facing anti-Semitism - even when it comes from the non-Jewish Jews of the Israeli governments. We cannot easily blame Jews who, over the centuries, have been beaten into pathetic submission and can only pretend courage but are, in fact, frightened witless. Most of the GA attendees are more to be pitied than to be angry with. They literally cannot help themselves, let alone other Jews.

Jonathan Pollard is merely one small, though significant, symbol of the Jewish establishment's unwillingness to face the extra-ordinarily unfair treatment of this one Jew.

They will go to bat in a heartbeat to defend blacks, Muslims or anyone not Jewish. For Jews who are wronged, they make faint whining sounds and tell everyone that they are using "quiet diplomacy" when, in fact, they do nothing. Quiet Diplomacy for the Jewish establishment equates to sniveling, whining and begging to be heard - but not too loudly.

They will proudly march for other causes, even go to court for them, speaking boldly but, only if the victim is not a Jew. "Quiet Diplomacy" didn't work for freeing the Soviet Jews to emigrate to Israel. It was only the loud, continual and tough protests that finally achieved a revolution that freed one million Soviet Jews. Ask Natan Sharansky, Ida Nudel and the other former jailed Soviet refuseniks who had the personal courage to defy the cruel anti-Semitic Soviets and, except for a few others, had to go it alone.

The protest at the GA was right, proper and necessary - given that Jonathan Pollard is now entering his 19th year of imprisonment. While most all other agents, even those from hostile foreign governments are released after a few years or no imprisonment, Pollard was given life in prison by Judge Aubrey Robinson, well known as the CIA Judge.

Many Arabs were caught stealing super-secrets, like the Egyptian who stole the missile nose cone re-entry material called carbon-carbon but he was released in days by orders from the U.S. State Department.

It was right and proper to address Prime Minister Sharon at the largest gathering of Diaspora Jews in Jerusalem on this matter since he was part of the groups who received Pollard's vital intelligence regarding Iraq's poison gas and chemical facilities which was purposely withheld by the prior Bush Administration, which included former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Admiral Bobby Ray Inman. But, never mind them because they all had deep vested financial and political interests with Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria and other Islamic/Arabic dictatorships - most of whom were rich oil producing countries. Never mind them, because they, like other anti-Semites were incurable in their hatred of Jews.

What is shameful was the subsequent cowardly behavior of those who call themselves the Jewish leadership. In America, they were terrified that they would be blamed for wanting Israel to survive and thus they felt targeted with the accusation of "dual loyalty."

In Israel, those receiving this heretofore hidden intelligence were equally terrified that, because they tasked Pollard to find out more, they would become "Persona Non Grata" in the Washington arena. So they didn't want Pollard out of prison for their own reasons - based on personal fear. Let them say it isn't so.

In America, those who linked their financial future to rogue Arab nations also didn't want Pollard released lest he blow their cover and they, like Richard Nixon's men, would end up in Federal Prison.

I am less concerned with the political crooks of Washington and can only hope Congress will one day find their shrunken backbone and put these treasonous so-called Americans in prison for perjury and betraying their best ally. We are seeing the results of their perfidy as American casualties creep up toward the number of 500 dead. This from Arabs who were pals of those traitorous Americans who also put Jonathan Pollard in prison for exposing their treason.

I am more concerned with the self-anointed Jewish establishment who may never have started life with an operative backbone of courage. When it comes to representing Jews, they are limited to chicken dinners, bland speeches and claims that they are doing their best for the Jews. To be fair, they do a pretty good job in raising money for Jewish charities but, when it comes to defending Jews subject to hard anti-Semitism, they are too weak. The activists who have any real credibility are the ones who shout out that "The Emperor is a liar and looks lousy naked!" They are , however, an embarrassment to the "Sha-Sha-nikim" Jews of the GA and the vaunted UJC Jewish leadership. Too bad they have no natural pride in their activists and pioneers.

There simply is nothing more to say about self-proclaimed establishment Jews except - don't count on them when the going gets tough! They usually get going - the other way.

As the Europeans once again ramp up their anti-Semitism, don't look to the GA or the UJC Jewish establishment to step out smartly in protecting the Jews. If they cannot bring themselves to protect even one Jew, what can you expect of them when thousands are at risk?

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 18, 2003.

This article was written by Philip Carmel and appeared on the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) Global News Service, November 16, 2003.

An Islamic fundamentalist accused of anti-Semitism and suspected of links with Al-Qaida is the new star of Europe's anti-globalization movement.

Swiss Muslim theologian Tariq Ramadan stole the show at last week's European Social Forum in Paris, a three-day event that attracted more than 50,000 anti-globalization activists from across the continent.

Ramadan, who teaches Islam at the universities of Geneva and Fribourg, appeared as the principal attraction at two events and was the only participant granted a personal news conference.

Ramadan's presence at the forum was controversial since he has been widely criticized for penning an allegedly anti-Semitic text attacking French Jewish intellectuals.

Ramadan wrote last month that a list of French intellectuals "who have always been considered as universalist thinkers" are "increasingly affected by a community-based sectarianism which tends to relativize the defense of universal principles of equality and justice."

The article went on to describe how the "political positioning" of "French Jewish intellectuals" was determined by their personal status as "Jews, nationalists and defenders of Israel."

This, Ramadan claimed, had caused Andre Glucksman, Bernard-Henri Levy and Alain Finkielkraut to support the U.S.-led military operation in Iraq. Levy had decided to write his recent book on the assassination of American Jewish journalist Daniel Pearl as a way to support Israel's pro-India policy and attack a Muslim state, Pakistan, Ramadan also wrote.

In fact, Levy also wrote a number of articles opposing the war. Both he and Finkielkraut have publicly criticized the policies of Israel's current government and have endorsed the "Geneva accord," an unofficial peace plan drafted by Israeli opposition figures and Palestinians close to the Palestinian Authority leadership.

Moreover, another of those accused by Ramadan as placing his Jewish ethnic background before his universalist principles - the author of "The New Judeophobia," Pierre-Andre Taguieff - is not even Jewish.

A number of leading French newspapers refused to print Ramadan's article, but the European Social Union printed it on its Web site and strongly resisted demands that Ramadan be excluded from the Social Forum.

Those targeted by the article were not forgiving. Glucksman said he was "less surprised that Tariq Ramadan is anti-Semitic than by the fact he has no trouble in admitting it."

Levy went further, writing in his regular column in the weekly magazine Le Point that Ramadan had "resurrected the good old theme of the Jewish plot."

The French Union of Jewish Students filed suit against Ramadan for racial incitement, taking up the suggestion of the forum's principal organizer, Pierre Khalifa, that if they thought Ramadan was anti-Semitic then they should sue him.

In a statement, the Jewish student union's president, Yonathan Arfi, said, "there is no such thing as good or bad anti-Semitism. Tariq Ramadan is an anti-Semite and should be judged as such."

Ramadan's polemic also had the effect of splitting France's opposition Socialist Party from the rest of the French left, with leading party figures calling on the forum to exclude Ramadan.

One of the strongest attacks on Ramadan came from three leaders on the left wing of the Socialist Party, who long have called for the party to build closer links to the anti-globalization movement. By specifically pointing out Jewish intellectuals, Ramadan had joined "the classic tradition of the far-right," the three wrote in Le Nouvel Observateur. "Fascists think and talk like that."

However, the rest of the French left was considerably more accommodating to Ramadan, with the Greens claiming that the socialists were using the controversy over Ramadan to destroy support for the Social Forum.

Whatever the criticism of Ramadan, the publicity surrounding the article meant that he became the star attraction at the Social Forum.

By the second day of the forum, crowds had to be turned away when Ramadan took part in a debate entitled "Religion, Social Struggle and Anti-Globalization."

The situation was similar the following day, with Ramadan again drawing a massive crowd for a debate on "Racism, Xenophobia and Anti-Semitism."

The sole Jewish presence among the 1,500 European organizations supporting the event was the anti-Zionist group known as European Jews for Peace.

However, the Jewish group was not alone in promoting a pro-Palestinian agenda: Anti-Israel banners were clearly in evidence at a march in central Paris marking the end of the forum.

Many audience members came from Ramadan's traditional circles of support - young French Muslims in the suburbs of France's large cities, where the theologian is considered a hero.

Moreover, the ante had been raised still further by an investigative report in a Parisian daily that claimed that Ramadan had long maintained links with leading Al-Qaida figures.

According to Le Parisien, a court in Washington state investigating claims by families of Sept. 11 victims has evidence that Ramadan's address in Geneva appears on documents linked to the Al-Taqwa bank, which is on a State Department list of organizations accused of supporting Islamic terrorist groups.

The paper also cited U.S. intelligence reports that Ramadan and his brother organized a meeting in a Geneva hotel in 1991 with one of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants, Ayman Al-Zawahiri.

Ramadan denied the Al-Qaida links and the claims of anti-Semitism.

At the Social Forum last Friday, Ramadan said there was nothing anti-Semitic in his article, and thanked the forum for refusing "to bend, in spite of the witch hunt" against him.

Among those backing Ramadan was another hero of European anti-globalization activists, the former leader of France's peasant farmers, Jose Bove, who has compared Palestinians to Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto.

Jewish leaders suggested that Ramadan's dialogue was dangerous in the current climate. Local Jewish Community Council head Sammy Ghozlan warned that politicians and associations that made Palestinian solidarity their standard could push wilder elements into attacking Jews.

As if to reinforce Ghozlan's warning, a Jewish school was burned down Saturday night in an apparent arson attack, not far from where the forum was taking place

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, November 18, 2003.

Yossi Beilin, he of the failed Oslo Accords, is at it again, promoting - at the behest of his masters, the European Union - another horror, the Geneva Agreement, which gives away Biblical Israel and the Temple Mount to the Arabs. Like the Oslo Accords, The Geneva Agreement is intended to weaken Israel and make it more vulnerable to Arab attack. The reckless behavior of the Left was also shown by Member of the Knesset (MK) Yossi Sarid of the far-Left Meretz Party. Read this write-up from Arutz-Sheva (http://www.israelnationalnews.com).

Likud MK Yuval Shteinitz, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, has taken the unprecedented step of requesting that MK Yossi Sarid (Meretz) be removed from the committee. The request follows what Shteinitz called "attempted blackmail" by Sarid in the form of a threat to leak classified information.

During a committee meeting two weeks ago, Sarid asked Defense Minister Mofaz to reveal information pertaining to weapons used in a recent counter-terrorism strike in Gaza. Mofaz said that the information was classified, prompting Sarid to threaten that if Mofaz did not reveal the information, he himself would publicize it. Shteinitz, shocked at Sarid's behavior, said at the time that he would consider his response. He later turned to Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin and asked him to remove Sarid from the committee. It has been reported that Rivlin is expected to sharply rebuke Sarid, while Mofaz will provide the controversial information in a confidential manner.

Both Shteinitz and Sarid, neither of whom is generally shy in public, refused to speak to the media about the matter.

Shteinitz did speak about another topic this morning, telling Israel Radio that Egypt's mediation efforts are essentially their way of acting to preserve the Palestinian terror infrastructure. The Likud MK noted that instead of encouraging the PA to disarm the terrorists and disband their organizations, Egypt is once again trying to broker an arrangement to keep intact groups such as Hamas. In contrast with Jordan, Shteinitz noted, Egypt continues to allow a continuous flow of terrorists and weapons across its border into Israel.

This weekend, representatives of the PA's terrorist organizations will be meeting in Cairo to discuss a "ceasefire" with Israel. Shteinitz warned that Israel has paid a dear price in the past for temporary quiet with the Palestinians under "ceasefire" arrangements that were exploited by the Palestinians to expand and improve their assault capabilities. Repeating this mistake, he said, would ultimately bring a nightmare to Israel when the fighting resumes.

Homes throughout Israel have begun receiving their private copies of the Geneva agreement - that controversial document formulated by Yossi Beilin and comrades that calls for a near-complete Israeli retreat from all of Yesha, the Old City, and the Temple Mount. Private donors, including European Union sources, are funding a three-million-shekel campaign to mail the 70-page booklet to every home in Israel. MK Yuri Stern, National Union party Knesset whip, has asked the Non-Profit Associations Registrar to investigate the source of funding for the Geneva agreement.

Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman (National Union) said today that the agreement is "reminiscent of the Munich Pact [a document signed in 1938 by Hitler, Chamberlain, and Mussolini, stipulating the ceding and evacuation of the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Germany within 12 days] and the Communist Manifesto..."

"What Israel needs now is not a hudna [temporary ceasefire], in which the terrorists get some time off to rebuild their murderous capacities, but rather to defeat terrorism. It must be totally crushed from every standpoint, and only then will we be able to build a stable situation. I'm not only talking about Arafat, but also Abu Ala and Yassin and all the rest." He clarified that Abu Ala need not be killed, "because we don't have any proof that he himself actually has blood on his hands - but we do have very much proof that he was very involved for many years in funding terror attacks... We must liquidate the terrorist infrastructure, which also includes the incitement in schools, etc."

The right-wing has also been working on a diplomatic plan of its own. The guiding principles of a plan being formulated by the Yesha Council (Council for the Jewish Communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza) are that no Palestinian state will be established, but the Arab-populated areas will be autonomous, and no Jewish community will be dismantled or removed. Bentzy Lieberman, head of the Yesha Council, told Arutz-7 that at present, the only two plans on the public agenda are the Road Map and the Geneva agreement, "both of which are worse than Oslo. Those who criticize us in this area are right; the nationalist camp must present its own plan - and the stronger and quicker, the better."

Tourism Minister Benny Elon (National Union) has proposed a plan, entitled The Right Road to Peace, which can be seen at http://www.therightroadtopeace.com. the plan calls for the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority, and involves the recognition of Jordan as the Palestinian state.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 18, 2003.

I would like to most strongly suggest that we all STOP refering to the cult of leftism as if it were some sort of political ideology. I insist that from now on we all should refer to it as leftist fundamentalism. After all, it is a theology and not a political ideology. So to get you into the swing of things, here we have the Canon of Basic Tenets of Leftist Fundamentalism.

If you truly wish to convert to being a PC progressive, here is a list of the most important principles of PC theology. Try to remember them all so that you can be caring and open-hearted faster than you can say "race, gender, class" (the PC Trinity):

1. Affirmative action is not about lowering standards.

2. Affirmative action never has anything to do with quotas.

3. The transformation of Cuba from Latin America`s wealthiest country into its poorest does not mean that socialism does not work.

4. The transformation of Russia from the world`s largest food exporter before communism to the world`s largest food importer during communism does not show that socialism does not work.

5. Comparing East Germany (before unification) with West Germany, or Red China with Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, or North Korea with South Korea, one cannot conclude that capitalism works and socialism does not.

6. The fact that Marx was wrong about every empirically-testable hypothesis does not mean that Marxism is wrong.

7. The fact that Marxism caused a conservatively-estimated 100 million deaths in the 20th century does not mean that Marxism is bad or a failure.

8. Marxists care about people.

9. Conservatives hate all people and small animals.

10. The fact that socialized medicine does not work anywhere does not mean that it would not work in America.

11. The fact that the green lobby was screaming just a few years back about global cooling (and sometimes still does) is no reason why its warnings about global warming should be regarded with skepticism.

12. The fact that black Americans live better on average than white people in Europe or Japanese people in Japan does not disprove the charge that black Americans are the most oppressed and impoverished people in the world.

13. If one country is rich and another poor, it must be because the rich one stole all the wealth away from the poor one.

14. Women are just as capable of combat roles as men.

15. Most Arabs are interested in peace.

16. Homosexuality is genetically determined. 10% of humans are gay.

17. Native Americans and Eskimos have always spent their days worrying about the environment.

18. National Public Radio is objective.

19. The New York Times is not liberal

20. All Christians are racists.

21. All Jews are racists.

22. Moslems can never be racists.

23. Blacks can never be racists.

24. The bombing of Hiroshima did not save any lives and was done because Americans are racists.

25. Mowing your lawn and using insecticides is murder; partial-birth abortion is not.

26. Israeli settlements are the cause of the Middle East conflict.

27. The Ozone hole was caused by deodorants.

28. Recycling saves resources.

29. Poverty is caused by low self-esteem.

30. Poor school performance is caused by low self-esteem.

31. The fact that Asian Americans make more money and are better educated thanAmerican whites does not disprove the claim that America is a racist country in which only whites can succeed.

32. Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, and their friends are thinkers and idealists.

33. Michael Lerner is a rabbi.

34. If one tribe in Africa oppresses another tribe, it is all the fault of white people.

35. The United States does not need any army at all, other than as a laboratory for social engineering involving women and gays.

36. Liberalism is based on compassion and caring.

37. Capital punishment does not deter crime.

38. If there are proportionately more blacks in prison than whites, it is because the courts and police are racist.

39. The CIA is run by far-Right fanatics.

40. Organic produce is good for you.

41. Throw-away diapers cause the environment to be destroyed.

42. Hollywood actors are more sensitive and caring than the rest of us.

43. Investments by multinational corporations are bad for the economies of developing countries.

44. Labor unions are good for the economy.

45. Workers in poor countries would be better off if all the overseas corporations were kicked out.

46. Slavery was always practiced exclusively by white people. Slaves thoughout history were always non-white.

47. Raising the minimum wage does not increase unemployment.

48. Rent controls do not create housing shortages.

49. Mentally ill people are better off on the streets than in mental institutions.

50. The media are not dominated by leftists.

51. Marching against AIDS helps prevent AIDS.

52. Palestinians are oppressed.

53. Israel can by peace by making concessions to the Arabs.

54. Anti-globalization protesters care about the poor have non-negative IQs.

55. Terrorism is caused by suffering.

56. Terrorism is caused by poverty.

57. Suicide bombers have legitimate grievances.

58. There is no military solution to the problems of terrorism.

59. Terrorism has underlying social causes.

60. Leftism is an ideology rather than a theology or a personality disorder.

So you see, practicing the theology of political correctness is easy - just repeat three or four of the above assertions every day before breakfast and you too will soon be a caring, compassionate, progressive humane person!

A SHANDA: Will Jerusalem Move Against the Jews of Yesha?
Posted by Isralert, November 17, 2003.

Former-General Security Services (Shin Bet) chief Avraham Shalom told Yediot Ahronot Friday how Israel could solve the problem [of the Zionist communities in the territories that the Government plans to uproot.] "Take 15 of them, put them in administrative detention, and see how the rest of them don't do a thing."

If that didn't work, Shalom suggested the threat of death was an acceptable alternative. "Are they ready to be killed? The answer is absolutely not." This article was written by the Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff. It's entitled, "Israel set to move against Jewish settlements?"

Jerusalem (jnewswire.com) - Amidst leftist demands and US pressure that Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza be done away with, Jerusalem this week appeared set to signal the beginning of the end of Israel's settlement enterprise.

According to one senior minister, Israel should then turn to PA-sanctioned Arab militias to ensure so-called "illegal" settlements removed in the future are not reestablished.

Jewish resettlement of Israel's biblical heartland in Judea and Samaria began under the auspices of the left-wing Labor government, shortly after the return of those lands to Jewish rule in the 1967 Six Day War.

Bracing for pressure.  Jerusalem last week began bracing for a resumption of US pressure that it deal with an estimated 100 "illegal" outposts, after the Bush administration indicated its intention to bolster the Arafat-controlled government of Ahmed Qurei.

Washington reportedly sent strong messages to Israel, citing the Sharon government's Road Map promise to remove the outposts, and arguing that such a move would send a strong signal of Israel's willingness to make peace to the PA.

Observers countered that the message sent would rather be one of weakness and surrender. Israel had originally stopped dismantling outposts during the summer after the PA openly and admittedly failed to meet its parallel Road Map obligation to "disarm and dismantle" the terrorist infrastructure.

Preparing to cave in.  Nevertheless, Israeli officials appeared ready to cave in to the pressure when Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom this month bundled the removal of settler outposts together with a package of gestures he believed Israel should make towards the Palestinians.

His assessment was followed by a Foreign Ministry draft document on Israel's image in the world, which found that the Jewish state is perceived as a provocative, unreliable country whose agenda is controlled by a handful of settlers, Army Radio reported last Wednesday.

The document further inflamed leftist sentiment towards the national religious sector of Israel society - to which the vast majority of the 250,000 settlers belong.

Amid increasing pressure from center-left ministers in his own government, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said at Sunday's cabinet session that he would soon convene an official discussion on what to do about the settlements.

Detain or kill them.  The leaders of Israel's settler community have on several occasions indicated that while they would not operate outside the bounds of the law, they would not go quietly from their homes.

In response to the desire to defend their homes, former-General Security Services (Shin Bet) chief Avraham Shalom told Yediot Ahronot Friday Israel could "solve the problem [by treating the settlers] as if they were Arabs. Take 15 of them, put them in administrative detention, and see how the rest of them don't do a thing."

If that didn't work, Shalom suggested the threat of death was an acceptable alternative.

"Are they ready to be killed? The answer is absolutely not."

And in a particularly shocking development, Interior Minister Avraham Poraz (Shinui) was quoted by Army Radio Monday as saying that after Israel had forcibly evacuated the settlements, it should turn to PA-sanctioned Arab militias to prevent Jews from returning to the sites.

Jewish settlers would not attempt to rebuild their demolished homes for fear of the armed Arabs, Poraz suggested.

Why the animosity?  While the growing crusade against Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza suggests that the settlers are a rogue sector of Israeli society, the settlement enterprise was actually started by the ruling left-wing Labor Party in the post Six Day War period, with the realization that Israel needed to control those lands for security purposes.

Planting new Jewish communities where the Jews of Israel had thrived as a nation thousands of years earlier was considered both a national duty and security necessity.

You can subscribe to Isralerts by emailing Isralert@aol.com

Jerusalem Newswire is the only independent Jerusalem-based, Christian-operated news service providing daily coverage and commentary on events in and relating to Israel.

Posted by Herby Rawley, November 17, 2003.

Unfortunately most Jews and Jewish sympathizers talk about policy as in "must put a stop to terrorism" or "the arabs must be made to see" but provide no method. We all know what the terrorists "must do." We all know "the PLO must control suicide bombers" but the Jews and their sympathizers who write these things have never for the most part slapped anyone with a baseball bat.

It's true that I attended the Crown Heights Yeshiva 1940-47. In '52 I turned down the halls of ivy to run night clubs for 'the boys.' I was present at a shul during the David Dinkins pogrom when my bretheren turned down a suitcase full of pistols with which to resist assaults on Jews with talmudic thumb waving even though they all drive cars made from 'oven doors' reclaimed from Belsen etc.

The method? Cheap and efficient. 25 kgs. of explosive $50, ash can $10, cell phone operated fuse mechanism $25, anti-tamper device and explanatory poster $15. Total $100. Easy to make 1000 of these placed on every street corner in territory controlled by the PLO. They only go off (at random) if something blows up or is attacked in Israel. 20 Israeli tanks and 10 moving van type trucks can emplace them in one day and replace those that explode.

I believe that every Palestinian agrees with and wants to aid and support the suicide bombers. But they don't all want to be one. And that in the face of this action, the citizenry will control the bombing. Targeting specific agents by israel is useless.

Whaddya think?

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 17, 2003.

One of the most persistent sellers of second-hand lemons is Thomas Friedman. He keeps casting in a new light the notion of a one-sided Israeli withdrawal in favor of the Arabs. In his latest scheme, he quotes an "expert," Stephen P. Cohen (whom I consider more as a notorious anti-Zionist, like Friedman).

For the Saudi ruling family to survive (as if that were desirable), the royals must raise their people's standard of living and settle the Palestine question. That question requires "a dignified solution," "which returns the mosques of Jerusalem (where they preach undignified Jew-hate) to Muslim control." A by-product would be to reduce European antisemitism, "abetted by the real images of Israeli settlers seizing Palestinian land and uprooting their olive groves." The solution would follow the Clinton plan (NY Times, 11/13).

Whom does Friedman think controls the mosques, now? On the Mount, the Arabs destroy Jewish artifacts. The problem is to return the Mount to Jewish control.

If the European media were fair, it would be rousing the people with pictures of Arabs seizing Jewish land and destroying Jewish people and cafes. It would explain that the Jews do not seize Arab land and are not uprooting Arab groves except when the Arabs exploit them for ambushes. European antisemitism is stimulated by Arab slander. What does Friedman suggest for stopping that?

Friedman's big pretense is that the Arab-Israel conflict is over the size of Israel. Actually, It is over the existence of Israel (and of any non-Muslim sovereignty). How can the Saudi leaders of jihad be expected to make peace with Israel?

As for Friedman and the Saudis, let him study his own newspaper's editorial of 11/11. It attributes much of the Saudi problem to the royals' lavishing wealth upon themselves, the people's over-populating, and repression of dissent. "Misspending" isn't sufficiently defined. He should have mentioned the fortune spent on armaments. Why didn't he? Afraid of antagonizing the Saudis?

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 17, 2003.

Just in case there are still any Jews out there who are still living in the pipe dream, fantasy world of "Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance," think again. Islam is and always has been an active, bitter enemy of the Jews. Islam is the religion of Yishmael, the savage beast that looks like a human. As such, his descendants have created a savage and beastly cult of death that is fixated on us.

In a world of over 6 billion people, the Arab-Nazi alliance is obsessed with the murder of a few million Jews. They teach that only after the Jews are obliterated can the great purification of the world begin. It is we, the Jews, that prevent this by our steadfastness to the One True G-D and the Torah He gave us.

What is this purification they seek? It is the purity of Amalek which is the total destruction of the world. The culmination of Islam, like the Nazi cult, sees the end of days as a type of Gotterdammerung, Ragnarok or what have you. The total destruction of everything. This is what the Torah call Tohu Vevohu; total chaos. That is why the Torah commands us to obliterate Amalek from the world. Amalek in all his manifestations is dedicated to destroy. This articles is from Arutz Sheva (http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=52839).

Terrorism expert Dr. Sha'ul Shai of the Interdisciplinary Institute in Herzliya says it's likely that Al-Qaeda is behind the attacks: "It first allows some smaller or unknown organization to take credit for the attack, and then the truth begins to come out, via the internet and the like, within a few days. This gains them a few days for its operatives to escape, and also an increase in confusion and uncertainty."

Dr. Shai says that Jews and Judaism are prime targets of Al-Qaeda: "Al-Qaeda, ever since its beginning, has always targeted Judaism. It declared a worldwide jihad against the Crusader-Jewish covenant. This began in 1999 in France, then Jerba and Morocco, and now Istanbul."

Less than two hours after yesterday's murderous attack in Turkey, a religious Jewish school north of Paris was torched, causing heavy damage. The destroyed building housed the Merkaz HaTorah elementary and high school for boys.

Over 200 antisemitic attacks, physical and otherwise, have been registered around the world since the beginning of 2003, including 80 in France. Murderous antisemitic attacks around the world over the past several years include:

Morocco - 2 killed, Sept. 2003
Morocco - 40 killed in a series of attacks against Jewish targets in Casablanca, May 2003
Kenya - 18 people, including three Israelis, killed in a car bomb attack in the Paradise Hotel, Nov. 2002
California - two Israelis shot to death at El Al ticket counter in Los Angeles, July 4, 2002
Tunis - 17 people in a truck bomb explosion outside synagogue, April 2002
Buenos Aires, Argentina - 29 killed by car bomb outside Israeli Embassy, July 1994
Buenos Aires, Argentina - 86 killed by car bomb outside Jewish Center, March 1992

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 16, 2003.

[These are excerpts from Parts 1 and 2 of Winston's essay, "Shaming the Nation" and "America, the Beautiful." - Ed.]

Esther Pollard has described the non-standard treatment Jonathan Pollard received in jail during the two weeks he waited for his latest court proceddings. "There were special orders to govern every aspect of his daily life, calculated to maximize the discomfort, the isolation and the humiliation." He wasn't allowed to change clothes the whole time; he was allowed no books, magazines, television, paper or pencil. He was deprived of all religious material. He could make no calls, even to his lawyers. He was deprived of sensory input; he was allowed no exercise. He was told these orders came from "higher up" for "reasons of national security."

For this kind of treatment, one can be assured that the betrayal of Israel, in concert with the conspiracies by the Arabs and Europeans which Pollard stumbled across, was so barbarically atrocious and involved so many high-ranking politicians, State Department and Intelligence Agency bureaucrats that the cover-up will only be considered 'safe' when Pollard is dead.

The information accumulated by American Intelligence well before 1985 on the development of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction), including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) by Iraq, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia was withheld from Israel - despite MOUs (Memoranda of Understanding) signed by all the preceding American Presidents to insure Israel's defense against such WMD.

In addition, according to documents released by Saddam Hussein to Hans Blix, Saddam admitted receiving pre-cursor chemicals, technology and other assistance from corporations in America, Germany, France and other countries - all illegal under the U.N. arms embargoes. These companies could not and would not put themselves in such jeopardy without the approval of their various governments. Therefore, these are called "Black Ops (Operations)".

Jonathan Pollard unknowingly exposed an insidious operation of supplying Arab countries with such arms, well beyond merely transferring illegal weapons, materials and technology to rogue Arab nations. Clearly the ultimate goal targeted Israel for elimination as an impediment to better relations with the Arab oil nations.

When Jonathan Pollard blew the cover of America's secret deals to supply Iraq with the materials to make WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical), he had to be swept first into an insane asylum for the criminally insane (to establish that he was crazy), then into super isolation lest what he testified to en camera (secret hearings) become known to the public. Oh, everyone else knew. The FBI knew; the CIA knew; the President and his men knew. Pollard did the unthinkable. He spilled the beans to the Israelis that their self-sworn enemies, the Iraqis were being armed with poison gas, biological substances - all with the connivance of the most powerful people in Washington.

Suddenly, Saudi Arabia's Prince Bandar was exposed as having secret connections to President Bush (formerly Director of the CIA, remember?) and Defense Secretary Weinberger. How is it all those Arab nations who were supported by a corrupt Presidential Administration are now fully surfaced as America's long term enemies, axis of Evil, Terrorist States who fund, train, direct and harbor Terrorists? This includes especially Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, and Libya.

It is understandable that the continued presence of Jonathan Pollard who hold this information in his head would jeopardize the freedom of those in government who were conducting illegal Black Ops, not only against a U.N. mandate but, also against a member nation, Israel - the only democracy in the Middle East.

As in Iran-Contra, what lengths would you go to in covering up your involvement in assisting rogue Arab countries obtain WMD and then try to silence the one man who stumbled onto your illegal Operations' As John Loftus states in his book: "The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People: 1920-1992," Pollard exposed the first Arms-for-Hostages shipment fully one year before the Iran-Contra scandal broke. He didn't know that's what it was but he alerted Israel to a shipment of illegal arms he thought were going to the PLO. How many government officials involved in that would still fear being exposed after almost 20 years? Many. Top guys.

It seems clear that these government officials working together to keep Pollard in prison (but not able to kill him off in one shot) are killing him inch by inch, day by day. These people have demonstrated that the American Courts are too easily corrupted (or at least misled) and NOT the free, fair judicial institutions we Americans expect them to be. Given the circumstances, I do not see much difference between the court system under the Former Soviet Union - who committed political prisoners to insane asylums for 'special' treatment, or solitary confinement or shipped those whom they feared off to the Gulag in the frozen wastelands of Siberia. Some may forget that it was Judge Aubrey Robinson who requested the Weinberger letter, which is still kept "secret" from Jonathan's lawyers.

After Pollard was accused of being responsible for the murders of 41 U.S. agents in the Former Soviet Union, lo and behold, they actually caught Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen who were proven to be the CIA moles who sold the American agents' names to the Soviets - who then executed these agents. Nevertheless, having blundered in accusing Pollard, they could not stand up like honest men, admit their mistakes and withdraw their charges against Pollard - because they would look so stupid - just as they do now for having failed to detect and prevent 9/11.

America is an outstanding democracy but, we do have our political crooks who use our Intelligence Agencies and Courts to advance their personal wealth and power while working with dictators or eliminating those who get in their way.

They shame the nation and, hopefully, some powerful Congressional Committee or gutsy Woodward and Bernstein investigative journalists will pull up the sheet that covers them. Generally, the last refuge of a scoundrel is to wrap themselves in the American flag.

Posted by Richard A. Shulman, November 17, 2003.

Deploring the growth of terrorism in S. Arabia, the New York Times suggests that police work alone could not squelch it. A partial solution would be democracy and an end to royal corruption that impoverishes the masses. The clincher would be to stop subsidizing schools that indoctrinate "children in other Muslim lands and sometimes recruit them to join armed bands..." (11/11, Ed..)

There is no connection between non-democracy and poverty and terrorism. There is one between Islam and prosperity and terrorism. The Saudis do not just indoctrinate "children in other Muslim lands." It escapes "Times notice that many of these terrorists are Saudis! They indoctrinate their own children and ours. Yes, Islamist schools operate in Europe and even in the US! If Times journalists weren't appeasement-minded, ignorant, and biased, they would deplore the growth of Islamism in the West and demand that we close such schools. Where is the patriotism and practicality of the Times?

The editor should declare that the Saudis brought terrorism upon themselves. They deluded themselves that they could forever direct terrorism against others, and that S. Arabia is a rich prize and fails to live up to the radicalism it espouses.

Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, November 16, 2003.

ter-ror (n) 4: violence (as bomb throwing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands

ter-ror-ism (n): the systematic use if terror esp. as a use of coercion - ter ror-ist adj or n

I picked up the above definitions from the 1973 edition of Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (I received the now tattered volume as a gift when I turned 15 and I still use it). The world made more sense back then...

When Egypt and Syria (later joined by Jordan and Iraq) attacked Israel on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year, a good part of the world thought it was a despicable act. Today, blood and body parts litter our Shabbat, Rosh Hashanah and Passover tables, as well as our busses returning with worshippers from the Western Wall - and a good part of the international community is no longer sure if it's so bad. Some wonder if, perhaps, it isn't justified. And I wonder if the confusion is due to the media's reluctance to classify these acts as terror perpetrated by terrorists. Last week, in Truth or Consequences I reported that Foxnews.com linked their lead story of a terrorist bombing in Riyadh to an Associated Press listing of Recent Terrorist Attacks Around the World. The listing referred to 16 attacks in 13 countries from as far back as 1998, and Israel wasn't mentioned (nor was Russia, India or Chechnya)

I feel the issue warrants further exploration, as the media's response to Israel is most certainly linked to a disturbing pattern of unraveling current events.

Is it possible that in the media's attempts at non-bias and political correctness (i.e., avoiding the application of a uniform usage of the term terror), they may have inadvertently legitimized and encouraged terrorist groups' After all, everyone knows that terrorism is abominable, but that ain't necessarily the case for a popular uprising.

The media's avoidance of labeling these murderous groups as terrorists may have originally stemmed from their need to maintain good relations with these groups and their leaders in order to "get a story" in a fiercely competitive field. This poses a real moral dilemma for the press and can of course backfire on both a grand and personal scale. Daniel Pearl being a classic example.

But the media, especially news-wire services, must stop and think. The primary responsibility of an international news agency should be to disseminate accurate information and to provide clarity, rather than cloud the issues. In these precarious times, the media is obligated to reassess their goals and purposes. In today's world, the mere flash of a camera can destroy lives and bring the world to the brink. This is no exaggeration. The world is in crisis and no one understands this better than the journalists, photojournalists, and news agencies. So what gives?

There may be a bigger question bothering the perverse conscience of the press -one which drives their depraved sense of morality and fuels their habit for distorting the truth. Perhaps they feel that in certain cases of terrorism (a case perpetrated by the palestinians), the end justifies the means. Is it ever legitimate for a group to use terrorist tactics in order to achieve their religious, political, cultural or economic goals? That question is best left to theologians, philosophers, historians, professors, students and editorial commentators to grapple with- not international news services. But not to worry AP and Reuters, as a final and just decision on that perplexing matter will be rendered by none other than G-d Almighty Himself.

In the back of my mind there remains another immensely disturbing question... By acting as prosecutor, judge and jury, with regards to Israel, is the electronic media in some not so small way responsible for a resurgence of classical anti-semitism?

It occurred to me that in my quest to figure out what motivates the media, I may have given them too much credit. Could it be that there is something far more sinister behind all of this?

Last night I couldn't help myself, and so I snuck a peek at CNN.com to see how they covered the Turkish synagogue bombings. Sure enough the lead CNN.com homepage story was linked to a Reuters list entitled Worst Terror Attacks Since 9/11.

This time Russia, Chechnya and India made the list. But once again, Israel didn't merit a mention amongst 20 nations suffering from 13 highlighted incidents of terrorism since September 11th 2001. It should be noted that within hours, the Reuters list was removed from the CNN site. I believe this was due in part to the actions of some alert and concerned supporters of Israel.

FoxNews.com, CNN.com, the Associated Press, and Reuters News Agency are among the top sources of up-to-the-minute news in the world. People believe what they read, hear and see, and even if Israel's miserable public relations apparatus could mass produce and distribute cloned Netanyahu's, we wouldn't stand a chance against this out-of-control leviathan.

There should be an international outcry followed by rigorous efforts to correct this gross distortion of reality on the part of worldwide news services. If such an outcry isn't heard or if the protests go unheeded, then we can assume that there is indeed a deliberate and calculated bid to segregate the State of Israel from the world community. This is no conspiracy on the part of the international community - it's in your face anti-Semitism, the likes of which we haven't seen since WWII. It's not about occupation, territorial disputes or settlements. It never was.

This dramatic shift in the scales towards injustice isn't new - just painful and ever so clear. But I know which side I'll throw my weight on... "Yaacov remains alone," but he stands on the side of truth. That being the case, I appeal to all of my fellow Jews in the Diaspora to come home and stand with me.

The author lives on the Golan Heights with her husband and six children. She is a painter, writer and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com

THE REGION: Virtues and Problems
Posted by Barry Rubin, November 16, 2003.

Washington: In a major speech, President Bush has set a new direction for U.S. foreign policy: the promotion of democracy, especially in the Middle East.

This is a worthy theme. But is it a workable one?

Take Iraq, for example. Things are not going well there and are unlikely to get any better. The problem is not whether the United States can show its good intentions or whether more Iraqis get electricity. Rather, it is whether the United States can smash the insurgency and provide real security on a daily basis.

There are monumental difficulties here. The one most often cited - casualties wearing down American resolve - is a minor issue. If Bush loses the 2004 presidential election his replacement may opt for a quick withdrawal. Otherwise, if the United States wants to stay in Iraq it can certainly do so.

Yet why should Iraqis view its continued presence as benefiting them? They face violent threats to their daily existence, which also sabotge prospects for higher living standards or democracy. At the same time, continued American presence offends nationalistic and Muslim sensibilities, allowing opposition movements to mobilize more support.

Nor is that all. What about all the ambitious individuals, interest groups and movements that want to be running the country? The longer the United States keeps them from getting their hands on power and loot the more likely they will consider America their enemy.

There are two tremendous ironies here which are unlikely to get recognition in the Arab world.

First, radical forces want to keep an occupation going so they can inflame the masses to support them. Israel wants a peace agreement which would rid it of ruling Palestinians if that brought real security and an end to violence and conflict. The United States wants to pull out of Iraq leaving behind a stable and moderate country. Yet terrorists have the power to stop this process by their disruptions, then blame the continued situation on their intended victims.

Second, America's problem is not that it is too brutal and imperialistic but that it is too nice. It is not going to undertake the degree of violence necessary to wipe out the terrorists. The Syrian, Iranian, or old Iraqi security forces would easily find such insurgents by torturing and murdering people indiscriminately until they were eager to turn in their grandmothers.

Moreover, a realpolitik approach would let the United States find allies in Iraq - say a coalition of Kurdish and Shia factional leaders with sizeable bases of support - and agree to turn over the country to their rule in exchange for following policies it wanted.

By supporting democracy, though, the United States becomes trapped in the paradox that everyone's friend is no one's friend. It can have no powerful allies because it will not prejudge the situation of who would win an election. To keep things fair, the United States alienates everyone who controls guns, followers, and powerful ideologies.

Both in Iraq and elsewhere, the new U.S. strategy amounts to going over the heads of the current leaders and appealing to the masses. In the long run, the masses may be willing to turn against their rulers and abandon Arab nationalism and Islamism. But in the shorter run, this seems unlikely. Instead, the rulers and intellectuals can be far more effective in mobilizing the masses against America.

They will tell the people that the fact that America wants to overturn their societies, governments and beliefs proves that it is imperialistic, anti-Arab, anti-Islam, pro-Zionist.

Bush asked: "Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism?" Well, they are as long as heavily armed populist regimes either win their support or intimidate them into silence. Remember that the United States had to invade Iraq to bring down that government. Why are other countries any different?

Bush showed this problem by his rather fanciful appeal to the dictatorships to lead the way to reform. "Many Middle Eastern governments," he said, "now understand that military dictatorship and theocratic rule are a straight, smooth highway to nowhere. But some governments still cling to the old habits of central control."

This isn't just a habit, it is the whole basis of the Arab state system. Those benefiting from this system like it just fine, especially the "straight, smooth" part. Moreover, the great fear of the masses is anarchy, a scenario that contemporary Iraq seems to embody.

Bush continues, "Instead of dwelling on past wrongs and blaming others, governments in the Middle East need to confront real problems, and serve the true interests of their nations." But dwelling on old problems and blaming others is precisely how they stay in power. They are not going to cooperate in dismantling themselves. They serve the interests of the regime, not the nation.

He states, "Governments across the Middle East and North Africa are beginning to see the need for change." Yet his examples are pitifully limited. In fact, such governments firmly believe they must block real change.

He denounces Palestinian leaders "who block and undermine democratic reform," suggests the Saudi government is gradually moving toward democracy, and urges "the great and proud nation of Egyptshould show the way toward democracy in the Middle East."

But these are the enemies of change who are firmly entrenched and know how to whip up popularity by denouncing Israel and the United States.

In short, Bush understands the region's real problems. The question is whether this strategy will end up fulfilling or tragically discrediting that vision.

Professor Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and Editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA).

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 15, 2003.

Sharon wants to release Arab terrorists while incarcerating Noam Federmann without a trial. And four former heads of SHABAK (Shin Bet) focus on confronting Jews in the Territories, but hope for a "diplomatic solution" with the Arabs. Is this just the usual behavior of bullies, who only picks on the weak? Or are they really keen on giving Biblical Israel away to the phony-baloney people who call themselves Palestinians? I like this Voice of Judea commentary on the Shabak meeting.

Wow! Scarey stuff, when the last four heads of Israel's Secret Police, known as the Shabak - GSS, call for Sharon to bring on another Altalena style affair to bring about a final solution for Jewish "settlement" in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Shocking is not the word! These guys were in control of state secrets and internal security for the state of Israel. They fully endorse arresting, without trial, under administrative detention, "settlers" for their "belief that the hills of Shechem and Hebron" are Jewish hills. These guys sound worse than KGB agents in the darkest days of the former Soviet Union.

They are clearly endorsing a confrontation, of a violent murderous Altalena style, if there is no peaceful way to destroy the "settlements" and expel the Jews. And the left speaks of incitement that led to violence and assassination of Yitzhak Rabin? These characters are openly speaking of arresting and killing their political rivals. Where is the outcry?

The message is clear. If they would truly believe that there would be serious resistance on the part of the "settlers" they would rethink their position to surrender the "settlements". As Shalom is quoted, "So I said: if they were Arabs, you would know how to solve the problem" They told me: yes. So I said: so let's solve the problem as if they were Arabs. Lock 15 of them in administrative detention, and see how the rest disappear. I said another thing: You say they're like the Hamas? Are they willing to die? The answer was unequivocally: no. So I am more optimistic. When we leave them there alone, they will come. You better believe it. They will come. They will come".

Every time the leaders of the "settlement" movement condemn the "extremist" hilltop youth, thinking that this will keep them within the national consensus and mellow opposition to the "settlements", in effect their soft image, truly endangers the future of the "settlements". They are frightened that if they appear to be too extreme the government will have an easier time tarnishing their image and tearing down "settlements". The reality is quite different. The only thing that could prevent the surrender of Yesha is the belief that 90 percent of Yesha would be prepared to die, sooner than leave their homes. The "settlement" leaders need to stand united, with one clear voice, opposed to any compromise and in full support of the hilltop youth. They must not let Altalenist hate mongers succeed in dividing and conquering Judea and Samaria on behalf of Arafat.

In the end, it may be true that the hilltop youth only represent 10 percent of the Jews in Judea and Samaria. However, let it be known that the majority of Jews throughout Israel support unlimited Jewish "settlement" on every hill in Israel. The leftist extremists who control the courts and who used to control the Shin Bet are a dieing minority. They could threaten their Altalenas and wage their private wars against their political rivals now. However, the masses in Israel will not support a civil war against the "settlers".

After reading the virulent hatred of former key security chiefs in Israel, it is perhaps no coincidence that Arutz Sheva, the popular "settler" mouthpiece was shut down now. Is the government preparing to make the "painful concessions" Sharon warned about recently? Is the government paving the way for a "confrontation" with the "settlers?" Are they planning to roundup dozens of "settlers" and hold them without trial? Are they trying to stifle legal and legitimate opposition to a new Altalena affair?

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 15, 2003.

This week, Yossi Beilin and his fellow travelers are planning to send petitions to support his Geneva Misunderstandings with the PLO to each and every household in Israel. Israelis will be asked to send back some sort of card or letter endorsing the appeasements and capitulations in the Beilin "plan." The mass mailings are no doubt being financed by the usual culprits who plow megabucks into the Israeli Far Left, such as the Eurotrash and the New Israel Fund. These are agencies who will pump large sums into any Israeli "initiative," no matter how picayune, if it serves to delegitimze and weaken Israel and make it easier to destroy Israel.

This morning there have been appeals circulated all over the Jewish internet, originating either from Prof. Ezra Sohar or from Naomi Ragen or both, calling on Israeli residents to deal with the mass mailings in the following way:


From: Professor Ezra Sohar sohar@inter.net.il

When you receive in your mail box Beilin/Burg's "Geneva Accords", or Ayallon/Nusseiba's "Understandings", PLEASE:

1. CLEAR your name and address;

2. MARK on the envelope (in black);
> "Do'ar Zevel - Le'Hachazir La'Shole'ach" ("JUNK MAIL - RETURN TO SENDER");

3. DROP the envelope into a public mailing box.

I believe Prof. Sohar's suggestion needs one extra crucial element added!

While I have not gotten my own copy yet of the Beilin Proposed Munich Agreement, I assume it will be coming with pre-paid return card or envelope. Taking the lead from Abbie Hoffman and the Yippies, I would like to most strongly urge every single person in Israel receiving the Beilin Misunderstandings in the mail to attach the return card accompanying the treasonous material firmly to a brick or a cinder block and place it in a proper postal facility. That way, Beilin's lemmings will be forced to pay the mail costs of shipping the bricks and we should quickly hear the last of him and his "initiative"!!


THE REGION: Virtues and Problems
Posted by Barry Rubin, November 15, 2003.

London: It's strange to go from Prague to London, a one-hour air trip that a decade before would have crossed the front line of the Cold War. Exactly two-thirds' of a century ago, the British and French governments forced Czechoslovakia to give up territory that Germany considered to be "occupied." A few months later, Germany wiped Czechoslovakia entirely off the map.

The British and French leaders thought appeasement would protect them from Germany's wrath, saving them from having to fight a terrorist state. Once he got this Czech territory, German leader Adolf Hitler explained, he would have no more demands and would get along just fine with the British and French. They believed him. They were wrong.

But they also justified their behavior in terms of human rights and charity to the weaker side. After all, the land Czechoslovakia was forced to yield was inhabited by ethnic Germans. Berlin's demand to rule those citizens could be portrayed as reasonable. Also, Germany had been humiliated a few years before in World War One so it was only trying to regain national pride and reacting against its mistreatment by the victors.

Obviously, the analogy with the current situation can be easily overdone and I certainly don't believe the outcome will be the same. Still, it might be useful if people thought through this comparison. Certainly, the Czechs have done so.

That is why the Czech Republic can be considered Europe's most pro-Israel state. After a half-century experience of Nazi and Communist rule, the Czechs don't evince romanticism toward radical ideologies, respect for dictators with excuses, tolerance for propaganda, or illusions about rationalizing terrorism. They can tell the difference between a fence to stop terrorists and the Iron Curtain wall that not long ago crossed their own country where those trying to flee were shot down. They also know the consequences of inciting against Jews, no matter how such accusations are falsely glorified as progressive or dishonestly rationalized as deserved.

Their own capital, Prague, is more crowded than any in Europe with Jewish ghosts in its old, little-changed Jewish Quarter. They know, too, their country's best-known writer, Franz Kafka, was a remarkable voice for that people's unique situation. If you talk to a Czech about ignorant, craven leaders trading off the rights of a far-off land of which they know little, he recognizes this as a paraphrase of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's remark about their country when he was selling it out.

In short, there is not much patience with nonsense. London is a more complicated place in this regard. The government is not so hostile to Israel, at least less so than in the past. The media is split, though the main television news is in practice antagonistically partisan. Many campuses are hysterical on this issue. The most outrageous statements can be made with little fear of contradiction. It is open season on Israel. England was, after all, the country where George Orwell explained that certain ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them.

Yet how much practical effect does this widespread misrepresentation actually have? And are things getting better or worse? These questions are hard to answer.

Of course, much of the problem stems from a far left desperately seeking a post-Marxist revolutionary cause. There are many professors and journalists who are passionate about their political engagements and far less so regarding their professional ethics.

Yet there are also many people with open minds who are genuinely baffled as to why the region remains so turbulent, its problems seemingly so unsolvable. How can one comprehend the damage done to the region by the dictators' deceptions and extremist ideologies if they are merely adapted by Western observers?

Recently, an Israeli colleague explained to a European audience that it overstated the ease of "solving" Middle East problems. A French military official sneeringly attacked him, making clear his detestation for anyone so foolish as to believe in the "brutal" notion that force determined the course of events in the world. What was needed, he explained, was peaceful diplomacy and the willingness to make concessions.

An American participant asked how, in light of this philosophy, he explained that France had intervened 47 times by military force in Africa without ever seeking a UN resolution. The official looked so angry that I believe he would have punched the American in the face if he had not just made a speech extolling pacifism.

Consider the proposed deal worked out by French and other European negotiators with Iran which was hailed in Paris as a great victory for diplomatic methods in "stopping" Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The Europeans will tightly control uranium but let Iran build a reactor that will produce plutonium. No doubt, Iran will use this reactor to build more deadly plutonium bombs.

The Czechs have had ample experience on how easy it is for the arrogant, ignorant, and malevolent to pass judgment on other's survival. Blessed are those who do not have to obey them.

Barry Rubin is author, with Judith Colp Rubin, of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography," just published by Oxford University Press in the United States and Continuum in Great Britain.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 15, 2003.

Just as politically-minded organizations reward the undeserving, investigation commissions whitewash the unworthy. That is what happened to Ariel Sharon over Sabra-Shatila. The commission was so even-handed, that it let the world ignore its finding of direct Arab guilt and emphasize its finding of indirect Sharon guilt. It stated that Defense Min. Sharon should have anticipated that the Phalange would commit a massacre in revenge for the Palestinian Arabs' assassination of their leader.

I don't know whether Sharon should have anticipated it. In order to anticipate how Arabs will react, one has to understand what Arabs are like. Maybe he knew. Most Israelis don't. Israeli education about the Arabs is scanty, false, and politically correct. Geared to engender a culture of peace, the curriculum depicts the Arabs as desirous of peace, innocent people with bad leaders. Hence the public thinks that if the leadership were changed, the Arabs would make peace. The US exploits that misconception by proposing the Road Map, based on a change in P.A. leadership. To compound the fraud, the US adheres to the Map even after the P.A. offers up a phony change in leadership. But even a change in leadership would be of little avail, because the Arabs are a guilty people desirous of war and enjoying every criminal triumph in it.

The Israeli curriculum should depict the Arabs as they are. It should suggest how to deal with them, which would be to defeat and disperse them, to reclaim what rightfully belongs to the Jewish people, to stay strong, and to hope that Arab society evolve into a civilized one. Hatred of the Arabs is not necessary to properly oppose them, but it wouldn't hurt. That is, it would be more normal and motivating than the present appeasement of them.

PM Sharon has by now lived through all the Arab and US duplicity of Oslo. He should know that further agreements with the Arabs, such as Road Map, are fraudulent and lead to more terrorism and war. Nevertheless, he lurches on. As a result of his failure to wipe out the enemy forces, enough terrorist forces remain to continue massacring Jews. For those murders, Sharon is indeed indirectly responsible. He should be held indirectly responsible for them, and not for Sabra-Shatila.

Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, November 14, 2003.

Let's try putting things in perspective.

The Third Reich that promised to last for a thousand years survived only 12.

The Soviet Union fell apart after spreading its evil around the planet for 74 years.

The United States, God bless it, is counting its third century.

The Romanov dynasty ruled Russia for three hundred years before losing the empire to the Bolsheviks.

Five hundred years ago, Columbus discovered America.

Eight centuries ago, Pope Gregory IX established the Inquisition.

Great Britain's most expensive decoration, its royal family, traces itself nine centuries back.

A thousand years ago, Russia accepted Christianity as its official religion.

Attila the Hun pillaged Europe 15 centuries ago.

According to recent archaeological discoveries, two thousand years ago, when Christianity was merely an insignificant Jewish sect, ancestors of today's Britons, were not averse to having a neighbor for dinner - as a main course.

At that time, two thousand years ago, long before most of the nations that exist today emerged, Jews were already an ancient people and the Torah, up to the letter identical to the one we read today, had already been written.

Longevity inevitably affects one's outlook on things, and the Presidential elections in the United States provide an excellent example of that. In preparation for the Big Tuesday next year, the Democratic Party has assembled an impressive array of utterly unelectable candidates who are doing their absolute best eagerly competing for the honor of losing elections to the incumbent president. Meanwhile, our next president is patiently, quietly waiting in the shadows, ready to step into the fray as soon as some unforeseen event makes Bush's reelection problematic. If no such event occurs, she will skip 2004 only to effortlessly win in 2008 against an utterly unelectable candidate the Republican Party will have inevitably put forth. There is drama in it worthy of Sophocles, but, unlike Sophocles' tragedies, what will it matter 2 thousand years from now? Or even fifty?

The history of the Jews during the last two millennia can be outlined in just a couple of sentences. Escaping pogroms and persecution in country A, Jews settle in country B. If country B pays little attention to them - which, from the Jewish perspective, means being good to them - they decide that they, after so many centuries of wandering around the world, have finally found a home. A few decades or a couple of centuries later something inevitably happens, and Jewish bliss in country B comes to an end. Escaping pogroms and persecution in country B, Jews settle in country C. And so on.

Presidents come and go. Empires rise and fall. Superpowers emerge and fade into oblivion. Dynasties, nations, religions, ethnicities get born and die, and only one thing remains constant: the Jews persevere throughout whatever befalls them.

We've seen the fall of Babylon, Egypt, Rome, Ottoman Empire. We've seen superpowers turn to dust, and we will see more of them emerge and disappear. But Greece is a different story. Ancient Greeks are everywhere around us even today.

Euclid and Pythagoras accompany our very first steps in geometry. Archimedes introduces us to physics. Philosophy - the way it exists today - would've be different if at all possible without Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and quite a few other Greeks. Odyssey and Iliad have been translated into every language on Earth. Electron and atom are Greek words. Greek names richly adorn the starry skies above. Implicit references to Greek myths are so abundant in our speech that it takes an effort to detect them. Democracy is a Greek invention. In fact, the Renaissance itself was mostly falling back to whatever had been achieved by Greeks centuries earlier. Chances are, without the Greeks, there would've been no Renaissance, and the Dark Ages would've lasted forever.

And of course they had Pericles. Remember Pericles?

I will never forget the first time I saw Greek sculptures at the Louvre. They were old - millennia old - but it seemed that if I touched their marble skin, I would feel the living warmth of a human body and the pulse of youthful blood under it.

Incidentally, one of my most favorite artists of all times is Domenicos Theotocopoulos, better known as El Greco - The Greek. He of course lived much, much later, in the 16th century. Apparently, the Greece in which he was born was already drastically different from the country that conceived our civilization millennia ago. He studied in Italy and worked in Spain. Had there been an abundance of Greek artists at that time, the nickname El Greco could not have been used to identify one of them. Apparently, when El Greco was alive, famous Greeks were already quite sparse.

What's left of Greece's ancient glory today? Today, Greece is a country that subsists at the receiving end of the European Union's welfare system. It's main industry is tourism: Greece lives off its ruins.

