ISRAEL NEEDS ARAFAT Posted by TheRaphi, October 31, 2004.

This was written by Dov Gilor, a retired systems engineer and active volunteer. He is a freelance writer and editor and lives in Hashmonaim, Israel. By the time you read this article, Yasser Arafat may have died and many will say good riddance. I, for one, want Arafat to remain alive. Let him suffer in constant pain for all the lives of Jews and his own people that he destroyed, but let him remain in power. Where would Israel be without Arafat? Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin (of blessed memory), began the giveaway to the Arabs of Egypt, Shimon Peres offered the Palestinian Arabs big chunks of Judea and Samaria, Yitzchak Rabin (of blessed memory) offered more, and even Binyamin Netanyahu offered parts of Israel; while Barak offered 95% of Judea and Samaria and Gaza. Now, Ariel Sharon is in charge of the big giveaway, but it is hard to give away land when there is no one to accept what the Israelis are giving away. Without Arafat's intransigence and his unwillingness to compromise, there would be little left of Israel today. Arafat saved the land many times over by being intractable about what the Israelis were offering. If Arafat, G-d forbid, dies, then Israel's liberal establishment will fall all over itself to offer more and more parts of Israel to any weak Arab leader that arises. Once the deal is sealed, it will be practically impossible to go back and re-conquer the land relinquished. Rabin was reported to have declared that if the Arabs were to use the rifles the Rabin administration gave them against Israel, then Israel would take the rifles away. What nonsense. Just like the rifles that were turned against the Jews, once land is given away, the anti-Israel, and even the pro-Israel, nations of the world will not let us go in to take it back. The terrorists will murder those who compromise and then they will be that much closer to their goal of taking over all of "Palestine". As Arafat has publicly declared hundreds of times, "Tel Aviv is Palestine; Jerusalem is Palestine; Haifa is Palestine; Beersheva is Palestine." As long as there is no partner, Israel, despite Sharon, will remain mostly intact. Once Arafat goes down, his successors may be bright enough to realize that if the Arabs feign peace, the Israelis will give away everything. Most non-Zionist Israelis do not care. Jerusalem means little to them and they will feel comfortable anywhere in the world that they might be forced to flee. There are many Israelis who went to live in Germany, Poland, Hungary and Russia. There are Israelis who feel at home in Australia, France, Scandinavia, England and, of course, America. They all claim to be coming back to Israel "soon", but who knows what will be left if Arafat dies and his successor is not as intransigent. Not enough of those living in Israel really care, and I do not believe that a referendum will make any difference. Only Arafat's inflexibility saved us. If he is still alive, pray that he suffers, but that he remains the Palestinian leader. TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/index.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays. To Go To Top

FALSE ARAB CONDEMNATION OF TERRORISM Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 31, 2004.

FALSE ARAB CONDEMNATION OF TERRORISM "Al-Ahram" declares that "legitimate resistance," its euphemism for the terrorism at Taba, "should be confined to the conflict zone." Dr. Joseph Lerner notes that when terrorism is committed against Jews elsewhere, as in Turkey or France, the Muslims do not condemn it. Many Egyptians are angry at the Taba bombings for having killed non-Israelis, especially Egyptians, and disrupting their tourist industry and their sense of security (IMRA, 10/19). Arabs "logic" is ad hoc. They make up conditions for a current argument, that terrorism shall be only in Israel. This is not Western logic, but an inconsistent, non-rational, deceptive, eastern logic. The Egyptians express no sympathy for the Israeli tourist families. The Arabs lack a real sense of decency! No revulsion against terrorism, only dismay when it turns on them. Uncivilized! SPLITTING LIKUD COULD OFFER ISRAEL DEMOCRACY The informal split in Likud has become so prominent, that Prof. Steven Plaut suggests the Party formally split. Party leaders are reluctant to jeopardize their Knesset seats that way, but Prof. Plaut thinks that the forced unity in the slate, with inconsistency and conflict in policy, drives away voters. Either half on its own might attract a majority, if it had a clear mission. Splitting off the nationalist portion would give Israel a democratic alternative. (The assumption here is that only a major party offers a democratic alternative, because most voters would be afraid of wasting their ballots on a minor party, even if that were the party they prefer.) When the electorate switches to Likud in order to end Labor Party appeasement, the Likud, divided in its ideology, nevertheless adopts much of that appeasement and, except recently in exchange for Netanyahu's support, retains much of Labor's socialist form of economy (Plaut, 10/19). Are the leftist surprises by Likud leaders independent or bought by foreign interests? OUR DISJOINTED WAR The US does not admit to be in an international clash of civilizations. We fight as if the Iraq war were disjointed from the Afghanistan war and from everywhere else jihad is active by force, propaganda, recruitment, and fundraising. Our war aims are not clear. The American people think they have a choice of not going to war. They do not realize the gravity of the peril. We have not mobilized for international war. Our military technology affords great advantages, but are insufficient to overcome insurgencies, occupy populous countries, protect our country now fund to be vulnerable, manage terrorism, and defend us from China's burgeoning military. We focus more on what we have done than what we should do next. We should threaten Mideastern regimes with overthrow, unless they eradicate their terrorists. The difficulty in pacifying the one Arab country, Iraq, should dampen our enthusiasm for the stated mission of democratizing the whole region. (The goal is worthy, but would have to be approached incrementally and not become the major effort.) Our war aim must be a "disciplined, justifiable, and attainable objective of self-defense." We should strike here and there, as needed. Shift from our present mode of "conquer, occupy, fail, and withdraw --- to strike, return, and re-energize. In occupying Iraq, we let Iraq occupy us. That is, we let ourselves be tied down and kept from defeating other foes main forces. We hardly have devoted the resources to block our borders, safeguard our airports, and stockpile antidotes to biological warfare. Our lack of preparedness for a small pox epidemic may induce terrorists to foist the epidemic. Our war is criticized as "unilateral." It isn't. We did seek and do have allies, but their number is limited by having small armies or opposing our aims. (We should seek out allies but not be paralyzed in protecting ourselves if few allies step forward.) We admired Britain's unilateral stand against the Axis, and detest the multilateral Axis invasion of Greece. Critics would urge unilateral US action against genocide in Africa. (What about the Sudan?) The notion of unilateral vs. multilateral is all mixed up and irrelevant. It should not be a criticism of US policy. The commission on terrorism let us down. It could have warned about the clash of civilizations, and devised a strategy against it. Instead, it concluded that we merely should revise our intelligence agencies. Moreover, its recommendations are questionable. The enemy works with small groups that intelligence cannot penetrate fast enough. The commission neglected the need for competent airport screeners, proper border control, and reinforced cockpit doors. Three years after 9/11, "our strategy shiftless, reactive irrelevantly grandiose; our war aims undefined; our preparations insufficient; our civil defense neglected; our policy divided into support for either a hapless and incompetent administration that in a parliamentary system would have been turned out long ago, or an opposition so used to appeasement of America's rivals, critics, and enemies that they cannot even do a credible job of pretending to be resolute (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2004, p.13 from Mark Helprin, Wall St. J., 9/10). That is an admirable analysis. It is non-partisan, thoughtful, imaginative, and frank. GUESS WHAT CHINA IS UP TO China is offering its own UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) to Egypt at half the price of Western ones. China is seeking other clients for them. Egypt is co-producing planes for China, so it will get some, as a result (IMRA, 10/21). Egypt wouldn't have acquired advanced weapons with which to challenge the West, but for Western aid! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

PM: DISENGAGEMENT PLAN TO BE ENFORCED - REGARDLESS OF ARAFAT Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, October 31, 2004.

Of course it does not matter what happens to Arafat. The casino must be built no matter what. The only change is that there will be one less partner for Sharon to have to share the profits. This is an item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=71298). (IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ariel Sharon continues to make clear that he intends to go ahead with his "Disengagement Plan" - which calls for the eviction of nearly 10,000 Jews from their homes - no matter what. Many Knesset Members, including those from the Left, made repeated statements several days ago that the primary reason for abandoning Gaza would be null and void with Arafat out of the picture. As reported by the PM himself, the main reason that the Disengagement Plan was deemed necessary was the lack of any "political partner." With reports rampant in the last few days of the impending death of Arafat, many felt this would no longer be the case, and that moderates within the PA would have a chance to come to the fore, creating a new "political partner" with whom to dialogue. PM Sharon said today that, "as long as there will be no partner, we will push forward with the disengagement plan that was approved by the government and the Knesset." Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz proposed that Israel not allow Arafat to return to Ramallah should his health improve, however Sharon stated that, "Israel has made a commitment to allow Arafat to return to the territories." Sharon added, however that "so long as I am prime minister, Arafat will not be buried in Jerusalem." Though Sharon refused to change his plans to destroy 25 Jewish towns in Gaza and the Northern Shomron, he did state to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on Thursday that if a new and moderate leadership were to take over the PA that Israel would coordinate its implementation of the Disengagement Plan with the PA. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet To Go To Top

PA CARTOONS: BIN LADEN DECIDING US ELECTIONS Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, October 31, 2004.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to revere Osama Bin Laden, and even suggests that he has the power to dictate America's future. In response to Bin Laden's taunting and vaguely threatening message to the US, released Saturday by Al-Jazeera, cartoons in two PA dailies today show a gloating Bin Laden determining the outcome of Tuesday's US presidential election. The first cartoon shows a rifle-toting Bin Laden, triumphantly astride the conquered ballot box, while George Bush and John Kerry - depicted as much smaller and weaker than Bin Laden -- cower below him. The second shows a smirking Bin Laden casting what is obviously meant to be the deciding vote in the US election. Besides mocking the two presidential candidates, the tone of the cartoons reflects the PA's continued admiration of Bin Laden's power. Palestinians danced in the streets after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. The PA-controlled media has continued to celebrate the anniversary of 9/11 with mocking cartoons, such as a fearful Uncle Sam running in terror from an image that depicts both the Twin Towers and the date, 9/11. Today's cartoons suggest that should he choose, Bin Laden has real power to determine the future of the US -- just as the train bombings in Madrid are believed to have changed the outcome of the Spanish elections. VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES WITH IMP MATERIAL ON 12 TOPICS http://www.pmw.org.il/tv.html VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES ON PA INCITEMENT TO GENICIDE http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part6.html VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES ON PA INCITEMENT OF CHILDREN TO SHAHADA [MARTYRDOM] http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part1.html Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. To Go To Top

GUESS WHO OPPOSES THE EXPULSION PLAN? Posted by Evelyn Hayes, October 31, 2004.

This was written by Hehezkel Bin-Num. Quick! Who said the following sentence? "Those who espouse unilateral disengagement under fire - to this line or that - only invite more terror." (Jerusalem Post, January 9, 2003) As amazing as it sounds, if you answered Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, you would be correct. In fact, it was on this platform that Ariel Sharon ran in the last Israeli general elections and on this platform his Likud party won almost a third of the seats in the Israeli Knesset. The party that supported unilateral disengagement, the Labor party, lost half its seats in parliament. So people naturally became upset when Sharon gave democracy the boot and did the exact opposite of what he promised. Sharon's words against his own plan, unfortunately, have proven prophetic. Since he announced his scheme to forcefully expel the Jews of Gush Katif, the number of Arab terror attacks in the region has risen exponentially. In the past year, dozens of civilians and soldiers have been slaughtered. But that is only the tip of the iceberg. Sharon's capitulation in Gaza and the victory handed to Arab terrorists has emboldened them for the first time to attack Israeli civilian targets within the 1967 borders with artillery. In the past few months, Arabs shooting Kassam rockets on the development town of S'derot have murdered three children and one woman. And the death from the skies continues to pour down daily. Attacks of this type were unheard of prior to Sharon's show of weakness. Large population centers such as Ashdod and Ashkelon are also within range of the terrorist rockets. Of course, we didn't need Sharon to tell us that surrender to terror only leads to more terror. We already learned that from "Oslo". After 10 years of territorial compromise in exchange for promises of peace, Arab terrorists have murdered 1,500 Israeli citizens, a 700% increase in the number of terror victims over the 10 years prior to Oslo. The current plan has many asking how can we continue to go forward with such a discredited policy? Has Sharon learned nothing from the failure of Oslo? But worse than compromising Israel's security is the immoral nature of the plan. The ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims by Serbs was roundly condemned by the world, and former US President Clinton even sent in the US military to forcefully stop the practice. But the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Gush Katif is not only ignored by the world, but encouraged. Most hard to believe is the Jewish leftist support for the racist policy. They have been at the forefront of the civil rights movement in the US. In the sixties, they forced segregated schools and universities in the American South to accept Black students. In Israel, the Left has forced Jewish communities to accept Arab families; whereas, many Arab towns are legally off limits to Jews, such as Shechem and Bethlehem. Unfortunately, these same activists who fight against racial discrimination against Blacks and Arabs favor racial discrimination against their own Jewish brothers. They are willing to kick these people out of their homes only because they are Jewish. Jews today can live in New York, Paris, London and throughout the free world. Only in the Land of Israel, and due to a Jewish government, are there rules forbidding them from living where they will. Throughout their history, Jews have been expelled from the majority of the lands in which they lived. The English forbid Jews to live in England for centuries. It took Oliver Cromwell to overturn that decree. France had a similar policy. Of course, they were the good guys. What the rest of Europe did to the Jews was a lot more efficient - they simply burned them in ovens. After all, these expulsions and ethnic cleansing of Jews, it is particularly painful to see Jews doing the same thing to other Jews. Its sad to say, but after two thousand years of anti-Semitism, it seems that the message of Jew-hatred has finally been internalized. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

TERROR HITS ISRAELIS HARD - BUT LESS SO IN GUSH KATIF Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, October 31, 2004.

This is from today's Arutz-7. More than one out of every five Israeli Jews has experienced the loss of a relative or friend through terror or war in the past four years of the Oslo and Road Map Wars. This is the picture that emerges from a phone survey conducted by the University of Haifa's Center for National Security Studies. The poll shows that 21.8% of Israel's Jewish population suffered the terror-related loss of a friend or relative since September 2000, and over a quarter of the Israeli public (28.1%) makes sure to stay away from events, persons, or situations that remind them of a terrorist incident. The terrorism of the past four years has, according to the respondents answering the phone pollers, deteriorated to the extent that some 2/3 of the public report a drop in their confidence in the government's ability to protect them. Just over half the Israeli public - 51.8% - says it feels "less in control" of factors affecting their lives. The poll was conducted by Center director Prof. Gabriel Ben-Dor and research associate Dr. Daphna Canetti-Nisim, who arranged telephone interviews in late September with 1,613 respondents. The researchers found that Israel's Arab population is even more despondent - despite the fact that they have been less exposed to terrorism-related suffering than Jews. Another study carried out of late shows that the residents of Gush Katif are dealing with stress better than residents in other parts of the country. The results were surprising, said Dr. Hagit Cohen, who supervised the study on behalf of the Mental Health Center in Be'er Sheva, considering the proximity of Gush Katif to centers of violence and the constant mortar shellings and rocket attacks. Dr. Cohen, a researcher in the Center's Trauma and Post-Trauma Clinic, said that the results show that the people of Gush Katif show less stress and display fewer fears than others. "For instance," Dr. Cohen told Arutz-7 today, "we asked them to rate their sense of security on a scale from 1-10. Most of the people in Gush Katif gave very high ratings - adding, 'with G-d's help,' of course - while in the greater Tel Aviv area we saw mostly ratings of 1-3." She said that preliminary results from Kiryat Arba, in southern Judea, indicate a similar trend. The researchers' evaluation is that these residents are aided by their ideology, support for each other, and group-cohesiveness. The entire survey will be released later this week. Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@acm.org To Go To Top

TEN MINUTES AFTER TAKING OFFICE Posted by Arlene Peck, October 31, 2004.

Lord, what happens to Israel's leaders, in just ten minutes after taking office? They all turn into "Barak" and want to give away the store. Is it because they want to be loved so much? Well dear Israel it's not working. No matter matter how much you give in, newspapers like the Los Angeles times, and many more, are going to insist that it's not enough. We'll get to that in a minute. I used to think that it was only Arafat, the EU and United Nations who were determined to chop up Israel into little pieces, like slicing salami. However, that was before I watched with dismay how Ariel Sharon turned into a dictator, against his own people, no different from the ones who surround him in the third world Arab countries. In addition, I will be frank with you. I live in a state, California, where we are flooded with referendums to vote on every issue from three strikes for criminals and the key is thrown away, for life! to making ferrets legal. The absolute power a few tired, retired, retreaded or retarded politicans are able to wield amazes me. Hey, even our Governor, Arnold Schwartznegger,was brought into power by a dissatisfied constituency. Therefore, knowing that, it is obvious why I have been conditioned to thinking that a vote by the people is the only way to go. For one man to decide to turn over a chunk of his country to a foreign power would be the same as George Bush one day waking up and deciding to turn over the State of Texas to his good friend President Fox of Mexico. Because, he believed it historically belonged to them and was the "right" thing to do. Furthermore, it actually might not be such a great loss? However, we could not just do things like that in this country. An action such as a state giveaway would cause riots and chaos in our streets and there are people who would even miss Texas. So, that brings me back to the "love issue." Hey, as a journalist, I've traveled to Gaza a few times and saw for myself what a disgusting, filthy, nest of hate it is. There are hordes of barbarian, savage terrorists living there as a result of largesses of their Arab brothers. All they have to do with their time is to burn tires, smoke that 'laughing water ', and plan how they can get into Israel for their homicide bombings of innocent civilians. Personally, to my way of thinking, it is a cancer in the middle of the country and needs to be cut out by transferring the Arab population. However, I never envisioned the transfer to be that of the Jews from the Jewish State. But, it is a problem. If the Arabs can't be expelled, and they can't be controlled, let them stew in their own filth. So, let me tell you guys outside of the United States how this issue is playing out with the editors in my city. The Los Angeles Times reported Sharon's and the Knesset's actions as "A step toward a lasting peace between the Jewish state and the Palestinians. BUT much more is required: the actual evacuation of those settlers and many more in the West Bank." Get that guys? No matter what Israel offers, too much is never enough. The PLO supporting Los Angeles Times also wrote in this searing editorial, "Several hundred other settlers will be removed from the West Bank under the plan, but more than 200,000 Israelis will remain---a major stumbling block to the peace process." Personally, knowing their anti-Semitic leanings, they would not be happy until the entire state of Israel was given over to the PLO and I am not sure even that would be enough. Folks, they do not love Israel. All the Arabists who are on the payrolls of the Arab states from our State Department would probably agree with them when the Times wrote, "The government (Israel) should work with the Palestinians, to let them cross into Israel for the jobs they need: Gaza is heavily dependent on foreign aid, with more then half the population living on $2 a day or less." Why, in heaven's name is it Israel's responsibility to put these terrorists to work in the Jewish state and they don't feel the burden should go to any of the surrounding Arab states who have put them in their deplorable situation with their "refuge camps" for fifty years instead of absorbing them into the population. A follow-up editorial in the Los Angeles Times continued in this vein with "If Arafat is replaced with a transitional interim government, Israel can offer support by negotiating with it and letting ... Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com To Go To Top

TERROR ON THE WESTERN CAMPUS Posted by Phyllis Chesler, October 31, 2004.

Sometimes, as bad as things may seem, one must also remember to count one's blessings because things can always be worse. Indeed, elsewhere, they often are worse. For example: for the last month my columns have focused on what was happening at Duke University. In my view, when universities refuse to teach students the difference between what is true and what is false this constitutes an abdication of intellectual and moral responsibility which renders democracy utterly vulnerable to barbarism. I fear that Duke's hosting of the PSM conference without "taking sides," may indeed border on such abdication. But, as the immediate Jewish world and our supporters were covering the Palestine Solidarity Conference at Duke, something decidedly worse was happening at the University of Pisa in Italy. At Duke, both the pro-Israel and the pro-Palestine speakers, activists, protestors, and infiltrators were physically non-violent. Jew-hatred is far more physically violent in Europe, not only on their mean streets but at their universities. According to my informant, the prominent Roman journalist, Anselma Dell'Olio, last week, Shai Cohen, an Israeli diplomat, was invited to give a talk to students at the University of Pisa, a venerable institution which was founded in 1343. Cohen was to speak on "Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. " Professor Maurizio Vernassa invited students from the History Department and from the Afro-Asian institutes. The invitation was no secret. Cohen entered through the main entrance of the Aula Magna of the Political Science Department. According to Dell'Olio, "Cohen was greeted by a group of about 20 students wearing the Palestinian keffiah around their necks, shouting "Sharon assassino! Israel is a death dealer! Zionism is a crime against humanity!" Cohen was called a fascist murderer and other personal and far worse insults. The left-wing group then proceeded to shout him out of the University, literally and loudly threatened to pass from verbal to physical violence if he did not leave. Other students tried to calm things down and defended Cohen's right to speak, but they were unsuccessful, and the left-wing thugs shouted that no Israeli would be allowed to speak, that Israel has no right to exist and so on." The point: No national scandal ensued, except in Guiliano Ferrara's influential newspaper, Il Foglio, which has been publishing pieces about what happened in Pisa. The Dean of the University sent a tepid, delayed apology to Cohen. More important: The invitation to Cohen has not been re-scheduled. According to Dell'Olio, "A press release proudly bragging about "Pisa antagonista" successfully casting out the Israel heathen from the university and preventing the conference, appeared in Indymedia. Can what happened at the University of Pisa happen here? Some might say that it already has. There is very little free speech for anyone who takes a pro-Israel position at Berkeley. Concordia University in Montreal, the site of previous anti-Jewish riots, recently refused to allow former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to speak; citing security risks, they previously did not allow former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak either. Ironically, Duke University spent more than $50,000.00 to protect the PSM's freedom of speech. My point: Threats of violence have led to self-censorship on some NorthAmerican campuses. Pro-Israel factions do not threaten to riot if anti-Israel speakers come to town. De facto censorship also rules the North American campuses courtesy of Arab oil money, (and American oil company money too) who, over many years, have funded anti-Israel and pro-Palestine scholars at Middle East Institutes. Again, I ask: Can what happened at the University of Pisa happen here? America is a former British colony. Ex-colonials tend to internalize the belief that the colonizer is wiser, more sophisticated, intrinsically "better. " Thus, Americans are avid followers of British culture. But Americans--especially its intellectuals--love Italy for it's sensuous, pagan-Catholic beauty, landscape, music, art. Recently, one American leftist told me that if President Bush wins this next election she will "probably become an expatriate in Italy." Another left-wing professor said that if President Bush wins that "America will effectively become a police state and I'll probably have to move to Europe." Some second- and third-generation Israeli Jews have been moving back to their grandparents' European countries of origin, especially Germany and Poland. "The Promised Land," directed by Israelis Avy Hemy and Yael Friedman, and produced by Idan Regev, is an excellent film about this troubling subject. I recently viewed it at the East Hampton Film Festival. I understand: Jews have always been on the road, we are the original "beatniks." I understand: Like the biblical Abraham, some Jews, whether in Israel or elsewhere, want to leave their fathers' homes to explore both inner existential and outer geographic space, move freely, as individuals, from continent to continent. I understand: Some Israeli Jews want to escape the pressure cooker of the Middle East, even for a little while if not forever. Of course, most Israeli Jews are absolutely ready to die for their right to remain in Israel, despite the cost. But, if you've read the recent pieces by long-time expatriates Nidra Poller in Commentary (France) and Carol Gould in Frontpage (England), it is increasingly clear that Europe is no longer safe for Jews. If you've seen any of Pierre Rehov's important films, including his latest one, "Hostages of Hatred," which I also viewed at the EastHampton Film Festival, you will know that the Muslim Middle East is boiling over with Jew-hatred. Arab Jews can't go home again. Nor can most Christians. Please visit my website (www.phyllis-Chesler.com) where I have posted a 45 minute video by the Maronite Christian Brigitte Gabriel, who talks about her experiences growing up under Palestinian tyranny in Lebanon. North America remains safe. But, if the hate propaganda against the Jews and against the Jewish state is not quickly and effectively countered, then what happened at the University Pisa will happen here. It is only a matter of time. Let us use that time very well. Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D., is the author of twelve books including her latest, The New Anti-Semitism. The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It (Jossey Bass/John Wiley). She may be reached through her website, www.Phyllis-Chesler.com. This article appeared on Front Page Magazine (www.frontpagemagazine.com), October 29, 2004. To Go To Top

WHO BELIEVES A LIAR? Posted by Marcel Cousineau, October 31, 2004.

P.M. Sharon came out loud and clear that he will not permit Arafat's body to be buried in Jerusalem. But we all know that P.M. Sharon has lost his spine. He's says alot of things that he doesn't mean. There is no doubt that just 1 phone call from Washington will change his mind. This has been proven time and again. He's said a lot of things in the past with conviction that he has suddenly changed his mind on. There is no truth worth holding to with these politicians, they sell their soul to hold to power and advance their delusional agendas. The sad thing is they get away with their lies. A weak Israel will bend and Arafat will very likely be buried in Jerusalem. That's the reality appeaser Sharon gives us as he quiets all credible oppposition to his schemes that have proven dealdy to Am Yisriel, but pleasing to those who seeks Israel's extermination. To Go To Top

THE MOHAMED AL DURA AFFAIR CONCLUDED; BIALIK IN BAGDAD Posted by Steven Plaut, October 30, 2004.

"Al Dura Affair: the Dramatic Conclusion" (info # 012510/4) by Stéphane Juffa, Metula News Agency, 25 October 2004. This is a Résumé by Nidra Poller. The original article in French can be read at: http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=956 Background September 30, 2000: A France 2 news report filed by Talal Abu Rahma with a voice-over commentary by Charles Enderlin purports to show the fatal shooting of a Palestinian child, Mohamed Al Dura, and the wounding of his father Jamal by Israeli gunfire. France 2 distributed the report free of charge to world media. Metula News Agency has thoroughly investigated the affair, and concluded that the report is a fabrication, deliberately aimed at vilifying the IDF. The accusation against the IDF was based solely on the testimony of France 2 reporter Abu Rahma, backed up by his hierarchy at France Télévision. Abu Rahma's testimony under oath before the Palestinian Center for Human Rights can be read here: [accéder à la déclaration] The 3-year Metula News Agency investigation, in conformity with the findings of the IDF commission led by physician Nahum Shahaf, has consistently maintained that Abu Rahma's declaration was false, and that the 27 minutes of footage allegedly showing the Israelis shooting at the Al Duras does not exist. Repeated requests by our agency to view the 27 minutes of footage were denied. Further, MNA concluded that France 2 correspondent Charles Enderlin was deliberately lying, to make the incident seem authentic, when he claimed that he cut out the sequence of the childs death throes because they were too horrible to show. Enderlin also declared that there was no footage showing the fatal bullet hit the child. The images on the news report do not corroborate the accusation that child was killed by Israeli soldiers; the commentary suggests what the images do not show. France 2 claimed to be holding the clinching evidence -- the film of the childs death throes -- but would never present it. Friday October 22nd: the abscess is lanced Under circumstances connected to the Metula investigation and film demonstration, France Télévisions CEO, Marc Tessier, asked the station's news director Arlette Chabot to show the 27 minutes of raw footage to Luc Rosenzweig, former Le Monde journalist (now free lance contributor to Metula News Agency, Radio Communauté Juive, etc.) Rosenzweig, accompanied by two eminent media directors, was received in the France 2 offices by A. Chabot, Didier Epelbaum (advisor to the president of France 2) and an image analyst from the station's legal department. The France 2 officials tried to sidestep projection of the 27 minutes of raw footage, dismissing them as insignificant and irrelevant, since Abu Rahma had retracted his testimony, explaining that the cameraman had been caught off guard when he testified. Caught off guard? Three days after the incident, comfortably seated in a lawyers office? So they are admitting that Abu Rahma gave false testimony and subsequently retracted. Now that the sole witness to the assassination of Mohammed Al Dura has retracted, there is nothing left of the affair but a shred of bad fiction not worth a kopek. Rosenzweig and his colleagues were not aware of Abu Rahma's retraction for the simple reason that France 2 never made it public. For four years French public TV officials had been hiding the fact that they do not have 27 minutes of film to prove the blood libel against Israel. They had allowed the hoax to become a symbol of the Palestinian revolt against the barbarous Jews. The Al Dura image has generated years of dreadful violence, murderous mobs, the Ramallah lynching, etc. It has fanned hatred between Palestinians and Israelis, between Jews and Arabs. The atmosphere in the France 2 office became tense. Didier Epelbaum was violating numerous provisions of the ethical charter he himself had drafted, namely the obligation to correct news reports when new, contradictory information arises. Informed that Abu Rahma is in Paris undergoing medical treatment, Rosenzweig said he would like to speak with him. Epelbaum replied that it wouldn't be worth the trouble because the Palestinian cameraman doesnt speak French and his English is very poor. St&ecute;phane Juffa remembers hearing Abu Rahma speak on CNN; his English was fine. Finally Rosenzweig and his colleagues are shown the 27 minutes of raw footage. No new images of the Al Duras. No shots of Israeli soldiers. Scenes of demonstrators attacking the Israeli position, scenes of kids pretending to be wounded by the Israelis. Epelbaum comments: Those kids are always doing that! Enderlin claimed he'd handed over the raw footage intact to Israeli authorities. Rosenzweig saw that this wasn't true. The few seconds where you can see the child moving voluntarily after he was (allegedly) killed instantly by the fatal shot had been retouched with stills. Rosenzweig asks about the unbearable death throes Embarrassed reaction from the France 2 officials. There are no such images. Epelbaum asks the visiting journalists if they have proof that the news report is a fake. He doesn't seem to realize that the September 30, 2000 incident at Netzarim Junction is totally baseless now that it has become obvious that the sole witness (Abu Rahma) gave false testimony and the correspondent (Enderlin) was caught lying. But Rosenzweig has further proof. He plugs his USB stick into a computer and brings up the picture of a dead child taken in Gaza's Shifa Hospital on the day of the Al Dura incident, and presented as Mohamed Al Dura. There's a slight problem here, he says. The face on this corpse is not exactly the same as the face [of Mohamed] in your news report. Chabot wonders out loud if they had been fooled, and suggests having police experts compare the two. Metula has already made the test: the two boys are not the same age, the wounds on the corpse have nothing in common with the alleged wounds of M. Al Dura. Conclusion Enderlin can stick to his usual defense--explaining that Israeli army officers fell into his trap, which is true, and that the State of Israel would have sued him if the report were a hoax but it won't work anymore. In fact, Daniel Seaman, head of the government press office (GPO) and the Prime Minister's spokesman, Raanan Gissin, have already publicly announced that the Al Dura news report is a fake. Seaman informed us that the government had decided it was not appropriate to drag accredited foreign correspondents into court. But that might change after the revelations in this article. There is nothing left of the claim that Mohamed Al Dura was assassinated by Israeli soldiers. But the larger question, of the dangers when foreign media interfere in a conflict, remains to be addressed. France 2 has been fooling people for four years, pretending they were holding raw footage that showed Jewish soldiers assassinating an Arab boy. The French public TV channel contributed to the revival of medieval rumors that demonize Jews: the Israeli soldiers would have to be utterly heartless to pick out a child in the crowd and fire at him for 45 minutes until they killed him. The media hoax fabricated by Abu Rahma and Enderlin exceeded their expectations. The image of the ferocious Israelis still holds, and it has convinced the vast majority of French-speaking people. Now France Télévision has a tremendous task. They have to explain what happened and acknowledge what they did. And they must reconsider the journalists and methods that produced the Al Dura affair, the biggest hoax in media history. The people who did it should no longer be allowed to inform the French public about the Arab-Israeli conflict. And they shouldnt be allowed to keep the prizes awarded for the scoop. The Metula News Agency will be watching! The original article in French can be read at: http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=956 "Bialik in Baghdad" by Amnon Rubinstein, The Jerusalem Post, Oct. 26, 2004. Amnon Rubinstein is founder of the Shinui movement and a former education minister, is dean of the Radzyner School of Law at The Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya. What is the connection between the Hebrew poet Chaim Nachman Bialik and the American invasion of Iraq? Is there a connection between the author of In the City of Killing, who died in 1934, and the killing now taking place in Baghdad? The answer is given several times a week in Britain, at London's National Theater, which is having a successful run of a new play by David Hare called Stuff Happens. This play, like others presently on in London, fiercely attacks the United States and the Bush administration over its invasion of Iraq. The three-hour play presents two kinds of actors: caricatures and reciters. The caricatures are of the stupid enemies of humanity George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Condoleezza Rice all of whom are presented as mindless idiots. Two characters, however, are not idiots Colin Powell and Tony Blair. They're weak, ridiculous, and ultimately manipulated by the mindless idiots. The reciters stand up and say what they think of the situation. One of them is a "Palestinian academic" who declares that the Hebrew poet Chaim Nachman Bialik said Israel would be normal and human only when it had Zionist crooks, Zionist prostitutes and Zionist murderers. She adds: "Well, it's human now. The victims of the conflict have become the problem. We are the Jews of the Jews." The audience one of the most sophisticated audiences in the world bursts into applause. The Palestinian reciter goes on to describe Israel as a "$3-billion-a-year American colony in the Middle East," for which the mindless idiots are waging the war. Needless to say, there is no Israeli reciter to refute that. The new fashion rules out any such balance. That story about Bialik is a joke that made the rounds during the Palestinian yishuv: According to the anecdote whose veracity is hard to ascertain when Bialik learned there had been a theft in the little Tel Aviv of the day, he responded with typical humor: Finally we are normal. Bialik didn't say anything about murderers. And anyone who knows anything about the poet also knows he was incapable of saying what playwright David Hare attributes to him. Hare, moreover, has seemingly never heard of Palestinian, Arab or Muslim murderers. The only murderers mentioned in the play are Bialik's imaginary "Zionist murderers." Hare can hardly be accused of anti-Semitism his wife is a leading Jewish fashion designer. Nor can we charge him with extreme anti-Israeli sentiments. His monologue about a visit to Israel and Palestine may be critical of Israeli policies who isn't? but it was fair and full of empathy toward Israelis. So what's going on here? Two things: First, ideology defeats artistry. This is not the first time an artist has subjugated his talent to rigid ideology, the result being, invariably, boring theater. Secondly, fashion trumps common sense. It's faddish to be anti-Israeli, even when Israel is not involved and it's a fashion that must not be argued with. The Spectator's theater critic noted that there is no play in London which understands, or even tries to understand, the Bush-Blair position, because were there a playwright who wrote such a play, nobody would present it. And if, by some miracle, such a play did get produced, it would be trashed by the critics and closed within days of opening. We cannot ignore this fashion, so prevalent in Western intellectual circles including among those who were once avid supporters of Israel. And we cannot fight it with hasbara. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

LET'S DO IT AGAIN. FAX/PHONE MK'S TO VOTE AGAINST SHARON'S UNILATERAL RETREAT PLAN Posted by Susie Dym, October 30, 2004.