Besides El Greco, can you name at least one famous Greek that lived during the last few centuries - an artist, a writer, a scientist? I went through the list of Nobel Prize recipients - no Greeks there. I don't remember a single contemporary book by a Greek author. How is that possible? What happened to the Greeks?

The mystery has been solved by Mikis Theodorakis, a Greek composer who wrote the PLO anthem and the score for Zorba the Greek. Zorba the Greek was quite a success, but let's face it, Mr. Theodorakis is no Bach. Two thousand - or even fifty - years from today, nobody will listen to his music, no one will remember his name. If Islam wins and returns us to the Dark Ages, the magic of Mikis Theodorakis' music will not jumpstart another Renaissance. A man not quite as blind as Homer, but apparently less open-minded than Homer Simpson, he has declared Jews the root of all evil.

That's right. It's all our fault. All those suicide bombers would have been leading happy, productive lives today had it not been for the Jews.

The Greek government has issued a tepid apology to Israel, but as far as I know, there has been no public outcry in Greece over Mr. Theoderakis' statement. That explains how the people who had practically started our civilization became so tragically barren.

The remarkable perseverance of the Jews is accompanied by an interesting side effect: societies that treat their Jews decently, prosper; societies that harbor anti-Semitism, rot. Even the so-called Golden Age of Islam somehow coincided with the historically brief period when Muslims were protecting Jews rather than persecuting them. Jews never suffer from anti-Semitism alone: anti-Semites inevitably suffer along with them. Six million Jews perished in the Holocaust; ten times as many gentiles had to die in the process.

Greece is not just famous for the splendor of its intellectual life in the distant past. Greeks have long been known for their anti-Semitism as well.

In today's Greece, the death rate slightly exceeds the birth rate. The country is dying. I am confident someone is going to explain how it is the fault of the Jews.

Other articles by Yashiko Sagamori can be found at http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/

Posted by David ben Ariel, November 14, 2003.

It is commonly reported that Saudi Arabia is supportive of the United States in the Middle East - even displaying unprecedented cooperativeness. Following a Saudi raid on al-Qaeda suspects in September, a U.S. diplomat in the country stated that the incident was proof of the high level of cooperation between the two countries, adding the comment that Saudi collaboration had increased in the last several months.

But just how deep is the Saudis' support? How sincere is their cooperation? Are they really on America's side?

Saudi Arabia is one of the world's leading producers of oil, holding a position of influence within the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). With Iraq once again beginning to produce a steady flow of oil, currently at 1.4 million barrels per day (BPD) and expected to rise, Saudi Arabia perceives a threat to its dominance in this arena.

The leverage Saudi Arabia possesses in OPEC hinges on its "spare capacity" of oil - about 2 million BPD of spare production capacity that it could use to glut the market, collapse prices and force others out of the export market - which, the Near East Report stated, the Saudis "have demonstrated time and again their readiness to use" (Sept. 8). Foreign Affairs explained the strategic value of this in its March/April 2002 issue: "Saudi spare capacity is the energy equivalent of nuclear weapons, a powerful deterrent against those who try to challenge Saudi leadership and Saudi goals."

The problem for Saudi Arabia is, if Iraq - with U.S. assistance - increases its oil production enough, the Saudis will lose their ability to control the oil market. With the lowest production costs in the world, Iraq has the capacity to potentially come out the better in any price war. Not since 1979, when it pumped 3.1 million BPD, has Iraq had high, stable levels of oil production. War and sanctions have prevented Iraq from being a significant player in the market for more than two decades. But now, the U.S. is changing all that - and Saudi Arabia is not happy.

Thus, while outwardly friendly toward America, the Saudi government is actually attempting to undermine U.S. efforts, hoping to chase America off. The Near East Report explained, "Though the Saudi government often claims to be a close ally to the United States, its actions indicate this outcome is precisely what it is hoping for. It has not lifted a finger to seal the border to block the surge of jihadists to Iraq, and certainly has done nothing to help rebuild Iraq's vital oil industry" (op. cit.).

Just how far are the Saudis prepared to go to counterbalance the U.S.? Consider the fact that they are now seeking help from Russia. In September, Crown Prince Abdullah, the Saudi leader, talked with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow "in hopes of influencing Moscow's oil exports and controlling U.S. involvement in the Middle East... Almost since the founding of the Arab state, Moscow and Riyadh have viewed each other as enemies, but now, Riyadh's deteriorating ties with Washington are forcing it to seek other allies" (www.stratfor.com, Sept. 2). While any significant success in the venture is doubtful, this move clearly illustrates that Saudi Arabia is not the friend of the U.S. it may pretend to be.

What is more, Bible prophecy reveals that Saudi Arabia will be part of a future alliance that will have as its goal the destruction of America. Psalm 83 states, "They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee" (vv. 4-5). This is talking about a future alliance that will form against "Israel" - or, the modern nations of Israel, particularly the U.S., Britain and the Israel of the Middle East. Which nations will be included in this hostile alliance? The "Ishmaelites" of verse 6 are the forebears of the people of Saudi Arabia (as taught at Ambassador College under Herbert W. Armstrong). Here is a prophecy that Saudi Arabia will join with other nations to one day attack America.

We can see that Saudi Arabia's duplicity, and its smoldering resentment of the U.S., is but a precursor to a much more overt hostility toward America.

Posted by Aliza Karp, November 14, 2003.

Baruch Marzel, founder and administrator of numerous religious and benevolent organizations, has been arrested more than 100 times. He has sat in jail as a result of being convicted. not once. All his arrests have occurred while he is supporting Jewish causes.

Without a fair trial, there is currently a court order confining Marzel to the city of Jerusalem for six months, barring him from going to his home and family in Hevron. The reason: he is dangerous to policemen. Irrelevant to the court: there are policemen in Jerusalem, vulnerable to a man dangerous to police officers.

A few weeks ago, Marzel was approached by tens of policemen and forcibly taken into a police vehicle. The reason: he had not responded to an order to appear for interrogation. Irrelevant to the court: Marzel never received the order. The police admit that they did not serve the summons because they could not find Marzel, knowing full well that Marzel passes the police every morning on his way to daven at Maaras HaMachpela.

The timing of the hearing was very strategic. Not only was Marzel under pressure to not be incarcerated over Shabbos, it was in the week of Sheva Brochas of his sister and his parents dearly wanted him to attend the family simcha. Kibud Av V'aim, which Marzel shows every day to the Avos and Emahos, he also shows to his own parents. He did everything in his power not to let them down that Shabbos. The compromise he made, to win his freedom for Shabbos, was to agree to the six month exile.

Marzel has dedicated his life to Eretz Yisroel, more specifically, the security of Yesha, through settlement. He is careful not to get involved in fights with police that would only besmirch the title of 'settler,' and not contribute to the security or Eretz Yisroel. In and around Hevron the security personnel count on him to be a calming influence when settlers conflict with authority. He is respected by both sides.

A month before the arrest, was the evacuation of the Gilad Farm in the Shomron. Marzel was at the scene. Fully aware that the press and the police were watching him, he stayed aloof, until, he was approached by both soldiers and police officers, to go the main areas of contention and try to calm people down.

"When I got there," reports Marzel, "I saw Israeli special patrol units, Yasam, brutally and aggressively attacking a youth. I approached the presiding officer and asked to see his credentials. He refused and I repeated my request, at which point I was attacked from behind and forcibly taken from the area. I suspected that the police were being protected by someone who would excuse them for not presenting their ID. I was not be deterred by their use of force. I do not allow myself to be intimidated when facing injustice. I returned to the area again demanding to see the officer's identification. Like a well-directed movie, the television cameras moved in while I was making my way back to the officer, protecting myself from being pushed and shoved aside. That is when the cameras got the picture that made my self-defense look like I was the one causing the trouble. It appears as if the television crew was part of the police operation."

The current charge against Marzel, that he is dangerous to police, is based on the pictures from this scene. Irrelevant to the court: the declaration that Marzel is dangerous to policemen was made one month after the incriminating incident, in which time Marzel has interacted peacefully with police on a daily basis at Maaras HaMachpela.

At the time of the arrest the press aggressively reported the story, assuming Marzel guilty of the charges and more. His acquittal, due to the lack of evidence, will not be big news. The result: Marzel's reputation, in the minds of the well-meaning public, is that he is a hoodlum, when in fact, Marzel is a hero.

When he served in Lebanon and saved his tank unit from disaster, he was regarded a military hero. His exceptional actions of goodness and kindness, render him a genuine folk hero. For years Marzel traveled throughout Eretz Yisroel and to many places abroad, personally speaking with Jewish leaders, convincing them to visit Hevron. Once the leaders came, the followers came, and eventually, with more hard work there emerged a change in public attitude towards visiting Hevron.

Marzel initiated the first Chol HaMoed concert at Maarat HaMachpela. He set the popularity of visiting Hevron into motion and it has gained tremendous momentum with the help of others. But if one man is responsible for the crowds that now visit Hevron. it is Baruch Marzel.

Marzel has assisted in the establishment of no less than 14 settlements in Yesha, where he actually moved in with the original residents and stayed until the settlements overcame the initial gliches and became functioning entities.

In these days of terror, Marzel attends all the funerals of victims of terror, visits the mourners and visits the hospital beds of the injured. This past summer he brought Jewish superstar, Mordechai ben David, with him to Tel HaShomer hospital. They visited many victims and MBD actually gave a private concert for a bedridden soldier, with Baruch Marzel at his side.

Marzel micromanages the extensive Chachnoses Orchim operation in Hevron. "The Gemora teaches us," quotes Marzel, "more than the calf wants to nurse, the mother cow wants do the nursing. So it is in Hevron, the city of our Father Avraham, who taught us the mitzvah of welcoming guests, as much as the guests want to come to Hevron, we in Hevron want even more, to welcome them."

When I asked Tirtza Eisenberg, an American teenager who spent her summer in Hevron, what Baruch Marzel was all about, she answered: "He has a lot guests, he serves them chollent and he makes sure they have a ride to the airport. If they don't, he takes them himself. But the whole time he is on his cell phone, organizing and arranging, unless, of course, it is Shabbos." "I have walked along the streets of Yerushalaim many times with Baruch," says Rabbi Danny Cohen, Chabad Shliach in Hevron, "and it is amazing how many people stop to talk to him. He is very well known, very well liked and very well respected."

Recently the community of Hevron held a farewell gathering in honor of the soldiers who had served in Hevron for half a year and were now being transferred to another location. At the gathering the commanding officer, not of right wing persuasion himself, had words of praise for Marzel: "The one person who was always cooperative, friendly and helpful was Baruch Marzel. We did encounter incidents from time to time and it was Marzel who could be counted on to intervene and work thing out."

Marzel admits that he was arrested a total of 11 times for visiting the gravesite of Rebbitzen Menucha Rochel Slonim in the ancient Ashkenazie cemetery on the outskirts of the Jewish community in Hevron. This area is clearly Jewish property, but the army did not allow Jews to be there.

However, with persistence of Marzel and others like him, Jews now have permission to go there. In fact, the entire Jewish community of Hevron was settled because a group of Jewish women who moved into Beit Hadassah in the middle of the night with no permission. Only through an act like this could the Jewish community of Hevron be established. All political attempts had failed. The self-sacrifice of these women succeeded.

Having a Jewish community in Hevron is the best way to defend and secure Maarat HaMachpela. Having soldiers stranded in Hevron guarding the Maara without the Jews coming and going everyday would be a terrible situation, and a volatile one. Marzel, his supportive wife and children, the righteous women of Beis Hadassah and the other brave souls who sometimes have to break the rules and risk arrest, are preserving Maarat HaMachpela for the tens of thousands of guests who visited this past Sukkot and entire Jewish nation.

Another exceptional deed of Marzel, that did not make headlines in the news, is the establishment of the first Talmud Torah in Hevron since 1929. This year 15 boys are learning Torah in Hevron all day, six days a week, thanks to Marzel.

The organizations operated by Marzel include: the Guest House in Hevron; the Charity Fund, the largest organization in Judea and Samaria that helps families under stress; Talmud Torah Zilberman in Hevron and Yad L'Achayot, an organization that rescues and cares for Jewish girls otherwise unable to free themselves from abusive relationships with Arabs.

Concerning the current arrest, Marzel's friends assume it is related to the upcoming elections. If settlers become popular they will become powerful. The 'establishment' needs to uphold the reputation of the settlers as being violent fanatics. Who could better represent that image than Baruch Marzel?

Many politicians like to project themselves as saviors but turn out to be the opposite. Marzel is committed through and through to the Jewish people and the Jewish homeland. His reputation as a hoodlum is false, the current charges against him are false but his integrity is true.

Posted by Ruth Matar, November 14, 2003.

Dear Friends,

I do so wish that I didn't feel the need to write this particular letter.

Unfortunately, I must tell you that Israelis still live under the threat of Administrative Detention, a legal instrument left over from British Mandate days.

No doubt, Administrative Detention was and is a reasonable and legitimate legal instrument in times of riots and terrorism. There is no other way to detain, for any length of time, a large number of suspects involved in acts of extreme violence against the State. Following all normal court procedures in such circumstances would paralyze the legal system and help potential killers.

What is Administrative Detention? Individuals may be imprisoned by the State without due process, without being charged, or even without being informed what their crime might be. Such individuals don't have to be brought before a judge, and are often not allowed to have their day in court. They are not entitled to the usual free society rules, which render all suspects innocent until proved otherwise.

The Agency in Israel which uses this tool of Administrative Detention is Israel's General Secret Service, the Shabak (also called the Shin Bet).

Since the rebirth of the State of Israel, the Shabak has used this tool in what many think is a rampant denial of civil rights. I want to mention three well known cases of such abuse of Administrative Detention in the State of Israel.

In 1995 a Kiryat Arba resident, Shmuel Cytryn, who had served in the Golani brigade in the Lebanon war, and had no criminal record whatsoever, was arrested on December 4, 1995, a month AFTER the Rabin assassination, and jailed under an Administrative Detention order.

According to the Jerusalem weekly, "Kol Ha'ir", Cytryn's crime might have been that he irritated the General Security Service by being the first to charge that Avishai Raviv was a Shabak agent and provocateur. This was three months BEFORE Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's assassination, and well before Raviv was exposed as an agent for the Shabak, whose particular assignment was to discredit the national religious camp. As an example, Avishai Raviv ran the Eyal organization to which Yigal Amir belonged. Shmuel Cytryn's family believed that the reason that their son and husband was arrested and isolated in jail was that he should not be able to publish details of Avishai Raviv's activities from there.

Because of public outcry by civil libertarians, both in Israel and the United States, Shmuel Cytryn was finally granted a court hearing. "We don't have the slightest idea what the man has been detained for, even in a general sense," Cytryn's lawyer told the court, asking it to examine the classified evidence against Cytryn and to enlighten him.

After doing so, the head of the court, Justice Aharon Barak, said that Cytryn was being held because of "an extremist world view and extreme statements, which, in the estimation of the security services, could lead with relative ease to acts that would endanger the security of the region."

Cytryn's lawyer responded "this is something for which it is forbidden to put someone in Administrative Detention. A man is permitted to have twisted opinions, as long as he does not incite."

After the Justices left the room to examine the classified evidence, Cytryn began screaming at his guards.

"Why are you doing this? Because I said the General Security Service is responsible for Prime Minister Rabin's death? "

At the end of the hearing, Cytryn asked to make a statement to the court, in which he attacked the reliability of the classified evidence, noting that anyone could spread lies and have them entered into the GSS's file on him.

"I don't intend to eat anymore," he said, his voice choking with tears. "I see no reason that I should be in this position. I have a family that has been destroyed? I am not willing to accept any compromise. I am not a terrorist."

Another glaring example of Administrative Detention abuse was the arrest and imprisonment of a prominent and highly respected Rabbi, Yitzhak Ginsburgh, on charges of incitement to violence and endangerment of public safety. The Administrative Detention order was signed by then Minister of Defense, Shimon Peres. Rabbi Ginsburgh was the head of "Od Yosef Chai" Yeshiva in Shchem (Nablus), which was located next to the Jewish Holy site of the Tomb of Yosef, the son of the patriarch Yaakov. Yosef had died in Egypt but requested that the Jews take his bones along to be buried in the Holy Land. (Genesis 50: 24-26)

A Jerusalem Post editorial of March 19, 1996, expressed the belief that the Government was not concerned about incitement, but rather wanted to dismantle Rabbi Ginsburgh's "Od Yosef Chai" Yeshiva, because it felt that this was a politically awkward site and a security burden.

(The sad result of this government attitude was that Joseph's Tomb and the adjacent Yeshiva were shamefully abandoned under a violent attack by the Arabs in the year 2000. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has not reclaimed this Holy site, which even under the Oslo Accords belongs to the Jews and the State of Israel.)

The latest victim of Administrative Detention abuse is Noam Federman, a 34 year old man with a wife and seven children, the oldest twelve years old, and the youngest one year old. He has literally been whisked away from his family and imprisoned in solitary confinement since September 22 of this year, without being charged. He has been put in a cell block together with Arab terrorist murderers, who continually shout threats against his life.

To protest his incarceration, Noam Federman has started a hunger strike. He has already lost 20 kilos (44 pounds), because he is only consuming liquids. His wife, Elisheva, has asked that these liquids be either milk or juice in order that he have some nourishment, but her request has been denied. She has further requested that a doctor be allowed to examine him. This request has been denied as well by the Shabak. No one is allowed to visit him in prison, not even his wife Elisheva. She has seen him only twice since his imprisonment, once during the Sukkot holiday, and one other time when the court ordered that he be allowed to attend his daughter's Bat Mitzvah celebration for two hours. On both these occasions Noam Federman was in handcuffs and leg-irons, and chained to a Shabak agent, so that he could not have a private conversation with anyone, including his wife.

Noam Federman is a law school graduate, but is forbidden to practice law. Some people believe that the reason for Federman's imprisonment is that he has published a booklet which advises people who are arrested by the Shabak, amongst other authorities, of their legal rights, such as being silent when interrogated.

The cases of Shmuel Cytryn, Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburgh and Noam Federman are a sad commentary on the civil rights of Jewish Israeli citizens.

Convicted Arab terrorist murderers are being released in groups of hundreds, allowing them to immediately organize further attacks and to once again kill Jews. Jewish citizens, on the other hand, are put in Administrative Detention for political reasons by a government fearful of popular protest.

But it is one thing to use emergency wartime regulations to fight the country's enemies and preserve its security interests, and quite another to employ them arbitrarily to intimidate political opponents! A note to civil libertarians: To protest abuses of civil rights only when leftists and Palestinians are affected is to mock justice. To arbitrarily throw Noam Federman in jail is to mock democracy.


Or you may well ask yourself: WHO IS NEXT?

What can you do to help obtain justice for Noam Federman? Telephone, fax or email Prime Minister Sharon at: Tel - 02-6705555, Fax - 02-5664838, Email - webmaster@pmo.gov.il.

Administrative Detention orders must be signed by the Defense Minister. Shaul Mofaz, who is the current Defense Minister, signed Noam Federman's Detention order. Telephone, fax or email Shaul Mofaz at: Tel - 03-6976663, Fax - 03-6976218, Email - sar@mod.gov.il.

(When calling of faxing from abroad dial Israel's country code 972 and then dial the number, eliminating the first zero)

With Blessings and Love for Israel,

Ruth Matar

P.S. In order to better understand the Shabak, I recommend that you read the book "Lies - Israel's Secret Service and the Rabin Assassination" by David Morrison.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 14, 2003.

Theory is, make life easier for the Arab enemy, and he will appreciate you enough to refrain from terrorism. Under that theory (or is it under pressure from the anti-Zionist State Dept.), Israel just made life easier for the Arab enemy. It permitted thousands more P.A. Arabs to work in Israel. The accompanying relaxation of travel restrictions also made it easier for Arab terrorists. Attacks are said to be imminent. So much for the theory of being nice to Arabs (Voice of Judea, 11/2).

The theory long has been disproved. It never made sense. How can one expect jihadists, among the most vicious fanatics, to appreciate decency from a hated enemy, when the Arabs are intransigent and believe that enemy concessions indicate weakness that can be parlayed into more concessions? Certainly the Arabs take concessions for granted. They pile on the terrorism, rather than express appreciation.

If the theory were first being formulated, its adherents would have some excuse. Its having been tried and repeatedly failed, however, gives it adherents no excuse. They either are uneducable or ingenuous.

It was irresponsible to make life-and-death policy decisions on the basis of an untested theory. It is criminally negligent not to follow up and realize that the theory has failed. It adds insult to injury to try to persuade people to approve such theories that get more Israelis murdered.

Egypt's grand Sheikh Tantawi announced that under Islamic law, suicide bombers who defend again aggressors and invades are martyrs. Islam forbids killing innocent civilians and children (IMRA, 11/3).

These Muslim clerics seem constantly to be changing and shading their opinions, and hiding their intent from Westerners by using language that has a benign meaning in the West but a coded and malign meaning in the East.

Westerners want to hear that Islam forbids killing innocent civilians and children. What most Westerners do not know, and their media do not tell them, is that the Arabs then define innocent civilians and children to mean their own non-uniformed gunmen and bomb-throwing children, and not the really innocent Israeli civilians.

Most of the foreign fighters in Iraq are Palestinian Arabs. Palestinian Arab gunmen have come to kill Americans. This must be the result of years of burning Old Glory and, what our media does not report, the steady propaganda in P.A. mosques (and elsewhere in the Arab world), favoring destruction of the US. No wonder that after hearing their preachers pray for the destruction of the US, and helped by Syria, terrorists from the P.A. are joining other foreign Arabs to attack our troops.

Posted by Shmuel HaLevi, November 14, 2003.

The enhanced "Jewish Sektion" schedules are called from the EU, receiving huge sums of money and follow orders from the new Greco-Romans. There is nothing spontaneous on the assaults of the 27 salty air force persons, followed by the wild strikes, then the Peres-Beilin Olso-Geneva, then the Rabin Festival Ltd., the Ayalon-Neuseibah section activities.

* The next scheduled activity of the UNJewish UNDERGROUND is about to be performed by THE "Jewish Section" SHABBAK QUARTET (Messrs. Ayalon-Gillon-Perry and extra help) Following right on the heels of the criminal courtiers in the supreme court assault will now comes the "Jewish Sektion" SHABBAK!

* Remember who gave a GSS card, training and facilities to Yigal Amir - Shabbak's Mr. PERRY!

* Remember who used the GSS's facilities to operate a vast network of agents provokateurs, police elements, Arbel and Beinish and many others including but not limited to Avishai Raviv AND Yigal Amir to participate in the conspiracy leading to their execution of general Rabin. - Shabbak's/ambassador/Mayor GILLON!

* Remember who has been actively promoting the UNJewish UNDERGROUND work led, initially, by general Rabin and now by his associates Peres-Beilin-Barak-Shahak-Mitznah-Dayan-Vilnai, etc. If you have not yet received mail or have been targeted by Ayalon-Neuseibah, it will be happening soon - Shabbak's Mr. AYALON!

THE UNJEWISH INDERGROUND will publish shortly, even this week, a joint "interview" part of the continuous EU plan to undermine and destroy the Nation. Be prepared to act and DEFEND our Heritage and future.

Those people are mortal enemies of the Jewish Nation working in close association with their islamic partners and their foreign controllers from the EU.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 14, 2003.

The timing could not be more amusing. On the very day when the British courts were preventing overseas papers from being distributed in the UK because they might carry a story the court censor regards as inflammatory and libelous, Israel's Supreme Court handed down its ruling in favor of free speech absolutism for Arab fascists and leftist traitors (only).

The British censorship involved preventing non-British papers from being sold in Britain if they repeat the assertion by a former butler for Prince Charles that he had witnessed the Prince having homosexual relations with a servant. The British establishment, the same that daily asserts there is of course nothing at all WRONG with gay relations, had a fit. Sixteen papers were banned in the cradle of democracy.

And that very same day three Supreme Court justices in Israel, led by Dalia Dorner, handed down a ruling revoking the ban by Israel's film censor board on the anti-Israel propaganda film "Jenin Jenin" in the name of free speech absolutism.

Israel has a film censor board that ordinarily does very little. It occasionally has banned things like child porn and has banned some films regarded as offensive to religious sensitivities - usually the religious sensitivities of CHRISTIANS. For example, it once banned an Italian film portraying Jesus in offensive semi-porno manner.

After the mini-battle in Jenin during Israel's Defensive Wall mini-offensive, as many as 20 denizens of Jenin and about the same number of Israeli troops lost their lives in street fighting. The Israel-bashers of the planet declared that Israel had perpetrated a war crime and genocide there, a libel repeated in such pits of depravity as the BBC. In other words, the lie was proliferated by the very same people who had nothing to say about the mass murders of Jews that triggered Israel's Defensive Wall incursions in the first place. Later of course it turned out that nothing of the sort happened, and that there were no war crimes committed in Jenin, at least not by Israel. Even the UN commission that investigated and Shimon Peres confirmed this. Nevertheless a cottage industry of books and films portraying the Israelis as Nazis for their "crimes" in Jenin has been growing.

Perhaps the worst of these was "Jenin Jenin", a Goebbels-like film by Israeli Arab Mohammed Bakhri. It is a tissue of lies. It claims Israeli troops blew up a hospital wing that had never been constructed at all. It interviews a man claiming Israeli troops shot him in his leg for no reason when it turns out he was never shot at all. And so on. Bakhri by the way is the first cousin of Arab mass murderers who placed a suicide bomber on a bus in the Galilee last year. He proudly proclaims his support for his murderer cousins and he insists they were driven to their mass murder by what Israel did in Jenin, which I guess means that they were driven to it by the lies that Bakhri tells in his film about what Israel did.

The film board had issued a ban on Bakhri's Goebbels film on grounds that it was an outrageous insult to the families of the Israeli troops who had lost their lives in the battle, men were killed, by the way, because Israel was reluctant to level Jenin neighborhoods with artillery. In other words - men who lost their lives because Israel was endeavoring to PROTECT Palestinian civilian lives.

Ever since, the Israeli Caring Left has been defying the ban and screening the film on campuses illegally, before groups of Far Leftists. Natch, no one has been prosecuted for this. As you know, the highest human value in the minds of the Tenured Traitors is seeing Israel destroyed and anti-Semitism fomented around the world. (Imagine their excitement at events in Greece this week.)

The Left went to court to demand that the ban be revoked. Bakhri was represented by Far-Leftist lawyer Avigdor Feldman, who has spent parts of his career defending Arab murderers of Jewish children (see below). Yesterday the court handed down its ruling. Claiming "there is no truth and no falsehood in matters of free speech," the Court ruling drafted by Justice Dorner declared that it is ok to screen anti-Semitic canards on the screen in Israel during time of war. Funny how the Court never exercises such relativism when it comes to prosecuting Right-wingers for exercising THEIR free speech!

Now the only problem with this is that the lovely free speech absolutism of the Court only extends to the Jewish treasonous Left and to Arab fascists and supporters of terror. The Court - and Dorner personally - have long DEFENDED the bans on free speech for such groups as the various Kahanist splinters. The Court has upheld the criminalization of these groups as "racist," although has never allowed Israel's ludicrous anti-racism law to be applied to Arab fascists calling for mass murders of Jews, people like Mohammed Bakhri himself. At this very moment the radical Rabbi Ginsberg is being prosecuted for "fomenting racism." The Court has maintained the banning of the Kahanists as "terrorists" apparently because they sometimes scribble indelicate graffiti on walls in Jerusalem, at the same time that people like Bakhri sing the praises of the suicide mass murderers with impunity in the name of free speech.

It is NOT protected speech to wear a T-shirt on which it is printed, "Where there are no Arabs there are no terrorist atrocities." That has been proclaimed racist incitement. Those sporting such garb have been arrested and are now awaiting trial in the land of free speech absolutism.

The free speech absolutism of Dalia Dorner and her comrades only extends to those people seeking the destruction of Israel and mass murder of Jews. Dorner has a long track record of imposing her leftist ideology on her court rulings. You may recall that she was one of the justices who invented a constitutional right to spuse benefits for gay partners, in a ruling based in part on citations from gay Marxist French "philosopher" Michel Foucault (who died of AIDS a few years back in Frisco), remarkable given the fact that Israel does not even have a constitution. She also issued the ruling that two lesbian mothers must be registered as the "parents" of a baby.

Dorner was the justice who ordered three of the five Arab murderers of the 15 year old Haifa boy Dani Katz put back on the streets while awaiting a retrial. (The murderers were defended by Avigdor Feldman - who else? - and were reconvicted.) She once ruled that Arabs who throw Molotov cocktails (fire bombs) at Jewish civilians should be sentenced to nothing more than a tap on the wrist and a warning. (Haaretz Mar 25, 02). She is a groupie of the doctrine of judicial activism, meaning judicial tyranny, being promoted by Chief Justice Aharon Barak. She has issued restraining orders to prevent the government from shutting down the illegal PLO offices at Orient House in Jerusalem. Like all Court justices, Dorner of course is non-elected and cannot be impeached. (For a good picture of the devotion of Dorner to democratic freedoms and due process, take a look at http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.08.01/news10.html and http://www.me-ontarget.com/archarticles/arch020708/020818humanrights.htm and http://goldwater.mideastreality.com/judgerules.html a nd http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/14/world/main518615.shtml and http://www.jewishmediaresources.com/article/178/).

Jenin Jenin has become the cause celebre of the Bash-the-Jews movement. Israeli leftists and overseas ill-wishers, like Mikey Lerner and the Tikkun potheads, have been promoting the film as a great statement of the "Arab narrative." (Tikkun this week is gather cash for ads calling for a reduction of US support to Israel. Tikkun celebrates free speech absolutism by refusing to print any letter that disputes any fatwa that Rabbi Moonbeam has issued.)

Speaking of arbitrary application of Israel's "anti-racism" law and free speech absolutism, just considered the latest anti-Jewish libel run in Haaretz this week. Israel in recent days experienced a tragedy involving German-manufactured baby formula that had been produced without a vitamin. Two babies died and 15 were hospitalized before the problem was identified.

Naturally the Caring Left has an explanation for all this and that is that the tragedies occurred because of the awful Orthodox religious people. You see, the babies died because of the conspiracies of the religious to impose their archaic devotion to kosher eating rules on the rest of the country. The German product was being imported because it is made with soy and not animal milk, which means that people who only drink "Cholov Yisrael" (milk a Jew has supplied, to be sure it did not come from a non-kosher animal) can use it. Ultra-Orthodox (haredi) kosher certifiers will not approve a product if it has milk supplied by a non-Jew who is not under supervision, although ordinary kosher certifiers do.

The Der-Sturmer-like libel that somehow kosher observance was behind the tragedy is repeated in Haaretz, the main Palestinian newspaper published in Hebrew and the daily infommercial for the Far Left. It is under the byline of Avirama Golan, whom you may recall as someone trying to organize a mass boycott of all kosher food in Israel a couple of years back.

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 14, 2003.

Item 1:  Arab Children Terrorize Jewish Children in Lod.

Maariv on-line reports on the arrest of a gang of Arab children ranging in age form 12- 14 who were attacking and beating Jewish children for many months in the Chabad and other parks. The Arab children, also residents of Lod, said that they would beat the Jewish children until they would bleed, in revenge for what the IDF does to their "Palestinian" brothers. The Arab children said that they were angry and frustrated after viewing Al Jazeera TV. Police finally caught up with the gang of Arabs after many Jewish parents filed complaints.

Comment: Arab TV and PA TV broadcast freely into Israel, openly inciting Arabs to kill Jews. This is legal. However, the nationalist-Torah Arutz Sheva Radio is banned in Israel.

Item 2:  PM's adviser's proposal:

PM Ariel Sharon's advisor for Arab Affairs Uri Borovsky has submitted a proposal that would mandate taking and oath of loyalty prior to receiving an Israeli identity card, the flying of Israeli flags on all public buildings (Jewish and Arab), and the enlistment of minority groups in the IDF or for national service. Borovsky is claiming these measures will cultivate patriotism among Israeli Arabs.

Comment: Cultivate patriotism among Israeli Arabs? Good luck! Get them to swear allegiance to the state and to fly Israeli flags? Jews are scared to enter into Arab villages, and this character is talking about having Arabs fly the Israeli flag from their roof tops. I think this astronaut is a bit out of touch. Should we also get them to stand at attention before and after entering their mosques to sing the Hatikva - the Isreali national anthem, that speaks of "Nefesh Yehudi Homeeah" - The soul of the Jew yearning to return to Zion for thousands of years?

Jewish children are scared to walk the streets in Israeli cities with large Arab populations such as Lod and Sharon's aids are speaking about coexistence with the Arabs and Arab loyalty to the Jewish state? What kind of weed is Sharon growing on his farm?

Item 3:   Arabs workers tried to poison cafe diners:

The three Arab terrorists who tried to poison Jewish diners at Cafe Rimon last year were sentenced this week to five, seven and a half and ten years. When the owner of cafe Rimon was asked if he was angry at his worker for being involved with this terrorist plot, he respnded, "you can only be angry at someone you don't know. I'm disappointed, I never expected this, they worked here for three and a half years and were great workers."

Comment: They should be fried alive! Israeli Judges are in desperate need of psychiatric care. How could they justify sentencing the Rabbi's from Bat Ayin to 15 year sentences and more for their plot to retaliate against Arabs, and at the same time sentence Arab terrorists to five, seven and 10 years for their crime of poisoning Jews? The owner of this cafe should have his head examined and should be put on trial for endangering the lives of his customers. This 'meshugena' criminal continues to employ Arabs!

Posted by David Frankfurther, November 13, 2003.

The attached story from the San Francisco Chronicle should prompt you to ask your government how they will be voting. It was written by Edith M. Lederer, an Associated Press Writer and appeared November 10, 2003.

Are the lives of Israeli children less precious than those of Palestinian children? Are the hundreds of anti-Israel resolutions less "political and insensitive" than asking the UN to equally protect Israeli children, as the Palestinian UN observer would have us believe?

The Palestinians have asked that a U.N. committee reject a resolution calling for the protection of Israeli children victimized by Palestinian terrorism, saying the document is political and insensitive.

"This is an anti-Palestinian resolution much more than it is a pro-Israeli children resolution," the Palestinian U.N. observer Nasser Al-Kidwa said Monday.

Israel circulated the draft last week - the first resolution it has introduced since 1976.

Ariel Milo, the spokesman for Israel's U.N. Mission, said the vote on the draft will reveal whether the General Assembly "thinks that the lives of Israeli children are less important than those of Palestinian children."

The Israeli draft closely mirrors a resolution adopted by the General Assembly last year by a large majority on the plight of Palestinian children affected by more than three years of conflict in the region.

Egypt submitted a similar draft two weeks ago for the current session of the General Assembly, and it was approved by the committee dealing with social and humanitarian issues. The same committee was expected to take up the Israeli draft on Wednesday or Thursday.

Al-Kidwa told reporters the Palestinians "were not amused" at having the format of their resolution copied.

"This reflects a complete lack of sensitivity with regard to the suffering of the Palestinian children," he said, adding that Israel had added "absolutely unacceptable political substance in each paragraph."

Al-Kidwa said the case of Palestinian children was unique because they are "deprived of every single right in the Convention on the Rights of the Child - from statehood and nationality up to the physical safety. It is not the case of any other child in the world."

Al-Kidwa told reporters that European nations have already said they will abstain. The United States opposed the draft resolution on Palestinian children, but a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Monday "we have not yet taken a position" on the Israeli draft.

For years, Israel has refused to take seriously the numerous resolutions Arab states sponsor annually, which almost always condemn Israel's actions against the Palestinians while making little, if any, mention of Palestinian attacks against Jews.

Posted by Dr. Asher Eder, November 13, 2003.

The Sept.11 attack on the Pentagon and the Twin Towers was surprising to many in two aspects: that it happened at all, and that it was carried out with breathtaking planning and efficiency. This showed that it was not masterminded by some fringe rascals.

The fact that it happened, however, surprised only those who could not - or did not - want to read the map. It did not come as a sudden bolt of lightning from a clear, cloudless sky.

Let's try to read the map, at least in retrospect.

1) From its early days, the Arab/Islamic world has developed the idea that the entire world would have to be converted to the denomination of Islam. This idea, although derived from the Koran, is not supported by it. The Koran acknowledges as Muslim such Jewish Prophets as Elijah, Elisha, and King David, and even pre-Abrahamic figures like Noah and Adam. In addition, the Koran states that Allah willed to create different nations (peoples), each with its own specific ordinances and callings. In spite of that clear dictum, Muslim scholars and clergy [if I may be allowed to use this Christian term in our context] declared the world to be divided into two realms: the realm of Dar-es-Salaam, identified as that part of the world where Islam rules; and the realm of Dar-el-Hareb (lit. "rule of the sword") identified as the rest of the nations that are not yet governed by Muslim law but must be brought to accept Islamic rule and rulers - if necessary by war.

The two major attempts made so far in that vein, have failed: The first advance of the Muslim Arab armies towards Rome was thwarted in 711 by Charles Martelle; and the second attempt, carried out by Turkish Muslim armies from the Balkans via Vienna, was thwarted by Prince Eugene. However, as an age-old Arab/Muslim saying has it, one has to make three efforts to achieve a goal, with the third being the decisive one.

2) Islam, once the leading world power culturally and militarily, began to decline in 1254 with the destruction by the Mongols of its cultural center, Baghdad. The Muslim military victory over the Crusaders in the very same century did not lead to political or cultural advances; on the contrary, the European powers gained the upper hand, to the extent that they could subjugate even Muslim nations and treat them like colonies. When the European powers weakened themselves in WWI & WWII, and the Turkish Empire collapsed, only then could Muslim and Arab nationalistic movements thrive, and infuse new hope into their societies.

3) The Balfour Declaration of 1918 brought another, and decisive turning point: the decision that a Jewish national home be established in the Land of "Palestine." (The English used this name for the land, translated from the ancient Roman term.) "Palestine" of the British Mandate was clearly within the realm of what had been considered "Dar-es-Salaam" since the Khaliph Omar in the 8th century.

While some Arab/Muslim leaders (like King Feisal of Iraq and Sheikh Abdallah of Transjordan) were ready to accept the Jews back in their ancient homeland, others under the leadership of the Grand Mufti Amin el-Husseini gained the upper hand in their adamant and violent hostility against any return of the Jews. The newly-established Arab League gave political support to the Mufti's efforts on a national and international level. In WWII Amin el-Husseini established close ties with Nazi leaders, went to Germany, and in 1943 he broadcast a call on Radio Berlin to wage Jihad against the Jews, and "kill them wherever you find them - this would be pleasing to Allah". He also raised two Muslim SS-divisions (from Muslims of the Balkan and of Southern Russia then under German occupation), in support of the German war effort.

4) El-Husseini was captured in 1945 by the French, but instead of bringing him to trial together with other war criminals, they released him shortly afterwards to Cairo. In cooperation with the Arab League, he played a decisive role in organizing violent resistance against any immigration of Jewish refugees from Europe. In the ensuing civil war, his gangs fought against Jews and British alike - but England also did not bring him to justice.

5) The newly-established United Nations, on behest of England as the Mandatory Power over "Palestine", debated the latter's fate. In their famous Resolution of Nov. 29, 1947, a UN majority vote decided to divide what was left of the Land of "Palestine" - 78% of Palestine had already been converted into Transjordan - and establish therein a Jewish State next to an Arab Palestine State.

6) The Arab states, together with most of the other Muslim states, had not only voted against the establishment of a Jewish state - that is, a non-Muslim entity in a territory conceived to be part of the Dar-es-Salaam - they tried by all means to prevent the coming into existence of Israel: in the war of 1948, seven Arab states sent their armies against the newly established State of Israel. The Transjordanians succeeded in capturing the so-called West Bank and East Jerusalem, but instead of establishing a Palestinian state, they incorporated these areas into their own state, renaming it The Kingdom of Jordan.

Not abiding by a majority vote of the UNO; sending regular armies against one of its legally recognized member states; and annexing a territory against an UNO decision, amounts to clear threefold defiance of UNO authority. The UNO chose to ignore that snub - the first one in a long chain of defiances to follow:

a) The "Arab League" waged a propaganda and economic war against Israel (the notorious "Arab boycott" of Israel being one of their many actions).

b) They organized and supported guerrilla groups (now spoken of as terror groups) to undermine Israel from within, and openly proclaimed as their goal the destruction of Israel.

Some groups palm off this war of theirs to the world as a Muslim's religious duty, while others clothe it in the garb of a national liberation movement. The most notorious among the latter is Arafat's PLO = Palestine Liberation Organization, a term coined for political convenience mainly in the arena of international relations. His very (adopted) name Arafat is a highly charged religious term which as a nom de guerre serves to drive home a salient point to Arabic-speaking Muslims: Arafat is the name of a high mountain climbed by the faithful as the climax of Haj to Mecca.

Although the PLO's charter has defined the term "Palestine" as the territory stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, thus including the territory of the State of Israel (meaning the elimination of the latter), Arafat and his PLO were -and are- widely supported by all Arab/Muslim states: financially, politically, propagandistically, etc. Again this is in defiance of the UNO, and aimed against one of its member states, Israel. The UNO swallowed that as a given.

c) Furthermore, when the PLO's chieftain, Yassir Arafat, was invited to address a UNO plenary session, he showed up in uniform, clutching an olive branch in one hand, and in the other hand brandishing a pistol. He was warmly applauded, despite this threefold transgression of the UNO Charter:

--he was invited although he does not represent a recognized state;
--the very name PLO advocates the elimination of a member state, Israel;
--and no weapons are allowed in the UNO compound.

7) Aside from the war of 1948, Arab states waged two major wars to destroy Israel (in 1967, and in 1973) but were never taken to account by the UNO- which was obligated to come forth in defense of Israel as one of its member states. By this failure on their part to act, along with the above-mentioned violations, the UNO as such - along with its individual member states - constitutes a de facto acceptance of the Islamic concept of Dar-es-Salaam versus Dar-el-Hareb. This inaction with its implied acknowledgment, brings even moderate Muslim states and individuals under the sway of Arafat and his supporters.

8) Equally overlooked by the non-Muslim world are the "Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the Academy of Islamic Studies". This Conference was convened in Sept. 1969 at the Al-Azhar University, Cairo, on behest of Gaml Abd-el-Nasser, then President of Egypt. It outlined the rules for the Jihad to be waged against Israel. Support of the latter was denounced as a "challenge to Muslim peoples, a demonstration of enmity toward them and a total disregard of their sentiments" (pp. 921, 924). The "Proceedings" of that Conference were published and distributed in 1970 by Egypt's "General Organization of Government Printing Offices" in Cairo. This constitutes Egyptian governmental backing of the "Jihad" against Israel, and a declaration that any support for Israel is "enmity toward the Muslim people".

9) Lebanon is, on the one hand, treated as an independent nation (Lebanon is under Syrian occupation), but on the other hand, it is not held responsible for allowing terrorist groups to operate against Israel from its territory (first the PLO and other Palestinian groups; then Amal and Hizbollah).

10) Israeli soldiers and an American Jew have been taken hostage by those terrorist groups, but Lebanon is not held responsible; rather Israel is forced to negotiate with these terrorist groups (indirectly, with the help of third parties.

11) Syria, which attacked Israel in 1948; in 1966/7; and in 1973, is rewarded for these aggression with a seat in the Security Council - something which is denied to Israel for "technical reasons". Since Israel still has no internationally recognized borders, it apparently can be attacked till its disappearance from the map allows Dar-es-Salaam to be re-established in the Near East.

12) Shortly before the USA and Britain toppled Saddam's regime, Iraq's deputy prime minister, Mr. Aziz, declared in a plenary session of the UNO that his country's support for Palestinian suicide bombers does not constitute backing terror; rather it should be understood as aiding freedom fighters. He was actually allowed to get away with that remark without a reprimand. The UNO simply swallowed it.

13) The "Road Map", with its promise of an independent Palestinian State by 2005, must be conceived by the Arab/Muslim states as proof that their politics of combining membership in the UNO with defying the core reason of its existence, while all along supporting all kind of terror groups, has softened Israel and the USA (not to speak of Europe), and is paying off handsomely. If so, more terror attacks can be expected...

14) The above should not be understood as an attempt to declare the "West" free of any sin. Who in this world could claim to be without sin and guilt? Who could "throw the first stone?" There are ways to solve our problems, and perhaps we will look for them once the situation deteriorates to the unbearable.

The points raised above are only a few of the examples that could be offered, but they are sufficient to demonstrate that the UNO has become a travesty of its original purposes.

True, General Secretary, Mr. Kofi Anan, recently said that the UNO would not allow Israel's destruction. Well spoken - but what backing do these words have? So far, these words of his have not been supported by congruent actions.

The UNO's very intention to create a Palestinian state on Israel's homeland amounts to Israel's mutilation and ensuing destruction. If the struggle were a confrontation between two religions, it would perhaps be asking too much of the UNO to deal with it, as this would be beyond its capacity and raison d'etre as a political body. But the Arab/Israel conflict is a political confrontation, under the guise of religious motifs and in plain distortion of the Koran.

It took the Sept.11 attack on the Pentagon and the WTC to awaken the USA, at least to some degree, to the harsh facts. But the UNO goes on, entangled in its dichotomy, apparently unaware that untruthfulness will eventually have its revenge on those who champion it.

Dr. Eder is Jewish Co-Chairman of the Islam-Israel Fellowship, Root and Branch Association, which is based in Jerusalem.

The JINSA Report #373, November 13, 2003.

The Saudis are furious! They don't like their women and children being blown up, particularly not by Moslems during Ramadan. Similarly, the Red Cross moaned that its "neutrality" should have protected it from the bombing that killed scores of its people in Baghdad. Neither victim group seems outraged by bombings per se, only that their status (not Americans?) should have made the bombers choose someone else. But if not them, who?

Israeli children, perhaps? American soldiers?

This is a misunderstanding about the enemy in the war against terrorists and the states that harbor and support them, about who they are and what they want. The terrorists are Moslem totalitarians - like Nazi and communist and Palestinian totalitarians. Anyone insufficiently enthusiastic about the agenda is the enemy, including other Moslems. The Nazis killed Germans, the communists killed Russians, and Mussolini's fascists killed Italians. Palestinians kill Palestinians all the time. We just tend not to notice when people are killing their own, and notice more when they kill us.

When the Red Cross provided aid and comfort to Iraqis who are not fighting the Americans, the Red Cross became the enemy and Iraqi civilians who took their help became the enemy as well. When the Saudi government backed the liberation, Saudis became the enemy. Doctors, relief workers, women and children - they are all the enemy of both religious and secular Islamic totalitarians.

So are Jacques Chirac, the Germans, the Belgians, most of the rest of the UN and the EU, regular Arabs including regular Palestinians, and the American anti-war crowd - all of whom consider an American failure in Iraq to be tolerable because they think it will be the failure of President Bush. They think they will be safe because they are not he. They are wrong. Mr. Bush said, "You are with us or you are with the terrorists," and the terrorists hold the principle in the obverse. If you are not with them, you are with "us" and if you are with "us," you can die.

To simplify the syntax, we ask, "Who are the 'we' that 'they' would kill?"

First, "we" are people who are sorry Saudi children died - while "they" are people who hail the death of Israeli children. "We" are the liberal, small-d democratic world that believes in human rights, liberty and the rule of law. "We" are the multiple coalitions fighting the totalitarians of the 21st Century. America and the governments of Israel, Britain, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Japan, Hungary, Poland and more.

Failure in Iraq is not an option for us, for the Iraqis or for millions of people in many, many countries who understand that in the eyes of the fascists, "we" are all Americans now and "we" are all Israelis.

Even the Saudis and the Red Cross.

Posted by Lori Lowenthal Marcus, November 13, 2003.

Where are the heroes? I have been watching, and waiting, for prominent members of Jewish communities across this country, across the world, to stand up and say: "I am a Jew. I will not allow another public anti-Israel, anti-Semitic slur go unchallenged. I will not wait for someone else to take up the cudgels."

But last week the name partner of an international law firm based in Philadelphia said "Enough." Stephen A. Cozen, of Cozen O'Connor, took a stand.

Cozen sent an email to all of his law firm colleagues, more than a thousand of them.

After reading about a worldwide campaign to shame Israel for defending itself, coordinated by an organization named, "The Grassroots Palestinian Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign," Cozen spoke out.

"I can no longer feel comfortable with myself if I simply stand silent in the face of organized terrorism," he explained in his email. After a few succinct paragraphs explaining his understanding of the historical facts, Cozen shared his underlying concern.

"Israel and the Jewish people have learned what it is like to live under a regime which perverts the truth and seeks the annihilation of a people." Cozen wrote that he and his "wife, children and grandchildren are today twice-targeted for murder and extinction by radical Islamic fundamentalists throughout the world simply because we are Americans and because we are Jews."

Cozen ended his missive with what I suspect is an explanation for his reluctance to speak out, earlier. He wrote, "I am not a 'public person' and doubt that I have the capability, acting alone, to influence vast numbers of people." But his exhortation to understand the facts and not be swayed by the rhetoric proves that he does have that elusive but indispensable capability.

Steve Cozen, a prominent lawyer and leader in an important legal community, has made his mark. He does have the "capability... to influence vast numbers of people." That influence must be felt and acted upon by others in his position.

One local Jewish community leader has taken a position, driven by his own moral strength. Cozen was not physically threatened with knives or the threat of torture and imminent death. But Cozen did, in essence, proclaim the same words that Daniel Pearl was forced to utter with his last breath of life. And we must all understand both the content and the source of Cozen's message. We must speak those words from strength, or we'll be forced to speak them from fear.

Too long comfortable Jews, in comfortable positions, have been hobbled by the discomfort of taking a public stand. Consider the vast numbers of still-fearful Jews who have risen to the highest echelons of corporations, the entertainment industry, the citadels of higher education. In fifty years time Jews have dragged themselves up from the pits of hell and risen to positions of power.

But to what end? The "glass ceiling" that women and complexion-minorities (non-Caucasians) still face is transparent for Jews. Yet how many of these leaders have used their public faces to speak out on behalf of Israel? The shame of being "Just a Jew" binds their mouths just as their dreams were once bound by persecution and worse. Despite their impressive achievements, those Jews are still in hiding below glass ceilings of their own construction.

In Cozen's email he didn't request, much less demand, that his employees follow the "party line." Quite the opposite. He told them to make their own judgments, but cautioned them to "be careful about the rhetoric you hear." The bile rose in his throat upon realizing he had overestimated the power of truth, and underestimated the power of street theater and glib slogans. Cozen firmly believes everyone must make their own informed decisions. But he cautioned against decisions "informed" by slogans that ignite passion, those same slogans built upon foundations of misinformation.

It is time for American Jewish leaders to rise above their glass ceilings of shame and silence. Be an actor on the world stage. Follow Steve Cozen's lead.

Lori Lowenthal Marcus, a writer and lawyer, lives outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 13, 2003.

Ever since Yitzhak Rabin was gunned down by an assassin, the political establishment in Israel has attempted to construct a sort of cult of personality around him and his "legacy," at times bordering on deification. While I happen to believe that Rabin was in error about nearly everything he did or said in his last three years of life, I also believe that there are indeed positive aspects of the Rabin legacy that should be learned by Israel and applied by the political establishment.

And the most important part of the positive Rabin Legacy is exactly the same as the one the political establishment is trying to suppress and forget: namely, Rabin's attitude towards buying the release of captives by releasing jailed terrorists.

While the McCarthyist Left would like everyone to forget everything Rabin ever did except when he imposed the Oslo fiasco on the country, in reality the most constructive, courageous, and remarkable thing that Rabin ever did in his entire career was to refuse to release jailed terrorists to meet the demands of the PLO hijackers of the Air France plane full of Jews to Entebbe, Uganda, and instead order in the Israeli crack troops.

The very same politicians who salute the Rabin Legacy and use Rabin's photo as an icon are also cheering on the cowardly decision by the government to release 400 murderers in order to reward the Hizbollah for murdering three POWs in cold blood. No crack troops ordered in. Now baths of napalm for Hizbollah villages. No Rabin Legacy.

Rabin, the courageous and intelligent part of Rabin, is rolling in his grave.

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 13, 2003.
As world pressure mounts against Israel's construction of the 'security fence,' Israel continues to attempt to justify the costly venture. In a front page, headline appearing in Maariv, 16 Heshvon, 5764 the following misleading headline appears: The fence prevented tens of deaths. According to statistics gathered by the Israeli Defense Ministry the number of those murdered in areas that had already constructed the fence is down by 95 percent. Terrorist admit under interrogation: We search for places where there is no fence.

Comment: Brilliant. The Arab terrorists take their guns, grenades and bombs to other areas. In other words terrorists will continue to attack Jews wherever they can have an easier job of doing so. And if there is a fence surrounding Tel Aviv, they will be forced to crawl under the fence as they have already done in some cases. And if they can't crawl under the fence, they will concentrate on massacring Jews on the roads in Yesha. And if Israel spends billions of additional dollars to build walls around the roads, the Arabs will still find ways to shoot through and over the walls as they have done on the tunnel road between Jerusalem and Efrat. And if Israel succeeds in protecting the roads, then the Arabs will simply launch more attacks against the 150 'settlements' in Yesha. The point is clear. The Arabs are multiplying in numbers and increasing attacks against Israel and even in areas such as Gaza where the handful of 'settlements' and the 'border' fence is more 'secure,' the Arabs! have simply moved on to Kassam rockets.

Eventually Israel will need to understand that they must find a true solution to prevent Arab terrorism. Bypass roads, bulletproof vehicles, rock proof vehicles, fences, tunnels and all of the other billion dollar bogus solutions will not solve the problem. Some say there is a political solution. Others claim there is a military solution. It dos not seem that those in power are having much success in convincing the Arabs to make peace. The Generals are not having enough success on the battlefields either. It is time to find new methods to distance the Arab threat and to smash Arab terrorism. However, building fences and running away from the Arabs or surrendering land is not working.

Today [Ed:This was received Nov 5th.], marks the 13th anniversary since the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane HY"D, it is time to legalize the Kahane groups and to encourage open debate and review of all those who offered real answers to the very real threats that endanger the survival of Israel.

At a time when the left openly accuses the nationalist camp in Israel of name calling and incitement that they claim led to the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, it is only fair to review the slanderous and unprecedented campaign of hate and incitement against Rabbi Meir Kahane, before his assassination. Who was Rabbi Meir Kahane? What did Rabbi Kahane advocate? The Israeli press and politicians claimed that he wanted to kill the Arabs. Rabbi Meir Kahane constantly refuted those allegations. To find out who Rabbi Kahane really was and to formulate your own opinion, you should visit the Kahane web site and decide for yourself. Go to http://www.kahane.org

If you do not owe it to Rabbi Kahane, you owe it to yourself, to your children and to the future of Israel to search for urgently needed answers. A blueprint for the survival of Israel must be found. The answer will not be found in billions of dollars worth of additional fences.

Posted by Herbert B. Sunshine, November 13, 2003.

Rabbi Meir Kahane Ben Yechezkel, was the antithesis of the assimilated Jew. Descended from a dynasty of Rabbis on both his father's and his mother's side, he himself is the father of Rabbis. He lived the way he believed and his beliefs are in his writings. His role model was the ancient poet-warrior, David, King of Israel. His Yeshivah of the Jewish Idea extolled Jewish pride, Jewish heritage and authentic Torah learning.

His essays of twenty and thirty years ago were timely then and timeless now because of their vision and truthfulness.

He officiated at my wedding in l987 and we were close personally until his murder in 1990, Rabbi Kahane was a constant inspiration. He appointed me to write his press releases during the last eighteen months of his life. I traveled with him during his campaign for Knesset in l988. I was at the High Court on the day he was banned from running for the Knesset and I demonstrated in favor of the Referendum intended to restore his right to run. At the end, I followed his body from his Yeshivah to his grave in Har Menuchot in Jerusalem.

He was depicted by the media disrespectfully. But he was respected, even loved, by the thousands of Jews whose lives he touched.

I lived for a time in a Merkaz Klitah (Absorption Center) together with many other immigrants, the majority of whom were from the former Soviet Union There, during the winter of 1988 I took ill. Rabbi Kahane, more ill than I came to visit. A Russian neighbor, seeing Rabbi Kahane with me, invited me to his tiny, sparsely furnished apartment. He proudly pointed out the two pictures hanging on his wall. One was of his beautiful daughter. The other photograph was that of Rabbi Meir Kahane to whom he gave credit for his liberation from the Soviet Union.

The test of a true Prophet is whether his predictions for good come true. In that sense, and because no man is a prophet in his own time, Rabbi Kahane's vision was perceptive, not prophetic. However, like the Prophet Yeshiayhu, the Rabbi did not speak of "sweet things." Not unlike some of the Prophets of Old, he was vilified, jailed, banned and murdered. The Jewish establishments of both Israel and the United States targeted their mortal enemy, Rabbi Meir Kahane, the religious, Zionistic Jew. I want to give at least one example of the arbitrary hostility of the Israel Establishment against any threat to its politicalpower. Israel has retained a British Mandate Law prohibiting the "causing of dissatisfaction" to a public official. It was used by both the British and Israel governments against Jews. It was a major weapon in the Government's war against Rabbi Kahane. Arrested dozens of times for political reasons, on one occasion he was jailed for "causing dissatisfaction" to then Prime Minister Yithak Shamir.

An Arab murderer had grabbed the steering wheel of TelAviv-Jerusalem Bus 405 pulling it into a steep ravine killing and injuring many riders, Rabbi Kahane immediately called for the resignation of the Prime Minister for failing to protect the lives of Jews. This statement "disatisfied" the government. This disgraceful British Mandate law further states that the "truth" of the "guilty" expression shall not constitute a "defense" to the charge.

The Rabbi's defense lawyer moved to dismiss on the usually valid ground that the indictment was unsigned. The Judge denied the motion, stating that she wanted to hear the "truth" of the charges, despite the irrelevance of truth under the law of Israel. The charge, which could have resulted in five years imprisonment, was pending at the time of the Rabbi's murder.

Consistent with his religious beliefs that every Jew has an obligation to defend the State, the Rabbi served in the Israeli Army. The Arabs were at that time rioting in the city of Kalkilya and the IDF was assigned to intervene. Who better to send than the Rabbi? Then, as now, Israel endured an Arab revolt and pursued a futile policy of "purity of arms." The unit commander gave the Rabbi his orders. "You must first give warning in Hebrew and in Arabic before shooting; you must fire in the air before attacking." The Rabbi declined this invitation to commit suicide and was told, "If the Arabs don?t kill you, then you will face court martial for disobedience."

Together with one frightened rookie assigned to him, Rabbi Kahane approached the rioters. He was instantly identified. "Kahane, Kahane," screamed the Arabs as they dispersed. No shots were fired. No blood was shed. Peace was restored.

He was later to say, "If I am ever Prime Minister, there will be no need to transfer Arabs. When they hear of Kahane's election, they will run out on their own."

In l984, the Central Elections Committee, described by the High Court, as a body "which is almost entirely composed of members with defined political outlooks...," disqualified Rabbi Kahane's Kach Party. The ruling was reluctantly reversed. The High Court required enabling legislation which set forth "yardsticks, clear limitations and definitions." For a list to be banned, the Court asked for legislation and standards. To survive court review the law must define the "measure of the violation and the reasonableness of the danger (to democratic principles)." [Neiman v. the Chairman of the Central Elections Committee E.A 2,3/84]

In 1985 the Knesset heeded the Court's message and passed legislation to ban a competing party. They passed a law lacking standards and definitions in conflict with the Court's decision. They passed a law tailor made to ban Rabbi Kahane and his Party.

"7A. A list of candidates shall not participate in elections to Knesset if there is in its goals or acts... any of the following:

(1) The negation of the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish people.
(2) The negation of the democratic nature of the State.
(3) Incitement to racism."

In the original bill "racism" was undefined. The expectation of the bill's sponsors was for the High Court to equate Kahanism with "racism". The Rabbi wrote in a letter from the Knesset.

"472 days passed and still no bill... I did want a bill with a good definition, a thing that only a dreamer and people of immense faith could ever imagine the Knesset coming up with... And, of course, the miracle happened, in the way G-d always makes it happen. My worst enemy saved me. Knesset Speaker Hillel - a man who goes to sleep every night with me in his head - saw that the Knesset session was coming to a close... so in his obsession he announced that come what may he was tabling it for the next to the last day of the session. Faced with the ultimatum by Hillel... and the anger of the religious parties, the Law Committee, which is controlled by Likud, CHANGED [sic] the bill and added a definition which took out "religion" as a cause of incitement to racism and specifically declared that statements based on Judaism would not be racist... In the end of this Alice-in Wonderland scene, all the leftists who originated the bill voted against it and I voted... for it. G-d is great."

Rabbi Kahane sought re-election to the Knesset in l988. In August he told an enthusiastic crowd of hundreds of campaign workers, "The polls show us as getting between l0 and l3 seats. We will then be the third largest party in Israel."

"There will be no government without the Kach Party or there will be no government."
"We will demand conditions, and these conditions are non-negotiable."
"Every Jew sitting in an Israeli prison for ideological reasons will be freed immediately. He will not be given a pardon because pardons are only for criminals. (These Jews) will be welcomed in the Knesset by the Prime Minister himself."
"There will be an automatic death penalty for Arab terrorists."
"The Temple Mount will be given to the Chief Rabbi of Israel and we will build a synagogue there."
"The Arab citizens of Israel will do National Service on the roads."
"There will be an end to the insanity of subsidizing Arab babies."
"The law of 'who is a Jew' will be amended in conformity with Halachah."
"There will be an anti-missionary law. The Mormon Temple will become the largest synagogue in the country."
"We will create a Jewish State, not a State of Hebrew speaking Gentiles. No longer will Jews be afraid in their own Land."
"The dream of 2000 years has become a nightmare."

Hearing these words, I thought, "Rabbi, catch the ball before you run with it." Friends have later told me, "If he(Rabbi Kahane) had only softened his words. If he had only been more polite, he might not have banned from running." The Rabbi, in reply to this said, "If I were to speak only 'nice things' then I am Shimon Peres, not Meir Kahane."

Retribution for these conditions was swift. On October 5, l988, the Central Elections Committee for the l2th Knesset, decided that the Kach list is prohibited from participating in the elections under paragraph 7A, for "inciting to racism."

To prove that the "goals and acts" of the Rabbi and his party were within the confines of Torah Law,(to be exempt from racism under the Knesset law)) the Rabbi's attorney sought expert testimony from leading Rabbis. All of the Rabbis approached confirmed that the principles of Rabbi Kahane and his Kach Party were within Halachah; however, each requested support from two others, before agreeing to testify. Thus, the High Court did not have the guidance of religious experts on such issues as Jewish sovereignty in Israel, intermarriage, transfer of enemy aliens, or the incompatibility of Torah Judaism with Grecian-derived democracy.

In an opinion that is historic and which should be required study in all Israeli schools, particularly in its Law schools, The High Court of Israel, speaking through its Kippah-wearing Judge, Menachem Eilon, found the Halachah (Torah Law) as expressed by Rabbi Kahane to be "racist." (October, 1888)

The learned Judge defined the word "ger" as "resident stranger" (a neighbor to whom the Jew owes 'kindness') rather than with its true meaning, "ger toshav," (a non-Jew who has accepted the Seven Noachide Laws) and is thus permitted to live among Jews in the Land of Israel.

Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, which is the consensus authority on Torah Law, states:

"When, however, Israel is in power over them, [the gentiles] it is forbidden for us to allow an idolater among us... [Exodus 23:33] states, 'They shall not dwell in your land' - i.e., even temporarily... A person who accepts these seven mitzvoth is a "ger toshav." A "ger toshav" may be accepted only in the era when the [laws of the] Jubilee Year are observed. In an era when the [laws of the] Jubilee Year are not observed, however, we may accept only full converts [to JudaIsm]." (Rambam, Hilchot Avodat Kochavim l0:6)

Rabbi Kahane explained this law:

"...The Ishmaelites who view the Jewish People as thieves are thirsty for Jewish blood and will never abandon their ambition of destroying our nation and its land. For that reason, the law of the seven nations applies to them, and whoever hesitates in this, will, through his foolish mercy, bring cruelty upon merciful sons of merciful fathers." (Or Hara'ayon, The Jewish Idea, vol. II, p. 631, Rabbi Meir Kahane)

The State of Israel is the "State of the Jewish People" but Western "democracy" would permit an elected Arab majority to rule Israel. About this, the opinion says:

"...the existence of the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish People does not negate its democratic nature, just as the Frenchness of France does not negate its democratic nature."

If the Kach Party could run for office because their "racist" programs were (by statute) exempt as being based on religion, and if such statements "negate[ed] the democratic nature of the State, then is there not a fundamental incompatibility between Torah Judaism and Western Democracy? The High Court's resolution of this dilemma was to deny the religious content of the Kach program and further to sanctify the "Israelness" of Israel over its Jewish nature.

There is a photo of Rabbi Kahane as he emerged from the Court House being carried on the shoulders of his supporters. They sang and they danced. "Did you win or lose, Rabbi?" I asked. "Gam zu l'tova," he replied, "Everything from G-d is for the good."

During the same session the High Court held that the Arab lists, which unashamedly advocated the destruction of the State of Israel and its Jewish inhabitants, were not in violation of Section 7A. Their platforms were declared to be neither undemocratic, inciteful nor racist, and therefore the Arabs of Israel were eligible to serve as Knesset members with the power even to determine "Who is a Jew."

A body blow, not yet fatal, had been dealt to the Kach Party. Other assaults were designed to prevent the resurgence of this right wing Party.

Fearing the loss of seats to Kach, Likud sponsored a bill requiring that any candidate for Knesset must, before running, surrender any non-Israeli citizenship. Such a bill (directed against a single individual) is unconstitutional in the United States, Had Golda Meir been subject to this legislation, she could have lost her U.S. citizenship. The taking of Rabbi Kahane's U.S. citizenship was intended to cripple his ability to travel to raise funds.

In the letter which accompanied the surrender of his passport to the U.S. State Department, the Rabbi (a citizen of the U.S. by birth) stated that he intended the renouncement of american citizenship to be conditional upon his re-election to Knesset.

In 1990 Rabbi Kahane entered the United States with permission to contest this issue in Federal Court. The case become moot upon his death.

The last blow to the Kach Party was administered by a Knesset seeking to pacify the United States State Department which demanded "even handed-ness" in Israel's war against the Arab Revolution. There being no Jewish terrorists, Kach would do, and so the Party, having been incessantly demonized by the Government controlled media, was declared to be illegal. In true autocratic style, this was done without notice, or hearing or right of appeal. Based upon the Israeli decision, the United States, without independent proof, placed Kach on its list of terrorist organizations, side by side with Hamas and Al Qaida.

The hand was the hand of Esau, but the mind was the mind of Jacob. The hand which fired a bullet into the head of Rabbi Meir Kahane, in mid-Manhattan on the night of November 5, 1990 was that of the Egyptian terrorist, El Sayed Nossair. Esau hates Yaakov, in every generation, and Yaakov, in the form of the Government of Israel, hated and feared Rabbi Meir Kahane.

The Egyptian was acquitted of Rabbi Kahane's murder. He was found guilty only of illegally possessing a weapon. A search of the murderer's apartment uncovered 47 boxes of documents in Arabic which proved that "he (Nossair) was at the heart of a worldwide terrorist network." (Jerusalem Post 11/25/94)

The Israel government's indifference to the assassination of this Member of Knesset was mirrored by the American Jewish Establishment. Neither demanded an objective thorough investigation, and so the motivation, financing and larger significance of the murder remains hidden to this day.

Baruch Marzel, a disciple of the Rabbi and later to be a Knesset candidate, requested that the F.B.I. "look into the backers of Nossair..." On December 7, 1990 he wrote:

"The killing of Rabbi Meir Kahane is a terrorist act held in the United States because America has little experience with terrorism and is not prepared. If the F.B.I. will treat this case as an act of international terror, then the support group behind Nossair will be unearthed."

In February of 1993, a bomb was set off in the parking level of the World Trade Center. Six people were killed and more than 1000 injured. Four terrorists, linked to Nossair, were convicted of this attack in March, 1994.

On October 1, 1995, Nossair and the blind Muslim Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman, and ten others, were convicted in U.S. Federal Court of conspiracy to blow up the UN, an FBI building, and three bridges and tunnels.

The funeral of Rabbi Meir Kahane was announced on hundreds of huge posters pasted on boards throughout Israel. On Thursday, November 8, 1990 at 3:00P.M., the procession commenced from the Rabbi's Yeshivah of the Jewish Idea in the Shmuel HaNavi neighborhood of Jerusalem.

"He sacrificed his life for the sake of the Nation of Israel, its Torah and its Land," declared the posters. Those present exceeded l00,000, making it the second largest funeral in Israel's history. Mourners flooded the streets for blocks around the Yeshivah. Young and old, religious and secular, Sephardi and Ashkenazi, native Israelis and immigrants, men, women and children, jointly mourned their great loss. Rabbi Meir Kahane, a leader of the generation had united Jews at his death as he had attempted to lead them during his life.

The Government of Israel never ceased its de-legitimization of Rabbi Kahane and the harassment of his followers. Despite the murder of more than 1000 Jews, the wounding and maiming of thousands more, and the more than 5000 murderous attacks during the years folowing the failure of Oslo.

On July 7, 2002, the Attorney General of Israel indicted a young Kahane supporter: "The Defendant is accused of having "printed... the picture of Rabbi Kahane on the front of a number of shirts, and on the back thereof he printed the slogan, 'no arabs, no terror attacks.'" The charge, still pending, is "incitement to racism."

On most Fridays, an Arab cleric will preach at the Al Aksa mosque on the Temple Mount that Jews are "infidels," "occupiers" of "Arab" land and deserving of expulsion, if not death. No Arab preachers have been indicted for "incitement" or "racism" arising out of their expounding their (Muslim) religion.

One is tempted to speculate on the history of the Jewish people in Israel had Rabbi Kahane's life been spared.

Had Israel been led by a strong, G-d fearing Jew, would Israel have adopted the Oslo Surrender Plan, creating a PLO Army with 50,000 Israel-supplied machine guns? Would the Holy Places of Shchem (the Arab Nablus), the Cave of the Patriarchs, the site of the First and Second Temples, have become Mosques, dangerous if not impossible for Jewish worship? Would there have been brazen desecration of the name of the G-d of Israel when priceless artifacts of Jewish history were scooped up by Arab bulldozers and dumped in garbage heaps under the eyes of the Israeli Department of Antiquities?

Would there have been interminable Arab revolution, relentlessly decimating Jews, the Israeli economy and the standing of the Jewish people throughout the world? Would an Israeli government, led by a less fearful Jew be guided by a policy that there is no "military solution" to the Intifada?

Would there be crammed down the throats of a sovereign people a series of "Land for Peace Plans," (Madrid, Oslo, Wye, Taba, Camp David, Tenet, Mitchell, The Road Map, and recently, Geneva) whereby the People of Peace with little land give land to People of Terror who have millions of square miles of land, trading Holy Land for dubious peace?

"The Jewish people should be a light unto the world, not a memorial candle," Rabbi Kahane often said.

"Anti-Semitism is not created by Jews who stand proud and tall in defense of their people." (Rabbi Meir Kahane, December 11, l970.)

Mr. Sunshine is a retired U.S. Attorney-at-Law who resides in Jerusalem. He conducted a private practice of law for 35 years and was an adjunct Professor of Law in Upstate New York. In Israel, Mr. Sunshine served as President of the Yeshivah of the Jewish Idea and was, until its banning, a member of the Inner Council of the Kach Party. He was the English-speaking spokesperson for Rabbi Meir Kahane from 1988 to 1990.

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 13, 2003.

The Palestinian spin doctors are slipping. They are letting the world know what Israelis and Jews have known for many years: Palestinian Arabs want to murder Jewish children. They made their intentions known not once but twice at the UN during the past week.

Lest you think that the Palestinian Arabs actually came out and said "We want to murder Jewish children," let me disabuse you of that notion. However, their behavior was only slightly less subtle. Earlier this week a resolution was drafted calling for the protection of Israeli children victimized by Palestinian Arab terrorism. This particular resolution didn't come from out of the blue; it was in response to one passed last week that called for the protection of Palestinian Arab children yet made no mention of Jewish children and babies. And unlike Palestinian Arab children who are sometimes accidental victims, Jewish children and babies are the most frequent and deliberate target of Palestinian Arabs, in an apparent effort to continue the genocide that Hitler failed to accomplish.

Therefore, in response to that decidedly one-sided resolution, Israel introduced some legislation of its own - the first resolution it has drafted in almost 30 years. The initial draft of the resolution was rejected out of hand by the Palestinian Arab observer to the UN because it was deemed 'political and insensitive.' So Israel rewrote the resolution dropping references to "Palestinian terrorist groups," instead referring to "attacks by terrorist groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade directed against Israeli civilians, including children." The new draft, in an attempt at even-handedness, also closely copies the one passed last week for the protection of Palestinian children.

And still the resolution was thoroughly rejected by the Palestinian Arab observer to the UN, Nadya Rasheed. She declared, "The draft still shamelessly abuses the rubric `Israeli children' to achieve illegitimate political goals, for the draft is more anti-Palestinian than it is pro-Israeli children." One must wonder if Ms. Rasheed is so concerned with a draft being pro-Israeli children, why she didn't come up with an alternate one that does just that?

Meanwhile, another Palestinian Arab observer, Nasser Al-Kidwa stated earlier that the case of Palestinian children was unique because they are "deprived of every single right in the Convention on the Rights of the Child - from statehood and nationality up to the physical safety. It is not the case of any other child in the world." Apparently that man isn't up on current events and is clueless as to his own country's convoluted dealings with Israel.

The Palestinian Arabs were offered statehood with nearly everything they wanted back in 2000 and they rejected it. They were also given the same opportunity with The Roadmap and have so far failed to work towards it. The only thing depriving Palestinian Arab children of statehood are their own people.

In regards to physical safety, Israel does not put Palestinian Arab children in the way of danger. Their own parents, mosques, imams, and government, unlike rational adults concerned about the welfare of their own children, encourage them to go out where the military is operating and throw rocks. These same Palestinian Arabs who profess to care so much for their children also use them as human shields, cowardly hiding among them. They also brainwash them, from the earliest age, in camps and schools to kill themselves while trying to kill as many Israelis as possible.

In actuality, the Palestinian Arab's behavior towards their own children is in direct violation of the 'UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.' In fact, according to that Convention, the Palestinian Arabs' treatment of their own children, as sanctioned by their own government, requires the removal of the children for their own safety. But that is for another editorial.

Meanwhile, let's see if that world body called the UN, whose stated goals are to promote peace, understanding and the protection of children (among other things), values the lives of Jewish babies and children as much as it does Palestinian Arabs and passes a similar resolution to the one last week protecting Palestinian Arab children. And if it doesn't, then it is time to disband the UN and start anew with only those countries that view all humans as precious, not merely Arabs and Muslims.

Posted by Anita Tucker, November 12, 2003.

We have been living in the Gaza Shore town of Netzer Hazani for the last 28 yrs, and have children and grandchildren who live here as well. My husband Stuart visits his hometown - Cleveland - often.

A letter to a friend;

Unfortunately the bombs and shooting continue as "usual" - which is in and of itself crazy. I stopped writing e-mails about it as I felt the subject was getting boring (it sure isn't "boring" for us here) and I felt like I sounded like a "cry-baby" - repeating the same depressing descriptions. Even the descriptions of the miracles probably lose their shine when read so often. However, have no doubt, to us who experience these miracles - every one stands out on it's own as an awe-inspiring event - as a life was saved, as God's presence and intervention was clear as day.

Here it is the thing that gives us the Koach, the strength to continue when we are getting tired of the awful explosion noises that penetrate our Neshama, our soul and try to etch away at our fortitude.

Just yesterday evening three mortars fell next to the Degorker family's home (6 young children). This must be about the fifth time (about 15th mortar) that fell and exploded near this home only since Rosh Hashana. The explosions yesterday evening felt as if I was blowing up - it seemed obvious that something terrible happened.

Amazingly, though, no one was physically hurt. Tzion Edri, father of 5 from Netzer, was driving on the main road of the Yishuv passing the Degorker home (which is the first when you make the left after coming into yishuv), when his cellphone rang.

Tzion halted his car to speak to the caller. At that moment, two meters from him he saw and heard the mortars land and explode. Tzion's car filled with blinding smoke as he touched himself to be assured that he was alive and whole.

Two hours later I met Tzion and Ruthie Degorker at the Bar Mitzva of Avidan Almasi, one of the Yishuv's children, that took place in a Hall in Netivot. They both were fine and whole. Ruthie, who at the beginning of this war seemed frightened and even considered leaving, now was filled with Bitachon in Hashem (faith in God) and felt that she had been the receiver of a big zchut, a privilege to personally experience another miracle - she looked relaxed and strong. Tzion still looked a bit shook up from his adventure but could only express enormous gratefulness to Hashem.

This Bar Mitzva was a most joyous simcha as the music and the dancing reached new heights as we all celebrated this thirteen year old boy's having reached this special day, as we tried to give him energy to reach his future potential as well.

I feel frustration at knowing that this cruel evil enemy again targeted this specific area to try to kill and maim the very many children and youth that are always in the basketball court and in the Moadon Yochanan Youth building that are meters from the Degorker home. Apparently the Israel Defence Force, as us in the Yishuv, are grateful for God's miracles and rely on them. However if, God forbid, (we should know no troubles) the enemy continue in these murder attempts directly on our children and hurt any of them, the I.D.F. and us will feel criminal. We knew, yet did nothing!

So this war is not about land, nor about peace. It is about the basic tenets of humanity. It is about evil and good, about sadness and joy, death and life. We are commanded to choose good and joy and life - so this must prevail over what this cruel evil enemy has chosen.

I think I'll go say some Tehillim(Psalms) and then write a letter to our Minister of Defence.

Anita Tucker is a member of the Jerusalem Diaries group, who record their everyday experiences living in Israel.

Posted by Dr. Ali Sina, November 12, 2003.

We often hear that Islam is a religion of peace, that the terrorists are extremists and that we should work with the moderate Muslims to build a more peaceful world. The question is however, where are they and who are these moderate Muslims? Let us find one moderate Muslim, peer into his mind and see what he thinks and what his outlook of the world is. Who is better for this than Doctor Mahathir, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, who stepped down from the office last October? Prime Minister Mahathir tried to create a modern Islamic country. He believed that Muslims should not just read religious books but also go after science, mathematics and technology and build modern countries. He was hailed as a moderate Muslim and probably would make a perfect choice for us as the specimen. His last political performance was when he chaired a summit of the leaders of all Isamic countries OIC. In his speech, Mahathir used the word "enemy" and "enemies of Islam" 17 times. He talked about how in the early days of Islam "Allah helped the Muslims to defeat their enemies and to create a great and powerful Muslim civilization" and stated that Muslims today have more wealth (oil) and are more numerous than the early believers and hence they can defeat their detractors and enemies.

To incite his audience, he played the Muslim's favorite card "the victimization card." And kept repeating, "We are all Muslims. We are all oppressed. We are all being humiliated." He groaned, "They will attack and kill us, invade our lands, bring down our Governments."

He acknowledged that the early Muslims built a great civilization by studying the works of the Greeks and other scholars before Islam and then boastfully added that the "Europeans had to kneel at the feet of Muslim scholars in order to access their own scholastic heritage."

Mahathir blamed the "western democratic system" for undermining the unity of the Ummah (The entire Muslim population), even though in reality, the division of the Ummah is due to the incompatibility of Islam with democracy. Muslim rulers often use the Sharia (Islamic law) to suppress the will of the majority.

He concluded that this weakness of Muslims allowed the Europeans to excise Muslim land and create the state of Israel for the Jews.

Then he urged his colleagues to amass "guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships."

He told them that they should encourage learning of science and mathematics and modernize, so that the "Ummah can produce its own weapons and not rely on its detractors and enemies for what it needs most."

So that is what the Muslims need most.

Not food, not medicine, not drinking water and good sanitation, not democracy, not freedom of speech, not respect of their human rights, not equality for their women; but "guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships." This is what the Muslims need most.

Mahathir condemned those who interpret the Quran superficially and do not understand the importance of the above.

Then Mahathir comforted the Muslims by saying, "1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategize and then to counter attack. As Muslims we must seek guidance from the Al-Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet. Surely the 23 years' struggle of the Prophet can provide us with some guidance as to what we can and should do." Mahathir is absolutely right. Al Quran and the Sunnah contain the guideline for the Muslims to strategize and then to attack. Al Quran tells Muslims to hate the unbelievers. It divides the world into two halves, the house of war and the house of Islam. It teaches them that the infidels are fuels for hell, that Muslims should wage war against them in the house of war and kill them wherever they find them and cut their throat from above their necks.

Of course Mahathir's audience were all Muslims.

That is why he did not try to sweeten his talk by sugarcoating it. This is not what we hear from the Muslim apologists in the West who tell us that Islam is a religion of peace and the Quran is a message of love.

Mahathir even spelled out the strategy that Muslims should follow to win this war against their "detractors and enemies". He reminded them of the Hudaibiyah treaty.

In Hudaybiyah, the Prophet Muhammad reluctantly signed an accord that was less than what he and his companions had bargained for. In fact it was a retreat. However, he waited a few more years and after his army was stronger, he broke the treaty and invaded again.

By reminding the Muslims of Hudaibiyah, Dr. Mahathir hinted that Muslims should make a "strategic retreat," "calmly assess the situation, build more weapons, devise a plan, a strategy that can win us final victory" and then strike en mass and conjointly at the enemies of Islam.

Muhathir named the Jews and all those who defend their right to live as the decorators and enemies. He said, "Today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them."

This "others" are of course the Americans, the Europeans and anyone who defends the Jews' right to live and prevent the Muslims from drowning them in the sea.

Dr. Mahathir however, perhaps remembering the support of few friends of Islamists such as Jacques Chirac, the BBC, the liberals and the leftists and their rampant opposition to the USA in its war against terrorism acknowledged that "not all non-Muslims are against us. Some are well disposed towards us. Some even see our enemies as their enemies."

This speech delivered by a moderate Muslim and greeted with standing ovation by the leaders, the kings and the presidents of the entire Islamic world is significant because it sheds light into the reality of Islam.

It makes us see the world through the eyes of the Muslims, not the extremists and the terrorists but the moderate ones, the ones who are our allies, "friends" and the recipients of our aid.

Islam is a divided house. Muslims fight and kill each other constantly for interpreting the Quran in different ways. However all the Muslims are united in one thing and that is their hatred of the Jews and the West.

Dr. Mahathir while emphasizing on the unity of the Ummah acknowledged that a total unity would be impossible. However, he suggested, "all the Muslim countries can close ranks and have a common stand if not on all issues, at least on some major ones, such as on Palestine."

Why should Palestine be important to Malaysia, Indonesia, Bangladesh or Pakistan? Why shouldn't the plight of the Shiites in Pakistan or the Sunnis in Iran be the major point of concern for Muslims and their leaders?

Why is there not even a mention of the slave trade of millions of Christians in Sudan conducted by the Arab Muslims?

Why this much ado about Palestine? The answer is that the perceived occupiers of Palestine are Jews; the ones who, as Muhammad said are descendents of apes and pigs. This is a major humiliation for Muslims. Even a Muslim living in the UK or USA, enjoying all the benefits of the free world and who has no ties with Palestine, can feel oppressed because of this.

After peering into the mind of a moderate Muslim the question that begs an answer is: what is the difference between a moderate Muslim and a terrorist Muslim?

As a former Muslim myself, my long and careful analysis leads me to the conclusion that the only difference is the latter wants to start the Jihad against the infidels now while the former thinks it is better to wait until the Muslims are strong and then attack.

The difference is in the form not in substance. Their only disagreement is when and how the Jihad against the infields should take place. Otherwise all the Muslims, whether moderate or extremist, believe in the same book. That book calls for waging war against the non-Muslims until they are subdued and humiliated. The Quran teaches:

9:29, Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Dr. Ali Sina is the editor of www.faithfreedom.org, an Internet site that strives to lead Muslims out of fundamentalism and into the fold of humanity. http://main.faithfreedom.org/ is the politically incorrect source of information on Islam.

Posted by Morris J. Amitay, November 12, 2003.

It has been asserted that for every human problem there is a solution which is neat, simple - and wrong! But is this always necessarily the case? A number of recent events would indicate otherwise where simple and direct ways of looking at things make a great deal of sense.

Should the proposed lopsided exchange between Israel and the terrorist organization Hezbollah take place, isn't it logical to assume that future kidnapping and hostage taking is almost a certainty? Similarly, the creation of a new Palestinian administration with Arafat, not the new prime minister, in control of all the security services, effectively eliminates the chance of any real clampdown on Hamas and Islamic Jihad. This, in turn, means there can be no meaningful prevention of terrorist attacks and no real progress. This should not be all that hard to figure out - even for those who still talk about fighting "terrorism" instead of eliminating specific terrorists. Another example of not seeing the forest for the trees was the New York Times "revelation" - splashed on its front page (and followed by a lead editorial) of a missed opportunity to prevent the war in Iraq. Given that this is the same publication that campaigned so vigorously against removing Saddam Hussein from power to begin with, and failing that, has been putting the worst light on the aftermath, this hype is no surprise. However common sense tells us that if indeed Saddam had been interested in really doing something to forestall the invasion he would have used more serious channels, i.e. France or Russia, to extend feelers, than a Lebanese-American businessman. Reporter Jim Risen wove together an interesting and complex yarn with colorful characters and complete with secret meetings. But in light of the Times vendetta against the Administration's Iraq policies did this throwing sand in Uncle Sam's face really fit with "all the news fit to print?" We should all know what the answer here is - with only a single definition of "is."

On the other hand, President Bush, previously accused by the French Foreign Minister for his "simplisme" - to his credit, continues to cut to the chase. In his recent major foreign policy address he stated, "Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the cost of liberty."

Well said, Mr. President - and thank you for naming names.

But compare this to his own State Department's attempts to weaken the Syria Accountability Act by granting greater waiver authority over some proposed restrictions on Syria. Reportedly, State's rationale here was that the waiver could be used so we would be able "to provide Syrians with dual use equipment to help it capture terrorists." Capture terrorists? Syria still openly harbors, aids, and abets numerous terrorist groups. A more coherent policy would be to seek the overthrow of the Syrian dictatorship thereby freeing both the people of Syria and its captive state, Lebanon. But the State Department never seems to run out of convoluted reasons to appease dictators in keeping with its status quo uber alles philosophy. Getting from point A to point B at Foggy Bottom is never in a straight line.

And a final example of turning common sense on its head, is the fiasco of the U.S. Army seeking to punish an American officer for protecting his troops in Iraq by using a bit of theatrics. When Lt. Col. Alan fired his pistol near an Iraqi detainee to prevent an ambush, he was definitely doing the right thing at the time. To be then threatened with a court-martial and to be tried for aggravated assault strains credulity. This ill-considered action by the Army must really be a terrific morale builder for our increasingly beleaguered troops in Iraq. As author John Weisman aptly put it, "This is what happens when lawyers, not soldiers, run the military." Here, we thought the Clinton Administration "touchy-feely" approach to war making had been abandoned - but apparently not yet, anyway. It is inconceivable this decision will stand. If it does, our nation is in much more trouble than one thought.

If, indeed, we are in a war, we must surely let our common sense prevail over convoluted reasoning, endless rationalization and failure to acknowledge the obvious. This can only give aid and comfort to our enemies, whose own goals, incidentally, are crystal clear.

Morrie Amitay is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com).

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 12, 2003.
This important article provides the (correct) answer to the crucial question of how long the Middle East conflict will last. The article has some important implications on the situation in Iraq. It was written by Evelyn Gordon and explains why Moshe Katsav, President of the State of Israel, is wrong. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post online edition (http://www.jpost.com) November 10, 2003.

The average Jewish Israeli, according to the latest monthly poll conducted by the Tami Steinmetz Center's Peace Index project, is less gullible than the initiators of the Geneva understandings undoubtedly hoped.

They may have scored with US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who hypocritically gushed last week that "projects such as [this] are important in helping to sustain an atmosphere of hope." (Had a group of Democratic congressmen negotiated a draft peace agreement with Saddam Hussein in the run-up to this year's Iraq war, would Powell also have viewed that as "helping to sustain an atmosphere of hope?")

But a resounding 65 percent of Jewish Israelis declared that peace negotiations by private individuals, such as those that produced the Geneva document, are illegitimate, even if technically legal, because they undermine the elected government's status. Only 28% deemed such behavior legitimate.

Moreover, substantial majorities viewed the document's Israeli sponsors as incapable of representing the national interest. Yossi Beilin was perceived this way by 61% of Jewish Israelis (only 18% thought the opposite), Amram Mitzna by 57% (22%) and Avraham Burg by 41% (26%). That is precisely why Beilin, who vied for places on two Knesset lists, Labor and Meretz, in the last elections, failed to win a realistic slot on either one; why Burg lost the Labor Party leadership contest to Binyamin Ben-Eliezer; and why Mitzna, after becoming Labor's leader, led his party to the most resounding defeat in its history, garnering half the number of seats that Likud did.

Nevertheless, Beilin and friends believe they have a secret weapon: Israelis' well-known impatience. This impatience is epitomized by President Moshe Katsav, who reportedly told the Geneva gang last week: "We have to make a strategic change. In the past three years, we have tried everything within a very specific strategic framework.

We have tried all sorts of political initiatives and all sorts of military initiatives. The time has come for a change of strategy, a different way of dealing with the problem. Israeli society is ready for it, and is ready for the change in mentality." (Since Katsav has not denied this quote in the week since it appeared on Haaretz's front page, he presumably considers it accurate).

On a factual level, Katsav's comment is inane: The Geneva understandings, far from representing a "change in strategy," are a direct continuation of the Oslo strategy that produced the intifada in the first place.

FAR MORE troubling, however, is the warped understanding of international relations that this comment reflects: the presumption that all conflicts are necessarily solvable within three years, and if we have failed to solve ours within that time frame, our own behavior must be to blame.

In fact, most major conflicts between democracies and non-democracies take decades rather than years to resolve - because resolution generally requires a sea change on the non-democracy's part. The Arab-Israeli conflict, of which the current intifada is merely the latest round, is an excellent example.

It took 30 years and four wars before Israel signed its first peace treaty with an Arab country (Egypt), and what enabled that breakthrough was not any change in Israeli policy, but Cairo's decision to abandon its goal of driving the Jews into the sea and accept the Jewish state's existence. Without this Egyptian turnaround, no peace agreement would have been possible.

Similarly, the Cold War lasted almost five decades, and ended not because of any revolution in American policy, but because the Soviet Union collapsed - and with it, the ideology of worldwide communist revolution. Without an end to Soviet efforts to dominate and subvert countries around the globe, peace would have been impossible.

The India-Pakistan conflict, which has involved three hot wars over the last five decades, remains unresolved to this day, and India continues to suffer Pakistani-inspired terror attacks on a regular basis (though most, unlike the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, merit only a few lines in the papers).

Perhaps the best parallel to the intifada, however, is the Irish Troubles: a terrorist war that killed close to 500 people in its worst year (1972) and continued at a lower level (60-120 deaths a year) throughout the 1980s and most of the 1990s. In total, this conflict lasted three decades before a peace deal was signed - and that agreement, too, was made possible only by a radical turnabout in the IRA's position: a decision to halt its terror campaign, despite having failed to achieve its goal of uniting Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Whether the agreement will survive is an open question: It was suspended last year because of the IRA's refusal to disarm. Yet it remains alive, however fragilely, because the IRA has honored its declared cease-fire for the last five years - unlike the Palestinians, who began violating their declared cease-fire the moment the Oslo Accord was signed (suicide bombings alone killed 132 people from 1994-96).

Unpleasant though it may be to acknowledge that some things are beyond our control, the unavoidable lesson of history is that no conflict is resolvable unless both sides want peace.

Until that point is reached, all that is possible is conflict management: attempting to keep your casualties as low as possible without conceding key goals. On this front, Israel could certainly do better - but that would not change the fact that there is thus far no evidence of Palestinian willingness to live in peace with us.

And until there is, no "change of strategy" on Israel's part will end the violence.

Evelyn Gordon is a veteran journalist and commentator.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 13, 2003.

Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg proposes that Israel completely relinquish Judea, Samaria, and Gaza to the Arabs. Israel would be a small state that would remain Jewish and be Zionist. He urges the US to force Israel to stop annexing territory there (which Israel doesn't) and to force the P.A. to give up violence and the drive to resettle Arabs in Israel. He accuses both sides of intransigence. "Let neither side keep invoking its supposed right to attack the other in the delusion that each is doing God's work." (Sandee Brawarsky, Jewish Week, 10/31, p.40).

His standard is inconsistent. On the one hand, he urges, drive Yesha Jews into Israel, to keep it a Jewish state, but leave the Arabs in Israel, as if that isn't risking its remaining a Jewish state. Likewise, give up the core of the Land of Israel and call that Zionism, though Zionism aimed to restore the homeland to the Jewish people and the Jewish people to the homeland.

His concept of the Arab-Israel conflict is myopic. Once cannot end it by dealing only with Arafat's Arabs. Arab countries repeatedly attacked Israel. A small Jewish state without secure borders and strategic depth would invite attacks.

His accusations against Israel are libelous. The Arabs attack Israel. Israel does not consider itself to have a "right to attack" the P.A. "in the delusion that" it is "doing God's work." The problem with the Israeli government is its lack of sense of history and culture, not "intransigence." It offered so much to the Arabs, who rejected the offer for not being total and because they refused to abandon terrorism. It is not intransigent for some Israelis to wish to retain the historic core of their homeland as mandated by the League of Nations.

His promotion of a US role is ingenuous. He must know that the State Dept. is anti-Zionist and dishonest in its monitoring. The US seldom sticks out a hostile situation, and has waning resources to do it with. What makes him think that the US would de-Nazify the Palestinian Arabs? How does one change their whole culture, dedicated to intolerance, violence, and jihad? Better to defeat jihad. This is just another scheme for injustice to the Jews. All the sadder the state of modern Jewry, that it comes from a Jew and one with the title, "rabbi!"

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 12, 2003.

I couldn't believe my eyes. In fact, I had to read it three times and then read it to a few other people before I was convinced that it wasn't some bad babaganoosh betraying my cognitive skills. Apparently, the US State Department has made a complete policy reversal when it comes to Israel. Also, it may have been speaking for that gang-of-four Roadmap group in announcing a critical and fatal revision to that Israeli death certificate, The Roadmap to Oblivion.

I was skimming the Associated Press news feed when I came across a piece entitled "U.S. Disappointed That Arafat to Keep Control of Palestinian Security." It was written by Barry Schweid and dated Nov 9, 2003.

Amanda Batt, a US State Department spokesperson I am unfamiliar with, was being quoted. First she said "What is most critical is that Palestinians move quickly to end terror and violence and build strong Palestinian institutions in preparation for statehood." But it was her very next quote that made my jaw drop and my eyes twirl in their sockets. Here is what she said.

"The prime minister must have control of all of the security forces and insist that terrorists and military organizations not under the control of the Palestinian Authority be disarmed and dismantled."

The first part of that sentence seemed okay: it was just restating US and Roadmap quartet policy of who controls what. It again emphasized that the usual Palestinian ploy of having a bajillion security forces running circles around each other in an attempt to bamboozle the world into thinking they are doing something productive was unacceptable. But it was the second part of that sentence, which seemed to have been deliberately slipped in in an almost offhand way, that appears to spell out a reversal of everything the United States purports to represent. It is so important that it bears repeating.

"....terrorists and military organizations not under the control of the Palestinian Authority be disarmed and dismantled."

To restate it in plain English, terrorists and military organizations under control of the Palestinian Authority are now acceptable and do not have to be disarmed and dismantled. That one little sentence fragment has just delegitimized America's war on terror, given legitimate fuel to America's critics, and may spell the end of Israel.

That one little sentence fragment has just blown away America's excuse for going after the Taliban and putting pressure on Syria. Both governments, although supporters of terror, were and are (respectively) legitimate governments.

So the next questions should be: why would the US State Department issue this statement, why now, why by a relatively unknown spokesperson, and in particular, why on a Sunday afternoon. The following is what I believe is going on.

The Palestinian Arabs, still under the control of Yasser Arafat, just 'elected' (and I say this with more than a hint of sarcasm) a new cabinet. If one peruses the list of members, it can be seen that most of them are from one particular terrorist group: Fatah. In fact, out of 24 cabinet members, 20 of them are from Fatah according to an Associated Press release (dated November 9, 2003). That means a whopping 83.33% of the new Palestinian cabinet is terrorist.

So the US State Department, supposedly representing President Bush, had a choice. It could out-of-hand reject this new Palestinian cabinet and in effect, declare the Roadmap dead (in a presidential election year). Or - and it's a big gamble - try to sneak one by the world, save Bush's misbegotten Roadmap fantasy, throw Israel to the terrorists to save Bush's dreams of being the top peacemaker and next Nobel Laureate, and hope no one notices the hypocrisy behind all US policy since 9-11.

But to offset this big gamble, the US State Department had a relative unknown make the statement and do it on a Sunday afternoon, when most Americans are food shopping, taking their kids to soccer games or watching football. In other words, they hoped no one would notice. And if anyone did, they could blame it on the spokesperson being 'unseasoned.'

But because I have no social life, I refer to food shopping as the 'F' and 'S' words, and my son thinks sleeping is a competitive sport, I had nothing more exciting to do than read the news feed on the internet this afternoon. So I noticed. And I'm telling the world. In fact, I am screaming it from every news site that will carry me. THE US WAR ON TERRORISM AND PRESIDENT BUSH'S POLICIES ARE A BUNCH OF DONKEY'S DINGLEBERRIES!

Anyone want to join me in a scream fest of righteous outrage? With any luck, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice will be have their hearing aids turned on.

Your move, US State Department.

Posted by Michael D. Evans, November 12, 2003.

Bethlehem has been overrun by Moslems after being presented to Yasser Arafat in a land-for-peace deal on December 23, 1995. The "little town of Bethlehem" has not been the same since. Islamic fundamentalist militants hate Christians as much as they hate Jews. (We found that out on September 11th.)

Arab Christians have been labeled as collaborators and/or assassinated as spies if they have any interaction with Jews. Should they commit the ultimate crime of converting a Muslim, they are put to death, often in the most barbaric ways.

Fifty years ago, fifteen percent of Mid-East Arabs were Christians. That number has dropped to approximately 2 percent.

Please send your gift today to help Arab Christians in Bethlehem. The Wise Men brought gifts to Bethlehem; will you send your gift today?

Where have all the Arab Christians gone? Why has there been such a dramatic decline in their numbers?

Not only are they being driven out, and their homes given to Muslims, they are being murdered, raped, persecuted, harassed and intimidated. They are, at best, second-class citizens who live constantly with abuse and discrimination.

Arafat is rewriting the story of our Lord's birth! "Welcome to the Muslim town of Bethlehem, where the first Palestinian, Jesus Christ, was born." If Arab Christians tell the truth about the Bible, they are targeted.

From Voice of the Martyrs comes this story of two Palestinian Christians:

"Abed converted from Islam to Christianity in 1995. He was drawn by the love of Christians he had met, and challenged by a teaching very different from what he had learned in his Palestinian village.

"The general society just incites against the Jewish people, against the Christian people," Abed said. "But God says, 'Love your enemies.' This is the difference which encouraged me...to belong to Jesus and to receive Him and to consider him as savior."

Abed...shared his new faith with family and friends. But shortly after his conversion, Palestinian security officials began to question Abed. He was arrested nearly a dozen times, and eventually jailed, beaten, and tortured. They hung him up in the air, and forced him to go without sleep for days.

"They tried to sit me down on the leg of a chair...And it makes me like, cry...But I feel that this suffering is a privilege from the Lord, because I suffered for Him," Abed said.

Both Abed and a fellow believer, Khalid, were told that local Muslim clerics have issued a "fatwa" or judgment against them. If they do not renounce their Christian faith, the sentence is death."

This is happening even with the eyes of the world focused on the PA territories, the Road Map, and hopes - however tenuous - for peace in the Middle East. What will happen to Arab Christians when or if Arafat meets his objective for an autonomous Palestinian state? Will Arab Christians face the same fate as 6 million Jews during World War II?

Please help the Jerusalem Prayer Team help Arab Christians in Bethlehem today. CLICK HERE.

Thank you on behalf of these innocent victims.

Michael Evans is a Christian Zionist who heads the Jerusalem Prayer Team, which includes more then 300 Christian leaders.

Posted by Shep Fargotstein, November 12, 2003.

According to the BBC, the Riyadh, Saudi Arabian bombing really "appalled the Arab press." The only "appalling" reality of this act of terror was the fact that the Arab press, by their own definition, called it an act of terror in the first place. For too long, Arab governments have insisted on defining terrorism as "political acts against civilians" - with a self-serving exception for those who "struggle against occupation" - an exemption exclusively reserved for Arab/Muslim governments that have supported the use of terrorism by Palestinians against Israel.

The editorial "Massacring innocents is no substitute for real politics," in the leading Lebanese English language newspaper, The Daily Star, attempts to make the case for Arabs to continue their hypocritical diplomacy of terror duplicity: "There is a time and a place for guerrilla warfare, but only in the face of grave injustice and when all other options have been exhausted. The Palestinian struggle against Israel is a perfect example: Targeting civilians is always wrong, but at least when these movements have done it, it has been as a method of punishing the enemy for injuries of greater magnitude."

The Al-Quada bombings in Saudi Arabia are suspected to be inspired by an Islamist struggle to free Saudi Arabia from 50+ years of "occupation" by the Western influenced Saud family. Using the Daily Star's justification of the use of terror, Al-Quada was justified in committing this horrific act.

For those who are less informed, this existential threat to the Saudi government could be mistaken as a sign that the Saudis are the "good guys," and that Al-Quada the "bad guys." That would be a gross misinterpretation of this monumental event. First of all, it is a known fact that Saudi Arabia has been a core supporter of the Al-Quada network, enabling it to pursue its expansion of terrorism around the globe. This failed strategy of appeasing the Islamists was an effort to prevent them from aiming their expansionist ideology at the seat of Arab oil wealth and Islam - Saudi Arabia. The first lesson to be drawn from the Saudi bombing is that appeasing terrorist only enables them to gain strength and become an even greater threat. The French should pay special attention to their leadership role in appeasing forces that could one day bring Riyadh to Paris.

The second lesson to be drawn from this incident is exactly what President Bush has been saying all along. This isn't a war of Judeo/Christian civilization against the Muslim faith. It's a war against a radical Islamist ideology that threatens everyone - including fellow Muslims. The Muslim world has incubated and exported this ideology, and now they are faced with a dilemma that doesn't allow them the luxury of using "proxy forces" and "plausible deniability" to escape responsibility for creating and contributing to this threat. Their participation is no longer "plausible" or "deniable." Either the Arab world gives in to the radical forces that they nurtured against others, and risk seeing themselves regress into a Talibanized 4th century civilization, or redefine terror in terms that are more in line with President Bush, without any exceptions - including Israel.

Let's hope that the opinion of the Lebanese Daily Star - that terror still has its exceptions - is a lonely voice in the Arab/Muslim world. Otherwise, they will learn the real meaning of "what goes around comes around."

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 12, 2003.

I have written in the past that the real motivation [of the Labor Left] for Oslo was never to make peace with the Arabs but to prevent the emergence of a religious majority in Israel that would remove political control of the country from its present rulers. Despite all the efforts of the Erev Rav (of the Golden Calf episode), they have not been able to prevent this. Now in desperation, open dictatorship will be established.

The great irony of it all is that due to the mega-stupidity the ruling elite has shown over the past ten years or so, no one will take seriously any of their efforts to suppress religion in Israel. The most likely result of the "Secular Revolution" will be to further "privatize" religion in Israel. This will result in the strengthening of the Haradi (Ultra-Orthodox) sector and the virtual destruction of the National Religious sector. It will also further erode the legitimacy of the Government in the eyes of the still large non-religious but not anti-religious sector of the population.

The establishing of open dictatorship will not, however, solve the "problem" of Israel having too many DOSIM. As a result, out of further desperation, they will try out and out repression. This will lead to their final downfall. Like so many desperate oligarchies past and present, Israel's has been trapped by its own propaganda and believes that the religious population really is primitive and passive. They are in for a very big surprise soon. This essay by Eleonora Shifrin appeared on the Arutz Sheva website (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) on November 10, 2003.

Congratulations! "The only democracy in the Middle East" has been done away with - and by its democratically elected legislature!

Unbeknownst to the people of this country, and thanks to Israel's "free" media, a coup d'etat was virtually executed in Israel last month. The Knesset adopted the first reading of a law authorizing the Supreme Court to veto any law passed by the Knesset itself. Israel is about to become the only country in the democratic world where the Judicial branch of government has been given dictatorial powers. Judicial despotism has thus been legalized by Israel's democratically Legislature. Nowhere else in the democratic world have legislators manifested such stupidity as to willfully subordinate themselves to an unelected oligarchy.

It thus becomes totally meaningless which parties or which individuals sit in the Knesset, because whatever law they may enact, it can be nullified by the Supreme Court, dominated, by the way, by its President, Aharon Barak, who almost certainly was behind this coup d'etat. By passing this law, the MK's have made themselves unnecessary - a useless financial burden on the country. Indeed, why do we need these 120 well-paid public officials who also waste a lot of money on all kind of secretaries, parliamentary assistants, offices, cars, hotel rooms, and even face-lifts for their wives? We may as well dismantle the Knesset as an obsolete and useless institution and save the people's money. But ponder this: the same secularists who never tire of warning us about theocracy are preparing Israel for a Courtocracy. This Courtocracy, moreover, is dominated by ultra-secularists; it is anti-Zionist and, therefore, anti-Jewish.

Now, it should be emphasized that investing the Supreme Court with the power to veto legislation - clearly the singular most destructive law ever initiated by the Knesset - was introduced by the Likud and Labor together. This could not have been done without Prime Minister Sharon's approval. But this proves Prof. Paul Eidelberg's thesis that Ariel Sharon is Labor's surrogate prime minister. It also proves Eidelberg's other point, that Sharon is Israel's most dangerous prime minister. He is swiftly and cunningly executing - with hardly any protest on the part of the people - Shimon Peres' and Azmi Bishara's goal of transforming Israel into a "state of its citizens." This has been clear-cut goal of Supreme Court President Aharon Barak. Add Sharon's commitment to a Palestinian state on Jewish land and Israel's demise is clearly on the horizon.

Under Sharon's leadership, the so-called "Right" has joined forces with the Left, both in the government and in the Knesset, and is now actualizing the leftist dream: to de-Judaize Israel, which can only be done by a left-wing dictatorship; all under the facade of law.

As we know from history, the only way to overthrow a dictatorship is not by demonstrations but by a revolutionary movement. We had better grasp quickly what has happened here, and start thinking what we are going to do about it. Yamin Israel's lonely voice calling for urgent institutional reform has not been heard or heeded. For years, we have been calling for the establishment of a United Jewish Front to counter "the enemy within." It is not too late to organize such a front, if only extra-parliamentary nationalist groups put aside organizational egotism and address the clear and present danger confronting Israel - a judicial despotism of such magnitude that it overshadows the danger of a Palestinian state.

Time is running out. Time is closing in on the present State of Israel. Either we unite or perish.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 12, 2003.

Sodom was the epitome of evil doing in the Bible. But what exactly were the details of the misdeeds of the Sodomites?

Jewish Biblical tradition insists that the main transgression of the people of Sodom were that they made a mockery out of standards of justice. For example, when someone would injure his neighbor, the court would rule that the injured had to make payment to his tormentor in compensation for having performed the service of bleeding him (as was regarded as a medical surgical procedure). Or if a man slashed the ear off the donkey of his neighbor, the Sodom court would rule that the slasher would be required to take away the donkey from its owner and exercise possession of the animal he had maimed until the ear would grow back. In addition, there was a bridge across the river for which a toll of 4 zuzim was being charged. But whenever someone would wade across instead of using the bridge, the court of Sodom would rule that the wader owed 8 zuzim for having been transported across the water. If he would not pay, the court would order him beaten.

I mention these famous court rulings, because I do not believe that any of them reach the truly absurd dimensions of the "ruling" by the cabinet of the Sheriff of Sodom, Ariel Sharon, which will declare tomorrow that countless Jewish lives must now be sacrificed as a result of releasing hundreds of Islamist nazi murderers and terrorists, including the two arch-terrorists from Southern Lebanon, all in order to secure the release of the bodies of three murdered Israeli soldiers and the release of one captive criminal being held by the Hizbollah. As a response to the cold-blooded murder of the three Israeli POWs, Sheriff Sharon and his gaggle Likud goslings are about to go far beyond anything ever perpetrated by the courts of Sodom.

Posted by David ben Ariel, November 12, 2003.

Why would a blond, "non-Jewish" American want to emmigrate to Israel? What's the connection? Especially when so few Jews in the United States are willing to make the move.

What force would drive someone to travel to Israel 11 times, serve in 8 kibbutzim and even stay there during the Persian Gulf War, complete with gas mask, with his room designated as cheder atoom - "sealed room" - that other volunteers had to run to whenever the eerie sirens sounded that another Scud Missile was headed for the Promised Land? Why would such an individual risk arrest, defamation and deportation to participate in legal demonstrations in Jerusalem?

The first time I visited Israel was with a Church group in 1980 to celebrate Sukkot - the Biblical Feast of Tabernacles. (Some Christians understand that Israel's harvest festival foreshadows the peace and prosperity that everyone will soon enjoy under the Messiah's golden rule). But that whirlwind experience only whet my appetite. I wanted to return for a closer look at Israel than through a tour bus window. That's how I decided to return as a kibbutz volunteer in the fall of 1982. A kibbutz is a collective farm, although increasingly it includes other industries as well. I initially served at Ramat Yohanan near Haifa, in full view of Mt. Carmel, famous for the fiery prophet Elijah's close encounter with pagan Israelites.

You could say I have a God-given love for the Jews and the nation of Israel (Isaiah 62:6-7). That sacred bond has been strengthened over the years by the fact that I've been blessed to have lived all over Israel, getting to know its land and people quite well. Apart from 5 months at Ramat Yohanan, I've also stayed at Sdot Yam on the Mediterranean, next to Ceasarea, the site of my first ulpan (intensive Hebrew course), and where Israel's heroine, Hannah Senesh, was from; Regavim, near Zichron Yaakov, where I continued my Hebrew lessons amid its rolling green hills; Reshafim, near Bet She'an, with Mt. Gilboa practically in our backyard, and Jordan's mountains in lovely view out front; Adamit, on Lebanon's border, high up on a mountain, from where on clear days you can see all the way to Haifa's Mt. Carmel; Shoval, a rose in the Negev desert, just north of Be'er Sheva; Dan, way up in the northernmost part of Israel, in between Syria and Lebanon, next to the majestic snow-covered Mt. Hermon, where I was living when "Operation Desert Storm" blew in; and Ha'On, with its campground and ostrich farm on the eastern shores of the Sea of Galilee, across from Tiberias; and last but not least, my beloved Jerusalem, next to my favorite spot on earth: the Temple Mount. But why would I leave the beautiful farms and magnificent greenery of Ohio for a Middle Eastern country? (My ancestors sailed to America from England, including John and Priscilla Alden on the Mayflower.)

Why would I legally change my name from David A. Hoover to David Ben-Ariel? (Hebrew for: David, son of God's Lion - a nickname for Jerusalem [Isaiah 29:1]). Yes, why? (1) Because I am a Christian Zionist who believes the rebirth of Israel is nothing short of a miracle, and that all Bible-believers must support this fulfillment of prophecy or deny their faith. And (2) because I strongly believe what many are now discovering: the Israelite identity of the peoples of Northwestern Europe. This awareness of our Biblical roots and responsibility hastens the process of redemption. Herbert W. Armstrong was one of the greatest to restore this truth to millions, but I'm friends with Yair Davidy in Israel, author of The Tribes and Ephraim, who represents a growing number of Jews who are again accepting the revelation of their brother, Joseph, head of the northern ten-tribed Kingdom of Israel (distinct from the southern Kingdom of Judah). Due to my Anglo-Saxon heritage, as well as descent from the British and Scottish Royal Families, I'm considered of the tribes of Joseph and Judah. (There are twelve tribes of Israel). For people like me, Israel is also our ancient Homeland. I truly feel my return to Zion completes a historic circle in my family's history. Having been to Israel so many times, and written innumerable letters to The Blade (Toledo's newspaper), and various articles in support of a Jewish state, I never imagined that one day I would be deported from it!