ROUND 2: NATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO FAX AND PHONE MK'S TO VOTE AGAINST SHARON'S UNILATERAL RETREAT PLAN Following the Knesset vote on the "disengagement program," a vote on the "disengagement law" is scheduled to be held this Tuesday - but yet another grassroots campaign is underway to have it pushed off by at least a week. The bill to be voted Tuesday, November 2, 2004, known as the Compensation/Evacuation bill, contains the nitty-gritty of the expulsion from Gaza and northern Shomron. Almost 90 pages long, it contains details such as: the amount of money each family will receive for moving-van costs; the amount of time they are liable to spend in prison for congregating in groups of three during the evacuation (three years; five, if they are armed with a gun or knife at the time); the fact that all movable and immovable property that remains in the area after the specified date of evacuation becomes the property of the government; and more. The "delay the vote" campaign is working on several fronts, including reminding Likud MKs of their commitment to vote against the plan and pressuring Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin to use his authority to reschedule the vote for a later date. The organizers state that the following points can be made to Rivlin (who can be reached by fax at 02 (+9722, from abroad) 649-6193): There is no reason to cooperate with Sharon in rushing the Knesset vote - especially in view of the political upheaval to which we are currently witness; the proposed law has many "holes," such as what to do with children - who by law may not be arrested - in the expected event that both of their parents are arrested for protecting their homes; and more. Remember the men, women, and children of Gush Katif who have endured terrorist attack after terrorist attack over the past four years and have stood fast and remained strong and made many sacrifices for their convictions to protect the Land of Israel. PLEASE ACT IMMEDIATELY The message is simple: Ask the Knesset Member to VOTE AGAINST anything that promotes to Sharon's unilateral disengagement retreat plan. The unilateral retreat by Israel, and rout of Israelis, will create yet another radical Islamic terrorist state. It will encourage the terrorists by handing them a victory and it will increase Israel's strategic vulnerability to attack. You may add another sentence or 2 if you like. Please make it short. Be sure to give them your name, address and phone number. Note: These numbers are for calling within Israel. If calling from the U.S., begin with 011-972-remove the 0 and dial the rest of the number. This campaign is coordinated with all the major pro-Zionist groups in Israel and the Gush Katif Committee. These are the 20 MK's who are central to the vote on Tuesday: Cell phone numbers of the MK himself (for the brave) fax numbers Telephone numbers of offices (speak to aide)  Member of Knesset 050-952121 052-8502075 02-6753360 02-6753206/6753280 MK Ruchama Avraham 050-6272090 02-5308933 02-5309980/ 02-6753446 MK Yaakov Edri 054-700002 02-6753199496404 02-6753273 MK Michael Eitan 050-5284710 02-6496164 02-6753240/6496538 MK Eli Aflalo 050-6298049 02-6496591  03-6976990 02-6753846/   6977154-03 MK Zev Boim  -050-5493233 08-8640640 02-6496456 02-6753872/3 MK Daniel ben-Lulu 054-220100 02-6753486 02-6753937/6753170 MK Roni Bar On 054-7703225 052-4501818 02-6496406 02-6753443 MK Inbal Gavrieli 050-6205014 / 02-6773699 02-6753266 6773690-02 MK Tsachi HaNegbi 054-5655292 02-6753567 02-6753656 MK Yehiel Chazan   03-9485835 02-6753237 / 75 /  03-9485800 MK Yisrael Katz   02-5602246 02-5602330 Min Limor Livnat   02-6787662 02-6705811 MK Danny Naveh   02-6496421  02-5635769 02-5317200 Min Bibi Netanyahu 050-708712 02-6753100 02-6753123 / 3658 MK Yuval Steinitz   02-6753792 5303506-02 02-5303531 Min Silvan Shalom 050-457817 02-6496014 02-6753221/6753393 MK David Tal  052-481138 02-6496186 02-6753870 / 371802 MK Chemi Doron   02-6496503 02-6753666 / 133 MK Yigal Yasinov .Was former Prisoner of Zion 02-6703729 6703748-02 MK Victor Breilovsky Ten information items to read before you get started: 1. On Tuesday, 26 October, there will be a fateful vote in the Knesset re: the unilateral retreat plan. Below is a list of the 20 MKs who are central to the vote on Tuesday. This campaign is coordinated with all the major pro-Zionist groups in Israel and in particular with the Gush Katif Committee. 2. It's simple -- you call and say to the aide or secretary who answers something like: "My name is ___ and I would like MK ___ to vote against hitnatkut (unilateral withdrawal) on Tuesday". If the aide or secretary refuses to accept your message, or insists that you "have to" send a fax, insist that accepting telephone messages is -- with all due respect -- part of their job. If you get an answering machine, by all means, leave a message. 3. If you have a fax, fax the same short message. Don't waste your time on long messages; they are not read. Your time is better spent calling a dozen or more friends and relatives and urging them to please, please participate in this campaign. 4. Don't use email -- it is not effective enough. Knesset members hardly ever read email, and your friends and relatives are MUCH more likely to cooperate (fax or make phonecalls) if you show how much you care by personally calling them -- rather than merely emailing them. 5. All the MKs are from the Likud party, except for David Tal (Amir Peretz's workers' party -- formerly Shas) and Doron, Yasinov and Brailovsky (Shinui). 6. Are you willing to use YOUR fax machine to send a fax on behalf of somebody ELSE? Call friends or relatives who don't have a fax and ask them to dictate a message to you! Or, contact Susie Dym sddym@bezeqint.net and I will send you however many faxes (from other people) you ask for. For example, if you ask for 3 faxes from others, that will mean you have 60 pages to fax out -- 3 pages to each of 20 Knesset members. It doesn't take as long as you think and it's extremely effective. 7. If you have no fax machine, you can email me a message for the MKs and I will try to find someone with a fax machine who will fax out your message. Messages in Hebrew rather than English are better. HOWEVER DON'T FORGET TO MAKE THE PHONECALLS. Phonecalls are the most important of all!!! 8. If you know Hebrew, and are willing to call 25 people (who are known to oppose the retreat) and ask THEM to phone and fax, please contact 052-987566 or email man_mos1@yahoo.com and you will get 25 names to call. 9. Please forward this to everybody you know who you think MIGHT be against the unilateral withdrawal campaign. 10. If you get really nervous on Tuesday, it will make you feel better to make a second round of phonecalls. MANY THANKS FOR YOUR WONDERFUL ASSISTANCE!! Sincerely, Susie Dym, spokesperson Mattot Arim To Go To Top

CAN RUSSIA LEARN FROM ISRAEL'S EXPERIENCE IN COUNTER-TERRORISM? Posted by IsrAlert, October 30, 2004.

This article was written by Ratmir Orestov, Special to Russia Profile, October 26, 2004 (http://www.russiaprofile.org/international/article.wbp?article-id =D0C11C92-D5ED-4492-BC28-EA8A065301F7). Israel has been counteracting the threat of terrorism for about 40 years. Over the past decade, the country has developed what many people consider the world's most effective system for combating terrorism. Dr. Eli Karmon, senior analyst at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism attached to the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzlia, describes how this mechanism works. Karmon highlights four main elements in the terrorism-prevention scheme. These elements act as links in one chain, defending society against the threat of terror. ......To begin with, intelligence work is of paramount importance. Karmon believes that it is far more important to foil terrorists' plans on the drawing board than to deal with a real attack. Therefore, the police do not play a major role in counteracting terrorism in Israel. Rather, they are considered the last line of defense. Reports from agents in the field have led to the arrests of dozens of suicide bombers before they were able to carry out their attacks. Moreover, says Karmon, agents on the ground are not the only way that Israel's security services collect information. For instance, airborne surveillance is also used. Defense measures are the next element that deserve particular attention. Above all, these involve guarding air and sea transportation routes, foreign embassies and any public spaces where people tend to gather. Armed air marshals began flying on Israeli planes in the late 1960s, while tight security checks were later introduced at airports and seaports. These defense measures have had an impressive record: Since then, there has not been a single terrorist attack on an Israeli plane. Significantly, the job of providing security in Israel does not belong to the government alone. Under a special government resolution, private security is mandatory in public spaces, including shopping centers, restaurants, parking garages and schools. Since the state cannot maintain an entire army of private security guards, business owners implement these measures and cover their expenses with a small markup on their goods and services. The police have the right to check the efficacy of a business's security, and they can even close it down if the owners have not taken strong enough measures. One remaining vulnerability, however, is public transportation. In particular, buses remain at risk and the relevant security measures still need serious work. All this activity requires not only considerable financial and human resources, but also certain psychological preparations. This leads to the third link in the chain: The general population has to be included. Ordinary people play a significant role in Israel's counter-terrorism doctrine. For years, movie theaters and television stations have run short films about what a suspicious package looks like, how to identify a potential criminal and what to do if you find yourself in a dangerous situation. An Aganti-terrorist literacy campaignAh is being run to educate the younger generation. Consequently, law enforcement receives a constant stream of alarms, each one of which is checked. Of course, the police do not always find a bomb, but the result is that people feel involved in something important. This, in turn, increases their confidence in Israeli law enforcement. Karmon is convinced that keeping the population informed makes them trust the authorities and cooperate with them when necessary. The fourth important area in Israel's counter-terrorism scheme is the neutralization of terrorist groups' strategic leaders. Karmon believes that the masterminds of terrorist attacks are far more dangerous than the individual perpetrators. He argues that attacks cannot be carried out unless there is an organized structure behind them, and that the internal coordination of such structures is undermined when the people who give the orders to attack are taken out of the equation. The cooperation between the Israeli and Palestinian security services in the late 1990s clearly demonstrates how effective this policy can be. At the time, the Palestinian Authority arrested most of the mid-level and senior leaders of extremist movements, which led to a near cessation of terrorist attacks. However, when the second intifada began in 2000, these prisoners were released. Karmon points out that they needed only six months to re-establish interaction within their own ranks and resume their terrorist activities. The counter-terrorism expert is convinced that both in Israel and other countries, governments pay insufficient attention to studying public sentiment in the areas where terrorists live and work. For example, they rarely consider that the use of excessive military force against terrorists often leads to civilian deaths and a consequent surge in radical beliefs. Meanwhile, in various meetings and exchanges of opinions with the other side, it is possible to identify moderate voices with whom constructive dialogue can be conducted. Karmon believes that Israel's counter-terrorist scheme can be applied to Russia, even though the different scale and conditions NQ including the much larger size of the population, the country's vast territories and its complicated state structure NQ mean that far greater efforts will be needed to implement effective measures. Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

LETTER TO SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE EDITOR Posted by Dafna Yee, October 30, 2004.

Dear Editor: In the article, "Mighty Macedonian: Alexander the Great" by Richard Covington, the map on pages 74-75 is faulty, as it completely omits Judea/Israel. A more accurate map can be found at: http://www.epsaweb.org/images/0260.gif. According to all historical references I've ever read, Alexander specifically conquered Judea/Israel, and the Hellenic influence remained long after Alexander died. "In 333 BCE, with the conquest of Judea, Alexander the Great instituted Greek rule over all of Judea and of Israel." In fact, the entire Maccabean revolt was against a Hellenic ruler, Antiochus, in 168 BCE http://www.jafi.org.il/education/festivls/hanuka/h1.html. Covington mentions Alexander's conquest of Syria as well as the fortress of Tyre in present-day Lebanon, but noticeably omits Judea/Israel. He writes, "The conquest continued. Following a grinding, seven-month siege, Alexander captured the island fortress of Tyre, in present-day Lebanon; Egyptians, oppressed by the Persians, welcomed him as a liberator." (page 77) Tyre is on the map but Jerusalem, which was a far greater city, and which Alexander also conquered at this time, is not. The name of that land at the time of Alexander was known as Yehud to the Greeks, and it was most definitely on their maps as separate from Syria. "After Alexander's conquest, if not earlier, the name Yehud had become known to the Greek-speaking world in the form of Ioudaia and this became the Latin Iudaea (Judea), or perhaps the name came from the people, now called Judeans instead of 'Syrians'." http://focusonjerusalem.com/whatromecalledthepromisedland.html There has been too much altering of history in otherwise reputable publications to accommodate present-day political correctness about Israel. This is usually done in an attempt to eradicate the Jews' historical claims to their homeland, often with the excuse of being "fair to both sides." I find this tendency both appalling and contrary to sound historical research. In fact, it amounts to a historical massacre of the truth. You can email the Smithsonian at LettersEd@simag.si.edu or send a letter to Letters, Smithsonian, MRC 951, P.O Box 37012, Washington, D.C. 20013 Include you name and address. Dafna Yee is the director Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

LESSONS FROM ISRAEL'S WAR Posted by IsrAlert, October 29, 2004.

This was written by Michael Oren, and appeared on National Post, October 27, 2004. The fall of 2000 saw the outbreak of yet another Arab-Israeli war -- the sixth or seventh, depending on who's doing the counting. This war was different from any that had raged before it. Though several Middle Eastern states were indirectly involved in the fighting, this was overwhelmingly a struggle between Israel and the (Ed. Arab) Palestinian people. The fall of 2000 saw the outbreak of yet another Arab-Israeli war -- the sixth or seventh, depending on who's doing the counting. This war was different from any that had raged before it. Though several Middle Eastern states were indirectly involved in the fighting, this was overwhelmingly a struggle between Israel and the Palestinian people. Moreover, in contrast to previous wars, most of which were fought between regular armies, this war was fought mostly in urban areas, pitting Israeli forces against Palestinian irregulars whose principal targets were Israeli civilians. Yet, in one fundamental way, this latest war resembled those that occurred before it. The wars of 1948 and 1956, of 1967, 1973 and 1982 -- all were proxy wars in which the Israeli and Arab armies served as stand-ins for the competing powers of the Cold War. This war, too, has been a proxy war -- not between Soviets and the West, of course, but between the West and world terror. This was the first war in which a Western-style democratic state was subjected to relentless, often daily, terrorist strikes whose stipulated purpose was neither a change in that state's government nor even an alteration of its borders, but the unravelling of its civil society and -- ultimately -- the elimination of that state entirely. When the violence began in 2000, it mainly consisted of clashes between Israeli security forces and rock-throwing Palestinian youth -- a repetition, so it seemed, of the Intifada that had shaken the territories between 1987 and 1991, and that had persuaded so many Israelis of the need to end the occupation. Yet it soon became clear that the word "Intifada," connoting a non-violent popular revolt, was no longer applicable. Before long, masked gunmen took the place of rock-throwing youths. Their weapons were being turned not only on Israeli soldiers in the territories, but increasingly on Israeli civilians on both sides of the Green Line. The southern Jerusalem neighbourhood of Gilo came under intense fire from the Palestinian suburbs of Bethlehem -- the level of shooting growing so loud at times that my family and I, situated just down the road, could barely hear ourselves talking around the dinner table. However, the impact of shootings paled beside that of suicide bombers who aimed to kill the maximum number of civilians on buses, restaurants and other public sites. Now there was nothing terribly new about roadside ambushes in Israel or suicide bombers -- my sister-in-law (a Jewish day school teacher from Connecticut) was killed in one such bus bombing in August, 1995. At the time, however, she was considered not so much a victim of terror as a victim of peace, an attempt by peripheral extremists to derail the Oslo negotiation process. What was new in 2000 was the massive outpouring of support for terror by the Palestinian population -- parades of tens of thousands in Gaza, the relentless adoration of martyrs in the official Palestinian media, and the calls for a million martyrs more. Israel's reaction to this new type of war was shock. The government responded not by suspending negotiations with the Palestinians but by expediting them, offering Arafat more concessions than he had achieved at Camp David the previous summer. Meanwhile, there was no attempt to beef up defences around public areas, no attempt, certainly, to counter-attack and bring the fighting across the Green Line and into the Palestinians' camp. On Oct. 12, 2000, I was called to emergency reserve duty. A few hours later, I was in a Blackhawk helicopter bound for Nablus, the hottest front. I landed amid confusion and flying bullets. Several peppered our jeep; another, a 7.62 mm sniper's round, hit my commanding officer in the head -- where it was stopped by his newly issued Kevlar helmet. Two Israeli reservists had just then been taken prisoner by Palestinian policemen who then turned them over to a mob that lynched them and mutilated their bodies. That night, squatting in a trench on one of the mountains overlooking Nablus, I watched Israel's response to these attacks -- an IDF gunship flew over and fired its machine guns directly into ... a deserted soccer field. I remember thinking: Why is Israel, after sustaining such terrible losses, retaliating against turf? The most basic reason was that Israel simply lacked the means to retaliate. Though much of the territories remained under Israeli occupation, well over 90% of the Palestinian population, including all the major cities, were under Palestinian Authority control, meaning Israel no longer had access to intelligence sources. Consequently, the Israeli army's most senior officers told Barak that Israel lacked a military option and that victory over terror was impossible. Internally and internationally constrained, unsure of itself and unwilling to confront its enemy, Israel was all but frozen. Theatres and restaurants stood vacant. Foreign investment, the lifeblood of Israel's high-tech industry, dried up. This was Israel's situation in January, 2001, when Ehud Barak's government fell and was replaced by a more right-wing coalition under Ariel Sharon. He called in Israeli generals, demanded a plan for military victory and brought in a chief of staff who would implement it. Slowly, almost imperceptively, Sharon began to escalate counter-measures -- targeting terrorist leaders, and establishing checkpoints around Palestinian cities. These measures continued till March, 2002, Israel's bloodiest month, which concluded with a nightmarish attack on a Passover Seder in the city of Netanya. Sharon struck back with Operation Defensive Shield -- a far-reaching military operation to reoccupy the West Bank's cities. Open season was declared on the so-called "political" leaders of Hamas and the al-Aqsa brigades. Yasser Arafat was confined to his half-ruined headquarters in Ramallah, where he has remained ever since. For the first time in 18 months of war, the terrorists were put on the defensive, the targets of swift-hitting raids launched by Israeli commandos working in close collaboration with the intelligence services. One of those commandos was my 19 year-old son, Yoav. During my old paratrooping days, one operation every three months was considered a heavy load, Yoav and his group went out nightly, sometimes twice nightly. Instead of calling in air strikes or artillery -- what any normal army would do, precisely what the U.S. military is now doing in Falluja -- the Israeli commando units went directly into the terrorists' homes, ferreting them out -- risking their own lives, yes, but also greatly reducing the number of collateral civilian casualties. The result: In contrast to Israeli casualties in the war -- three-quarters of whom have been civilians, less then half of all Palestinian casualties have been civilian -- a statistic almost unrivalled in modern warfare. The immediate result was a drastic reduction in the number of successful suicide bombings. Sharon had proved that Israel could strike back against terrorists, greatly inhibiting their ability to act. In 2004, Israel has prevented over 400 attempted suicide bombings, and the rate of successful attacks has been reduced by over 90%. Some of this success can be attributed to the separation barrier, which has virtually eliminated terrorist attacks in sectors of the West Bank where it has been completed. Looking back at the last four years, the world can learn some invaluable lessons from Israel's war on terror. The first is, quite simply, recognizing that this is a war -- a total war, an existential war, a war of survival. A national leader, accordingly, must put virtually all other considerations aside. He or she must seek to create a national consensus and to maintain vital alliances -- to emulate Churchill in 1940 and Roosevelt after Pearl Harbor. Even then, the state and its leaders must be prepared to endure significant stress internally and bitter condemnations in the international arena. Secondly, victories can be won against terror without totally devastating the host society. Victory is possible while maintaining basic moral and democratic values. This, arguably, is Israel's greatest achievement in this war, for though the Palestinian people declared war against not just the state but also the people of Israel, we did not retaliate with war against the Palestinians. Throughout, Israel used only a fraction of its military force, and never fired a single artillery shell at a Palestinian target. And though some Palestinian neighbourhoods, particularly in Gaza, have suffered extensive damage, Palestinian society has not been reduced to rubble -- no place in the territories even remotely resembles Dresden in 1945 or Hanoi in 1972 or Chechnya today. No place evokes a sense of what a country would look like after it had sent successive waves of suicide bombers against the civilian populations of France or Russia or the United States. From a state of near-paralysis at the end of 2000, Israel has rebounded. The hotels are filled and the restaurants, though now gated and guarded, are packed. In this year alone, Israelis garnered the country's first Nobel Prizes in chemistry, its first Olympic gold medal and the championships of both European basketball leagues -- heady achievements for a nation at war. I would urge other Western nations to take a close look. Israel has been your litmus, your laboratory. We have shown the world that you can prevail against terror. Michael Oren is a Senior Fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and is the author of the critically acclaimed 2002 book "Six Days of War: June 1967" and the "Making of the Modern Middle East". This essay is adapted from a lecture delivered on Monday at Toronto's Holy Blossom Temple as part of the Gerald Schwartz/Heather Reisman Fall 2004 Lecture Series, "Terror and the Defence of the West." To Go To Top

BANKROLLING TERRORISM Posted by Tamar Bush, October 29, 2004.

This was writen by Alastair Gordon, director of communications, Canadian Coalition for Democracies (http://CanadianCoalition.com). The Canadian Jewish News reported this week that Paul Martin's Liberal government has decided to continue funding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). UNRWA's commissioner-general, Peter Hansen, recently admitted to a CBC interviewer that Hamas members were on his organization's payroll. In May, 2004, UNRWA ambulances were caught smuggling out terrorists after they killed Israelis in Gaza. In that same month, Israeli news broadcast a video of armed terrorists using UNRWA ambulances to flee. Hamas is a group that has been designated as a terrorist organization by our government. As a Canadian, I am ashamed that my tax dollars are bankrolling Hamas terrorists through the $10-million per year given to UNRWA. Why are UNRWA services to the Palestinians deemed so important by our government that they are worth the lives of innocent Israelis? We are sending tax dollars to an organization that we have outlawed. Our government has also given a quarter-billion dollars to the Palestinian Authority while refusing to account for how it is spent. What Canadian interests are being served by such a policy? UNRWA funding should be stopped until we are certain that the agency's activities are 100% humanitarian. By supporting UNRWA, an organization that employs Hamas terrorists, and by failing to pressure the Palestinian Authority to end its terror campaign against Israelis, Paul Martin and his government are proving to be neither friends of Israel nor friends of democracy. To Go To Top

ARAFAT IN PARIS Posted by Donna Hadida, October 29, 2004.

He should be sent to hell one way ticket no return ... Arafat hurry! Hell is waiting for you anxiously ... To Go To Top

CODE WORDS FOR APPEASEMENT; ARABS FEIGN TOLERANCE; OTHER ITEMS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 29, 2004.

CODE WORDS FOR APPEASEMENT The Israel Policy Forum approves of Israeli withdrawals (which have proved counter-productive). An activist in it said, "Being pro-Israel means making sure Israel is at peace." "An active US engagement is critical to that goal." Candidate Kerry named a former Board member of AIPAC to head the campaign's Mideast policy formulation. But the Senator also consulted with former Mideast officials Martin Indyk and Dennis Ross. The latter pair would want Israel to negotiate even under terrorist attack. They would demand "progress" in the negotiation, when one side is not fulfilling its commitments (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2004, p.6 from Ron Kampeas, Jewish Telegraph Agency, 7/28). What is "peace?" To the Israel Policy Forum, it means peace agreement (that the Arabs violate). It should mean the end of Muslim intolerance of infidels and tolerance of violence. What is "active US engagement?" To Martin Indyk, it meant frequent US interference in Israel but no pressure on the Arabs. What is "progress in the negotiations?" To Dennis Ross it meant that the two sides come closer together. Since the Arab side doesn't budget, "progress," or "bridge the gap," as Pres. Clinton used to put it, really means that Israel makes more concessions. What do they mean, progress, even when one side is not fulfilling its commitments. They mean that Israel should continue to make concessions, even though the Arabs do not fulfill their commitments. That encourages Arab bellicosity and strengthens Arab belligerence. HOW EGYPT DESCRIBES U.S. COUNTER-ATTACKS IN IRAQ "Al-Ahram," an official Egyptian newspaper stated that "US massacres picked up in Iraq," and "Sharon escalated his brutal 'days of penitence' campaign." Israel and the US attempt to divert attention from their alleged brutality by blaming violence on al-Qaeda. The attack in Taba may have been the work of "extremist" settlers, wiling to use any means to keep from being evacuated. (Recognize the familiar Arab disavowal of responsibility?) Israel will use the attack in Taba to make more attacks on the P.A.. IMRA points out, it doesn't. Rather, Egypt uses these allegations to divert attention from the lack of security measures there. The resolution against terrorism that Russia proposed fails to distinguish between terrorism and national liberation (IMRA, 10/19). Some Americans assert that US actions invoke hated of the US. Al-Ahram's vitriol indicates that that hatred existed before the US war, as the series of terrorist incidents culminating in 9/11 demonstrated. This hatred gets exacerbated by continued defamation by Egypt, when it accuses Israel and the US of brutality. (The US donates a couple of billion dollars a year to building up the Egyptian army. That is my country's real sin.) The Arabs commit the brutal acts, but Egypt excuses it, calling that national liberation. The bombing does not keep that prospect away. Nor are any settlers known to be willing to use such means, and especially not on their own people. This slander would not be indulged in so lightly if the Israeli Left had not prepared the way by defaming the settlers. It isn't national liberation that Arafat seeks. It is religious domination. Terrorism is the practice of making war on civilians. It is a war crime. It never is permissible. INTERNATIONAL HORSE TRADING To enroll Britain in the coalition against Saddam, Pres. Bush was asked to endorse the Road Map (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2004, p.9 from Eli Lake, NY Sun, 8/4). Pres. Bush did seem suddenly to endorse the Europeans' anti-Israel version of the Map, after having emphasized that the Arabs must end terrorism. Was it a horse trade? Alternatively, was it that the traditionally anti-Zionist State Dept., headed by the powerful Powell, got its way? The Axis of Evil looms over all. Pres. Bush should have made that apparent. Then threatened countries would join the US voluntarily and in their own long-term interest, without having to be paid concessions. The Democratic Party should have helped spread the alarm, instead of suggesting that diplomacy (at Israel's expense!), police work, and intelligence would suffice. THE ATTACK AT TABA STARTS A TREND Islamist ideologists have been developing two theories: (1) The way to get at Israel is to take over Egypt; (2) Islamists, who have been freelancing all over the world, should struggle primarily in their own countries. They predict more attacks within Egypt. Egypt had been releasing Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, when the organization switched to political means. The current terrorists, however, may be in the next generation (IMRA, 10/19). They would use political means to gain power, then commit violence. They still belong in jail. SEN. KERRY HAS A POINT Sen. Kerry proposes to use more diplomacy and to work within more of a coalition. That proposal has been derided, to some effect. Pres. Bush cites the existence of a coalition. However, British membership in that coalition is insecure. Britain may pull out at any time. In the way he treated the Europeans, Pres. Bush made their policy disagreements more irritating. Britons feel unconsulted by the Bush administration about Iraq policy. The feel insulted, too, after Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld said that they were dispensable. As a result, when the US asked Britain to redeploy some troops to guard an area, thereby freeing US troops for more active combat, Members of Parliament objected. All three major British Parties are anti-Bush, though for now the Prime Minister is not. If we need British help in the future, we may not get it (Andrew Sullivan, NY Sun, 10/22, p.11). The US request actually was putting US troops in the most danger. The US does have a way of ruffling feathers when it takes charge. An Administration must be particularly inept to alienate Britain, our closest ally in combat. Sen. Kerry has a point. ISRAELI ECONOMY A current report on the state of the Israeli economy shows it has been growing and will continue doing so for the foreseeable future. Finance Min. Netanyahu credits his reforms for moving thousands of Israelis from welfare to employment. On the other hand, some businessmen foresee greater deficits, foreign restrictions, and insufficient reform. PM Sharon threatened to stop supporting reform if Netanyahu stopped supporting the abandonment plan (Arutz-7, 10/20). The reform is moving slowly. The government does play politics with billions, as for fences instead of fuller offensives. Foreign political restrictions are easier to impose upon a government that is so appeasement-minded and does not proudly make its case. Sharon plays dirty in holding his country's economic progress hostage to his abandonment plan, as if it has no case. COLUMBIA U. GETTING LIKE CAIRO U.? "... Columbia's standing as one of the great research universities in the nation is jeopardized by a contingent of professors whose disdain for Israel, America, democracy, and freedom has a remarkable influence over Columbia's curriculum and quality of its research." These professors, are a minority. Their views are not accepted by most students. A book by the chair of Arab studies is "riddled with errors and anti-Jewish themes." The contingent's "loathing of Israel, dismissal of Israel's security concerns, and contempt of Israel's democratic values cannot be explained or rationalized but are best understood as irrational expressions of antisemitism." Do the heads of such universities welcome anti-Western professors who are enemies of freedom and democracy? Will they return donations from Arab states, often coming with conditions? What will they do about complaints that these professors insult students for being Jewish? (NY Sun, 10/22, Ed..) What else to expect from Islamist professors? Academic freedom cuts both ways. Yes, universities should have the freedom to choose their professors, but they should use some judgment and seek scholars, not propagandists. Yes, a professor should have freedom of thought, but he should not deny students freedom of thought. Student conferences shouldn't be hate fests. American Jewish students should not have to fear for their safety from anti-American foreigners in US colleges. Islamism made war on the US. Nevertheless, many Middle Eastern Studies programs hire Arabs who wage that war from within the American universities. The non-Arab leftist professors in Middle Eastern studies are anti-American, too. The universities badly need reform. Congress meanwhile should stop subsidizing those programs. We taxpayers should not pay for professors to teach treason and antisemitism. SMEAR AND RULE Israeli security officials find threats of assassination and violence greatly exaggerated. The Yesha Council explains it opposes PM Sharon's abandonment plan with non-violence, and that the exaggeration about violence is an attempt to smear that campaign (Arutz-7, 10/20). Let Israelis learn to be skeptical about news reports. Do they realize that the Establishment is running a smear campaign against Sharon's opponents? HOW ARABS FEIGN TOLERANCE A P.A. diplomat asserted that his religion and his Arab culture forbid him to be antisemitic. "Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all are part of Arab culture... their prophets come from our region and are part of us. Islam is the continuation of Judaism and Christianity?" He cites past eras of tolerance, but those were mostly under foreign control (and the Arabs before that were not tolerant, merely less murderous than Christians, except at the beginning of Islam). No, IMRA explains, "Islam regards itself as SUCCESSOR to Judaism and Christianity, insisting that Jews and Christians manipulated the Bible text to their own advantage." "The Jews also are accused of having seized of having seized holy places and of limiting availability." (IMRA, 10/20.) It was not the Arab region. The Arabs poured out of their Peninsula, conquered the pre-existing Mideast Christians and Jews, and claimed the other religions' prophets and holy cites. It insults other faiths by claiming they manipulated their own Bibles. Tolerance or usurpation? The other religions have the decency not to asset that Islam distorted their Bibles. THE ANSWER TO THE WORRY WE ARE LOSING IN IRAQ The Taliban is exiled and dispersed, Saddam's sons are dead, Saddam himself shackled and destined for the gallows, his regime smashed beyond repair. But Pres. Bush must announce that this is only a shadow of what will happen to Iran, Syria, or to any regime that sponsors or permits any future attack on America and its interests." "And then, as the earnest of his pledge, Mr. Bush must wage war with new vigor, larger forces, and a farseeing strategy for victory." (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2004, p.13 from Charles A. Kessler in the Claremont Review of Books.) Those are my sentiments. Unfortunately, conservative commentators' assumptions that Pres. Bush shares those views are contradicted by Bush's failure to express and propose them. SIGNIFICANCE OF US-ISRAEL DISAGREEMENT Sometimes the US and Israel disagree about the Arab-Israel conflict. What are the consequences? Some people try to garner support for the Gaza abandonment plan by warning that if Israel does not go through with it, the US would abandon Israel. ZOA issued a release reassuring friends of Israel that the warning is mistaken. The US does not expect Israel to follow every US desire for Israeli policy on national security. Members of Congress, the people, and even the President would support Israel anyway. Some members of Congress have expressed astonishment that Israel would make concessions to the enemy during wartime (10/21). Those Members of Congress understand life and are rational about it; Israeli leftists do not and are not. Remember, the abandonment plan was devised by Israel. The US did not demand it. But it is not correct to say that Pres. Bush supports Israel. Israel should explain its case and then do what it must to preserve itself. . SIGNIFICANCE OF POLLS Experienced in taking polls, IMRA's comments about polling in general are valuable. Its Dr. Aaron Lerner explains that when polled, people talk "off the top of their heads." If the abandonment plan came before them, and they thought about it, they might realize how self-contradictory the plan and its defenders are. The people already disagree with PM Sharon's arguments in behalf of the plan. In that case, their polled support for the plan cannot be solid. Only 28% agree with Sharon's contention that the plan would reduce pressure on Israel for additional evacuation. (The West wants total evacuation. Why would it be fobbed off with voluntary partial evacuation? Rather, it would sense in partial evacuation a weakness it could turn into total abandonment.) Only 24% accept his contention that abandonment would reduce terrorism. (If the majority realizes that it would INCREASE terrorism, they should, and they would, oppose the plan.) Opponents of retreat don't have to convince the people of the weaknesses of Sharon's arguments. They just have to get the people to draw logical conclusions. That may be why Sharon, who had his own polls conducted, opposes a referendum (IMRA, 10/21). He hints at promising one on condition that the Knesset give him the power to proceed without it, in which case he could and would break his promise. He is all about manipulation, not about democracy. He is not doing this for the people, not with his false arguments. Then whom is he doing it for, and why do they want it? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

MOUNTING A LEGAL FIGHT TO STOP THE SHARON PLAN Posted by David Bedein, October 29, 2004.

Five Step Plan for a LEGAL TEAM to challenge the Sharon plan, in the court of law and in the court of public opinion. 1. Bring hundreds law suits in the name of every business, health, education and social facility that face eradication by the Sharon plan. The LEGAL TEAM will file several hundred individual suits in this regard. Such actions will tie up the courts and make the implementation of any eradication plans nearly impossible during the litigation process. 2. Bring hundreds of law suits against the PA from people in Sderot and from the western negev whose property values will be depleted by the continuing mortar attacks from Gaza. The LEGAL TEAM will demand a lien on all funds that the Sharon government continues to transfer to the PA. This will also serve to publicize the fact that Sharon continues to fund and strengthen the PLO, after Israeli intelligence demanded that all such funding cease. 3. Represent those whose loved ones have been murdered and maimed by the PLO security forces, at a time when mainstream Palestinian security forces take credit for the majority of the 25,000 terror attacks that have occurred in Israel over the past four years. The LEGAL TEAM will also bring suit to challenge the legality of Israel offering to train a hostile force, as mandated in clause five of the Sharon Plan. All this will help to expose the fact that the Sharon Plan indeed involves Israel's "training of Palestinian security forces", even though clause one of the Sharon plan declares that "there is no Palestinian peace partner..." 4. The LEGAL TEAM will go to the Israel High Court of Justice to to challenge the continuing Sharon employment of Dov Wesisglass, since our news agency has uncovered the fact that Dov Weissglass, the closest confidante to the Israeli Prime Minister, and the creator of the Sharon Plan, never closed his law practice or business partnership, as required by Israeli civil service law. Meanwhile, Weissglass's law practice and business partnership are conducted on behalf of the leading financial interests of the PLO, which are directly owned by Arafat himself. We must also now hire top investigators to uncover and reveal the full and precise documentation of Weissglass's financial interests in the PLO and the Palestinian Authority. Indeed, documents of the PM office show that Weissglass personally intervened to renew Israel government funds for the Palestinian Authority, in August 2003, after the Israeli security establishment had examined the Arafat HQ papers seized the year before which showed the funding for humanitarian services were being siphoned off for terrorist use. Weisglass's office openly acknowledges that his law firm represents the Palestinian Authority casino and resort interests, and that his law firm also represents Muhammad Rashid, the man in charge of Arafat's mysterious accounts. At the same time, the tourism and trade department of the Palestinian Authority have confirmed that their intent is to construct a new casino resort village to replace the 19 Israeli farming communities of Katif. That would present a profit motive for Weisglass's involvement in the current Sharon Plan. In January 2001, a senior Israeli intelligence official stated that funds from the Casino were laundered to support terrorist activity. After that, Weisglass threatened to sue that official. When the official would not back down, Weisglass did not follow through with his threat. The Israeli public, outside of the small readership of the our news column in the weekly newspaper, Makor Rishon, do not have a clue about the Weislass conflict of interest. 5. The LEGAL TEAM will sue to bring charges against Israel Minister of Interior Avraham Poraz to the fraud division of the Israeli Police and to the attention of the Israel High Court of Justice. Poraz is a founder and senior member of the Shinui party, formerly associated with the Meretz (Peace Now) political party and remains a key advocate of the Sharon plan. Our news agency's investigations have uncovered documentation from the Israel Ministry of Interior's Registrar of Non Profit Organizations which shows that the Poraz's own organization, "The Liberal Institute", helped to fund the Meretz political party during the last election, in direct violation of Israel's election laws. In addition, we have uncovered documentation which shows that Poraz's organization was funded through funds received from the German government, and that Poraz is not willing to provide an accounting of the funds he received from the German government for a period of four years, 1995-1998. When the head of the registrar of non profit organizations asked that Poraz disclose past bookkeeping of his organization, as required by law, Poraz would not do so. Poraz remains in direct violation of Israel's campaign laws. Poraz's refusal to disclose the accounts of his non-profit organization place him in a felony . The LEGAL TEAM will be headed up by Yaakov Rubin, former head of the Israel Bar Association, and Maxim Rakov, former legal counsel for the Israel National Security Council. This was written by David Bedein of the Israel Resource News Agency (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). David Bedein is Bureau Chief of Israel Resource News Agency. To Go To Top

AFTER ARAFAT Posted by Moshe Dann, October 29, 2004.