As reported on the front page of The Jerusalem Post (Jan. 8, 1996), the GSS (Israel's Secret Service) sought my deportation on the trumped-up charges of my alleged involvement in a plot to blow up the Al-Aksa mosque. This travesty of justice occurred during the "witch-hunt" that followed Prime Minister Rabin's assassination. Israel's Left was exploiting Rabin's death to squash their legal opposition. Such Stalinist tactics were condemned by former Russian refuseniks and "Prisoners of Zion." Thankfully, Shimon Peres' regime was toppled with the election of Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. Bibi (as Netanyahu's affectionally called) had also been branded as an "enemy of peace" for opposing wholesale surrender to PLO demands. He promised the Israelis "peace with security."

As a Christian member of the Temple Mount Faithful, I'd been privileged to participate in their legal demonstrations during my 10-month stay in Jerusalem awaiting citizenship. Israeli television often showed me with my Jewish friends carrying Israeli flags throughout the Old City. I've also had letters published in The Jerusalem Post, The Traveller and other publications about the burning issue of the Temple Mount. Presently that most holy site is under a militant Muslim occupation that forcibly forbids Christians or Jews from praying or reading the Bible there. This despite the fact that both Solomon and Herod's Temple stood there, and Jesus and His disciples taught and prayed there. Israel has a law against such violent religious discrimination, but apparently they're afraid to enforce it. Such shameful appeasement rewards the aggressors and punishes the innocent! The Temple Mount Faithful boldly calls for an end to this injustice.

In my book, Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall, I've called for the Israeli government to exercise its Jewish responsibility to build the Temple. I wrote that book in the United States before any of this trouble. The book explicitly explains that I'm not calling for any individual to remove the mosques, but rather expecting the GOVERNMENT to fulfill its historic obligations. I mentioned this to the police during my six and an half hours interrogation. Later I was imprisoned in Jerusalem's "Russian Compound" for three weeks until my heartbreaking deportation.

As my attorney in Israel, Naftali Warzberger, has written, my future is linked with that of the Jews and Israel. That's why I'm confident justice will prevail. Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D. Ohio) has persistently presented this case of religious discrimination and political persecution before our State Department. Senator Mike DeWine (R. Ohio) has inquired on my behalf to return to Zion and was informed that the Ministry of the Interior "has made the decision not to grant the visa and does not offer any information behind their decision." They've since written Senator DeWine that I will not be "eligible for a visa until 2005!"

Is it a crime to have an abiding love for Israel? To believe what's written in the Law and the Prophets concerning the Temple and our responsibility to construct it? To mourn that it hasn't been done yet? As the Jerusalem Talmud states: "every generation in which the Temple has not been built is as if the Temple were destroyed in it..." Isn't Israel's state emblem a gold menorah in between two gold olive branches? Must I remain in exile, banished from the Land I love, because my hope, prayer, and dream is for Israel to fulfill what that symbol represents: the Temple and Israel's destiny to become a Light to all nations?

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 12, 2003.

Once again, Israel is considering releasing prisoners. And I predict that once again, they will come back to bite Israel in the innocent civilian jugular. Nor is that the worst of it. The Israeli government, by its actions is actually sanctioning and encouraging kidnapping

The exchange with Hezbollah of Arab prisoners for the bodies of three Israelis and the release of an Israeli businessman with criminal dealings is, in itself, bordering on the criminal. It also places the return of three corpses and one man above the lives of many innocent Israelis - in all likelihood women and children, judging by past behavior.

First, Israel's negotiations with Hezbollah go against it's own former ironclad policy of not dealing with terrorists. Even as Israel talks with these genocidal monsters, they continue to shell Israeli homes, not military installations as any brave and honorable soldier would do, but homes with women and children, so typical of the Arab cowards who want the Middle East judenrein. It also goes against common sense to appease kidnappers. Giving a kidnapper what he wants will only encourage more of it. Giving a blackmailer what he wants opens oneself up to more blackmail. Is this what Israel wants?

Second, Ariel Sharon says that only prisoners without blood on their hands will be released. Where have I heard that before? And what qualifies as 'blood on their hands?' After the last Israeli release of prisoners (in an attempt to prop up that so-called moderate Palestinian leader Mr.-Holocaust-Denier-Abbas), some of those newly released prisoners went on to commit more genocide bombings murdering dozens of innocent Jews and permanently maiming scores more.

Apparently Mr. Sharon is not considering the dangerousness of the people he is considering releasing, just as he did not in the recent past. Failed genocide bombers and their collaborators were allowed to be freed. Not a single thought of their future behavior was considered. Also, apparently murder is the only thing that counts as having 'blood on one's hands' according to Mr. Sharon. And according to DEBKAfile, one of the prisoners being considered for release is a torturer named Dirani, responsible for the torture of navigator Ron Arad. Is there bloodless, pleasant torture?

Third, Israel as a Jewish state uses Torah as a moral and legal guide. According to Torah, life takes precedence over everything. Even the corpses of Jews in enemy hands. The lives of many take precedence over the life of one. And the life of a child takes precedence over the life of an adult. Torah also says that past behavior coupled with unrepentence is a pretty good indicator of future acts.

Therefore, only a fool would entertain the notion that these Arabs who would be released will suddenly love Israel and Jewish people and never again try to commit genocide or undermine the State of Israel. When one weighs the consequences of what will happen, based upon very recent experience, it is obvious that scores of Jewish civilians will become future victims to buy back three corpses and a businessman who tried to commit a criminal act by dealing with Iranians to offset his debts. Despite my sympathy for the families of the dead soldiers being held by Hezbollah, and my horror at what they do to living captives, how will these victims feel knowing that the redemption of their loved ones caused the death of babies, mothers and fathers in some future genocide bombing?

However, Israel does have another choice, also based upon past experience. But first it must give up the notion of a politically correct, low-level war aimed at appeasing a world hostile to its existence. There ain't no such animal. One either wins a war and gains respect (or at least fear) and peace, or one loses in a long drawn-out process similar to a spreading and unstoppable cancer: one piece at a time, one horror to the next.

Israel can take an example from her past successes. Entebbe and the 1967 war come to mind. In the face of threats, she took action. Harsh and decisive action. It is time for Israel to again confront her enemies, not appease them and hope they won't do it again. They will. Most probably even worse than before. It is time to hit Hezbollah and her supporters with everything Israel has. Will Israel be condemned? You bet. But she is condemned every time she breathes and continues to draw breath. The two things that will change is that she will have shown that such tactics as kidnappings and blackmail are more harmful to the perpetrators and she will gain a grudging respect of her resolve to survive. Arab society respects nothing but strength. Appeasement to Arabs is like the scent of blood in the water to a shark.

It is time for the Israeli government to decide if she will continue to be a victim. It is time for the Israeli government to protect and value her citizens more than she does three corpses and a man who was willing to treat with the enemy. It is time to take a stand.

Posted by Gedud Hai'vri, November 12, 2003.

The Gedud Hai'vri (Zion Peace Corps and K-9 Unit) is a group of Jews from around the world, who have come together to join in the struggle to defend Jews in Israel against Terror attacks. The Gedud deploys volunteers in Jewish towns in Judea, Samaria and wherever they are needed.

The Gedud offers housing, training and food for all volunteers and also offers a tactical Ulpan course, Torah classes, defense training and plenty of hours of guard duty.

Volunteers who wish to enroll in local college or to help local farms with agricultural work can be attached to local farms and colleges. An option exists for members to join the I.D.F. and to do part of their service in the Gedud. 20 of our volunteers are presently serving in the I.D.F. after a tour of training and guarding with the Gedud. These members who received excellent training with the Gedud and who gained hands - on experience guarding with the Gedud before they joined the I.D.F., entered Tzahal with the motivation and skills to turn them into exemplary and outstanding soldiers. Some remain in the Gedud during and after their service to volunteer guarding or to help instruct.

While most of our volunteers receive no salary, serious recruits, who sign on for 1 year or longer can apply for scholarships after their first month of service

Application and information are on our website (http://www.defendisrael.net). Or email us at info@defendisrael.net or call 718 874 2057 from the USA or Canada.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 12, 2003.

Originally believing in the peace Treaty, Jordanians now feel cheated by Israel.

IMRA rebuts: "Jordan got everything Israel promised" (and more water than promised). The P.A. war on Israel eroded the economic gains. Further limiting them, the Jordanian professional organizations boycott Israel. Israel did not get much of what Jordan promised. Instead: no ambassador, little trade, and anti-Israel textbooks. (Who cheated whom?)

The Israeli ambassador claims that it is almost business as usual, government-to-government. IMRA attributes that to Israel not protesting against Jordanian violations, such as the textbooks and the anti-normalization.

Jordan acknowledges that the P.A. must fulfill its share of Map obligations, but thinks it should not crack down on Hamas. IMRA notes: "Ending Hamas is central to the roadmap." (Otherwise, why sign a "peace" treaty just to give concessions to those who still want to destroy Israel? Jordan is being self-contradictory.)

Jordan regards Sharon's fence not as a security wall but a political one, because it was not erected on the 1967 lines (which would make it political). The wall is a reason for poor relations with Israel. Jordan links the return of its ambassador to "tangible progress on the ground in implementing the roadmap." IMRA: Jordan's hostile attitude preceded wall-building. IMRA suggests returning the Ambassador as a confidence-building measure (10/27 from Jordan Times, 10/26).

The Arabs build up fantasies of great and immediate benefits, cheat, and then complain that Israel cheated them. (Obviously, peace is not their motive.) By failing to declare Arab violations of their pacts with it, Israel forfeits an opportunity to disparage the notion of another Accord with the P.A. and statehood for it. Although such complaints would anger the Arabs, letting them feel that then can continue making and breaking Accords encourages violations.

Why doesn't Jordan suspend good relations with the P.A. until it makes tangible progress, such as by disarming and disbanding the terrorist organizations? And if it doesn't, then let Jordan stop pretending to be a seeker of peace in good faith!

Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, November 12, 2003.

For the past 3,500 years, there have been a host of theories on how to eliminate the scourge of anti-Semitism. Some scholars have even suggested that Jew-hatred actually predates Judaism itself. Go figure.

Throughout much of recorded history, a rather large portion of the world has subscribed to the belief that if only they could get rid of the Jews who were dispersed throughout their lands, perhaps forcing them into some small, isolated far-away desert, Jews would not be hated any longer. However, the ancient Egyptians released Moses and his minions from their land and regretted those actions. The chase began and Passover was born, an event which seems to recur time and again.

After cremating two thirds of European Jewry during World War II, Europe allowed the one third that survived to emigrate to a rather barren historical homeland with few natural resources, but a nice beach front. Europeans have always put great value on beaches.

They gave Jews some oceanfront views, but would not allow access to a 2000 year old Holy Wall. How dare those Jews be so arrogant to request the right to visit chipped Jerusalem stones with moss hanging from them, the remains of a supposed old temple. Europe's premise was to send the remaining Holocaust survivors to a far away place, putting them out-of-sight and out-of-mind. Perhaps, if Europeans did not see many Jews around anymore, Jew-hatred would cease and anti-Semitism cured.

However, now it is 55 years later and guess what? Much of the world is saying the exact opposite. "If we get rid of the Jewish state of Israel, and disperse the Jews or allow other ethnic and religious populations to assimilate with them, but not as a Jewish state, the entire problem will be resolved and anti-Semitism will disappear."

The truth is that somehow Jews can never win. Amazingly, anti-Semitism exists in places where Jews have never set foot. Actually, most of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world never even met a real live Jew. There are 70 million Egyptians today, 95% have never come within a mile of a Jew, except if they were in the Egyptian army that was surrounded in 1973. Yet, one of the highest rated Egyptian television programs in recent memory was a 41 episode series on the Jewish conspiracy to take over the world and the methods used by that "accursed, wicked race" to utilize non-Jewish blood to bake matzohs, among other dastardly deeds. Much of the world has hated Jews when they were living among them and hated Jews when they were not living among them. Therefore, there is only one other possibility. That is "to destroy and kill all Jews." Now that should certainly eliminate anti-Semitism.... except when we consider what Hitler predicted about that possibility.

Adolf Hitler gathered artifacts to create a museum dedicated to "the race that no longer exists." He collected books, menorahs, Judaica, Torahs and numerous other objects. This pet project was Hitler's way of solving "our problems which are caused by the Jews; although when we finally get rid of them, their evil will probably continue to cause us troubles for eternity!"

The Nazi premise was that even if they had been successful at wiping out every living Jew from the face of the earth, the Fuhrer would somehow hold Jews responsible for many of the world's future problems. Thus continued the victimization ideology that the Left has adopted today. Blame others for whatever goes wrong and never look into the mirror.

Reinforcing this belief, is the fact that the greatest hatred of Jews today exists throughout the 60 or so Arab and Muslim nations, where only 28 lonely Jews actually remain.

Yet, there is one country in the world that is thriving today and is truly the first hyper-power in history. America has become hated by much of old Europe and the Arab/Muslim world because of the successes it has achieved and its overwhelming strength. As the only Judeo-Christian country, America has embraced everyone including its Jews in a very unique way.

Unless all other nations follow suit with this wonderful American example, America, Israel and a relatively few other Western democracies will have to build a fence around them and allow the rest of the world to destroy itself.

This essay first appeared on JewishIndy, November 5, 2003.

Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, November 12, 2003.

Here's a lieutenant who understands things better than his Commander-on-Chief. This essay was written by Jonathan D. Zagdanski, a 1st Lieutenant in the U.S. Army. It appeared on the Front Page Magazine website (http://frontpagemag.com) October 31, 2003.

I recently returned from Baghdad, Iraq, where I served as an infantry platoon leader of 26 men during nearly 6 months of combat operations. We were part of the 3rd Infantry Division, the unit that led the invasion into Iraq and captured Baghdad. Our political and military leaders told us before the invasion that we were key players in the War on Terrorism. However, as a Jew and an American having fought the war, I came to realize that we are not just fighting terrorism. Rather, we are engaged in a war against something much more fundamental.

Shortly after we breached the city limits of Baghdad on that fateful day of April 9th, it was obvious that the Iraqi Army was not going to fight us in the city. The U.S. Military was caught by surprise at the lack of opposition and was rather unprepared to transition to nation-building so rapidly. Thus, Military commanders hastily assigned each Platoon Leader, including myself, a section of Baghdad to oversee. The neighborhood under my control was roughly 3 square miles in northwest Baghdad with approximately three thousand Iraqi citizens, most of whom were Shia Muslims. My initial responsibility was to find heavy conventional weapons and ammunition, arrest looters, identify destroyed power lines and restore order in the neighborhood by conducting day and night street patrols. This was a very difficult task but it gave me the opportunity to interact with many Iraqis during these unstable times.

While patrolling the streets of Baghdad, I often got involved in political conversations with secular, educated, and "moderate" Iraqis about the war against Iraq, Israel, the Jews, and America. To my surprise, most of them held wildly irrational beliefs about the world. For example, most of them would swear that Ariel Sharon pressured a reluctant President Bush to go to war against Iraq [or] that the CIA put Saddam Hussein, a CIA agent, in power to allow U.S. forces to take Iraqi oil and impoverish Iraq. Finally, they were convinced that the CIA is an organization controlled by the Mossad and that powerful Zionists dominate Washington, D.C.! In fact, most Arabs in the world believe these absurdities. These beliefs are the product of years of intense brainwashing by their education[al] system, mass media and political and religious leaders. These beliefs turn educated, intelligent Arab family men into hijackers that slam passenger planes into buildings and homicide bombers that murder as may Jews as possible on Israeli buses.

We are not at war against terrorism; we are at war against an ideology. I consider this ideology to be the product of a dangerous mental disease. It is a disease that has infected millions of Arabs into believing that by destroying the enemy - the Jew, the State of Israel, and the "Great Satan" America - past Arab pride and glory [will] be restored. This mental illness is slowly but deliberately plunging the world into World War III.

In the 1930s, a similar disease threw the world into World War II. It was a disease that infected millions of Germans into believing that by obliterating the Jews and conquering non- Aryan nations, Germany would attain unsurpassed glory and freedom. Fortunately, America and its allies mustered all their efforts, resources and determination to crush and eradicate the German disease.

Unlike the Germans during WWII, the Arab world is fighting a multidimensional war against America and Israel. First, Arab nations are using the United Nations as a powerful tool to discredit Israel and the United States. Second, oil-producing Arab nations use oil as a means to pressure the United States and Europe to adopt biased foreign policies against Israel. In addition, oil is used to deter many nations from trading with Israel. Third, Arab governments ensure that Arab children are fed anti-Semitic and anti-American material in their schools, thereby assuring a constant supply of future terrorists. Fourth, Arab public relation spreads lies and twisted facts to Western media, thereby fueling anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli sentiment in the West. Finally, Arab nations promote, finance or condone terrorist activity and organizations.

Unfortunately, most of us in America and Israel believe that we are at war with terrorism. We therefore concentrate all our attention and effort against terrorism only. To do so is to wear blinders and not grasp the big picture. To worsen matters, we commit troops and equipment to fight the enemy precisely where he wants to fight - that is, in his backyard using guerrilla tactics. We fail to understand that terrorism is only one of the many weapons used by our enemies. Every American and every Jew is under attack in some shape or form.

It does not take a gun or a bomb to be under attack. A negative and biased article about Israel in the New York Times is a bomb directed against the Jewish community. We must fight back! Every one of us has the ability and the weaponry to contribute to the war effort. One does not need to join the U.S. Army and patrol downtown Baghdad in 120-degree weather. We can fight with our computers, our telephone, our money, our time, and our voice. Inaction is not an alternative. Should we decide not to fight, our enemies will bring the battle to us, as they have done on September 11th and as they do daily in Israel. We have paid too often with our blood the price of passiveness and nonresistance.

It is time to stand up, fight and shout, "Never Again!" May God help us.

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, November 12, 2003.

News reports are circulating about recent "behind-the-scenes" peace plans that have supposedly been worked out by left-wing Israelis and some Palestinian Arab politicians and academics, notably Yasser Abed Rabbo and Sari Nusseibeh.

As a result of the Arab invasion of a newborn Israel in 1948, two refugee situations were created: Arabs who fled Israel and a like number of Jews who fled "Arab" lands. Unlike the former, however, the latter did not have some two dozen other states to potentially choose from...including one carved out of 80% of the original Palestinian Mandate issued to Britain on April 25, 1920 and today known as Jordan.

Nusseibeh is perhaps best noted for his advice for Arab refugees - both real and fudged - to give up their claim to return to Israel for peace to occur. He has also called for an end to suicide bombings. The American State Department - grasping at straws to blow some life into its all but dead roadmap - has recently given its own blessings to these initiatives.

The problem, of course, is that, unlike Israel, where there is strong grassroot sentiment for an honorable compromise to be found, poll after poll among Arabs still reveal that even if Israel agreed to withdraw to its pre-'67, 9-mile wide, armistice line existence, most Arabs would still not accept its right to exist and would continue to support attacks upon its people.

The sad reality is that Nusseibeh lives only because Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa, and Arafat himself don't take him seriously. Isam Sartawi and other previous rare voices of reason were eliminated as soon as they appeared to be a real threat to the overwhelming Arab rejectionist mentality. Arafat's Palestinian Authority has done nothing to change this climate. Its schools, media, mosques, etc. continue to assure that the possibility of an Arab "grassroots" campaign for an honorable peace with a viable Jewish neighbor will be an impossibility for at least a long time to come. Arabs talk only of a temporary "Trojan Horse" truce to gain tangibles from Israel on the ground while retaining their destruction in stages goals towards the Jewish State. Hundreds of Arabs who didn't tow the line have been eliminated by their brothers as "collaborators" over the years.

Nusseibeh is like the Eugene McCarthy of American politics - but only not as influential. He's tolerated only as long as he's useful to be showcased as a voice of alleged reason to a naive West. The late Feisal Husseini served in a somewhat similar capacity, although his "vision" was still a purely Arab Palestine from the River to the Sea. Rabbo can be seen as just another Arafatian marionette. Don't look for anything really "new" from this direction.

If Nusseibeh can be used to win additional concessions from Israel, he's safe. But he better have some solid tricks up his sleeves if he expects support from the Arafat/Hamas, good cop/bad cop team if he also expects Arabs to have to live up to their side of the "deal." Will Yossi Beilin, Yasser Abed Rabbo, Sari Nusseibeh, or Colin Powell feel safe boarding a bus in Jerusalem or eating in a restaurant in Haifa? That's the real test of any such plan or "deal." Having stated all of this, I pray that I'm wrong - Sari Nusseibeh is a good man.

Thus, little of the above should be taken seriously until something crucial occurs to change the current reality. Let's step back in history for a moment to truly understand what is needed at this time.

It was early May 1948. Surrounding Arab countries invaded a reborn Israel to nip it in the bud. The Jews had no choice but to immediately emerge out of the shock of the Holocaust in order to deal with yet another harsh reality.

David Ben-Gurion, leader of the new state, made countless historic decisions, but one particularly painful one involved the ship Altalena - a pen name for his Labor Zionist Party's rival, the late Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky.

Jabotinsky's heirs were determined to repay the Arab slaughter of Jews in kind and to hasten the end of British rule and anti-Israel policies by any means necessary. Among other things, they purchased an American ship and landed it near Marseilles, France. It was expected that the vessel would be making repeat trips between France and Israel carrying arms and new recruits gathered from the survivors of Europe's nightmare and the frightened mellahs of kelbi yahudi - "Jew Dog" - Jewish existence in Arab North Africa and the Middle East.

Israel desperately needed the arms and manpower aboard the Altalena. But Ben-Gurion insisted that there would be but one unified command. On June 20th, Ben-Gurion made a heart-wrenching decision to resist the Irgun's challenge concerning the ship's precious human and material cargo. In the ensuing tragic battle, scores of Jews were killed by Jews for the sake of shaping the infant state's future and character.

Holocaust-denying author and former Arafat-appointed Palestinian Authority Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas, had given lip service to the need to end attacks on Jewish innocents - for whatever his reasons. He and his successor, Ahmed Qureia, specifically don't like the bad press that comes along with suicide bombings. Arafat, the master puppeteer, has long been exposed as saying one thing to Western ears and quite another to his own people in these regards.

Both the supposedly "moderate" Abbas and his security chief, Mohammad Dahlan, had past ties themselves to terrorist activities. Dahlan had been caught on tape, for example, issuing orders for suicide bombings. Yet the hope was that that was yesterday's news and that there could be a chance for a better tomorrow.

But Hamas is Hamas, and Arafat is Arafat. Neither has any intention of arriving at a settlement in which a viable Israel exists on the morrow. That has been proven over and over again, and there's no need to repeat the evidence about Camp David 2000 and Taba, etc., etc., yet again. There will be no better tomorrow with this good cop/bad cop team still calling the shots - literally.

That better tomorrow will not arrive unless new leaders arise in the would-be 23rd Arab state with the power and will to make the decisions a stateless and millennially persecuted people and its leaders - at the end of their collective rope - made fifty-five years ago. What will Beilin, Rabbo, Ayalon, and Nusseibeh do the day after the next Egged bus blows up loaded with innocent Jews aboard, or another father is murdered having dinner with his children...and this after Israel has withdrawn to its microscopic, armistice line existence again?

Merely "chatting" with Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa, etc. won't solve the problem - and this is all that Arafat & Co. say that they're willing to do. The Oslo days of the Trojan Horse "peace" Arabs played with Jews are over. The more Israel gave, the more it bled. Despite Arab visions of the much touted and now highly endangered "roadmap" to the contrary, there will be no Oslo II. How many nations would tolerate the continuous slaughter Israelis are expected to put up with? Think of our bunker buster and daisy cutter bombs used in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Until the Arabs make clear their intention to live peacefully alongside a secure Israel with concrete measures that are actually taken to stop the murder of Jews and the promotion of hatred and violence among the Arab masses, then Israel should not be expected to become a party to its own demise by caving into Arab demands and those of the hypocrites elsewhere who support them. The Yossi Beilins are convenient tools of the Arabs here as well. No other country would demand less under the circumstances Israel has been faced with. Indeed, most of those European and Russian sponsors of the roadmap would have leveled Gaza a long time ago if they had been subjected to what they expect Jews to continuously tolerate. America is coming close to making some similar decisions regarding Tikrit.

What's missing is the Arabs' own Altalena.

Posted by Arlene Peck, November 12, 2003.

What a difference a day makes - or, was that a year? I almost had to laugh yesterday when I saw a front page picture in the Los Angeles Times. Like they say, "A picture is worth a thousand words." and it depicted a dozen Iraqi men surrounded by barbed wire. The accommodating story had something about how the entire town of Tarquit was surrounded with fence and barbed wire and, there was now only one entrance into the city. A heavily guarded entrance too I might add. The reason for the barrier was obviously for 'damage control' and to protect the soldiers who were patrolling the town.

My, my, isn't that something? Funny, I can remember in our not so distant past when the State Dept and its leaders, and especially President Bush, were giving almost daily photo-ops about how 'angry' and 'disappointed' we were with Israel for building that nasty fence.

Hey, not so long ago, the State Department was proposing that the United States hold in the reins with Israel and, cut to almost nothing the badly needed loan guarantees if Israel continued building the barrier between Israel and the terrorists. Somehow they failed to mention that the need for the fence in the first place was because of the terrorist's attacks that made the separation fence necessary. Out of the hundreds of homicide bombings into Israel and its citizens, isn't it amazing how not one has come from Gaza? A place coincidentally where there is already a fence in place separating Gaza from Israel.

What I find even more interesting was that in the horrific Road Map, nowhere was a fence even mentioned. However, it did mention and specify in the Roadmap to Auschwitz that the Palestinians must cease the violence and dismantle their terror regime. None of that was even attempted, while Bush and Powell and the rest of the 'gang' continued to ignore the most important violation while continuing to get on Israel's case for a fence that wasn't even mentioned in any document.

Amazing now that the same Arab crazies are shooting our American planes down from the sky, how the 101st Airborne feel free to go into the Saddam's hometown of Tikrit where most of the ambushes have been happening and bomb the hell out of the city. Wow, where are the same cries for 'restraint' that Bush and Powell were so recently demanding from the Israeli government after the same thing happened to them. Except, in the case of Israel, it wasn't five or six soldiers killed as in Iraq but maybe thirty innocent men, women and children who might have been having lunch in a seaside cafe and just happened to get in the way of the Palestinian terrorist's bomb? The double standard that is so often used when it comes to Israel just doesn't seem so palatable now that it's on the other foot and so close to home. Wait folks, until they start bombing inside of our coffee shops and departments stores like in Israel right here on our home turf in the United States.

It is inevitable that it is going to happen. I have repeated so often its getting boring how Israel was the canary in the tunnel. These Islamic fundamentalist love nothing better than to test our resolve by doing the only thing they know best, terrorism. They tried it out in the streets of Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem. Now, they have perfected it to the streets of Baghdad and surrounding neighborhoods. They are again testing Uncle Sam's resolve in continuing the war on terror.

Does it make me a bad person when I see that the Royal Family in Saudi Arabia is now having it hit them on the home front and I smile? I watched the evening news and saw the Saudi Prince saying how terrorism must be stopped and the evilness they do punished! Wow! Does that mean that they won't be having those big telethons anymore where they raise hundreds of millions of dollars to present the poor families of the 'martyred' victims? Or, does that just mean they'll continue to promote and pay for terrorism against the Jewish State and punish the terrorists within their own country?

However, I have to tell you one important thing. As an American who feels strongly about the State of Israel and her safety, I don't understand how the present government in Israel can vote to release four hundred terrorists so they can go and kill more civilians in coffee shops, schools, and buses so the bodies of three dead soldiers and one live business man can be released. Lord, what kind of message does this send? The lesson learned from this is that terror pays and guarantees future kidnappings and blackmail Nor, can I fathom what is in their minds when they silence the radio of Arutz Sheva because they are a little too much to the right for the powers that be.

Not so long ago my column was dropped, after thirty years from The Jewish Post & Opinion because the new regime thought my writing was too "mean to the Arabs." The Thought Police seem to be alive and well in Israel, much to the detriment of its people.

Are they so blind that they just 'don't get it' and realize that the final plan is for the State of Israel to disappear? It seems to be apparent to everyone, except the politicians who continue to make disastrous decisions. It should be obvious to everyone who lives on our planet that this is just not a war of terror. We are in a war of ideology and there are two billion Arabs out there who are waiting in the wings for the destruction of the West. Discussion is not an acceptable solution.

Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, November 12, 2003.

I'm not sure what to do or how to feel. The eleventh of Cheshvon has arrived and it's the matriach Rachel's Yartzeit, the anniversary of the Rabin assassination, and my husband's birthday. Should I be reflective, mourn or celebrate? And if the kids and I greet my husband with balloons and a cake later today, will I be arrested for incitement, excitement or inappropriate behavior?

This is not the first time that the marking of occasions or memorials for individuals has left me at a loss.

While studying art and design back in 1978, I had an assignment in illustration class to draw a portrait of a person whom I admired and believed would go down in history. For a full week I drew a blank, and so I asked the instructor if it would be okay if I opted to illustrate a personality whom I despised - but who I was sure would go down in history. A week later, Yasser Arafat graced my canvas board, flanked by an Israeli soldier carrying a victim of the Ma'alot massacre; an old Jewish women clinging to a gravestone; and some victorious gun-wielding Fatah guys on a hill.

Meanwhile in painting class, I began a commemorative portrait of Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat - to mark the Camp David Accords and the ushering in of an era of peace. The painting wasn't going as smoothly as I had planned. Something about it just didn't look or feel right. I was unable to capture the exhilaration of the historic moment and so, in a fit of artistic frustration, I obliterated the piece with a frenzied palette knife and some fatal strokes of a brush. As a finishing touch, I dry-brushed some bloodied feathers falling from the dove that was hovering above the two leaders.

Feeling rather disgusted with myself, I nevertheless shlepped Begin, Sadat and Arafat to class for two humiliating critiques. The instructors winced and the class was silent. Artists want the audience to react, even if it's scathing criticism. To a creative person, no response is worse than death. It was a bad couple of weeks for this painter, but I photographed the works for posterity, before throwing them into the pile of failed artistic endeavors.

Twenty-five years ago, somewhere deep in the heart of a liberal, Reform Jewish University student, was truth. But I casually disregarded the gut feelings and chalked them up to a common creative block. Now that I'm older and wiser, I know that when I feel that familiar gnawing in my heart and the creative juices stop flowing, or gush in an ominous direction, then it's time to explore and examine the issues.

I found myself digging around for the old negatives of those discarded works the other day. You see, I'm haunted by the past and its startling intrusion into our present. Take a look, the headlines are full of ghosts:

* Seems that a European Union Poll found that 59 percent of 7,500 Europeans surveyed called Israel a larger threat to world peace than North Korea or Iran. C'mon, that's got to alarm even the most extreme adherent of the 'everything's gonna be OK.' philosophy.

* Remember, this comes on the heels of the Malaysian PM's speech at the Islamic Conference Summit in which he proclaimed that, "Jews rule the world - and the world's 1.3 billion Muslims should unite - for a final victory." Which in turn drew the following ominous reaction from the Egyptian Foreign Minister: "I think it was a shrewd and very deep assessment of the situation."

* But wait, we're not finished yet. Dark tunnels continue to emanate from Egypt as this week Egypt's senior religious authority, Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar Tantawi, elevated suicide bombers to the standing of martyrs.

* Arafat is reportedly ready to talk peace again. Ever read his bio? The prince of darkness was born (with a silver spoon in his mouth on August 29, 1929)) and bred in Cairo. He's nothing more than a bad will ambassador from Egypt, in charge of their chief export - terror.

* I hardly derive comfort knowing that Dr. Mohamed El-Baradei heads the International Atomic Energy Commission and is responsible for keeping nations like North Korea and Iran in line. He's an Egyptian national, who began his illustrious career as part of the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1964, under President Gamal Abdel Nasser (remember him, the guy who swore he'd throw the Jews into the sea?).

* National Geographic saw fit to feature the Egyptian sun god on this month's cover.

* Meanwhile it seems that Pharoah is back. Now you may think nothing of a 3000 year old mummy by the name of Ramses returning to Egypt, but it made big waves on the banks of the Nile. The mummy was welcomed back home with songs and a military band. During a ceremony at the national museum in Cairo, a group of Egyptian schoolchildren stood by the coffin and sang, "We are the sons of the Nile. Welcome Ramses, the builder of esteemed Egypt."

I wonder what would happen if Israeli children went on a frenzy and cremated the old Pharoah's resting place the same way Palestinian youth burnt and desecrated Joseph's tomb three weeks ago.

It should be noted that Moses, personally searched for Joseph's remains, found them in the Nile, and carried those bones with him - out of Egypt - in order to keep an ancient promise.

Anybody who doesn't think that we're living through epic times had better read their Bible. Whether taught by a rebbe in cheder or nun in Sunday school, basic bible 101 is coming to life, and if you can't see that then you're simply not looking (or perhaps you're the zombie).

America is busy slugging it out in Babylon. Israel keeps trying to appease Amalek. Ishmael has switched into high gear, and Pharoah's praises are being sung on the Nile. Sounds like another sequel to "Return of the Mummy." But I have a theory that if it's stranger than fiction, then it's probably true.

I can't locate the source, but I once read that in the end of days, Pharoah and Nebuchadnezzar will be resurrected so that they can derive comfort from witnessing the destruction of Edom - a force far more powerful than their armies were. Well, Pharoah has returned and I hear that Saddam Hussein's portraits and posters are making a comeback in Iraq (it seems Saddam always considered himself the reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzer), but where is Moses when you need him?

Before Moshe made the fateful decision to kill the Egyptian, who was brutally beating the Israelite, "he looked back and forth and saw that there was no one there." According to our sages, Moshe could see into the future and was able to perceive whether or not this Egyptian would have any worthy descendants, and he found none. We obviously don't have the prophetic abilities of Moshe Rabbenu, but as Jews, we have ingrained within us the foundations of Torah and the teachings of our Prophets and Sages. When faced with critical decisions we are required to engage in a thought process that involves deep consideration of the consequences of our actions on both a large and small scale. We have the potential to be able to incorporate the past, present, and future in order to perceive reality, truth and make wise choices.

Next time we enter negotiations with our enemies via the prodding of our American and European "friends", we'd better take a tip from Moshe, and take a good look and carefully consider the commitments made to our ancestors, to our children and to our G-d before we turn our back on our inheritance, and negotiate away a G-d given gift. Or, before we shake the hands of any leader emanating from Egypt.

The day is winding down and Rachel continues to weep for her children. There are those who continue to weep for Rabin. As for me, well, I've got a cake to bake.

Ellen lives on the Golan Heights with her husband and six children. She is a painter, writer and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com

Posted by Manhigut Press, November 12, 2003.

Today [November 6] is the "Yahrzeit" of Yitzchak Rabin and the following article by syndicated columnist Ben Schapiro says it all.

Eight years ago this week, the fate of Israel was sealed. On November 4, 1995, Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir. The murder was tragic, not just because Rabin suffered an untimely death, but because Rabin became sacrosanct. The illusory image of Rabin as the tough sabra willing to negotiate with the Arabs, as the invincible general turned peacemaker, as the tolerant, wise leader of the Jewish state, was forever enshrined in the public consciousness. Rabin's political inheritance, the Oslo Accords, became unassailable.

On the anniversary of his death, it is now more necessary than ever to explode the myth of Yitzchak Rabin. As long as Rabin's myth exists, it will be impossible to move beyond his failed policies: negotiation with terror, persecution of the Israeli right wing, apologetics for Jewish existence.

Rabin was no "great general." As Uri Milstein's The Rabin File explains, Yitzchak Rabin bears responsibility for many of the most fouled-up military operations in Israeli history. On December 9, 1947, during the War of Independence, Rabin took charge of the Jerusalem sector of the Palmach (the elite striking-force of the Haganah, precursor to the Israeli Defense Force). Rabin's task was to secure Jerusalem and access to the city. Under his watch, Israeli forces met with disaster after disaster. The substantial losses incurred by Rabin's soldiers led the United States to withdraw support for the establishment of the Jewish State on March 19.

Rabin's military record extends beyond incompetence. The celebrated soldier actually fled the field of battle in 1948. On April 20, a food and supply convoy set out for Jerusalem. The area fell under Rabin's jurisdiction. His forces failed to secure the road, and the convoy was ambushed. When the ambush occurred, several officers attempted to lead counter-attacks; Rabin did not. Instead, he personally drove away for reinforcements. After requesting reinforcements, Rabin did not return to fight with his men - he went to sleep.

One of Rabin's proudest military moments came on June 22, 1948. Menachem Begin's Irgun, another Israeli military group, was in the midst of negotiating a pact with David Ben-Gurion under which Irgun would join the new Israeli Defense Force. Meanwhile, the Irgun had loaded a ship, the Altalena, with weapons and Jewish fighters (many of them Holocaust survivors) to join the IDF. Ben-Gurion ordered that the Altalena be fired upon. Rabin carried out his orders to the letter. Later, Rabin bragged how he had "bumped them off on the deck of the burning ship and while they were trying to swim to safety." Sixteen Jews were killed, many shot while swimming to shore.

So much for the "great general." More importantly, however, Rabin's true political legacy - the diabolical "peace process" - must be exposed. Before his election in 1992, Rabin promised the Israeli public that he would never negotiate with arch-terrorist Yassar Arafat or his murderous Palestine Liberation Organization. Yet before the Israeli elections, in May 1992, eight Labor Party members, led by master-appeaser Yossi Beilin, met with Abu Mazen (then the head of the PLO "political wing") in Cairo. This was against Israeli law. According to Yehoshua HaMe'iri, a journalist then stationed in Cairo, "what was discussed was an attempt to ensure a Labor Party victory in the elections." A quid pro quo was made: Labor would work on behalf of "Palestinians" if the PLO influenced Israeli Arabs to vote Labor.

After the election, the Rabin government immediately cracked down on Israelis opposing the Oslo Accords. Moshe Feiglin, now the head of the Manhigut Yehudit block within Likud, organized peaceful mass protests. Rabin retaliated by putting Feiglin on trial for "raising fear among the public." At future protests, the Israeli Police were used as a political organization, blocking protesters and sometimes assaulting them. It is vital to remember that before Rabin's murder, his peace program had been overwhelmingly rejected by the Israeli public. By April 1994, Rabin's approval rating had dropped to 41 percent. Before his assassination, Rabin was trailing anti-Oslo Likud candidate Benjamin Netanyahu by a wide margin. Only after his murder did the public deify Rabin.

After Rabin's death, the witch-hunt shifted into high gear. The Israeli right wing found itself in a position akin to the American right wing after the Oklahoma City bombing. Eight years later, the madness has not ceased. The government has shut down the radio station Arutz Sheva, a right wing news service; actions are underway to shut down Arutz Sheva's internet site as well.

Yitzchak Rabin did not deserve to be murdered. He simply deserved to lose the public trust. He deserved to live out his life in obscurity rather than dying a martyr for a detestable cause.

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 12, 2003.

This was in Arutz-7 online (http://www.israelnationalnews.com).

In light of the ongoing and intensified Arab efforts to attack and terrorize the Jews of Gush Katif, in Gaza, the Lev L'Noar (A Heart for the Youth) organization is sponsoring a day of performances and children's activities in the communities of Kfar Darom, Rafiach Yam and N'vei Dekalim. Earlier in the week, a theater group of the organization visited the community of Morag, and other events took place on Wednesday in Gadid and Bedolah.

Lev L'Noar sponsors such activities for children living in the shadow of Arab terrorism every few months. In the past six months alone, S'derot, frequent target of Arab rocket attacks, Afula, and many communities in Samaria and Judea have benefitted from the organization's efforts to bring a smile to the faces of Israel's children.

Lev L'Noar is a charitable organization under the auspices of businessman and philanthropist Lev Levayev. Levayev is also the President of the Federation of Jewish Communities of the CIS. His contribution to the Jewish communities of the former Soviet Union was formally recognized in January with his receipt of the Jerusalem Prize for Jewish Leadership.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 5, 2003.

Israel's Chief of Staff used to support strong action against the P.A. Now he "said that Israel's hard-line policies against the Palestinians (Arafat's Arabs) were working against Israel's 'strategic interest' and had contributed to the downfall of the previous Palestinian (sic) prime minister - " Travel restrictions and curfews imposed upon the P.A. allegedly get more Arabs to hate Israel and become terrorists. He suggested that Israel should have eased the measures, to strengthen rule by former PM Abbas. Abbas had complained that PM Sharon took no steps to convince the Arabs that the latest peace plan would improve their lives. Sharon objected to the Chief of Staff for criticizing his policy publicly.

Israel eased the restrictions the same day as the Chief of Staff's comment was reported (Greg Myre, 10/30, A5).

When the NY Times reports, there are three stories: (1) The "party" line, summarized above; (2) Between the lines; and (3) Not on any line. People may not read between the lines if they lack the requisite skepticism.

Between the lines, one might surmise that Israel periodically eases the restrictions. It does, and that the problem. Easing them doesn't offer much hope to non-terrorist, oppressed by their own rulers. It offers opportunity to terrorists.

Not on any line of the Times, but often in IMRA releases, is the observation that that tighter the restrictions, the fewer terrorists get through; the looser the restrictions, the more terrorists get through. IMRA concludes that restrictions should be retained, especially roadblocks on the Gaza north-south highway otherwise used for transporting and positioning terrorists and their armaments.

Not mentioned by Mr. Myre, who interprets the news when it serves his paper's point of view, is that the prior P.A. Prime Minister, a terrorist, like the current one, refused to crack down on terrorism, and that the whole P.A. is geared to "armed struggle" against Israel. There is no benefit for Israel in making it easier for the terrorists. The Times might have noted that Abbas, who falsely complained that Israel offered his people no hope, did not offer Israel hope.

Not mentioned is a more important point. The war is waged for totalitarian reasons. The P.A. motivates its people not on the basis of hardships imposed by Israel, but with the false accusation that Israel belongs to them and that the Jews are evil. Shouldn't the Times report and object to the P.A. campaign of calumny against Israel, Judaism, and the Jews?

The Times misses few opportunities, itself to demean Israel. Thus after reprimanding a US general who publicly criticized US policy for interfering with civilian rule, the Times praised an Israeli general publicly criticizing Israeli policy. This inconsistency stems from dishonest advocacy journalism.

In place of real information, the Times fills in with deception and posturing. The Chief of Staff might have complained that Israel did not ease restrictions enough. That is a matter of judgment. But for him to deny that Israel did, when it did, is deceitful.

The P.A. leader's complaint that Israel did not show the Arabs that the peace plan was worth their while, while his Arabs were murdering Israelis, is effrontery. The P.A. committed itself to several peace plans and violated them all. After each violation, it asks for more concessions to fulfill its obligations, but doesn't come through. Such duplicitous warmongers should be smacked own, not buttered up. Either the P.A. has an agreement or it does not. If it doesn't keep its agreement, then Israel should stake its own claims in Yesha, permanently reducing the terrorists' opportunities there.

A false impression is left that the war is the sole cause of P.A. poverty, when the P.A. leaders steal half the people's budget and charge them monopolistic prices. Of course, the war is a factor in their impoverishment (and in Israel's). Then why does the P.A. wage it? Since the P.A. started it, how unfair of the P.A. to blame Israel for it! Why do no such thoughts get expressed in the columns and editorials of the Times? After all, the Times purports to want peace. I think peace is a lower priority for it than Israeli surrender.

Thus we can see that the Times pursues its anti-Israel agenda regardless of how much that helps enemies of the US, such as the western Palestinian Arabs. It misleads, lies, and omits crucial facts. It accepts unsupported and false assertions. Oh the poor readers of the Times who depend upon it for news and think it is a great paper because of the size and quantity of its pages!

Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, November 5, 2003.

Primitive tribes offer sacrifices hoping to mollify whatever nonexistent beings they believe in. The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman belongs to a very sophisticated tribe that, according to the recently retired Malaysian Prime Minister, rules the world by proxy. One would think Mr. Krugman should be above such crude superstitions. Nevertheless, in his column on October 21, he suggests that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld should fire General Boykin in order to mollify moderate Muslims.

General Boykin, the leading anti-terror expert at the Pentagon and a devout Christian, had openly and publicly, on several occasions, expressed his personal opinion of Islam, which happens to be rather low. Considering where the terror is coming from, this is far less surprising than Mr. Krugman's eagerness to sacrifice both General Boykin and the First Amendment to mollify moderate Muslims. I'd like to ask Mr. Krugman what gives him a reason to believe that the beings he is trying to mollify actually exist.

The official, politically correct point of view says that Islam is just another monotheistic religion, not that different from Judaism or Christianity. If that is true, then moderate Muslims must exist, just like moderate members of other faiths. However, moderate members of other faiths do not require sacrificial mollification - that's basically how we tell moderates from extremists. Therefore, either moderate Muslims are mythical creatures, or we need substantially different criteria to identify them. That dilemma alone should make us suspicious as to whether Islam is "just another religion." Obviously, it is important that we determine how a moderate Muslim can be distinguished from a Muslim extremist.

Why not ask Muslims themselves? Irshad Manji, a young Canadian author, has published a book titled The Trouble With Islam. Since we don't hear too many Muslim voices criticizing their religion, her book deserves our attention. This is what the author herself says on her promotional website (http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/the_book_archives/oldindex.html):

I appreciate that every faith has its share of literalists. Christians have their Evangelicals. Jews have the ultra-Orthodox. For God's sake, even Buddhists have fundamentalists. But what this book hammers home is that only in Islam the literalism is mainstream.

Apparently, the terms literalism and fundamentalism in the quotation above are used interchangeably, as synonyms of religious extremism. Unfortunately, the author fails to mention the most important difference between "literalists" in Islam and other religions. Evangelical Christians may believe that heaven is reserved for them alone. Ultra-Orthodox Jews may display intimate understanding of the murkiest places in the Talmud. I have no idea what extreme fundamentalist Buddhists do that sets them apart from their moderate coreligionists. What I do know however is that no religion except Islam pursues the idea of physical extermination of those who believe differently. The concept of holy war is unique to Islam. Jihad is the absolute monopoly of Muslims. There is no parallel to it in any other religion in the world. (Yes, I have heard about Crusades, but Christianity does not mandate them, and do you know when the last Crusade ended?

So, here we have it in plain English, as simple as A, B, C:

A. According to the Koran, holy war against the infidels is a sacred duty of every Muslim.

   B. According to Ms. Manji, mainstream Muslims interpret Koran literally. The conclusion is inevitable:

      C. Mainstream Muslims perceive war against the infidels - meaning you and me - as their sacred duty.

Once you understand that, you don't need books to explain to you what exactly the trouble with Islam is. The trouble with Islam derives from the fact that mainstream Islam openly calls for murder of all infidels. That's why Islam is not "just another religion." That's what, in my view, allows to classify all its followers as extremist.

What then, besides our stubborn, groundless faith in the general goodness of our fellow human beings, leads us to believe that moderate Muslims are not just a figment of our imagination? How do they manifest themselves in the real world?

It would be utterly useless to look for them in Gaza, Judea, or Samaria. Unlike bin Laden, terrorists occupying Israeli lands do not live in caves. They live in small towns, villages and crowded refugee camps where everyone knows everything about everyone else. They couldn't survive for a day without popular support. When someone gives them a reason to doubt the sincerity of his support, they label him a collaborator and murder him on the spot. Indeed, the PA-sponsored educational system guarantees that innocent children are indoctrinated in the most murderous variety of Islamic extremism - thereby losing their innocence - at the earliest possible age. Therefore, in Israel, a moderate Muslim is a dead Muslim, which is bad news for those who want us to believe that there is a peaceful solution to the continuing Arab war against Israel.

Let's look elsewhere. Afghanistan, liberated by the United States from the medieval tyranny of the Taliban is about to publish the draft of its first constitution. Their new constitution is going to be firmly based on Islamic principles. The country itself is soon to be renamed the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. We wouldn't call a Jew or a Christian who wanted his religion to become the basis of his country's constitution a moderate, would we? Here, in the United States, we value the separation of church from state so much that we launch court battles to remove the Ten Commandments and every reference to God from everything that is even remotely related to the government. If Islam is "just another religion," shouldn't the same criteria apply to Muslim countries? And if the same criteria do apply, we have to conclude that President Karzai installed in Afghanistan by the American military and unable to survive now or in the foreseeable future without the American military presence, is not a moderate Muslim, but an outright religious extremist. His "Very correct" remark to Mahadir's call for the extermination of Jews shows that he is a political extremist as well. Therefore, the only practical question regarding Afghanistan is why did the United States have to waste lives of its soldiers and tens of billions of dollars in order to replace one bunch of Muslim extremists with another? It might have been worthwhile had it improved our security at home, but, as we know, that didn't happen. Therefore, we have to conclude that the United States has once again won a battle but lost the war. Next, the same will inevitably happen in Iraq.

Desperate search for moderate Muslims goes all around the world. It is especially urgent in Europe whose face is being irreversibly altered by mass immigration from Islamic countries. Recently, the British government appealed to the growing British Muslim community to isolate extremists in their midst. It's not hard to predict the response. Actually, there will be no response, because everyone in any Muslim community is an extremist. Such is the nature of Islam, and the only thing that I find hard to comprehend is the self-imposed blindness of the British government. Apparently, such is the price of liberalism and political correctness. Bye-bye, Europe. We are next.

I don't think World War II could be won if the Allies, instead of eradicating Nazism, attempted to replace Nazi extremists with moderate Nazis. Actually, nobody was looking for moderate Nazis during World War II. But those were simpler, purer times. Today, the mythical moderate Muslim remains the focal point of the US foreign policy in the Middle East. The blind faith in his existence has already led the United States to many monumental failures, and many more are to be expected in the future. Meanwhile, the moderate Muslim, along with the Big Foot, the unicorn, the Loch Ness monster, remains more elusive than a cure for cancer: there is at least a theoretical possibility that a cure for cancer can be found one day, unless of course Islam takes over and drags us all down into its own endless Dark Ages.

Other articles by the author are available on http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/

Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, November 5, 2003.

About twenty years ago as a young Yeshiva - Rabbinical Seminary - student in Jerusalem - recently graduated from college - I met some members of a Jewish Federation Mission to Israel, in downtown Jerusalem. We began talking, one thing led to another, and I then told them one of my "pet" ideas of the time.

I pointed out, that there were a lot of programs that are run by the Jewish Agency, or funded by various ministries of the Israeli government, to encourage young people to come to Israel. There are Ulpans - Hebrew language courses of study, volunteer programs at Kibbutzes - collective farms, one-year programs for overseas students at Israeli universities and Yeshiva programs to learn about Judaism or strengthen Jewish identity; but even when young people really fall in love with Israel, and decide to make Aliya - immigrate - to Israel, many need to go back to the states or Europe first, they need to get a job to pay off student loans or other debts, and in the process get bogged down there and never return to Israel. I told them, many other young people would love to come to these programs, but since they have to be able to pay their own airfare - even for the programs that are totally free - they can't afford it. What's lacking I told them, is assistance from the organized J ewish community in America or elsewhere to help finance these young people to get to Israel.

Why not, I asked them, create a fund to pay for the plane tickets, for those who want to go on these programs? And also, to help pay off student loans and other debts, for those who want to make Aliya? Not only did I tell these people on a federation mission, but I also told others who came later that summer for a World Zionist Congress meeting, and others for the Jewish Agency meetings. I was telling everyone in those days about my "idea". I have no clear evidence that anyone worked on it, but almost twenty years later, I can sit back with some satisfaction and watch as projects like "Birthright Israel" and "Nefesh B'Nefesh" which do just as I suggested, are successfully implemented. They now bring many young people to Israel for totally free programs - airfares included - and help people, including families pay off their debts, so that they can make Aliya.

Why do I tell you all this? As an introduction to my next "pet" idea. While reading the Torah portion Lech Lecha (Genesis 12:1) where G-D tells Avram - not yet renamed Avraham - to "Go from your land, from your relatives and father's home, to the land I will show you," which is the basis for the Mitzva - divine command - for Jews to live in the Land of Israel; I thought about this verse in today's context. This is the Zionist Mitzva par excellance, for Aliya. Yet Avram and Sarai - later Avraham and Sara - were not youngsters when they made Aliya. According to traditional commentators, they were 75 and 65 years old respectively. So here is my new idea, based on G-D's model. Programs need to be developed to bring older people to Israel, and they need to be encouraged to make Aliya and "retire" in Israel, to start the next stage of their lives, just as Abraham and Sara did. You could call it, the Abraham and Sara Project.

I say, "retire" because most older people today don't really stop working; and sit around reminiscing about the good old days. With many people living into their 80's and 90's these days, retiring at 65 leaves at least 20 more good years of life. Since most people are in much better health for their age than used to be the case, "retirees" can still be productive contributors in society. Heck, living 10, 20, or 30 years staring at the "four walls" has got to be boring enough to kill you. Bring those people to Israel; they're full of life experiences, skills, and yes, resources.

Unlike younger people just starting out in life, older people have worked their whole life. They've raised families, own homes, businesses, and property. They won't come to Israel as financial burdens, but assets. We should be encouraging older people to "retire" to Israel, i.e. move there and start chapter two, or three, or four, of their lives. Encourage them to volunteer. Encourage them to start businesses there. Encourage them to act as consultants. Israeli businessmen need help getting into markets abroad. These people have a lifetime of connections. The Weather is as good as Florida or California, and it's the Jewish State.

Most in professional Zionist circles have always thought of encouraging youth to make Aliya. The work was tough. Israel needed soldiers. It wasn't a place for sissies. It still isn't, but most people don't work in agriculture or backbreaking labor anymore. Israel has a modern developed economy, and the white-collar and entrepreneurial skills of Jews from America, Europe, Australia, and South Africa fit nicely into that. Older people can make great contributions to Israel's economy and Israeli society.

It was always thought in professional Zionist circles, that young people settling down in Israel would act as a magnet to attract their families. It was hoped that parents, brothers and sisters would follow them and move there too. I want to propose a new model of Aliya. Older people - grandparents - will move to Israel. Their now grown children, who also have more wealth and resources than young people, will come out for visits. Who doesn't fly across America to visit their elderly parents? They'll send their kids on vacation to "Savta & Saba", "Bubie and Zaidie", or Grandma and Grandpa's just as they always do. Only now the kids will be taking a trip to Israel. Since people are living much longer, someone who "retires" out to Israel at 65, and lives another 20 or 30 years, is likely to see their children "retire" out there as well.

Another important point to stress is that this is the future. Jewish birth rates are at an all time low, except in Israel. The aging populations of America and Europe are growing faster than the general population and Jews even more so. While the potential pool of Aliya from young Jews in America and Europe is drying up, numbers are shrinking; the numbers of Jewish retirees is growing. The Baby Boom generation will begin retiring soon and they must be tapped for the next big wave of Aliya. It makes sense to reach out to these people.

The lone son or daughter who moved to Israel can be discounted, it can be seen as just another "rebellion". But when Grandma and Grandpa move to Israel, they'll be setting an example that will have lasting impact on the family. Since grandparents tend to be the links to Jewish tradition, it will teach everyone in the family how important being Jewish and living in Israel are. If they open a new business, well, they'll be able to invite someone - their grandson or granddaughter - from the "old country" to help run it. And although it's not pleasant to talk about, when they die, family members will want to go out there to acquire their inheritances. How many will decide to move to Israel permanently when they already own factories, stores, and real estate there?

With all the elderly moving to Israel, whole new industries will pop-up, remember they're elderly with money. Geriatric medicine will expand, putting many of the underused Russian doctors to work. New entertainment places will open. Why can't retirement communities be built, just as in Florida? They can be.

G-D would never have told Abraham to pick himself up and go to Israel if it wouldn't have been good for him. We have a concept, "Ma'ase Avot Siman L'Banim" - the actions of our forefathers are guides to what we should do. Rather than just encourage Aliya for the young, Israel must make a concerted effort to encourage Aliya for the aged. It will be the renewal of their lives - just as Abraham and Sara started their lives anew - and that will be good for them and the Jewish people.

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

Posted by Israela Goldstein, November 5, 2003.

Can anyone figure out how to get this televised? If you do, contact Monika Koplow (mkoplow@jewz.com), one of the documentary's producers.

A woman in Jerusalem is standing at a bus stop when a terrorist detonates a suicide bomb. The woman's mother and vivacious 5-year-old daughter are killed before her eyes, and she is severely injured.

Five young boys are traumatized by the memory of their father's death in what is recalled as the Passover Massacre of 2002. Months later the youngest boy, not yet 8, still suffers extreme trauma.

A 22-year-old woman, an aspiring dancer, is eating pizza with her best friend on a busy shopping street when a suicide bomber blows himself up. Her friend dies and she loses her legs.