Scenario #1: The Rafiah Plan There is no need to evacuate Jews or the IDF from the Gaza Strip in order to "end the occupation of Palestinians"; the Palestinian Authority controls all Arab- populated areas. Jewish residents of the Gaza Strip are completely separate from the million Arabs who live there. Jews have built communities on land that was uninhabited, unclaimed or undisputedly Jewish-owned (like Kfar Darom). Most of Gaza's Jewish residents are located in a small area along the coast called "Gush Katif," bordering Egypt. There are no Arab towns or villages between Gush Katif and the western Negev, except Rafiah (on the Egyptian border) and Khan Yunis. Rafiah, a divided city in the Strip's least populated district contains only about 150,000 Arabs. By unilaterally withdrawing from its part of Rafiah, Israel can immediately eliminate the major source of weapons to Palestinian terrorists and allow Egypt to take control of the entire city. Khan Yunis can either be relocated a few kilometers to the north, or remain where it is, under Palestinian Authority control. The national trauma of uprooting 8,000 Jewish residents in order to create a mini provisional Palestinian state can be avoided. Except for the extreme Left, most Israelis would likely approve and Palestinian terrorism would be more containable and eventually eliminated. Even President Bush could support this plan given his commitment to negotiate the future of major settlement blocs. Scenario #2: Status quo Israel continues its war against Palestinian terrorism until a moderate non-terrorist leadership emerges. Israel must control their access to weapons and pre-empt attacks. After Arafat, a violent power struggle among various clans and gangs that control Palestinian towns and villages will consume them. Eventually moderate leaders will emerge from localities and make separate peace agreements with Israel. They will have local autonomy, without national sovereignty. Scenario #3: Regional solution Solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict demands a change in perspective, not piecemeal, local maneuvers. This is a regional problem, involving every surrounding Arab country; everyone must work together with international assistance and enforcement towards a regional solution. The burden must be shared by all. UN sponsored Palestinian "refugee camps" must be dismantled, turned into towns and residents given citizenship rights in their host and/or other countries. "Palestinians" living in Israel should be given the opportunity to become citizens of Jordan. Until the Palestinian Authority abandons terrorism and moves towards peace, Jordan should be considered the sole representative of the Palestinian people and responsible for them. Palestinian terrorism and incitement must end as a pre-requisite. This is a fundamental principle, not only for Israel but for the world community. Terrorism deserves no rewards or legitimacy. A society that teaches homicide and murder threatens not only Israel, but our entire civilization. All Palestinian terrorist organizations, including Hamas, Fatah, Tanzim, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aksa Brigades and those who support them must be outlawed. All humanitarian funds should be directed to legitimate institutions which promote the health, education and welfare of those in need for a limited period wherever they reside and whatever their origin. This will allow people to get on with their lives. Only when terrorism ends once and for all and a regional solution imposed will there be a real possibility for peace. Moshe Dann is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem. He can be reached at moshedan@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

THE IRANIAN THREAT IS THE REAL ISSUE Posted by Michael Anbar, October 29, 2004.

Dear Friends: I would like to present to you a very important reason for not voting for John Kerry in the coming elections. If John Kerry would be elected, his foreign policy is likely to endanger the future of the USA and jeopardize the very existence of the State of Israel. John Kerry may sacrifice Israel politically for an Iranian unreliable promise to stop enriching uranium and build nuclear bombs. The Iranians may be ready to launch a nuclear attack on Israel in two years. They vowed to do this as soon as it will be possible. Kerry promised to negotiate with Iran rather than destroy their nuclear facilities. However, he has nothing of significance other than Israel to offer to the Islamic clergy in order to satisfy their religion-driven political ambition, at least for a while. The US attack on Iraq, so bitterly criticized by Kerry, was aimed not just to topple Saddam but, more impotently, to achieve a regime change in Iran, the most dangerous member of the "Axis of Evil" Unfortunately, this objective has not been met, and Tehran is now fighting the US in Iraq to prevent this threat from happening. This has been the greatest failure of the war in Iraq. The US cannot permit a nuclear threat from religious zealots who cannot be deterred by retaliation. It will have little choice but to confront and defang Iran sooner or later as part of the global war with Islamism. This will be a major decision that the next US President will have to make. John Kerry, who has shown a life-long reluctance to project militarily abroad, is extremely unlikely to take a preemptive step against Iran, or urge Israel to do it, before it might be too late for the Jewish state. A single successful nuclear strike would devastate Israel. After such an attack the US will have no choice but to fight Iran with or without global consensus. However, for Israel it may be too late. If the US does not subdue theocratic Iran, it might have to capitulate to Islamism, which will then proceed with its global expansion. John Kerry will promise anything to win the elections, even if it contradicts his life-long political convictions. Therefore, his promises regarding Israel are utterly unreliable. I am ready to go out on a limb and state that if Kerry is elected any Jew who voted for him will have contributed to the potential destruction of the State of Israel and eventually to the demise of the Jewish people. My prediction is not intended to scare people. I hate to be a Cassandra and I truly hope that this nightmare never happens. However, the growing virulent anti-Semitism in Europe under the guise of anti-Zionism, echoed by the American Left (which is the political power base of John Kerry), combined with the vicious aggressive Jew-hatred of the Arab and Iranian Islamists, make this a realistic projection. I cannot forget that Adolph Hitler was elected Reichskanzler (Imperial Chancellor) of Germany in free democratic elections. This took place when his supremacist ideology was public knowledge. Hitler's "Mein Kampf," was published four years before those elections. Please understand that I am not comparing Kerry to Hitler. These two personalities have diagonally opposed ideologies. I brought up Hitler's election to show that of a democratic process in an enlightened society can elect a leader whose decisions result in a national disaster. Unfortunately, too few Americans pay attention to the passivity demonstrated in Kerry's political track record and to his anti-nationalistic ideology. Both these attributes are likely to be disastrous in a time of war. I am a one-issue voter. That issue is the survival of Western culture, its ethics and way of life, which is now under attack. The Jewish nation is likely to become the first victim of that assault, just as it was two generations ago, before Hitler started his expansionist campaign in Europe. All other political and social issues are miniscule compared to the issue of survival. When this issue is at stake, all of us should become single-issue voters. If Jewish civilization, on which Western civilization is founded, will not survive, nothing else will matter. Michael Anbar, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, University at Buffalo, did his PhD work at the Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovoth. Before coming to the US he was Professor in the Feinberg Graduate School and Director, Chemistry Division, Soreq Nuclear Research Institute, Yavne. He is author of "Israel and its Future: Analysis and Suggestions." To Go To Top

AFTER ARAFAT Posted by Marcel Cousineau, October 28, 2004.

Since Israel continues to bend under pressure always, without fail, more pressure will be applied to advance the Arafat plan. For those of you ignorant of the Arafat plan, it is the removal of non-moslems (infidels) from land once under Islamic rule, the extermination of Israel. The plan has always been to advance in stages. Since the majority of the Israeli population has been dumbed down along with the present Prime Minister, who helps Yasser, the next move will be much easier. Israel, trained to surrender and appease with nothing in return, will be pressured to allow Arafat to be buried on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The pressure will be unbearable to Israel's weakened and spineless leaders, so once again they will fold. It will take a phone call from Washington and after this success, the Palestinians will increase their jihad, knowing the time is right to kill off a feminized and cowardly Israel in retreat, which would rather die than fight and defeat the enemy. The road to hell has been prepared by the weak and vacillating Neville crowd who bring RUIN to Israel. Welcome to WWIV. To Go To Top

THIRTY SIX INSPIRED IDEAS OF WHAT TO DO WITH ARAFAT'S CARCASS Posted by Steven Plaut, October 28, 2004.

1. Upset the environmentalists by using it to poison piranha fish. 2. Use it to help boost Purina's stock value. 3. One word: McNuggets. 4. Give it tenure at Ben Gurion University. 5. Fire it off into space so Barry Chamish's UFO friends will never want to visit earth again. 6. Clone it and sell the spinoffs as 21st century scarecrows. 7. Just leave it in the gutter holding a sign reading "I am deconstructing." 8. Hoist it up on two-by-fours and then let Israeli bulldozer drivers train for future Rachel Corries. 9. Save Holland by using it to plug the dikes. 10. Market it as a carpet beater. 11. Let the US javelin team train on it for the Olympics. 12. Makes a great speed hump. 13. Tie it to a pole and use it as the bait at the dog race track. 14. Send it to the Presbyterian leaders. 15. Enroll it in the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Seminary. Heck, it already has taken more Rabbinic courses than Michael Lerner. 16. Halloween Decoration. 17. Lease it as straight man for Oprah's show. 18. Export it to France as a wine supplement. 19. Sell it as organic produce in Berkeley. 20. Tie it to the back of cars for newlyweds in MTV commercials. 21. Use it to scare your kids when they refuse to clean their rooms. 22. Sell it as a Yigal Tomarkin original sculpture. 23. It gives people 101 reasons to prefer having a dead cat. 24. Use it to become the patron saint for dung beetles. 25. Sell it to that Museum in Sweden that ran the "Snow White" sculpture. 26. Let John Edwards and his tort lawyer bandit friends file a class action suit on behalf of it against the Plastic Surgeons responsible. 27. Enter it in the Texas State Cow Chip Toss as the world's largest cow chip. 28. Make it the drummer in a punk rock band. Or better yet, the drum. 29. Tell Anna Nicole Smith it is rich. 30. Sell it to Soros for three billion smackers. 31. Put it in an envelope and send him to the Elect Ralph Nader committee. 32. Let Brandeis hire it for its peace and justice studies program. 33. Rent it to Cubans as a device to hold their place in the bread line while they go off fishing. 34. "Fear Factor" TV show could make people sit on a bench next to it. 35. Clearicil could use it in its commercials to show what happens if you use the inferior brand. 36. Set it up on 3rd Avenue with a sign reading "Will Terrorize for Food". Addendum From Ely Silk: Here are some more possible uses for Arafat's body: (1) Put it back into his Ramallah compound and prop it up. This way, the Israeli left can still go to him for guidance. (2) Send it to Jacques Chirac. (That is kind of what was actually done - SP) (3) Using the skills of head-shrinkers, shrink his entire body down to three inches in height. Attach it to a chain and send it to Shimon Peres for his car mirror. So many possibilities. So little time Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

ARAFAT: FATHER OF MODERN-DAY TERRORISM Posted by Bryna Berch, October 28, 2004.

This is from today's Arutz-7. Yasser Arafat, who reportedly is now breathing his last, is considered the father of modern terrorism. He is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Israeli citizens, the deaths of untold numbers of Arabs and the killing of more than 100 U.S. citizens. Among the Americans were two diplomats, whose cruel murders in Sudan Arafat ordered by radio from his Beirut headquarters. In 1995, Ariel Sharon said, "I don't know anyone other than Arafat who has as much civilian Jewish blood on his hands since the time of the Nazis." Arafat's official biography on the Nobel Prize website glosses over his terrorist past, writing only, "In 1958 he and his friends founded Al-Fatah, an underground network of secret cells, which in 1959 began to publish a magazine advocating armed struggle against Israel. At the end of 1964 Arafat left Kuwait to become a full-time revolutionary, organising Fatah raids into Israel from Jordan. It was also in 1964 that the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) was established, under the sponsorship of the Arab League, bringing together a number of groups all working to free Palestine for the Palestinians. The Arab states favoured a more conciliatory policy than Fatah's... Arafat developed the PLO into a state within the state of Jordan with its own military forces. King Hussein of Jordan, disturbed by its guerrilla attacks on Israel and other violent methods, eventually expelled the PLO from his country. Arafat sought to build a similar organisation in Lebanon, but this time was driven out by an Israeli military invasion. He kept the organization alive, however, by moving its headquarters to Tunis..." In fact, however, this long period was one of blood and murder orchestrated by Arafat. The PLO under his leadership conducted plane hijackings, bombings, and other acts of violence against Israel. In fact, the beginning of terror sky-jackings has been attributed to Arafat and the Fatah. Two years ago, after an Israeli plane was almost shot down in Kenya, then-Foreign Minister Binyamin Netanyahu warned, "Sky-jacking terrorism first began against Israeli targets abroad by Arafat and Fatah in the late 1960's, and it very quickly became an international plague. We face exactly the same situation now. The terrorism of firing missiles against civilian airlines is now beginning against Israeli planes, but it can easily spread to other areas..." Arutz-7 reported at the time that though there had been "transportation" skyjackings in which criminals wished to reach Cuba, the first terrorist-extortion hijacking of an airliner apparently occurred when Palestinians hijacked an El Al airliner to Algiers in July 1968. Two years later, Palestinian terrorists hijacked four jets almost simultaneously; the passengers were released after three weeks, and the planes were blown up. The PLO under Arafat was also responsible for the massacre of 26 people, mostly children, in the Netiv Meir school in Maalot in May 1974. Another PLO organization perpetrated the Munich Olympics slaughter, killing eleven Israeli athletes in 1972. In Lebanon, Arafat's forces killed hundreds of thousands of Christians, destroyed Christian villages, and burned churches, as detailed here. See also this article by a Lebanese Christian. Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc, wrote [Wall Street Journal, January 12, 2002], "... I am not surprised to see that Yasser Arafat remains the same bloody terrorist I knew so well during my years at the top of Romania's foreign intelligence service. I became directly involved with Arafat in the late 1960s, in the days when he was being financed and manipulated by the KGB... Gen. Sakharovsky asked us in Romanian intelligence to help the KGB bringing Arafat and some of his fedayeen fighters secretly to the Soviet Union via Romania, in order for them to be indoctrinated and trained. During that same year, the Soviets maneuvered to have Arafat named chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, with public help from Egypt's ruler, Gamal Abdel Nasser. When I first met Arafat, I was stunned by the ideological similarity between him and his KGB mentor. Arafat's broken record was that American "imperial Zionism" was the "rabid dog of the world," and there was only one way to deal with a rabid dog: "Kill it!" ... Arafat and his KGB handlers were preparing a PLO commando team headed by Arafat's top deputy, Abu Jihad, to take American diplomats hostage in Khartoum, Sudan, and demand the release of Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian assassin of Robert Kennedy... Just six months earlier Arafat's liaison officer for Romania, Ali Hassan Salameh, had led the PLO commando team that took the Israeli athletes hostage at the Munich Olympic Games... "On March 2, 1973, after President Nixon refused the terrorists' demand, the PLO commandos executed three of their hostages: American Ambassador Cleo A. Noel Jr., his deputy, George Curtis Moore, and Belgian charge d'affaires Guy Eid. In May 1973, during a private dinner with Ceausescu, Arafat excitedly bragged about his Khartoum operation. "Be careful," Ion Gheorghe Maurer, a Western-educated lawyer who had just retired as Romanian prime minister, told him. "No matter how high up you are, you can still be convicted for killing and stealing." "Who, me? I never had anything to do with that operation," Arafat said, winking mischievously. "In January 1978, the PLO representative in London was assassinated at his office. Soon after that, convincing pieces of evidence started to come to light showing that the crime was committed by the infamous terrorist Abu Nidal, who had recently broken with Arafat and built his own organization. "That wasn't a Nidal operation. It was ours," Ali Hassan Salameh, Arafat's liaison officer for Romania, told me. Even Ceausescu's adviser to Arafat, who was well familiar with his craftiness, was taken by surprise. "Why kill your own people?" Col. Constantin Olcescu asked. "We want to mount some spectacular operations against the PLO, making it look as if they had been organized by Palestinian extremist groups that accuse the chairman of becoming too conciliatory and moderate," Salameh explained... Arafat has made a political career by pretending that he has not been involved in his own terrorist acts. But evidence against him grows by the day. James Welsh, a former intelligence analyst for the National Security Agency, has told U.S. journalists that the NSA had secretly intercepted the radio communications between Yasser Arafat and Abu Jihad during the PLO operation against the Saudi embassy in Khartoum, including Arafat's order to kill Ambassador Noel..." Christophe Boltanski and Jihan El-Tahri revealed in their 1997 biography, Les sept vies de Yasser Arafat, that Arafat was born in August 1929, in Cairo - and not in Jerusalem or Gaza, as Arab sources often claim. To Go To Top

"DISPROPORTIONATE FORCE"; "MUSLIM SENSITIVITY"; TROUBLE WITH GAZA ABANDONMENT Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 28, 2004.

"DISPROPORTIONATE COMBAT" Human rights organizations purport to review, in harmony with international law, whether the P.A. war is waged with proportionate means. They find Israel's methods "disproportionate." "Disproportionate" means flinging ordnance far beyond military need, and pursuing military goals without unnecessary risk to civilians. By that standard, the P.A. Arabs should be ostracized. The P.A. targets primarily civilians! It needlessly risks its own civilian lives by placing terrorists among them (which is a war crime), and urging them to be human shields. It should not have launched a war in the first place, after having signed an agreement for peaceful resolution. The NGOs fail to raise these issues. By contrast, Israel screens military plans and reviews ongoing battles, striving to minimize civilian casualties. It often uses ordnance that will not destroy a wider area than the target, which it sometimes fails to destroy. (That risks its own, innocent people). It leads occupants out of buildings to be demolished for having been used as ambush sites. It arranges for sending food and medicine into embattled areas. Israel should be renowned for that, but instead is criticized as brutal, because a few Arabs are killed (some because the P.A. stationed terrorists among civilians). The NGOs fail to explain how Israel's minimal action is "disproportionate," they just call Israel names. Their theory seems to be that war is war, when it comes to Jewish casualties, though the Arab method of fighting be war crimes, whereas deaths are impermissible when Jewish self-defense brings about a few dozen Arab casualties. I think there also is a psychological explanation for the false judgment against Israel. People tend to sympathize blindly with the perceived underdog, even though the perceived underdog is a mad dog that warrants being put under. They think of the Palestinian Arabs as the underdog, as if several Arab states didn't and wouldn't gang up on Israel again. What about the peace treaties, you ask? Arabs don't consider them binding. Deeming Arafat's Arabs as the underdog, these critics of Israel resent the Jewish state's use of heavier weapons than Hamas and the P.A. forces have. Would they really prefer that the Arab terrorists have equally effective weapons? MUSLIM "SENSITIVITY" Just as, under Gresham's law, unsubstantiated currency drives out sound money, current rationalization drives out sound ideas. The fault is not just that "the media" fails to present news fully and fairly. The problem is that we have become so consumerist a, that many of the "thinking people" neither think straight nor possess the facts to think about. What do students even of highly rated schools learn about Western civilization, modern conflicts, propaganda, and political analysis? Little and lopsided. What they are taught renders them hostile to the civilization they ought to be saving. They sympathize with its enemies, instead. That, they imagine, makes them ethical. (Let us not be confused by the fact that our civilization has committed foul deeds, into concluding that it should be taken over by civilizations still committing fouler ones.) For whatever reason, Western correspondents blindly accept the latest Arab propaganda against Israel and start it percolating through our society. How rapidly the Arab lexicon has become a Western one! Words such as "humiliation," "occupation," and "sensitivity" have taken on their unfair Arab meaning. "Sensitivity" originally meant to avoid gratuitous offense to other groups, without abasing one's own. Every act of religious independence from Islam offends the Arabs. We Westerners cannot appease their "sensitivity" without submitting to them. Nevertheless, Western "political correctness police" demand that we defer our own religious and political traditions to the Arabs'. Remember the humiliation of the American troops sent to S. Arabia to save it from Saddam, forbidden from holding open-air Christmas services on their own base? A couple of years ago, Muslim terrorists used to fire from a Christian village into Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem. If Israel returned fire, it might strike a church. Then Arafat would condemn Israel as oppressing the Christians, whereas his thugs actually do. Why not ask the Muslims to honor Western religious sensitivities? THE TROUBLE WITH GAZA ABANDONMENT Hillel Halkin explained the "Trouble Over Gaza Withdrawal" (NY Sun, 10/19) clearly and powerfully. PM Sharon's failure to win approval for abandoning Gaza and part of Judea-Samaria is due to his presenting it poorly and failing to set precedent by swiftly dismantling unauthorized outposts. PM Sharon falsely claimed his proposed territorial sacrifice would enable Israel to retain most of Judea-Samaria. Worse, he is afraid to cite what makes the plan imperative - the demographic threat that, counting the Territories, makes Jews a minority that would fall under Arab domination. Why afraid? Because if they hear that the abandonment would be of most of the Territories, Israelis would reject it. After having lost a Likud Party referendum on the plan, PM Sharon is afraid to hold a national referendum, lest his less disciplined majority not come out to vote. Sounds like sour grapes -- PM Sharon afraid of losing because he makes a poor case, and he makes a poor case because his case is poor? Why call the Jews a minority by virtue of counting Arabs not part of Israel. If not part of Israel, don't count them. Despite Mr. Halkin's command of the demographics, he omitted a key fact. The same high Arab population growth that he cites in the Territories, also occurs in Israel. Will he some day propose ceding part of the State to the Arabs? When does this process stop? Besides, Israelis would not agree to cede it, and leave themselves an easily conquered rump. But they should be awakened to the problem. The same problem applies to ceding the Territories, which are just as much a part of the Land of Israel as is the State of Israel, and in fact contain more of the cradle of Jewish civilization and offer the secure borders that Israel badly needs. Retreat from jihadists does not provide security, but encourages them to press on. Let us find another solution than retreat. If the problem is that Israel holds areas that contain too many Arabs, then one solution is to relinquish only those areas and annex most of the rest, populated by Jews or vacant. Israel has a legal right to do that, as heir to the Palestine Mandate for a Jewish national home, of which the Territories are the unallocated portion. The Arabs in what is left of the P.A. would not be attached to Israel. The result should ally Mr. Halkin's fears of Jews being swamped by Arafat's Arabs and there would be no rationale for the Sharon plan. If the problem be too many Arabs, then the solution is to reduce their number. Arabs migrate to where they can earn a living. They came into this area because Zionism built up its economic opportunities. Hundreds of thousands left the Territories, when the Gulf state offered them better jobs. Hundreds of thousands have left recently, as wartime conditions deteriorated, but the rest stay on, where their basic needs met by charity. Israel is one of their main benefactors, providing jobs in its own sovereign area, tax revenue, utility service, and for Arab residents of Jerusalem, welfare benefits. Why spend money succoring the enemy making war on it? As for the Arabs in Israel, many are illegal immigrants, or stole the land on which they live, build illegally, evade taxation, enjoy subsidy for their polygamy, get favored subsidy for college, and are draft-exempt. Enforce the laws on immigration, land ownership, building, taxation, and marriage, equalize college admission standards, and require equivalent national service of draft exempt populations, and the internal Arab demographic threat that Mr. Halkin omitted to mention would diminish. Besides preserving Jewish national development and security, these measures would save billions of dollars that could improve defense and allow for tax reductions on Israelis, among the most heavily taxed in the world. If Israel needs foreign workers, let it select, say, the non-threatening Philippinos, rather than Arabs whom it must inspect at checkpoints for terrorism and then get criticized or having checkpoints. DIRECTING THE IRAQI INSURGENCY Some 20-50 Saddam intelligence officials in Syria are said to be financing and directing the insurgency in Iraq. Border tightening complicates their mission, but they manage to keep the cells well organized and the networks running. They actually had mortars fired across the border. Western intelligence officials think that these former Iraqi Baathist officials are using the Shiite rebels and the foreign Islamist fighters, rather than the reverse. The Baathists are in this for the long run. They know that America does not like long wars. If Iraq falls to the Islamists, bases could be set up alongside S. Arabia. Nevertheless, Saudis are believed to be financing and arming some of the insurgents (IMRA, 10/18). SHARON SCHEMES TO TRICK THE KNESSET On the strength of a vague offer to hold a national referendum, which all along he has opposed, and fears losing, PM Sharon is asking in advance for a Knesset vote of approval for his abandonment plan. When the Knesset approves, one suspects, he would proceed rapidly with his abandonment, without waiting for a referendum. Rabin and Peres used to promise referendums, in order to allay opposition, and then forget the promise. Why the belief that the Knesset vote is a ruse? First, it is a matter of logic. Logically, there is no need for the vote. If the referendum rejects the plan, the vote would have been wasted. If the referendum approves the plan, the plan could be submitted for a vote. The Knesset is likely to approve the plan with weak safeguards that it surely knows PM Sharon would ignore. It would pretend to rely upon the future, iffy, referendum to protect the nation. Second, Sharon's broken promises about prior referendums. Sharon had promised to abide by the votes of the Likud Central Committee and then by Likud Party members. He did not. Third, Sharon is acting increasingly like a dictator, repressing dissent. He shut down radio station Arutz-7, that would have exposed his scheme as harmful without benefit. He plans to reduce security protection in the areas he would like to abandon, cut off their utilities (but not that of the Arabs!), tear up their roads, and administratively detain opposition leaders there, on the false grounds that they plan violence. Non-cooperators are threatened with imprisonment. Sharon is using his position against Israel in behalf of foreign interests. The Knesset ought to investigate why that is true of the past several PMs (Winston Mid East Analysis, 10/19). Why do Israelis believe their leaders any more? If anyone should be detained, it is Sharon. SHARON'S MEMORIAL TO MK GHANDI Three years ago, a well-liked, right-wing MK of rare integrity, known as Ghandi, was assassinated apparently by Arab terrorists. PM Sharon just paid him generous tribute (IMRA, 10/19). The MK was about to pull his small party out of the governing coalition, over its appeasement of the Arabs. The coalition probably would have failed. Was the assassination coincidental, any more than was the assassination of the Israeli Ambassador to France, when he was about to expose government appeasement, any more than was the assassination of PM Rabin, when he balked at continuing with Oslo? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

THE BATTLE OF THE RELIGIONS Posted by Batya Medad, October 28, 2004.

"The idea that you can merchandise candidates for high office like breakfast cereal, that you can gather votes like box-tops is... the ultimate indignity to the democratic process." - Adlai Stevenson The Greeks, led by their King, Antiochus tried to destroy Judaism, then the Christians, in many guises including the Crusaders and then the Catholic Church during the Inquisition. Later the Nazis were more concerned with murdering anyone with Jewish ancestors, while in the same century the Communists tried to wipe out all religions, especially Judaism. But in modern time Judaism has an even more dangerous enemy: DEMOCRACY! I have to finish this musing quickly. The words were rattling so noisily in my brain, that they were crowding out the shacharit prayers, and I have less than an hour before leaving for boker limud nashim, where I study King David's T'hilim and his son, King Solomon's Kohelet. Democracy, the ultimate philosophical hevel, norishkeit. In recent weeks, as political and spiritual leaders are being "polled" as to their opinions/instructions concerning Arik Sharon's "disengagement" from yishuv Ha'Aretz, "settling" the Land of Israel, the Land that G-d sent Abraham and all Jews to in this week's parsha, portion of the Bible, Lech Lecha. This is a moment of truth between man and G-d, between those considered leaders and the One G-d, HaKodesh Baruch Hu. Some, like HaRav Ovadia Yosef, have publicly stated that we are to oppose Sharon's plan. But another rabbi, who had been saying confused things, causing many to publicly argue and debate what he means, finally said that "democracy" must rule. Yes, Rabbi Shlomo, "Stevie Wonder," Riskin stated that as important as Eretz Yisrael is, "Israel is a democracy." (quoted from The Jerusalem Post, Friday October 22, 2004.) The same rabbi, who inspired so many of us in the 1960's, the rabbi who was not embarrassed to be an Orthodox Jew, to doven with a mechitza to posken that the only hair covering for a married female must be 100% obvious, a hat or scarf, not a wig. He was, for us, the epitome of a proud Jew. Today Rabbi Riskin publicly stated that Judaism is secondary to democracy. I am saddened to write this, but Stevie Wonder is no longer wonderful. He worships demoracy as his primary religion. G-d's rulings, G-d's Torah, G-d's mitzvot, go second to votes in the Keneset. Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein in the same issue of The Jerusalem Post said that "... the government is framing the disengagement in a way that would translate halachically as pikuach nefesh ..." so it must be considered as not violating halacha. That brings us to the Adlai Stevenson quotation and the Kohelet shiur I'm rushing to get to. Rabbis Riskin and Lichtenstein are basing their decisions on norishkeit, not Yiddishkeit. Hevel, vanities, democracy, advertising. Let's return to our roots and not repeat - ain chadash mitachat lashemesh - there's nothing new under the sun. Let's not repeat the sin of the spies. The "people" worshipped democracy; ten spies verses two. That fatal mistake has been made too many times. Now we must prove to G-d and man that we have learned our lesson. We must follow Joshua and Calev and redeem Our Land. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il This article is Musings #79. To Go To Top

BEN-GURION: NO JEW IS AT LIBERTY TO SURRENDER THE RIGHT OF THE JEWISH NATION" Posted by Ruth Matar, October 28, 2004.

Dear Friends, Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion, made a speech to the 21st Zionist Congress, in Basel, Switzerland, in 1937. His words are as relevant today as they were then. "No Jew is at liberty to surrender the right of the Jewish Nation and the Land of Israel to exist. No Jewish body is sanctioned to do so. Even all the Jews alive today have no authority to yield any piece of land whatsoever. This right is reserved to the Jewish People throughout the generations. This right cannot be forfeited under any circumstances. Even if at some given time there will be those who declare that they are relinquishing this right, they have neither the power nor the authority to negate it for future generations. The Jewish Nation is neither obligated by nor responsible for any such waiver. Our right to this land, in its entirety, is enduring and eternal. And until the coming of the Redemption, we shall never yield this historic right." Tuesday, October 26, 2004, 67 years later, will go down in Jewish history as a most tragic occurrence. Sharon's Plan to forcibly evacuate fellow Jews from their communities in Biblical Gaza was approved by the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) on this date. Our government has been hijacked by Ariel Sharon, who has turned into a clever manipulative dictator. He thumbs his nose at his own party, the membership of which had rejected his Unilateral Disengagement Plan (deporting Jews from their Biblical Homeland) by an overwhelming majority of 19.5% on May 3, 2004. One cannot blame Labor, Yachad (formerly Meretz), and the Arab Knesset Members who voted for the Plan. They did what was expected of them. They had advocated surrender to the Arab enemy all along. The "Revised Disengagement Plan" was approved in a 67-45 vote with 7 abstentions. 29 of the votes in favor of Unilateral Disengagement came from Left wing opposition MKs, who jumped jubilantly from their seats after the vote to congratulate Sharon that he now has Knesset approval to uproot Jews from their homes. Ironically, once upon a time, before Sharon betrayed his own Likud Party and the voters who had given him a landslide victory in the last election, these very leftists considered Sharon to be Public Enemy Number One. Thus, there were few surprises in the result of the Knesset vote. Nevertheless, there were some heartening aspects. Seventeen Likud Knesset Members had the courage to vote against Ariel Sharon. The nation may be seriously divided as a result of Sharon's Plan, but it should be noted that there are those in the Likud Party who will not timidly submit to his dictates. Bibi Netanyahu, Limor Livnat, Tzachi Hanegbi, Dan Naveh, and Silvan Shalom, our so-called "friends", all Likud Ministers in Sharon's Cabinet, have put a knife in the back of their own constituency - betraying all Zionist principles - in order to hold on to their ministerial seats of power. They have joined the camp of the enemy, the extreme Left, which brought us the disastrous surrender policies of the Oslo Accords. Of the Likud Ministers, only Uzi Landau and Michael Ratzon had the moral integrity not to go against their own Likud Party Platform and the great majority of the Likud membership. They cast their votes against Sharon's Disengagement Plan. As promised, they were immediately fired by Sharon, just as he had previously fired Ministers Benny Elon and Avigdor Liberman, when they announced that they were going to vote against his Plan. We will continue to fight Sharon's evil immoral Plan to forcibly evacuate Jews from their Homeland. The People of Israel will not accept this shameful vote of the Knesset. NO ONE, NO PRIME MINISTER, AND NO PARLIAMENT, HAS THE RIGHT TO GIVE AWAY ANY PORTION OF OUR G-D GIVEN BIBLICAL HOMELAND. Most importantly, the Women in Green will continue our important work to educate the People of Israel as to THE RIGHT TO OUR LAND, and to resist government suppression of dissent to Sharon's manipulative Plan to surrender to terror. We are in desperate need of a leader who believes in the ultimate destiny of the Jewish People at this crucial period in our history. May the G-d of Israel send us such a leader. THE STRUGGLE FOR THE LAND OF ISRAEL HAS JUST STARTED. WITH G-D'S HELP IT IS IN OUR POWER TO SUCCEED. With Blessings and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

THE BUSH-KERRY CONSENSUS Posted by Ted Belman, October 28, 2004.

This article was written by George Friedman, who is with the Stratfor organization. (www.startfor.com). It appeared October 12, 2004. "Stratfor provides strategic intelligence on global business, economic, security and geopolitical affairs." During the two presidential debates held so far, we have learned three things. First, that George W. Bush never made a mistake. Second, that John Kerry would never have made any of the mistakes Bush made, and that he does not intend to make any mistakes in the future. Third, and most important, that there is precious little substantial disagreement between the two candidates on war strategy going forward. Whatever Kerry has had to say about Bush's execution of the war in the past, he has made it clear that he will continue what Bush calls the "War on Terror" and that he will not abandon the war in Iraq. This last is by far the most important thing to have emerged during the campaign from a geopolitical and strategic point of view. However much the candidates argue over who would be better at fighting the war, it has become clear that the war will go on regardless of who is elected or re-elected -- and that that includes the Iraq campaign. Neither is promising a radical redefinition of the war. Each is claiming simply to be the more effective in executing the war. Therefore, on this fundamental level, the election has become unimportant. What is important is how the war will be executed after the election. Neither candidate has been particularly enlightening on this subject. There has been no substantial discussion of follow-on campaigns or operations either in the general war or in Iraq. From an American point of view, this should be comforting. Underneath the storm and stress, the two parties have -- as unbelievable as this might sound -- agreed that the war must continue unabated. They have also agreed, in effect, that discussing war plans during a debate would not serve anyone's interest. For whatever reason -- patriotism or political expediency -- the campaign is being carried out within careful, prudent boundaries. The future of the war is not being debated. The campaign is being confined to vicious personal invective. Since we know that the war will continue, it falls to us to consider how it will be executed after Nov. 2. One fundamental fact must be borne in mind: Since the war will not be abandoned, it will be the war, not the candidates, that will determine the course of events. What we mean is simply this: The war has an inherent logic that constrains policymakers. If you continue to fight this war, there are certain things that you must do, and certain things that are impossible. The choices are much fewer than what one might imagine. Therefore, having agreed on the basic strategy that the war will continue, most of what follows from this decision will apply to either a President Bush or a President Kerry. If you are going to make fried chicken, there aren't that many ways to do it. U.S. and al Qaeda War Aims The primary American war aim is simple: The United States wants to secure its homeland against any further attacks by al Qaeda or any other group using its tactics. It is a clear and simple war aim. The goal is easy to define, but far more difficult to achieve. The United States is full of potential targets, and al Qaeda is a very small and dispersed group. Defending the homeland -- in the sense of physically preventing the penetration of the United States by al Qaeda operatives -- is difficult to achieve, and it is even harder to know whether you have achieved it. Since al Qaeda is a global, sparse network consisting of covert operatives skilled at evading U.S. intelligence, an offensive strategy is equally difficult to execute. It is not merely a question of destroying al Qaeda. It is more a matter of knowing when you have destroyed all of al Qaeda that you need to destroy. At this point in the war, no reasonable person would claim the United States has achieved its primary war aim. Al Qaeda's war aim is more complex. Its goal is to trigger a massive uprising in the Islamic world that will sweep away at least one and preferably several existing Muslim governments, replacing them with jihadist regimes. These countries would serve as the nucleus for the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate that would both restore the authority of Islamic law -- understood in al Qaeda's terms -- while setting the stage for the political reconstruction of Islamic greatness. Thus far, al Qaeda has failed in its war aim. Contrary to dire forecasts, the single most important fact of the war has been a negative: There has been no rising in the Islamic streets of sufficient substance to endanger any established Islamic government (Iraq is excluded inasmuch as it lacks an established government). Not a single Islamic government has shifted its stance in support of al Qaeda while many -- some overtly like Libya, some covertly like Syria -- have moved toward suppressing al Qaeda on their territory. Since al Qaeda initiated the war, it is critically important to understand that it has completely failed to achieve its strategic goals. From a purely political standpoint, the war has thus far been a disaster for al Qaeda. At the same time, assuming that al Qaeda has not lost the ability to carry out operations, the United States has not yet secured the homeland from follow-on attack. This is more a military-security failure than a political one, but it remains a failure. To this moment therefore, al Qaeda is losing the war from a political point of view, while the United States has failed to win the war from a military point of view. Strategies The American strategy has been driven by a realization that the United States does not by itself have the intelligence and covert capabilities needed to destroy the al Qaeda network. Without the active support of Muslim governments, such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the United States cannot hope to destroy al Qaeda and secure the homeland. By the same token, many of these countries have little appetite for a vicious back-alley war with al Qaeda. Such a war threatens the survival of their regimes by increasing the chance that either al Qaeda will strike directly at the political leadership, or that the covert war will trigger a backlash that will create an uprising among the masses. U.S. strategy has therefore focused on inducing or coercing these governments not only to strike out at al Qaeda and jihadists in general, but also to have them work in tandem with U.S. intelligence so their combined capabilities can be that much more effective. In order to do this, these countries had to become certain of three things: First, that the United States would punish them severely if they did not cooperate; second, that they had more to fear from the United States than from al Qaeda; and finally, that the United States was willing to bleed with them. We can argue endlessly at this point about the wisdom of the Iraq campaign or about the Bush administration's justifications for it. Stratfor readers know our view of this well. This fact, however, is incontestable: Prior to the Iraq campaign, the key country, Saudi Arabia, was not cooperating with the United States in trying to crush al Qaeda. After the Iraq campaign the Saudis did begin to cooperate with increasing intensity, the proof of which has been the jihadist attacks in Saudi Arabia. There were not attacks before the war. There were increasing attacks after the war. Clearly the Saudis were taking actions that the jihadists didn't like. What we are seeing is coalition warfare in the fullest sense. However, it is not the "traditional allies" (France and Germany) that can bring the needed resources to bear. It is the Islamic countries whose intelligence services have the most knowledge of jihadist networks, and who are the most valuable allies in this war. Coalitions change depending on goals, and in this war that means joining with Islamic powers. This is not a coalition of the eager, or even of the willing. In many cases it is a coalition of the blackmailed, bullied and coerced. Some countries, like Egypt, are deeply hostile to al Qaeda and the jihadists. Others, like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, have little appetite for this conflict and will cooperate only to the extent that they are forced and induced to do so. Al Qaeda can be crushed only to the extent that these countries are induced to cooperate. At this moment, most Islamic countries -- even Syria and, at times, Iran -- have with great reluctance done what they were forced to do. President Bush or Kerry, if he chooses to continue to prosecute the war, will have to continue to carry out a strategy of coercion against those Islamic countries whose participation is essential. It is a fantasy to believe that countries like Saudi Arabia will risk their internal tranquility on behalf of the interests of the United States. Their interests diverge from America's. Therefore, all strategies will have to focus on maintaining the pressure for cooperation. Kerry will have an opportunity for a few months of creative diplomacy before returning to this course; Bush will simply continue this course. But in the end, the United States will have to frighten these countries more than al Qaeda does, while demonstrating its ability and willingness to protect the regimes. If the United States were to simply withdraw from Iraq at this point, it would undermine U.S. credibility with these regimes. Therefore, as both Bush and Kerry have stated, they will remain in Iraq. Bush's rhetorical flights notwithstanding, this will not be about building democracy. The one obvious lesson learned in Vietnam is that you do not do nation-building in the midst of a guerrilla war. The purposes of remaining in Iraq now are: Creating a psychological atmosphere in which Islamic countries do not doubt American will. Setting rational, achievable goals. Matching goals with resources. Leaving Iraq is not an option. Defining the mission effectively is an option. The United States will neither bring an end to the guerrilla war, nor will it bring democracy to Iraq. However, the actual intensity of the guerrilla war, compared to such wars in Vietnam or Algeria, is much lower. The United States has -- in about 18 months -- lost fewer than 2 percent dead compared to Vietnam. The goal for the United States in Iraq is not to end violence but to reduce U.S. casualties even further. That means reducing the exposure of U.S. forces by reducing their security responsibilities. This does not require fully trained Iraqi troops to take the place of U.S. forces. Since violence cannot be eliminated, trading somewhat higher levels of violence for lower U.S. casualties is clearly the option that will be pursued. Bush is currently mounting an offensive to set the stage for this by attacking guerrilla strongholds. This offensive will create a temporary window that will allow the United States to become less intrusive; however, the guerrillas appear to have substantial recuperative powers, at least at the relatively low levels of effectiveness at which they are currently operating. The need to reduce the exposure of U.S. forces by withdrawing to bases -- as in Afghanistan -- or to the west of the Euphrates is not simply conditioned by Iraqi reality. It is also conditioned by the U.S. force structure. The first problem either Bush or Kerry will face as president is the fact that the U.S. military -- particularly the Army and Marine Corps -- is too small for the war. A mistake was made under the Bush administration, and will not be rectified by either president. This will not mean a draft. Apart from political consequences, this is not World War II. The kind of troops needed take a long time to train and mature. They need to be highly motivated and capable. The volunteer force will have to be massively expanded through a vast increase in the defense budget. Kerry or Bush will propose this early on. There is no choice, particularly because al Qaeda's strategy must now be to counter the United States in the Islamic world. As the attacks in Egypt last week showed, jihadists are expanding operations in the Islamic world. If they cannot topple the Saudi, Pakistani or Egyptian governments through an uprising, they will try to sap their strength through ongoing, low-grade conflict. At a certain point -- and the point is unpredictable -- the United States might have to suddenly intervene in any of a host of Islamic countries in order to stabilize exhausted regimes. At this moment, the United States does not have the manpower to do so. The expectation that the United States will have the option of whether to intervene is unrealistic. Events will determine what the United States has to do, and al Qaeda -- having failed thus far -- is not giving up. It intends to shape events. This excludes the possibility that a U.S.-Iranian confrontation might suddenly explode. If all goes well -- and it has not gone nearly as badly as some would say -- there remains the endgame, in which the United States destroys the command cell of al Qaeda. That cell is by all reports in northwestern Pakistan, and the Pakistanis show no appetite for going in and getting it. The United States will have to commit forces to the task in the end, and right now the forces aren't there. Having agreed that the war will continue and that there will be no withdrawal from Iraq, these things simply follow. The pressure on reluctant allies in the Islamic world will continue. The United States will not leave Iraq, but will reduce its exposure. Forces must be held in reserve for al Qaeda countermoves. Kerry might well hold a meeting with the French. Bush will undoubtedly make speeches about building democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Politicians must be granted their little pleasures. Democrats seem to love European summits, which seem to remind them of John F. Kennedy or something. Republicans love to call things evil, which seems to remind them of evil. Neither French help nor rhetorical gestures will make the slightest difference. Whether they know it or not, Bush and Kerry have agreed on one thing: The only thing they have to offer is blood, toil, sweat and tears. Ted Belman is cofounder and cohost of IsraPundit, a pro-Israel strong activist website (http://israpundit.com). To Go To Top

MYTHS IN THE MAKING Posted by Barry Rubin, October 28, 2004.