These tragic stories are among those related in a heart-wrenching and well-crafted documentary called "No Safe Place: Six Lives Forever Changed," produced by Jay Sanderson, CEO of the L.A.-based Jewish Television Network.

"It struck me after I had been reading all the coverage in The New York Times about the victims of 9/11 that I hadn't really heard too many stories about the people who, in the course of living in Israel, suddenly had their lives totally destroyed by suicide bombers," Mr. Sanderson recalled. "So I went to Israel and saw that even the media there didn't do anything other than a sound bite when an incident happened. And in the American media, where there have been lots of projects done on the Palestinian side, there was nothing, zero, done on the reality of these average citizens dealing with suicide bombers."

The one-hour documentary, shot on a minuscule $150,000 budget with digital video cameras, does not contain any political rhetoric or propaganda. There are no arguments about issues, mentions of causes or calls for revenge. It doesn't even focus on the devastating impact fear created by terrorism is having on Israel's economy and society.

"This isn't about the conflict," said Mr. Sanderson. "It's about people whose lives have been disrupted by terrorism. These are human stories.

"It's not about whether the Green Line [separating Israel proper from its territories] should exist. It's different. That's the point," he said. "These stories have value, just like the 9/11 stories have value. To say this doesn't have an audience because somebody did something about the conflict in the past is to demean the lives of these victims.

"The reason we made it in the first place was to tell their stories."

That is the basis for a different kind of tragedy. There is no assurance "No Safe Place" will ever be seen by a wide audience on television, as was intended. Since it was completed, it has been submitted to a number of broadcast and cable outlets. "I'm still out there. I'm still trying to get someone to do it," Mr. Sanderson said. "But everyone has basically said the same thing, which is unless we shoot the other side, or something analogous, [they] won't air it."

The fact is there are no Jewish suicide bombers, so there is no equivalent other side. There is an Israeli army, which operates openly, and there have been lives altered on both sides; but this documentary isn't about any of that. Over the past months, Mr. Sanderson has heard a litany of reasons as one network after another passed. Some said they feel they have already aired a lot on the subject. And others, as a spokesperson for the History Channel explained, declined because they see it as too contemporary, and not part of history.

That kind of resistance frustrates and infuriates Kelsey Grammer, the star of "Frasier," who donated his time and talents as the narrator of "No Safe Place."

"It's political correctness run amok," said Mr. Grammer. "I do believe that within the media there is a little too much obsession with appearing to be politically correct, and not taking sides. But of course by doing that, they are taking sides. So that is an unfortunate mishap, I think."

"There is a certain amount of political correctness that people feel," agreed Mr. Sanderson. "I believe HBO would rather do a documentary on two elderly lesbian Jews who leave their husbands and live as outwardly gay women. They're happy to push the envelope when it comes to sexuality or a lot of other issues, but people are unwilling to push the envelope when it comes to these kinds of human crises."

A spokesman for HBO said that as a matter of policy the network doesn't comment on why it chooses not to license a certain documentary.

Mr. Sanderson, however, believes he knows the answer, and it isn't exclusive to HBO. "Israel has become a difficult subject for Jews and non-Jews to deal with right now," he said. "Anything sympathetic to Israel makes them uncomfortable. Israel has gone from being David to being Goliath. But these people are not soldiers. They are not in this. They are just living."

Mr. Grammer is not Jewish and has no history as an activist for Israel. He said that after he reviewed the material in "No Safe Place," he just felt "there was a problem and it was worth lending my name to and my voice to."

Asked what he would say to network executives considering the project if he were sitting across the desk, Mr. Grammer didn't hesitate for a second: "I would say, 'Take your head out of your ass and put this on the air because people need to know about it.'"

Then with a nervous laugh, he asked, "Is that quotable enough?"

"I am reduced to a lack of convincing arguments at this point," Mr. Grammer added, "because I am just devastated by the idea that these people can't find a reason to put this show on. It seems extraordinary."

At a time when the United States is losing soldiers and civilian workers to suicide bombers in Afghanistan and Iraq, and terrorists around the world are increasingly turning to suicide bombing, the title of this documentary is uncomfortably universal. "No Safe Place" will be seen at some film festivals and eventually may be offered through home video, but if it fails to find wider TV distribution, it will just compound the tragedies suffered by these victims, even as new tragedies continue to unfold around the globe.

Posted by Itamar Marcus, November 5, 2003.

Vicious incitement of hatred towards the United States continues unabated in the controlled Palestinian media. The PA daily condemned the Khawza Shiite institutions, for not encouraging suicide terror against the US in Iraq. President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld are "bloodthirsty beasts", Bush is "the Great Liar", the USA is the "imperialist power". American involvement in Iraq is called: "fascism and cruelty... repression and humiliation of the Iraqi people". It should be noted that the PA leadership is not limiting its incitement against the US to the PA areas. In a speech in Brazilian Parliament a PA National Council Member called the "triangle of terror and evil... Bush, Sharon and Blair" and their policies "organized terror... and war crimes." USAID, while it continues transferring hundreds of millions of dollars to the PA, is called "spies". [A full report on PA attacks on USAID will be distributed next week.]

The following are 4 articles that appeared recently in the PA press:

Article #1: The PA daily criticizes the Shiite leadership for not supporting terrorism against the US, using a play on words: "Shahid" -"Martyr" and "Shaa'hid" - "a witness". The Shiite religious leaders are condemned for merely "Shaa'hid" - "witnessing" the terrorism and not encouraging its people to become "Shahids" "Martyrs", fighting Americans.

Title: "The Shaa'hid and the Shahid" [The Witness and the Martyr]

"There is consensus in Iraq that American and British forces symbolize military occupation of Iraqi territories... Recent activities against America forces including helicopter interception, bombing of command centers and convoys and attacking political targets undoubtedly prove that the resistance is getting stronger. And that there are many reasons, foremost among them the occupation's fascism and cruelty, which helps the flow of many to the Iraqi resistance... The Khawza [Shiite religious institutions] admit publicly - and can not do otherwise - that the U.S. forces are invading forces, but the [the Khawza institutions] offer unclear and unconvincing ways for the long run concerning the attitude towards them [the U.S. forces]. The Khawza Shiite institutions try to achieve historic benefit from the presence of these forces... even if this involves participation in the Ruling Council, which is appointed by the American Governor!!! Are the [institutions of] Khawza capable of maintaining this dangerous balance?! Are they capable of reaping substantial achievements... in this way; after all, the people of the Shiite Congregation historically have been Martyrs [Shahids] and view the Martyrdom [Shahada] - since their first Martyr [Shahid], Ali, as a sacred obligation. Can the Khawza convince the Shiites to [merely] witness [Shaa'hid] the armed resistance that is growing more fierce due to the increased American repression and humiliation of the entire Iraqi people... Will the Khawza keep silent and [merely] witness [Shaa'hid], leaning toward the American occupier in the middle of a sea of Martyrs [Shahids]?" [Al-Ayyam Oct. 27, 2003]

Article # 2: "PA leadership is not limiting its incitement against the US to the PA areas. Palestinian National Council representative, Basam Abu Sharif, attacked the United States while meeting with Brazilian officials. In a speech in Brazilian Parliament he referred to the "triangle of terror and evil... Bush, Sharon and Blair" and their policies "organized terror... and war crimes." He called for a boycott of the United States by Brazil.

"[Palestinian National Council representative] Basam Abu Sharif spoke later in [Brazilian] Parliament about the dangerous developments in the Middle East and Palestine. He called for the nations and the UN to confront the triangle of terror and evil, in the figures of Bush, Sharon and Blair. He further stated that the sources of organized terror are the occupation and war crimes that these three states are committing in order to subjugate the nations and force hegemony and enslavement... He asked the representatives of the Brazilian nation to support the Palestinian people politically and boycott Israel the US and Britain until the occupation ends and the UN decision are implemented." [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Oct. 30, 2003]

Article # 3: "Bush and Rumsfeld "are human beings whose ambitions have turned them into bloodthirsty beasts" is the conclusion of this article condemning US involvement in Iraq, written by a Member of the PA Legislative Council in the official PA daily, Al Hayat Al Jadida.

"...The American soldiers [in Iraq] are collapsing emotionally, because they are fighting a cruel war, that in their opinion has no justification and which appear to have no end. And this, while their enemy believes in their battle... Bush says that he will stay in Iraq and win. To which victory is he referring? Did he not rain missiles down on Iraq, projectiles and explosives that equal at least 3 nuclear bombs? Did he not enlist the army, the navy, aircrafts and hundreds of millions of dollars in order to take over Baghdad, thanks to the treason of some spies? What additional victory does he want? Does he want the Iraqis to turn into domestic animals that surrender and bear the [yoke of] occupation while seeing the oil and the good of the land plundered, and when the honorable Iraqis turn to beggars, expecting the grace of the Americans.

"Donald Rumsfeld recently spoke about the victory of the, what he called: "the war of ideas." Which war and which ideas? Is it possible to put entire nation into solitary confinement... "Is this victory about which Rumsfeld speaks? Is it enough that Rumsfeld calls the "occupation" - "liberation", "interests" "theft" and the "military administration" "independence"? Is it enough to overthrow the legitimate government of the country [whether or not it is really legitimate] and replace it with Al-Jalabi and similar people... "No, no, no! I do not think that Bush, Sharon and their counterparts like Rumsfeld and Mofaz truly believe that they have any logical sense... They are human beings whose ambitions have turned them into bloodthirsty beasts." [Nahidh Muneer Al-Ris, PA Legislative Council Rep, official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida Nov. 3, 2003]

Article # 4: Since Bush is the "The Great Liar" the US "has to bury all of its imperialistic illusions," as the primary condition for victoryin the war fo ideas over terror.

"The American Agency for International Development [USAID] (of spies) decided to award a grant of $1,350,000 to fund the training of 50 [Egyptian] journalists in an American University so that when they return to Egypt and work in the Egyptian press, they will be able to speak about the United States with "professional expression" that humiliate the Egyptian people and nation. The [American] Ambassador represents a country where the majority of the inhabitants refer to their president as "The Great Liar." He [the Ambassador] accused the Egyptian press of "distorting the facts" at the very time it became clear to the whole world and to most of the American citizens that the "lie" and the "distortion of facts" were the basis for the excuses of the Bush administration for waging war on Iraq. [It also became clear] that the American press needs, more than any other press, "professionalism" in its expression. Rumsfeld wanted to resurrect the bones of the "Liberal" American idea, which have rotted. In order to implement this miracle, America, first and foremost, on its own and with the help of other nations, has to bury all of its imperialistic illusions. The death of the USA as and imperialist power is the primary condition for its victory in the " ideas war" against " terror" and "terrorists." How nice it would have been had those who are as dead as Rumsfeld, would buried their dead." [PA daily, Al-Ayyam November 1, 2003, Jawad Al-Bashiti, PA columnist and political commentator, living in Jordan]

The author is Director of Palestine Media Watch (PMW).

Posted by Lewis Lipkin, November 4, 2003.

On Nov 3, Israel introduced a resolution in the UN General assembly!!!!

What is the big deal? It is a precedent-shattering event for several reasons:

  1. It is the first time ever in 55 years that Israel has placed a measure before the UN.

  2. The.measure deals with the welfare of Jews in Israel - calling for protection of Israeli children victimized by "Palestinian" terrorism - a most infrequently voiced diplomatic concern of Israeli officialdom.

  3. It is as far as I am aware the first example of an Israeli counter-punch to the yearly avalanche of Arab anti-Israeli UN blows. Specifically Israel offered its motion as a riposte to "...a similar draft submitted by Egypt last week highlighting the plight of Palestian children..." [Dafna Linzer. Associated Press article in the Washington Times, 4 Nov 2003].The plan of course is to see whether only one, i.e., the Arab motion, is adopted. Otherwise the supposedly impartial UN Assembly (including the numerous Arab states) is faced with the difficult prospect of a favorable action for Israel, counter to their pattern for the last half century.

Instead of Israel's classical stance as a self-accusatory or merely passive punching bag, she has launched what one hopes is the beginning of a counter offensive. For hundreds of years, the public face of Jewry, in the form of Stadlans or Parneses and even Roosevelt's Rabbi Steven Wise, has responded to attack by "explanation." We "explain" that our Passover matzos would be inedible if it contained any human blood at all. We "explain" that we have abandoned proselytism for almost two millennia. We "explain" that we have no secret poisons that we drop in wells. We "explain" that Judea and Samaria are ours by ancient right, and do not add that in any case they are now ours by right of conquest in the 6-Day War. In all these cases, historically and now, we have "explained" and "explained" without calling the enemy the liars that they are.

Let's hope that the new resolution is the beginning of an era in which Israelis - diplomats and citizens in general - stand tall and positively assert their nationality as Jews in a Jewish State. Truly one hopes we are about to fulfill Hillel's injunction to become men in situations where until now there has been a notable absence.

Despite the recent mini-triumph for Israeli diplomacy at the UN, there is the concern that most Foreign Office officials still see things in terms of the old fashioned pleading, humble Jew, "explaining" things to the sovereign or the Cossack chief or whoever else was promoting the pogrom. For example, in today's (4 Nov 2003) issue of Arutz-7 one finds the retired Israeli Ambassador to France, Ovadiah Sofer, remarking:

"A major problem is the one-sided anti-Israel media in Europe," Sofer said. "The Palestinians, no matter how few and low-budgeted they are, simply have better explainers than we do... They bring in people who know how to explain at a level the people understand. [In addition,] the personal relations between government representatives of Israel and European countries affect the way Israel is presented in the public media. Even countries that are not considered very friendly to Israel - when the relations are closer, the public media allow many pro-Israel figures to explain their position..."

Posted by Itamar Marcus, November 4, 2003.

The two burning tasks of the Arab world today are the total destruction of Israel and the fight against the US in Iraq, according to the official Palestinian Authority [PA] daily, Al Hayat Al Jadida. The call for Israel's destruction, a basic and widespread Arab view, was to have been rejected by the PA after the Oslo Accords, yet it continues to be promoted in the tightly controlled PA media. It should be noted that the refusal to recognize Israel's existence is expressed in the article by the rejection of the name Israel, as well, as references to Israel are placed in quotation marks as follows - "Israel" - implying - "so-called Israel."

The article depicts Israel and the US as parallel and prime enemies of the Arab world and this is consistent with the opinions of the general Palestinian population according to the poll PMW released last week in Washington. That poll found that 87% of Palestinians thought either the US or Israel "is the single greatest threat to world peace." [51% answered Israel, 36% answered the US]. The article's call to fight Americans in Iraq is likewise consistent with PA opinions as the poll found that 42% of the Palestinians support the Iraqi attacks on Americans and 74% of Palestinians supported Saddam Hussein in the war.

The following is from the article in the PA daily:

"During these moments in history it is extremely important to adopt a direct and decisive position regarding imperialism, and especially regarding the Zionist entity. There is no option but resistance to imperialism... There is a need to crystallize a position regarding the imperialist-Zionist project in the Arab region. The resistance - that is meant to bring the expulsion of the American occupation in Iraq - should be supported by all means. The same applies to the struggle against the Zionist entity until the Zionist project is defeated, it's entity is eliminated, and a free and Arab Palestine is established as a first step towards uniting the Arab homeland and striving towards independent development and socialism. There are no other fundamental solutions to the Arab problem, but this one...

...The two state solution, a binational state, or even one democratic state outside the Arab dimension, will not be capable of getting rid of the contrast between the Arab masses and the Zionist-imperialist project in the Arab region... [There is] another issue, that the world movement should decide and take a standpoint: There are no "progressive Israelis." Every person, who is part of the Zionist-imperialist project, even if he is "opposed" to Zionist policy, is part of the structure of "Israel"... A person cannot be simultaneously both progressive and part of the Zionist entity - Zionist project... ...Israel is an illegitimate state. This definition applies to organizations and individuals that represent [Israel] or recognize it. Therefore, in order to emphasize this illegitimacy, all ties with the "Israelis" should be canceled, and in other words: normalization with Zionists should be opposed on a world level, not only in the Arab homeland...

...There is no option other than the elimination of the imperialist-Zionist project... The meaning of resisting Israel is resisting Globalization, and vice versa..."
[Op. Ed. by Dr. Hisham Al-Bustani, a Jordanian columnist, in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, official PA daily, Oct. 25, 2003]

Posted by Ruth Matar, November 4, 2003.

On Wednesday morning, October 15, three Americans were killed and a fourth severely wounded, in a terrorist bombing of a U.S. Embassy convoy traveling in Gaza in Palestinian controlled territory. The powerful roadside bomb, set off by remote control, ripped through the armored vehicle, cutting it in half.

A group of six U.S. investigators, who came to examine the site immediately thereafter, were pelted with stones by the Palestinians. The U.S. investigators were forced to leave, as Palestinian Authority security officials shot in the air to try to disperse the stone throwers.

On the following day, Thursday, PA police came to search homes in the Jabalya refugee camp to arrest suspects in the attack. They aborted their mission when they came under machinegun fire.

As of today, Monday, October 20, eight "suspects" have been arrested. There is no way of knowing whether Arafat's investigation and arrests merely amount to "rounding up the usual suspects." It is interesting to note, however, that terrorism against Israelis does not produce even this attempt at creating the appearance of action on the part of the Palestinian Authority.

The media keeps stressing that this was the first time that American diplomats were targeted by Arafat's terrorists. NOT SO!

In February of 1973, United States Ambassador Cleo Noel, and his assistant G. Curtis Moore, were tortured and machine-gunned in Khartoum, Sudan on ARAFAT'S DIRECT ORDERS. Arafat's voice was recorded on tape (three days worth) ordering the execution of these American diplomats.

The following article is a condensed version of my radio program of October 31, 2001, for Arutz Sheva. The full version of this radio program includes testimony by James J. Welsh, who was a Signals Intelligence Analyst for the National Security Agency in 1973, who spoke Arabic fluently. He taped Arafat's voice during three days, from February 27 to March 1. James J. Welsh charges that these tapes of Arafat ordering the execution of the U.S. diplomats, were deliberately covered up and that subsequent U.S. administrations have, in fact, been appraised of the authenticity of Arafat's voice on the tapes. He further charges that U.S. Administrations have chosen, for political reasons, to turn a blind eye to the direct guilt of Yasser Arafat in the cold blooded murders of Cleo Noel and G. Curtis Moore. (To obtain the complete version of my original article, you can request it via email and we will send it to you without delay.)

The Cover-Up Of The Arafat-Ordered Murder of U.S. Diplomats

On October 6, 2001, President W. Bush made a shocking statement. On behalf of the United States, he officially endorsed the creation of a Palestinian State. He said, and these are his exact words, "A Palestinian State has always been part of the United States' vision."

Always? Was a Palestinian State part of the vision of the United States when US Ambassador Cleo Noel and his assistant, G. Curtis Moore, were machine-gunned in Khartoum, Sudan, in February 1973, on the orders of Yasser Arafat?

Was a Palestinian State part of the vision of the United States when Yasser Arafat supplied the weapons used by the terrorists who killed two hundred forty one American Marines in Beirut in 1983?

According to a November 1999 issue of Newsweek magazine, a National Security Agency phone tap recorded a September 24, 1983 call from the Iranian Ambassador to Abu Haidar. The Ambassador told Abu Haidar to get weapons from Yasser Arafat to "undertake and extraordinary operation against US Marines in Beirut." The attack on the US Marine barracks in Beirut took place shortly thereafter and two hundred forty-one American soldiers were killed.

Was a Palestinian State part of the vision of the United States when Yasser Arafat was involved in the planning of the first World Trade center bombing in New York in February, 1993, which killed six people and injured thousands?

Moshe Peled, Israel's Deputy Education Minister in the Netanyahu government, told CIA representatives in early 1997 that Israeli intelligence had concrete evidence regarding Yasser Arafat's involvement in the attack. The official Iranian government newspaper, E-Kihan also accused Arafat of responsibility for the first World Trade Center bombing.

These are just a few examples of terror perpetrated against the United States and her citizens, in which Arafat played a major role. However, while Arafat has often been referred to as the "Father of Modern-day terrorism," this arch-terrorist is also fiendishly clever in covering up his tracks and in shifting the blame to others. On one occasion, though, Arafat slipped up and left unmistakable fingerprints, or rather, voiceprints. Arafat's voice was recorded ordering the aforementioned murder of the United States diplomats in Sudan in 1973.

So why has Arafat not been prosecuted? The tape with Arafat's voice has conveniently disappeared. However, thirteen years later, on February 12, 1986, forty-seven United States Senators, including Al Gore, addressed a letter on this matter to then-Attorney General Edwin Meese. In that letter, the Senators wrote that "These allegations, if substantiated, leave little doubt that a warrant for Arafat's arrest should be issued, and a criminal indictment filed against him. To allow other factors to enter into this decision is to make a mockery of our laws and our stated commitment to eradicate terrorism."

Yet these forty-seven Senators were never told the truth and, yes, a mockery was made of "our laws and our stated commitment to eradicate terrorism." President Ronald Reagan told and American Bar Association at that time, "We will seek to indict, apprehend and prosecute terrorists." Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

James J. Welsh was a Signals Intelligence analyst for the National Security Agency twenty-seven years ago. He was responsible for the analysis of Palestinian Liberation Organization communications at the time of the Black September murders of the American diplomats. He has alleged, including in a letter to members of the US Congress, that the US State Department has consistently acted to cover-up its failure to give priority to an NSA warning that Mr. Welsh, and others, has initiated to the American embassy in Sudan. The warning was based in the intercepted conversation between Yasser Arafat and Salah Khalaf, the leaders of Fatah, in Beirut and Khalil al-Wazir (Abu jihad) in Khartoum, discussing preparations for an imminent operation in Khartoum.

Mr. Welsh further alleges that the cover-up has continued under subsequent US administrations, who have all been appraised of the authenticity of Arafat's voice on the tapes, for political reasons related to the inconvenience of acknowledging the direct guilt of Yasser Arafat in the cold blooded murders of Cleo Noel and G. Curtis Moore.

Welsh further wrote to Victoria Toensing, a Justice Department attorney, that "If in 1986, Arafat's taped voice (three days worth) had been released to the American public, I do not think that the current mess that Israel is now in would have happened... the decision to withhold from the Committee the truth of these tapes may be one of the reasons that Arafat was able to re-invent himself... It was a long time ago, but this man did order the deaths of two US diplomats. We taped his words. I guess there is nothing that can be done now, but I often wonder why Yasser Arafat?s image and continued presence on the world scene is more important than simple justice for two dedicated diplomats who were murdered twenty-eight years ago."

As an aside, it is rather interesting, at the very least, to note that Mr. Welsh recently cancelled a radio interview with us on the Women in Green radio program on Arutz Sheva. The cancellation came at the last minute, after a lengthy and enthusiastic correspondence with the author of this article, in which Mr. Welsh expressed his gratitude at having found a platform to express his concerns!

The State Department, the National Security Agency, the CIA and Colin Powell continue to protect their dirty little secret. Yes, unfortunately, foul-ups do happen and it is natural for human beings to try to protect themselves, but the great immorality of the affair is compounded when Colin Powell and the State Department knowingly consort with the murderer Arafat, pushing President George W. Bush, a believing Christian, into advocating a Palestinian State on Biblical lands, knowing that this will become an Islamic state of terrorists. Do they not realize that when you make pacts with the devil, there will always come a day of reckoning?

Yasser Arafat must feel utter contempt for the United States. He knows that the Americans know that he has murdered many of their citizens. He also knows that because the State Department thinks there are advantages in not rocking the boat with the Islamic world, the United States has turned a blind eye toward the wanton murder of her own citizens. The message which is conveyed is very clear: Terror pays. Now, Arafat's ultimate "reward" is the promise of a Palestinian State on Biblical lands.

We are left with this central question: Why does the State Department and Colin Powell continue to dance with the arch-murderer Arafat? Why does the United States not bring Arafat to justice? As President George W. Bush recently said so eloquently: "The goal of the war on terrorism is to bring our enemies to justice, or justice to our enemies." Yet by rewarding Arafat and not bringing him to justice the United States encourages terrorists all over the world, like Osama bin Laden, to commit further and greater acts of terror.

What Can We Do?

Share this story of State Department perfidy with your family, your friends, your local media, Members of Congress, and President George W. Bush. Demand that Arafat be brought to justice for the crimes committed against Americans. Not expelled from Israel, not put in isolation in his Ramallah headquarters to hobnob with his European well-wishers, but brought to justice, which means indicted, tried, and punished, for the murder of his countless victims. What happened to the American law that killers of Americans who are murdered abroad, must be extradited to stand trial in an American Court? Such an action will be a small, but important, step in eradicating worldwide terrorism.

Write wfit@womeningreen.org for a complete copy of Ruth Matar's article.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 4, 2003.

The new head of state in Israel took office some time after his earlier mentor was assassinated. He initiated at once a policy of appeasement. Appeasement was openly advocated and declared, especially regarding the brutal dictator in Syria. The Israeli head of state offered the Syrian dictator everything imaginable and then some. When he was criticized by people opposed to his policies, he had them arrested for incitement. The Syrian dictator refused to be satisfied with the terms of the appeasement. He demanded more and more, including rights to the very capital of Israel.

The above passage is NOT referring to Ehud Barak and his policies, nor to Shimon Peres nor Yossi Beilin and his Geneva Boondoggle. It is not referring to the Assads of Syria. It is not the appeasement policy of Ariel Sharon being discussed, nor his offer to release hundreds of murderers from prison in exchange for the Hizbollah releasing three bodies of murdered Israeli POWs and perhaps also a captive Israeli drug smuggler. It is not the parody of Dunkirk perpetrated by Ehud Barak in Lebanon.

It is a summary of the events describes in the First Book of Kings, Chapter 20.

In Ecclesiastes it says there is nothing new under the sun. The governments of Israelites over the past decade were NOT the first to attempt to achieve peace through appeasement. King Ahab, the one and the same, the husband of painted Jezebel, was also the head of the Peace Now movement of his days. He offered the Syrian dictator, named Ben-Hadad, everything imaginable. For peace. He sent tribute to Ben-Hadad. He stripped his capital of gold and silver. He even sent his wives and children to the Syrian dictator.

But as in all forms of appeasement, the goodwill gestures for peace merely emboldened the dictator. They were interpreted as a sign of Israelite weakness. Ben-Hadad demanded MORE. Now he demanded direct access and sovereignty within the capital of Israel itself. He must be allowed to roam the capital freely, searching the homes and taking what he wanted.

Meanwhile, like his Oslo disciples thousands of years later, the original King Ahab promoted his "peace movement" accompanied by a "secularist revolution," designed to detach the state of Israel from its Jewish roots. He would deny any role or importance for Jewish religion, and instead pursue politically correct paganism. Anything to increase his prestige among the nations!

King Ahab had myriad faults and indeed is probably the very worst king of the Israelites described in the Bible. But unlike his direct Oslo and Beilinite descendents, King Ahab at least had some national pride and set a limit beyond which he was unwilling to pursue appeasement for "peace." That limit was reached when the barbarians demanded parts of his Capital.

Such a demand pushed Ahab over the edge. Never mind the massive hordes and sheer numbers of his enemy. Never mind his own track record of suppressing Judaism and promoting PC paganism. Ahab abandoned appeasement overnight, with the approval of the Prophets and the Bible. He discovered that there really IS a military solution to terrorism and Syrian aggression after all, and he devastated the forces of his opponent. Ben-Hadad's Syria was annihilated. Even Ahab's arch-nemesis, Elijah, begrudgingly congratulates the King on his shift to sane national policies. Ahab whips the enemy twice, once on the mountains and once on the plains. Israel is redeemed, although not from Ahab's bad government.

Even a villain such as Ahab could display fleeting good sense and courage, and atone for his having pursued appeasement for so long. Perhaps some day Israeli political leaders will elevate themselves and achieve the moral courage and wisdom of King Ahab.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 4, 2003.

Emotions win arguments, but facts and logic justify them. The military argument against having Jewish communities in Yesha has poor logic and assumptions. This argument is that these communities are expensive to defend.

The fallacy in that argument is to assume that if Israel withdrew from those communities on the eastern side of the Green Line, the Arabs would not attack ones on the western side of the Green line, in Israel. Of course they would! They always did, before there were any on the eastern side. Their goal is to conquer Israel. Don't the proponents of Israeli withdrawal read the Arab polls and pronouncements? (Not such a good question. The leftist media probably does not emphasize those polls and pronouncements.)

Another fallacious assumption is that community defense must be static. Sure it takes more troops to try to guard dispersed communities, if one waits in each town for the enemy to come to them. Why wait for the enemy to select the time and place of attack? Israel knows where the terrorists are. They are in the P.A. (and some are in Israel). The Israeli Army should pursue and eradicate them all. End the war, and end its costs.

Israel also knows that the terrorists take roads out of P.A. towns. Let in and out only essentials. When the US, EU, and UN object, tell them that their people are not being slaughtered by the dozen, and that their interest in the right to life ought to extend to the people of Israel.

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 3, 2003.

Ariel Sharon is doing all the right things:

He is harassing potential troublemakers so they don't have the time or energy to do anything but answer charges against them. He is jailing people who might turn into terrorists sometime in the future.

He is jailing people who give information to these possible terrorists.

He is suppressing newspapers and broadcasting stations that possibly could convince Israelis that the government is pursuing the wrong policy.

He is heavily promoting the importance of an independent State.

He is thwarting farmers who want to import foreign labor so they won't have to hire local help.

He is fighting terrorism in such a minimalist way that no one in the world can claim that he is endangering anyone except known terrorists.

He is showing his opponents that their religious beliefs are unimportant.

The only problem is: he's not doing them for Israel.

Instead, he seems to be working for the Palestinian Arabs. He jails Jews that are under suspicion and releases known terrorists. He suppresses Arutz-7 on the grounds of "incitement" but lets Bishara inflame Arabs and Beilin promote the destruction of Israel. He uses minimally-effective bombs and destroys empty building to prevent killing the Arabs 'civilians' who aid and abet the terrorists. It is made deliberately difficult to bring farm workers from Thailand into Israel, so farmers are forced to use disloyal Arabs. He's keen on building Arab confidence while the Jews sink into despondency. He spends money on a useless mum-mum security fence, when, for the same money, he could keep the territories and rid the land of the disloyal and radicalized Arabs. He says he's all for an independent Palestinian state, knowing full well it will become another terrorist state fixated on destroying Israel. He shows great respect for Islam, letting it control and destroy Jewish holy sites, but he promotes secularism among Jews. He does not proclaim the obvious: Yesha - the collective name for Samaria, Judea and Gaza - belongs to the Jews by right of Torah, by right of history, by right of the Balfour Declaration, by right of reclaiming Jewish property, by right of return and by right of conquest. He knows the U.S. State Department and the European Union are plotting to sever some of Jerusalem and give it as a gift to the Palestinians. He knows they plan for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Yesha and the severed part of Jerusalem. And his response is not to take effective action but to ask - as timidly as Oliver in Oliver Twist asks for a little more gruel - 'please sir, can Israel keep a piece of the territories. For a while.'

He has forgotten he was elected to be a strong leader, to be a lion capable of destroying the terrorists who prey on Israel and defanging the Arabs who hate Israel. He's turned into a pussycat who likes to be stroked by America, but who hisses and bites self-respecting Jews who want a Jewish state.

Posted by Women In Green, November 3, 2003.

This is an important article. It was written by Victor Davis Hanson and appeared October 31, 2003 in the National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com).

If only Israel and its supporters would disappear.

There are certain predictable symptoms to watch when a widespread amorality begins to infect a postmodern society: cultural relativism, atheism, socialism, utopian pacifism. Another sign, of course, is fashionable anti-Semitism among the educated, or the idea that some imaginary cabal, or some stealthy agenda - certainly not our own weakness - is conspiring to threaten our good life.

Well apart from the spooky placards (stars of David juxtaposed with swastikas, posters calling for the West Bank to be expanded to "the sea") that we are accustomed to seeing at the marches of the supposedly ethical antiwar movement, we have also heard some examples of Jew-baiting and hissing in the last two weeks that had nothing to do with the old crazies. Indeed, such is the nature of the new anti-Semitism that everyone can now play at it - as long as it is cloaked in third-world chauvinism, progressive thinking, and identity politics.

The latest lunatic rantings from Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad are nothing new, and we should not be surprised by his mindless blabbering about Jews and his fourth-grade understanding of World War II and the present Middle East. But what was fascinating was the reaction to his madness: silence from the Arab intelligentsia, praise from Middle Eastern leaders ("A brilliant speech," gushed Iran's "president" Mohammad Khatami), and worry from rance and Greece about an EU proclamation against the slander. Most American pundits were far more concerned about the private, over-the-top comments of Gen. Boykin than about the public viciousness of a head of state. Paul Krugman, for example, expressed the general mushiness of the Left when he wrote a column trying to put Mahathir Mohamad's hatred in a sympathetic context, something he would never do for a Christian zealot who slurred Muslims.

Much has been written about the usually circumspect Greg Easterbrook's bizarre ranting about "Jewish executives" who profit from Quentin Tarantino's latest bloody production. But, again, the problem is not so much the initial slips and slurs as it is the more calculated and measured "explanation." Easterbrook's mea culpa cited his prior criticism of Mel Gibson, as if the supposed hypocrisy of a devout and public Christian's having trafficked in filmed violence were commensurate with the dealings of two ordinary businessmen who do not publicly embrace religion. Michael Eisner and Harvey Weinstein simply happen to be movie executives, with no stake in producing Jewish movies or public-morality films, but - like most in Hollywood - with a stake in making money from films. That they are Jewish has absolutely no bearing on their purported lack of morality - unless, of course, one seeks to invent some wider pathology, evoking historical paranoia about profiteering, cabals, and "the Jews."

Recently, Joseph Lieberman was hissed by an Arab-American audience in Dearborn, Mich. when he briefly explained Israel's defensive wall in terms not unlike those used by Howard Dean and other candidates. What earned him the special public rebuke not accorded to others was apparently nothing other than being Jewish - the problem was not what he said, but who he was. No real apology followed, and the usually judicious and sober David Broder wrote an interesting column praising the new political acumen of the Arab-American community.

Tony Judt, writing in The New York Review of Books, has published one of the most valuable and revealing articles about the Middle East to appear in the last 20 years. There has always been the suspicion that European intellectuals favored the dismantling of Israel as we know it through the merging of this uniquely democratic and liberal state with West Bank neighbors who have a horrific record of human-rights abuses, autocracy, and mass murder. After all, for all too many Europeans, how else but with the end of present-day Israel will the messy Middle East and its attendant problems - oil, terrorism, anti-Semitism, worries over unassimilated Muslim populations in Europe, anti-Americanism, and postcolonial guilt - become less bothersome? Moreover, who now knows or cares much about what happened to Jews residing under Arab governments - the over half-million or so who, in the last half-century, have been ethnically cleansed from (and sometimes murdered in) Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus, and almost every Jewish community in the Arab Middle East?

And what is the value of the only democratic government in a sea of autocracy if its existence butts up against notions of third-world victimhood and causes so much difficulty for the Western intelligentsia? Still, few intellectuals were silly enough to dress up that insane idea under the pretext of a serious argument (an unhinged Vidal, Chomsky, or Said does not count). Judt did, and now he has confirmed what most of us knew for years - namely, that there is an entrenched and ever-bolder school of European thought that favors the de facto elimination of what is now a democratic Jewish state.

What links all these people - a Muslim head of state, a rude crowd in Michigan, an experienced magazine contributor, and a European public intellectual - besides their having articulated a spreading anger against the "Jews"? Perhaps a growing unease with hard questions that won't go away and thus beg for easy, cheap answers.

A Malaysian official and his apologists must realize that gender apartheid, statism, tribalism, and the anti-democratic tendencies of the Middle East cause its poverty and frustration despite a plethora of natural resources (far more impressive assets than the non-petroleum-bearing rocks beneath parched Israel). But why call for introspection when the one-syllable slur "Jews" suffices instead?

And why would an Arab-American audience - itself composed of many who fled the tyranny and economic stagnation of Arab societies for the freedom and opportunity of a liberal United States - wish to hear a reasoned explanation of the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian war when it was so much easier to hiss and moan, especially when mainstream observers would ignore their anti-Semitism and be impressed instead with the cadre of candidates who flock to Michigan?

How do you explain to an audience that Quentin Tarantino appeals both to teens and to empty-headed critics precisely because something is terribly amiss in America, when affluent and leisured suburbanites are drawn to scenes of raw killing as long as it is dressed up with "art" and "meaning"?

How could a Tony Judt write a reasoned and balanced account of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when to do so would either alienate or bore the literati?

So they all, whether by design or laxity, take the easier way out - especially when slurring "Israel" or "the Jews" involves none of the risks of incurring progressive odium that similarly clumsy attacks against blacks, women, Palestinians, or homosexuals might draw, requires no real thinking, and seems to find an increasingly receptive audience.

You see, in our mixed-up world those Jewish are not a "people of color." And if there really is such a mythical monolithic entity in America as the "Jews," they (much like the Cubans) are not easily stereotyped as impoverished victims needing largesse or condescension, and much less are they eligible under any of the current myriad of rubrics that count for public support. Israel is a successful Western state, not a failed third-world despotism. Against terrible oppression and overt anti-Semitism, the Jewish community here and abroad found success - proof that hard work, character, education, and personal discipline can trump both natural and human adversity. In short, the story of American Jewry and Israel resonates not at all with the heartstrings of a modern therapeutic society, which is quick to show envy for the successful and cheap concern for the struggling.

This fashionable anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism - especially among purported intellectuals of the Left - reveals a deep-seated, scary pathology that is growing geometrically both in and outside the West. For a Europe that is disarmed, plagued by a demographic nightmare of negative population growth and unsustainable entitlements, filled with unassimilated immigrants, and deeply angry about the power and presence of the United States, the Jews and their Israel provide momentary relief on the cheap. So expect that more crazy thoughts of Israel's destruction dressed up as peace plans will be as common as gravestone and synagogue smashing.

For the Muslim world that must confront the power of the patriarch, mullah, tribe, and autocrat if it is ever to share the freedom and prosperity of the rest of the world, the Jews offer a much easier target. So expect even more raving madness as the misery of Islamic society grows and its state-run media hunker down amid widespread unrest. Anticipate, also, more sick posters at C-SPAN broadcast marches, more slips by reasonable writers, and more anti-Israeli denunciations from the "liberals."

These are weird, weird times, and before we win this messy war against Islamic fascism and its sponsors, count on things to get even uglier. Don't expect any reasoned military analysis that puts the post-9/11 destruction of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein's evil regime, along with the liberation of 50 million at the cost of 300 American lives, in any sort of historical context. After all, in the current presidential race, a retired general now caricatures U.S. efforts in Iraq and quotes Al Sharpton.

Do not look for the Islamic community here to acknowledge that the United States, in little over a decade, freed Kuwait, saved most of the Bosnians and Kosovars, tried to feed Somalis, urged the Russians not to kill Chechnyans, belatedly ensured that no longer were Shiites and Kurds to be slaughtered in Iraq, spoke out against Kuwait's ethnic cleansing of a third of a million Palestinians - and now is spending $87 billion to make Iraqis free.

That the Arab world would appreciate billions of dollars in past American aid to Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority, or thank America for its help in Kuwait and Kosovo, or be grateful to America for freeing Iraq - all this is about as plausible as the idea that Western Europeans would acknowledge their past salvation from Nazism and Soviet Communism, or be grateful for the role the United States plays to promote democracy in Panama, Haiti, the Balkans, or the Middle East.

No, in this depressing age, the real problem is apparently our support for democratic Israel and all those pesky Jews worldwide, who seem to crop up everywhere as sly war makers, grasping film executives, conspiratorial politicians, and greedy colonialists, and thus make life so difficult for the rest of us.

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 3, 2003.

A new 26-part television series emanating from Syria, produced by al-Manar (the mouthpiece of Hizbollah), and airing worldwide, is giving credit where it isn't due. At the same time, one must marvel at the aborted lessons of history that the Islamic world embraces these days. If it weren't for digital watches, automatic nose hair clippers and the like, one could easily believe we were living in beginning to middle of last century again. Why? Because like their non-Muslim predecessors, the Muslim world is now crediting the Jews with aspirations that are really those of Islam.

Apparently, the other movers and shakers of the Islamic world read the same flawed history books as that champion of ignorance, Dr. Mahathir. To refresh your memories, Dr. Mahathir is the former Prime Minister of Malaysia who said that the Jews rule the world by proxy. He also said that Jews invented democracy. In reality, the Greeks invented democracy. (The Jews invented guilt about not voting. If I were the Greeks, I'd sue. And if I were Dr. Mahathir, I'd sue whomever gave me my degrees while failing to make sure I knew even basic history, thus opening me up to world ridicule. Maybe it was a Jewish conspiracy...)

But I digress. This most recent piece of pernicious fiction being touted as fact uses the same tactics as first Stalin and then Hitler employed to deflect criticism of their actions and rally their masses into a genocidal blood lust. Both Hitler and Stalin accused the Jews of committing the very atrocities they themselves were inflicting. Both also accused the Jews of pursuing the goal of world domination. And so it is with Islam today.

Even before the laughter, derision, and criticism have died down regarding Dr. Mahathir's ignorant and uneducated rantings, the Islamic world is inviting more scorn. This latest television series, entitled "The Diaspora," is a long-winded piece of utter fantasy which takes the actions of Muslims and credits them to the Jews. What actions? Below are some of the scenarios described by Reuters in their article of Oct. 29, 2003, written by Mariam Karouny.

"The show...by a private Syrian company with al-Manar's backing, opens with an actor portraying an early promoter of Zionism telling his children to spread their ideas in Europe. "Our lord has promised us retribution against those who sent us into exile. For this reason...we must control the world, all of it, through loyal agents in foreign governments," he says."

"In one yet-to-be-broadcast scene, set on a boat taking Jews to what would become Israel, a Jewish rabbi is portrayed as raping a young woman."

The series cites "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as its main source of information as well as the Torah. While it is obvious that the writers and producers of "The Diaspora" read The Protocols, it is also equally obvious that they never read the Torah. Nowhere in Torah does it command the Hebrew people to aspire to world domination.

On the other hand, Mr. Spokesman-For-the-Islamic-World, (that orator extraordinaire who got a standing ovation from even the so-called moderate Muslims), Dr. Mahathir, outlined Islam's goal of world domination and bemoaned the fact that Europe threw off the shackles of Muslim domination in his recent address to the OIC. Since no one there has repudiated one bit of Dr. Mahathir's speech, it would be a correct assessment that the Muslim world has as its goal world conquest. Just like Hitler and Stalin.

The timing of this piece of filth is also interesting. It was one year ago, at this time - during Ramadan, that Egypt aired it's 41-part series, "Horseman Without a Horse," also based upon The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. If I weren't so politically correct, I could draw the conclusion that Islam is a cult of liars and murderers who use their supposedly most sacred holiday to enflame their followers into a genocidal rage aimed at first the Jews and then the rest of the non-Muslim world.

This television series is also further proof that President Bush, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice are either ignorant, self-deceiving fools, or want to bamboozle the public. Since 9-11, they have been declaring that Islam is a "peaceful" religion. They declared it last year after the Egyptian series was aired and are still claiming so today. Even if one were to believe them that "only 10% of Muslims are radical," that makes 100 million megalomaniacal fanatics on the loose.

However, "The Diaspora" did get one thing right. There is a conspiracy among the Jews - at least among this Jew (if you can call a conspiracy of one a conspiracy). I plan not to tell them how Hitler and Stalin's Soviet Union ended up. If they had bothered to read the whole history, the Muslims would know that anyone who tries to use the Jews as the fall guy for their schemes of world domination end up by having their regimes fail. Anyone want to join me?

Posted by Jerry Gordon, November 3, 2003.

One of the questions, after Yossi Klein Halevi delivered his remarks at the Alexander Schindler Lecture at Temple Israel in Westport, CT on a beautiful Sunday morning, was what about the "despair and lack of hope of the Palestinians."

Halevi replied that "there was a war going on brought by religious fanatics" who "would use any means of destroying the sovereignty of a Jewish state, Israel."

This is not what most people in this audience composed largely of suburban liberals wanted to hear from a commentator who called himself an Israeli "centrist."

But it was very reflective of his lecture's main "teaching point" that was aimed at shaking up those US Jews who still held out some vain hope for peace, totally delusional in the wake of a three year terrorist war after the failure of the Camp David and Taba discussions held by the former Barak regime with Arafat and the PA leaders. PA Leaders who saw concessions as a weakness and thought that open terrorist warfare would reach their real goal: destruction of the will of the Jewish state. As Halevi said later in the program: "no way was Israel going to permit this to occur." Moreover, he characterized the self-ballyhooed Geneva Accords developed by the failed former Labor party leaders: Beilin, Burg and Mitzna as showing "contempt for democracy and an act of national irresponsibility." All this on the seventh anniversary of the assassination of the late Itzhak Rabin by a Jewish extremist in Tel Aviv in November, 1995. All this on the eve of an EU funded "road show" by Beilin, Mitzna and Burg in major US Jewish communities in North America.

Halevi's main theme was "strengthening the center in Israel," and for that matter in the Jewish galut, as well.

One week prior to his trip to the US, Halevi attended the 30th anniversary of a heroic elite parachute unit: Brigade 55. Brigade 55 had fought to unite a divided Jerusalem in the 1967 war and they were the first unit across the Suez Canal in the Yom Kippur War of October, 1973. A war that ended the Israeli delusion of "ha concepcion" - the official doctrine at the time that Israel's military might and buffer zones captured during the 1967 June War would make it invincible.. Like all vainglorious national hopes, that was dashed during the first devastating days of the October 1973 War, replete with pictures of captured Israeli soldiers being routed from the Bar Lev line bunkers by victorious Egyptian assault units and going into rear areas with their torahs.

At the Brigade 55 reunion there was a schism among the veterans. One contingent led by Haninya "Aleph" was a founder of Gush Emunim - the settler movement, while that led by Hanninya "Bet" founded Peace Now. As Halevi relayed it there was a third Para who rose to speak and got more applause than either of the two Haninyas when he said: "you both failed. You gave us false hopes."

Halevi used this imagery to frame his talk. His punch line was there is a new centrist consensus in Israel, which realizes that in the short term, no "peace offers," like the "misbegotten and benighted Geneva accords" will be honored by a non existent partner in the Palestinians. What characterizes this emerging centrist consensus according to Halevi is that it is; "pragmatic in theory, hard line in practice."

One hopeful questioner during the Q+A asked Halevi: "is there a centrist leader in Israel?" He said "yes, and this will shock you: it is Sharon." "A Sharon whom Israeli respect for his history as a "tough counter-terrorist since the early 50's" of the last century. But a Sharon who pragmatically knows how to provide security vis a vis the "fence" and when to "lift embargoes in the PA territories." He went further to say that Sharon was like Bush, but especially Sharon, may be effective war time leaders like Churchill during the critical days of WWII. But perhaps like Churchill, they may lose when Peace breaks out, or in this case the war on terrorism achieves its objectives. Given today's tragic events in Iraq, we're not so sure about Bush and US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.

Halevi contrasted the First versus the Second Intifada in terms of the transformation of the body polity in Israel towards a centrist position.

The left during the first intifada were defined by views that held that the occupation had "corrupted" Israeli society. This was the view of observers like Ishail Laibovitz who felt that Ben Gurion should give up the disputed territories occupied in the wake of the June 1967 victories. Israeli reservists were clearly uncomfortable about serving as "policemen" in Arab refugee camps in the disputed territories. Halevi said that those on the left would do "anything to end the occupation." Even he admitted as a former liberal that he voted for Rabin in 1992 because he offered what in retrospect was the illusory "hope" that somehow you could "break the endless cycle of despair."

The Oslo accords according to Halevi were the "cure that was worse than the illness."

The second Intifada that began three years ago, Halevi said showed "the truth of the right." That "truth" was, according to him, that the "consequence of empowering the PLO leadership was no recognition of a sovereign Jewish state with secure borders."

He said that the "centrists" in Israel during the first Intifada believed wrongly that the Palestinians had a "history in the area and that partition was a historical necessity and just."

The centrist consensus emerging from the second Intifada was that there was "no reciprocal breakthrough on the Palestinian front."

Halevi gave his own evidence for this hard reality when at meetings with the new PA security head, General Nasser Yussef in the late 90's, when Halevi asked him a question: "What will happen after peace breaks out?" A question that Halevi said that the world media never asks.

The response from General Yussef-a member of a Sufi Muslim sect was devastating to Halevi. Yussuf told him that "Jews were really Arab Jews. You will be part of us." This "utopian vision" articulated by General Yussuf left no room for a two state solution and acceptance of a Jewish state. General Yussuf, Halevi characterized as a Palestinian moderate who wanted Arafat toppled.

Halevi saw Yussef's position reflected in recent polls conducted in the PA that fully three fifths (59%) of PA residents sampled said that the terror wars would continue even after accords were reached with Israel. Moreover that 80% would not give up on the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees languished in mired poverty in UNWRA administered camps both in the PA and host Arab countries.

Halevi next discussed the settlements. He viewed the "indiscrimate placing of Israeli settlements" as "massive stupidity of politics." He indicated that the Yesha Council of the settler movement recently admitted that they never recognized the problem of "demographics" vis a vis the burgeoning Palestinian population in the West bank. "Halevi strongly underlined his position and that of many Israelis that the "settlements are not the issue that preventing final status discussions in the broken Oslo accords." He told of an interview with former US Ambassador Dennis Ross, now head of the Washington Institute for Near East Peace who questioned Arafat and the PA negotiating team on this issue at Camp David and at the final Taba discussions in January, 2001. Ross made the point that the settlements comprised less than 1.5% of the territories. The PA leaders according to Halevi agreed with Ross, but said the existence of the settlements reinforced "psychological impressions" of Israeli dominance. Halevi noted that fully 80% of the settlements were in the Gush Etzion bloc adjacent to the Jerusalem municipality and included both Ma'aleh Adumim and Efrat, as well. While the Palestinians argued that Barak was continuing to build settlements, Halevi believed there was no "double posture" by Barak during the failed Camp David and Taba discussions.

Halevi next dealt with the devastation of the left in Israel as a result of the Oslo accords failure and the current terror war waged by the PA leadership against Israel. He said that "Meretz and Mapai party lists were completely devastated." They have no leadership. He used a recent interview with the revered Israeli composer, "Yankele Rosenblit" who wrote the "anthem of the left" Shir ha Shalom-The Song of Peace. The song that the late Israeli PM Rabin sang with a large crowd in Tel Aviv on the night of his assassination in November, 1995. Rosenblit stunned the interviewer when he said that the left lost because they deserved to lose. We deceived ourselves."

Halevi believes that the Rosenblit recognition was the moral equivalent in Israeli society on the left of Khrushchev's speech at the 20th Party Congress in 1956 when he revealed Stalin's crimes against the Soviet people.

On the last gasp by the defeated left, the recent Geneva accords, Halevi was scathing in his derision. He characterized the freelance diplomatic foray by former Labor party leaders, Beilin, Burg and Mitzna as "self delusional because they had no one on the other side." They showed "contempt for Democracy" because they "negotiated with PA representatives of Arafat" and that it was an "act of national irresponsibility." Halevi stopped short of using the "T" word. It was also absurd, because as Halevi noted for "every increase of terror from the PA," the PA expected an "increase in concessions." The worst example of that was Barak and Beilin arbitrarily increasing the ante from 93% of the disputed territories to 97% at Taba before complete break off in January, 2001. The temerity of the "gang of three: Beilin, Burg and Mitzna was they upped the ante again to 100% including dividing the sovereignty of a united Jerusalem and giving the PA the Jaffa gate and letting PA security forces police these areas. But Halevi indicated the PA disavowed the one tenuous thin reed offered by the "gang of three," by signaling that they had not given up on the demand for the "rights of return."

Despite all this, Halevi said that "the collapse of the left has not led to the vindication of the right." But instead has resulted in a deep sense of disappointment. He said historically that the London agreement "aborted" at the end of the first intifada might have provided a solution to the problem by the re-entry of Jordan to the West Bank. But then neither is the Kingdom of Jordan a long term stable partner given the mushrooming presence of their Palestinian population and the increasing minority status of the ruling Hashemites and Bedouins.

But returning to his current themes, Halevi felt there was a "need for sobriety that would wash out self deception," that a "comprehensive solution is not possible." That "no peace can be achieved through withdrawal" and that "no [Palestinian] partners would "recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel." "This is a war without end."

Halevi next turned to the matter of the separation between Israel and the PA: the security fence. He said that the Palestinians and others characterize the security fence as a so-called "apartheid wall." The reality is that fully 317 miles of the barrier are fence and that perhaps 12 miles are a true concrete wall where the borders overlook Israeli Highways along the Mediterranean. He said that if you looked at the "terrain on either side of the fence they looked the same." That's because "the fence doesn't separate Jews from Arabs but Israelis [Arabs} from Palestinian Arabs."

Halevi was originally against the security fence because it created an "armed Jewish ghetto." And Israel in his view was "created to eliminate Ghettos." He also felt that the existence of the security fence communicated a message of weakness.

Now he believes there is substantial justification for the security fence. He said look at the contrast between the security fence on the Gaza frontier versus virtually none on the West Bank. "Zero homicide bombers" got across the barrier at Gaza, while "120 bombers came across on their terror missions from the West Bank." He also believes that the fence sends an important message to the Palestinians: "the map has shrunk." Effectively the unilateral imposition of a de facto border meant the loss of 10 percent of the PA territory. Halevi also believes that the three year terror war has also resulted in the Palestinians "losing all claims to Jerusalem." Halevi believed that a "unified Jerusalem was a lot better and more secure than, say a divided Belfast," in Northern Ireland. Halevi felt that these views had to evaluated in the "greater context off the wider war on terrorism" that confronts Israel and the U.S. Israel he said "had an obligation not to crack." He likened an embattled Israel to England in 1940 during the Churchillian "finest hour." It was important in his view that Israelis go about their normal activities very much like the embattled Brits during the Nazi aerial terror campaigns during WWII. Israel's primary objective according to Halevi should be "resisting and destroying terror." Make no mistake about it, he said this terror war confronting Israel was not the "moral equivalency" that plagued the antiwar movement during Vietnam in the US, but very much akin to the WWII "moment" of a necessary just war. A just war that was in his view one against religious Muslim fanatics. Having said that he feels that a crucial moment for Islam is looming to crack open and transform itself." Many of us will believe that when pigs fly. He was never pressed to answer that observation during the following Q+A.

So what "do we have to hold on to?" Halevi said that it is the schizoid response typical of Israelis surveyed recently, who overwhelmingly were despairing of any prospects for peace, while more than four fifths felt that their everyday life was "great." Higher, he commented, than Canadians who responded to the later poll question.

During the Q+A, Halevi was asked a number of questions, two of which I cited earlier in these notes on his lecture. Here are a few more.

Two questions dealt with the recent EU poll results that put Israel at the top of threats to world order and whether this was tied to an increasing Muslim presence in Europe and Oil. Halevi answered by saying that the EU poll covered only western Europe and not a more friendly to Israel eastern Europe. The problem with western Europeans was that these survey results reflected their own psychological transfer to Israel as a "Nazi state" oppressing a post colonialist peoples, the Palestinians, a reflection of their own guilt from WWI and their own past colonial empires.

He was asked by another questioner whether Israel was acting morally against the terror threat posed by the Palestinians. Halevi responded by saying that the IDF has shown "exemplary restraint" so far in the conduct of the war against Palestinian terrorism. But he to note that a message had to be communicated to the Palestinian population, that if you knowingly lived next door in an apartment bloc to a Hamas or Islamic Jihad leader that you couldn't claim being an innocent form of collateral damage should the IDF take action against the "neighbor."

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, November 3, 2003.

A hundred thousand people filled Rabin Square to overflowing yesterday to mark the New Year of the Peace Camp.

I was considerably surprised. Logically, the more Rabin's path becomes revealed as a bloody fiasco, and as more and more Israelis lose their lives, livings, security, hopes, and happiness as a result of the cursed Oslo Agreement, the number of oddballs coming to commemorate and identify with the man who symbolizes it more than anyone else should decrease.

But the contrary happened. And even if we say that they came to hear Aviv Gefen, or that they were bored youngsters, or that once again they made use of worn-out provocations - swastikas on the memorial (no Kahanist would draw a swastika), or a strange act of spitting at the memorial precisely when there was no guard around and precisely when an amateur photographer was passing - no explanation can be given for the phenomenon.

It seems that a kind of mental illness sometimes attacks whole populations. Stalin murdered 18 million of his own countrymen, and they bitterly mourned when the Sun of the Nations was extinguished. Was this only because they did not know? After all, 18 million people don't simply vanish. They knew, but they had been trained to reach a conclusion contrary to reality. I have been invited several times to participate in confrontations in educational institutions of the most extremist Left. I was always amazed by the uniform thinking and the capability of training consciousness. I spoke there to robots. I always won the battle but lost the war. I won because the facts were on my side, and I left the other participants incapable of providing an answer. But I lost strategically, because they came to the conclusion that I was a dangerous person. How can such a person be right? He must have employed some kind of trick.

It was then only a short step to a local campaign of demonization. I even remember one internal campaign of slander in the Green Page (the newspaper of the National Kibbutz Movement) in which the principal of a high school who invited me was attacked. The principal subsequently apologized for not knowing whom he was dealing with.

Obviously members of the youth movements and educational institutions of the Left undergo this brain washing in a very intensive form, but the average citizens of the country do not differ from them to any marked extent. The media in Israel are very effective. It is sufficient to recall that Channel 2 broadcast in its entirety the birthday party of the architect of the bloody agreement, Shimon Peres. Man is a social creature who cannot rebel all the time. If parades are made for Stalin, birthday parties for Peres, anniversaries for Rabin, this means that the victims died for a different reason: perhaps because of the religious people, or the Kahanists, or Netanyahu, or perhaps they just died and it's advisable not to think too much?

It apparently makes no difference what the reality in Israel indicates. They are trained to think in a specific way, and no facts facing the tens of thousands in the square will change their minds. Without doubt, Yigal Amir (whether or not he actually murdered Rabin) gave the Left the dearest gift of all - a focus and purpose for their entire existence, a myth to unite around, and annual tribal bonfire to control themselves around.

I've stopped trying to convince the Left. The Left is not an ideology but a mental illness. Those who are actually infected by it (and they are few in number) have little chance of recovery. It is reasonable to assume that if the total destruction of Germany and Japan had not been accompanied by Allied occupation, there would still be admirers in Germany and Japan of Hitler and Hirohito. That's how it is in societies managed in accordance with totalitarian codes. That's how it is in the Left in general, and in the Israeli Left in particular.

There's no point in trying to persuade them. We have to defeat them, and only those who present an alternative to their path are capable of doing so.

Posted by Michael D. Evans, November 3, 2003.

In a mere 45 minutes on Monday, October 2, suicide bombers drove carloads of explosives into five buildings around the capital of Iraq. Four police stations and the International Red Cross building were destroyed. More than 200 were wounded, and 45 died in the attacks. These terrorist attacks followed the overnight killing of three American soldiers, and came just a day after a rocket attack on the Rashid Hotel where the Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was staying.

Yet while people die, the charade continues. Liberals, lunatics and liars are still attempting to sell an American public, still in shock over 9.11, that Islam is a peaceful religion.

If that is true, then Islamic states need to prove it by their actions. Peacefulness does not come to mind when 68 Islamic heads of state gave a standing ovation to the Prime Minister of Malaysia at the Islamic World Summit when he said, "The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy." One of those applauding loudly was Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

When he visited President Bush in Crawford, Texas, three members of his entourage were confined to the plane. Why? They were known terrorists wanted by the FBI in connection with terrorist activities. The U.S. State Department turned a blind eye, and allowed them to lounge in safety aboard the Saudi royal jet.

The first day of Ramadan was Sunday with the appearance of the new moon. Moslems believe that Ramadan began when the angel, Gabriel, revealed the Koran to Mohammed in AD 610. One billion Moslems celebrate Ramadan according to the lunar calendar, at the appearance of the crescent moon. They believe that Satan is chained during Ramadan, and that the doors of hell are closed and the doors of heaven are opened. They fast from sun-up until sundown.

Islamic fundamentalists are attempting to recruit as many Moslems as possible by appealing that it is the obligation of every Moslem to fight a holy war in Iraq. The reason for the acceleration of attacks is because Islamic fundamentalists teach that America is the "Great Satan." To attack the "Great Satan" on Ramadan and succeed, in their minds, is to prove that Satan is chained, and that the door to hell (America's ability to retaliate) is closed. This creates linkage between the faith of Islam and Islamic fundamentalism.

This new 21st Century terrorism now is a direct confrontation against "The Great Satan - America" who in the eyes of the bin Ladens of the world is desecrating the cradle of Islam. Is it a coincidence that the bombers struck on the first day of Ramadan? Absolutely not!

Organized crime is about greed. Terrorism is about glory...the glory of humiliating "The Great Satan - America"...the glory of believing that all of the terrorists' family members are guaranteed a place in heaven because of their acts, and that, as young men, they will be greeted in heaven with a room full of voluptuous virgins.

The terrorist crosshairs are on "The Great Satan - America." They see the U.S. as a pig polluting the world with her prosperity, power and pornography and infecting the Islamic vision with her moral and religious perversion. Terrorists don't hate the West because of Israel; they hate Israel because of the West.

Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, spiritual leader of the World Trade Center bombers in 1993 said, "The obligation of Allah is upon us to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah. We have to thoroughly demoralize the enemies of God by blowing up their towers that constitute the pillars of their civilization...the high buildings of which they are so proud."

On the morning of February 26, 1993, Yigal Carmon, then counter-terrorism adviser to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, warned the Pentagon that radical Islam was an imminent threat to America. At the end of his briefing, smirking critics told him that they did not consider a religion to be a threat to national security.

Later that morning Carmon flew on to New York City, where, while having lunch, a huge explosion took place nearby: Islamic terrorists had attempted to blow up the World Trade Center, killing six people and wounding 1,000. When the FBI arrested Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman who was involved, they wrote on the boxes confiscated from his apartment "irrelevant religious stuff."

The popular concept of trying to convince the American people that Islam is a religion of peace - as if this will shut down the engine of terror - is the theater of the absurd and a festival of hypocrisy. It will do just the opposite; in time, it could open the floodgates for glassy-eyed, demon-possessed human bombs (H-bombers) to roam the streets of America waiting for the most opportune moment to hit the detonator.

Simply put, the H-bomb is a time-tested weapon that works. It causes panic, reduces the will and power of resistance so as to advance political goals...no matter how unrealistic. The H-bomb forced the U.S. and Israel out of Lebanon; Islamic fundamentalists are attempting to achieve the same goal in Iraq. They must not succeed! If they do, there is a 100 percent chance that they will bring their war to the streets of America.

The truth is, this is a battle between two books (the Bible and the Quran) and two kingdoms, democracy and theocracy (Islam). Islamic fundamentalists believe that the Great Satan defeated the USSR with their Judeo/Christian invention - democracy - and are attempting to do the same in the Middle East.

I had a conversation with prince Khalid in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. He said, "Don't exaggerate! No more than 10% of the Moslem population are fundamentalists." Well, call me a taxi! That means there are only 100 million Islamics who want to kill Americans...instead of one billion. I don't find that very comforting.

Dr. Tim LaHaye, Mrs. Anne Graham Lotz, Dr. Pat Robertson, Dr. Paul Crouch, Dr. Adrian Rogers, Mr. Pat Boone, Dr. John Hagee, Dr. Jerry Falwell, Mr. Bill McCartney, Ms. Kay Arthur, Rev. Tommy Tenney, Dr. A.R. Bernard, Dr. Stephen Olford, and Dr. Jay Sekulow are just a few of the more then 300 Christian Leaders who are part of the Jerusalem Prayer Team.

Posted by Jack Golbert, November 3, 2003.
This week is the 13th anniversary of the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane. Looking back, it turns out to have been the first act of terror by Al Qaeda. It related directly to the first attack on the World Trade Center and, subsequently the second one, which destroyed the complex on 9/11. Kahane has been called the first casualty of World War III.

Give it a thought.

By the way, the Jewish Defense League and the Kach movement, which Kahane founded, and Kahane Chai ("Kahane lives") which was founded by some of his followers in the years following his murder, are the only organizations in the world that are classified as terrorist organizations solely on the basis of what they say and write. The State Department has a web site listing all the organizations which it so classifies. Look at the verbs. All the others say "murdered", "bombed", "massacred", etc. About Kach and Kahane Chai, it says "advocates", "praises", "calls for", "teaches." It's fascinating.

Today, the walls in Israel always have stickers that say "Kahane tzadak" - 'Kahane was right'. Everyone knows it. Give that a thought too. This article was written by Sarah Levy and is entitled "Never Again."

On November 5, 1990, the Marriott East Side hotel conference room in New York City was packed with Rabbi Meir Kahane's supporters. The Brooklyn-born Kahane possessed an international law degree but was better known to his followers for his poignant, powerful oratory and, to those less sympathetic, as an infamous rabble-rouser.

In 1968, Kahane founded the militant Jewish Defense League (JDL) in response to virulent anti-Semitism directed against vulnerable inner-city Jews. Kahane envisioned the Jewish nation as mighty defenders, not victims, and he adopted the slogan of the Warsaw Ghetto fighters: "Never again," as in "Never again will Jews stand by as their brothers cry for help."

In Israel, Kahane established the controversial "Kach" party. One plank of its platform called for the forced removal of Arabs from within Israel's borders and the annexation of all territories gained in 1968. He pointed out that "since 1948, every Arab country, including Syria, Algeria, Morocco, Tripoli, Iraq, and Yemen, has pressured out or forcibly removed their Jews; therefore, why shouldn't Israel, likewise, remove Arabs?" Kahane was jailed repeatedly for his incendiary ideas. He was elected to the Knesset in 1984, but, despite growing popularity, was banned from further elections. As a result of his extreme views, Kahane and the JDL were identified as one of America's most dangerous extremist groups and were placed on an American government watch list.

On that fateful November evening at the Marriott hotel, El-Sayid Nosair, bearded and with a kippah on his head, blended into the crowd. As Kahane finished speaking, Nosair rushed toward the stage and fired a single, fatal shot. As Kahane collapsed, he raised one finger towards heaven, silently reciting the Shema. Nosair botched his getaway and was taken into custody.

Although the majority of New York law enforcement believed Nosair to be a lone assassin, some, like then federal prosecutor Rudolph Giuliani, warned that Nosair was part of a larger conspiracy.

A search of Nosair's New Jersey apartment revealed his handwritten diary, which called for "jihad against the enemies of Islam" by "destroying the structure of their civilized pillars, their high world buildings which they are proud of." Investigators also found instructions on bomb-making, cartridges for high-powered assault rifles, and a collection of false driver's licenses and passports. At the time, however, investigators dismissed as absurd the idea of a terrorist conspiracy.

Prosecutors working on the case knew they couldn't depend on a jury to be overly sympathetic to the murdered Kahane, whose hostility towards Arabs was legendary. Still, they were stunned when the Manhattan jury acquitted Nosair of murder and convicted him, instead, of assault and illegal weapons possession, for which he was sentenced to 22 years in prison at Attica, N.Y.

In prison, jailers regularly waved through Nosair's visitors. During these meetings, Muslim militants led by "the Blind Sheik," Omar Ahmad Abdul Rahman, planned attacks on New York City's bridges, tunnels, and landmarks. In early 1993, accomplice Ramzi Yusuf (uncle of Khalid Mohammed, Al Qaeda mastermind of the 9/11 attacks) slipped into the country. Nosair then told his wife: "What will happen in New York, G-d willing, will be because of my prayers."

In February of 1993, a rented Ryder van packed with explosives was detonated in the basement parking lot of the World Trade Center, leaving six dead and a thousand injured. A piece of the Ryder van imprinted with a serial number incriminated Nosair's friend, Mohammed Salameh. Investigators painstakingly uncovered the wide-ranging international terrorist conspiracy that they had denied in 1990. More than a dozen terrorists, including "the Blind Sheik" and Nosair, were identified.

During the ensuing trial, authorities acknowledged that "the attack on Rabbi Kahane did not occur in a vacuum. It was a small, albeit brutal, step in a terrorist campaign which comprehended not only assassinations of individuals but the mass destruction of political, social and economic assets of the 'infidel' West, of which the United States was deemed the leader." The prosecution continued: "The crimes are not random, disconnected acts of unthinking brutality. They are, instead, all parts of the same very real battle the defendants and their co-conspirators still see themselves fighting." Nosair and Rahman were sentenced to life in prison.

Before his death, and before any terrorism occurred inside America's borders, Rabbi Kahane published a disturbing article in the Feb 12, 1987, edition of USA Today: "One of the great problems with Americans is that - being decent people - they assume that everyone else is equally decent. They assume that all cultures are similar in concepts and values. But that is simply not so. It is not decency and goodness or gentleness that impresses the Middle East but strength. Because of this, the U.S. is looked on as a paper tiger - with all the accompanying contempt."

In the article, Kahane noted that in the Talmud it says: "If one comes to slay you, slay him first." He concluded: "One doesn't deal with terrorists, one doesn't bargain with terrorists, one kills terrorists."

In life, Kahane's ideas were often disturbing, perhaps shocking; yet, in death, their truth is frightening. His murder and the subsequent lack of justice or proper investigation led to a tragedy beyond our wildest expectation. No longer innocent, we need to draw on some of Kahane's strength to say "Never again."

Sara Levy is associate editor of the Kosher Spirit.

Posted by Barry Rubin, November 3, 2003.

Syria is a country at war with Israel and, more recently, with the United States as well. But it expects to pay no price for the terrorism it sponsors against both countries. Given the peculiar logic of the Middle East, things usually work out that way for Damascus.

Last week, however, Israel launched a rare raid against a terrorist training camp on Syrian territory. The more usual practice after major provocations or terrorist attacks aided by Damascus is just to hit Syrian or Syrian-protected targets in Lebanon. This time, though, Israel was sending a signal at how angry it is at continued Syrian behavior.

It does not seem a good moment for Syria to engage in an aggressive policy. The country is relatively weak militarily since the USSR's collapse deprived it of a superpower ally and supplier of advanced weapons. In relative terms to Israel, Syrian power is probably at the greatest strategic disadvantage in the last half-century.

As implied above, the diplomatic balance of forces is also unfavorable. While Arab states would talk loudly about supporting Syria in a crisis against Israel they are unlikely to do anything to help. Now would the Europeans take active measures to assist a Syrian dictatorship for which they have a political taste and which lacks the money or trade opportunities to woo them toward a more supportive stance.

What especially stands out is the fact that Syria, along with its satellite state, Lebanon, is nearly surrounded by forces it views as adversaries. It turned down a chance to make peace with its southern neighbor, Israel, and get back the whole Golan Heights in 2000. Turkey, to the north, is a powerful state which pressed Syria into expelling the leader of the Kurdish terrorist group by threatening an all-out attack a few years ago. Jordan is friendly the west and has itself suffered from Syrian subversion.

Most recently, Iraq, to the east, has been occupied by a U.S.-led coalition. The leaders in Damascus saw how quickly the neighboring dictatorship fell. The United States, the world's most powerful country, is now on its doorstep for a long time and with a big army.

The kind of response one would expect to such a situation would be caution. A country that is weak and surrounded by powerful neighbors would try to defuse the threat by compromise and concession.

This is now, however, the way things work in the Middle East. Instead, the Damascus regime screams defiance and escalates. In the regional way of doing things, weakness is a time to deter through ferocity, to intimidate would-be enemies who would respond to retreat by getting tougher themselves.

True, there are some tactical acts of cautiousness - restraining Hizballah a bit, for example - but these are mostly limited to empty promises. Before the war, Syria falsely promised the United States to close its illegally functioning oil pipeline, which violated UN sanctions, to Iraq. After the war, Syria made and broke a promise to close the terrorist groups' offices in Damascus, where these groups receive government financing, training, and technical help.

Moreover, despite U.S. demands, Syria gave refuge to high-ranking Iraqi war criminals and possibly to Iraqi weapons of mass destruction materials. But what stands out most is an absolutely startling new development:

Syria has become a state-sponsor of anti-American terrorism. There are recruiting offices and training camps on Syrian soil for terrorists seeking to kill Americans in Iraq. They are armed, transported, and probably subsidized by the Syrian government.

Yet so far the only U.S. response to this war on America is some cautionary words from the United States and proposals to pass congressional resolutions tightening economic controls on that country.

This Syrian policy is a product of its long-term style and strategy but is also the course set by the country's relatively new and young president Bashar al-Asad. In effect, Asad is saying to the United States: What are you going to do about it?

Correctly assessing that the United States does not want to attack Syria he believes he can get away with such behavior. Indeed, this country which is one of the world's most consistent sponsors of terrorism and most repressive dictatorships currently sits as an honored member of the UN Security Council in the midst of a "war against terrorism."

Israel, however, does not enjoy the luxury of watching its deterrence with Syria decline. Of course Israel does not want war with Syria but Asad's statement disguises the fact that Syria is fighting a war with Israel. Either the attack on the terrorist training base in Syria was a one-time warning or it is part of a campaign to pressure Syria into clamping down on the Lebanese Hizballah and the Palestinian terror groups it sponsors.

Syria is in a poor position to respond openly. Its retaliation comes, as has been true so long, by covert means, mainly through more terrorism. The continuation of Syria's radical policy will lead to that country's on-going strategic weakness and economic stagnation. But the Syrian government is quite willing to pay that price as long as it remains in power. And unless directly overthrown by outside forces, as the experience with Iraq shows, regime survival in the Middle East is not at risk no matter how badly it manages the country.

Still, one wonders whether there might not be a point where the pressure is high enough that Asad, perhaps at the insistence of his powerful, older advisors, decides that a bit more caution is a worthwhile strategy.

Barry Rubin is author, with Judith Colp Rubin, of the newly published Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography (Oxford University Press).

Posted by Len Litsky, November 2, 2003.
This was published by Rabbi Daniel Gordis. You can read other of his writings at http://www.danielgordis.org

Though I'm sure you weren't wondering, I'll begin by telling you that we had a pretty nice Shabbat here in Jerusalem. The weather was beautiful, we had a house full of guests, there was a wedding across the street that went way into the night. And nothing blew up. Kind of an idyllic day here in Jerusalem. For the most part.

But not entirely. You see, I made the mistake of re-reading your recent piece in the New York Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16671) before heading off to shul in the morning. Big mistake. You can imagine how distressing it must be for someone living here in Jerusalem to read an article in a journal as respectable as the New York Review of Books that declares the State of Israel an "insecure, defensive microstate born of imperial collapse," that the idea of a Jewish State is a "late-nineteenth century separatist project" and that Israel, an "anachronism," should be replaced by a bi-national State of Jews and Arabs, bringing the Zionist project to an end.

Wow. That is one annoying piece of writing. Admittedly, you're not the only intellectual suggesting that it's time to declare the experiment called Israel a failure. A recent issue of The Nation has an article by Daniel Lazare saying more or less the same thing, and even Israelis like Meron Benvenisti have declared Zionism dead, agreeing with you that it's time for Jews and Arabs to share one state before the river and the sea.

So if others have said this already, why did your piece bother me so much? Some of it, of course, was the parts that were plain silly. You note that Ehud Omert, Israel's deputy Prime Minister, has insisted that Israel still has the option of killing Arafat, which, "you say," reveals Zionism's "fascist" elements. "Political murder is what fascists do," you write. I'll be sure to point that out to the American troops hunting for Saddam and Osama bin Ladin. Or your suggestion that the real reason for the war on Iraq was to improve Israel's strategic position in the Middle East. You really expect us to believe that the United States would demolish an entire country for Israel's sake, at the expense of billions of dollars, and then quibble with us about where to put the security fence? To say that that's counter-intuitive would be to put things mildly.

But I can deal with the silly parts of your article. What is much harder for me is the not so subtle anti-Semitic underpinning of the whole argument. Now, I know how you'll respond. You'll say, "There they go again. Any time anyone says anything negative about Israel, they reply, in some knee-jerk fashion, that it's just anti-Semitism." But you'll be wrong if you say that. I agree with you that Sharon is an unsavory fellow, that we could be doing more to promote some possibility of peace. I wouldn't compare him to the inventor of modern terrorism and the butcher of the Middle East, Yassir Arafat, as you do, but I disagree with a lot of what he does. I'm uncomfortable with many of Israel's policies. And I don't believe one has to be Jewish to point out those failures. No, you have a right to critique.

So what's anti-Semitic about your article, you want to know? It's the fact that not so deep down, you just wish the Jews would disappear. No, of course you don't say it that clearly. That's no longer politically correct in the academic circles you inhabit. So you just hint at it. "In a world where nations and people increasingly intermingle and intermarry at will - where more and more of us have multiple elective identities and would feel falsely constrained if we had to answer to just one of them; in such a world, Israel is an anachronism." But here's the rub, Professor Judt. Many Jews (most, I suspect) don't want to intermingle and intermarry at will. Of course, we have multiple identities, but we answer to one before the others. We take pride in the fact that Jews have survived for thousands of years. We believe that Jews have something to contribute (as do other cultures, obviously) to the world, and frankly, we don't think of our Jewishness as an "elective identity." To many of us it's a gift, and a responsibility. We're not around today because our ancestors walked away from their Jewish obligations, and we don't plan to start walking away now.

The real problem, you see, isn't that Israel is an anachronism. It's that Judaism, or Jews, is an anachronism. We are so very annoying in our insistence that we don't want to completely blend in. Now, when you compare us to Islam today, I think we've done a pretty admirable job of blending in. If Islam were to embrace modernity and western culture the way that we have, the world would be a much better place. The World Trade Center would still be standing, the United States would not be in Iraq, there would be no American troops in Afghanistan, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be over, because rejectionist Palestinian leaders would have accepted the State that they were offered in both 1947 (by the United Nations) and in 2000 (by Ehud Barak's government). If there's any group you should be annoyed with for refusing to have "multiple identities," it's Islam, not Judaism.

But, of course, it's not surprising that you focus on Jews, for example, and not Muslims. The world has a history of having a problem with the Jews' identities. It would be hard to imagine a Jewish community more blended into its surrounding culture than German Jewry in the early 1930's. Yet they can't tell you much about their lives, you see, because their history didn't end particularly well. They went up smokestacks.

Oh, no. I've slipped again. I know you don't want to hear about the Holocaust. You've told us to drop it. "The circumstances of [Israel's] birth have thus bound Israel's identity inextricably to the Shoah, the German project to exterminate the Jews of Europe. As a result, all criticism of Israel is drawn ineluctably back to the memory of that project, something that Israel's American apologists are shamefully quick to exploit." Well, if mentioning the Shoah is shameful or exploitative, I'm guilty as charged. Since you're a historian, though, I suggest that what's shameful is not our mentioning the Shoah, but your subtle minimizing of its scope. Because you, more than almost anyone else, know much better.

The Shoah wasn't just Germany's project. If I remember my European history correctly (but correct me if I'm wrong, because you're the Professor of European History), there were quite a few other countries who joined in this "project." ("Project"? My God. That's what you call the genocidal attempt to wipe out the Jews? A "project"? How clinical can someone possibly get?)

Nor was the target just "European Jewry." Those are the Jews who were, indeed, destroyed. But Hitler had a grander plan. Surely, he didn't plan for a "Museum of a Vanished Race" because he planned to leave non-European Jewry alive. When he was done, there were going to be no Jews left anywhere. It wasn't about European Jewry, which would have been bad enough. It was about Jews everywhere. It was about eradicating Judaism, a "project" I suspect you'd like to see completed, but we'll come back to that.

Even those who fought the Axis powers weren't exactly wild about the Jews. Roosevelt closed the borders of the United States, Canada didn't let the Jews in, and the British also sealed the shores of Palestine. In that regard, you're in good company when you express your distaste for the Jews, and I suspect you'll have good company for a long time to come. This month, you've got the Malaysian Prime Minister, Mahatir Mohamad, who is annoyed with the Jews for ruling the world. But others will follow.

The problem for Mahatir Mohamad, and for you, is that the Shoah and its tactics are no longer politically correct. The world frowns on ethnic cleansing these days (which is why you accuse Israel of being willing to do that, even though you know it's absurd; we've long had the power and have never done anything of the sort, and anyone who knows anything about Israeli public opinion knows that it's unthinkable to the vast majority of Israelis), so one has to subtly come up with other ways to end not just Zionism, but the Jewish people. And that's where your article comes in. Let's just end the Jewish State and put an end to the fighting. Sounds reasonable. But you know what many others, Jews included, haven't yet figured out. The end of the Jewish State is the end of Judaism as we know it.

Would there be some Jews left who would practice a several thousand year old religious tradition? Of course there would, you're right. But the thriving, flourishing Judaism that the world knows today is a Judaism that can exist only with a Jewish State. How many novels are written in Hebrew outside of Israel? I'm not aware of a single one, but there are certainly very, very few. How significant is the production of Jewish art, or high culture, outside of Israel? Relatively speaking, there's almost none. How many people would speak Hebrew - the language that allows access to Judaism's critical and formative texts - if not for Israel? Very few, indeed.

But Israel has the Jewish cultural productivity that it does because it is only in Israel that Jews make up the majority of the population, it is only in Israel where a Jewish consciousness is part of the rhythm of the society, its media, its artists, its women and men of letters. Where else, as Israelis debate whether or not to follow through on a prisoner exchange that would free Elchanan Tenenbaum in exchange for hundreds of terrorists, even though Tenenbaum now appears to have been captured when he traveled to Abu Dhabi for some illegal purpose, would even secular citizens offer their opinion about a possible prisoner of war trade by citing the case of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg, the great Talmudic sage of the 13th century? The Maharam of Rothenburg, as he's known, was also kidnapped, but when he heard that the Jewish community had raised the money for his ransom, he realized that if he were freed, other Jews would be similarly kidnapped, and he refused to allow the deal. He rotted in prison until his death. Many of us take pride in conversations like that, in dialogue in which the richness of Jewish history, law and expression is often the foundation of our contemporary discourse. But only in a country that's Jewish at its core will the radio waves be filled with the discussion of a 13th century Talmudist as people opine on a current affairs topic. It's that sort of cultural richness which is unique to post-War Judaism; it's that sort of cultural richness that only a Jewish culture in a Jewish state can provide. And it's that cultural richness that you want to see eradicated.

No, I understand. You'll say that you have no objection to that cultural richness surviving. You just want the political and military battles to cease. Enough bloodshed. Let's share the land, and then Jews can flourish without having to die in a never-ending conflict. But there are solutions to this conflict, though you deny them, that do not require dismantling our country. They'll be hard to implement, true, but they're not impossible. So why advocate doing away with us? Because, Professor Judt, you know in a bi-national state, Jews would almost immediately become a minority. And with time, a rather small minority. How well would we fare there? Well, let's ask ourselves. How many westerners do you see running to Egypt, to Saudi Arabia, to Jordan, to Syria, to Iraq, to Iran or to Lebanon (for starters) so that they can live in an environment in which they'll have complete and unfettered access to cultural expression and flourishing? (Even Israeli Arabs overwhelming say that they wouldn't move to Palestine when the State is created; they'd rather live in the Jewish State.) Those are the kinds of places that you suggest we re-create in order to permit the Jews to thrive? Surely you jest.

And one final question, if you don't mind. Why is it that when Ceausescu turns Romania into a living hell, no one suggests doing away with Romania? Or when Iraq menaces the world, the United States invades Iraq, not to destroy it, but to save it and return it to her people (with minimal success, I agree). When North Korea announces its arms proliferation program, the discussion is about how to contain North Korea; no one says that North Korea has no right to exist. Why do we hear claims that a country has no right to exist only when it comes to Israel? Doesn't that strike you as odd?

Sadly, though, it's not that odd. Throughout your article, you keep reminding us that the world has changed. But your brave new world doesn't seem all that brave to me, or all that new. The French still have a country of their own, and a place to root their culture. And the same with the Germans, and the Swiss, and the English and so on. No, the only culture that you think doesn't need or deserve a place to have roots is Jewish culture. The only people threatened by your view of the world are the Jews. No one's talking about doing away with France. Alas, the world hasn't changed almost at all. That's the real problem.

Happily, though, reading your piece wasn't the last thing that I did on Shabbat. When we got home from shul, the whole discussion of Elechanan Tenenbaum started again. Books flew off shelves, Jewish history suddenly came alive, and our kids avidly participated in the kind of discussion they could have only in a country where they have a right to believe that Jews should make distinctly Jewish decisions about the fates of other Jews. Not bad given where the Jewish people was half a century ago. Then, at night, my wife and I went to the movies. We saw Costra-Gavras' film, AMEN. I know. More Holocaust. I apologize.

As we waited for the movie to begin, we couldn't help but notice the makeup of the crowd. Four native Israeli thirty-somethings in the row in front of us, some American retirees in the row behind us, and to our left, two elderly men speaking French. The movie, as you know, isn't an easy one to watch. But as powerful as it was, perhaps the most moving thing was what we heard during the very few scenes that take place in the concentration camps. It was, obviously, silent in the theatre, except for the sound of the film, and except for the sound of one of the French men weeping as he saw the place in which he had undoubtedly been. You watch that movie and the world's refusal to care, you hear the sounds of this man sobbing, remembering God only knows what, and I must tell you, Professor Judt, that with all the problems that Israel has, and they are many, I walked out of the theatre with renewed gratitude that we have this place, and like my fellow Israelis, I suspect, determined that we'll never give it up. Never.

Virtually every other major culture in the world has a home, Professor Judt. Almost everyone. Jews have learned what happens when we don't have one. We've been there, and we're not going back. Everything about this place reminds us that we are home, and everything about our history reminds that we need this home.

I'm sorry that you find us so bothersome. I'm sorry that the only way you can see ending this conflict is to do away with us. But we're home, Professor Judt, and your transparent objections notwithstanding, we're here to stay.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 2, 2003.

Dear friends,

If you have been reading my bulletins, you know how many times I mentioned the following most important points or aspects in the current conflict: 1) The puzzling question of the "liberal" left siding with the murderous Palestinians, instead of with the only liberal and democratic country in the Middle East - Israel. I wrote repeatedly that the conflict is not a question of right and left, but right and wrong. 2) The fact that those who came up with the ill conceived Oslo Accords had it up-side-down: They agreed to 'land for peace' instead of peace for land. This mantra of "painful concessions" is haunting us until this very minute.

The following insightful article deals with both these questions, but particularly with the first: What is the true reason behind the support of the Palestinians by the liberal left. The article raises important food for thought. It was written by Steven Plaut and appeared on the Arutz-7 website October 31, 2003 and is archived as http://www.israelnationalnews.com/print.php3?what=article&id=2897

Let me know what you think.

Your Truth Provider, Yuval.

In recent years, one of the mantras heard so often in Israel is the insistence that Israel must make painful concessions for peace. Naturally, in all cases, those demanding the painful concessions have been incapable of delivering any peace.

The "Land for Peace" concept was always a fantasy of Israeli politicians. It was never the Arab position. Israeli politicians deluded themselves into believing that Israel could buy peace by giving up lands. The Arab position was that Israel should give up land in order to be dismembered and easier to finish off and annihilate.

But it is not the fallacy of purchasing peace with "painful concessions" that I wish to contest here.

It has been asserted so often and in such Pavlovian repetition that those proposing the swap of land for peace regard the loss of the land as "painful" that virtually no one today challenges the idea. In fact, those demanding painful concessions for peace do not regard those concessions as painful at all.

Let me clarify. Whatever the positions of the Likud leadership, and I personally am not sure they believe in anything at all, the rank and file of people who vote for the Likud would indeed find it "painful", excruciatingly so, for Israel to lose control over Judea and Samaria, and they would find it completely unbearable for the Old City of Jerusalem to be turned over to the PLO barbarians. I do not doubt the authenticity of their pain.

I do completely doubt the authenticity of the "pain" postured by the Israeli Left, including the Labor Party and Meretz. I do not believe they would regard Israeli loss of Jerusalem and of the West Bank as painful. I believe they would regard those losses with ecstasy.

Their ecstasy at the idea of Israel losing the West Bank and Jerusalem is not because they actually think such losses will buy peace. The past decade of Oslo is more than sufficient to prove to the most deluded leftist that it will not do so. The Left no longer sincerely thinks it will buy peace with these Israeli concessions. It wants those concessions in spite of the fact that they will not buy peace.

The Left wants Israel to give up the West Bank and Jerusalem because the Left thinks it is the proper thing to do. It is irrelevant whether the concessions buy peace. That is why the Left continues to demand Israeli abandonment of the West Bank and Jerusalem even as Palestinian atrocities accelerate. The Left wants Israel to give up these territories because the Left finds their loss a source of ecstasy.

The reason why the Left seeks to force Israel to lose Jerusalem and the West Bank is that these areas stand in the way of the Left's dream of divorcing Israeliness from its Jewish roots. The Left seeks to create a new being - an Israeli, but a "Canaanized" Israeli, a post-Jewish Israeli. He could be an Israeli who might light Hannuka candles and pay lip service to Jewish traditions, just as long as he never takes his Jewishness too seriously. The Israeli that the Left wishes to engineer has no real connection with Jewishness. Arabs and Druse can become these Canaanized Israelis as easily as Jews, which is how the Left thinks the war will be resolved.

But Jerusalem stands in their way. Jerusalem is the center of the Jewish universe, but not the universe for the Canaanized Israeli. The post-Jewish Israeli does not need Jerusalem. Indeed, it is a nuisance, a barrier to driving the herd to its post-modernist cosmopolitan demise. The West Bank is also an impediment, what with its Cave of the Patriarchs, Joseph's Tomb, Beth-El and Shiloh. It oozes Jewishness, and that is what offends those seeking to engineer the Canaanized Israeli.

Abandoning these territories causes excruciating pain to Israelis who feel Jewish, and that is a large part of why the Left wishes Israel to lose them. The Left does not want to torment Hamas terrorists nor Tanzim stormtroopers, but dreams of tormenting Jewish Jews.

That being the case, the Left needs Israel to lose those territories to promote the Left's social engineering agenda. The Palestinians have nothing to do with it. The Left could not care less whether the Palestinians will indeed reduce their terror and savagery if they are awarded Jerusalem. The Left's slogan and bumper sticker has long been: Get out of the Territories for Israel's  sake. For Israel's sake? For the sake of the post-Jewish Israeli the Left seeks to engineer and clone.

And that is why removing Israel and Jews from the West Bank and from the Western Wall and the Old City of Jerusalem are hardly matters of pain for the Left. They are matters of the ultimate joy.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 2, 2003.

More leftists are giving up hope of negotiating as a "solution" to the Arab-Israel conflict, a second partition, this time of the western portion of Palestine left over after the trans-Jordanian portion had been given to the Arabs, last century. Instead, they contend that the choice is either between an ethnically-cleansed Israel that includes Yesha, or a single state encompassing both Arabs and Jews.

Leon Wieseltier finds that not an alternative FOR Israel but an alternative TO Israel. It confirms to him that the Left always wanted to end Jewish sovereignty.

This bi-national state would depend on an international force and new political outlooks. (If it requires an international force, then it is not viable and no solution.) With their high birth rate, the Arabs would come to dominate.) The Arabs who propose bi-nationalism do so because they know it means their imminent dominance

Tony Judt, who proposes this in the New York Review of Books, does not state any requirement about democracy. He would make the Jews dependent upon the decency of the Arabs (who are bigoted and barbaric). Mr. Judt makes this proposal out of fear of Israel committing ethnic cleansing, but what he proposes would submit the Jews to ethnic cleansing by the likes of Hamas (after Hamas commits enough terrorism against the international force to scare it off). Since gentiles cannot depend on an international force, Jews cannot.

Judt opposes Jewish statehood, because he thinks mono-ethnic states are anachronistic. Although most countries are mono-ethnic, he does not propose dissolving them. If he doesn't like "Greater Israel," why does he propose what shortly would become a Greater Palestine? He would replace a state for one nationality with a state for another (and terrorist one). He'd relieve Arab statelessness with Jewish statelessness.

Judt not only doesn't like the feeling of belonging that Israelis have, but as a Jew he feels embarrassed over gentile criticism of Israel. (The charges are false and usually malicious, but he lacks the courage to debate or denounce the critics, so) Israel should go under, because he gets embarrassed. If so morally weak, let him deny responsibility for what Israel does. Besides, it is an antisemitic notion that all Jews are responsible for what Israel does.

He explains the burning of synagogues in Europe as a way of getting back at Israel. Why doesn't he criticize those antisemitic arsonists, instead of favoring them by punishing the Jews of Israel? He thinks Israel is bad for the Jews, but it is a haven for Jews persecuted outside Israel. That is a practical justification for perpetuating the Jewish majority in the Jewish state (Prof. Steven Plaut, 10/21, e-mail).

How neurotic that this Jew would doom millions of fellow Jews, and destroy their opportunity for national development, because he cannot rise above his embarrassment over antisemitic accusations. Criticizing Jewish and not Arab nationalism is hypocritical.

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, November 2, 2003.

This is an article by Ravi Nessman, a writer for the Associated Press. It appeared yesterday in the Washington Times. It's called "One Mideast State May Be Future of Israel."

What is being promoted is the proposition that if Israel doesn't accept a 2-state solution (without the Arabs having to reform their character), then the only alternative is a 1-state solution, in which the Arabs will soon dominate. (At least the article doesn't pretend that the Arabs will be transformed into a democracy-loving people.) Of course, there is an obvious third option: send the Arabs packing to Jordan and keep the territories. Actually, that would still be a 2-state solution in Palestine, because Jordan was carved out of land earmarked for the Jews.

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) - Ramallah, the bustling heart of Palestinian life in the West Bank, is rapidly becoming surrounded by Israeli settlements, from the trailer homes of hilltop outposts to the cookie-cutter apartment buildings on the nearby outskirts of Jerusalem.

It's a familiar picture throughout the West Bank, and as the Jewish and Palestinian populations become more entangled, the internationally backed solution of separating them into two states is looking increasingly difficult.

With settlement-building continuing and peace efforts stalled, Israelis in growing numbers are worrying that a partition may soon become impossible - and some Palestinians have concluded that a single state for both peoples is in their interest.

"The conflict is not far from the point where it will no longer be possible to carry out a two-state solution," said Yossi Alpher, a leading Israeli political analyst.

It has become a matter of intense discussion on talk shows and editorial pages, supplying ammunition to Israeli peace campaigners who say a pullout from the West Bank and Gaza should be framed not as a compromise but as a necessity. The alternative, they say, will be an Israel swamped by Arabs, torn between giving them the vote and losing Jewish dominion over the country, or denying them the vote and standing accused of emulating apartheid South Africa.

That concern spurred at least two efforts by moderate politicians to negotiate unofficial peace deals with the Palestinians. The most recent plan, known as the Geneva Agreement, foresees Israel giving the Palestinians nearly all the territories it captured in 1967 and dismantling most settlements.

That agreement has no legal standing and has been vehemently condemned by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. But it's "perhaps the last chance for a fair division of the land between Jews and Palestinians before the creation of a Palestinian majority west of Jordan that will effectively make the country binational," Israeli negotiator Yossi Beilin, a former Justice Minister, wrote Tuesday in the daily Maariv.

In a single state, Israel's 1.3 million Arab citizens combined with the 3.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip would soon outnumber Israel's 5.2 million Jews because of their higher birthrate.

Sharon says he supports separation in principle, though he would offer the Palestinians far less land than they demand.

Most Palestinians still hope for a separate Palestinian state, but some no longer feel any need to make such a compromise. They argue that the single-state idea gives them leverage, sending Israelis the message that if they do not pull out of the entire West Bank and Gaza soon, they could lose the whole country.

"Down the road you have to deal with a binational state coming your way," Palestinian political analyst Ali Jerbawi said. "It might take another 50 years, 70 years. Whatever."

To keep Israel Jewish and democratic, says Avraham Burg, Israel's dovish former Parliament speaker, "I'm for the amputation of land, rather than for the castration of the Jewish majority or democracy."

Meanwhile, the Israeli settlement drive that began after the 1967 Mideast war moves ahead - with the settler population growing to 220,000 last year, up 5.7 percent from 2001, according to Israeli government figures. Roughly the same number of Palestinians have moved to Israel since 1967, according to Israeli estimates.

The barrier Israel is building to keep out suicide bombers could be seen as an act of separation that keeps the two-state option alive, but instead of sticking to the pre-1967 border, it dips into the West Bank to accommodate Jewish settlements and is seen by Palestinians as a land grab.

Hemi Shalev, a leading political analyst, wrote in Friday's Maariv newspaper that Israel's military chief of staff also sees the Palestinians shifting away from the two-state idea.

According to Shalev, Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon fears that Palestinian leaders who favor a two-state solution are losing ground, and that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat himself is willing to sit back and wait for Israel to buckle under the weight of a growing Palestinian population.

Jerbawi says Israel should be given an ultimatum - agree on a Palestinian state in six months or the Palestinians will dump the idea and switch to seeking Israeli annexation.

Israel would surely object to giving its new Palestinian citizens the vote, but eventually would have to yield, he said.

Although official Palestinian policy remains a two-state solution, Michael Tarazi, a legal adviser to Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization, says a shared infrastructure of roads, utilities and water already binds the settlers and the Palestinians.

"Most people want a two-state solution... but it's not happening," he said. "One state would solve a lot of issues."

On the fringes are Israelis who would simply expel the Palestinians or, conversely, accept a binational state. But the vast majority see both options as nightmarish and unworkable.

"There has not been one case in which a conflict between two national movements has been solved by a binational state," political analyst Shlomo Avineri said.

Besides continuing violence, he said, every detail of the binational state would bring a challenge - "Every street name, every day of celebration, every program in school."

In the end, it will be very difficult for Israel to dismantle settlements and evacuate most of the West Bank, as it almost certainly would have to do under any final peace deal, he said. But it will be far less painful than ending the Jewish state, he said.

Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, November 2, 2003.

I received this message

From: GY
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 10:56 AM
To: ysagamori@hotmail.com
Subject: Palestine


My Grandfather was born in Palestine, he traveled on a Palestine passport, spent Palestinian pounds and his family has lived in the land of Palestine for a thousand years. To even question if Palestine ever existed would be akin to asking if Paris ever existed, even if it never was an independent nation. Since when do we judge if a region existed by the standards of modern day nationhood. If this were the case, 90% of the nations today would NOT exist in your mind, or under your warped logic.

Go back to your Zionist 101 propaganda books and try to come up with a different approach to this question. By the way, when exactly did the "State of Israel" exist? The Jewish Kingdoms of past lasted for no more than 500 years while Palestinians (Muslim and Christians) controlled the region for 1500 years. Caanan (Palestine) did not start nor will it end with Jewish domination.


PS - your name is plastered all over the Zionist websites.

Dear Mr. Y:

Thank you for your letter. This is the first time I received a letter from an Arab that would attempt to reason against my arguments rather than simply curse me.

In response, I would venture a guess that your grandfather's passport, as well as his pounds, were issued by the authorities of Great Britain - a country that was entrusted by the League of Nations with keeping the Jewish homeland for its rightful owners and then blatantly betrayed that trust by establishing Arab kingdoms at its whim. You know as well as I do that, regardless of all the different names people have applied to the geographical area in question, there has never been a nation called Palestine: not during the British Mandate, not prior to it, and not afterwards. So, what's your rationale for creating it now? Unless your argument is purely toponymical, Paris presents a very poor analogy - precisely because, to the best of my knowledge, the Parisians have never attempted to turn their city into an independent political entity.

Furthermore, If you carefully (and honestly) consider all possible outcomes of the ongoing Arab war against Israel, you will most probably agree with me that under no plausible scenario (Israel wins, Israel looses, or whatever else one can think of) a viable "Palestinian" state is realistically possible at the outcome. Even the worst (from my point of view) case scenario, in which Arafat's terrorist organization achieves its goal of wiping Israel off the map, is not going to result in a "Palestinian" state. If you need proof, please consider the sovereignty of Lebanon today.

And since the state of "Palestine" has never existed, the state of Israel, no matter how many times destroyed in the past, has an infinitely greater right to that land than an Arab terrorist organization created for the purpose of its destruction.

Your attempt to connect Arabs to the ancient Philistines is misguided. Arabs in general and those occupying Gaza, Judea, and Samaria in particular, today, do not descend from the Philistines, just like modern-day Egyptians do not descend from those who built the pyramids thousands of years ago. This is a commonly accepted, scientifically established historical fact.

Having said that, I must agree with you that the lack of common ethnic identity among the so-called "Palestinians" cannot alone serve as a sufficient reason to deny them a right for self-determination. I have attempted to address this argument in an essay called "Genius and Evil" that can be found at http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/. If you have time and desire to continue this discussion, I would appreciate your opinion on that piece.

Finally, I have no reason to doubt that your family has lived in the area you call Palestine for a thousand years. A thousand years is a very respectable chunk of time. My family has lived there five times that long, but even that is not the point. If Arabs can use prolonged residence to support territorial claims, then, as a fair person you no doubt are, you should agree that Jews must have the same right. Would you be ready and willing to support similarly based Jewish territorial claims against Egypt? Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Lebanon? Jordan? Yemen? Ethiopia? Iran? All of Europe? Unless your only concern is the destruction of Israel, you must.

If however you are saying that a thousand-year-long history in the area entitles your family to remain there, I will agree with you wholeheartedly. Each one of us has a right to live whenever we choose - as long as we do not engage, either directly or indirectly, in attempts to exterminate our neighbors.

With the most sincere regards,

Yashiko Sagamori

Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 2, 2003.

You'd think a bunch of people who stole their name from an established, millennia-old group, who are despised and forbidden to own property in the lands of their own brethren, who are so abysmally ignorant that they think killing off their future generations is a good thing, would have nothing to teach. But they do. And Israel, world Jewry, and all the non-Muslim world would be wise to learn the lessons.

The first lesson is really one taught by Aldous Huxley is his book "Brave New World." In it, he states that ".... A thousand repetitions equal one truth." The Arab Palestinians have taken this lesson to heart. By repeating, ad infinitum, that Israel oppresses them, that they are the original inhabitants of that land, that they are justified in murdering women and children, etc., the world has come to see Israel as a big bad bully oppressing an underclass minority.

Nor have the Arab Palestinians stopped at world opinion. They use the same principle to rally their own people. They continuously show edited footage of dead Palestinians, accompanied by some spiel that says the evil Jews did it. They show this 24/7/365 until they get the whole populace worked up. Then they take their show on the road. Like cockroaches infesting a filthy building, they overrun campuses in the civilized world blasting their hate-filled and lying propaganda at every turn.

The next lesson is anger. The Palestinian Arabs spew outrage in their every breath. Never mind that it is misdirected - often at the very people who are trying to help them (remember the roadside bombing of Americans who were there to hand out Rhodes scholarships recently?). Anger works. It frightens civilized people into backing off. Israel and world Jewry should this lesson. No more timid protests. No more polite requests or passive demonstrations. Active, loud fury and utter, unrelenting outrage will do much more to impress and alter an ambivalent world than the restrained way in which Jews are used to expressing themselves. Time to let the world know that our blood is boiling at their treatment of us.

The third lesson is one of expectations. No matter how outrageous or preposterous, the Arab world presents their wants as reasonable. And a gullible, frightened world accepts them. One example is the Palestinian idea of a Judenrein country. Not one single member of the UN or the Roadmap group has protested the idea. It hasn't even been mentioned.

Another example is the Palestinian notion that Israel owes them jobs. Does America owe Mexicans or Canadians jobs? Does the world protest that America limits foreign workers? Is there a hue and cry that Saudi Arabia bans Jews from working in their country? Does the UN condemn Lebanon for preventing Palestinian Arabs from working in most fields of endeavor? The answer to all these questions is a resounding NO! No sovereign nation is responsible for the employment of foreigners. None that is, except Israel. And the reason for this goes back to lessons one and two: propaganda and anger.

The final example is shamelessness. The Palestinian Arabs have no shame. None whatsoever. What civilized people would proudly boast of encouraging their youth, from the very cradle, to kill themselves? The Palestinian Arabs do and yet the most critical thing we've heard to date is Colin Powell mildly admonishing them to "tone it down," as if they were fidgety children at a church picnic.

Another area of shamelessness is the Palestinian Arab expectation of Israel to cut out her heart and give it to them on a golden platter. They want all of Israel's capital, Jerusalem, as well as Judaism's holiest site, the Temple Mount. What would be America's reaction if Mexico demanded the Bush ranch? Yet Mexicans have much more of an historical right to Texas than the Palestinian Arabs have to actually any place in Israel.

Israel and world Jewry should at the very least be shameless in demanding that which is rightfully ours. We should be demanding respect, we should be demanding no compromise on our historic homeland and we should be vehemently demanding equal and evenhanded treatment by the world body.

Until we Jews learn these lessons, we will always be living in uncertainty and fear. If Jews are so smart, how come we need the world to beat us over the head time and again, by way of the Inquisition, the Holocaust, and the latest Arab/Muslim push for genocide, before we learn these lessons? It's final exam time, and if we don't pass the test on this go-around, we may be permanently removed from schoolhouse Earth.

DEMYSTIFY IT: How To Defeat Suicide Terrorism
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 2, 2003.

This is an article written by Adam Wolfson about how to defeat suicide terrorism. It appeared on the National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com), September 16, 2003. It was distributed by MidEast Truth (http://www.MidEastTruth.com), a website that provides daily articles, opinion pieces, cartoons and videos.

I would add there is also the potentially very effective deterrent of burying the savage with a pig.

Jack Golbert said: "The policy implications are clear. Stonewall it and retaliate against the ones who send the suicide terrorists and educate others to follow in their path. Those are the ones the world calls the 'political leaders'."

The religious orientation of the Islamists...breaks down deterrence. How do you deter someone who is willing, indeed eager, to die?...You cannot deter Islamic fundamentalists. ... Fareed Zakaria

In the suicide terrorist we have met our match. Or so we are told. For 40 years, deterrence kept the Soviets at bay, dissuading them from attacking our cities. But deterrence is impossible, it is said, against religious zealots. How astonishing and inexplicable is their behavior! What unfathomable commitment they show! Surely, such fanaticism cannot be deterred.

That's the conventional wisdom, but as is so often the case with conventional wisdom, it is mostly wrong. In a rigorously researched article for "The American Political Science Review" (http://www.apsanet.org/apsr.cfm), Robert Pape has examined every suicide-terrorist attack in the world from 1980 to 2001. There have been 188 such suicide attacks worldwide, ranging from Lebanon to the West Bank, from Sri Lanka to Chechnya, and from India to Turkey. From his survey research, Pape, who teaches political science at the University of Chicago, is able to explain much about this barbaric practice: He shows how suicide terrorism operates, and why it became a growth industry over the last several decades. His superb study should help dispel the widespread notion that suicide terrorism is somehow beyond comprehension, and beyond remedy.

One of Pape's most important findings is that suicide terrorism is guided by clearly identifiable strategic goals. It is not a mere act of wanton cruelty, though it is certainly that. Nor is it an act of desperation by the dispossessed. Rather, suicide -attacks are nearly always carefully calibrated to accomplish the political goals of nationalists groups. Of the 188 suicide-terrorist strikes from 1980 to 2001, a whopping 95 percent were undertaken as part of an organized political campaign; that is, only 9 of the 188 attacks were unplanned.

These statistics give us a clearer picture of what we're up against. The vast majority of suicide attacks are not the work of psychos; they are not the random and unpredictable acts of fanatics. We're not in the realm of trying to divine the dark psychology of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. Rather, suicide terrorism occurs, as Pape describes, in "clusters." And it is nearly always deployed as part of a larger political-military campaign. The psychology of an individual suicide terrorist might indeed be incomprehensible, but this is not the case of those who recruit, train, and outfit him. A suicide terrorist's handlers are not so eager to die, and there is little reason to believe that deterrence - if forcefully and consistently applied - will not prove effective against them.

Pape uncovers another startling and vitally important pattern: Every suicide attack in the period under study was launched against a democracy. Hezbollah used this weapon to force the United States and France from Lebanon in 1983; Hezbollah and Hamas have used it repeatedly to force concessions from Israel; Tamil terrorists have used it against the Sri Lankan government; the Kurds against Turkey; the Chechen rebels against Russia; the Kashmir rebels against India; and perhaps most infamously, on September 11, al Qaeda launched its suicide -terrorist attacks against America.

This is an extraordinarily important finding. Clearly, the terrorists have reached certain conclusions about our own "regime." They think we are "soft," and they surmise that democracies in particular are vulnerable to nihilistic coercion.

And in this regard, the terrorists are, sadly, not entirely wrong. For another pattern Pape unearths is that suicide terrorism against democracies is effective. It is more destructive than regular terrorism - from 1980 to 2001 suicide attacks made up 3 percent of total terrorist attacks but produced 45 percent of all casualties - and that's not even counting the immense carnage of September 11. Moreover, suicide terrorism more often than not achieves its strategic goals. By Pape's accounting, of the eleven separate suicide campaigns from 1980 to 2001, six produced "significant policy changes by the target state toward the terrorists' major political goals." This bodes ill for the future, as Pape indicates:

The main reason suicide terrorism is growing is that terrorists have learned that it works. Even more troubling, the encouraging lessons that terrorists have learned from the experience of the 1980s and 1990s are not, for the most part, products of wild-eyed interpretations or wishful thinking. They are, rather, quite reasonable assessments of the outcomes of suicide -terrorist campaigns during this period.

So how should democracies respond to this new scourge? Pape argues in favor of beefing up homeland security. Good advice. But much more than that can and should be done.

We need to see suicide terrorism for what it is; we need to demystify it. Suicide terrorists are not some other breed of men, unsusceptible to the usual tools of statecraft. As Thomas Hobbes once said of human cruelty: "That any man should take pleasure in other men's great harm, without other end of his own, I do not conceive it possible." The terrorists have their ends. Deny these - make sure that suicide terrorism does not pay - and it will surely lose much of its luster. http://www.mideasttruth.com/forum/ Speak up. We look forward to reading your views and sharing your insights and thoughts.

Adam Wolfson is editor of "The Public Interest". His article is archived at http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-wolfson091603.asp

Posted by David Bedein, November 2, 2003.

Dennis Ross, the special Middle East coordinator during the Clinton administrations from 1993 to 2001, and now the director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and the new head of the "Jewish People Policy Planning Institute" of the Jewish Agency, was bringing four leaders of the Fatah Tanzim to Washington, D.C., to advance their cause with the U.S. Congress and with various Jewish organizations. That's what the Washington correspondent of Voice of Israel Radio just recently reported.

The next news item on the Midnight Voice of Israel Radio was of a drive by terror attack north of Jerusalem, where the same Fatah Tanzim took credit for wounding the driver...except that the driver riding with Israeli license plates was a Palestinian Arab driving a stolen Israeli vehicle. The Fatah Tanzim apologized for shooting the wrong guy, who meanwhile was getting treatment in an Israeli hospital.

Meanwhile, the Fatah Tanzim were more efficient on Sunday evening because just as their leaders were landing in Washington, they laid an ambush for an Israeli army foot patrol north of Jerusalem, where they wounded four young Israeli soldiers and then executed three of them while their fourth buddy was writhing in his wounds in the bushes nearby.

Earlier that same day, the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center (JMCC) issued results of a poll which boasted that 75 percent of the Palestinian Arab population endorsed the October 3rd Arab terror suicide bombing in the Maxim restaurant in Haifa, in which 21 Israeli men, women and children were murdered.

The JMCC, set up by the Fatah Tanzim and funded in part by the European Union, runs these polls through recorded personal interviews with families, with no confidentiality assured in any discrete method of polling.

In other words, the interviewee expresses what the Fatah Tanzim wants the media to hear...which is that the Palestinian Arab people favor continuing the campaign of premeditated, cold blooded murder that has plagued Israel for the past three years.

Yet for some reason, Dennis Ross, who is supposed to be one of the leading experts in Middle East research, somehow posits that the Fatah Tanzim represent a force of "moderating influence."

Writing in the Baltimore Sun on June 24, 2003, Dennis Ross wrote that the "activists of Fatah, the Tanzim, who led the first intifada more than a decade ago and who have played an instrumental role in this one, believe that it's time for change. In meetings with several Tanzim leaders, I heard: Force cannot work on Israelis or Palestinians."

For whatever reason, Ross ignores the reality of the Fatah Tanzim, who have taken "credit" for the vast majority of the 18,000 Arab terror attacks that have been inflicted on Israel over the past three years, which have claimed the lives of 897 men, women and children.

The four Fatah Tanzim who have been Ross' "guests" this week in Washington have directed that very murder campaign.

Hatem Abed Al-Khader, one of Ross' "guests," stated in a news interview on Israel's Independence Day to a Palestinian Authority publication that, "We have no objection to suicide attacks, so long as these attacks advance our purposes." (Source: www.amin.org, on May 15, 2002).