One of the most remarkable distortions of the many now circulating around the world is the claim that Israel controls the United States. This notion is difficult to distinguish from a traditional antisemitic theme. When one examines the weakness of the evidence used to advance this argument it is clearly merely a new version of it. Yet this claim is no mere marginal phenomenon but from supposedly great intellectuals, serious journalists, and former policymakers, appearing in such places as the Guardian, Toronto Star, Financial Times, and even in the New York Times. These people insist that the Bush administration--or even both U.S. presidential candidates--do whatever Israel says, give Prime Minister Ariel Sharon total support, and, consequently, betray America's own interests. Here is how the New York Times puts it in an October 18 editorial which is so beyond belief that it must be quoted extensively: "Although the United States has long been a close ally of Israel, Washington had also managed, prior to the Bush administration, to convince the Palestinians of its good faith as a peace broker. Over the past three and a half years, that trust has been needlessly and recklessly forfeited. This administration has allowed itself to become the pawn of Mr. Sharon's machinations. How far this has now gone is clear from a recent Israeli newspaper interview in which the prime minister's chief of staff bragged that Mr. Sharon had secured American endorsement for positions designed to postpone serious discussion of Palestinian statehood until the far distant future." What is that dreadful position? That Israel withdraw completely from Gaza! And how can someone criticize the United States for undermining its own trustworthiness in Palestinian eyes, when the exact opposite is so clearly the case? It requires only 800 words to demolish this nonsense. First, these claims omit the reasons why American leaders might support Israel, other than Ariel Sharon's supposedly hypnotic charm--a remarkable notion for anyone even generally familiar with the Israeli Prime Minister. The United States has sound reasons for its strongly pro-Israel stance. These include: --Watching a seven-year-long peace process sunk by Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat's and Syrian intransigence and helped little by Arab states. --Observing how the Palestinian leadership rejected ceasefires and supported terrorism since 2000. --Knowing that the current Palestinian leadership is not going to make any conceivable compromise peace or live up to any serious commitments it makes. --Understanding, after 9/11, that Israel is a fellow victim of terrorism and partner in the global struggle against it. --Witnessing Yasir Arafat's lies over arms smuggling in partnership with Hizballah and Iran, his funding for terrorists, his refusal to arrest the murderers of three U.S. government employees in Gaza last year, his sabotage of reform and many more reasons. --The conclusion based on careful investigation that Arafat sabotaged the Roadmap by encouraging continued Palestinian terrorism, even though the plan promised his people a state in a matter of months. In short, the United States has good reasons based on its interests, strategy, and experience for taking a strongly pro-Israel stance at present. The second distortion is that Bush has done nothing for peace. There can only be two assumptions here: either some real opportunity has been missed (which is hard to show) or Washington should be active just for the sake of being active. Yet again the actual evidence is deliberately obscured. Bush has sent out many emissaries to the region, was the first president to endorse a Palestinian state, devised the Roadmap, and even set a bold strategy to encourage Palestinian reform. It is a lie to say Bush has neglected the issue. Indeed, it would be more accurate to note that he gave the Palestinians two big gains: accepting their statehood and promoting Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. Third, if the United States supports most of what Sharon did this is largely because he has followed a restrained policy which couples a few targeted killings of those involved directly in terrorism (something U.S. policy is also doing now) with limited, temporary military operations into the territories rather than reoccupation. He has gone slow on the fence, heeded judicial verdicts to change its route, and even sought U.S. approval for where it will be built! And he is the first Israeli prime minister to order--at the risk of his own continued power--dismantling Jewish settlements and the withdrawing from the whole Gaza Strip. What is particularly obnoxious is the lie that Sharon advisor Dov Weisglass implied some arrogant belief that Israel set U.S. policy. For anyone who actually reads what Weisglass said, his tone is not one of bragging, as the Times would have it, at manipulating the Americans but rather one of almost cringing awe and praise at American power. He makes it clear instead that the Americans reached their own conclusion, "They didn't need us to understand what it's all about." And at least in large part, the same applies to Kerry. So does all this add up to, in the New York Times' words, the leader of the Jewish state having "the world's only superpower dancing to his tune" and leading the Bush administration "by the nose"? If, as the editorial complains, neither candidate for the U.S. presidency offers "any serious proposals to break the deadlock," perhaps that is because there is no possible such plan at the present time. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography and Hating America: A History (Oxford University Press, August 2004). This article is archived at Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at . To Go To Top

A(NOTHER PROBABLY TOO) SIMPLE SOLUTION Posted by Rabbi Haim Cassorla, October 27, 2004.

"A[nother probably too] Simple Solution - or if you prefer, with a nod to J. Swift A Modest Proposal" This is archived at http://www.rabbihaim.com/disengagement.html People who have read some of my previous comments on the Arab war against Israel might remember that I like to find the simplest solution to what seems to be the problem. I hope that by doing this, in some way I might be able to emulate Noah, who was selected to save the world by virtue of his simplicity. Let it be clear that any solution I might suggest will be, to the best of my humble abilities, in full compliance with Jewish Law and tradition. Here, then, in the interests of simplicity and Halakhicly correct justice, is my proposal: First I will cover the facts on the ground, as I see them: 1. Those who speak in the name of the "Palestinians" have repeatedly rejected any solution which would include the continued existence of any piece of land as a remnant of the "Zionist entity" on lands which they claim as Arab lands. Since this claim includes ALL of Israel, it is a demand that we cannot accede to. Because of this, we will have to offer a solution that will not make the "Palestinian" side completely happy. Despite this, my solution will try to help them and the rest of the world get at least some of what they want, while not denying Israel's existence. Halakhicly we cannot end the existence of Israel. This principle is called NILI. 2. Those who speak in the name of the "Palestinians" have repeatedly rejected any solution which would not allow the "Palestinians" a contiguous land mass. 3. Over the entire history of the modern State of Israel a major issue has been the passage of family members across Israel for purposes of "family (re)unification." 4. The State of Israel has always had to deal with the problems of the "refugee camps" built and supported by UNRWA. This burden on the world organization grows from year to year and there has been no solution proposed to replace these "camps" with permanent housing, and reduce the UN budget in this area so that something can be done to preserve life in The Sudan, or other troubled areas of the world. 5. The Rabbis of Israel, (and many others throughout the world) have declared that observant Jews may not take part in uprooting Jews from their homes in Eretz Yisrael. These same Halakhic authorities also declare it to be unacceptable to "cede" any part of Eretz Yisrael. To be perfectly clear, most of these same authorities include YeSh"A as part of Eretz Yisrael. 6. The government of Israel, led by Arik Sharon, is committed to "disengagement." 7. The government of the United States has affirmed its support of the resettlement of large populations from Gaza as part of a "disengagement." This is an endorsement of "ethnic cleansing," clearly and undeniably. Taking all of the above into account, I submit my solution. Please understand, I know that it is simple. I also know that this is not a complete solution and will not settle border issues, but remember that the Arik Plan also does not purport to solve everything. Disengage from the "Palestinian" population in Gaza by removing the "Palestinian" population from Gaza. I believe that enough money has been allocated by the Knesset to allow the resettlement of these people to other places - not excluding PA controlled areas of Judea and Samaria - but also not limited to those areas. The United States government has already agreed to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Why shouldn't they agree to moving a different group to the same end? This will defacto end the "Refugee Camps" which have been a bane to the "Palestinians," Israel, and the UN. This solution will allow for the (re)unification of those families who wish to live together and will end the need for a land bridge to connect a "Palestinian Entity" at the cost of the contiguity of the "Zionist Entity." I am sure that the government of Egypt will give its tacit support to this proposal that will limit or end smuggling across the demarcation line. This single act will also send a clear sign to all of those who support the "Palestinian Cause" that terrorism will not be rewarded, and that we will fight terrorism by uprooting its perpetrators. This solution will decrease the need for crossing points from PA administered areas in the name of "family visits." This unification of the now separated "Palestinian" population will also allow those "Palestinians" who have attempted to engage in commerce, to now engage in building an indigenous "Palestinian" economy. As a final point, I believe that a "disengagement plan" that looks like this will allow Arik to change his name back to Ariel. Rabbi Haim Cassorla lives in Jacksonville, Florida. Contact him at his website - www.rabbihaim.com - or send emails to rabbihaim@comcast.net To Go To Top

THE "PRISONER RELEASE" FARCE! Posted by Tamar Eden Rush, October 27, 2004.

In honour of the chairman's (hopefully painful) suffering, I think I'll repost a few things from IsraPundit (http//israpundit.com). This was published Wednesday, August 06, 2003. It is now late afternoon here on the coast of Israel, and I have spent all afternoon witnessing the release of 339 Palestinian prisoners on Israel Television. I had expected to see a few arrogant souls flashing the victory sign, but even "cynical little me" was surprised at the anger and hatred displayed by most of those who will spend this evening with their family and loved ones, courtesy of our policy of appeasement. Arch-Terrorist Yassir Arafat told a local paper yesterday that he, " regards Israel's release of prisoners this week as an act of fraud and deceit.", his newly released followers echoed those sentiments as they spoke to reporters, claiming that they did not want to be released, while 3,000 other members of various Palestinian terror organisations remain imprisoned for "infractions", such as blowing up busloads of Jews, and shooting innocent children in their beds. Arafat and his minions have made a farce of the "Goodwill gesture" demanded by the Bush administration. If we continue with the implementation of the even more farcical "Road Map", then we should be absolutely pedantic about it, and refuse to accommodate the Arabists at the State Dept. by enacting an endless succession of new and unappreciated "confidence building measures". If it ain't in the "Road Map", then forget about it! The Institute for Contemporary Affairs has published the following article, that should clear up the "Prisoner release" issue, once and for all! It's called "Prisoner Release - Veering Off the Roadmap" and was written by Eli Kazhdan. It is in Vol. 2, No. 31, 14 July 2003. Eli Kazhdan is a senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He served as a foreign policy advisor to Minister Natan Sharansky. The Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) is dedicated to providing a forum for Israeli policy discussion and debate. The first sentence of Phase I of the roadmap is crystal clear, demanding that "the Palestinians immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence." The roadmap's cease-fire is not contingent upon Israeli performance on any other issue. Any linkage between the question of Palestinian violence and Israeli implementation of the roadmap makes violence part of the negotiating process. Not a single mention of Palestinian prisoners or their release is to be found in any of the three phases of the roadmap. The Tenet Plan, to which the roadmap refers, only called upon Israel to release Palestinians "arrested in security sweeps, who have no association with terrorist activities." Over the past few weeks, there has been a protracted arm-wrestling match between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, as well as within Israeli and Palestinian governments and societies respectively, regarding the issue of prisoner release. Government meetings and negotiations, press releases and threats, condemnations, and counter-condemnations have all focused on one issue: the release of Palestinian prisoners incarcerated in Israel. Judging by all the recent global commentary around this issue, one would naturally assume that this is a first and foremost issue of the roadmap, referred to in the first sentence of this document as one of the "performance-based and goal-driven benchmarks" essential for any further progress. Additionally, militant Islamist groups, like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, have been insisting that unless their prisoners are freed, their temporary truce (hudna) with Israel will be cancelled, thereby creating a formal link between the prisoner release issue and the cease-fire. Are these assertions consistent with the roadmap or a deviation from its original terms? The Roadmap's Concept of an Israeli-Palestinian Cease-Fire While the roadmap includes three phases connected to benchmarks, the first sentence of Phase I is crystal clear, demanding that "the Palestinians immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence." The roadmap's cease-fire is not contingent upon Israeli performance on any other issue. The requirement of the Palestinians to halt violent activities is absolute. Any linkage between the question of Palestinian violence and Israeli implementation of the roadmap makes violence part of the negotiating process. The roadmap cease-fire, moreover, is not confined to halting Palestinian terror attacks alone. It states that the "unconditional cessation of violence [be undertaken] according to the steps outlined below." Those steps include "dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure," as well as "commencing confiscation of illegal weapons." In terms of sequence, it is clear from reading the roadmap that these security steps are an inherent part of the definition of a cease-fire and are to be implemented immediately as well. Unfortunately, the Palestinian Authority security services have not taken one step to dismantle the terrorist organizations or disarm them, in accordance with their obligations. Worse still, Palestinian ministers, like Muhammad Dahlan, have repeatedly asserted that they have no intention of implementing this roadmap obligation. True, the Palestinian Authority has taken some initial steps against incitement, a handful of weapons were confiscated from "criminal elements" - not members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and some attempted attacks were foiled. But the roadmap's fundamental demand to deal with the terrorist groups by removing them along with their arms has yet to be acted upon. Moreover, there are increasing signs that Palestinian organizations, like Hamas, are actually expanding their infrastructure, by increasing the rate of production of Qassam rockets and upgrading their range. The Roadmap and the Prisoner Release Issue Overlooked in the controversy over prisoner release is the fact that not a single mention of Palestinian prisoners or their release is to be found in any of the three phases of the roadmap. The only possible reference appears in the roadmap's demand that "Palestinians and Israelis resume security cooperation based on the Tenet work plan" - a demand which is a "supportive measure" to the immediate cessation of violence, certainly not a precursor to it. In any case, the Tenet Plan itself only called upon Israel to release Palestinians "arrested in security sweeps, who have no association with terrorist activities." So before the two parties have even begun to follow the roadmap, Israel already finds itself in a corner: on the one hand, a cease-fire which was supposed to be immediate and unconditional has become temporary and contingent upon prisoner release; on the other hand, the Palestinians are not moving ahead on other "immediate" demands of the roadmap, such as dismantling terrorist groups (or disarming them) and comprehensive political reform, until the prisoner issue is settled to their satisfaction. Within a very brief period, Israel has found itself at a strategic disadvantage as the Palestinians focus our own attention on the issue of prisoner release and effectively divert world attention from critical demands for performance on the Palestinian side. The roadmap, which has been accepted by Israel and the Palestinians as the compass for the peace process, is today the prism through which progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front is globally judged. Israel must play strictly by the roadmap, meticulously monitoring Palestinian compliance with each and every benchmark and demand of the roadmap, and not veering off it, especially when the Palestinians seek to divert attention to an issue that was never part of it. To Go To Top

AFTER WE BREAK OUT THE CANDY Posted by Beth Goodtree, October 27, 2004.

After the first 24 hours of celebrations among the civilized world at the death of the most foul creature to infest humanity since Hitler, there will be big problems. The Arabs will blame Israel and the Jews for Arafat's demise. They will say something to the effect that if it weren't for his isolation in Ramallah, he would still be alive and killing. They will blame his lack of living in obscene luxury and with a nice scenic view on his 'premature' departing. Then the killings and chaos will start. Definitely look for the Arabs to attack each and every one of the Jews living in Gaza. Look for them to tear their bodies apart and kick-roll their heads down the streets like they have done in the past. Look for them to take keepsakes of babies hands, men's ears or noses, and do other unspeakable acts that they have done mere months ago. Then look for chaos and darkness to descend upon the land. Every group will be angling for rulership. Judging from recent elections there, many groups will run on the same platform as one did so successfully before: who can kill the most Jews. When rival groups aren't busy killing each other, look for them to be competing as to how many rockets they can launch at Israel, how many genocide bombers they can send, roadside bombs they can plant, axe murders they can commit and more. Meanwhile, look for the media to play it up to Israel's detriment. Look for al-Jazeera, the BBC, CNN and Reuters to report that 'Palestinian Activists' took to the streets to express their grief. They may even show file footage of a Jewish family celebrating a wedding with much dancing, laughing and handing out of treats, implying that this was the way that Jews treated the death of Arafat. Even the New York Times and the Village Voice might get into the act with banner headlines reading: "Last Victim of Intifadah" and showing Arafat's picture alongside some file photos of the IDF bulldozing a house. Also look for Islamists the world over blaming Jews for the 'premature' death of Yasser Arafat (as if he was too young to die of old age). Recalling recent incidents in Europe, riots, burnings and home invasions on a massive scale may become common, along with knifings and stonings. Jewish businesses the world over may be trashed and looted, Jewish school children may be dragged through the streets and beaten. This will be a very difficult time for Jews. Meanwhile, I noticed a curious thing which may be more than an oddity if Arafat dies now. When the talk of a Knesset vote on Sharon's 'disengagement plan' (more accurately known as expulsion-of-Jews-from-their-homes-plan) first started, Arafat got sick. Within hours of it passing, he fell critically ill. I wonder...... Moving along, in keeping with journalistic tradition, I have written a piece about Arafat before his demise. Most newspapers do this for famous people so they can go to press as soon as someone of importance passes. Here is mine, which is not a bio but the eulogy I'd love to deliver. Arafat's Pre-Mortem Eulogy We come here today to rejoice in the belated death of Mohammed Abdul-Ra'ouf Qudwa Al-Husseini, an Egyptian who changed his name to Yasser Arafat. Having aspired to follow in the footsteps of his uncle -- The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem -- who was Hitler's representative in the Middle East, Arafat decided to continue Hitler's plans of committing genocide on the Jewish people. In the early 1960s, he cobbled together a group of Arab rejects, mostly from Jordan and Egypt, and renamed them the 'Palestinians.' Right off, he led his 'people' to an ignoble start, using murder, terror and unmentionable atrocities in an attempt to destroy a sovereign nation and exterminate an entire people. He continued on through 40 years of murder, mayhem and genocide and will share a place in history next to Hitler. Listing each and every one of his acts of horror, barbarity and chaos would take way too long and I know you are all in a party mood, so let me conclude this with a warning to Satan: Now that Arafat is in your domain, look out for him organizing a bunch of demons, declaring them the originators of your realm and the first and only 'Satanists,' creating chaos and angling to have your own area declared illegally 'occupied' by You. You must also beware that he will soon have help. Some of his most ardent supporters in the UN are biologically scheduled to relocate to your realm soon, as is his 'partner for peace' and co-Nobel Laureate. Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer who lives in the NYC metro area. She writes political commentary/analysis, and the occasional science and humor articles. To Go To Top

A BLACK DAY FOR ISRAEL Posted by Bernard J. Shapiro, October 27, 2004.

Yesterday was a BLACK DAY FOR ISRAEL. The consequences of the Knesset vote on the expulsion of Jews will be horrendous and is not fully understood. The Jews have faced expulsions many times throughout their history - the largest from Spain in 1492. Today we witness the first time Jews have been expelled by a Jewish government from their own nation. The immediate consequence of this vile act by the Sharon government is the total fracture of the national consensus. It is a rupture of the historical roots of Israel in Zionism. The ruling Likud Party will be split and there is a possibility that the anti-Zionist left will emerge as the most significant influence on Israeli politics after being defeated in the last election by a landslide. Democratic principles are being undermined and critics of Sharon's policies are being threatened with imprisonment. What can we expect in the future following the surrender to terrorism. For one, Gaza will be come a haven and training base for terrorists from all over the world. New weapons will be introduced in large number including rockets capable of reaching Israel's major cities. Just like the days before the Six Day War, terrorists will infiltrate into Israel from Gaza bringing death and destruction in their wake. The most significant damage will be to Israeli morale. While the Arabs will feel elated at this victory over Israel, Jews will become depressed and their feelings of national pride will be greatly diminished. Many Jews will seek to avoid joining the IDF and its elite units. Many more will emigrate to other countries, disgusted with Israeli anti-Jewish policies. The goal of improving Israel's demographic balance by leaving Gaza will fail as fewer Jews will immigrate to Israel as the security situation deteriorates. As increasing numbers of Jews emigrate and the Arab birthrate continues to grow Israel will find itself in the same difficult position. There are other answers to the problem like transfer, but the leftist government will refuse to even discuss it. HOW CAN WE SAVE ISRAEL AND PREVENT EXPULSION OF JEWS? [Writer's Note: This editorial is conceptually based on the history of both the American Revolution and Martin Luther King Jr's struggle to emancipate the black population of the United States. Of course it is modern and on the struggle for Israel, but the voices of George Washington, Patrick Henry and Dr. King ring loudly in my heart and soul.] It is clear to all of us that the present Likud government of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is leading Israel to disaster. It is also clear that nothing external is compelling this self-destruction. The only thing that will save Israel is new elections. THAT COULD BE TOO LATE! ISRAEL WILL BE LOST! The only way to speed up elections and thus save Israel is by destabilizing the current government and causing it to fall. This would force new elections and stop the insane Oslo/Road Map process. HISTORY Over the last one hundred years, many governments have been destabilized by the action of a determined group of its citizens, not necessarily a majority. Two recent cases in this country are the Civil Rights Movement and the Anti-War in Viet-Nam Movement. There is no doubt that Lyndon Johnson chose not to run for a second term because of the anti-war movement. There is also no doubt the Afro-American population would not have been able to throw off the yoke of discrimination without non-violent protest. In Israel it is obvious that the intifada succeeded, no doubt because of the Israeli government's reticence in crushing it. It is this reticence by democratic regimes to crush popular uprisings that is the biggest weapon in the hands of groups wishing to destabilize their government. This principle does not work under autocratic governments as witness Syria (Hama) and China (Tiananmen Square). TECHNIQUES 1. Demonstrations -- the larger the better. Demonstrations will not in and of themselves bring down a government. Good media coverage is essential to give the population a feeling that the tide of history is turning against the regime. 2. Civil disobedience -- the key to success. There is one essential requirement for destabilizing a government and that is for a determined group of people to be willing to go to jail, be beaten by police, and possibly be killed in the pursuit of their political aims. More will follow later on organizing civil disobedience. 3. The Wrench In The Machinery Of Government A Physical - roads and bridges can be blocked by slow or stalled cars. B. Electronic - computer networks, telecommunications can be adversely affected [10,000 people calling government offices at the same time can paralyze the system]. C. Psychological - photo's can be taken of police and military personnel who become involved in violent action against peaceful demonstrators. Available now are miniature video cameras that can be worn inconspicuously and send live feed to distant computers. At a time and place of your choosing their names can be revealed - you can compromise those security officers involved in non-democratic violence against demonstrators. Their names and photos can be publicized, leading to fear and a sense of insecurity. 4. Violence - ONLY TO DEFEND ONE'S LIFE A. Armed resistence to non-democratic police and military actions is not the best course of action since the military, police and security services will always be stronger and better equipped. B. Open revolt against authority - Democracies are primarily based on voluntary compliance with the legal system. When that democracy ceases to govern in the best interests of its citizenry, with its security and survival, then it is lawful and justified to resist authority. This includes refusing to pay taxes, following illegal orders of the non-democratic army, traffic regulations etc. C. Mass demonstrations, including the right of self-defense, are meant to intimidate the police and the government. The horrible vision of civil war will restrain the government. Knowing that the Zionist/Right will not physically resist, gives the government strength to pursue suicidal policies. The policy of not striking back at the Left (as experienced during the "season") begun in the pre-state days by Menachem Begin has had the effect of emasculating the Right in its relations with the Left. STRATEGY While it is preferable to wage a non-violent campaign, there are certain lessons one can learn from the Israel Defense Forces. 1. Most important: Do not give the enemy time to rest and re-group. The IDF always advances in one massive push to victory, never allowing the enemy a respite. The same must be true of the demonstrations against Sharon. It is a mistake to agree to a truce. This time will be used to organize special police units including female police officers to handle demonstrators. The government has already learned that reservists do not like this heartrending undemocratic task. 2. Attack in many places at once, causing physical and psychological stress on the enemy. Demonstrators should not just take over hills in YESHA, but should take over government offices from Eilat to Metulla. Roads should be blocked all over the country. In Jerusalem, with its many government offices and a supportive religious population, you should be able to create and sustain chaos. CONCLUSION Half measures will not work. Either we want to bring down this government or we don't. You can not be both meat and milk. It was the IDF's failure to destroy the intifada that led to much of our trouble. Remember the principle of vaccinations: a tiny doze of the disease that allows the body to build its immune system. Half-measures allow Sharon to develop a resistance to the demonstrations. We must take the momentum and build continuously to the day of victory. The decision is ours. A TIME FOR PEACE, AND A TIME FOR WAR We find all the expressions of horror at the recent Rabbi's ruling concerning a soldier's obligation to avoid abandoning army bases and settlements to terrorists, to be hypocritical, self-serving, and unfortunate. The Israeli government is in rebellion against everything that Israel, Zionism, and Judaism are all about. They are the ones causing the rift in the body politic and they will be totally responsible for any resulting violence. When will the Nationalist Camp realize that we are "at war already" with a PLO-supported government that rules Israel? At what point will Israelis realize that the CIVIL WAR they fear, IS ALREADY TAKING PLACE AND THEY ARE LOSING? Why don't members of the Nationalist Camp understand that FORCE is being used by only ONE side and that is the government. The monopoly on power must be broken or there is no hope. Under the Nazis, the Jews of Warsaw numbered over 500,000. They were depleted with regular deportations aided by Judenrats (Jewish leaders). The Revolt in Warsaw began when the Jewish population was down to 50,000 (or 90% murdered). At what point is it OK to rebel? When is civil disobedience OK? When is civil war a better course than suicide? All throughout history there have been rebels and loyalists. History is usually written by the victors but truly there is seldom a universally accepted moral standard as to what is a proper rebellion and what is not. We can say with absolute certainty, however, that the Jewish return to Zion and our struggle today for Eretz Yisrael are more righteous than any other struggle for national liberation in the history of the world. The Jews of YESHA must not be passive pawns in the political surrender of their homes. They must fight the Arabs, where necessary, to maintain their travel, water, and land rights. When the Israeli government retreats, leaving them behind PLO battle lines, they must be prepared to go on the offensive militarily to secure safe contiguous areas of Jewish control. The defeatist Israeli leaders, who have surrendered our Jewish rights to Eretz Yisrael, should be told that there are still proud Jews in YESHA who will give up neither their inheritance from Abraham nor their right of self-defense. Exercising one's right to self-defense is a moral imperative. There is a lot of hypocritical talk coming from the government about the danger of Jew fighting Jew. These warnings came from the likes of Yitzhak Rabin who delighted in shooting Zionist (Betar) teenagers swimming to shore after his forces sank the Altalena in 1948. New more dangerous hypocrites are putting the Jews of YESHA and all of Israel in life threatening peril. They care nothing about Jewish lives! The glorious Hebrew Warriors who defeated five Arab armies in 1948, three in 1967, and two in 1973 must not surrender their Jewish homeland to an evil terrorist, who delights in killing Jewish women, children, husbands, sons and daughters.. The Brave Heroes of Zion must not limit themselves to passive civil disobedience but must on the offensive. While such internal Jewish fighting would be DREADFUL, it is a consequence of the government's disregard for the security and well being of its citizens. At this great time of trial and apocalyptic threat, the safeguarding of the future of the Jewish people's right to Eretz Yisrael must take precedence. Bernard J. Shapiro is the Executive Director of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies and editor of its monthly Internet magazine, "The Maccabean Online" and its email broadcast, freemanlist. To Go To Top

KNESSET APPROVES DISENGAGEMENT PLAN Posted by Bryna Berch, October 27, 2004.

The Disengagement Plan was approved by the Knesset Tuesday night in a 67-45 vote, with 7 abstentions. While the plan had been expected to pass all along, there were some last minute tensions - the result of power play attempts by Ministers Binyamin Netanyahu and Limor Livnat who sought to present Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with an ultimatum during the last hour before the vote. Netanyahu and Livnat were planning, according to reports, to threaten to vote against Sharon's plan unless the Prime Minister would agree on the spot to hold a national referendum on the withdrawal plan. Mr. Sharon refused even to meet with them, taking his seat in the Knesset plenum 15 minutes before the vote in a demonstrative show that he had no desire to engage in last-minute negotiations. Netanyahu, Livnat and several other ministers did not show up for the first reading of names, leading many to think they would carry out their threat and vote "nay" - but they suddenly appeared in the plenum and actually voted in favor, apparently fearing Sharon's threat to dismiss any minister who did not vote for the plan. A smiling and victorious Sharon later told his aides, "Let this be a lesson to you: Never give in to threats or pressure." While, or before, Netanyahu and Livnat were attempting to present their ultimatum, Minister Zevulun Orlev of the National Religious Party (NRP) came out with a 14-day ultimatum of his own. He said that the four members of the NRP who still support the government would quit the coalition in 14 days unless Sharon agrees to hold a national referendum regarding the expulsion of Jews from Gaza and northern Shomron. On the other hand, if Sharon agrees, the NRP would promise not to quit the government at all - regardless of the outcome of the plebiscite. Immediately after the Knesset vote, Ministers Netanyahu and Livnat attempted to save face with a dramatic announcement that they were joining the NRP's ultimatum. "If within 14 days, the Prime Minister has not agreed to a national referendum, we cannot see ourselves remaining in the government," Netanyahu said, stating that the terms apply to him, as well as Ministers Livnat, Yisrael Katz and Danny Naveh. Katz and Naveh refused to be interviewed today. "We do not want to topple or replace anyone," Netanyahu said, "but we want to give unity a chance, uniting the Likud and the nation." He added that if the Gaza plan is not taken to the nation to decide, it will lead to a severe split. Likud loyalists who oppose the plan were disappointed that Netanyahu and Livnat actually voted in favor of the expulsion of Jews and the hand-over of land to the PA. The two explained repeatedly in recent days that they remain essentially opposed to the plan, and favor a national referendum. While most analysts said that Netanyahu had come out the loser in the war of nerves with Sharon, a minority said that Sharon now faces the threat of losing several of his most senior Cabinet ministers, as well as the prospect of a toppled government. Likud loyalist Minister Dr. Uzi Landau remained true to his position and voted against the plan, as did Deputy Minister Michael Ratzon. They were both well aware that letters of dismissal awaited them, and in fact, Minister Landau was invited to the Prime Minister's office only minutes after the vote, where he was fired. The dismissal takes effect on Thursday night. Ratzon has also been sacked, effective immediately. MK Ruchama Avraham is reportedly interested in his position. Landau told the media yesterday that if Sharon in fact dismisses him, he will continue his battle against unilaterally forfeiting portions of the Land of Israel from his Knesset seat. In a press conference this morning, he had strong words against Sharon, accusing him of taking the nation's overwhelming vote for a right-wing government and turning it into a left-wing one. Ratzon said he was very proud of his letter of dismissal, adding that he planned to frame it in gold as a testimony of his having passed the test of commitment to the Land of Israel. Aside from Ministers Netanyahu and Livnat, many other votes aroused interest. Minister Yisrael Katz, a leading member of the "Likud loyalists" opposed to the disengagement plan, voted in favor, fearing Sharon's threat of dismissal. Some said that he had thus forfeited his right to lead those who oppose the withdrawal. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, as well, opposes the plan, but never indicated he would vote against it - and in fact voted in favor. He said that the vote had nothing to do with removing Jewish communities, but was rather a ratification of the Cabinet decision of June 7. Likud Minister Danny Naveh has expressed opposition to the plan, absented himself from the first polling last night, but ultimately voted in favor of the plan. MK Yisrael Eichler of United Torah Judaism had indicated he would abstain, but in the end, voted against the plan, together with all the other members of the hareidi parties - UTJ (5) and Shas (11). Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, who issued a strong ruling against the disengagement plan, phoned Eichler's rabbinical authority, the Rabbi of the Belzer Hassidim, yesterday afternoon, and asked him to advise Eichler to vote against. On the other hand, at least two other UTJ Knesset Members said they voted against - not because they oppose the plan, but because of political considerations. Several Arab Knesset Members, particularly Muhammed Barakeh, embarrassed themselves when they changed their vote at the last moment. A rowdy exchange between Labor MK Chaim Ramon and Barakeh had taken place in the Knesset several hours earlier, when Ramon accused the Arab MKs of subjugating their ideals to their political needs. "You know very well," Ramon railed at Barakeh, "that if we in Labor were not voting for this plan, thus giving it a majority, then you would vote for it. What, are we your Shabbat Goy [a reference to non-Jews who perform actions on the Sabbath for Jews who are not permitted to carry them out]?! You know that this plan is exactly what you want, and yet you're voting together with the right-wing against it! Look at who your allies are - Effie Eitam, Benny Elon and the like!" Barakeh responded furiously and could barely contain himself, continuing to shout at Ramon even after the latter was on his way out of the plenum. Holding a copy of the disengagement plan, Barakeh shouted, "I cannot vote for a plan that states that it does not call for the removal of communities! I cannot vote for a plan that states that it is aimed at strengthening Israel's hold on Judea and Samaria!" In the end, when it appeared that a last-minute change of vote by some Likud ministers might endanger the plan's passage, Barakeh and five of his Arab colleagues abstained, instead of voting against. The other two Arab-party MKs had said all along that they would vote in favor, and did so. The other abstention was that of MK David Tal, formerly of Shas and now of Labor's Am Echad faction. He had planned to vote in favor, but changed his mind following Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef's ruling against the plan. It should be noted that the rabbi's ruling negated abstention, saying, "If you see a baby drowning, would you 'abstain' from helping?!" Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin of the Likud voted against the plan, as he long indicated he would. He has in fact expressed strong criticism of Ariel Sharon for the plan... MK Eli Aflalo (Likud) arrived at the Knesset from the hospital in an ambulance, and voted in favor of the plan... MK Yehudit Naot of Shinui, who resigned her Cabinet post due to illness, was the only MK not present for last night's vote... MK Chemi Doron (Shinui), who had been rumored to be considering voting against or abstaining, voted in favor... The entire Shinui faction voted in favor, as did all of Labor (except for Tal) and Meretz/Yachad. The entire NRP and National Union factions (except for Michael Nudelman, who voted 'yea') voted against. The Likud was split almost down the middle, with 17 voting against and 23 in favor. Among those voting against were Chaim Katz, Ness, Kara, Kachlon, Gorlovsky, Erdan, Chazan, Yatom, Ben-Lulu, Saar, Blumental, Gamliel, Edelstein and David Levy. To Go To Top

WITHDRAWAL FROM GAZA HALTED IN ITS TRACKS Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, October 27, 2004.