Achmed Renam, another of Ross' "guests" in Washington, wrote in a news article in the Jordanian publication Al Hadej on June 25, 2001 that: "We have the right to fight Israel. We will choose the way in which we defend ourselves."

During his eight-year tenure as the special Middle East coordinator during the Clinton administration, from 1993 to 2001, Ross acted as the salesman of Clinton's Middle East "peace package" to the world.

It would seem that Ross continues to do so, as he spent the better part of Monday and Tuesday escorting his "guests" to meet leading congressmen and congressional aides and Middle East policy makers. The height of Ross's visit was the meeting that Ross organized for the leaders of the Fatah Tanzim with David Satterfield, the Deputy Asst. Secretary of State.

The only question is whether the FBI and the INS should have met Ross' cherished Fatah Tanzim instead of the leading policy makers and congressmen in Washington.

The consistent premise of the U.S.-sponsored Oslo Process, Road Map, Mitchell Plan and Tenet Plan was that all negotiations with the representatives of the PLO and its Palestinian National Authority were to be predicated on the absolute commitment of the Palestinian Arab interlocutors to cease and desist from advocating the murder of Jews.

Dennis Ross has ignored that premise, even though he was the architect of the very premises of the current Middle East "peace" process.

This appeared on Front Page Magazine's website (http://www.frontpagemag.com) on October 23, 2003.

Posted by Shep Fargotstein, November 2, 2003.

News that Israeli-Arab and Balad MK, Azmi Bishara, met Friday morning with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa in Qatar should come as no surprise, thanks to a weak-kneed Israeli judicial system, Yossi Beilin, and AG Rubinstein.

MK Bishara's strategy is clearly an attempt to capitalize on the refusal of Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein to prosecute former justice minister Yossi Beilin for his involvement in the Geneva "conspiracy", as well as to (rightfully) expose the hypocritical treatment of Israeli-Arabs vs. Israelli Jews. AG Rubinstein has allowed Israeli citizens to exploit a loophole in the Israel's flawed justice system that allows them to consort with the enemy simply by conducting their meetings on the soil of a third party nation not officially included on Israel's list of enemies.

Haaretz diplomatic and political columnist Uzi Benziman, a member of the editorial staff of a major leftist Israeli newspaper, justified Beilin's freelance foreign policy inititive by citing this loophole - and a weak defense of it: "According to Israeli law, and the principles of democracy, there is no ban on negotiations aimed at ending such a bloody conflict. American law does ban contact by non-governmental citizens with the enemy, but Israeli law does not. It is a moral imperative to make every effort to prevent bloodshed, and I see no reason to object to this one. What Beilin and his colleagues did was a sort of brainstorming between Israelis and Palestinians, that created a model for each of the peoples that serves as an alternative to the status quo, and enables them to decide freely whether they accept it or not."

AG Rubinstein's argument before the Israeli supreme court, in an effort to close this loophole, should acknowledge that there is no way to know what is said at these "brainstorming sessions" between Israelis and Palestinians. The "brainstorming sessions" could be a discussion of conspiracy against the State of Israel as easily as they could be discussing peace. The courts's decision should default in favor of closing this loophole, based on national security - as well as the fact that if the "enemy" has anything to say, it should be said to authorized officials of the democratically elected government.

Israelis like to view themselves as the "bastion" of democracy in the Middle East, to the point where it has become a destructive national complex. There is natural reluctance to limit to the rights of citizens in a democracy, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. If anything, Israel is setting a bad example for the Palestinians. With the US-Israeli demand that the Palestinians install a truly democratic government, it is an imperative that they understand that their dissidents, their religious radicals, and their violent extremists have limitations that their government is willing to clearly define - and enforce.

Posted by Barry Shaw, November 2, 2003.

Terrorists are not the problem.
The problem is the refusal of Western media and diplomats to call them terrorists.

The problem is not Israel's response to terror attacks.
The problem is the West's refusal to differentiate between Islamic terrorism and Israel's legitimate right to defend itself.

The problem is not the suicide bomber.
The problem is a society that thrives on a cult of death and martyrdom.

The problem is not the inability of 'Palestinian prime ministers' to rein in their terrorists.
The problem is the reasoning behind Arafat's refusal to do this.

The problem is not 'occupation'.
The problem is an Arab/Islamic yearning for Palestine to 'occupy' Israel. problem?

Terrorists are not the problem.
The problem is the refusal of Western media and diplomats to call them terrorists. p>The problem is not Israel's response to terror attacks.
The problem is the West's refusal to differentiate between Islamic terrorism and Israel's legitimate right to defend itself.

The problem is not the suicide bomber.
The problem is a society that thrives on a cult of death and martyrdom.

The problem is not the inability of 'Palestinian prime ministers' to rein in their terrorists.
The problem is the reasoning behind Arafat's refusal to do this.

The problem is not 'occupation'.
The problem is an Arab/Islamic yearning for Palestine to 'occupy' Israel.

The problem is not the security fence.
The problem is that Jews are, once again, being forced into a ghetto to defend themselves.

The problem is not Israel's attempts to defend itself.
The problem is an implacable enemy resolved and determined to eradicate the one and only Jewish state.

The problem is not the anti-Semitic remarks pronounced by the Malaysian Prime Minister at the Islamic Summit.
The problem was that he was given a standing ovation by 57 world leaders.

The problem was not Condeleeza Rice's opinion that these remarks were not endemic of the Islamic worldview.
The problem is that politicians, such as Miss Rice, cannot see that these remarks ARE endemic of the Islamic worldview.

"The View from Here" is an Israeli perspective of current events and is written by Barry Shaw. To sign up to receive them, write netre@matav.net.il

Posted by Evelyn Hayes, November 1, 2003.

Author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes."

I once had a beautiful friend who became more beautiful after she made aliyah.
They put a bullet in her head while she was a passenger in her own car, while she was reciting tehillim.

My children once had a wonderful principal who inspired his children to do good deeds.
His son made aliyah, studied in the Tomb of Josef, went to protect the Torah Scroll when he saw
the holy place assigned to the protection of the Arabs burning to the ground. He was brutally murdered.

I was once walking on King George Street, across the street from the plaque for Mayor Nashashibi, the Arab mayor in 1924 who was later replaced because Sir Herbert Samuels wanted to make a terrorist a statesman and perhaps he would reform. I was walking to Sbarros on that sunny August afternoon. I turned and the blast of a human incinerator echoed down my back. After saying Shema over and over again, I uncovered my eyes and saw crowds running away to safety and as many running into the chaos to help. I saw a little girl placed on the lap of her mother in a wheelchair. They were both alive. Little Chaya who told the Prime Minister to keep one Shabbos was orphaned. Her burning brother's last words to his burning father were, "What should I do?" His father's last words were, "Say Shema."

Some say, Chaim Mizrachi, one of the first victims of Oslo, the making of an Egyptian terrorist into a "Palestinian" statesman and peace with the enemies of all mankind, died because he went to buy cheap eggs.

The truth is in the mirror. He died because he was murdered because he was a Jew.
The truth is in the mirror. As we lit candles for the 39th, the 40th, the 1000th, Oslo is still incinerating Jews.
The truth is in the mirror. Haj al-Husseini did Temple Mount blood libels in 1929 as an appeased statesman and the bodies of the Jews of Musrawa that were mutilated beyond recognition are buried in a mass grave in the Mount of Olives Cemetery.

The truth is in the picture: Haj al-Husseini went to Berlin to join with the Nazis to solve the Jewish problem.
The truth is in the picture: Arafat al-Husseini is on hold in RamAllah because of the evidence found in RamAllah that he was taking money from another Hussein, Saddam Hussein, to pay the suicide bombers.
The truth is in the picture: Arafat al-Husseini's police dumped the bodies of young IDF from the police headquarters and his savages danced with their organs in the street.
The truth is in the picture of Arabs wishing to be free of these medieval evil dictators: they are dragged through the streets on fire in Bethlehem. They are found dead in RamAllah. They are tortured in the jihad jails of Jericho.

The truth is in the picture: remember the suicide toddler. Some of the "Cease-a-Me" kids are grown bodies marching in hate stupors to kill the Jews again.

If the truth is in the mirror and the shiva is over why is the world shivering to look at the monster it created?
If the truth is in the mirror and evil is looking humankind in the eye, isn't it to cruel to continue to let killers kill?
If the truth is in the mirror, are you too scared to see how scary it all is?
If the truth is in the mirror, is it you who hate Jews so much that you would hold hands in a "durbanish" hatefest
with those who will even hate you.

If the truth is in the mirror, we have to look.
If we don't look ugly truth in the eye it will only get uglier.
If we don't look ugly truth in the eye, we might not be in the mirror
and the mirror may be covered without anyone left to cry.

Truth is a premise for busting phantoms hovering over us in the mirror.
Bust the beast before there is no more beauty in the mirror.
Bust the beast so love can live.

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, November 1, 2003.

I was driving home from work on October 20th when I was treated to some more National Public Radio wisdom. Keep in mind, the American taxpayer funds much of this programming.

The show was about the Arab-Israeli conflict and reflected NPR's usual anti-Israel slant. This time the topic was about growing frustration on the Arab side regarding the improbability of another viable Arab state in Palestine arising any time soon. Of course, no mention was given to why that second state would not likely emerge: the rejectionist mentality of the Arab side for a viable Jewish neighbor.

So the issue of an alternative solution became the focus of the program. Since Arabs could not get everything that they want in this proposed second Arab state (compromise is evidently not in the Arab vocabulary), the focus of the show turned to a discussion of the creation of one binational state for Jews and Arabs instead. At no time did the fact that Arabs had rejected a solution a few years earlier which would have given them almost everything they claim they wanted short of Israel agreeing to slit its own throat come out in the program.

The discussion went like this: Since the sole miniscule state of the Jews (my own description) won't consent to giving up on its own minimal security needs (most nations demand far more) so that a 23rd Arab nation can be born, the soaring Arab birth rate would insure that the Jews would be overwhelmed in any democratic binational endeavor. Jews were then interviewed about their own feelings regarding this proposed alternative, and Israel, of course, was the "heavy" for not consenting to allowing Arabs to have all that they want in the disputed territories.

Now what I'm about to say next is really nothing new. Indeed, not much "new" has been written about this conflict for decades - just rehashed old arguments and positions.

What was missing from NPR's program, to no real surprise, was the obvious third alternative. The producers at NPR are not dummies, so the omission was deliberate - and so far worse.

After the Paris Peace Conference closing World War I, Great Britain was awarded its share of the spoils of the former Ottoman Turkish Empire. The Turks had ruled the Middle East and North Africa for some four centuries. The Brits' share largely consisted of Mandates for Palestine and Mesopotamia. The borders of Palestine Britain received on April 25, 1920 included lands which are now Israel, Jordan, and all unapportioned territories in between as well.

But these were complex times of multiple promises to competing national groups. Britain's chief allies in the area were the Hashemites of Arabia, Sheriff Hussein and his sons, Emirs Abdullah and Feisal (remember the movie Lawrence of Arabia?). The Hashemites were in the process of getting their own derrieres booted out of the Arabian Peninsula by the rival clan of Ibn Saud - hence, Saudi Arabia today.

The French were also grabbing their share of the spoils. Their moves into Syria and Lebanon cut into the Hashemites' "Greater Syria" schemes. So now, to appease the Hashemites, the British backed off of promises to the Kurds in oil rich Mesopotamia - Hashemite Arab Iraq being created instead - and, in 1922, handed over some 80% of Mandatory Palestine to another Hashemite prince, creating the purely Arab Emirate of Transjordan and making it totally off limits to Jews.

While mention is often made to the largely "Palestinian" Arab population of Jordan, the hows and whys of this fact seldom seem to register with journalists and others involved in such discussions.

And so, the third alternative.

It's obvious that in the small area between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, there's not a heck of a lot of room. The Jordan River was the obvious natural boundary of the Jewish State if Palestine was to be divided between Jewish and Arab nationalisms and Arabs had already received the lion's share of the original 1920 borders - all the land east of the River. When arriving at other such compromise solutions, such as that which created Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan, population exchanges were frequently part of the package - not a "perfect" solution by any means, but one which allowed each party an honorable outcome. For every Arab who eventually became a refugee because of the Arabs' own total rejection of a Jewish state regardless of size, there was a Jewish refugee who fled Arab lands - but without the choice of some two dozen other potential states to choose from.

So, for Israel to remain viable in the face of a totally rejectionist enemy whose idea of "peace," in the Arabs' own words, is only a temporary "Trojan Horse" truce designed to further a "destruction in stages" agenda, Israel cannot cave in to all the demands Arabs make regarding the disputed territories. Those lands were not lands apportioned solely to Arabs by the Mandate - so a compromise solution must be found whereby Israel gains a bit more essential strategic high ground depth while not ruling over millions of Arabs. It will never return to its former 9-mile wide, armistice/Auschwitz line existence.

Thus, the proposed 23rd Arab state and second Arab one in Palestine will have to be very small. It's desires cannot displace the needs of the sole state of the Jews it seeks to replace, not live side by side with.

The real solution, once popular but now never mentioned, lies with Jordan, since the latter encompasses 80% of the original land to begin with, and the majority population is already "Palestinian" (however you define it. Many Arabs entered the Mandate from other surrounding states). So, if a compromise with Israel was to occur regarding the West Bank/Judea and Samaria with Jordan, the latter emergent Jordanian-Palestinian State would still be a much larger entity while granting Israel the minimal security adjustments it needs in the area as well.

This, of course, is never brought up these days - certainly not on NPR - for fear of destabilizing the Hashemite rulers, who have indeed proven to be reasonable neighbors of late to Israel. It's worth recalling that it was Israel who saved Jordan from a joint Syrian-PLO attempt at the overthrow of the Hashemites in 1970.

But isn't it interesting (no, sickening) that NPR would pursue the binational alternative in its program regarding Arabs and Jews, but totally ignore the far more sensible creation of a binational Arab-Arab state in Jordan/Palestine. It's thus "legitimate" to discuss undermining the sole state of a millennially-persecuted people who finally lived to see the resurrection of their nation, but not so to discuss a solution which would merely bring together different elements within the same Arab family. Israel's Jews also come from many different lands, but that didn't mean that they expected the creation of dozens of individual Jewish states - and at the expense of everyone else.

NPR - know who not to send your money to.

This article appeared on Israel Insider (http://www.israelinsider.co), October 24, 2003.

Posted by Linda Barron, November 1, 2003.

It is impossible to mistake the sincerity, honesty and the rock-bottom certainty with which Moshe Brody promulgates his solutions to the "situation" in Israel, and by extension, the Middle East and the rest of the world. Add to this the articulate, professional and intellectual arguments that accompany his reasoning, and - agree with his political ideology or not - you have in front of you an extremely fascinating account of the background to the sweep of events that have lead to the devastating and seemingly inevitable state of "irreconcilable differences" that exists in the Middle East today.

Brody styles himself a "troubleshooter" or consultant whose expertise is not so much in a specific field, like insurance, high-tech or education, but in the actual process of the problem solving. He says that very often an outsider can not only pin-point the specifics of what has been vaguely identified as a problem in a company, but in thinking "out of the box" he can find the key to unraveling dilemmas and making decisions. Brody is saying that once certain truths about a situation are taken as given, one is then free to explore options that might be unacceptable or unpalatable to those close to the situation, but are nonetheless pointers to a solution.

Anyone who has ever been in a position of authority, from the head of an international corporation to the chairperson of a fund-raising committee, from a military commander to the principal of a school often has to learn these truths the hard way, but Moshe Brody puts them on the table for us, and it makes for compelling reading, no matter whether you end up nodding your head in accord, or shaking it in disagreement.

Brody starts by examining the nature of a problem in and of itself. It seems self-evident that before we can solve a problem, we have to identify what it is. But before we can describe and characterize a problem, we have to be able to admit that a problem exists at all. How many times have we dismissed the notion of a problem existing within a marriage, with our children, a problem with colleagues, with clients, with our boss, whatever. This state of denial precludes the necessity to deal with an embarrassing or threatening situation, and so the underlying circumstances seethe away until they boil over into an untenable situation that needs drastic measures to contain the often violent and destructive symptoms. If this holds true in one's private life, how much more so in the context of nations? In the context of the historical acrimonious relationships in the Middle East? In the context of the global war on terrorism, famine and the internecine struggle for power in so many underdeveloped countries of the world?

Brody has no hesitation in identifying and characterizing the problems that exist in the context of the political and social circumstances in this region of the world. In offering solutions, he is no less forthright, although a bit more circumspect, as one would expect from a person whose mantra is Respect. He defines respect as "the acknowledgement that you are entitled to your human needs, whatever and however you determine those needs to be." He goes on to say that the enormous power of respect can be summed up very simply. "The amount of respect you receive determines the quality of your life. People who are respected lead happy, productive, fulfilling lives. People who are disrespected live in misery." However, Brody also states that in the case of the irreconcilable differences and generational hatred that characterize the relationship between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs there is no room for compromise.

So, how does the quintessential troubleshooter find a way out of this plight? The desire to learn the answer to this question is what keeps one turning the pages of this book. The colloquial language and logical progression of idea and concept makes it eminently readable. And finally, the writer's obvious respect for the reader's intelligence and the professional yet unpatronising approach makes it ultimately a very interesting addition to the canon of overviews of the Middle Eastern predicament of today.

* Moshe Brody, "TROUBLESHOOTING IN THE PROMISED LAND: an Independent Investigator's Report on Israel, the Middle East and other Parts of the World " Judean Hills Publishing, P.O. Box 1251, Kfar Sava, 44111 Israel. In Israel: NIS 95 including shipping. total To USA: $25.95, including shipping.

Linda Barron is on the staff of ESRA (English-Speaking Resident's Association) in Israel.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 1, 2003.

The website description of the Declaration listed platitudes. One was that "terrorism and extremism are against the spirit of religious values." Another is "The respect of peoples' right in defending themselves and their right in self-determination are among the main sources of international security and peace."

IMRA finds this declaration consistent with previous Arab declarations against terrorism. The Arabs believe that the P.A. is defending a right to self-determination, so they do not consider their attacks on Israeli civilians but Israeli self-defense as terrorist. They denounce terrorism, to impress the West, but secretly approve of terrorism (10/15). Duplicitous!

The Arabs are trying to switch the focus of the definition of terrorism from means of warfare to motive. The Arabs judge that jihadist ends are legitimate (which, itself, is imperialist nonsense). Beware of vague declarations by the Arabs! They pose as upholders of human rights while they actually degrade human rights and accuse the upholders of human rights of degrading human rights.

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 1, 2003.

As the international community continues to debate Israel's right to build a fence, roughly along the Green Line, IDF planners plead poverty and warn that they lack the shekels needed to complete the fence. The fence that Israel's treasury once said would cost 3 billion shekels is now being priced at no less than 15 billion shekels to complete. American opposition to the fence has made it clear to Israel that they could not expect the U.S. to pick up the outrageous tab. The IDF warns that they will also need serious funds to operate the fence and the new border crossings as well as to secure the fence, if it is ever completed.

The fence that Israel calls a "security fence" and that Arabs call a new border fence usurping "Arab land" has also been sharply criticized by some Jews in Israel for defining future borders that will mean surrendering more land, to Arab enemies in the future. Others argue the fence will only hurt Israeli security, in the long-run.

Voice of Judea Commentary:

Israeli politicians have done their best to promise a bogus "Security fence" to soothe the minds of the many insecure Israeli's who are seeking mental refuge from their constant fear of terrorism. It is unlikely that the fence will accomplish anything more than planting a temporary and false sense of security for the insecure, at heart.

I hate to ask stupid questions to the wise governors of Chelm, but how exactly will the great dreadful fence stop katyushas and kassam missiles, from flying over and into Tel Aviv, Netanya, Hadera, Kfar Saba and Jerusalem,

The fence and the great wall of Israel can't even stop Arab terrorists who wish to pass under them. As has already been demonstrated - Arab terrorists seem to manage to crawl under the wall/fence in areas that the fence has already been erected.

And if the fence will stop terrorists from crossing into the major Israeli population centers, then it will mean sure death for the 200,000 Jews who will be left on the wrong side of the fence.

And how will the fence prevent Arabs who live in Jerusalem, the Negev, the Triangle and Haifa from continuing their "resistance?" Most recent attacks were carried out by or with the help of Israeli Arabs, who live on the side, the fence is supposed to protect.

Israel must not be a foolish ghetto. It is time to stop running away from Arab terrorism and to confront it. The moronic fence is reminiscent of the bypass roads of the 90s. Israel built bypass roads at the cost of billions of shekels, to avoid Arab attacks on jewish travelers. Once the Arabs commenced attacks on the bypass roads, they then built bypass roads, to the bypass roads. Today, the bypass roads are the most dangerous roads to travel on. And the IDF has been given the impossible task of securing hundreds of kilometers of new and additional roadways.

The Arabs started their intifada in the 1980s by killing Jews with rocks and boulders hurled at Jewish vehicles. The Israeli geniuses spent billions to fortify every Jewish car with special rock-proof windows. The Arabs then moved on to rifles and grenades. The government now spends millions to arm public vehicles and school buses.

The Israelis now build a "security fence" that will offer no security, other than in a few feeble brains for a very short period. What next? Perhaps they will pay two security guards to protect every Jew, or build a bullet-proof glass house around every Jew? It would be much more effective and certainly a lot less expensive to confront the Arab issue like men and to offer them two choices: to live in peace and accept Jewish sovereignty over the land or to get out.

Posted by Girish Kurtkoti, November 1, 2003.

The fundamental problem in the world is Islamic fundamentalisma and its pervading idea that sharia law must reign supreme over the world. The civilized world must answer this phenomonon with absolute moral clarity and pre-emptive action. We cannot be afraid of tackling it head on and killing those who would kill us.

The three major players in the global fight against terrorism are America, India, and Israel. All threee countries have been the victims of terrorist atrocities committed by militant Islamists. We must work together and resolve our petty differences if we are to ensure the survival of our people. America must make available her vast military and technological weaponry and munitions to the other two countries so they can have a significant military advantage over our islamist enemies.

Israel must make available her advanced intelligence gathering techniques so that the other two countries can learn from her vast experience in combatting terror.

India must provide the world with the manpower and Arabic speaking people who can infiltrate various terrorist organizations and hide among their populations because of our common racial and ethnic features that we share with the vast majority of terrorists.

With a common strategy and vision, we can defend our people. We must not be afraid to trust each other and fully support each other during this trying time in history. It is absolutely necessary to understand that our enemies are hellbent on our destruction and will stop at nothing to destroy us. Once this is understood, petty rivalries between the countries and various military and intelligence institutions will dissipate.

The enemy is Militant Islam and it must be recognized as such. Terrorism is simply the means by which Islamists manifest their ideology on the world stage. To call it "The War on Terrorism" is stupid because it should be termed "The War on Militant Islam." Imagine if the War on Nazi Germany was called The War on Blitzkrieg. Without a proper redefinition of the terms, average people will not understand the enemy and will therefore be unable to fight it. Until our three countries combine our resources and have a common vision, we will continue to lose this war. I just pray that we come around before a major city is blown up or one of our countries ceases to exist.

Mr. Kurkoti writes that he is 22 year old, which makes his understanding of a major problem that confronts civilized countries even more impressive.

Posted by Dutch W. Griffin, November 1, 2003.
I actually heard someone say, "All the Jews own Hollywood."

What this man was referring to was alleged pro-Israel Jewish control of the media. Well, who really thinks the media is doing a good job of defending Israel? American media is no friend of Israel; besides, it is Muslim interests that dominate CNN, AP and Reuters, and it is the Saudi Arabian Wahabbi Muslims that are buying television time to dull the minds of Americans.

While Muslims have given us only grief, the Jewish contributions to America are very important, even dating back to the early colonies. True, it was Jewish men who brought the film industry to California, so what? You don't like movies? I do not believe Jews should have to apologize for doing their share to help develop the most technologically advanced, most philanthropic and most moderate powerful nation in history. Americans are glad to have them, and Americans should be cautious of those trying to drive a wedge between us.

However, I do think this man raises a valid point about Jews and Hollywood. There are tons of stories that can be told - tragedy, triumph, courage, intrigue, romance - all the classic elements, and the world is watching; so where are the Jewish novels, movies, songs or plays telling this conflict? Even a good action flick that brings light to important details would be priceless. If Jews "own" Hollywood, then they owe an apology to their Israeli brethren for the deafening silence. Barbara, Billy, where are you?

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, a Mohammad Assadi wrote me:

Thank you Mr. dutchgrif, but I am sorry to tell you that you are not telling the truth. American media is controled by Jews, Hollywood is controled by Jews. For a very long time, Hollywood have been showing an ugly picture about Arabs, and about Muslims, a hate that could not come from any one else but Jews in the past before Sep 11. You need to listen to Hal's Lindsey character from Trinity Broadcast, a Jewish Mason in Christians' cloth. You need to listen to most Radio stations, tune to Janet Partial America, this woman is payed by Jews to propogate one point view. Listen to many Zionist Christians at churches, to see how much control the Jewish Loby has over the small brain.The Jewish control is so clear when we watch idiots that work at Fox News, and many other stations. When CNN one day criticized the Jews action and terrorism against the Palestinians, other stations made CNN feel miserable, in the country that claims democracy. You do need to reconcidar your statement, for it is not true. Perhaps you are the only one on this planet that does not know of this control of Jewish Loby over the media.Any way, you have the right to speak up your point of view, but you need to let other express, and not supress. Thanks for your message nevertheless. Salam

I responded:

I have not seen any "ugly" portrayals of Muslims coming from Hollywood. The movie "Sarajevo" was favorable to Muslims, and the George Clooney action movie "Peacemaker," was altered from the book by Hollywood. In the book the villians are Muslim terrorists, in the movie they are European neo-nazis. Your only evidence that Jews control Hollywood is that Christians support Israel. I take this as an insult. The Christian community is well informed, and we support Israel because they are deserving, and for no other reason.

What we despise about Islamic societies does not come from Hollywood or Jews. It comes from Islamic terrorist and their clerics.

Here are some things I learned about Islam that did not come from Hollywood, or any Jew:
1. Muhammad taught that the Devil spends the night in your nose, and if you fall asleep during prayers, it's because the Devil is pissing in your ear.
2. Muhammad taught that the sex of a child is determined by which parent has an orgasm first. Because of this, some Muslim clerics have discounted DNA research as heresy.
3. Seventh century Arabs believed that the moon and sun were the size of a basketball, the Hadith claims that Muhammad cut the moon in half with his sword; and that every night, the sun sinks into a muddy pool.
4. Muhammad believed in jins, or genies. He also worshipped Allat, Al Uza and Elat, three goddesses of the stars. Their father, Allah, is the moon god. Whether they know it or not, Muslims can actually see their god.
5. Muhammad preached that black and white spotted dogs are an appearance of Satan, and that men live on the moon. He really did!
6. The Hadith teaches that if a fly drops in your soup, it's OK to eat it because, although one wing of the fly contains poison, the other wing contains the antedote.
7. The Quran also teaches benefits for drinking camel urine.
8. Muhammad owned black slaves, and slavery is legal in some Muslim countries today.
9. Islam proclaims Muhammad to be the best "Makata," which is liar, cheat and deceiver.
10. Muhammad confused all the Bible stories he ever heard, he even taught that Jesus' mother was the sister of Moses, he didn't know they lived fifteen hundred years apart. Muhammad has Haman building the Tower of Babel in Egypt when the flood came. Actually, the Tower of Babel was built in Babylon after the flood. Haman lived there two millenium later, during the Persian empire.
11. The traditions of making pilgrimage to Mecca, running seven times around the Kabah and throwing stones at the devil, predate Muhammad by centuries. He merged a polytheistic pagan religion into Christianity and Judaism; and came up with something that is only believable to an oppressed seventh century mentality. That is why Islam seeks to preserve that ancient society, if Muslims ever had an "Age of Enlightenment", Islam would vanish overnight. That is why it is so easy for you to believe that Jews control America.
12. Muhammad commanded his followers to propagate their "gospel" by killing and looting. Muslims believe he was a greater prophet than Jesus, apparantly for them it is better to kill than to heal, and better to steal than to sacrifice.
13. There are a hundred Muslims in the world for every Jew, yet only nine Muslims have ever won Nobel prizes. One hundred and thirty Jews have been awarded prizes by the Nobel committee. Islamic societies really don't have much to contribute to the world besides oil. Even in modern times, their oil industry had to be developed for them - and without any appreciation.
14. Muhammad had twenty wives. He married Isha, his favorite, when she was six years old, and took her to bed when she was nine and he was an old man. Deceived by lust and greed, Muhammad invented a ludicrous, oppressive and immoral religious system. Islamic terrorists will not collect seventy-two virgins when they follow him to hell.

B'shem Yeshua,
Dutch Griffin 

PS. That is a lie about Hal Lindsey. If you are attempting to discredit Christian leaders who support Israel, you had better get started, you have a lot of work to do.

Posted by Jewish Legion, November 1, 2003.

Friday, 5 Heshvan 5764: a hot intelligence tip to Israeli securtiy forces brought IDF troops escorted by a special bomb-sniffing dog to the home of a Hamas suspect in Northern Jerusalem.

With the help of the dog, the suicide bomb belt was found in a most unexpected location, under the crib of the terrorist's daughter. Israeli media reports indicate that without the help of the bomb-sniffing dog, untold number of lives might have been lost. Police say the terrorist was planning a serious massacre in Jerusalem within hours of the time of the search.


The Jewish Legion is seeking to buy more bomb-sniffing dogs to patrol yishuvim and busy city streets in Israel.


To help sponsor the purchase and maintenance of such dogs or to help sponsor the volunteer Jewish Legion canine handler training, visit our website (http://www.JewishLegion.net) or write JewishLegion@aol.com or call 011 972 67 910 341.

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 1, 2003.

Today is the eight anniversary of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, according to the Jewish calendar. And while it is hardly Rabin's fault, that assassination will be eternally linked in my mind - and I presume in many others - with the ferocious campaign against free speech launched by Rabin's followers after the murder.

The Oslo Left decided that the assassination had been caused by those who opposed Oslo and Rabin's policies exercising their right of free speech. The dogma of "words produced the bullets" was invented by the McCarthyist Left and its captive media, and has been repeated in the Israeli media so many thousands of times that few Israelis today even consider the hypothesis questionable.

In fact, the very idea that opponents of Oslo exercising free expression caused Yigal Amir to murder Rabin is not only preposterous, but it is the proof that Israel's Left is fundamentally anti-democratic. The "words produced the bullets" doctrine is a thinly-disguised attempt to paint all those who opposed or oppose Oslo appeasement as collectively guilty of the murder of Rabin. It is the figleaf for Israeli leftist McCarthyism, the attempt to achieve political victory by stifling the speech of the anti-Oslo political opposition, by representing non-leftist speech as dangerous and illegal "incitement".

I vehemently opposed almost everything Rabin did as Prime Minister and said so openly. I believe that the 1300 Israelis murdered since the first Oslo Accord are victims of the policies implemented by Rabin and Peres, when they turned the West Bank and Gaza into nazi terrorist launch pads. The

way to defeat those policies was democratically. Assassin Yigal Amir's crime was not only an assault on democracy, but it made Rabin's policies near-sanctified and unchallengeable. Yigal Amir bears considerable direct responsibility for Oslo's bloodbath continuing so long.

I am one of those old-timers who actually believe that non-leftists should also be allowed to express their views, not just leftists seeking Israel's destruction. I believed Rabin's policies endangered Israel and betrayed Israel's fundamental interests. And because I believed that, and still believe it - with a even greater certainty today, the McCarthyist Left has effectively declared that I am one of those people who murdered Rabin. So are you.

The same Left is responsible for the murders of 1300 Israelis in the Oslo bloodbath. I do not think we can hold Rabin personally responsible for the assault on free speech launched by his followers after his death. Indeed, I like to imagine that if Rabin had lived he would have understood the folly of Oslo, would have reversed it and tossed Beilin into the klink. No I have no evidence this is what would have happened but no one can prove it would NOT have happened.

But that assault against free speech for non-leftists continues and is renewed every year on Rabin Memorial Day, where speakers and TV stations repeat over and over and over the lie that Rabin's death was caused by right-wing "inciters", that Rabbis supposedly gave the ok to Amir to kill Rabin (except no one has ever managed to name or locate any such Rabbi), that the fact that some Rightists used overheated rhetoric at anti-Oslo demonstrations is what killed Rabin (but not the deafening nonstop obscenity of leftist rhetoric), and that free speech by non-leftists represents a clear and present danger of violence.

Last night's large memorial rally in Tel Aviv's Rabin Square constituted yet another Rabin Day partisan demand that Israelis submit and implement Rabin's POLICIES, those failed policies that have already resulted in 1300 murdered, and tens of thousands of destroyed families and lives. The rally insisted that Israelis implement "Rabin's Legacy," meaning his political agenda, in the form of Yossi Beilin's Geneva Misunderstandings, as the only effective way to commemorate Rabin. Last night saw yet another annual Rabin Memorial Day Rally in which the lies were repeated. Rabin Memorial Day has become not simply a day to commemorate the fact that Israeli democracy was assaulted by a violent assassin, a day in which the Prime Minister of all Israelis, even of those like me who vehemently opposed his policies, is remembered. If it were such a day, then people like me could feel just as at home there as anyone else. Instead Rabin Day has become a day in which the mantras of anti-democratic leftist McCarthyism are screamed and everyone is afraid to challenge them. It is a day for assaulting open debate and free exchange of ideas.

Shimon Peres last night declared, "Dear Yitzhak, those who incited against you have now chosen to follow your path." Oh really? Peres was clearly regurgitating the McCarthyist mantra that the Likud had "incited" against Rabin, that the Likud had plotted to have Rabin murdered, that Rabin was murdered because Bibi Netanyahu dared to call him some names, and because hotheads at Likud rallies carried banners claiming Rabin was a traitor. And yes in a sense the Likud has indeed followed Rabin's path, to the detriment of the country. So Peres joins the leftist McCarthyists and effectively insists that free speech by opponents of Oslo is a clear and present danger and so must be suppressed and prosecuted. There is very little difference between Peres' call and that of the chief McCarthyist of the 5-member Meretz Knesset faction, Zehava Galon, who celebrated Rabin Memorial Day by filing a petition with the Attorney General to prosecute a columnist at Arutz 7's web site for "racism". The columnist had called for mass expulsion of Palestinians from the West Bank. Galon's party's platform is a call for mass expulsion of Jews from the West Bank.

In short, the Left still claims that everyone who disagrees with its dogmas is a criminal, an inciter, a murderer. And it is getting harder and harder to keep this vile anti-democratic leftist McCarthyism separate from the memory of the Rabin assassination.

A few years back I had an interesting experience. My son's elementary school class was in charge of the Rabin Day ceremonies at his school. Aside from my parental duty to applaud my son in obscenely loud tones, I was also curious to see how the public schools were running Rabin Day. After all, it is now obvious to all that Rabin's "conception" was flawed and that his policies have produced a growing bloodbath, that his PLO "peace partner" is nothing but a gang of murdering nazis seeking to use its territories as a base to start a war that will destroy Israel and produce a new Holocaust. I should also add that the school is a secular school.

The Rabin Day ceremony began with the principal standing before the entire school and announcing that today is the anniversary of the day Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated, and that he was killed for the simple reason that he was struggling for peace. Such an announcement of course left me nonplused. I agree that Rabin probably thought he was struggling for peace. But all those who adamantly opposed Rabin's policies, like me, also thought all along that THEY were struggling for peace. For that matter, I imagine that in his own perverse way even the assassin Yigal Amir thought HE was struggling for peace.

The ceremony then continued with the children reciting Rabin quotation clips in which he announced to the Palestinians that we have had enough tears and blood and want to coexist with them. No choreographed child mentioned that the response to this from the PLO was "Itboch al-yahud - Butcher the Jews." The children then did some dancing and sang a bunch of songs about Jerusalem. How ironic, think I, that the proteges of Rabin are at this very moment trying to get the PLO back to the negotiating table so they can hand them half of Jerusalem, yet the school is presenting Jerusalem songs as "Rabin's legacy". (The pension fund outrage is a far more proven part of that legacy.) The children then raised their arms to heaven when Rabin was mentioned. Most are children who have never learned the basic Jewish prayers to Heaven.

In sum, it was my decided opinion that the main difference between Rabin Day ceremonies in Israel and those Cult of Personality school ceremonies in North Korea is thatin North Korea the school dancers are a lot better.

I remind you all that the Israeli McCarthyists fired a teacher three years ago because he suggested that such ceremonies be revised to emphasize the tragedy of an assassination of an elected leader in a democracy and not to celebrate the legacy of Rabin's disastrous policies.

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 1, 2003.

This was part of an interview by Arutz-7 of Minister Benny Elon and was printed on October 30, 2003 on the Arutz-7 website (http://www.israelnn.com).

"The problem with our ongoing war is that the government has not yet marked its target." So said Tourism Minister Benny Elon in a talk with Arutz-7 this morning. "This war is not a conventional one," he said, "but rather a long and ongoing one, with ups and downs in the national morale. Yet the PA, which began a war against us in 2000, has still not been marked as our enemy... the victory will come when the PA is destroyed politically, and the terrorists are either deported or killed. This has not yet happened, but I am optimistic that with the ongoing pressure and our unyielding strength, we will reach the point when we do this."

Elon, of the National Union party, said that the media that are trying to "spin" the dispute between Yaalon and Mofaz into a left-wing/right-wing dispute, or a question about whether army figures should criticize the government, are missing the point: "For one thing, IDF Chief of Staff Yaalon has many credits in his past, and I wouldn't want to judge him based on reports of quotes in the press... I do have some criticism, however. I think that the entire concept of replacing one Abu with another until we find one who will talk with us [a reference to Abu Amar [Arafat], Abu Mazen, and Abu Ala] is mistaken...

"Our government is not defining 'victory' correctly. As of now, we have a definition that says that the terrorists will gain nothing via terrorism. This is very mistaken, as it implies that as soon as they stop shooting and start negotiating, they will obtain all their objectives - as happened after the Yom Kippur War... Instead, what a healthy nation should do is to make it clear that an enemy that begins a war against us is endangering its own land and homes. An enemy who faces a healthy nation like that will think 1,000 times before embarking on a war. Instead, we have an enemy who knows that he has nothing to lose by fighting us, because even if they die, they are promised 70 virgins - and that in the end they are guaranteed their goals, either by breaking us or by negotiating with us. This, then, is my criticism on the Chief of Staff and the Defense Minister and the entire government - those who are responsible for formulating this mistaken and faulty misconception."

Regarding the closure of Arutz-7, Elon said, "The 'evil ones' have definitely won a battle this time. I have heard from many people that they simply feel humiliated that they can't just turn on the radio in their own country and hear what they want to hear. I personally feel humiliated as a Knesset Member that helped pass a law that was later overturned by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court and the State Prosecution are two fortresses of anti-democracy that think they can be more democratic than democracy itself..." Asked what people can do, Elon said that they could write personal, hand-written letters to one or more MKs explaining their feelings of frustration at not being able to hear Arutz-7.

REOPEN ARUTZ-7: The Voice Of Sanity
Posted by David Wilder, November 1, 2003.

To: Prime Minister Ariel Sharon


Yesterday the Israeli cabinet, voting 11 to 5, refused to append a suggested law outlawing all advertising on so-called 'pirate radio stations,' including Arutz-7. Lawbreakers could be fined up to one hundred thousand shekels and/or jailed for one year.

Early this afternoon a Jerusalem Magistrate Court convicted directors and broadcasters of the Arutz-7 radio station of illegal broadcasting. Among those convicted were Rabbi Zalman Melamed and his wife, Rebbetzion Shulamit Melamed, Ya'akov Katz, better known as Ketzele, Yoel Tzur (who lost his wife and son, both of whom were murdered by terrorists almost three years ago), and internationally renowned film-maker and Arutz-7 broadcaster, Adir Zik. They could receive a maximum sentence of three years in jail and a three million shekel fine.

It is written in the Talmud that a sage, resuscitated after having been "clinically dead" was asked what he had seen 'there.' His response, speaking about viewing this world from the next world: "An upside-down world." My friends, things have not changed in two thousand years. Our world is still upside down. But not only. It is also convoluted, warped and twisted.

Perhaps my generalization is not fair. So I will limit my definition, not to the entire world, rather only to the State of Israel. Oh, upside-down it is!

For the past ten years - no, since 1948, but more recently, since the middle of the 1980s, Israel has been involved in a 'hot war' for survival. The last decade, the "Oslo Era" has witnessed the deaths of over 1,100 Israelis. The past three years, the beginning of the Oslo War, has seen almost nine hundred victims. During this time the only reliable media outlet, the only radio station which broadcast the total, uncensored, truth, was Arutz-7. Virtually all of Israel's political leadership, including many left-wing politicians, voiced their opinions on this station. When Kol Yisrael " the mislabeled "Voice of Israel," actually Kol-Smol Yisrael, "The Left Voice of Israel" was using every technique possible to batter Bibi Netanyahu during the 1996 elections, Arutz-7 stood to Netanyahu's right, offering an alternative to the vile left-wing propaganda. So too during Ariel Sharon's campaign. All people who access the Arutz-7 internet site or receive their daily email news updates know and understand the vital importance of Arutz-7 in getting the truth out, around the world - in multiple languages. This, despite numerous attempts by the left to prevent broadcasts and to close down the station.

Today, temporarily, they have succeeded. Arutz-7's management has decided to stop all radio broadcasts, from five o'clock this afternoon. However, internet broadcasts will continue.

It is virtually impossible to comprehend what is happening in Israel. For the past ten years Israeli leadership has negotiated with terrorist killers, meeting and shaking hands with them in Jerusalem. Israel has abandoned major portions of the heart of our land to terrorists, leading to killing after killing. Israel, negotiating with Hizballah, is on the verge of releasing over a thousand terrorists for the release of an alleged Israeli criminal and the bodies of three murdered soldiers. In response to American pressure Israel is still 'easing up' on the 'innocent palestinian population. The list goes on and on.

Of course, the heart of the problem I have yet to mention. That is, freedom of speech - the right to freedom of expression. Yesterday I visited one of my wife's uncles in Jerusalem. Way back in pre-state Israel, Uncle Meir was a member of the Etzel - the right-wing Jewish underground working to expel the British from Eretz Yisrael. He told me that later, after the founding of the state, when a Teudat Zehut - an identity card - was issued to all Israeli citizens, all members of the right-wing underground movements received numbers beginning with 19. This was used to identify all 'opponents' of the state, i.e., the left, in order to badger them and prevent them from reaching any position of power within Israel. Fifty four years later, things haven't changed. Voicing opinions that directly oppose those of the ruling junta just cannot be allowed. Even at the cost of freedom of speech.

Unprecedented legal maneuvering has prevented the legalization of Arutz-7. Israeli law forbids private radio stations from broadcasting. A law attempting to resolve problems dealing with Arutz-7 and other religious radio stations was struck down by the Supreme Court. Despite the huge costs involved, Arutz-7 broadcast from a ship located outside the legal territorial borders of Israel. However, after a five year trial, a court today ruled that the station is illegal.

For fifteen years Arutz-7 has been the voice of sanity in Israel. Their broadcasts have included Torah, current events and love of Eretz Yisrael. This is, undoubtedly, the reason why the government and the left have worked so hard to bring it down. It won't surprise me if soon, the Knesset passes a bill outlawing love of Eretz Yisrael. For anyone who cherishes this land is at odds with the government, which still believes that dividing the land is the solution to all our problems.

It is clear that the tremendous opposition to Arutz-7's continued existence is due to the immense support the station has around the world, and also, to its magnificent success. Had Arutz-7 been a small, inconsequential radio station, no one would have lifted a hand against it. The fact that Arutz-7 is so influential attests to the attempts made to shut it down. I hope and pray that public uproar, in Israel and around the world will reach such proportions that will force the reopening of the station.

Arutz-7 is the Israeli voice of sanity. The repression of Arutz-7 can only be described as total insanity. Sanity will win out.


The Undersigned

Addendum: This was published in Arutz-7, October 21, 2003:

"To Our Readers:

We greatly appreciate the outpouring of your support in light of the difficult times Arutz-7 is undergoing. We have been inundated with your email letters, faxes, internet comments and phone calls expressing your appreciation for Arutz-7, as well as your refusal to accept the denial of the basic right to freedom of expression.

The message transmitted by Arutz-7's senior management is one of faith and confidence: "We will not be silenced." The directors are preparing for what may be a prolonged struggle to ensure the future of its broadcasts. Some of the options being considered are: 1) appeal of the court ruling, 2) legislation in the Knesset to bring about true pluralism of Israel's airwaves, 3) internet upgrade and expansion; 4) satellite/digital radio, and 5) other possible solutions.

Many of you have also asked what can be done. Some possibilities include:

* Faxes to the Prime Minister's Office (+972-2-670-5475)
* Sign on-line petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/arutz7/petition.html
* Organization of a mass rally in favor of freedom of speech, open skies, and Arutz-7.

In addition, and possibly most importantly: We turn to you - our readers and listeners - for your support in waging the battle to reopen this valuable mouthpiece which has been so abruptly and brutally silenced. The battle for the voice for Jewish and true Israeli values costs money!

Email your credit card pledge to mailto:donations@IsraelNationalNews.com Thanks for your support, and may we, together, go from strength to strength!"

Posted by David Frankfurter, November 1, 2003.

When Abu Mazen resigned from his post, he made a closed session speech to the Palestinian Legislative Council, in which he presented his successes and frustrations to his fellow legislators. This speech was published in the London Quds (Arabic) newspaper, and then translated to German and subsequently English. The German and English translations can be seen at: http://www.adf-berlin.de/html_docs/schwerpunkte/nahost_krise/rede_abbas.html The first half is in German; this is followed by the English version.

The speech contains amazing revelations. The Palestinian Prime Minister reported, amongst other things, on the theft of public money, lack of financial controls throughout the system, and the fact that the top Palestinian leadership directly controls the content of Palestinian television. No doubt I will write about those things later.

The most interesting and damning, though, is his report about Palestinian compliance with Roadmap requirements. Publicly, the failure of the Roadmap is blamed on Israel. The Palestinians claim to have complied - or at least were perfectly willing to - in full.

Here's what Abu Mazen reports about his government's compliance with Roadmap requirements:

"The road map calls for the unification of the security services. We surmounted this obstacle. It called for striking and uprooting the organizations. We surmounted this obstacle, too...."

In his view, the Roadmap requirements were obstacles to be removed, not requirements to be met. Obstacles to what?

David Franfurter publishes an occasional "letter from Israel." To subscribe, contact him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com

Posted by Ken Heller, November 1, 2003.

For many years Israel has benefited from well-intentioned philanthropic efforts. A majority of these efforts have been primarily designed to assist organizations and people west of the so-called "Green Line." Helping Judea, Samaria and Gaza (known collectively as YESHA), however, in an organized way, is a fairly recent phenomena born from the increased sensitivity to Am Yisrael's plight coinciding with the incredible increase in terror.

Currently, there are about 200,000 besieged Israelis living in about 150 or so communities in YESHA. There remains great need and the way I know that is first, I was there last year at this time and secondly, I have maintained contact with the friends I met during my trip.

There are so many priorities and all are equally worthy of your assistance - economic assistance, health and medical needs, safety and security needs, recreational and educational pursuits. Believe it or not as 5764 begins, hunger is a major problem in too large a percentage of our people. There remains a great need among the families of victims of Arab terror.

I am interested in meeting with your Executive Director, Rabbi and Israeli Program Chairman to propose the "adoption" of one of the Yesha communities. This would entail the shul directing charitable fundraisers and soliciting its membership for funds for the community. Because this is not an idea which started with me, some of the communities have already been previously "adopted" by synagogues. I am simply serving as a catalyst to try to get these programs initiated where they do not currently exist.

Some purchases you may be able to help with would be a bullet-proof emergency vehicle, a closed-circuit camera set up for the community's perimeter to enable the early warning detection of a terrorist incursion, generators, clinic establishment, recreational and educational centers, etc.

It is important for you to note that all the money you raise during your effort will go directly to the person in charge of the particular community so you could be assured that the money will be used directly and immediately to enhance the community's ability to see their most pressing projects to fruition.

Please call me in the evenings at 215-934-6707 or email me at KJHNHA@aol.com and let's agree to get together and talk about the possibilities of helping Am Yisrael in a most constructive way.

Toda raba!

Posted by Marilyn Ginsburg, November 1, 2003.

The news media, along with many others, have actively criticized Israeli settlements. The security fence has exacerbated this discussion and the Israelis have been harshly judged for building it. The building of a fence has long been debated in Israel. If I remember correctly Arial Sharon originally was against it. It is costly and may not even provide the security that is needed to re-establish a calmer pattern of life within Israel. But all this is not the point. Since peace proposals have never been accepted and negotiations are not continuing Israel has the right to secure their people as well as they can. Those who oppose the fence ignore the fact that it may save lives and are concerned that it is a land grab by the Israelis. But as long as the fighting persists and this war is continuing, no nation, organization, council has the right to assume that peace is foreseeable in the near future and Israel has to abide by the assumption that settlement land is not Palestinian land. Civilians are still being murdered and the Palestinians have not made any attempt to disarm or control the terrorist faction within their society. The people the Israelis have to negotiate with, obviously are not empowered to stop the murderous activities and really should not be considered legitimate. As long as those with varying opinions are allowed to run wild, Israel can not expect anything different from those in charge. The Palestinian people may have a history of elitism and culture within the Arab world as some say, but their society is one in conflict with the terrorists running the show.

We can not think of things as we would like them to be and hope that the future will convert the Palestinian Arabs into a peace loving people willing to respect and compromise with their neighbors. We forget that, while negotiations were going on, Israel was returning the land that the Palestinians never had for the peace Israel never received. The settlements should not be a bone of contention. Gaza and the entire West Bank, should never have been placed under Arafat's rule until peace was assured. The U. N. proposition stated that Israel has a right to secure borders and the settlements were meant to insure this. Israel, in its desire for peace, agreed to negotiate but there was no one to negotiate with. There was never any agreement or guaranted that all the land that Israel won in 1967 would be given to the Palestinians and as of now, there is no reason to think that peace is likely in the future.

Arafat never relied on negotiations to get what he wanted. He always used terror as his weapon of choice and it is unfathomable that our society seems to be sympathetic to those who seem unwilling to compromise. The world and Israel has rewarded him with the territory he has now even before there was a real sign of peace (the disarming of the militant factors and control of his own police force.) Neither the Gaza Strip, nor the West Bank belonged to the group now called Palestinians. Jordan and Egypt were in control before the 67 war. So why is it now an absolute right for these same people who never objected to being ruled by those two countries, to have an absolute right to all the West Bank and Gaza. Israel was not the aggressor. They won a war at great cost to themselves in 1967. They did not start the war and the U. N. proposition said that they had a right to secure borders and nine miles is not a secure border.

The Palestinians are a desparate people, ruled by a dictator who is corrupt, living under horrific conditions but they are controlled by militant factions that do not seem to care about those conditions. The displaced Palestinians have been kept in camps in poverty, not by the Israelis but by the nations of Arabs surrounding them. Their misery has been held up as a symbol of Israeli occupation in order to gain sympathy for a cause and that cause is to rid the Middle East of Jews. The Palestinian people have absorbed the propaganda that has been fed to them and they see the Israelis as oppressors. They are even willing and glad to add to their grief by sacrificing their children to the cause. They hide criminals and murderers in their midst, in hospitals, mosques, churches in order to protect them because they do not see the Israelis as a people who are willing to give them their own state. There is no way that, given the propaganda they have been fed by a one-sided media with a dictatorial ruling party, that the present generation of Palestinians will be able to see their neighbor as anything but what they have been told - a people who are subhuman, a people who make their matzahs with the blood of children, a people they have to destroy with their Jihad. They hate with a passion that permits them to believe sacrificing their children for this worthy cause is just.

Why does the world see their passions as right? Their hatreds as being justified. While the misery of their Israeli neighbors are ignored. People who want to get on with their lives but are not able to because they may be blown up in a temple, a restaurant, or on a bus. And even so, their need for protection and to feel safe is so great, they will spend a hugh amount of money to do so. And the world watches with indifference and says they should not build this fence to protect themselves. They are confiscating the land that is reserved for a people that may or may not make peace and accept their presence in some distant future. What does it really matter if a few more Jews are added to the list of the six million that dies in the Holocaust.

JMCC POLL: Palestinian Society Mired In Psychosis
Posted by Beth Goodtree, November 1, 2003.

The Jerusalem Media and Communication Center (JMCC), a Palestinian Arab polling and media group, just released the results of their latest poll taken among the Palestinian Arab population. Like any good poll, it merely shows statistical answers to questions; the conclusions are left to be drawn by others. And if one reads the latest poll released by the JMCC, it is abundantly clear that Palestinian Arab society suffers from psychotic thinking most closely resembling schizophrenia.

Before you see the poll results that lead to the above conclusion, a few definitions are in order. According to The World Book Online, the term 'psychosis' is defined thusly: "...a term used to describe a severe mental illness....The most common psychosis is schizophrenia." Meanwhile, the same reference defines schizophrenia as "... a splitting of the mind. It refers to the characteristic schizophrenic behavior of withdrawing from reality and thinking in illogical, confused patterns."

The JMCC poll questioned the Arab Palestinians in several areas of interest, including what they thought of the 'Roadmap,' the Intifada, suicide bombings, and what result they wanted to see come of their latest actions and behaviors.

Here are some of the poll's results that show a duality of thinking comparable to schizophrenia plaguing the Palestinian Arab thought processes:

In the Introduction on the JMCC 'Latest Poll' page, one of the points made is that "Most Palestinians believe in achieving their national goals through both negotiations and armed struggle..."

Here is the proof of illogical and even delusional thinking. The 'Roadmap' clearly states, as does Israel, that there will be no negotiations or progress as long as there is what the Palestinian Arabs call 'armed struggle' and what the civilized world terms terrorism. Even Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir, in his infamous speech recently, stated "For well over half a century we have fought over Palestine. What have we achieved? Nothing. We are worse off than before. If we had paused to think then we could have devised a plan, a strategy that can win us final victory."

The JMCC poll clearly shows that Palestinian Arabs believe that meaningful negotiations can exist alongside 'armed struggle' despite concrete and continuing evidence to the contrary.

Results of the same poll stated that 75 percent of the Palestinian Arab population endorsed the October 3rd suicide/genocide bombing in the Maxim restaurant in Haifa, in which 21 Israeli men, women and children were murdered.

Further proof of this is the following statement from that poll. "The majority of Palestinians believe military operations (including suicide bombings) against Israeli targets (including Israeli civilians) are a suitable response to Israeli occupation within the current political situation. Most Palestinians support military operations both inside Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory."

'Suitable response' implies that a certain behavior will generate a certain outcome. Time and again, without fail, the outcome of Palestinian aggression has been loss of political ground as well as economic, territorial and human losses. Yet unlike any thinking and reasoning creatures, they illogically continue along the same self-destructive path. Even lab rats in a maze learn that if they touch an electrified portion of said maze, they must alter their path. Illogical and confused thinking, unchanged by repeated negative results, fits the aforementioned definition of the psychosis of schizophrenia.

However, this societal schizophrenia did not develop overnight, or in a vacuum. It took years and years, over an entire generation, to become a full-blown psychosis. It was not merely nurtured, but force-fed to an entire society, through disinformation, outright lies, and unrelenting propaganda from cradle to grave. The main proponents of this mass psychosis have been not merely Yasser Arafat, but the entire Arab/Muslim world.

When one hears in their places of worship, on television, and in their schools such confabulations as Jews use Arab children's blood to make food, and Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs, one's whole view of reality becomes not merely distorted but delusional. And according to the definition of a psychosis, delusional thinking is a key symptom.

When one is taught to revere and aspire to committing mass murder of non-combatants as a way to achieve holiness, that person is doomed to become psychotic within a larger society that views mass murder (as opposed to fighting and/or killing military personnel in a legitimate war) as either evil or evidence of mental defect.

Yet, in spite of this mass indoctrination of the Palestinian Arab society with a distorted view of reality, it might still have emerged mentally sound if not for the behavioral reinforcement of merely the Arab/Muslim world, but also the UN, America and Israel. The UN, as well as varying administrations in both countries have repeatedly failed to punish bad behavior in a consistent manner. At various times, both governments have rewarded such bad behavior as suicide/genocide bombings with concessions like prisoner releases shortly afterwards. Such inconsistent behavioral reinforcement is a key cause of mental illness.