In order to illustrate the utter absurdity of Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza lunacy, here is a masterpiece article written tongue in cheek. It appeared on the IsraPundit's website (http://israpundit.com/archives/009297.html). I always wondered why only Jews must be evacuated from their homes in Gaza, why not Arabs? Of course, this makes no sense and is racially indefensible, as it would be anywhere else in the world. So, what if all the Gaza Jews convert to Islam? Should we evacuate them then? Although, the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza - the largest deportation of Jews from their homes since Poland 1944 - passed a legislative hurdle in today's Knesset vote, it has not begun or been definitively approved and may yet be subject to a nationwide referendum. The whole process, though, may have just been stopped in its tracks. In a press conference held at the Dome of the Rock immediately following the Knesset vote, Gaza settler leaders, led by the leaders of the settlement block Gush Katif, announced that they and their followers have converted to Islam. The Gaza settlers have all either submitted electronic forms through an Islamic website or have stated "I bear witness that there is no diety but Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." This news seems to have brought an immediate reaction from certain countries and NGOs. Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations, stated that "the deportation of 8000 Muslims from their homes constituted a serious crime against humanity and a violation of international law." Saeb Ekrat, interviewed on CNN, stated that the people of Gush Katif had lived in their homes since time immemorial, before the Jews even existed, and that the planned actions of the Sharon government constitute another vicious deportation of indigenous peoples by the Israeli government. He continued that the Palestinian Authority could not be held responsible for the violence that might result from this unheard of provocation - the deportation of 20,000 women and children. He stated that the Palestinians would seek an international presence in the Gaza Strip to protect these people. Also interviewed by CNN was the former president of Iran, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani. He was not aware of the developments but welcomed the new converts to the fold and stated emphatically that if any Muslims are removed from their homes, Iran would "burn the little satan, the Zionist entity, with fire from the sun to bring peace to the world." When asked if he was referring to a hydrogen bomb or other nuclear device, President Rafsanjani stated that Iran was only pursing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. In a hastily arranged speech in Kuala Lumpor, former Malaysian prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad stated that Sharon and the Jews are pig monkey dogs and that the attempt to deport 50,000 Muslims would demonstrate to the world that the Jews are cockroaches and the spreaders of AIDS. The Malaysian Foreign Ministry later clarified that these statements were not anti-Semitic but reflected a reaction to the actions of Israel. Human Rights Watch is preparing a report on the deportations which it says violates the first, third and forth Geneva Conventions as well as numerous other laws applicable only to Israel. It announced that it is investigating allegations of massacres of former Jews in these former Jewish settlements, now ancient Arab villages, by Israeli security forces, France in its role as rotating president of the European Union announced that it and other members of the European Union could not be expected to protect Jews living in the European Union if Israel undertakes such aggressive actions against Muslims. France has announced that it will accelerate aid to Hamas, Hizballah and other humanitarian organizations which will deal with the eventual human rights crisis that would result from these actions. When a reporter asked about the concurrent humanitarian crisis in Sudan, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier stated that as the crisis in Gush Katif dwarfed that of Darfur, Sudan, the European Union had rescheduled its meeting to discuss taking immediate action to aid those being killed by Arab militias in Sudan until the fall of 2006. The government of Israel has not formerly responded to these developments but former Knesset member, Yossi Beilin during a stopover in Geneva stated that while he did support the deportation of Jews from their homes, he did not support the deportation of Muslims under any circumstances but went on to question whether the settlers had the proper intent when converting. Tomy Lapid, head of the Shinui party stated that any form of conversion, no matter how cursory, was satisfactory and he would not stand for a haredi interpretation of conversion requirements. When questioned during a campaign stop over, John Kerry said that he would have voted for the disengagement but would now vote against it, if he could vote. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email an email to ynz@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

MONA BAKER DEFENDS AMERICAN ANTI-ISRAEL PROFESSOR Posted by Tamar Rush, October 27, 2004.

This article was written by Jacob Gershman, Sun's Staff reforter, and it appeared in the New York Sun (ttp://www.nysun.com/article/3758) yesterday. A British professor who caused an international uproar after she fired two scholars because they were Israeli urged academics to sign a letter in support of a Columbia University professor, Joseph Massad, who she believes is under attack by the "pro-Israel lobby." A professor of translation studies at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Mona Baker yesterday urged academics to sign the letter calling on Columbia's president, Lee Bollinger, to publicly defend Mr. Massad. The campaign was spurred by a report in The New York Sun last week about Rep. Anthony Weiner's reaction to an underground documentary film featuring Columbia students talking about what they perceive as an anti-Israel bias among a number of faculty members, including Mr. Massad. In response to the Sun article and an editorial published in the New York Daily News condemning Mr. Massad, Mr. Weiner, who represents Brooklyn and Queens, called on Columbia to "fire" Mr. Massad, saying the professor does not have "carte blanche to spew hate." Mr. Massad and Ms. Baker yesterday refused to speak to the Sun. On her Website, www.monabaker.com, Ms. Baker writes that Mr. Massad "is the target of a new and particularly vicious attack by the pro-Israel lobby in the States, aimed at getting him dismissed and destroying his highly promising career." Ms. Baker said she knows Mr. Massad "personally" and praised him for his "dazzling scholarship, academic and personal integrity" and his advocacy for "peace with justice" in the Middle East. The attention surrounding Mr. Massad mirrors a controversy involving Ms. Baker two years ago, when she fired Gideon Toury of Tel Aviv University and Miriam Schlesinger of Bar-Ilan University from the editorial boards of two journals she owned. Ms. Baker said she was following through on a boycott she signed against Israeli academic institutions. After carrying out an inquiry, her university said she had the right to fire people from her own journals. On her Web site, www.monabaker.com Ms. Baker encourages readers to sign a letter in support of Mr. Massad written by a University of Texas professor, Neville Hoad. In his letter, Mr. Hoad states: "We, professors, scholars, teachers and students at universities world-wide are shocked by the slanderous campaign long launched in the New York media against our colleague Assistant Professor Joseph Massad." The letter said attacks against Mr. Massad "grossly misrepresent" his scholarship and said the Columbia scholar has spoken out against anti-Semitism. Mr. Hoad, a professor of English who met Mr. Massad as a Columbia graduate student, said he has collected hundreds of signatures and plans to send his letter to Mr. Bollinger and Columbia's provost, Alan Brinkley, tomorrow. "It's very important that the academic community remains self-regulating and people not be vulnerable to this kind of political pressure," he told the Sun. A spokeswoman for Columbia, Susan Brown, said, "We appreciate people taking the time to share their concerns with us and we take them seriously." Since the death of Edward Said, a Columbia literature professor, in 2003, Mr. Massad, a non-tenured professor of modern Arab politics, has become one of the most well-known opponents of Israel in academia. To critics of Middle East studies at American universities, Mr. Massad represents the basic problem of the field, which they say has become corrupted by anti-Israel sentiment and has largely ignored Islamic terrorism and the lack of political freedom in the Arab world. Although he has popular support among members of his Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures department and among a number of students in his classes, Mr. Massad has caused Columbia some concern. According to a report in the Times Higher Education Supplement, a British newspaper, Mr. Massad was forced to cancel a course he taught on Israeli and Palestinian politics due to the controversy over his writings and the content of his courses. He continues to teach other courses at the university. Students writing on an unofficial Web site that collects student feedback on Columbia courses are divided about Mr. Massad. This spring, one student wrote: "Rather than just melting into the background as spoiled kids he must teach, he takes the students seriously and gives them the respect that many professors on this campus do not." In 2003, another student wrote: "He teaches a polemic, not an academic class, and abuses the position of teacher to rant at his students, offering little analysis grounded in anything resembling reality." In one scene in the documentary film "Columbia Unbecoming" an Israeli student is interviewed describing a lecture by Mr. Massad on the subject of the Middle East conflict in 2001. According to the student, who served in the Israeli Air Force in the 1990s, Mr. Massad wouldn't answer the student's question following his lecture but insisted that he say how many Palestinians he killed. The David Project, the Boston-based pro-Israel group that produced the film, is expected to screen it for journalists later this week. In his writings, Mr. Massad has argued that Israel is a racist, colonialist state that has never had legitimacy and does not represent Jews of the world. He has argued for a one-state solution to the Middle East conflict and believes that Palestinian-Arab refugees ought to have the right to return to Israel. In an article published in Al-Ahram in 2003, Mr. Massad argued that Palestinian Arabs were losing international support because their leader, Yasser Arafat, was giving in too much to Israeli and American political demands. "In light of Oslo, Arafat and the PA put a stop to the first Intifada and have been diligently trying to suppress the current one," he wrote. "Our allies and friends, as a result, began to waver in their support for Palestinian resistance." e-mail: mona.baker@umist.ac.uk phone: +44/0 161 200 3081 fax: +44/0 161 200 3099 To Go To Top

TRICK OR TREAT? Posted by Marcel Cousineau, October 27, 2004.

I watched unamazed, as the U.S. Government was the first and only Foreign power to applaude the Gaza surrender and retreat vote in the Knesset. I know why they applauded and I understand why P.M. Sharon is pushing for it so hard, and it's not for 'any' peace. Why would a Jew betray his own nation and people unless he was seduced by threats and promises from his Overlord, and did not have enough faith in Hashem to withstand? It is comforting to know that Israel's land and her survival are not dependent on a weak and confused P.M. Sharon nor on Road Map to Israel's destruction, President Bush or Senator Lying in wait, Kerry. Someone else,Someone whom these planners are ignoring will have the LAST WORD on the devious plans of these men. Men who can not deliver on any of their promises,men who can only deceive and lead astray those who thrust in them. Thank G-d there is someone else to trust in than these failed lying men. This article was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg and is entitled "An Open Letter To The Likud." The chairman of your party, Ariel Sharon, castigates as "rebel" those of you who oppose his unilateral disengagement plan - which he himself opposed in the January 2003 election campaign. He has the audacity to tell you and the entire nation that he has not departed from his January 2003 campaign against unilateral disengagement, which garnered your party 38 Knesset seats! He threatens that new elections may leave many of you outside the Knesset, because those seats, he boasts, were brought to the party by him personally, when in truth it was your party's anti-disengagement campaign that made this impostor Israel's prime minister. He has betrayed your Zionist principles, your voters, and the heritage of the Jewish people - and for what? Nothing! That is precisely the value of the good will he expects from the United States and Europe. And now he mocks settlers as having a "messianic complex," even though he was once their champion. Such is his arrogance that he disregards the warnings of IDF Chief of Staff, Gen. Moshe Ya'alon and of Gen. Aharon Ze'evi-Farkash, head of IDF Intelligence. He dismisses their warnings against retreating under fire from Gaza even while Hamas and Islamic Jihad are developing rockets that can reach Jerusalem. Would it not be ironic justice if their rockets struck the Knesset where you and your colleagues have so ignobly decided the fate of thousands of Jewish families? You have a monster at the head of your party, who is bringing the State of Israel to the brink, and you do nothing more than call for a referendum. How contemptible! Bring the government down! You have 17 MKs who voted against disengagement, and at least 8 more who really oppose this criminal deed. Form a coalition with the four anti-disengagement parties, National Union, the National Religious Party, Shas, and Torah United Judaism, which together have 29 MKs - a coalition that will now give you 54 seats, more than enough for the President to call upon you to form the next government! Know well that retreat from Gaza will only heighten the Arabs' contempt and reinforce their commitment to Israel's destruction. Know well that the Arabs despise Sharon, precisely because they know he has the power to destroy them but refrains from doing so. Know well that the Arabs despise the Jews because they are willing to sacrifice what they call their birthright - for peace. There is no honor, there is no courage, among Jews whose leader is Ariel Sharon. Therefore, I call your attention to a former leader of your party, Menachem Begin, before he succumbed to the cult of peace or appeasement and proceeded to surrender the Sinai to Egypt - today the primary arms supplier of Gaza's terrorists - Egypt, which Sharon has invited into Gaza to train those Jew-killers! * * * At the height of the outpouring of joy on Israel's declaration of independence on May 15, 1948, Menachem Begin - who had lived in the Underground for almost five years - addressed the Jews of Israel over the secret radio station of the Irgun Zvai Leumi: We went Underground, we arose in the Underground under the rule of [British] oppression in order to strike at oppression and to overthrow it. Now, for the time being we have Hebrew rule in part of our Homeland. And it is in this part that there will be Hebrew Law - and that is the only rightful law in this country ... The State of Israel has arisen, but we must remember that our country is not yet liberated, and you see now the words of your Irgun fighters were not vain words; it is Hebrew arms which decide the boundaries of the Hebrew State. So it is now in this battle [the War of Independence]; so it will be in the future. Our God-given country is a unity. To attempt to dissect it is not only a crime, but a blasphemy and an abortion. Whoever does not recognize our natural right to our entire Homeland, does not recognize our right to any part of it... Citizens of the Hebrew State, soldiers of Israel, we are in the midst of battle. Difficult days lie ahead of us... we cannot buy peace from our enemies by appeasement. There is only one kind of peace that can be bought - the peace of the graveyard, the peace of Treblinka. Be brave of spirit, and ready for more trials. We shall withstand them. The Lord of Hosts will help us; he will sustain the bravery of the Hebrew youth, the bravery of the Hebrew mothers who, like Hannah, offer their sons on the altar of God. Now let me speak for myself. Members of the Likud: Unless you form the coalition mentioned above, the Third Commonwealth will disintegrate; indeed, it is already disintegrating. Know well, however, that Israel is eternal. Though you abandon Gaza, Jews will return. Though you abandon Judea and Samaria, Jews will return. They will pay a terrible price for leaving, and a terrible price to return. But the Fourth Commonwealth that will emerge in the coming chapter of Jewish history will be very different from the Third, for it will witness the spiritual redemption of the Jewish people. To Go To Top

ISRAELI PARLIAMENT OKS SHARON'S PLAN TO REMOVE JEWS LIVING IN AREAS WON IN DEFENSIVE WAR Posted by IsrAlert, October 27, 2004.

This was written by Michael Matza and appeared today in Jewish World Review (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1004/sharon_wins.php3?printer_friendly) (KRT) JERUSALEM - Shattering decades of public policy with a landmark vote, the Israeli parliament has, for the first time in the nation's history, approved a plan to uproot Jewish settlements from lands claimed by the Palestinians for a future state. Tuesday night's vote in the 120-member Knesset was 67 in favor of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan, and 45 opposed, with seven abstentions. One gravely ill member could not attend the historic session. Sharon's proposal still faces fierce opposition from within his Likud Party, with no guarantee of implementation; four future votes of the cabinet are required before any pullout can take place. Seventeen of 40 Likud members voted against the plan, which the well-organized settlement movement has pledged to fight to the end. The plan for "unilateral disengagement" calls for the evacuation by next summer of all 8,200 settlers from 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip and several hundred from four small settlements in the northern West Bank. Sharon calls the move a necessary step to enhance Israel's security after four years of Palestinian violence and absent a Palestinian partner for peace. Palestinians remain deeply skeptical. Chief negotiator Saeb Erekat described the plan Tuesday night as Israelis "negotiating with themselves." Making good on his threat to remove ministers who voted against disengagement, Sharon immediately fired cabinet minister-without-portfolio Uzi Landau, and deputy minister Michael Ratzon, both of whom cast "no" votes. Opponents have called for a national referendum. Two principal members of Sharon's cabinet, Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Education Minister Limor Livnat, who reluctantly voted "yes," told reporters immediately after the vote that they will resign if Sharon does not call for a plebiscite in the next two weeks. Sharon opposes a referendum, which would take months to prepare, because he views it as a stalling tactic. The possible defections of Netanyahu and Livnat, along the expected departure of the National Religious Party unless a referendum is held, threaten to topple Sharon's already shaky governing coalition. He might be forced to call new elections or cobble together a unity coalition, mostly likely with the opposition Labor Party. Still, the historic significance of Tuesday night's decision is that it moves Israel one step closer to achieving Sharon's vision of withdrawing from Gaza while consolidating his hold on the largest West Bank settlements. "I cannot say the messiah came down," said political analyst Avraham Diskin, "but it's another important step that proves Sharon means business." In the countdown to the vote, an estimated 15,000 settlers, many in the movement's signature orange T-shirts, rallied outside the Knesset in a hilltop rose garden to urge legislators to reject the plan. Vendors sold ice cream and cotton candy in a carnival atmosphere, while loudspeakers blared patriotic songs and "Hatikva," the Israeli national anthem. Rabbi Mordechai Elon, leader of a Jewish school near Jerusalem's Western Wall, told the crowd "prayer and faith" would sustain them. Anita Tucker, 58, born in Brooklyn, has lived for 28 years in the Gaza Strip settlement bloc known as Gush Katif, in a community of 75 families called Netzer Hazani. Among the residents are her two married sons and five grandchildren. "I'm here with a lot of people from Gush Katif and they don't look too worried," she said. "The prime minister has pressured these members of the Knesset. They are totally disoriented. They're not listening to the people. There's no freedom of thought in the Knesset anymore," she said. Tucker said she worked hard to defeat the plan when Sharon put it to a referendum of his 190,000-member Likud Party in May, which he lost. She will continue to work against it by all legal means, she said. "My parents were refugees from Germany. My grandparents were refugees from Poland. I do not expect to be a refugee in the homeland of the Jewish people. ... Reporters ask me where I will go if the evacuation happens. G-d willing, they will be asking me the same question next year," she said. Some demonstrators held placards emblazoned, "Sharon is a traitor," and "Soldiers, disobey orders to evacuate us." Miriam Tratner, 45, a mother of eight in the West Bank settlement of Kedumim, said she came to Jerusalem to support her friends in Gush Katif. If soldiers try to move them out, she said, she will put her body on the line to try to block the evacuation. "We will be there. They will open their homes to us. We will be with them in the last bad moments," she said. To Go To Top

FALSE CONCERN FOR CHILDREN; SHARON'S FARCICAL MESSAGE TO FRANCE; EGYPT SCHEMES Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 27, 2004.

DOES THE WORLD CARE ABOUT CHILDREN AND EXCESSIVE FORCE? A frequent human rights organization complaint about Israel is that its military employs disproportionate force and kills Arab children. Dressed in humanitarian concern, the complaint reflects antisemitism. How so? The complaints are false and misleading. Israel acts with restraint; the Arabs do not. The Arabs endanger their own civilians as well as Israeli civilians. The so-called human rights organizations have little to say about Arab terrorism against Israel. Their silence is hypocritical. They don't care that most of the P.A. war effort goes into attacking civilians! These are war crimes. Not that Human Rights Watch or Amnesty Intl. notice. They act like the UNO, the US, and the Pope, who usually did not denounce terrorist attacks on Israel, but: (1) Urged Israel, when it was about to retaliate, to act with restraint, as if there should be any restraint in liquidating terrorists; or (2) Waited until after retaliation, and deplored the "cycle of violence." They should condemn only the Arab violence, for that is aggression, whereas Israeli violence seeks to curb P.A. means for inflicting more. Almost every day, the minor media describe attempted terrorist attacks turned back by Israeli security forces. Two terrorists killed at the security fence. Three at an army post. Another at a checkpoint. Some in a Jewish community. Attempted ambush. The major media publicize mostly the ones that succeed in murdering people. This kind of reporting gives the misleading impression of the conflict being intermittent and the current situation as a period of "quiet." By this means, the media pretends that the P.A. was reducing terrorism, and so Israel should resume making territorial concessions. Consumers of the media thought they were being informed and that our political leaders, who press for Israeli concessions, had some reasonable motives. The motives are not reasonable and unthinking if not sordid. The sector that should take most notice of the constant Arab terrorist attacks on Israel is the human rights NGOs. Since they fail to do so, they forfeit respect and entitlement to charitable donations. Instead of these inconsistent or antisemitic human rights organizations, contribute to Israeli relief organizations, such as the one that trains guard dogs for Jewish communities. THE WORD FROM EGYPTIAN ISLAMIST The head of an Egyptian Islamist political party commented on al-Jazeera TV about the Iraq war. He declared that Islam authorizes hostage-taking, that attacking US civilians there is permissible, that bombing civilians in Taba is legitimate, and that the US bombing of Fallujah warrants a future Islamist bombing of Los Angeles. These tactics are permitted when the Muslim forces are weak. He urged clerics to go to Iraq and fight. Oh, he laments, if only the insurgents had missiles that could reach L.A.! His rationale for the war and for executing certain hostages is that Iraq is occupied and the hostages supported the occupation. The Islamist deems them part of the military, because he sees war as total. Thus interpreters and those who provision the military assist the war effort. (This rationalization would designate water works engineers, seeking to restore supplies for the whole country, as targets.) His rationalization of the terrorism at Taba is that the Egyptian people, in his opinion (and perhaps he gauges this opinion correctly) do not want foreign tourists. (So murder them?) He finds it inconceivable that Taba has become a resort for the "Israeli Army." (The Islamists take the hard edge off perceptions of their terrorism by calling Israeli families "soldiers".) He claims that all countries permit execution of prisoners. He named none. He did cite examples by Mohammed of having poets and others assassinated (IMRA, 10/18 from MEMRI). Iraq no longer is occupied. Hostages who were rebuilding the country were not supporting occupation but the imminent independence of a viable Iraq, mostly at US expense. Most countries do not permit civilian hostage-taking, and forbid the execution of prisoners of war. The purpose of the insurgency is not to counter occupation, which, ironically, would have ended sooner if there were no insurgency. The purpose is to replace the interim government and nascent democracy with Islamist rule. Similar barbarities are rationalized by the Palestinian Arabs on the false, but if true, inexcusable, grounds that they are occupied. They signed a peace agreement, but commit aggression against Israel, thereby drawing in Israeli troops, and then complain of their presence. The false rationalization in behalf of cruelty indicates the evil at large. We had better destroy it! PM SHARON'S FARCICAL MESSAGE TO FRANCE PM Sharon and the Foreign Minister of France discussed many issues. PM Sharon praised Europe for adding Hamas to its list of terrorist organizations (rather late to do so, isn't it?) and France's efforts against antisemitism, etc.. (But it keeps importing Muslims.) Sharon emphasized Israel's acceptance of the Road Map. He did not, however, reiterate the conditional acceptance. It was his 14 reservations that gave Min. Netanyahu and others a rationalization for approving what otherwise was so obvious an anti-Israel plan. Sharon reiterated, "On security-related issues, Israel is not subject to pressure." He tells Israelis, however, that he proposes Israeli abandonment of Gaza and northern Samaria because of pressure and in the hope that this retreat would mollify those applying the pressure. IMRA wonders whether the Foreign Minister smirked at that contradiction, that pitiful Israeli bluster (IMRA, 10/18). Min. Netanyahu et al are not objecting now to Sharon's ignoring the reservations. Was their conditional approval lip service? They who wish to succeed Sharon are craven and duplicitous. DIPLOMATIC DOUBLE TALK Foreign Min. Shalom praised France's efforts to rein in Iran's nuclear weapons development, expressed satisfaction with UNO recognition that Syria must stop occupying Lebanon, and elicited France's help in getting the P.A. to relinquish terrorism. Shalom urged Europe to support those P.A. Arabs committed to reform and peace (IMRA, 10/18). They never identify any Palestinian Arabs "committed to peace," or at least they never prove commitment to it. Neither do they show which reforms would promote peace. The bruited reforms -- unifying the P.A. armed forces and ending corruption -- would not promote peace. To get the P.A. to relinquish terrorism would be like getting the Nazis to relinquish antisemitism. Can't be done. Fanatics with clerical authorization to use any means, and whose society prefers foul means and thinks them fair, are impelled by an inner voice. France does not tell them otherwise, when it constantly criticizes only the Israeli side and the EU enrolls the terrorist Syrian dictatorship in a free trade agreement supposedly premised on democracy and anti-terrorism. The Security Council has not enforced the order for Syria to stop occupying Lebanon. What French efforts to reign in Iran's nuclear weapons development? IF ISRAEL WITHDREW, WOULD ARMS STILL BE SMUGGLED? Israel's national security advisor stated that if Israel withdrew not only from Gaza, but also from the border corridor at Rafah (both withdrawals contrary to military advice), underneath which arms are smuggled into Gaza, a multi-national force is likely to patrol that corridor. A Member of Knesset observed that this so-called withdrawal leaves Israel still responsible for security, in that it anticipates having to return to repress continued attacks from Gaza. In that case, the only difference withdrawal makes is cruelty to the dispossessed Jews (Arutz-7, 10/18). An multi-national force probably would not stop any arms smuggling, if it even stays long. Precedent indicates it would work out an accommodation to let the Arabs smuggle and the Arabs would let the force pretend it is fostering security and order. When the Islamists tire of the infidel presence, they would attack the multi-national force. The force probably would not react with force. You may expect it to take that as its cue to depart. Its presence would have had the effect, as perhaps was intended, of barring Israeli troops from stopping the terrorists. When the international force is present, Israeli casualties might be low. When it departs, the P.A. force, by then rearmed, would inflict heavy casualties upon the Israelis. EGYPT PLEDGES SECURITY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL WON'T LAST Pres. Mubarak rejected Israeli praise of Egyptian security cooperation over the terrorist bombing in Taba as political, but complained that Israel did not express enough appreciation. Calling bilateral security arrangements unreliable, he said future security cooperation would await UNO arrangements. Rebuking Israel as not interested in maintaining good relations with Egypt, he implied that Israel should let Egypt's army approach (IMRA, 10/18 from al-Ahram). Trust him? The approach of an enemy army should make jittery relations. Pres. Mubarak realizes that Israel tries to put a better face on their relations than warranted. Israel praised Egypt too much, considering the initial lack of cooperation. Israel wants good relations, so it mostly ignores his slighting Israel by not visiting it, withdrawing his ambassador, not normalizing other relations as per treaty, fomenting hatred, letting arms be smuggled to the P.A., and the US building up the Egyptian military. But Egypt has become a menace, again. EGYPTIAN SECURITY AFTER THE BLASTS AT TABA Israeli firemen arrived before Egyptian ones, and rescued people. There are hardly any checkpoints between Suez and Taba; most are not staffed or have a solitary Egyptian cop. There were few barriers. Security checking at the entrance to the hotel area still is superficial, as if, "Who are you? Go on through." Egyptian hotel people did not believe themselves endangered, although Israel warned them. Their excuse is to pretend that they instituted security measures the week before. Now the Taba vacationers are gone, many Israelis, vowing never to return, as they advised the press (IMRA, 10/18 from al-Ahram). They learned the hard way. Couldn't forego casinos? JORDAN'S ECONOMY Jordan's economy has changed. Although still dependent upon foreign aid, Jordan's budget deficit has been halved. It signed free trade agreements, but still has a trade deficit (as does the US). It imports cheap labor for private industry, and exports or engages in services requiring well-trained workers, such as teachers, transport communications, medical services, and tourism. Unemployment has been reduced (almost to Europe's level), but still is high. This leads to poverty and social problems. The government employs more than a fifth of the work force. The "Jordan Times" crows that the economy is stabile, improving, and exploits every regional crisis. IMRA notes that the government laments each crisis (IMRA, 10/18) so it can claim compensation. Jordan was allowed by the US to smuggle oil for Saddam, while it complained that the UNO embargo hurt its economy. WHAT SHARON'S WITHDRAWAL PLAN WOULD PERMIT Terrorists could fire rockets from the "security" fence further into Israel. The P.A. could acquire anti-aircraft missiles and long-range rockets. Snipers could shoot Israeli farmers. Terrorists still could penetrate Israel, by tunnels, ladders, sea, or gliders. Gaza is more likely to descend into anarchy than to climb out of terrorism (IMRA, 10/18). U.S. CAMPUS BIGOTRY HORRIFIES "HAARETZ" The editorial inveighed against the terror festival at Duke U., cheered on by some far-leftist Jews who call Israel an apartheid state. Perhaps the problem at Duke is that the students have been reading "Haaretz." "Haaretz" long has been promoting the same kind of Jewish leftist self-hatred. "Haaretz" "understands" terrorism and its "root causes" (which are not the causes, religion is), opposes Israeli self-defense measures, suggests capitulation, denounces Israel as discriminatory, and has been running articles advocating combining the P.A. with Israel. A "one-state solution" would end Jewish sovereignty and national determination, and lead to mass dispossession if not mass-murder. Why does "Haaretz" deplore the bigots at "Haaretz," when its own columnists are just as bad? (Prof. Steven Plaut, 10/18, e-mail.) The proposal is to allow entry and voting by millions of Arabs who consider themselves entitled to dominate the Jews and their religious duty to murder them. Is that proposal by "Haaretz" journalists sane? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

STUDENTS RELEASE FILM SPOTLIGHTING ACADEMIC ABUSE AND INTIMIDATION AT COLUMBIA U. Posted by Charles Jacobs, October 27, 2004.

NEW YORK, October 27, Columbia University students will unveil a controversial, disturbing documentary, today, which reveals academic abuse and student intimidation at Columbia University. The film, Columbia Unbecoming, was produced for a group of Columbia University students by the David Project, a non-profit educational organization. The screening begins at 10 a.m. in the Regency Room of the Grand Hyatt Hotel on 42nd Street between Lexington and Park Aves. The documentary features interviews with students who share their experiences and feelings about professors and campus events relating to the Middle East conflict. Columbia student Ariel Beery comments: "What we have here is a clear case of abuse of professional power, of intimidation of students, done for political ends. The politics are irrelevant - the abuse is relevant. Some students here are fearful of expressing dissenting views or complaining against professors, and the Administration has yet to deal with the problem sufficiently." Another student observes in the film, "Harassing students because they express pro-Israel views or are identifiably Israeli should be treated no differently than harassment of students because they're black or gay." Students are asking the Administration to: adopt a zero-tolerance policy on campus against intimidation and harassment, with clear consequences for violators; ensure academic integrity and an intellectually-diverse faculty in the Middle East studies department; and adopt a single standard of sensitivity for all minorities and ethnic groups on campus. For more information, visit http://www.davidproject.org. Dr. Charles Jacobs is co-founder of the American Anti-Slavery Group, He launched The David Project in response to the increasing defamation of Israel and the rising new global anti-Semitism. Dr. Jacobs brings decades of passion and intellect to the struggle for peace and justice. To Go To Top

WHAT WILL "DISENGAGEMENT" ACCOMPLISH? Posted by Ted Belman, October 27, 2004.

Assuming Sharon is able to transfer the last Israeli from Gaza, what will be the situation the morning after? Gaza will be a hornet's nest of terrorist factions vying for power. As DEBKA points out (ttp://www2.debka.com/article.php?aid=923), no outside force will be willing or able to instil anything remotely resembling law and order. The PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (ttp://www.nad-plo.org/gazaplan2.php) makes the case for Israel still being considered by international law, the occupying power. This Report makes fascinating reading. The term "occupation" describes a regime of control over territory and population by a foreign sovereign's military.[4] When a foreign sovereign occupies land, international law obligates that sovereign to uphold basic standards to protect both the population under its control and the land on which that population lives.[5] The Hague Regulations of 1907 set forth the basic legal standard: "Territory is occupied when it has actually been placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation only extends to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. The IDF supports this conclusion. I submit that it is much more complicated than this. Obviously war precedes belligerent occupation. Thus it is necessary to determine when the war ends and belligerent occupation begins. To shed light on this question we should look at a legal decision as to when it ends, which is cited in this Report. In The Hostages Case, the Nuremberg Tribunal expounded upon The Hague Regulations' basic definition of occupation in order to ascertain when occupation ends.[34] It held that "[t]he test for application of the legal regime of occupation is not whether the occupying power fails to exercise effective control over the territory, but whether it has the ability to exercise such power." So the question becomes, does Israel have the ability to exercise effective control? In other words, does Israel have the ability to subdue the terrorists and maintain law and order? I submit not; at least, not without going to war, as the US is doing in Iraq. This would entail much death and destruction. But if Israel were to attempt this, the world will complain that it is using excessive force and is not sufficiently protective of the Palestinian civil and human rights. In effect international law would be argued to conclude that Israel has the ability to exercise effective control but would also be argued to inhibit Israel from doing so. The Report argues "... one of the primary motivations behind the Gaza Disengagement Plan is to 'dump' 1.3 million non-Jews while illegally confiscating as much Palestinian land in the West Bank as possible." Other motivations which have been alluded to by Sharon include increased security and less pressure to make concessions are wishful thinking, similarly for freezing the peace process. The opposite will be the case. As for the primary motivation above set out. I ask you, how will Israel have "dumped the 1.3 million Non-Jews"? Since Israel will still be considered the occupier, it is doubtful to say the least, that Israel will have accomplished even that. As for whether it will have strengthened its hold on major settlement blocks, the answer is far from certain. America is not yet fully committed to this. Remember that the letters exchanged with Bush merely state that "it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949" and that ".. the settling of Palestinian refugees there (Palestine), rather than in Israel.". I would point out that what is "unrealistic" doesn't have much currency in the world when it comes to Israel the all important words "all" or "the" don't precede "Palestinian refugees" as they didn't proceed "territories" to be relinquished in Resolution 242. The EU recently reaffirmed its intention to pressure Israel to go back to the Green Line. So what in effect, will disengagement accomplish? One thing for sure is that it will leave Gaza Juderein. It will also succeed in traumatizing Israel, the effects of which we can only imagine. Similarly it will energize the Arabs to continue with their Khartum Declaration of "no negotiations, no recognition and no peace. Ted Belman is cofounder and cohost of IsraPundit, a pro-Israel strong activist website (http://israpundit.com). To Go To Top

KASSAM, QASSAM...SO WHAT'S IN A NAME? Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, October 27, 2004.