Left alone, the prognosis for the Palestinian Arab society is poor. Their delusions will only get worse and their prospects for their own country will diminish in proportion to said delusions along with the accompanying behavior. What is needed is not some other 'peace process' but a total re-indoctrination of a generation of people. They must unlearn the lies they have been raised on and must be taught what is acceptable and healthy behavior. Then and only then can talk of peace be fruitful.

Posted by Jerry Gordon, November 1, 2003.

When Anatoly Sharansky, Minister for Jerusalem and the Diaspora in the Sharon cabinet began his six day tour of 13 US college and university campuses, he didn't expect to get hit in the face with a cream pie by a pro-Palestinian Jewish activist at Rutgers. (See next blog=ed.) That act and its intended target, a prominent revered human rights activitist for Soviet Jewry in the 70's, was a defining moment for many of us who have actively observed, reported on and mentored the minority of Jewish students who are pro-Israeli activists on campuses. Campuses on which vocal minorities treat Israel as a "Nazi apartheid state."

The fact that many pro-Palestinian student leaders and their faculty mentors are Jewish may come as a shock to many of you, but not to those of us who have confronted it and heard the anguished stories of committed Jewish faculty and students who are pro-Israel supporters. Hillel and other groups who brought Sharansky to these 13 campuses were "smart" to bring an icon of human rights to these embattled campuses, because he could effectively combat the pro-Palestinian lies about Israel and demonstrate the strong commitment to democratic values and human rights that are non-existent in the Palestine Authority and many Islamic countries. This is especially troubling given the hate fest in Malaysia at which outgoing Prime Minister Mahtathir Mohamad spewed forth a veritable geyser of judenhass to the applauding leaders of 57 countries of the Organization of Islamic Countries, while our country's diplomatic representatives remained mute.

One would hope that in the wake of Sharansky's visit to US college and university campuses the American Jewish community would drop the veil from its eyes and join with Minister Sharansky in opposing campus intimidation that brands Israel falsely as a pariah state expunges the body of lies from their midst.

Given my experience on several college campuses here in Connecticut, and at my alma mater Columbia University, listening to concerned faculty, Jewish and non-Jewish student activists, we must develop an active and innovative program to quash the body of lies and educate future campus leaders, both faculty and students.

Here are my suggestions for such an innovative program: 1. We must inform concerned Jewish parents and students applying to these colleges and universities of what the "environment" is like for Jews on these embattled campuses-a guide is something that should be prepared and distributed widely both in print and via the Internet and updated continually via a weblog or "blog."

2. Jewish alumni of these institutions should earmark their contributions for specified purposes only thereby enabling funding of properly vetted programs of Jewish and potentially pro-Israel interests including establishment of Hillel chapters and facilities and possible Israel Studies programs. This is what is suggested by Rabbi Edward Rosenthal of Cornell Hillel where left radical former Georgia Congresswomen, Cynthia McKinney was selected as a visiting professor by a minority of faculty members at the Ithaca, NY campus consternating faculty, students and alumni (See: www.hillel.cornell.edu).

3. Like the David-project and the Israel on Campus Coalition headed by Hillel's Wayne Firestone and others, we should direct funds to programs that train and continually inform cadres of student activist leaders to form the core of rebuttal and of pro-Israel hasbarah on college campuses. I commend social entrepeneur Charles Jacobs of Boston for establishing and promoting the David-project for this important task. Charles's support of courageous Rachel Fish the Harvard Divinity School grad who revealed anti-Semitic Arab funding of an Islamic studies chair through the corrupt Zayed foundation. She is a stirring role model of passionate committed young Jews not afraid to defend our people and values. See the David project website at www.davidproject.org. See also the Israel on Campus coalition website at www.israeloncampuscoalition.org.

4. Promote the formation of alliances among Jewish and non-Jewish students. One example is Yale College student, Jamie Kirchick, Yale Daily News commentator and journalist. Jamie Kirchick and other students have formed the Yale College Students for Democracy, to promote common values between the US and Israel. The YCSD program emphasizes democracy, intellectually honest diversity and support for America and Israel's legitimate foreign policy interests. See their website at www.yale.edu/ycsd.

5. Make sure that your children's yeshiva, day school and synagogue Hebrew school curricula start early to educate affiliated Jewish children in the history of the Jewish people, Zionism and Israel. To that end, seek out and fund the distribution to entering college students of important "briefs" for Israel and books that combat the rise of anti-Semitism like Alan Dershowitz's The Case for Israel and The New Antisemitism by Phyllis Chesler.

6. Make sure that every bar or bat mitzvah candidate is given an opportunity to visit Israel whether privately or through an expanded Birthright Israel program when they are either senior high schoolers, college and university undergraduates.

7. Make sure that your youngsters attend pro-Jewish and pro-Israel programs when and where offered in your locales.

8. Get the Jewish defense organizations in your area to sponsor periodic Advocacy training. Establish local speaker bureaus to complement the "star" commentators and conduct outreach to both Jewish and non-Jewish audiences.

9. Conduct outreach to non-Jewish groups that are natural allies of Israel to strengthen alliances on issues of common purposes; e.g., Christian evangelicals (See: www.israelmybeloved.com/iczc), mainstream Christian Zionists, minority Eastern Rites Christians (Armenians, Assyrians, Copts, Maronites, Melkites) mainstream Christian minorities oppressed in Islamic countries, Hindus, Buddhists and sub Saharan African groups threatened by Islamist human rights violations like the American Anti-Slavery Group (See: www.anti-slavery.org) and Freedom Now News (See:freedomnownews@aol.com).

10. Develop 24/7 satellite and internet radio feed from Jerusalem to replace Arutz 7 "pirate radio," but with a rounded ideological agenda providing world wide programming in support of Israel hasbarah. This is akin to an effective use of technology discussed recently by Robert Katz of Hillel Development in Manhattan with Howard Jonas, committed Jew and owner of IDT-innovative satellite and internet telephony provider-(See: www.idt.net).

11. Create a secure weblog with adequate encryption to enable wide ranging commentary on Israel hasbarah and related communal issues that integrates feed on news and commentary daily. This information should be presented in one convenient website that emails the feed directly like the "daily alerts" of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs headed by former Israeli UN Ambassador and West Hartford, CT native, Dore Gold, under the auspices of the President of Major American Jewish Organizations. See the JCPA website at: www.jcpa.org.

12. Join national and local activist networks akin to the highly effective Jewish Action Taskforce developed by the Boston Israel Action Taskforce lead by Diana Muir Applebaum. JAT-Boston sponsors single action events like the national NPR media bias protests across 35 cities this spring. Contact JAT at: JAT.Action-subscribe@topica.com. Or consider joining the national and regional media monitors like CAMERA headed by Andrea Levin and Alex Safian (see www.camera.org) and Alan Stein of PRIMER here in Connecticut that can respond to local media anti-Israel biases in print, radio and TV media.

13. Support hasbarah development groups and websites that develop and distribute effective educational, background and graphic materials. Among those of note are the award winning Palestine Facts website (see: www.palestinefacts.org) developed by the Jewish Internet Association (see:www.jewishinternetassociation.org) led by Charles Chriss. In addition, Dr. Mitchell Bard, renowned author and lecturer has developed the widely respected Myths/Facts of the Middle East (see: www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf24.html ). West coast based Stand With Us has developed stunning graphic hasbarah media (see: www.standwithus.com).

14. Consult with national and regional Jewish defense organizations about what they are doing to combat the anti-Israel intimidation on college campuses. Groups like the American Jewish Congress (see www.ajcongress.org), American Jewish Committee (see www.ajc.org), Anti-Defamation League (see www.adl.org), Hillel (www.hillel.org) and Zionist Organization of America (www.zoa.org).

15. Form or join synagogue or Federation Israel Task Forces. See for example the Orange County California Israel Task Force at its website: (www.jfed.org/honeyforisrael/HoneyForIsrael.doc).

These are my suggestions on what is required to win the Israel hasbarah war on Americas embattled college campuses. Doubtless you may have others. We need to start early and we need to integrate and coordinate these activities and make them more effective. Only then can we say to Minister Sharansky, we have done what is required to win this fateful war for Israel and the Jewish people on U.S. college campuses.

Posted by Linda Olmert, November 1, 2003.
As one of the people most identified with Israel on campus at York University in Toronto in the early seventies, I knew first hand of the hatred of Israel that is inextricably linked with anti-Semitism.

This essay was written by Minister Anatoly Sharansky on his experiences on his recent visit to American college campuses. In my wildest nightmares, I could not have imagined the scenario that Sharansky describes. And as frightening as the violence today is, what is even more frightening is the fact that the leaders of America 20 and 30 years from now are on those campuses today.

A real war is being fought on the campuses all over the world, but especially in North America, because it is the war for tomorrow.

To my friends in the Diaspora: demand that speakers first and foremost head out to face down the campuses. And make sure that the speakers that are invited can and will handle Academia. Not only for the obvious reason, but because the Jewish students for Israel are badly in need of the support.

To my friends in Israel, we must demand that those in charge of sending people not send people who are in it for the fringe benefits - who often can not string a respectable sentence together in English - but send knowledgeable people, who are not afraid to travel from Israel to the war zone of today's campuses. These people must be experienced in making the case for Israel.

The good news is, that given the fact: that we are a people demanding to remain moral in the face of inhuman provocation; that the raging debate is about who has a better idea for bringing peace faster; that those who insist on remaining our implacable enemies have so many skeletons that they should move into the closet and let the skeletons have the run of the farm. Given all of this, the job should be somewhat easier than it sounds in Sharansky's article.

When I got to Rutgers University in New Jersey last month, I almost forgot I was on a college campus. The atmosphere was far from the cool, button-down academic reserve typical of such institutions. It was more reminiscent of a battlefield.

My arrival was greeted by a noisy demonstration of Palestinian and Jewish students holding signs reading "Racist Israel" and "War Criminals," together with black-coated Neturei Karta members calling for the destruction of the blasphemous Zionist entity. Faculty members, predictably led by a former Israeli professor, had sent out e-mails protesting the granting of a platform to a representative of the "Nazi, war-criminal" state. Of course, there was the famous pie incident in which a member of a campus Jewish anti-occupation group made his way past my security guards and plastered me in the face with a cream pie while shouting "End the Occupation."

Opposed to them were hundreds of no less rowdy Jewish students, full of motivation to defend Israel and give the protesters back as good as they got. After the pie incident, when I returned to the hall and mounted the stage, the atmosphere was so electric, so full of adrenalin, that the Palestinians and their supporters who had come to disrupt the event had no choice but to abandon their plans for provocation.

Things were not much calmer at Boston University: An anonymous bomb threat brought swarms of police to the lecture hall and almost forced a cancellation of my appearance. But here, too, some good resulted when the bomb threat caused the lecture to be moved to a larger hall, which was quickly filled with some 600 listeners who were unwilling to accept the violent silencing of pro-Israel views.

These moments - the pie throwing, the bomb threat, the demonstration - as raucous, threatening and contentious as they were, are among the more pleasant memories from my 13-campus tour of the United States. Perhaps it is because at these moments I felt that there was some point to my trip, perhaps because the violent hostility had stirred the students and motivated them to want to fight and win - which I, of course, was delighted to see.

There were other moments during my tour, difficult moments when I felt fear, sadness and worry. During a frank and friendly conversation with a group of Jewish students at Harvard University, one student admitted to me that she was afraid - afraid to express support for Israel, afraid to take part in pro-Israel organizations, afraid to be identified. The mood on campus had turned so anti-Israel that she was afraid that her open identification could cost her, damaging her grades and her academic future. That her professors, who control her final grades, were likely to view such activism unkindly, and that the risk was too great.

Having grown up in the communist Soviet Union, I am very familiar with this fear to express one's opinions, with the need to hold the "correct opinions" in order to get ahead, with the reality that expressing support for Israel is a blot on one's resume. But to find all these things at Harvard Business School? In a place that was supposed to be open, liberal, professional? At first I thought this must be an individual case, particular to this student. I thought her fears were exaggerated. But my conversations with other students at various universities made it clear that her feelings are widespread, that the situation on campuses in the United States and Canada is more serious than we think. And this is truly frightening.

To most Israelis, what happens on the world's campuses hardly seems a life-and-death concern. The world is against us in any case. And as for Jewish students, why should we care? They've got troubles? Let them move to Israel. In my own view, however, this is a fateful issue for the State of Israel and the Jewish people.

Israel has few strategic assets as critical as American Jewry. The fact that the world's leading superpower is a steadfast ally of Israel is due in large measure to this proud and activist community. But nobody can guarantee that the current state of affairs will continue indefinitely. I have been in close contact with the American Jewish community for more than 30 years, and its leadership is largely unchanged. I entered a Russian prison, I got out, I moved to Israel, I became a Cabinet minister and the people I work with are mostly the same people. The leadership is getting old, and the younger generation is not stepping forward.

The continuing support of American Jewry depends on this younger generation. If it chooses to affiliate actively with the Jewish people, if it supports Israel and acts on its behalf, then we will continue to have a strong backbone of support in a world that is turning more and more hostile. But if this younger generation were to disappear - whether through assimilation or an unwillingness to be identified - Israel would find within a very few years that it faces an entirely different United States.

This younger generation is growing up on the university campus. That is where the core of future administrations is taking shape. The students I met at Princeton, Columbia and Harvard will be the decision-makers of the coming decades. Will they be as pro-Israel as today's decision-makers? Will they stand up fearlessly for Israel? Given the level of anti-Israel sentiment on today's campuses, where being "in" means being hostile or at least apathetic toward Israel, I have grave doubts.

The transformation of campuses into hothouses of anti-Israel opinion did not happen by itself, nor did it occur overnight. In the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, the mood on campus was completely different. Jewish students then were at the center of student activism, leading movements for human rights, including the Soviet Jewry freedom movement. Demonstrations, hunger strikes, mass rallies - all this combined to form a massive army that was largely made up, as the Soviet secret police used to put it sneeringly, of "students and housewives." These struggles were an inseparable part of the Jewish identities of those young people. They were certain of themselves, certain of the justice of their cause and certain that they were on the side of the angels. The goal was clear, the enemy was defined and their pride in themselves, their Jewishness and Israel was boundless.

When I sat for Sabbath dinner with 300 Jewish students at Columbia University in New York - together with Glenn Richter, who in 1964 at the university launched the Student Struggle for Soviet Jewry - and I told them about those days, the events seemed to them all but unimaginable. Today, when Jewish activity on campus is directed almost entirely inward, when Jewish student organizations feel like walled fortresses in enemy territory, when pro-Israel students hardly dream of taking leadership positions in campus struggles for human rights, those days seem like a distant dream.

Years of massive investments of money and effort by Arab states and the Palestinians have changed the picture. One after the other, departments of Middle Eastern studies have been set up on university campuses, with generous Saudi funding - departments that worked to establish pseudo-scientific theories, presenting Israel as the last colonial state, a state whose very existence is immoral regardless of borders, a state that should not exist. Differing views are as a matter of course not tolerated. When Jewish community leaders decided in the last few years to begin investing funds to create chairs in Israel studies, they discovered there is no one to teach them. There are no experts, no writers. The field has been abandoned.

Not only in the intellectual arena have we abandoned the field. In the public relations field, too, the Palestinians have learned, unlike the Israelis, to appreciate the importance of the university as the shaper of the next generation, and to concentrate their efforts there. Articulate, effective speakers have been dispatched to campuses to mobilize the idealistic students for their own political interests.

They have been sent to explain that despite the fact that in the Arab nations, as in the autonomous areas of the Palestinian Authority, there are no rights for women, minorities, gays or nearly anyone else, that despite all this they are the true bearers of the banner of human rights; that all true seekers of justice should act on their behalf, and against Israel's.

The absurdity cries out to the heavens, but no one seems to notice. The banner of human rights, once identified to a great degree with Jews, has become a weapon against them. Liberal and democratic discourse on human rights serves mainly as a vehicle for attacks against Israel, and increasingly against Jews.

In the last three years the process has greatly intensified. Students, young, idealistic and naturally tending to see the world in black and white, have been greatly influenced by daily media reports about "human rights violations" carried out by Israel, by pictures of Palestinian children, by unbalanced reportage. Lacking a serious "other side," lacking any real information about the roots of the conflict, lacking any serious Israeli public relations effort, the campuses have become more and more hostile.

When I assumed my current position as minister for Jerusalem and Diaspora affairs, it was clear to me that this issue of campuses as centers of anti-Israelism and their influence on the young Jews of the world must be at the center of my agenda. It is a matter of critical importance for the State of Israel and the Jewish people. And so I decided to travel, to learn the facts first-hand and to try to begin a process of change.

Before I left Israel my daughter said to me, "Dad, if they throw eggs at you, duck." My other daughter countered: "Why duck? Catch them and throw them back." You may laugh, but that is how I felt. After ducking for so long, while Israel was under constant attack for supposedly being a "war criminal," a "Nazi state" and the "embodiment of evil," I felt the time had come to throw back a few eggs. Especially on campuses, especially on the topic of human rights. Not to apologize, but to try to show the true picture - who is the only democracy in the Middle East and who are the dictatorships, where are human rights honored and where are they trampled.

I wanted to show that even during a cruel war against terrorism, Israel was showing great sensitivity to human rights - certainly in comparison to other democracies at war: the United States in Afghanistan, NATO in Yugoslavia, Russia in Chechnya. I talked about the battle of Jenin, when we decided not to use airplanes that could hurt the Palestinian civilian population, and instead sent our soldiers hunting house to house for weapons and terrorists.

I wanted, as someone who had spent a considerable part of his life struggling for human rights, to bring the human rights struggle back to its proper context. To return it to its true owners. To explain that support for terrorists and dictators like Yasser Arafat and his gang cannot be considered support for human rights.

For six days I traveled across the United States. I did not meet with administration officials or do any politicking. Just campuses. Meeting students, instructors, Jewish and non-Jewish activists. A marathon of 13 campuses in six days. I discovered an enormous thirst for knowledge, for straight answers about these supposed "human rights violations" and "war crimes." I learned that combining human rights, a popular, burning issue among students, and Israel, a very unpopular issue, works to Israel's advantage, because even the most pro-Palestinian students, including Arab students, had to back down when the discussion centered squarely and honestly on human rights and democracy.

But I also learned that every such victory was a limited one, like capturing a single hill in enemy territory. The overall picture is deeply worrying. On every campus I visited, Jewish students make up between 10% and 20% of the population, but no more than a tenth of them, by my estimate, take part in Jewish or pro-Israel activity. Another tiny but outspoken fraction serves as the spearhead of anti-Israel activity, for there is no better cover for hiding the racist nature of causes like an anti-Israel boycott than a Jewish professor or student eager to prove that he is holier than the pope. And the rest? The rest are simply silent. They are not identified, not active, not risk-takers. Nearly 90% of our students are Jews of silence.

To the credit of the activists, it must be said that they do impressive work. But they are few, and many are tired and discouraged. One student who was active in pro-Israel organizations told us that at a certain point he could no longer stand the peer pressure of those around him who viewed him as a pro-Israel obsessive. He now pours his idealistic energies into an organic farm he started. Now that he is involved in environmental activism everyone is happy with him. Having myself grown up in a place where those around me barely tolerated my Jewish involvements, I know that this sort of peer pressure will drive most people to flee, just as we - most of us - in Russia tried to run away from our Jewishness to the ivory towers of science or the arts. We thought that scientific excellence would save us from the mark of Cain on our foreheads.

Can the trends be reversed? Can we recapture the campus? I believe we can. But it will require a concentrated effort and a genuine change of consciousness and direction in Israel's informational efforts. We in Israel and in Jewish communities around the world must combine our efforts and work together. In the United States things have begun to stir, and various organizations are active on campus. Now it is time for Israel to do its share.

This article first appeared in Ma'ariv and was translated by J.J. Goldberg into English, when it appeared in "The Forward" on October 24, 2003.

Posted by Lise Rubin, November 1, 2003.

Lisa Rubin writes: This is part II of Edwin Black's report on the Ford Foundation. It is called "How aware is Ford Foundation of the way its funds are being used?" The report is a 4-part series and appeared on the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) website (http://www.jta.org/ford.asp).

The Ford Foundation disburses approximately $500 million annually through 13 offices worldwide, to gantees of all descriptions, in dozens of countries.

Each year, the foundation, with an estimated $10 billion in assets, makes some 2,500 awards spanning the realms of art, education, development and social justice.

In the process, Ford practices globalization just as a multinational commercial corporation would, deftly weaving monies in and out of its offices and recipients, in a complex web of funding.

But the Ford Foundation's product is not commercial - it is philanthropic. A large portion of that annual philanthropic expenditure is devoted to what it terms "human rights and social justice" - that is, not to traditional relief and aid programs, but to advocacy, activism and agitation.

Ford carefully monitors all programs and materials enabled by its funds, maintains Alex Wilde, the foundation's vice president for communications.

Various grantees also confirmed that Ford requires detailed submissions of printed items and Web site development plans, sometimes two or three times per year. Hence foundation officials remain keenly aware of the fruits of their philanthropy.

There is no easy way to identify how much money the scores of anti-Israel and Palestinian advocacy groups and non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, actually receive from Ford. This is because significant funds or program benefits are also channeled through other not-for-profit organizations and even overseas government agencies.

For example, the 2002 annual report of the Washington-based Advocacy Institute lists the Palestinian NGO Network, or PNGO, as a "partner."

In February 2003, the Advocacy Institute brought a group of PNGO fellows to Washington in a Ford-funded program "to strengthen PNGO's advocacy capacity." The program involved "message development, coalition building, media," as well as "access and persuasion of decision makers," according to a statement that appeared in mid-August on the institute's main Web page.

Ford records indicate that the foundation in 2000 granted the Advocacy Institute $180,000 "to strengthen the role of a network of Palestinian NGOs." The money for PNGO is tallied among the foundation's U.S. grants, not those of the Cairo office.

Just a year later, in August 2001, PNGO was one of the main groups pushing for anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N. World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.

To be sure, Ford has also granted several million dollars to American Jewish and Israeli peace groups. For example, Ford in the past has granted $500,000 to the American Reform Judaism movement's Mideast peace program, known as "Seeking Peace, Pursuing Justice," which seeks to mobilize North American Jewry for social justice in Israel.

Ford also funds several Israeli-based dissident and human rights groups that campaign for Palestinian justice. The list includes such Israeli Palestinian rights advocates as B'Tselem, Rabbis for Human Rights and Hamoked.

B'Tselem currently receives $250,000 for what Ford databases and reports describe as "monitoring human rights in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, documenting violations, and advocating for policy changes."

Rabbis for Human Rights has been granted more than $250,000 for what Ford databases and reports describe as "rabbinically-based educational and organizing activities promoting human rights policies by Israel in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

Rabbi Arik Ascherman, the group's executive director, said the Ford money has been used to develop a Web site, place newspaper advertising and bring other rabbis to Israel to learn about human rights.

Last year, Hamoked was granted $300,000 for what Ford's databases and reports describe, in one summary, as "advocacy and legal action to promote human rights of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories facing human rights violations by Israeli authorities."

B'Tselem and Rabbis for Human Rights, while staunchly advocating for Palestinian human rights, have also vocally and publicly condemned the campaign of Palestinian suicide bombings and other terrorism aimed at Israeli civilians.

Ascherman spoke favorably of Ford, commenting, "Our experience with Ford has been very positive." He also said that, while "it would be wrong for a funder organization to have a heavy-handed thumb editing," in general, grant makers should "ensure the funds are spent for the goals they support, and I would like to think the goals of the Ford Foundation do not include anti-Semitism."

"We at Rabbis for Human Rights obviously abhor anti-Zionist organizations and anti-Semitism," said Rabbi Brian Walt of the group's North American branch.

The Ford Foundation also funds the Washington-based New Israel Fund for its activities supporting and promoting social change in Israel. Since 1988, the Ford Foundation has provided more than $5 million to the New Israel Fund, a coalition of Israelis, North Americans and Europeans seeking to promote human rights and justice issues in Israel.

Ford has just announced it would increase its funding to "peace and social justice groups" in Israel through the New Israel Fund with a $20 million five-year grant to be administered by a joint Ford-NIF enterprise.

Aaron Back, Ford's former program officer for Israel, will oversee the new funding.

The money is designed to "increase our funding in Israel and help build the capacity of civic organizations vital to strengthening its democracy," according to Ford's president, Susan Berresford.

The move will shift future grant-making from Ford offices in New York to the New Israel Fund. It is not yet clear which groups will receive money from the donor-advised fund.

The overwhelming majority of Ford's monies for the Middle East are granted to pro-Palestinian and Islamic rights groups.

The list extends for pages. For example, last year, the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights in Gaza received $100,000 for what Ford databases and reports describe as "community-based advocacy work on economic, social and cultural rights in Gaza."

The Al Mezan Center works closely with the International Solidarity Movement, which stages civil disobedience actions to obstruct Israeli security forces operating in the territories. The center also operates a Web site, at www.mezan.org, that seeks to document alleged Israeli atrocities and violations of international law, and that also denounces Israel's war against the Islamic fundamentalist group Hamas.

A recent typical Al Mezan Center news release began, "The Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) have blatantly escalated their aggression against Palestinian civilians in the OPT during the last week."

Al Mezan is one of the many Palestinian NGOs that refer to the Israeli Defense Forces as Israeli Occupation Forces. OPT is its abbreviation for "occupied Palestinian territories."

Augmenting its Ford funding, Al Mezan also receives funding from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, the International Commission of Jurists in Sweden, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, and several other U.N. and European Community sources.

A second Palestinian agency, operating under the name Health, Development, Information and Policy Institute, received one $60,000 Ford grant under "Media Arts and Culture," plus a second award for $75,000 under "Sexuality and Reproductive Health." The institute operates an incitement Web site, www.palestinemonitor.org, dedicated to mobilizing world action against Israel and Zionism. Its main page offers recommended activism.

For example, a page on the site, as of mid-August, sub-headlined "How can you take action for the Palestinian cause?" offered two Palestinian links, one of which is: "Boycott Israeli Goods." Clicking on that link leads to another site, www.boycottisrael.org, which includes a list of American companies to be boycotted for doing business in Israel, including Johnson & Johnson, Disney and Starbucks.

In mid-August, Palestine Monitor's own "Activism" page offered enthusiastic coverage of a September 2002 attempt by pro-Palestinian protesters to enter Caterpillar's Washington premises for the purpose of serving a so-called citizens-arrest warrant for "war crimes" related to selling bulldozers to Israel.

A third entity, the Jerusalem Media and Communication Centre, recently received three grants totaling $365,000 to create what Ford databases and reports describe as "media services for the foreign press and a weekly electronic magazine," as well as "enhancement of media activities related to the crisis situation."

The center publishes "The Palestine Report," which can be found at www.palestinereport.org. This Web site employs dramatic imagery and testimony to portray Israel as an apartheid state guilty of war crimes, violations of international law and repeated massacres.

As of early October, one of the center's main Web site features was a clickable section entitled "From Revolution to Revolution," which "focuses on internal Palestinian politics, political strengths and cracks in the armor of unity?"

A prominent "Resources" list links to the Web sites of six Palestinian factions. Several of them are listed by the State Department as terrorist groups, including the People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Islamic Jihad and Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement.

When the Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre was asked whether other organizations could be listed as well, an official explained, "We only link to the biggest and best organizations."

A State Department spokesman for the Near East Affairs bureau who viewed "The Palestine Report" and its link pages to terrorist sites declared, "I am uncomfortable with the funding of this site and especially these links - very uncomfortable."

Yehudit Barsky, director of the American Jewish Committee's division on Middle East and international terrorism, added, "I think this demonstrates that we in the United States have not paid attention - foundations can be used in a way no one can imagine. Here we see a Web site promoting terrorist organizations. The Ford Foundation just did not care."

During this investigation, Wilde, the Ford Foundation communications vice president, refused to answer any questions regarding PNGO, the Policy Institute, the Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre or any other aspect of the foundation's involvement with Palestinian NGOs.

Nor would Thea Lurie, the foundation's deputy media director, or media associate Joe Voeller.

But in a six-page written response to questions that the foundation released only after this investigation was completed, Wilde said: "We are a grant making organization. We support grantees for agreed-upon activities and do not dictate what they should say."

The statement also said: "Our human rights work reflects a commitment to principles that go beyond partisanship and politics, to basic rights and protections that human beings possess by virtue simply of being born."

During a visit to Ford's headquarters in New York, foundation officials brushed off questions about anti-Israel agitation. Quipped one senior Ford official: "Anti-Zionism is in the eye of the beholder."

Edwin Black is the author of the newly-released "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race" (Four Walls Eight Windows), which investigates corporate philanthropic involvement in American and Nazi eugenics. In May 2003, he won the American Society of Journalists and Authors' award for best book of the year for his previous book, "IBM and the Holocaust" (Crown Publishing, 2001). This report was written for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. [Ed. Note: See the BLOG-ED page for the September-October issue of Think-Israel for Part I. of this report.]

Posted by Morris J. Amitay, November 1, 2003.

News Flash:

Mohammed Salaam and Ahmed Salaami, representing the newly formed Palestinian Peace Party, and two well-known Israeli political figures Benny Alone and Effi Eet-em today announced agreement on a broad-ranging peace plan. Negotiators for both sides met secretly at a strictly kosher eatery in Crown Heights, Brooklyn for two hours over falafel and blintzes and toasted their success with slivovitz. This political bombshell called the "Hebron agreement" is named after Israel's first biblical capital. It calls for Palestinian recognition of Hebron as a second eternal undivided capital of the Jewish State to go along with perpetual Jewish sovereignty over all of Jerusalem and the area from "the river to the sea." In return, Palestinian Arabs and their descendents in Judea, Samaria and Gaza will be permitted to resettle in those Arab countries which drove out hundreds of thousands of Jews after 1948.

Since the numbers involved in this population exchange were unequal, with 100,000 more Jews having departed their homes than Arabs departing Palestine, the UN is to provide additional funding to Israel on a per capita basis. International donors will be called upon to contribute moving expenses for the Palestinian Arabs with special arrangements being made for those wishing to return to Tunis. Those choosing to reside in the East Bank (a.k.a. Jordan) will be required to sign a loyalty oath to King Abdullah and perform twenty hours of community service each month.

A sticking point during the intense negotiations was whether Israel would relinquish its historical claims to the East Bank of the Jordan - known as the "the right of 2.5 tribes to return." Tempers reportedly flared during this portion of the negotiations when the Israelis accused their interlocutors of using "salami tactics." But the Palestinians were adamant, with the final draft giving Israel control only over Petra in Jordan as a boost to its flagging tourist industry.

The peace plan was immediately attacked by Shimon Peres, speaking at a gala celebration of the 67th anniversary of his Bar-Mitzvah, attended by numerous world leaders. Peres claimed that no one had the right to negotiate away the inalienable rights of the Palestinians except his co-Nobel Peace Prize winner, and their democratically elected leader, Yasser Arafat.

Arafat's immediate reactions to the plan however are unknown at this time since he has left the Mukata. It was rumored that he had abandoned his trademark kaffiyeh for a Yankees' baseball cap, shaved off his stubble and had flown to Paris on his Egyptian passport to be with his wife, Suha. But according to other sources, Arafat had signed a no-cut contract to teach a Conflict Resolution course at Columbia University along with current Edward Said Chair holder, Rashid Khalidi. Arafat's last words before his sudden departure broadcast over Radio Jihad were "I'll be back." Reacting to the news, thousands of Palestinians marched throughout Jenin, Ramallah, and Gaza waving both olive branches and Kalashnikovs. Falling bullets caused scores of casualties, and walking was deemed treacherous with olives scattered all over the streets.

Salaam, an auto mechanic specializing in auto parts from Israeli vehicles, and Salaami, a popular shwarma vendor, were also not available for immediate comment - at press time their whereabouts were unknown.

Official reaction in Israel was mixed with Government spokesmen generally willing to accept what they called the "painful compromises" in the Agreement. But Labor and Meretz leaders quickly denounced the plan saying that no one could speak for the Palestinians other than their peace partner, Yasser Arafat. Former Knesset Member Yossi Beilin insisted that no one had the right to negotiate Israel's future except those with the kind of humility that can only be imparted from being defeated resoundingly at the polls. Former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg has been dispatched to Paris and New York to find Arafat and convince him to return if there was to be any hope for genuine peace and reconciliation based on the principles of land for the Palestinians, and bubkes for the Israelis.

In Washington, the State Department accused Israel of "using excessive farce" and excoriated Israel for its "unhelpful unilateral bilateralism, which, while bringing peace, threatens to bring the peace process to an end." However, President George Bush later praised the initiative as keeping with his vision of two states living side by side in peace - that is, Israel and Jordan. The White House announced that, if requested, the U.S. would grant political asylum to the two "courageous" Palestinian leaders, Salaam and Salaami - or to any of their surviving family members.

Morrie Amitay, a former Executive Director of AIPAC, is also noted for his sharp wit.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 1, 2003.

Dear friends,

Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Maher, said the speech (by the Malaysian Prime Minister) was "a shrewd and very deep assessment."

Here is Ariel Natan Pasko's chronicle of some gross violations by the Egyptians of the peace treaty with Israel.

Between Egypt and Israel lies the large Sinai Desert. Should Egypt decide to act with more aggression against Israel, at least there is a buffer and an obstacle (except in Gaza) between the two countries.

Not so between Israel and any future Palestinian entity in Judea and Samaria. These territories penetrate literally like a dagger in the heart of Israel, a mere walking distance from all major Israeli population centers.

Yet there are some sun-stroke Israelis who are willing to negotiate with terrorists, who violated every single promise they ever gave and signed, and are willing to gravely risk the security of Israel by entertaining the thought of a Palestinian state in possession of that dagger.

Absolutely crazy!

Yuval, Your Truth Provider

For some time now, I've been watching with astonishment the occasional cat and mouse game of "find the arms smuggling tunnel" in Gaza. I'm not astonished that the Israelis keep finding them. I'm not astonished either, that the Palestinians keep digging them. And I'm certainly not astonished that the Palestinian Authority doesn't try to stop them. They probably have gotten their best weaponry via the tunnels. What astonishes me is that, with all the media coverage about arms smuggling, drug smuggling and prostitute smuggling from Egypt, the Israeli government and media have yet to place the blame squarely where it belongs. On Egypt.

Recently, Israel went on another search and destroy mission in Rafiach/Rafah code-named "Operation Root Canal." After a few of days of house-to-house searches, they destroyed three large tunnels, then pulled out their troops and went home. The Israeli army believes that there are at least another ten tunnels operating in the area. These tunnels are 12-14 meters deep (more than 35 feet) and in some cases hundreds of meters (yards) long.

Senior Israel Defense Force officials said they would continue to operate against the tunnels, until the PA makes a strategic decision and does so itself. Government spokesman Dore Gold said Israel was forced to go after the terrorist groups and their infrastructure because the Palestinian leadership had not done so. "In uncovering the vast network of arms smuggling tunnels in the area of Rafah, Israel is compelled again to do the work that the Palestinian Authority is supposed to do," Gold said.

Israeli military officials said Israel had intelligence warnings that Palestinians were planning to use the tunnels to smuggle in anti-aircraft missiles, weapons that could have a strategic impact on the three-year conflict. They said Palestinians were trying to get shoulder-held Stinger missiles that could shoot down attack helicopters Israel often uses in Gaza, and could also threaten Israel Air Force planes or civilian aircraft flying close to the coastal strip. They also said the Palestinians were trying to smuggle in Katyusha rockets, which would have the range to hit Israeli cities near Gaza. The officials said Egypt was not taking steps to stop the smuggling. So far this year, the military said it has destroyed 33 smuggling tunnels in the area.

IDF officers reported that the significant resistance they encountered on the Palestinian side surprised them; the Arabs used automatic weapons, grenades, anti-tank rockets and bombs. Sure the fighting was stiff. First, weapons smuggling is the lifeline of the Palestinian "armed struggle". Without an influx of more and better weapons, how can they aspire to "conquer" Israel, or at least drive out the "occupation" - i.e., carry out more terrorism? Now read that first sentence again, "...the Arabs used automatic weapons, grenades, anti-tank rockets, and bombs." Second, they are using - and will continue to use - stronger, better, more sophisticated weaponry, until the smuggling is stopped.

Should that astonish anybody?

About grenades for example, in an interview of April 27, 1982, with Israeli Army Radio, then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin, spoke of such serious violations of the Peace Agreement by the Egyptians that he had threatened to postpone the Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai. The violations included, "the smuggling of weapons and explosives originating in Lebanon from El-Arish, and we caught more than 500 hand grenades. You can imagine how many people could have been killed or wounded by such a quantity of grenades," Begin said. "We also demanded of the Egyptians that they end this smuggling, and indeed, President Mubarak, in his letter to me of April 16, made a commitment to prevent the smuggling and combat it," Begin promised. So, Egypt is on record "to prevent the smuggling" of weaponry from its territory into Gaza.

But Israel has never made a serious effort to "enforce" the Peace Agreement commitment by Egypt to stop the smuggling. Or, for that matter, any other commitment by Egypt.

Violations of the treaty abound; for example, Egyptian troop movements into demilitarized areas. Egypt has put a division into Sinai, which is really a skeleton of four divisions that could be inflated quickly if they decided to attack. Or, bridgeheads constructed on the east bank of the canal, for quick entry into Sinai. All of Egypt's military planning and exercises have presumed a war to their east. Who else if not with Israel? Israeli military intelligence has noted an increasingly aggressive military posture in the last 4-5 years and has voiced, "quiet concern". Why be quiet about it?

Weapons smuggled into Gaza - as already noted - through tunnels that begin near Egyptian military positions in Sinai, end up in the hands of Palestinian terrorists. It has reached epidemic proportions. When Israeli Defenses Forces blew up tunnels in a past effort not long ago, they saw the smoke rise at the other end, next to the Egyptian positions.

The withdrawal of the Egyptian Ambassador from Israel just after the outbreak of the current Oslo War is also a clear violation of the treaty. As is the ongoing calls for professional and economic boycotts of contacts with Israelis.

Finally, there is continuing anti-Semitism and incitement against Israel in Egyptian textbooks and in the Egyptian media. For example, a recent hit song played on the radio that was entitled "I Hate Israel", political cartoons in newspapers reminiscent of the Nazi era and a recent TV series based on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. There seems to be no effort on the part of the Egyptian government to educate its people toward peace, or ban incitement to hatred against Jews and Israel.

Yet, according to the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt of March 26, 1979:

"Article III 2. Each Party undertakes to ensure that acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, or violence do not originate from and are not committed from within its territory, or by any forces subject to its control or by any other forces stationed on its territory, against the population, citizens or property of the other Party. Each Party also undertakes to refrain from organizing, instigating, inciting, assisting or participating in acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, subversion or violence against the other Party, anywhere, and undertakes to ensure that perpetrators of such acts are brought to justice."

Egypt generally hides behind the mask of "free speech" or "academic freedom" when anti-Semitic and inciteful behavior is addressed. But just as Israel has laws against racial incitement against Arabs, Egypt is treaty bound to legislate and enforce laws against hostile activities and incitement against Jews and Israel. One can measure how "successful" the Peace Treaty with Egypt has been over the last 25 years, by the lack of this enforcement on the part of the Egyptian government.

More importantly, the Egyptian government is directly responsible for the military violations of the treaty, and their turning of a "blind eye" on arms smuggling from the Sinai - now their sovereign territory - into Gaza. Is that "woeful ignorance", "passive acceptance", or "deliberate assistance", on Egypt's part, in this arms smuggling adventure?

In a recent expose entitled "The case against Jordan," Alan Dershowitz reminds us that "Jordan has a law on its books explicitly prohibiting any Jew from becoming a citizen, or any Jordanian from selling land to a Jew. It has refused to amend this law despite repeated demands." That, "Jordan has perfected the art of torture and uses it routinely against dissidents, suspected terrorists and perceived opponents of the monarchy." And that, "Jordan killed more Palestinians in one month, September 1970, known as Black September, than Israel has killed during the three years of suicide bombings that began in the fall of 2000. The brutality of the Jordanian Army toward Palestinian dissidents and terrorists was far more egregious than anything Israel has ever done." And Dershowitz reminds us of much more.

Yet, by contrast - and I'm no fan of Jordan - at the same time that Israel is fighting arms smuggling from Egypt without any help from their side, the Jordanian Information Minister, Nabil Sharif, announced that the Jordanian army killed two armed men and injured two others as they attempted to infiltrate into Israel. He said that Jordanian security forces searched the area and discovered machine guns and ammunition, Israel Radio reported. There is much lacking in the Peace Treaty with Jordan - for example, the level of incitement against Israel by Jordanian professional associations - but at least they are taking "real combat" seriously. What about Egypt?

Israel needs to publicly and loudly protest Egypt's treaty violations in the UN, to the Americans and Europeans, and in the courtroom of international public opinion. Ditto with Jordan. But with Egypt, unlike Jordan, Israel also has to take specific actions to stop the arms smuggling into Gaza; "quiet concern" isn't good enough.

Since the Egyptian and Jordanian "Peace Treaties" are held up as models for future agreements with the Palestinians, Syrians and others in the Arab world, Israel needs to be honest about how "successful" they've been, and how to prevent future failures as well. Israeli leaders have perfected the questionable art of "serial ignoring." Ignoring the treaty violations of the Egyptians; ignoring the treaty violations of the Jordanians; and yes - that's what got us into this recent mess - ignoring the agreement violations of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority.

It's about time Israel either insist on complete adherence to agreements, or not bother signing or upholding them itself. There is a military solution, if "peace treaties" don't work. Let's not be astonished anymore. Rather than "Operation Root Canal", Israel should just pull the tooth!

This article first appeared in Arutz-Sheva (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

Posted by Judy Balint, November 1, 2003.

This was written by Lessa Roskin, who lives in Alon Shvut, Gush Etzion.

Picking FIGS in Alon Shvut
a strong tree, an old tree, a fruitful tree
its roots nourished by a nearby spring
I'm standing under its branches
like arms welcoming me
next to an ancient mikva second Temple period
it's chodesh tishrei - late September 2003
almost my birthday
Michael and I are living in the Gush Etzion area
derech avot - patriarchs way
from Beersheva to Jerusalem
Did Avraham pass by this spring?
Did Issac pick figs here?
Did Yacov stop by to water his flocks?
Did Sara rest under this tree?
Did Rivka whisper secrets here?
Did Leah see the dudaim flower in the Spring?
Did Rachel "dip" in this Mikva?
Our Jewish history is so real here

Picking FIGS in Alon Shvut
a 12 minute drive to Hevron
close to the cave of Machpelah
where our forefathers and mothers are buried
a 15 minute drive to Bethlechem
burial site of Rachel
a 20 minute drive to Jerusalem
"Har haBayit" - the Western Wall
We've returned to Eretz Yisrael
the land of Israel
fulfilling haShem's promise to Avraham
to the "shevat haminim"
the seven spices native to this area
"For haShem 'your G-d is bringing you to
a good Land: a Land with streams of water
of springs and underground water
coming forth in valley and mountain
a Land of wheat -barley-grape-FIG-pomegranate
a Land of oil-olives and date-honey' "
(parashas eikev 8)

We've returned to the roots of our people
to the words of the Torah
to the history of Tanach
to the wisdom of our "chachamim""
to the Zionist "chalutzim" pioneers
We're planted firmly here
our tree bears fruit
our grandchildren are flourishing
their prayers are steadfast
their Hebrew is perfect
our ancient language
our language of prayer
our modern daily language

Our joys are uplifting
our sorrows deep and painful
our prayers are serious
our country is at war
our children are being murdered in their homes
families are being murdered in coffee shops
school kids are being murdered at bus stops
parents are being murdered at Shabbat dinner
grandparents are being murdered at Pesach seder
teenagers are being murdered at discotheques
unborn babies are being murdered with their pregnant mothers
It's too horrible to comprehend

Yet we go on day by day
our soldiers are fighting for us
combating terrorism is difficult
our police and guards are trying to protect us
We're encouraged by those who really care
about us personally
about other Israelis
about our religion
about our nation
about democracy
about fighting terrorism
about our ancient past
about our hopeful future
as Jewish people in the land of Israel

Picking figs in Alon Shvut
"Chodesh Tishreh" - the High Holidays
I'm going home to share the figs with my neighbors
I'm going to make fig preserves for the "chagim"
I'm going to make figs in honey and wine
from my friend's cookbook : The Garden of Eden Cookbook
I'm going to share my thoughts and feelings with you
and send you blessings from Eretz Yisrael.

Judy Balint and Lessa Roskin are among the group of Israelis, collectively known as the Jerusalem Diarists, who write about their experiences living in present-day Israel. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen, 2002) can be purchased from www.israelbooks.com.

Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, November 1, 2003.

Somewhere between the Chelm and Sodom of Israel's airwaves, there existed a little island of sanity and truth. It wasn't always easy to find. You had to bypass a lot of arabic, rap, trance, heavy breathing, incessant chatter, screaming, leftist propaganda and hair-removal commercials, before your radio dial would settle onto Arutz 7 and you could breath a sigh of relief.

There you would find clarity on political issues, tunes you could sing along with and lyrics you understood , public service announcements, new immigrant programming, and intelligent conversation. It was a station promoting people, Torah and the Land of Israel. It was the last word of Zionism on the radio.

Give me back my Succah! Ever since I emerged from that holiday reprieve, I've faced the following headlines:

* Malaysian PM has urged Muslims to unite against Jews
* Rivlin: "Geneva Initiative" now on public agenda
* Chirac Thwarts EU Condemnation of Anti-Semitism
* Malaysian PM's Speech Also Outlines Plan To Destroy Israel
* Jerusalem chosen as site of international gay fest
* Three Israelis killed in ambush near Ofra
* Peres urges Pakistan to discuss forming relations
* Swiss right wing win challenges political stability
* Five Year Arutz-7 Trial Ends with Guilty Verdicts

At least the headlines are consistent - consistently bad. What horrific crime are the folks at Arutz 7 guilty of that could throw them into the current chaotic vat of terrorism, anti-semitism, treason, perversion and reemerging nazism that graces our front pages?

Well, according to the Israeli media reports, "the group was convicted of transmitting from a boat within Israeli territorial waters and from locations in the West Bank without the required government permits."

Oh my! Say it isn't so! Transmitting Jewish Music, Torah and Pro-Israel opinions from within our territorial waters!

At times like this, I'm reminded of that Midrash about Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis who were walking near the Temple Mount. They saw a fox run out from the spot where the Holy of Holies had stood and they all began to weep - except Rabbi Akiva. He laughed, because he foresaw better days.

Well, so do I. I believe that one day, in the not so distant future, we're going to hear strikingly similar media reports. Only this time, they'll be broadcast loud and clear from a reinstated Arutz-7. Here's just a preview of things to come "...the group was convicted of negotiating from a country outside of Israeli territory and from locations in the East Bank without the required government permission."

Truth and justice will reign once again. And then, "our mouths will be full of laughter and tongues with songs of joy."

Ellen Horowitz lives on the Golan Heights with her husband and six children. She is a painter, writer and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com

BEILIN'S DEATH PROCESS: Another Leftist-Arab Agreement?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 1, 2003.

Israeli leftist Yossi Beilin, now a paid agent of the EU, headed a private Israeli delegation seeking his third agreement with a P.A. delegation. His other two attempts were the bloody Oslo Accords and the fizzled Mazen-Beilin Agreement. On 10/12, reports went out that his new, "Swiss Accord," was concluded, but Beilin told IMRA that it was not signed. Another meeting was needed.

According to the Left, both sides agreed upon PLO statehood and abandoning refugee return. Arab delegate Qadura Fares refused to verify that the Arabs had agreed to forego refugee entry to Israel. Arab leaders back home denied that the P.A. delegation had the authority to give up any rights. Another P.A. leader, Hisham Abdel Raziq, claimed that the understanding does allow the refugees an option of returning to Israel, with Israel's consent.

The meeting was held on the assumption that this time, the Arabs will honor their agreements. Therefore, Israel can base its national security on those promises.

Participants promised a copy of the agreement for every house in Israel and the P.A. No mainstream Israeli reporter asked who is funding this project.

What this amounts to is that after Israel would have pulled back to indefensible borders, the P.A. could pressure the refugees to declare intent to return, and if Israel won't accede and go under, that way, then the P.A. would have an excuse for returning to warfare, but this time as a sovereign state fighting from the Green Line, all along Israel (IMRA, 10/13). That means more military fronts to guard!

Shouldn't the Left explain: (1) Why, after all their policies towards the Arabs have failed, anybody should listen to them now; (2) Why should Israel make concessions to terrorists with faulty claims to Jewish patrimony; (3) Why, after the Arabs have broken all their agreements with Israel (and many with each other), and whose ideology permits the breaking of agreements with infidels, the Arabs should be expected to keep promises; and (4) Since Arab leaders tend to deny making, repudiate, or claim such agreements mean something else, why bother?

Here we go, again. Serving anti-Israel interests, Beilin subversively tried to get Israel to bare its throat to the unreformed Arabs in the phony name of peace. Meanwhile, the Arabs are up to their old tricks; denying their delegates authority, repudiating what was agreed, contradicting the terms, and reserving grievances for future discord to turn violent. Beilin makes problems for Israel, with his "death process."

Under his latest proposal, Jews would be permitted to walk from Jaffa Gate to the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, but the Temple Mount, like most of the Old City, would be controlled by the P.A. (which forbids Jews to ascend to their holiest site). The plan calls for the evacuation of about 100,000 Jews from Yesha. Under supposed "reunification of families" (which the Arabs abuse by fraud), Israel would take in 30,000 Arab "refugees." Israel would build two cities in part of Israel, to house half a million "refugees," and turn the cities over to the P.A.

A Likud MK asked one of the Israelis who reached that "agreement" that since he is willing to give up Israeli land (which he should not be), why not give up land that is inhabited by Arabs, rather than vacant land. Reply: this cannot be done, because they're Israeli citizens. The MK asked, "And the people of Ariel, whom you wish to evacuate, they're not Israeli citizens?" (Arutz-7, 10/13.) They are.

The "NY Times" explains that the use of land in Israel is in "compensation for land retained by Israelis" in Yesha (Greg Myre, 10/14, A9).

"Compensation" for what? Yesha never belonged to the Palestinian Arabs but it did belong to the Jewish people. Once liberated from Turkey, it was placed in the Mandate for a Jewish national home.

Why should Israel build houses for Arab refugees, if these even are refugees - most are not? The Arab created both the Jewish and Arab refugee problems. Israel already paid for resettling the Jewish refugees. Let the Arabs pay at least for resettling the Arab refugees.

Turning the Temple Mount over to the Arabs is a step in that direction. Asserting that Jews could walk to the Jewish Quarter of the Old City reminds one of the 1949 armistice. Jews were assured of access to Hebrew U. and Hadassah Hospital on Mt. Scopus. Once the Arabs took control, they barred Jewish access. It also reminds one of the Oslo Accords, that promised the Jews access to holy sites in the P.A. The P.A. destroyed some holy sites and attacked others, trying to bar Jews from all.

You can imagine what a misplaced sense of guilt Beilin has, unless his European paymasters assigned him to help destroy Israel, as his plan would. For his role in betraying his country to religious fanatics, Beilin should be racked with guilt, if not brought up on charges. But the Left feels guilt only towards the Arabs. The Left's problem is psychological. Politically, they are emotionally disturbed.

Posted by David Hersh, November 1, 2003.

The key to a final and complete resolution of the Israel Palestinian problem was in front of our eyes all this time. Thank you, Yossi Beilin and your list of nobodies, for showing the way. How stupid of us not to realize, democratically elected governments don't sign peace treaties. It's the people that sign them. Of course the important issue is giving the accords an international flavor. But I digress.

Ahmed (an alias to protect his family) and I have been meeting for over 6 months. Ahmed is a resident of one of the Palestinian villages south of Jerusalem. We like Yossi Beilin, Amram Mitzna and friends have lots of time on our hands, we don't have to run the country, we don't have to send our soldiers into dangerous even life threatening situations. We can sit back and kibbitz and tell our elected officials what to do. Ahmed, like myself, has never lost an election, so no one can say that the people have voted against us. And most importantly, we both see the importance of peace for our peoples. And both of us are willing to sacrifice for that peace.

So here we are 6 months of planning, countless clandestine meetings between us. The grass has been cut - I just wish we knew whose lawn we were signing on. Now we are ready to sign the accords. It's very simple, actually. Rather than hiding behind double talk and hidden messages, here is the agreement.

1. Work on the defensive fence will cease immediately.

2. As a first stage, Palestinians will, of their own free will, move into subterranean houses built inside the tunnels between Rafiah and Egypt. The construction of the tunnels (built by the best engineering students Bir Zeit has to offer) is of an extremely high standard, as is the architectural design of the houses built within. These homes will be well protected against the weather and any Israeli incursions. As a final stage the underground network will be allowed to expand to include the area UNDER Gaza. This has the added advantage of "out of sight, out of mind."

3. Jews will have the right to live anywhere they wish ON the Land, excluding the residential tunnel areas under Rafiah. Further, the land above the tunnels will be designated as Park land, so as not to over burden the foundations of the tunnels.

4. Israel has the right to establish communities anywhere ON the land of Israel.

5. Palestinians will cease to have any claims to land ON the Land of Israel It should be noted that their are rich mineral resources IN and UNDER the land. Any subterranean argricultural projects developed by the Palestinians will receive special international grants.

Our discussions were lively; Ahmed has a great sense of humor, we even re-enacted the Barak-Arafat dance from Camp David: "you go first," "no I insist, you first." Unfortunately Clinton wasn't there to smile serenely at our game, but we did have Bush - a small tree and a few flowers. Coffee cakes and burekas in true style were provided by our wives, who played an enormous role in bringing us together, my wife works with Ahmed's wife. Discussions were halted twice, because of differences, Ahmed wanted pizza and I falafel, but the spirit of compromise allowed us to move forward.

So here we are ready to sign. We have though a few problems;

A. How do we get the press to come out for the signing?

B. After which International City do we name the accords? My preference is Woy Woy a small town North of Sydney, in Australia. We are waiting for the mayor to confirm. They expect him back from the local pub any day now.

C. Ahmed's suit is at the cleaners. Mine no longer fits.

D. Neither Ahmed nor I own a tie apart from my Mickey mouse tie and that is for special occasions.

Oh, by the way, if you want to be part of this historic moment, well, actually just go out find a Palestinian and create your own peace accord. Anyone can do it. Just don't name it after the same city as my accords.

David Hersh lives in Jerusalem with his wife and 6 children. He is a proprietor of IDEAS Creative, www.i-deas.co.il and a co-founder of the web site http://www.HelpingIsrael.com.

Posted by Kaustav Chakra, November 1, 2003.

The acquisition of the Phalcon airborne radar system by India from Israel further strenghtens the existing bond of friendship and strategic cooperation between the two countries. India's Israel-made "eye in the sky" would definitely go a long way to enhance India's security, besides checking cross-border infiltration. The selling of the Israeli radar to India is a testimony to Israel's intelligent understanding of India's security needs. Another piece of good news is the proposed joint military exercise between the two countries. This growing cooperation between the two states in strategic matters should in the long run materialise into an India-Israel-American triad for the war against terrorism.

Mr. Chakrabarti is a M. Phil candidate, writing on the Calcutta Jewish community.

Posted by Israela Goldstein, November 1, 2003.

For those who don't know, Larry Miller is a comedian, an actor, a writer and a contributor to The Daily Standard, which is where this essay first appeared as part of an article entitled: "Whosoever Blesses Them: The intifada and its defenders." He lives in Los Angeles

A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Don't thank me.

I'm a giver. Here we go:

The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation."

So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."

I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel.

They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course - that's where the real fun is - but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it - for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something.

It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews.

Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals.

Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding.

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away.

However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight.

We've already lost some. After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint.

If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a bad id - uh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.)

There's bad news on the losing moral weight front, and the signs are out there. Last week, the day after Secretary Powell left on his mission (whatever that was), the Los Angeles Times ran its lead editorial in one hundred percent support of the trip and the pressure he and President Bush were putting on Israel. Here's a good rule of thumb: If the Los Angeles Times thinks you're doing a great job, everything you're doing is wrong, stupid and mortally dangerous. If they think everything you're doing is wrong, stupid and mortally dangerous, you're doing a great job, and, in fact, your chances are probably very good for getting on the fast track for sainthood.

Home Featured Stories Did You Know? Readers' Blog-Eds Background Information News On The Web