Ever since Prime Minister Sharon announced plans for a unilateral disengagement from Gaza last April, adjacent towns in Israel proper have come under increasing attack. Qassam rockets have been frequently fired into communities such as Sderot, deliberately aimed at terrorizing civilians. Whereas Israel tries its best to carefully target those responsible for the murder of its people, the Arab targets of choice are the most innocent. Not only is greater shock value derived from this, the reality is that, in Arab eyes, there are no Jewish innocents. Two Jewish preschoolers were recently killed in such a volley, helping to set into motion Israel's latest assault on Gaza's terror apparatus. Now, when choosing this Arab weapon of terror, Hamas (which, like most other Arabs, denies Israel's right to exist with or without the disputed territories) gave careful thought to the name that it should go by. Since the "militant wing" of the organization (the folks that actually blow up the buses, teen night clubs, pizzerias, and such) was named after Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, it made sense to name the weapon after him as well. Surely such a man must have had some great credentials in the "Palestinian" Arab movement...don't you think? Of course. Izz ad-Din made his name by butchering and disemboweling "Zionist invaders" during the early mandatory period after World War I. So, what else do we know about this legendary leader of the "Palestinians?" Well, for starters, hold on to your seats... Hamas' hero--like most other "native Palestinians"--was born elsewhere. In his case, Ladeqiya, Syria. In just one three month period alone, the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission documented scores of thousands of other Syrian Arabs pouring into the British Mandate of Palestine. Like numerous other Arabs moving in from elsewhere, they came to take advantage of the economic boom going on because of the influx of Jewish capital. And for every Arab newcomer--i.e. settler--that was documented, many more slipped in under cover of darkness and were never recorded. Add to this the fact that, for a number of reasons, the Brits were more concerned about entering Jews than entering Arabs. Despite this, lots of evidence exists which shows that--like the murderous Sheikh--most "Palestinian" Arabs were no more native than most of the returning, forcibly exiled, Diaspora Jews. Now think about this for a moment... So many Arabs were recent arrivals into the Mandate that when UNRWA was created to deal with the Arab refugee situation, created as a result of the invasion by a half dozen Arab states of a reborn Israel in 1948, it adjusted the definition of "refugee" from the prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948. Also keep in mind that for every Arab who was forced to flee the fighting that the Arabs started in their attempt to nip a nascent Israel in the bud, a Jewish refugee was forced to flee Arab lands...but with no UNRWA set up to help them. Indeed, scores of thousands of Jews fled the same Syria that the Sheikh immigrated to Palestine from. Greater New York City alone now has some tens of thousands of these folks. Many others moved to Israel and elsewhere. But, while Arabs see it as their natural right to settle anywhere in the Dar ul-Islam and what they claim as purely Arab patrimony (despite the fact that scores of millions of non-Arabs also live in the area and have been conquered and forcibly Arabized by them), when Jews moved into their sole, reborn state (as opposed to some two dozen for Arabs), Arabs declared this to be al nakba...the catastrophe. Hundreds of millions of Hindus and Muslims could arrive at a less-than-perfect modus vivendi in the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent--at virtually the same moment Arabs were rejecting a similar offer over what was left of the Palestine Mandate after Arabs had already been awarded the lion's share in 1922 with the separation of Transjordan--yet the mere thought of anyone else gaining a mere sliver of the very same political rights that Arabs demand for themselves (be they Kurds, Berbers, Black Africans, Jews, or whomever) was out of the question. The conflict we have in the Middle East today is largely all about this mindset. The next time you hear about those "Qassam" rockets, consider the irony here. And, oh yes, I almost forgot... Old Yasir himself was born in Cairo. And tens of thousands of other Egyptian Arabs had preceded his own migration and settlement in Palestine somewhat earlier in the wake of Muhammad Ali and son Ibrahim Pasha's military excursions in the 19th century. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. To Go To Top

QUOTE OF THE MILLENIUM; SDEROT: ANOTHER CASUALTY OF DISENGAGEMENT Posted by Steven Plaut, October 27, 2004.

1. Quote of the millenium: Speaking immediately after the Knesset vote to implement the Sharon-Mitzna capitulation plan for Gaza, Shimon Peres, the godfather of Oslo, was interviewed on the TV. I am paraphrasing because I was too catatonically shocked by what he said to get it down word by word. "A national ballot referendum now would be a catastrophe. After all, the Knesset today, which approved the plan, is entirely unrepresentative of the country. Therefore allowing the citizens to vote in a referendum would be undemocratic because it would block the will of the Knesset." Really. 2. Now that the Knesset has approved the Gaza First Unilateral Capitulation Plan of Sharon-Mitzna, by 67 to 45, I would like to make a modest proposal. The Knesset should now pass a new law requiring that all Knesset Members who voted in favor of the plan be coerced into moving to the Negev town of Sderot next to Gaza, together with their entire extended families, the day after the Sharon-Mitzna plan is implemented. A few months after the Sharon-Mitzna plan is implemented and Sderot has been erased from the face of the Negev and hundreds of rockets are hitting Ashkelon, we will be holding a contest to see which journalist or which politician writes the most convincing article entitled, "But who could possibly have known that the rocketing of Ashkelon would result from last year's peace plan?" The First Prize will be a month's free accomodation in Sderot. The Second Prize will be two months free accomodation. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

BEFORE THE VOTE FOR EXPULSION Posted by Bryna Berch, October 26, 2004.

These are items from today's Arutz-Sheva (INN). What is frightening is that some MK proponents have not even read the disengagement plan, but they are still willing to vote away Israel's future! And isn't it great - here is Sharon telling the Knesset he is not a liar. Shades of Nixon. And like Nixon, he IS a liar. And then there are the spineless, who claim to be against disengagment but will vote for it. They are more worried about being fired from their cabinet positions by Sharon than they are about Israel. But if they contribute to corroding Israel from the inside, what ensures there will be an Israel to govern? MK Yigal Yasinov (Shinui) requested to use his time to give the Knesset Members "five minutes of silence in which to carefully think about their vote." Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin, however, did not allow him to do so, saying that "demonstrations" are not allowed in the Knesset. "If you do not wish to speak to the point during your allotted time, you may take your seat," Rivlin said. Yasinov quickly decided to speak. This the first - and only - Knesset debate in which a vote on the expulsion plan is being held, and it is expected to pass by a margin of approximately a dozen votes. Prime Minister Sharon told reporters today that all other decisions related to the disengagement will be made by the Cabinet, and not in the Knesset. It must also be noted that the bill itself does not stipulate that the Jewish communities will be uprooted, but only confirms the Government's decision of June 7, 2004. At that time, as Sharon later said, the Government "decided that it is Israel's intention" - as opposed to what it will actually do - "to relocate all Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and four settlements in Samaria by the end of 2005." The government decision itself specified, "this decision does not [necessarily] include the dismantling of Jewish communities." Another Cabinet decision will be required to approve the actual demolition of the Jewish localities. Sharon led off the tension-packed debate yesterday with a heart-felt speech emphasizing the importance of the unilateral withdrawal. Ynet commentator Ofer Shelach wrote this morning, "Read Sharon's speech carefully. What are the reasons he mentions for the critical importance of the disengagement plan? - That he thinks it's critical, and some garbling about the demographic danger - as if there is something in his plan to thwart this danger..." Sharon said, "I am convinced to the depths of my heart and to the best of my understanding that this disengagement will strengthen Israel in its grasp on the territory that is vital for our existence, and will receive the blessing and admiration of those near and far, will lessen the hostility, ... and will advance us on the way of peace with the Palestinians and our other neighbors." "...As someone who fought in all of Israel's wars, and has 'learned on his flesh' that without power we have no chance to survive in this region, which has no mercy on the weak - I have also learned from our experience that not only the sword will determine this bitter battle in this land." Asked about this apparent contradiction - "power is critical" and "no mercy on the weak," yet at the same time, "the sword won't determine" - MK Benny Elon (National Union) told Arutz-7 today, "This apparently corresponds with his strange quote of not long ago, that 'restraint is strength.' He has apparently discovered a new form of power, and that is to turn the other cheek, over and over. He has unfortunately caused us to lose our unity, our majority, his own prestige, and is leading the State of Israel through a swamp of mud and mire in which we will be stuck for many years to come." Sharon also said that he had not deceived anyone, and that he had long called for "painful concessions." To this, MK Elon said it was clear to all that he was not referring to such vast concessions such as a unilateral withdrawal from an entire region: "He told me himself that he was not referring to specific communities, but rather to giving the PA more control over areas that they already controlled administratively [Area B]." Sharon continued, "I am told that this disengagement will be understood as a shameful retreat under pressure, will increase the terror attacks, and will show Israel in its weakness and our nation as one that is not willing to fight and stand up for itself. I reject this categorically. We are strong enough to defend this land and totally smash the enemy that wants to destroy us." THE PLAN'S SECURITY DANGERS "The public debate about the disengagement plan has concentrated mostly on the settlement issues, and has largely ignored the security issues - but the plain fact is that the plan will actually increase terrorism." So says IDF Col. (res.) Meir Indor, who has prepared a paper on the dangers of the withdrawal and has circulated it amongst the 120 MKs. According to the disengagement plan, Egypt, Jordan and the CIA will re-train and rehabilitate the terrorist armies, including Arafat's Force 17, that were badly affected by the fighting with Israel. The terrorists will be provided training in various combat situations, will be allowed to re-arm, will be given free mobility in wider areas than before, and will be restored to combat-ready status. The disengagement plan states clearly, "Israel agrees that consulting, aid and guidance will be given to the Palestinian security forces in order to fight terrorism and maintain order, by Americans, British, Egyptians, Jordanians and other experts." Col. Indor told Arutz-7 today that he was astonished to find that even Defense Minister Sha'ul Mofaz was not aware of some of these facts. "I asked him why he was promoting a plan that called for the retraining of Arab terrorists, and he said he didn't know what I was talking about," Indor said. Other excerpts from the document: * Three million Arabs - known as "Palestinian refugees" - will be on their way to Judea and Samaria from Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan and elsewhere. They will settle in the PA-controlled cities and villages, including the mountains that overlook Israel's coastal plane - Netanya, Kfar Saba and Israel's most densely-populated areas. They will all receive economic assistance from the European Union, encouraging them to arrive. The disengagement plan states, "It is clear that a realistic, agreed-upon and fair framework for the refugees issue will be found via the establishment of a Palestinian state and the settlement of the refugees there." * Most of the military checkpoints in Judea and Samaria will be removed. Israeli security activity in Bethlehem, Tul Karem, Shechem and elsewhere will be reduced, and the vacuum will be filled by terrorists - just as occurred in Hevron. The disengagement plan states, "In accordance with the circumstances, Israel will consider reducing its activities in the PA cities... Israel will act to reduce the number of checkpoints throughout Yesha." Some 65 checkpoints have already been removed, and were not restored even after the double bus bombing in Be'er Sheva (16 killed) - which was perpetrated by terrorists who arrived along the checkpoint-reduced southern Hevron highway. * The plan states that the construction of an Arab airport and sea port in Gaza will be considered - despite the long-held objections to such by Israeli security elements for many years. Sharon himself said, "Who will check the large containers that arrive there?" * The plan also states that Arab workers from Gaza will continue to enter pre-1967 Israel, that the PA will receive territorial contiguity in northern Shomron, and that implementation of the plan will negate the claims that Israel is "responsible for the Palestinians in Gaza" - something that recent developments have shown to be untrue. See, for instance, Arutz-7's article today, "Gov't Report: Sharon Plan Leaves Israel Holding the Bag" (ttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=70885). [Editor's note: The text of the Plan can be read below. Click here.] 3. THE MINISTERS OBJECT - BUT WILL VOTE IN FAVOR Opponents of the disengagement/expulsion plan continued to hold out hope - until last night - that Ministers Netanyahu, Shalom and Livnat would oppose the plan in today's vote. Once again, however, as most observers have noted, the three ministers' basic opposition to the plan has not stood the political tests to which it has been put. This was placed in basic relief last night when they decided to vote unconditionally in favor of the plan. The three had considered making their vote conditional on the holding of a national referendum on the issue. However, in light of Sharon's strong opposition to a plebiscite, as well as his threat to fire any minister who votes against the plan, they decided to withdraw this ultimatum. The original Cabinet decision of June 7, '04 - the subject of today's Knesset vote - was actually a compromise proposal formulated largely by these three ministers. The chief aspect of the compromise was that another government decision would be necessary to mandate the actual removal of the 25 Jewish communities. Ministers Netanyahu, Shalom and Livnat continue to support a referendum, and Livnat even predicted today that Sharon would not be able to withstand the increasing calls for such a vote. Foreign Minister Shalom said last night that the only way to carry out such important processes, like the disengagement, is by consulting the nation. MK Benny Elon (National Union) addressed much of his remarks in the Knesset today to the five Likud ministers who plan to vote for the withdrawal even though they object to it: "You five - Silvan Shalom, Limor Livnat, Binyamin Netanyahu, Tzachi HaNegbi, and Danny Naveh - wish to remain 'loyal' to the Prime Minister. But the simple arithmetic is that you could all vote against it and thus lead to its defeat. Sharon fired Avigdor Lieberman and myself merely in order to scare you - and he has succeeded! With just a drop of courage, you could lead to a situation in which he would be forced to resign - and then one of you could become Prime Minister." Elon said that some of these ministers say that they are voting only for the formulation agreed upon by the Cabinet last June, which does not stipulate the removal of communities - "but this is just a technical matter. The disengagement ball is rolling - just as the compensation law that was approved in the Cabinet this week, and that will come up for a Knesset vote in a few days, assumes that there will be an evacuation..." Minister Shalom, in his remarks, addressed himself to this point and said that all the relevant legislation is based on the wording of the Cabinet decision of June 6, which stated that it does not "include the removal of communities." Many MKs do not accept this explanation. Minister HaNegbi, for instance, who plans to vote in favor, said, "It's true that the vote is not on the actual implementation of the disengagement, but it's certainly accurate to say that it brings the disengagement closer..." HaNegbi also said, "It is clear to all of us that this government is on very wobbly legs. The question is, is now the right time to bring it to its end? ... This disengagement plan will clearly not bring about better security, nor does it make any claims to do so... The plan is dangerous for Israel, and in general, its damage is greater than its benefits... I didn't like Sharon's speech yesterday, and I specifically didn't like how he criticized the settlers by attributing to them 'Messianic' motives. You can call some of them fanatics, or whatever, but where would we be today without Messianism? When we sat on the rivers of Babylon and cried for Zion, that wasn't Messianism?" 4. MINISTER KATZ'S INDECISION, AND UTJ'S OPPOSITION Another Likud minister, Yisrael Katz, who has been a leader of the disengagement opponents, continues to remain uncommitted as to his vote. He essentially would like to vote "against" without actually doing so - as evidenced by his request to Prime Minister Sharon to "offset" his vote with that of Minister Yehudit Naot. In practice, he asked to be excused from the vote in consideration of the fact that Naot, a supporter, would also not be there. Sharon, however, turned him down, and said that Katz must show up and vote one way or the other - with Sharon's threat to fire ministers who vote "nay" looming sharply in the background. At least four of the five MKs of the United Torah Judaism (UTJ) party plan to vote against the plan, but at least two of them do not truly object to it. MK Moshe Gafni explained today that the decision to vote "against" was made in the knowledge that the votes of UTJ would not make a difference in the end, as the plan is sure to pass today's vote in any event. To Go To Top

RACHEL IS CRYING Posted by IsrAlert, October 26, 2004.

This was written by Moshe Kempinski and appeared in http://www.shorashim.net Today, on the day of the critical first reading of Sharon's "Disengagement/Retreat" plan, is the day commemorating the passing away of our matriarch Rachel, wife of our forefather Jacob. Rachel has, in our tradition become the archetypal mother. She was willing to sacrifice herself for her sister. She was fierce in her defense of her children. She would spare no effort on behalf of her natural or spiritual children. In an unusual segment in the biblical text we find ourselves eavesdropping on a conversation between her and G-d in the very Heavens. Jeremiah 31:14-16 "Thus saith HaShem: "...a voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not. Thus saith HaShem: 'Refrain thy voice from weeping, and your eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded,' saith HaShem; '...and they shall come back from the land of the enemy. And there is hope for thy future,' saith HaShem; '...and thy children shall return to their own border. " On this day Ariel Sharon is planning to do the opposite. On this day, in uniting with all the political forces that were thrown out in the last elections, he has succeeded in doing what was unheard of until today. Jewish force has never been used to uproot Jews from their homes. Ariel Sharon wants to change that precedent. We have been told that this disengagement plan of retreat will solve the demographic problem of a growing Palestinian population in Gaza voting in the Israeli Knesset. The argument fails when one realizes that the Palestinians have been voting in their own parliament in Ramallah and have no effect on Israeli elections. We have been told that this plan will help reduce terrorism.This argument seems strange as it goes against all the predictions of our intelligence authorities and is the opposite of what the Palestinians themselves say. We have been told that we are endangering battalions of soldiers to guard several thousand settlers. On the other hand Yitzchak Rabin said to Tzvi Hendel of Gush Katif "if your people were not in those settlements we would have to invent them. They are my excuse for putting the forces there that are keeping their eyes on Gaza and thereby protecting all of Israel". We have been told that "we have to do something". That argument never really made sense. In fact that argument has led to too many deaths and too much pain. Yet in this time of confusion and Divine hiding we can only turn to our Creator. If our Matriarch Rachel hears my words then I need to tell you, Momma Rachel, to wipe away your tears because your children ARE coming home to their borders. I saw them on my way to the Old City of Jerusalem. Young and old are standing on the street corners of Jerusalem in the hot sun holding flags and protest banners. Thousands were praying to our Father in heaven at your grave in Bethlehem all last night and will continue to do so all week. I watched parents who have lost their children to terrorism, and I watched children who have lost their parents to terrorism, stand up proudly and declare that the people of Israel are stronger than their Prime Minister and his misguided policies. These are your children Momma Rachel. These are your children and they are and will continue to return to their own borders. Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

EXPEL ARABS, NOT JEWS! Posted by David Ben-Ariel, October 26, 2004.

Israel, true to its suicidal self, enables traitor Sharon to bulldoze over them and trample democracy with his JUDENREIN plans, his evil intentions of letting loose trained foreigners, Gentile mercenaries, to soon violently expel law-abiding Israeli citizens from their biblical villages. If Sharon didn't have such a cruel and hardened heart, he could express love for his land and people, especially those who brought him to power whom he's now brutally betrayed, and lead the nation in discussing and implementing what Rabbi Kahane courageously called for years ago. This essay by Rabbi Meir Kahane, Zt"l was called "An Exchange of Populations" and it can be found at http://www.kahane.org/meir/anExchange.htm In all the furor that has been created in Israel and the world Jewish community over the suggestion by certain "radical" Jews that Israeli Arabs be transferred from the country, there appears to be forgotten the fact that such an action would only be the second part of an ultimate exchange of populations. The fact is, that with the creation of the Jewish state in 1948, hundreds of thousands of Jews fled Arab countries, almost all of whom left behind all their property for which compensation was never paid. It is worth while to look at the record before we dismiss the concept of the transfer of Arabs from Israel. Algeria had 150,000 Jews in 1948. Pogroms in that country had occured almost every 10 years since tha 1890's, and during the 1930's, many Jews of Constantine were massacred despite French intervention. In 1961, the Front de Liberation Nationale (FLN) attacked the large cities where most of the Jews lived and 100,000 were forced to flee the country, leaving behind all their belongings.The FLN desecrated the Great Synagogue at Algiers and the ancient Jewish Cemetary at Oran, and succeeded in driving out all but 900 Jews by 1973. And so: Algeria 1948: 150,000 Jews; Algeria 1973: 750 Jews. In Morocco in 1948 there were 300,000 Jews. On June 7 of that year, mobs in Oujda sacked the Jewish quarter, killing and wounding hundreds of Jews, and in nearby Djerada, 30 Jews were massacred by Arab mobs the same night. The new revolutionary government passed anti-Jewish laws so severe that they drove out 300,000 Jews. With the return of the Sultan in 1961, there was some relaxation of the laws; but by 1973 only 25,000 of the original 300,000 Jews remained. Morocco 1948: 300,000 Jews; Morocco 1973: 25,000 Jews. There were 23,000 Jews in Tunisia in 1948. Following the revolutionary government's program of Arabization, Jews became "instant scapegoats," and many were arrested for "economic" crimes simply for being merchants or practicing any gainful occupation. By 1973, all but 9,000 Jews had been driven out of Tunisia. Tunisia 1948: 23,000 Jews, Tunisia1973: 9,000 Jews. Syria had 45,000 Jews in 1948. They had prospered under the Turks and the French, but when the Arabs took over, they at once became the target for both official and unofficial violence. Anti-Jewish legislation froze bank accounts and confiscated property. New laws forbade Jews to sell their property or move more than three miles from their homes. Special identity cards were issued to them, and they were allowed to work only at certain jobs. Government employees and military personnel were forbidden to patronize Jewish shops. Today there are fewer than 4,000 Jews in Syria, and they are under constant attack. Syria 1948: 45,000 Jews, Syria 1973: 4,000 Jews. There were 45,000 Jews living in Libya in 1948. In Tripoli in 1945, 120 Jews had been killed by mobs of Arabs. After independence, most of the others were driven from the country, many were murdered after the Six-Day War and numerous others were arrested. In 1976, there were only about 70 Jews remaining in the country ruled by Colonel Qaddafi. Libya 1948: 45,000 Jews, Libya 1976: 70 Jews. Jews have been in Egypt since Biblical times, and Alexandria had once been, at least partially, a Jewish city. In 1945, the pro-Nazi "Young Egypt" group led anti- Jewish rioting in which many Jews were killed. In 1947, a new law for companies made it practically impossible for Jewish businesses to operate. Egypt had 75,000 Jews in 1948, when bombings, burnings and looting destroyed almost $50 million worth of Jewish property. After the overthrow of King Farouk by Nasser and his "Free Officers," life for Jews became intolerable in that country. After the Suez War, 3,000 Jews were arrested and imprisoned without trial. Thousands of others were presented with deportation orders forcing them to quit the country within days and leave all their property behind. By 1967, Nasser had managed to force all but 3,000 Jews out of Egypt. There were fewer than 500 Jews remaining in the land ruled by the "moderate" el-Sadat in 1976; the rest were driven out to find new homes, mostly in Israel. Egypt 1948: 75,000 Jews, Egypt 1976: 500 Jews. ( Amnesty International reported in 1976 that there were only 350 Jews in Egypt.) Iraq was the home of 125,000 Jews in 1948. Since then, the revolutionary government has conducted an almost incessant campaign of terror against them. Nine Jews were hanged in public and 68 tried as Israeli spies in January 1968 while chanting mobs moved through the streets beating up any Jew that passed their way, women and children included! By 1973, only 400 Jews remained in Iraq. Iraq 1948: 125,000 Jews, Iraq 1973: 400 Jews. Yemen, where 54,000 Jews lived in 1948, had none in 1976. Hundreds were killed, and the rest found shelter in British bases until they were carried to Israel by Operation Magic Carpet. Before that, it was legal to stone a Jew to death, and the law decreed that " fatherless Jewish children under thirteen be taken from their mothers and raised as Muslims."Yemen 1948: 54,000 Jews, Yemen 1976: No Jews whatsoever!! In Aden, there were 5,000 Jews in 1947, but in 1976 there were none. In December, 1947, Arab mobs attacked the Jewish quarter, killing several people and burning down buildings. Between 1948 and 1967, most Aden Jews fled to Israel. The 130 who remained fled after the riots in June 1967 to escape torture and certain death. Aden 1948: 5,000 Jews, Aden 1967: No Jews Whatsoever!! A total of some 750,000 Jews fled Arab lands since 1948. Surely it is time for Jews, worried over the huge growth of Arabs in Israel, to consider finishing the exchange of populations that began 35 years ago. David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." He can be reached at http://www.pushhamburger.com/david.htm To Go To Top

THE SECRET OF ISRAEL'S POROUS SOUTHERN BORDER Posted by Deb Kotz, October 26, 2004.

This is a recent article by Emanuel A. Winston, who is a Middle East analyst and commentator. When Yuval Steinitz, MK and chief of Knesset security and foreign affairs committee, spoke at KMS [Silver Spring, Maryland] last month, he said that "Egypt is the main supporter of terrorism against Israel" and that most of the arms for Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al-asqa Martyr Brigades, come from Egypt. In fact, he said, the head of Shin Bet confiscated 5,000 automatic rifles that came from tunnels in Rafa (in the Sinai) just three months ago. Jordan's King Hussein, whose country is also at peace with Israel, sealed his borders so nearly all illegal arms from Jordan are prevented from being smuggled in. So, yes, smuggling operations can be stopped. Egypt just refuses to stop them. It has been an open secret that the Israeli-Egyptian border facing the Sinai desert has been a porous entry for Terrorists and smuggled weapons for a long time. The fact of Egypt's continuing war with Israel, enabling Terrorists to fight an insurgent war against Israel is well known to Israel's Intelligence services. In fact, it is such an open secret that American, British, France and, of course, the Arab League members all know that Egypt is the willing enabler of weapons and explosives transfers into Gaza. The recent publication about 377 tons of HMX, RDX and PETN High Energy Explosives that have gone missing in Iraq is, of course, of grave concern both to America, Israel and Europe. These explosives are of a special nature which allows them to be shipped in anything, meaning that they do not explode without a detonator. The American and Allied forces are experiencing heavy losses due to roadside explosives, where small charges of highly powerful explosives in small quantities can blow up APCs (Armored Personnel Carriers). These explosives are designated as HMX (High Melting point Explosives), RDX (Rapid Detonation Explosives) and PETN (Pentaerythritol). The amount missiing would fill a fleet of 40 large trucks. These explosives pack far more power than conventional TNT. They are easily smuggled because, even hitting them with a hammer will not cause detonation, therefore they can be transported on by donkey cart on a rough dirt road. (1) For Israel, this kind of explosives can easily make it way across the Egyptian-controlled Sinai and into Gaza through the smuggling tunnels under what is called the "Philadelphi Road" and into the town of Rafah which straddles that road. From there it is not difficult to smuggle these explosives into Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin and even into Israel's cities. Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon understands all of this through Israel's Military Intelligence and her various Secret Services, namely, the Mossad, Shabak and others. Regrettably, Sharon is ignoring what will be an inevitable flood of shipments once Israel withdraws from Gaza. Presently, the Terrorists make do with smuggling tunnels and are thus somewhat limited although tonnage does get through. If Sharon succeeds in leaving Gaza (denials of military withdrawals notwithstanding), the gates will be wide open. Trucks with larger missiles coming from such Egyptian seaports as Alexandria from Iran and Syria will cross the Sinai into Gaza - with impunity. Some of the explosives out of the 377 tons missing in Iraq will make their way into Israel, courtesy of Sharon's Retreat and the Egyptians. When Israel's borders should be tightened with road patrols, check-points, Sharon is throwing the gates wide open. When the smuggling ship Karin A made its way through the Suez Canal controlled by Egypt a great pretense was made that the Egyptians knew nothing about it. There were other such shipments but Israel did not want to accuse the Egyptians of conspiring to arm Terrorists lest even the stone cold dead Camp David Treaty of 1978 be declared null and void publicly by the Egyptians. Better a fake peace than open hostility with Egypt now armed with $60 Billion in freely gifted American arms. American has been giving Egypt $2 Billion a year since Camp David was signed in 1978, adding up to $60 Billion which Egypt has used to buy weapons, courtesy of free American tax-payers dollars, thus building Egypt into the military colossus of the Middle East. Sharon's gamble is that, IF Egypt's military and intelligence forces are invited back into the Sinai they will stop the smuggling which, of course, Egypt has actually aided and abetted. But, Sharon has signaled that he believes Egypt will stop the Terrorists in their own self interests. These are only a few of the problems with Sharon's wishful thinking. One is that Hosni Mubarak is old, ill and will likely not continue leading his nation. Add to that the ever present possibly of assassination by the Muslim Brotherhood who managed to assassinate former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Egypt is slowly drifting toward the kind of Islamization that one sees in Iran. Should any of the above take place, Israel will see an Egyptian army in the Sinai who Sharon himself invited in. This army could phase into one driven and controlled by radical Muslim Jihadists. Sharon thought he could buy reduced pressure from the E.U. (European Union), the U.N. (United Nations) and American pro-Arab interests, IF he withdrew from Gaza. But, Javier Solana, Europe's foreign policy chief of the E.U. has already stated in the most hostile manner possible for Israel not to expect the Gaza withdrawals to be the end of Israel's capitulations to Arab Muslim Terror. (2) In the meantime, our defeated Prime Minister has agreed to give the World Bank authority to gift all Jewish properties to the Palestinian Authority. There was a phrase that precluded gifting Israeli properties to those involved in Terror but, even that was eliminated. Sharon has betrayed any principles he may have once had, to the point where malfeasance of office should be invoked by the courts to impeach Sharon. The number of Jews who have died due to his confused planning and those who, no doubt will die across all of Israel can be laid at Sharon's doorstep. Hopefully this dictatorial tyrant will be thrown from office before his Nero-like madness makes all of Israel vulnerable to massive attacks. The Jewish nation has always been under deadly peril, both from the Arab Muslims who intend to overtake the whole Jewish State and their European supporters. But, not until now has the existential threat of extinction actually come so clearly from inside - with the exception of the Oslo Gang. Sharon's rule must be terminated by all legal means possible before the prophecy which speaks of the sand being burned black, the streams run with pitch - with only the owl and the bittern inheriting the land. There are several passages spoken by the Prophet Isaiah which may make sense to those who wish to see, hear and understand: "Come close, O nations, to hear and regimes be attentive; let the earth and its fullness hear; the world and all its offspring. For Hashem has a fury against all the nations and a wrath against all their legions; he has destroyed them; he has delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain will be thrown aside and their corpses will bring up a stench; the mountains will melt with their blood. "For it is a day of vengeance for HaShem; a year of retribution for the grievance of Zion. It's rivers will turn to tar and its soil to sulphur; its land will become burning tar. Night and day it will not be extinguished; its smoke will ascend forever. From generation to generation (the land) will be desolate; for all eternity no one transverses it. Owls and bitterns will occupy it." Isaiah 33:16-35:15 Is HaShem speaking of all the nations who have attacked Israel who He will destroy. When Isaiah speaks of the sand becoming black and the streams to run with pitch (tar), burning with smoke going up forever, is the reference to the nations with oil. As for the ignorant Jew, Sharon - no doubt, he will be re-educated before he leaves us. ### 1. "Huge Cache of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq: US Admits the Loss of Material It Was Urged to Safeguard - Inquiry is Set" by James Glanz, William J. Broad and David Sanger, NEW YORK TIMES, October 25, 2004 2. "Solana Says EU Will Not Settle For Gaza Withdrawal Only", MA'ARIV, Oct. 24, 2004 Deb Kotz is a member of the Brandeis chapter of Zionists of America (ZOA). To Go To Top

RE CAROL GOULD'S ARTICLE Posted by Herb Greer, October 26, 2004.

Carol Gould's article (http://www.think-israel.org/gould.american.html) about hysterical verbal and physical abuse of herself, American tourists, and Jews in London sounds a bit overwrought to me. I notice that she is a dramatist. I too am an American and I too have lived as long or longer in Britain. I have travelled from one end of the British Isles to the other, I have vocally and in print supported Israel, and never have I encountered an incident the like of which she describes. I might add that most of the abuse and 'fury' that -- she says -- made her cringe is an offence under Britain's Race Relations Act, and -- assuming her descriptions are true -- she could have complained to the police and begun a prosecution. The 'bus' incident as described is a clear case of physical assault and would have rendered the assaulter liable to prosecution. Ms. Gould's explanation of why she did not complain to the police (she must know about the Race Relations Act) would be interesting to hear. Herb Greer is an American writer and playwright and a longtime resident in England. To Go To Top

AN AESTHETIC PEACE PLAN Posted by Menahem Alexenberg, October 26, 2004.

This statement appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNN.com) on October 17, 2004. It accompanied my exhibition at the Robert Guttmann Gallery of the Jewish Museum in Prague, August 11 - September 26, 2004. The exhibition was under the patronage of the Ambassador of Israel to the Czech Republic, and in collaboration with the Academy of Fine Arts, Prague, the Center for Jewish Culture and Creativity, Los Angeles, and the College of Judea and Samaria, Ariel, Israel. The lack of peace in the Middle East can be seen as an aesthetic problem that requires an artistic solution. It calls for a shift in perception derived from Islamic art and thought. In my "Cyberangels of Peace" exhibition, human creativity at its best in both Islamic and European cultures encounter each other. The beautiful patterns of Islamic art meet Rembrandt's angels in an aesthetic peace plan. Digitized Rembrandt angels* emerging from Islamic geometries are electronic age messengers drawing out the beauty in European and Islamic cultures, rather than the ugly anti-Semitism that plagues them. The Holocaust was the attempt to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe. Islamic extremists with the tacit support of most European countries are now using terrorism in an ongoing attempt to annihilate the Jewish State. My artwork invites a perceptual shift through which Muslims see the State of Israel as a blessing expressing Allah's will and Christians see it as the Divine fulfillment of the Biblical promise of the Land of Israel to the Jewish people. Historian of Islamic art Elisabeth Siddiqui writes in the Arabic journal Al-Madrashah Al-Ula that art is the mirror of a culture and its worldview. She emphasizes that there is no case to which this statement more directly applies than to the art of the Islamic world. "Not only does its art reflect its cultural values, but even more importantly, the way in which its adherents, the Muslims, view the spiritual realm, the universe, life, and the relationships of the parts to the whole." The repetitive geometric patterns in Islamic art teach Arabs to see their world as a continuous uninterrupted pattern that extends across North Africa and the Middle East. Unfortunately, they see Israel as a blemish that disrupts the pattern. From this perspective, Israel is viewed as an alien presence that they have continually tried to eliminate through war, terrorism, and political action. Palestinian Authority television labels Israel as a "cancer in the body of the Arab nation." Its emblems, publications and web sites show the map of Israel labeled "Palestine". Israel does not exist. Former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani expressed his longing for a day when an Islamic nuclear weapon could remove the "extraneous matter" called Israel from the midst of the Islamic world. The major obstacle to peace between Jews and Arabs is the Islamic world's rejection of Israel as a Jewish state in its midst. The 56-year-old State of Israel still does not exist on maps produced in Islamic countries. All Road Maps to Peace in the Middle East will come to a dead end until the sovereign State of Israel is included in Arab maps. Fortunately, the perceptual shift needed to lead to genuine peace can be found in Islamic art and thought. In Islamic art, a uniform geometric pattern is purposely disrupted by the introduction of a counter-pattern that demonstrates human creation as less than perfect. Based upon the belief that only Allah creates perfection, rug weavers from Islamic lands intentionally weave a small patch of dissimilar pattern to break the symmetry of their rugs. Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, Imam of the Italian Muslim community, who holds a Ph.D. in Islamic Sciences by decree of the Saudi Grand Mufti, proposes that the idea of underlying the Divine infinitude and the human fallacy by including some voluntary counter-pattern in works of art is common in Islamic art, and extends to tapestry, painting, music, architecture, etc. The Islamic artisan does not want to be perceived as competing with the perfection of Allah. In Islamic Textile Art: Anomalies in Kilims, Muhammad Thompson and Nasima Begum write that the weavers of Moroccan kilim rugs, "devout Muslim women, would not be so arrogant as to even attempt a 'perfect kilim' since such perfection belonged only to Allah. Consequently, they would deliberately break the kilim's patterning as a mark of their humility." Indeed, breaking symmetrical patterns characterizes life itself. All living organisms exhibit the principle expressed by the renowned biologist Paul Weiss as "order in the gross with freedom of excursion in details." Every grape leaf, for example, is a unique variation of a general pattern. No two grape leaves on the same vine are congruent. Although a whole leaf gives the overall appearance of symmetry, a closer look at the details reveals a different venation pattern in each half of the leaf. Peace can be achieved when the Islamic world recognizes that they need Israel to realize their own religious values. Israel provides the break in the contiguous Islamic world extending from Morocco to Pakistan. Accepting the Jewish State as the necessary counter-pattern demonstrates humility and abrogates arrogance before Allah, and honors the diversity evident in all of God's creations. The ingathering of the Jewish people into its historic homeland in the midst of the Islamic world is the fulfillment of Mohammed's prophecy according to the Koran (Sura 17:104): "And we said to the Children of Israel, 'scatter and live all over the world' and when the end of the world is near we will gather you again into the Promised Land." The State of Israel needs to be drawn on Islamic maps as a small break in the continuous pattern running from the Atlantic Ocean to the borders of India. If the contiguous Islamic world were the size of a football field, Israel would be smaller than a football placed in the middle of the field. Sheikh Palazzi quotes from the Koran, Sura 5:20-21, to support the Arab world's need to switch their viewpoint to recognize the sovereign right of the Jews over the Land of Israel as the will of Allah: "Remember when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favor of God unto you, when he produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the people. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and then turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'" According to the Imam, Islam's holiest book confirms what every Jew and Christian who honors the Bible knows: the Land of Israel was divinely deeded to the Children of Israel. The Jews are the indigenous people of the Land of Israel who have continuously lived there for more three millennia despite the conquests of numerous imperialist empires. Jews are from Judea. Arabs are from Arabia. The Arabs are blessed with 22 other countries. A paradigm shift can transform the perception of Israel as a blemish to seeing it as a tiny golden seed from which a lush green Islamic tree has germinated and spread its roots and branches across North Africa and the Middle East. Professor Khaleed Mohammed, expert in Islamic law, explains: "As a Muslim, when I read 5:21 and 17:104 in the Quran, I can only say that I support that there must be an Israel. The Quran adumbrates the fight against tyranny and oppression, using the Children of Israel as an example, indeed as the prime example." Tashbih Sayyed, Editor-in-Chief of Muslim World Today writes: "I consider the creation of the Jewish State as a blessing for the Muslims. Israel has provided us an opportunity to show the world the Jewish state of mind in action, a mind that yearns to be free.... The Jewish traditions and culture of pluralism, debate, acceptance of dissension and difference of opinion have manifest themselves in the shape of the State of Israel to present the oppressed Muslim world with a paradigm to emulate." Peace will come from a fresh metaphor in which the Arabs see Israel's existence as Allah's will. A shift in viewpoint where Israel is perceived as a blessing, as the necessary counter-pattern in the overall pattern of the Islamic world, will usher in an era of peace. Peace will come when the Islamic world recognizes Israel as the realization of its own values and draws new maps that include Israel. Note: * The Hebrew language links art and angels in our digital age. The Biblical term for "art" M'LAeKheT MaKhSheVeT is a feminine term literally meaning "thoughtful craft." Transformed into its masculine form, it becomes "computer angel", MALAKh MaKhSheV. The spiritual concept "angel" and reshaping the material world by "craft" are united in the Biblical image of Jacob's dream of angels ascending and descending on a ladder linking heaven and earth. We can learn from the Hebrew words for "angel", MALaKh, and "food", MA'aKhaL, being written with the same four letters that angels are spiritual messages arising from the everyday life. Before partaking of the Sabbath eve meal in their homes, Jewish families sing, "May your coming be for peace, angels of peace, angels of the Exalted One." The song begins with the words shalom aleikhem (may peace be with you). Shalom aleikhem is the traditional Hebrew greeting when people meet. It is akin to the Arabic greeting salam aleikum. Indeed, the word Islam itself is derived from the same root as salam (peace). May the Hebrew Malakh Shalom and the Arabic Malak Salam be recognized as one and the same Angel of Peace. Professor Menahem Alexenberg Menahem (Mel) Alexenberg is Professor of Art and Jewish Thought at the College of Judea and Samaria in Ariel, Israel, and Emunah College in Jerusalem. He is former Professor and Chairman of Fine Arts, Pratt Institute, Dean of Visual Arts, New World School of the Arts, University of Florida's arts college in Miami, Associate Professor of Art and Education at Columbia University and Bar-Ilan University, and Research Fellow at the Center for Advanced Visual Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). His artwork is in the collection of museums worldwide. He may be reached at malexenberg@beethoven.com To Go To Top

A CRY FROM GUSH KATIF Posted by Menachem Kovacs, October 26, 2004.

This 3 minute video made by the girls of the Ulpana in Nevei Dekalim was given to every one of the members of parliament. It is presented in Hebrew and is narrated by the siblings and children of the victims of terror in Gaza .It asks the simple question of Israel's parliament "How can it vote to pry these people from their houses, synagogues and graves? Even those who do not understand Hebrew will understand the message Go to http://www.katif.net/pirsom/rega_03.wmv To contribute to Gush Katif In Israel: Katif Region Development Fund Neve Dekalim, D.N Hof-Aza, 79779 Israel Tel: 972-8-6840846 Fax: 972-8-6840863 In the U.S.A: Friends of Gush Katif 588 South Forest Drive Teaneck, NJ, 07666. Tel: 201-8951323 To Go To Top

WITH LEADERS LIKE THESE WHO NEEDS ENEMIES? Posted by Gary M. Cooperberg, October 26, 2004.

This was written by Gary M. Cooperberg The one trait which Shimon Peres can be complimented upon is that of consistency. He has consistently maintained that peace can be achieved by Israel backing down upon any of its principles which may interfere with negotiations with our enemies. He is convinced that this policy will eventually result in peace. What he fails to take into consideration is the fact that, were his policy truly implemented, the peace we would enjoy would be under the rule of our enemies should they be kind enough to allow us to continue to live. Ariel Sharon, on the other hand, has exemplified the quality of most politicians... the ability to become completely inconsistent. Who would have imagined, even a year ago, that Peace Now would be demonstrating in favor of Sharon? This fact is the clearest illustration possible of just how completely the Prime Minister's policy has changed. One would expect even a Sharon to take notice of the fact that the most vocal Israeli political organization dedicated to the self destruction of the Jewish State is now his new partner! How ironic that, much like the thinking of Shimon Peres, Sharon has stated that one of the main reasons he wants to flee from Gaza is because there are so many Arabs there. Well the Arab population is growing faster than the Jewish one in Jaffa, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and all over Israel. Perhaps we had just better make plans to abandon the entire country. That would be the consistent conclusion one would have to arrive at should we follow through on this faulty logic. Arabs living in the Gaza Strip are not "innocent civilians". They are enemies of the Jewish State and they have turned their children into living bombs in the war to destroy us. How dare we even consider the well being of our enemies above and beyond that of our own country?! It has been said that this tiny country cannot take on the entire world. The USA and the European nations will never accept the idea that Israel include Judea, Samaria and Gaza as part of our country. What country in the history of nations voluntarily abandoned parts of its own homeland owing to threats, real or imagined, on the part of world powers? The only way any self-respecting nation would agree to give up its land is as a result of losing a war. Our hapless leaders have decided, in advance, that we would lose should a war break out and thus have decided to surrender even before the war begins! With leaders like this who needs enemies? The only wonder is why our government hasn't come up with a plan to change the name of Israel to Palestine and just hand the keys to Arafat. That would be consistent with the current thinking of our leaders, and would certainly result in the real peace that Shimon Peres envisions. Voluntarily fleeing from any part of our homeland is not only treasonous, but a clear message to our enemies that we are afraid of them. This will guarantee an increase in terror and encourage our enemies to believe that we can be defeated. In a war either you crush your enemies or they crush you. What kind of mentality would find a leader inviting his enemies to destroy his country by giving him the implements to do so? What country has ever voluntarily given weapons and training to those who clearly use them to destroy you? If you need proof that G-d is protecting us there is no better proof than the very fact that we still exist despite the incredible efforts on the parts of our leaders to self destruct. The very fact that a Sharon, in the office of Prime Minister, is working so determinedly to aid and abet our enemies owing to his fear of the nations of the world, will result in even greater miracles taking place as our G-d steps in to rescue us even from him. But woe to us for the deserved punishments we will suffer as a result of our failure to stand up to this bulldozer. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

HOW REPUTATIONS ARE MADE; MUSLIM HARASSMENT OF JEWISH STUDENTS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 26, 2004.

IRAQI TERRORISTS SEIZE DIRECTOR OF C.A.R.E. The head of CARE operations in Iraq, who aided Iraqis for 30 years, holds Iraqi and European citizenships, and had complained about the sanctions against the Saddam regime. Nevertheless, terrorists kidnapped her (Robert H. Reid, NY Sun, 10/20, p.8). The terrorists don't want foreign help for their country, at least if by discouraging it, the regime collapses and they can take over. What needless suffering they impose in the name of Islam! They call their religion a merciful one, but they do not practice mercy in its name. MUSLIM HARASSMENT OF JEWS AT UC-IRVINE Colleges that accept federal aid are obliged to provide an educational environment free of religious and ethnic discrimination. At UC-Irvine, Muslims often have harassed Jews without repercussion. ZOA has filed a complaint with the federal office of civil rights. Among the many incidents were: (1) A group of Muslims followed a student with an Israeli lapel flag into a Dean's office, cursing and threatening him. He reported this to the university and to local police, but no action was taken. (2) As a student with a Jewish t-shirt passed by the Muslim Student Union table, a rock was thrown at him; (3) Muslim radical groups and newspapers liken Israel to the Nazis (with whom the Arabs are comparable in much of their ideology and methods); (4) The Society of Arab Students sponsored an anti-hate rally, to which it invited all groups but Jewish ones, and at which the Vice-Chancellor nevertheless was a speaker (as if he condoned the slighting of the Jewish groups as not entitled to be free from being hated for their ethnicity); and (5) Muslim students were permitted to wear sashes at graduation identifying themselves with Hamas suicide bombers, as they had announced they would (IMRA, 10/16). HOW POOR REPUTATIONS ARE MADE A figure approached in a suspicious manner an IDF post that had taken enemy fire, and threw a package at the troops. They shot and killed her. She turned out to be a 13-year-old girl. The story was in the news for ten days, while the Army investigated. The investigation found that although other aspects of the soldiers' and commander's behavior was below standard, the shooting, itself, was not. The findings received only brief mention in the media. Thus in the media, the Army was on the carpet for ten days and off the hook for brief mention (IMRA, 10/16). That is the way the media works. In itself, this practice is not anti-Israel. However, the credulity with which the media treats lying Arab accusations, and the incredulity with which it treats factual IDF explanations, is anti-Israel. PRETENDED NORMALIZATION The Arabs demand that Israel withdraw from all territory acquired in 1967, and then they would normalize relations with Israel. (What has 1967 to do with it?) Problem is, that the normalization may never come or could be reversed, but the withdrawal could not be. If Israel were to withdraw at all, the proper sequence would be years of normalizations, to test Arab sincerity, before any withdrawal. UN Security Council Resolution 242 does not require total withdrawal. The Foreign Minister of Jordan hinted a concern that unless the P.A. gains statehood, Arafat's Arabs would seize Jordan. (If the P.A. gained statehood, it would have greater means of taking over Jordan!) He depicts the Geneva initiative as proving that Israel has a peace partner (IMRA, 10/17). The initiative was for only Israeli concessions, not peace, the Arab signatories lack official standing, and the Arabs don't keep their agreements. They promote hatred and conquest of Israel, as they had before Israel acquired the Territories. How can fanatics make peace? ANTI-ZIONIST ANTISEMITISM (1)Many US liberal religious, educational and journalistic leaders support the candidacy of Sen. Kerry partly because of Pres. Bush's perceived (but not actual) support for Israel. Nevertheless, because "the Israelis know more about terrorism than anyone else," Sen. Kerry cited favorably an Israeli study about terrorism that called the war in Iraq a diversion from the war on terrorism. (The study was by the Jaffee Center, which is appeasement-minded and foolish about terrorism.) (2) Some Presbyterian, whose Church is divesting from companies that do business with Israel (but not from China that persecutes Christians), met with a Hizbullah terrorist leader. A delegate found Islamic leaders easier to dialogue with than Jewish leaders. "We treasure the precious words of Hizbullah and their expression of goodwill towards the American people." Hizullah, however, is dedicated to the murder of Jews everywhere and to the destruction of America. (3) At UC-Irvine, a speaker told the Muslim Student Union meeting that Zionists control the Congress, the media, and the FBI. Arab students there greeted a Jewish one with, "slaughter the Jews." (I didn't know that the Jews control the FBI, too. That's a new one, to me.) (4) The "NY Times" on 10/18 urged the US to be evenhanded between Israel and its enemies, as if it should be evenhanded towards terrorists (NY Sun, 10/21, Ed.). I looked up that edition of the "Times," to see whether the "Sun" had exaggerated what surely seemed too pro-terrorist even for the "Times." The citation was correct. The "Times" editorial had other egregious statements and demands. The editorial denounced Israeli military incursions against the P.A. terrorists firing rockets into Israel. It suggested that the important issue is statehood for the P.A., requiring US encouragement for moderates there and the aspirations of the Arab masses, and diplomatic efforts to reach a peaceful solution. How would Americans like it if "Haaretz" called for evenhandedness between the Baathists and Islamist insurgents in Iraq and the US forces? Should "Haaretz" denounce US military incursions into Falujah intended to root out terrorists who kidnap foreign aid workers? Why should the US fight, when it could encourage moderates there and lend diplomatic efforts to reach a peaceful solution? There are moderates in Iraq, but they don't have military forces. No moderates in the P.A. are named; those named previously avowed a terrorist ideology. The aspirations of the Arab masses in the P.A. are for domination, dispossession, and death of the Jews. Their aspirations should go back to Hell. BIASED ARAB FILM TO BE SHOWN IN ISRAEL The film, "Jenin, Jenin" accuses Israel of non-existent war crimes. The film, which has been shown to be fraudulent, is being shown in Israel. Someone suggested that the Israeli research film that debunks it be shown before it (IMRA, 10/17). Why show the Arab propaganda film in Israel? (A dishonest, masochistic ideology impels this.) It would be like showing a Communist film in the US during the Cold War. The film has no legitimate viewpoint, it is just slander. Although the Israeli soldiers behaved with great restraint, and the Arabs gunmen committed war crimes, the Arab film pretends it was the reverse. ARAB CHILDREN BECOME TERRORIST AUXILIARIES Just as their schooling advocates, P.A. children enter the battlefield in support of terrorists. In a Gaza camp under Israeli siege, the children report intelligence to the terrorists and fetch them water. Being in the midst of battle, children perish. (No loss, there. They are not functioning as children for whom we should sympathize, but like terrorists. Their casualties are chalked up against Israel, however, as if Israel were the ones committing the war crimes, when it is the Arabs who are.) The Arabs call their role "resistance." Aggressors don't admit to transgression. To give the children's role legitimacy, P.A. textbooks deny the legitimacy of Israel by terming it "colonialist." (IMRA, 10/17 from Palestinian Media Watch.) U.S. JEWS STILL UNCLEAR ABOUT THEIR POSITION ON ISRAEL The Conference of Presidents was founded to support Israel. It is split on whether to support PM Sharon's abandonment plan. Those who support it suggest that because he heads the government, the Conference should endorse the plan. They said that not endorsing it would be hostile to Pres. Bush, who works with Sharon on policy (IMRA, 10/17). Not on the merits? Poor reasons. It does not help Israel to support a plan that is anti-Zionist. They confuse supporting Israel with supporting the appeasement-minded PM. A pro-Israel organization should not distort its goals by siding with a US President who demands an anti-Israel plan. RESISTING ARREST PERMITTED OF LEFTISTS Some leftists demonstrated in Tel Aviv against the security fence. They blocked the roads. Police who came to remove them, and charged them with resisting arrest violently. A Tel Aviv magistrate criticized the prosecution for bringing charges, although he will allow them a second hearing to present them. He thinks that resisting arrest is permissible, but asked the Attorney-General to rule on it (IMRA, 10/18). Violent resistance to arrest is universally banned. Does this judge have any doubts about it or is he seeking to get a rationalization permitting the Left to do what it wants? This seems to be another case of unjustifiable refusal to enforce the law against the Left. It condones leftist violence. Meanwhile, the Left is drumming up paranoia about anticipated right-wing violence. The Attorney-General has become part of the ruling triumvirate of Israel: Prime Minister, Supreme Court, and Attorney-General. Anybody who doesn't like some legislation or governmental action or policy can complain to the Supreme Court, without having legal arguments. The Supreme Court then ignores the law and insinuates its policy preferences. When a right-wing politician becomes threatening to established left-wing dominance, the Attorney-General opens a case against him, even if flimsy, so the politician must step down. Here the judge is asking for a ruling against required enforcement of the law. Like the Supreme Court, the Attorney-Generals also legislate regardless of the law (and regardless of justice). Democratic in form, Israel is not democratic in practice. Most people are taken in by the form and unaware of the undemocratic practice. The Establishment has the power to obstruct reform, starting by its control of the media, so that it becomes difficult to educate or rally that uninformed people. Most of us Westerners, whose own media and educational system is deficient and biased, suppose that Israelis surely understand their own problems. It is a questionable assumption by Americans whose own divided electorate does not understand its problems. EU VS. UNO The EU plans a Euro-Mediterranean free-trade zone by 2010. The document that calls for it seeks "essential provisions in respect for the democratic principles and fundamental human rights, cooperation to counter the proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction, and their means of delivery, and anti-terrorism." Syria has just signed that agreement. At about the same time, the Security Council rebuked Syria for continuing to occupy Lebanon. The US and France sponsored the UNO's "noted with concern." Syria replied defiantly. So, on the one hand, the UNO rebukes Syria. On the other hand, the EU invites it into a pact with economic gains for it (NY Sun, 10/20, p.8). Syria violates human rights, promotes terrorism, and builds weapon of mass-destruction. Its invitation to join the free-trade organization, whose charter forbids those crimes, indicates that the EU merely pays lip service to them. Thus the EU is an accomplice in dictatorship, violation of human rights, promotion of terrorism, and proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction with aggressive intent. Is this a case of money before humaneness? Or is it an alliance between an increasingly Arabized Europe and the Arab states, lubricated by Europe's antisemitism? Based on the EU boon to Syria, how do you suppose Syria will gauge the seriousness of the UNO Resolution? Will anyone remember Syria's violation of UNO Resolutions, when next the Arabs accuse Israel of being a criminal state because, among other false reasons, it violates UNO Resolutions? Will people realize that the Arabs sign anything, without fidelity to it? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

ISLAMISTS USING OIL TO INFLUENCE US ELECTIONS? Posted by Beth Goodtree, October 26, 2004.

Ever wonder why the price of oil suddenly rose astronomically in this run-up to US elections? If you haven't, you should. I wondered, and what I found out is that there is may be a plot by the Islamists to influence if not overturn the US elections. And it is probably because of Israel. The Islamist countries view Israel and America as the same thing. They say it often enough by calling America 'The Big Satan,' and Israel 'The Little Satan.' President Bush, despite his gross misstep in calling for a Palestinian State to be established (and I blame this partly on his trusting his Arabist-tainted State Department headed by Colin Powell), has been unswervingly supportive of Israel in the area of self-defense. This infuriates the Islamist countries who would like nothing better than to exterminate Israel and commit genocide on the Jews. Keep this in mind: Not a single Islamist country has come out in support of Israel's right to exist free from terror. They all voted to condemn Israel's security barrier. The Islamists, having experienced our reaction to 9-11, know that bombing us again will never get the US elections overturned the way it did in Spain. If we were to have another 9-11, the first thing we'd probably do is turn their homelands into wastelands. So they must do something else. You see, they hate President Bush for his support of Israel and his unswerving determination to go after every terrorist entity, although he has as yet to call them Islamist terrorist entities. For one thing, many of the major Islamist groups such as Hizbollah, al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are sponsored not by fugitive rogues but by legitimate OPEC countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. And these Islamists and their supporters, aiders, enablers and abettors love Kerry. "Last week, in a coordinated survey of opinions in 10 key countries in Europe, Asia and North America, Israel was one of only two countries - the other was Russia - where poll respondents favored Bush over Kerry (by 50 percentage points to 24)." (1) Meanwhile, "A Pew Research Center poll has shown that vast majorities in predominantly Muslim countries continue to hold unfavorable opinions of the United States." (2) And last week, Mr. Genocidal monster himself -- Yasser Arafat -- endorsed Kerry. (Recently, Saudi Arabia openly admitted to continuing to send money to the families of genocide bombers to pick up the slack when Saddam was arrested.) Regarding the US presidential elections, Russian President Putin had this to say: "International terrorism aims at causing maximum damage to President Bush and to forestall his second term re-election." (3) Because he is ostensibly part diplomat, apparently Putin himself is afraid to name the enemy -- Islamism --instead referring to it as 'terrorism,' which is merely a symptom. But I dare anyone to show me more than a handful of terror attacks in the last few years that were not Islamist-motivated and carried out. So it is apparent that the Islamists hate President Bush. And they have a huge weapon in their arsenal called oil. With it they can ruin the American economy or squeeze the American voter until it hurts. And it seems apparent that they are doing it. They want Kerry to win in the worst way and they are desperately afraid of President Bush. And here's the Islamist weapon of mass distraction: OPEC (Org. of the Petroleum Exporting Countries ) Members and Their Main Religions (4) Iran September 1960 Founder Member .............................................Islam Iraq September 1960 Founder Member .............................................Islam Kuwait September 1960 Founder Member ........................................Islam Saudi Arabia September 1960 Founder Member .............................Islam Venezuela September 1960 Founder Member ..................................Roman Catholic Qatar December 1960 Full Member ...................................................Islam Libya December 1962 Full Member ...................................................Islam Indonesia December 1962 Full Member ............................................Islam United Arab Emirates November 1967 Full Member ......................Islam Algeria July 1969 Full Member ..........................................................Islam Nigeria July 1971 Full Member ...........................................................Islam Ecuador* November 1973 Full Member ...........................................Roman Catholic Gabon December 1973 Associate Member ......................................Christian 55%-75%, animist, Islam less than 1% * Ecuador left OPEC in 1992 Some OPEC Members and How They Voted in the UN (5) Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time (Statistics on several other Islamic OPEC countries were not available, but a cursory glance at their recent votes showed they voted against America at least 75% of the time.) ....................................................................... So the next time you have to gas up your car or heat your house, remember who is responsible for the obscene prices and what they are doing to the profits they make by stealing your hard-earned money: they are using it to fund more Islamists whose only goal is to convert America into an Islamic entity where you, the American public, will be forced into subservience. This next quote says it all. It is by the co-founder of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) which is a group funded by Saudi Arabia and other Islamist countries. This quote explains our artificially high oil prices and the fact that in all likelihood, OPEC members are trying to overturn the American elections by manipulating our economy to get the voters angry with President Bush: "The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." (6) ........................................................... (1) http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/19/95245.shtml (2) http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/1957.cfm (3) http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page (4) http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html http://www.saudinf.com/main/d52.htm http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ (5) http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/unvote.asp =%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200410%5CFOR20041018c.html (6) http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32341 Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer who lives in the NYC metro area. She writes political commentary/analysis, and the occasional science and humor articles. Read more of her articles on her website: http://hometown.aol.com/bgoodtree/ To Go To Top

CO-EXISTENCE? Posted by Judy Lash Balint, October 26, 2004.

This essay was written by Leiah Elbaum lives in Modi'in. She can be reached at elbaum@actcom.co.il Driving home from the Judean desert recently, we stumbled across an English-language oldies station calling itself Mood 92 FM. It didn't sound like any Israeli station we knew of, so we guessed that it was Jordanian. Jordan used to have an English language music station a few years ago. We stayed tuned out of curiosity. Suddenly and without warning, another station cut in on the frequency. Strident, Arabic martial music blared out, with heavy male voices bellowing a defiant song. My Arabic is extremely rusty, but I could pick out enough words to figure out the gist: "our people", "revolution", and, finally, "Hamas". We were tuned to a pro-Hamas radio station. And then, just as suddenly, the mellow tones of Mood 92 returned: "All we are saying is give peace a chance." We couldn't stop laughing. Half-seriously I looked around for the hidden camera. Surely this was someone's idea of a practical joke?! We drove through the French Hill junction, with Arab Jerusalem neighbourhoods to one side, Jewish Jerusalem ahead of us, and heavily-guarded bus stops full of Jewish travellers by the side of the road. Too soon, the Hamas station regained control of the frequency. More martial music, which faded to an enraged orator. I picked up the word "Palestine" over and over again, interspersed with assorted vocabulary words from my old Arabic newspaper reading homework: "homeland", "nation", "army". The speaker worked himself into a frenzy. Then a woman's voice came on, apparently identifying the station by the name Al-Manar - also the name of a TV and radio network run by Hezbollah in Lebanon, one of the organisation's propaganda vehicles against Israel. I wonder if they're connected. And then it was back to Mood 92. Gloria Gaynor was belting out "I Will Survive". If only it were always this easy to get rid of Hamas. We were returning home from a day trip to Ein Prat, just east of Jerusalem, a little Garden of Eden hidden away in the Judean desert, a refuge of water and greenery amidst the rocky barrenness of the desert cliffs. The nature reserve is a narrow valley with a refreshing stream trickling through its floor, fed by springs which gush year round. Lush figs and shady eucalyptus trees grow here and there, seemingly from the middle of the stream. A hiking trail leads up to the rockier end of the wadi, towards the springs themselves. Emerald patches of natural grass - a rarity here - are dotted between sections of the streams. Pools form between natural rock pavements, and agile fish glide and leap in the water, glinting and gleaming in the mellow gold glow of the afternoon autumn sun. They share their home with tiny black water snails and an occasional river crab, both creatures making their homes by the rocky ledges of the pools. A gentle breeze stirs the luxurious foliage in the damp canyon bed, rustling the dried grasses on higher ledges, remnants of the fertility brought by last winter's rains. In a small meadow, white stalks of squill flowers wave meditatively, heralds of this year's approaching wet season. It was Friday, part of the weekend for both Jews and Muslims. Several families, Jewish and Arab, were picnicking separately under the trees by the stream. Teenage Palestinian boys basked in the sun just beyond the glade, while a religious Israeli family found a shady spot right by the water under a huge fig tree. Suddenly one of their young boys let out an excited cry, pointing to the water's edge: "Scorpion, scorpion! A big one! Here, here!" It was, of course, a crab, desert scorpions not being especially fond of ponds. And with that settled, peaceful relaxation returned to the reserve. I found my own personal paradise up by the flat stone slabs at the narrow end of the valley. Above I could watch hyrax, small furry brown mammals, nimbly scrambling over the rocks and grazing in the trees. Ravens soared overhead and small flocks of Tristram's grackles, a common local bird, congregated along the cliff, their characteristic whistles echoing down the canyon as they swooped across it in a flash of orange wings. Below me, a religious Israeli family was enjoying one of the larger, deeper, rock pools, an odd elliptical shape caught between flat sheets of bare stone. The teenage girls climbed in to the water fully clad, trousers under billowing skirts to protect their modesty. The father joined them, leaving his gun on the bank within easy reach. Above us on yet another ledge an Arab family had laid out a large picnic, and they nestled together on the small promontory, slightly too many of them to fit comfortably onto their scenic, breezy perch. Some Israeli teenagers clambered over the steeper rocks at the head of the canyon, moving on from there to inspect one of the many caves in the cliff walls. A young secular Israeli family ambled along the edge of the stream, the mother with her baby strapped to her chest as she negotiated the stepping stones. In the distance, a black-robed, pony-tailed, Russian Orthodox priest made his way up the path with a bag of groceries, heading towards the steep stone steps where a small, ancient monastery balanced on a high vantage point, a relic of the many hermits who inhabited this region in the early years of Christianity. On the hiking trail skirting the valley side, a pair of IDF soldiers in dusty combat fatigues and floppy army-issue sun hats patrolled the reserve, regularly pacing up and down the path, protecting the peace of this idyll, keeping watch for any sign of trouble. For this is also a "seam" between Israeli and Palestinian areas. The Israeli village of Anatot is clustered haphazardly high above the reserve, while further along the road lies the Palestinian village of Hizmeh. Walking back to the car I paused for a photograph, trying out my new digital camera. I suddenly found a small hand thrust into my face. It belonged to a smiling twelve-year-old girl clad in a red tracksuit, a short dark braid at her neck. "Hello," she greeted me with a thick Arabic accent, keen to shake my hand. Behind her another girl stood shyly looking over her shoulder. Their eyes were focused on my head, just above my face. Ahhh, the hat. My trusty broad brimmed brown felt tiyul hat. It is a fraction on the cowboyish side. I'm not a John Wayne impersonator, but it does keep the sun off my easily scorched skin. "Do you speak Arab?" she asked me. I don't know which was worse, my basic college Arabic or their rudimentary schoolroom English. They didn't know Hebrew. Somehow we managed a brief conversation. They had hoped I was a "real" American. I was sorry to disappoint them. They giggled and pointed to the stream: "Fishhhhh?" And then something I couldn't make out. "Yes, fish," I replied. "Fishhhh," they responded. I asked where they were from. One of them pointed in the general direction of Hizmeh, though she might have meant to indicate Jerusalem, hard to tell. Then we shook hands again and bade one another farewell, as they frolicked off to play by the stream with their picnicking family. Note to self: I must brush up on my Arabic. You never know when it will come in handy. Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (gefen). It is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

CABINET OKS ARRESTS OF WHOLE FAMILIES, 3-5 YEAR JAIL TERMS FOR RESISTERS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, October 25, 2004.

Dear Friends, How deeply ashamed the Jewish people must be of those such as so-called Justice Minister Tommy Lapid. I recall that there was once a meeting at Waunsee where a decision and a plan was made which was Hitler's own "Solution to His Jewish Question". Concentration camps, barbed wire, rounding up Jewish families. Just because Lapid was a Holocaust survivor gives him no right to do this. He says herein: "The destruction of homes must be stop because it is inhuman, un-Jewish and causes us great harm around the world." Of course, he was speaking about Arab Muslim homes that were hiding Terrorists. Read what Herr Lapid has made into a law for Jewish families who resist being forced from their homes...all at the orders of Arik Sharon. PLEASE VOTE TO STOP HIM! What follows is an article by the Israel Insider staff, published yesterday on http://www.inraelinsider.com. A ministerial committee led by Justice Minister Yosef "Tommy" Lapid has amended the compensation and punishment bill passed today by the Israeli government to allow for simultaneous arrests of parents and their children, which was not previously legal. Whole families resisting expulsion from their homes thus may be rounded up efficiently and deported to mass internment facilities prepared for them. Those arrested will be liable to 3 to 5 year prison terms, the latter if they are found in possession of "hot or cold" objects which might be used as weapons, even if resistance is passive. It is not clear whether children and adults will have the same terms or whether they will be allowed to serve together in "family detention centers" or whether families will be split up and sent to different internment facilities around the countries. The bill, which outlines compensation for settlers facing evacuation under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan, as well as punishments for those refusing or resisting expulsion and deportation, won support Sunday from the cabinet and the ministerial committee on legislation, two days before the bill is due to be presented to the Knesset plenum. The bill was first approved in the cabinet by a majority of 13 ministers during the weekly cabinet meeting, while six -- five members of the Likud and the sole remaining member of the National Religious Party -- voted against. The committee on legislation passed most of the clauses in the bill without changes, although several alterations were made, Haaretz reported, some regarding the authority of police and security forces in the event of resistance to the evacuation. Security officials believe that those detained for hindering evacuation will include whole families, and that it is unreasonable to separate children from their parents during an arrest, the newspaper reported. Thus the ability to round up whole families is conceived as a humanitarian measure. Humanitarian considerations have been a guiding force for the current government. Several months ago, Minister Lapid compared a Palestinian woman picking through the rubble of her home destroyed by the IDF during a mission to uncover arms-smuggling tunnels to "my grandmother who was thrown out of her house during the Shoah (Holocaust)," adding that "The destruction of homes must stop because it is inhuman, un-Jewish, and causes us great harm around the world," Lapid added. "In the end we'll be kicked out of the UN, we'll be put on trial in The Hague [seat of the International Court of Justice], and no one will want to have anything to do with us." Under the plan approved by Sharon's cabinet, and due to be voted on this week by the governement, 1500 homes of Jewish families in Gaza, along with schools and other community structures, are to be leveled and the land turned over to Palestinian groups. Families which do not accept compensation are to be forcibly deported and sent to mass incarceration facilities and internment camps which the Israeli Prison Services has been ordered to prepare. Graves of dead Jews buried in Gaza are reportedly to be dug up and relocated elsewhere along with synagogues which are to be dismantled. At the start of the cabinet meeting, Sharon described the evacuation bill as "clear and thorough." "The law will make things as easy as possible for the settlers who will be evacuated and I am certain that even those who oppose the disengagement plan will not want to make things difficult for the settlers," Sharon said. Creative solutions for mass incarceration ordered Ofer Lefler, spokesman for the Israel Prisons Authority (IPA), recently announced that the IPA had been ordered to develop "creative alternatives" for the mass detention of disengagement opponents. Lefler noted that detained disengagement opponents would not be "security prisoners" and thus the IPA would have considerable leeway in modes of incarceration. He cited the incarceration of illegal workers awaiting expulsion in a hotel that was converted into a temporary prison as an example of a creative solution. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). To Go To Top

IT'S NOT A MATTER OF MONEY Posted by Batya Medad, October 25, 2004.

The latest headlines say that Arik Sharon will offer more money to the victims of his transfer program, and that the "lucky" recipients won't even be taxed on their "windfall." He expects them to be overjoyed. Sharon totally miss-reads the situation and the minds and hearts of the Jews in YESHA. But even more revealing, is what he shows of his true self. There's a principle in psychology, projection, that a person demonstrates his true self, his inner self, in what he imagines in others. It is clear that Sharon believes that everyone has a price, like the story of the man who offers the woman a million dollars to sleep with him, and after she agrees, changes the price to a few cents. She, insulted, asks why he thinks her a whore, and he replies that she already established that. Now they're just haggling over the price. Obviously Sharon has his price, and he was well paid. He thinks everyone is like him, so he's haggling. But we the Jews of YESHA aren't whores. It's not about money. Neither a nicer house, larger more fertile piece of land, nor a generous deposit in the bank can bribe the good Jews in Gush Katif to leave their homes and destroy their communities and educational institutions. We're in our Homeland, and that's where we want to stay. No amount of money can substitute for it. There is no substitute for Eretz Yisrael and no justification for shrinking the tiny borders of the State of Israel. We didn't accept Uganda nor Birobijan, and we left Great Neck and Golders Green. We respect and value Israelis' rights to live in Tel Aviv and Kiryat Tivon. There must be Jews in all of Eretz Yisrael. This "disengagement" business makes no sense. Not from a security, tactical, diplomatic, psychological, historical - you name the adjective - it's totally illogical. And "insulting" is the nicest word I can think of. It insults the integrity of every Jew. People keep asking me whom we're supposed to follow, which politician should we listen to. These are tough questions in very difficult times. I'm just a "bubby" who teaches English. There are more questions than answers. This week I started learning Kohelet in a Shiloh women's study group taught by Rabbi Nissan Ben Avraham. We learned that in "Masechet Shabbat" Shlomo HaMelech is considered a symbol of "irrelevent," "too smart for your own good" questions. Basically they mock him, though, it was King Solomon who was privileged to build the Beit HaMikdash, the Holy Temple. Kohelet, like Shlomo HaMelech who wrote it is very controversial. It's very honest; he admits his doubts and faults. He was a man of many, maybe too many, talents and intelligences and doubts and contradictions. He did everything but fight in a war. That was his father's specialty. King David fought hard to prepare a peaceful world for his son, but it didn't give Shlomo personal peace. King Solomon spent his entire life searching, experimenting. In the end he came to the conclusion that it was all hevel - nothing, air. It was like the air that could fill a balloon; none of the material riches were worth anything. Ariel Sharon hasn't learned this. His haggling over the price is hevel. The Jewish residents of Gush Katif, of YESHA, understand what Shlomo HaMelech writes of in Kohelet. Ain chadash mitachat lashemesh - There's nothing new under the sun. It's all hevel, norishkeit (foolishness), vanities, air. There is no material price, no payment that can compensate for what we won't give away. Let's just go on with our real life and continue settling Our Land. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il To Go To Top

THE SPIRITUAL SIDE OF THE MIDDLE EAST PROBLEM Posted by Tom Mason, October 25, 2004.

Thank you for the excellent articles on various aspects on the Middle East problems. Generally speaking there is a lack of understanding of the spiritual side of the problem. It should be known for instance that the battle is not Jews against Arabs, but God and His chosen people, the children of Israel, against Satan and his anti Semitic hoards whom Satan has programmed to finish what Hitler failed to do, exterminate the Jews. Arafat is a good exanple. Why did Arafat form the PLO in 1964 three years before there was a land problem? His constitution states to push the Jews out of the land. Saddam Hussein had the same intent. Why did he fire 38 Scud missiles into an innocent bystander Israel during the Gulf War? That the Jews are God's chosen people is well documented in the Bible and the fact that Egypt, Syria, and Jordan attacked Israel at the urging of Arafat and were defeated in six days is a manifestation of God's care for the nation. Here are a few biblical truths. God speaking to Abraham. Gen. 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee (USA?), and curse him that curses thee (Arab dictatorships? Palestinians?): and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. I think the world is blessed by Jewish Nobel Prize Winners. The Jews often fell out of favor with God and were taken into captivity (the Babylonians) or driven out by the Romans. But God always relented. Scripture: Jer. 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. 23:7 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt (Miraculously across the Red Sea). But, The LORD lives, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I (God) had driven them (He used the Romans 70 AD); and they shall dwell in their own land (Not Palestinian land). It was the land given to Abraham; it included Jordan, part of Iraq and part of Lebanon. It is a sad fact there can never be peace in the Middle East until the Messiah returns. Zech. 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him. 12:2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. 12:3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. Again God will step in and save Jerusalem, for all times. Something of note. The world needs to realise that Islam like Nazism is a scam. It is an evil spiritual force. Satan causing the people of Iraq to be killed to get his will done. Eph. 6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, (it is not a people problem per se) but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places (we are in a spiritual war). 6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day etc. You should know that Muhammad the founder of Islam was born in 570 AD - that is 1500 years after Solomon built the temple. The Koran written in 600 AD states that Islam will dominate the world. The muslim population in Europe today is problematic. It is only Judaism and Christianity that stands in the way of Islam's aspirations. The USA is perceived to be Christian and is fighting Islam and the hate the USA suffers is anti Semitic. Apparently someone asked Bin Laden what would bring peace to the world. He wants us to get out of the Middle East and embrace Islam, confirming that Judaism and Christianity are the root cause of Islamic terrorists. A leader who does not come out 100 % behind Israel and the war on terror should not be the President of the USA. Tom Mason lives in Surrey, British Columbia To Go To Top

FLYING IN THE FACE OF FACTS Posted by Ted Belman, October 25, 2004.

PM Sharon, in continuing to push for disengagement, is flying in the face of the facts. What are they? 1. Likud voted, by a margin of 60 to 40, against bringing Labour into the governing coalition to enable it. 2. There is no money allocated in the budget to pay for uprooting the settlers and US has refused to pay for it 3. No financial model has been presented to the Knesset or to Israelis showing how disengagement saves money. But we are told the high cost of building the trench and the high cost of redeploying the IDF. 4. There is no security arrangement for Gaza that would prevent Gaza from becoming an armed camp or from attacking Israel after it withdrew. There is no doubt about it, Israel would be less secure. The rocket attacks will only increase. 5. It is far from certain that Israel will retain control of access to Gaza by land, sea or air. 6. Except for the letters from Bush, which suggested but failed to ensure that Israel could keep the settlements, the Bush Administration has continually taken the position that Israel must not enlarge the settlements and must dismantle certain settlements. They are against a "land grab" and in favour of Israel trading something in exchange for the large blocks. 7. Both America and Israel pay lip service to the Roadmap notwithstanding that there is absolutely no evidence, in word or in deed, that the Arab countries or the "Palestinians" are willing to live up to what is required of them. 8. The construction of the fence has been discontinued because the Israeli government is caving into world pressure. The ICJ said it was illegal, the High Court of Israel said it had to be less inconvenient to the Arabs and must not be a "land grab", the State Department is micro-managing where it will be built, the Vatican has also registered its objection to the proposed route and the IDF said that the proposed new route renders Israel defenceless. 9. The rational for the construction of the fence was that would save lives, which it has, but also that it would become a de-facto border, despite protestations to the contrary. This rational can no longer be sustained. Also, the fence cannot be routed through the minefields of Jerusalem. It is just too problematic. 10. There is nothing unilateral about disengagement as Israel has given the US a veto over everything Israel wants to do. 11. The insurgency in Iraq supported by Iran, Syria, Hezbolla, Al Qaeda, Hamas and Arafat, among others, serves to underline that these same groups will not allow Israel a moments peace or a permanent stay in the ME. 12. The US is preventing Israel from building the fence where it would serve to protect Ben Gurion Airport or to include many major settlement blocks. Disengagement, of which the fence is a part, is an attempt to create a more manageable situation for Israel for the long haul. Whether it will achieve this is far from certain. In fact the contrary seems more probable. Disengagement doesn't save money because the trench, the fence, the IDF redeployment and the resettlement will cost billions. It doesn't make Israel more secure in the same way abandoning area A under Oslo didn't make Israel more secure. It doesn't ensure that Israel can keep parts of Yesha. It doesn't solve any of the problems associated with Jerusalem. In fact it doesn't solve anything. The Roadmap, Oslo and Res 242 were all attempts to find a solution that the Arabs would accept. Sharon's Disengagement Plan is an attempt to find a solution the US will accept. They all involved a retreat by Israel from any idea of Israel retaining control of or sovereignty over Yesha. They were and are premised on the idea that the Arab world will live in peace with Israel. No sign of that. It is clear that the US has always tried to get Israel to disgorge almost all of Yesha. They certainly oppose a "land grab" as Powell puts it. Just as the status quo was better before we entered the Oslo Accords then after, so the status quo now is better than what disengagement will bring. Israel should not give up the control it now exercises, not should it incur the costs that disengagement will entail, nor should it retreat from Gaza and parts of Yesha until there is a "New Middle East." If Sharon wants Israel to retreat, the onus of proving that Israel will be better off is on him. He has failed miserably in satisfying this onus. If the US wants Israel to retreat, let it offer something worthwhile in return. Instead Israel should develop a different paradigm. Benny Elon's plan is one such paradigm. It envisions the two state solution as involving Jordan and Israel rather than Palestine and Israel. To this end, Israel should abandon the Roadmap, destroy the remnants of Oslo and embrace the Jordanian solution. Ted Belman is cofounder and cohost of IsraPundit, a pro-Israel strong activist website (http://israpundit.com). To Go To Top

"DIE WITH DIGNITY" = KILL THE JEWS Posted by CAMERA, October 25, 2004.

An October 14th segment on NPR's "All Things Considered" typifies NPR's consistent pro-Palestinian news coverage. Part of a pattern In 2000, a two-month CAMERA study of NPR noted that "entirely one-sided programs were commonplace;" that there was "a disproportionate reliance on Arab/Palestinian and pro-Arab speakers compared to Israeli and pro-Israeli speakers;" and a "chronic amplifying of Palestinian grievances and perspectives" which paralleled a de-emphasizing of Israeli concerns. Another three-month study of NPR's reporting during the period Jan 1 - March 31, 2003 found the same tilt in favor of Arab and pro-Arab views as has been the case in every other time span CAMERA has reviewed. The skewed Oct. 14, 2004 segment focused on the Palestinian mood in the fifth year of their intifada and despite serious accusations leveled against Israel in the piece, no Israeli speakers were included. NPR host Robert Siegel immediately set the tone, defining the so-called intifada as an "uprising against Israeli occupation." This is a distorted definition of the violence, one espoused by Palestinian advocates. It neglects the fact that much of the violence against Israelis is conducted by groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, whose avowed aim is not an end to "Israeli occupation," but rather an end to Israel altogether. Likewise, Palestinian violence was launched in 2000 precisely at the moment Israel offered to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Deceptive Statistics Reporter Julie McCarthy stressed the "disproportionate" nature of the conflict, focusing on Palestinian casualty figures that exceed those on the Israeli side: "For Palestinians, the price of four years of fighting with Israel has been disproportionate. This year, for every Israeli killed, five Palestinians have died. It's a trend borne out in Israel's current operation in northern Gaza, where daily funerals are a mixture of militancy and mourning. Some 100 Palestinians have perished. The Israeli army reports that one of its soldiers has been killed. "Since the second intifada erupted in September 2000, approximately 1,000 Israelis have lost their lives; 3,000 Palestinians have been killed. The unequal losses reflect the unequal strength of the two sides. The Palestinians deploy street fighters, suicide bombers and crude Qassam rockets; Israel deploys tanks, helicopter gunships and warplanes." While McCarthy's monologue emphasizes figures that suggest Palestinians suffer more from the conflict, there is no mention that 79% of Israelis killed were non-combatants, compared to 43% of Palestinian fatalities that were non-combatants. (Breakdown of fatalities according to International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (http://www.ict.org.il/) figures, Sept. 27, 2000 through May 1, 2004.) The reporter also omits that 67 percent of Palestinians killed during the current Gaza operation were combatants (Breakdown according to Haaretz, 10/17). She doesn't note that four Israelis, three of them children, were killed in the rocket attacks that prompted Israel's Gaza operation. She highlights that Israel uses warplanes while Palestinians deploy "street fighters," yet she conceals the fact that because Palestinian "street fighters" operate among civilians, Israel regularly forgoes warplanes and instead uses foot-soldiers. That is, Israel exposes its troops to greater harm for the purpose of minimizing collateral damage. This happened, for example, during Israel's 2002 operation in Jenin. The Jerusalem Post reported on this operation as follows: "As of last night, 23 soldiers had been killed trying to take over the Jenin refugee camp. The IDF has suffered so many losses because it chose to fight the battle on a virtually one-on-one basis, without the benefit of all its advantages in artillery or fighter-bombers. A senior officer said the attack helicopters have also swapped their rockets for TOW missiles, which cause less collateral damage. The reason is the army does not want to cause civilian casualties" (Arieh O'Sullivan, "Soldiers' deaths won't affect Defensive Shield," 4/10/02). National "Predictable" Radio and Palestinian grievances McCarthy graphically describes Palestinian casualties: "Gaza surgeons say the nature of the casualties in the past two weeks has been appalling: men decapitated, boys blown to bits, a bullet lodged in the brain of a teen-aged girl." There is no graphic or emotional description of the gruesome effects of Qassam rockets that recently killed 2 young Israeli children and helped spur the Israeli incursion to eliminate rocket factories. Instead, seven Palestinians expressed their views, often highly critical ones, of Israel. McCarthy translates the words of one woman who claimed that Israel "opened fire" at her family's house: "I wish that an Israeli family would suffer the same fate as mine." This declaration, which supports NPR's opening theme that Israelis don't suffer as much as Palestinians, is allowed to pass without comment from the reporter. The reporter doesn't ask the woman if she is angry at the terrorists for launching rockets into Israel and causing a shutdown of the entrypoints into Israel and an end to economic development. Nor was she asked how she feels about the Palestinian Authority that encouraged children to become terrorists and spent donor money on bombs instead of improving schools, roads, plumbing infrastructure and/or health clinics. Terror counter-productive -- not immoral Palestinian politician Haidar Abdul-Shafti and psychiatrist Iyad Sarraj do briefly criticize the terror against Israelis and Arafat's corrupt mismanagement, but only because the terror has hurt their cause, not because killing Israeli civilians is immoral. They reflect on how it has hurt the Palestinians in world public opinion and has led to violence in their own society. McCarthy did not probe their critical comments and never asked whether, aside from considerations of self-interest, they thought terror was morally wrong in and of itself. Dr. Sarraj then advances what turns out to be a central theme of the program: "The principle behind [suicide bombing]," he says, "is that it is better to die in dignity rather than to live in humiliation and shame." McCarthy didn't ask the psychiatrist why murdering Israeli civilians is "dignified." She didn't interview any additional psychiatrists, Israeli or otherwise, who might have offered an opposing view of what influences suicide bombers. She didn't note that Palestinian incitement, societal glorification of suicide bombers, and religious fanaticism are often cited as factors that motivate suicide bombers. Though NPR listeners are unlikely to hear about these factors, a PBS documentary about suicide bombers reported on incitement and religious fanaticism, presenting a bomb maker who said he wants to kill women and children because "it's the duty of every Muslim to liberate this land, every inch of it" (Wide Angle: Suicide Bombers, Dir. Tom Roberts, 2004). "Some observers claim that the older, more determined political activists manipulate the younger and more impressionable recruits," adds the narrator. The testimony of one failed suicide supports this observation. He states, "I already had hatred, and [my recruiters] added to it. They also spoke to me about paradise, where I would get all I want. They encouraged and excited me." None of this information on the roots of terrorism is provided by NPR, where Palestinians are overwhelmingly exonerated of responsibility and the violence they perpetrate is blamed on Israel. Camp David Never Happened Another Palestinian interviewed, diplomat Mahmoud Ajrami, also blames Israel for the continuing violence, saying: "Give us a settlement, a real just compromise, you know, and all these radicals will be isolated in the corner and they will diminish." Of course, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak did offer a generous compromise at Camp David. As Dennis Ross recounts in his new book, The Missing Peace, the Palestinian leader "said no to everything," and did not present "a single idea or single serious comment in two weeks". This attempt at compromise obviously didn't "isolate" the "radicals," but, again and predictably, NPR's reporter failed to remind listeners of this or to challenge the guest speaker. In conclusion McCarthy ends her segment underscoring the patently inaccurate claim that poverty and loss beget terror (rather than ideology and indoctrination). An unidentified Palestinian says, through a translator, "What do you expect from a people who feel poverty, who lose their children, lose their brothers, their fathers? What do you expect from them who are losing everything?" The answer: "They prefer to die, he says, than to live such a life. Julie McCarthy, NPR News, Gaza." To read the transcript of the October14 segment, go to: http://tinyurl.com/3ovow The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. The website address is www.camera.org. To Go To Top

PRESIDENT BUSH, THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME Posted by Michael D. Evans, October 25, 2004.

NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT. THE DATES ARE RAPIDLY APPROACHING WHEN THE PRESIDENT WILL AGAIN CONSIDER THE 1987 ANTI-TERRORISM ACT, AND THE JERUSALEM EMBASSY RELOCATION ACT. Please ask President Bush today not to sign another waiver on these Acts, and allow them to become law. Nothing will bring the blessings of God upon our President and our nation more quickly than recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Ask President Bush to take this prophetic step, today. Your help is urgently needed! Both Acts need to be allowed to become law! Click here NOTE: Dr. Ziad Asali of the National Council of Churches has proposed East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, with its own municipality in the extended 1967 borders; West Jerusalem would be the capital of Israel. Dr. Asali and the group for which he speaks, The American Committee on Jerusalem, speak of Jerusalem as "occupied territory", and believe and support the vision for Jerusalem as outlined by Professor Walid Khalidi. According to Professor Khalidi, East Jerusalem would be the capital of Palestine with its own municipality...West Jerusalem would be the capital of Israel. This is unacceptable! Such a move would place all Christian holy sites under Islamic rule of law. Many, if not all, would likely be subjected to the same indignities as those holy sites in Bethlehem. Arafat would, most certainly, rewrite the history of Christianity in East Jerusalem as he did in Bethlehem, when he declared it the birthplace of the "first Palestinian Christian, Jesus Christ". Jerusalem, David's City, must not be divided! Please ask President Bush today not to sign another waiver on these Acts, and allow them to become law. Your help is urgently needed! Both Acts need to be allowed to become law! As I wrote in The American Prophecies: The Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act of 1995 called for the U.S. to recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and move our Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by 1999. That has not happened. Each time the Act comes across the President's desk, a waiver has been signed due to security concerns. Here are a few of the basic tenets of the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act: * The United States maintains its embassy in the functioning capital of every country excepting the case of our democratic friend and strategic ally, the State of Israel. * Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel; and As Republican Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas said to the 2003 Jerusalem World Summit audience via satellite: "This point is essential. Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish people for three thousand years. Jerusalem has never been the capital for any state other than for the Jewish people...Our Embassy cannot remain in Tel Aviv while we claim to support and defend Israel's right to exist." Professor Walid Khalidi and the National Council of Churches also want former East Jerusalemites to be allowed to return to East Jerusalem. This "right of passage" back to East Jerusalem would inevitably include thousands of terrorists now barred from reaching the interior of Israel. It would most certainly result in a bloodbath for the Jewish people. West Jerusalem would become the target of rocket-lauchers armed with whatever is available to cause the most death and destruction, terrorists and suicide bombers with only one objective: The total annihilation of the Jewish people. PLO terrorism is not about land. If it were, then the PLO would have accepted the Barak-Clinton Camp David proposal. It's about eradicating Zionism and the Jewish state. Its strategy of using terrorism as a tool to achieve its goals has never changed. Please ask President Bush today not to sign another waiver on these Acts, and allow them to become law. Your help is urgently needed! Both Acts need to be allowed to become law! Read Title 22, Chapter 61, Section 5202, Prohibitions regarding the PLO, Now! Michael Evans is the author of "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," and founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org. To Go To Top

A LETTER TO MANKIND Posted by Ali Sina, October 25, 2004.

Dear Friend, Madness has overtaken a portion of humanity and what they do is nothing short of insanity. We are losing the fight against terrorism. That is because we are missing the target. We must reach to the world and let everyone know that terrorism is the symptom and the real problem is the ideology behind it. We need your help. Please read the following short "Letter to Mankind" and if you agree please forward it to all the people in your address book and request them to do the same. It is archived at http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina40908.htm Send a copy to your newspaper and politician too. Everyone must hear this message. Sincerely yours Ali Sina Publisher, www.FaithFreedom.org Dear fellow human, Today humanity is being challenged. Unthinkable atrocities take place on daily basis. There is an evil force at work that aims to destroy us. The agents of this evil respect nothing; not even the lives of children. Every day there are bombings, every day innocent people are targeted and murdered. It seems as if we are helpless. But we are not! The ancient Chinese sage Sun Zi said, "Know your enemy and you won't be defeated". Do we know our enemy? If we don't, then we are doomed. Terrorism is not an ideology, it is a tool; but the terrorists kill for an ideology. They call that ideology Islam. The entire world, both Muslims and non-Muslims claim that the terrorists have hijacked "the religion of peace" and Islam does not condone violence. Who is right? Do the terrorists understand Islam better, or do those who decry them? The answer to this question is the key to our victory, and failure to find that key will result in our loss and death will be upon us. The key is in the Quran and the history of Islam. Those of us, who know Islam, know that the understanding of the terrorists of Islam is correct. They are doing nothing that their prophet did not do and did not encourage his followers to do. Murder, rape, assassination, beheading, massacre and sacrilege of the dead "to delight the hearts of the believers" were all practiced by Muhammad, were taught by him and were observed by Muslims throughout their history. If truth has ever mattered, it matters most now! This is the time that we have to call a spade a spade. This is the time that we have to find the root of the problem and eradicate it. The root of Islamic terrorism is Islam. The proof of that is the Quran. We are a group of ex-Muslims who have seen the face of the evil and have risen to warn the world. No matter how painful the truth may be, only truth can set us free. Why this much denial? Why so much obstinacy? How many more innocent lives should be lost before YOU open your eyes? A nuclear disaster is upon us. This will happen. It is not a question of "if" but "when". Oblivious of that, the world is digging its head deeper in the sand. We urge the Muslims to leave Islam. Stop with excuses, justifications and rationalizations. Stop dividing mankind into "us" vs. "them" and Muslims vs. Kafirs. We are One people, One mankind! Muhammad was not a messenger of God. It is time that we end this insanity and face the truth. The terrorists take their moral support and the validation for their actions from you. Your very adherence to their cult of death is a nod of approval for their crimes against humanity. We also urge the non-Muslims to stop being politically correct lest they hurt the sensitivities of the Muslims. To Hell with their sensitivities! Let us save their lives, and the lives of millions of innocent people. Millions, if not billions of lives will be lost if we do nothing. Time is running out! "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing." Do something! Send this message to everyone in your address book and ask them to do the same. Defeat Islam and stop terrorism. This is your world, save it. The ex-Muslim Movement http://www.faithfreedom.org To Go To Top

TEXT OF THE SHARON RETREAT PLAN Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, October 25, 2004.

THE ISRAELI KNESSET VOTES ON THIS PLAN! We are informed that few members of Knesset (with some exceptions) ever bothered to read Sharon's Retreat Plan or to ask questions about it. We also understand that the settlers of Gaza/Gush Katif and the rest of YESHA (Yehuda, Shomron and Gaza) didn't bother to read the Plan (with some exceptions) and have never grasped Sharon's true intentions. Therefore, few were prepared for Sharon's coup d'etat. They have ignored Sharon's change of loyalties and only wanted to remember his old statements, supporting the expansion of settlements. In brief, they chose to delude themselves and are now in a panic. Even those of Gush Katif have succumbed to using a foolish slogan from a PR agency to the effect that: "All of Israel should love them". That won't capture their love. If the people of Israel and the members of Knesset really understood what Sharon's catastrophic "Plan" has created for all of Israel, they might resist it more effectively. This is the text of the Sharon Retreat Plan, with commentary by David Bedein of Israel Behind the News in caps in parens. Sharon's Disengagement Plan - General Outline (18/04/2004) 1. General Israel is committed to the peace process and aspires to reach an agreed resolution of the conflict on the basis of the principle of two states for two peoples, the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people, as part of the implementation of President Bush's vision. Israel is concerned to advance and improve the current situation. Israel has come to the conclusion that there is currently no reliable Palestinian partner with which it can make progress in a bilateral peace process. (IN OTHER WORDS, THE PLO REMAINS AT WAR WITH ISRAEL. IF THAT IS THE CONCLUSION FROM THE OUTSET, EVERYTHING SHOULD FOLLOW FROM THAT STATEMENT) Accordingly, it has developed a plan of unilateral disengagement, 9IN OTHER WORDS, RETREAT IN THE FACE OF ADVERSITY) based on the following considerations: i. The stalemate dictated by the current situation is harmful. In order to break out of this stalemate, Israel is required to initiate moves not dependent on Palestinian cooperation. (NOT DEPENDENT? THIS ENTIRE DOCUMENT DEMONSTRATES DEPENDENCY) ii. The plan will lead to a better security situation, at least in the long term. (PROPHECY WAS NULLIFIED AFTER THE SECOND TEMPLE'S DESTRUCTION) iii. The assumption that, in any future permanent status arrangement, there will be no Israeli towns and villages in the Gaza Strip. ("NO JEWS" IS AN ACCOMPLISHMENT?) On the other hand, it is clear that in the West Bank, there are areas which will be part of the State of Israel, including cities, towns and villages, security areas and installations, and other places of special interest to Israel. (WHO DEFINES THESE PLACES OF SPECIAL INTEREST?) iv. The relocation from the Gaza Strip and from Northern Samaria (as delineated on Map) will reduce friction with the Palestinian population, and carries with it the potential for improvement in the Palestinian economy and living conditions. (WHY ARE THE 21 KATIF FARMING COMMUNITIES THE CAUSE OF FRICTION? (WHY ARE FOUR ISOLATED COMMUNITIES IN SAMARIA THE SOURCE OF FRICTION?) v. The hope is that the Palestinians will take advantage of the opportunity created by the disengagement in order to break out of the cycle of violence and to reengage in a process of dialogue. (AND IF THEY DO NOT? DIDN'T THIS TEXT SAY FROM THE OUTSET THAT THERE IS NO COOPERATION WITH THE PLO?) vi. The process of disengagement will serve to dispel claims regarding Israel's responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. (WHY? THE RAISON D'ETRE OF THE UNRWA CAMPS IS THAT ISRAEL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REFUGEES FROM 1948 WHO CLAIM LAND IN ISRAEL) vii. The process of disengagement is without prejudice to the Israeli-Palestinian agreements. Relevant arrangements shall continue to apply. (WHAT AGREEMENTS? NONE WERE KEPT BY THE PLO) When (WHY NOT IF? PROPHECY AGAIN?) there is evidence from the Palestinian side of its willingness, capability and implementation in practice of the fight against terrorism and the institution of reform as required by the Road Map, it will be possible to return to the track of negotiation and dialogue. (EVIDENCE? WHEN THE PLO CONTINUES TO RULE?) 2. Main elements i. Gaza Strip: 1) Israel will evacuate the Gaza Strip, including all existing Israeli towns and villages, and will redeploy outside the Strip. (WHY?) This will not include military deployment in the area of the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt ("the Philadelphi Route") as detailed below. 2) Upon completion of this process, there shall no longer be any permanent presence of Israeli security forces or Israeli civilians in the areas of Gaza Strip territory which have been evacuated. (IN OTHER WORDS, NO JEWS FOR THE SAKE OF NO JEWS) 3) As a result, there will be no basis for claiming that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory. (SINCE WHEN DID ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE EXTREME ISRAELI LEFT CLAIM THAT JEWS WERE OCCUPIERS, AND WITH NO STATUS WHATSOVER. THIS ASSUMES THE PLO DEFINITION ...) ii. West Bank: 1) Israel will evacuate an Area in the Northern Samaria Area (see Map), including 4 villages and all military installations, and will redeploy outside the vacated area. (IN OTHER WORDS, HAND OVER VILLAGES AND MILITARY INSTALLATIONS TO THE PLO) 2) Upon completion of this process, there shall no longer be any permanent presence of Israeli security forces or Israeli civilians in the Northern Samaria Area. (TO BE REPLACED BY PLO MISSILES?) 3) The move will enable territorial contiguity for Palestinians in the Northern Samaria Area. (JUST GREAT - THEY CAN THEN COORDINATE MILITARY ACTIVITIES EVEN BETTER) 4) Israel will improve the transportation infrastructure in the West Bank in order to facilitate the contiguity of Palestinian transportation. (TO ENABLE THE PLO TO BE MORE MOBILE IN THEIR ABILITY IN THEIR WAR WITH ISRAEL) 5) The process will facilitate Palestinian economic and commercial activity in the West Bank. (NARCOTICS,ARMS, CARS, OTHER STOLEN GOODS) 6) The Security fence: Israel will continue to build the security fence, in accordance with the relevant decisions of the government. The route will take into account humanitarian considerations. (DOES 'HUMANITARIAN' MEAN THAT THE PLO WILL HAVE A VETO?) 3. Security situation following the disengagement i. The Gaza Strip: 1) Israel will guard and monitor the external land perimeter of the Gaza Strip, will continue to maintain exclusive authority in Gaza air space, and will continue to exercise security activity in the sea off the coast of the Gaza Strip. (WHAT ABOUT THE RIGHT TO PURSUE PLO TERRORISTS? 2) The Gaza Strip shall be demilitarized and shall be devoid of weaponry, the presence of which does not accord with the Israeli-Palestinian agreements. (WHO IS GOING TO DISARM THE PLO?) 3) Israel reserves its inherent right of self defense, both preventive and reactive, including where necessary the use of force, in respect of threats emanating from the Gaza Strip. (HARDLY A LICENSE FOR ISRAEL TO DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO DEFEAT AN ENEMY AT WAR WITH ISRAEL) ii. The West Bank: 1) Upon completion of the evacuation of the Northern Samaria Area, no permanent Israeli military presence will remain in this area. (WHILE THE PLO ARMED FORCES WILL REPLACE THEM?) 2) Israel reserves its inherent right of self defense, both preventive and reactive, including where necessary the use of force, in respect of threats emanating from the Northern Samaria Area. (WITH F-16'S?) 3) In other areas of the West Bank, current security activity will continue. However, as circumstances permit, Israel will consider reducing such activity in Palestinian cities. (WAIT A SECOND. ISRAEL MOVES OUT ITS FORCES AND WILL AT THE SAME TIME MAINTAIN ITS CURRENT SECURITY ACTIVITY? EXCUSE ME. HAVE WE MISSED SOMETHING HERE?) 4) Israel will work to reduce the number of internal checkpoints throughout the West Bank. (WHY? SO AS TO FACILITATE THE MORE EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF ARMS, AMMUNITION AND KILLERS?) 4. Military Installations and Infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria In general, these will be dismantled and removed, with the exception of those which Israel decides to leave and transfer to another party. (TO ANOTHER PARTY? LIKE WHO? THE PLO?) 5. Security assistance to the Palestinians Israel agrees that by coordination with it, advice, assistance and training will be provided to the Palestinian security forces for the implementation of their obligations to combat terrorism and maintain public order, by American, British, Egyptian, Jordanian or other experts, as agreed with Israel. (PREVIOUS SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO THE PLO WAS ABUSED TO TRAIN THE PLO TO MURDER JEWS) No foreign security presence may enter the Gaza Strip or the West Bank without being coordinated with and approved by Israel. (WAIT A SECOND!! THE PLO WAS TRAINED TO COMBAT TERROR IN 1993 AND 1994 AND USED THAT CAPABILITY AGAINST ISRAEL. WHY WILL THAT NOT CHANGE?) 6. The border area between the Gaza Strip and Egypt (Philadelphi Route) Initially, Israel will continue to maintain a military presence along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt (Philadelphi route). (WHY- "INITIALLY"? IS THE SITUATION EXPECTED TO CHANGE? This presence is an essential security requirement. At certain locations security considerations may require some widening of the area in which the military activity is conducted. (OF COURSE. AND WHO WOULD ALLOW THAT?) Subsequently, the evacuation of this area will be considered. (SUBSEQUENT TO WHAT? THE PLO BECOMING A LADIES AUXILIARY ASSOCIATION?) Evacuation of the area will be dependent, inter alia, on the security situation and the extent of cooperation with Egypt in establishing a reliable alternative arrangement. (RELIABLE? YOU MUST BE KIDDING?) If and when conditions permit the evacuation of this area, Israel will be willing to consider the possibility of the establishment of a seaport and airport in the Gaza Strip, in accordance with arrangements to be agreed with Israel. (ALLOWING A SEAPORT AND AIRPORT TO AN ENTITY AT WAR WITH THE STATE OF ISRAEL? DIDN'T ISRAEL TRY THAT ALREADY?) 7. Israeli towns and villages Israel will strive to leave the immovable property relating to Israeli towns and villages intact. (AND GIVE THE SOVEREIGN PRIVATE PROPERTY TO A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION?) The transfer of Israeli economic activity to Palestinians carries with it the potential for a significant improvement in the Palestinian economy. (ARE YOU KIDDING? THE LEADERSHIP OF THE PLO WOULD TAKE THE PROPERTY FOR THEMSELVES.) Israel proposes that an international body be established (along the lines of the AHLC), with the agreement of the United States and Israel, which shall take possession from Israel of property which remains, and which will estimate the value of all such assets. (TO CONFISCATE THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF JEWS!) Israel reserves the right to request that the economic value of the assets left in the evacuated areas be taken into consideration. (TO REQUEST? ISN'T THAT NICE?WITH NO OBLIGATIONS OF ANYONE TO ADHERE TO THAT REQUEST) 8. Civil Infrastructure and Arrangements Infrastructure relating to water, electricity, sewage and telecommunications serving the Palestinians will remain in place. (IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO "DISENGAGEMENT". ISRAEL MAINTAINS CONTROL OVER GAZA.) Israel will strive to leave in place the infrastructure relating to water, electricity and sewage currently serving the Israeli towns and villages. In general, Israel will enable the continued supply of electricity, water, gas and petrol to the Palestinians, in accordance with current arrangements. Other existing arrangements, such as those relating to water and the electro-magnetic sphere shall remain in force. 9. Activity of International Organizations Israel recognizes the great importance of the continued activity of international humanitarian organizations assisting the Palestinian population. (EVEN THOUGH STAFFERS OF THESE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS ARE DOMINATED BY THE PLO AND HAMAS) Israel will coordinate with these organizations arrangements to facilitate this activity. (HOW NICE) 10. Economic arrangements In general, the economic arrangements currently in operation between Israel and the Palestinians shall, in the meantime, remain in force. AGAIN, NO "DISENGAGEMENT". These arrangements include, inter alia: i. the entry of workers into Israel in accordance with the existing criteria. ii. the entry and exit of goods between the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Israel and abroad. iii. the monetary regime. iv. tax and customs envelope arrangements. v. postal and telecommunications arrangements. In the longer term, and in line with Israel's interest in encouraging greater Palestinian economic independence, Israel expects to reduce the number of Palestinian workers entering Israel. Israel supports the development of sources of employment in the Gaza Strip and in Palestinian areas of the West Bank. 11. Erez Industrial Zone The Erez industrial zone, situated in the Gaza Strip, employs some 4,000 Palestinian workers. The continued operation of the zone is primarily a clear Palestinian interest. Israel will consider the continued operation of the zone on the current basis, on two conditions: i. The existence of appropriate security arrangements. (WHO DEFINES "APPROPRIATE ARRANGEMENTS"?) ii. The express recognition of the international community that the continued operation of the zone on the current basis shall not be considered continued Israel control of the area. Alternatively, the industrial zone shall be transferred to the responsibility of an agreed Palestinian or international entity. (OH. ANOTHER TERRORIST ENCLAVE?) Israel will seek to examine, together with Egypt, the possibility of establishing a joint industrial area in the area between the Gaza Strip, Egypt and Israel. (WHILE EGYPT FACILITATES MORE WEAPONS TUNNELS. ?) 12. International passages i. The international passage between the Gaza Strip and Egypt 1) The existing arrangements shall continue. (WITH WEAPONS TUNNELS?) 2) Israel is interested in moving the passage to the "three borders" area, approximately two kilometers south of its current location. This would need to be effected in coordination with Egypt. This move would enable the hours of operation of the passage to be extended. b. The international passages between the West Bank and Jordan: The existing arrangements shall continue. 13. Erez Crossing Point The Israeli part of Erez crossing point will be moved to a location within Israel in a time frame to be determined separately. 14. Timetable The process of evacuation is planned to be completed by the end of 2005. The stages of evacuation and the detailed timetable will be notified to the United States. 15. Conclusion Israel looks to the international community for widespread support for the disengagement plan. (WHY NOT? THE WORLD LOVES TO SEE ISRAEL RETREAT) AREAS This support is essential in order to bring the Palestinians to implement in practice their obligations to combat terrorism and effect reforms, thus enabling the parties to return to the path of negotiation. (AND IF THEY DO NOT? WHAT SANCTIONS? IS THIS NOT WORSE THAN THE OSLO ACCORDS) U.S. obligations as part of the disengagement plan 1. On April 14, 2004, the United States, through a presidential letter, made the following commitments: - Preserving the Government's fundamental principle, according to which no political process with the Palestinians will take place before the dismantling of terror organizations, (WHAT IS A TERROR ORGANIZATION, ACCORDING THE THE US? SINCE THE US ONLY DEFINES HAMAS AND ISLAMIC JIHAD AS TERRORISTS, EVERYONE ELSE WILL NOT BE TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS), as requested by the roadmap. - American commitment that no political pressure will be exerted on Israel to adopt any political plan, other than the roadmap, (THE ROADMAP IS BAD ENOUGH) and that there will be no political negotiations with the Palestinians as long as they do not fulfill their commitments under the roadmap (full cessation of terror, violence and incitement; dismantling terror organizations; leadership change and carrying out comprehensive reforms in the Palestinian Authority (NO MENTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM AND THE MEDIA - THE PRIME PROMOTERS OF INCITEMENT). - Unequivocal American recognition of Israel's right to secure and recognized borders, including defensible borders. - American recognition of Israel's right to defend itself, by itself, anywhere, and preserve its deterrence power against any threat. - American recognition in Israel's right to defend itself against terror activities and terror organizations wherever they may be, including in areas from which Israel has withdrawn. (BUSH AND POWELL DENY THIS) - Unequivocal American stand regarding the refugees, according to which there will be no return of refugees to Israel. (THEN WHY IS THE US FINANCING PA SCHOOLS AND UNRWA WHICH ENCOURAGE THE RIGHT OF RETURN?) - American stand that there will be no return to the 1967 borders, for two primary considerations: major Israeli population centers and the implementation of the term defensible borders. (WHAT DOES "MAJOR"MEAN?) - American stand, according to which the major Israeli population centers will be part of Israel, in any event. AGAIN, (WHAT IS "MAJOR") All the remaining areas in Judea & Samaria will be open for negotiation. (IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN MAINTAIN A CITY IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA AND NOT THE ROADS) - The United States sets clear conditions for the establishment of a future Palestinian state and declares that the Palestinian state will not be created as long as the terror organizations have not been dismantled, as long as the leadership has not been replaced and no comprehensive reforms have been completed in the Palestinian Authority.(AND WHO DEFINES TERROR ORGANIZATIONS AND WHO DECIDES WHAT IS A REFORM?) 2. President Bush's letter to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's letter to President Bush constitute part of the overall disengagement plan, and these understandings with the United States will only be valid if the disengagement plan is approved by Israel. The exchange of letters between President Bush and the Prime Minister, as well as the letter by the Chief of the Prime Minister's Bureau to the U.S. National Security Adviser, are attached to this plan as an integral part of it. 3. According to the roadmap adopted by the Government of Israel, Israel has undertaken a number of commitments regarding the dismantling of unauthorized (UNAUTHORIZED BY WHOM? US AMBASSADOR DAN KURTZER?) outposts, limitations on settlement growth (REQUIRED BIRTH CONTROL?), etc. In the framework of the negotiations with the Americans, all of Israel's past commitments on these issues vis-??-vis the American administration, have been included in the letter by the Chief of the Prime Minister's Bureau to the U.S. National Security Adviser. (THAT SAME 'CHIEF' WHO UNTIL RECENTLY WAS THE LAWYER FOR THE PLO FINANCIAL INTERESTS AND THE PLO CASINOS) CONCLUSION: A Program of Ethnic Cleansing and Recklessness Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). To Go To Top

THE RED CROSS AND ANTI-SEMITISM Posted by Arlene Peck, October 25, 2004.

Lord knows how my three children got such rare blood. All three of them have AB Negative. It certainly didn't come from my genes. I should have known then, it wasn't a good match. Nevertheless, since they have the rarest form of blood known to man, the blood drives and Red Cross love them. All of them regularly donate their blood. My daughter, Dana however is one of their 'special one's'. Every three or four weeks, she makes the trip over to the Red Cross building and sits for a couple of hours with needles in her arms while they extract plasma. I don't know how many gallons she's donated but they like her so much they have her picture hung up in the room as a 'big giver." She likes to go there she tells me because each time she goes, she helps in the saving of someone's life. Also, it makes her feel good. What a kid! What bothers me however, and has for a long time, is the reputation of the Red Cross. In fact, a while ago, I wrote a column about my perceived notions of their biased against the Jews and Israel. I remember being in Prague and visiting the concentration camps. They were horrible beyond belief but, somehow, they were able to deceive the officials of the Red Cross who came to check it out. As a result, when they wrote their report they almost made the place sound like a summer camp and people did not become alarmed until it was too late. It was impossible not to see what was going on there, yet, the Red Cross overlooked it. It has bothered me for a long time how there has to be a separate organization for Israel, called Mogen David Adom as they refuse to have a symbol of the Jewish Star. Yet, somehow it's OK to let the Arabs use the crescent and the lion as their symbol. There are more reasons, but, you get the idea. I wondered how it got to be an anti-Semitic organization and never could find an answer. That is, until one of our readers was gracious enough to write to me and give some explanation of the background of this organization. He tells me the rest can be found in the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Mr. Chernoff writes, "As a young man, scion of a wealthy Swiss Banking family happened to observe the aftermath of a battle in Italy, (Tinorretto I think) wherein wounded and dying were left unattained on the battlefield. So moved by the misery and horror that he returned to Switzerland and became the founder of the Red Cross. Thus reversals of colors of the Swiss flag to the emblem of the Red Cross." The part I found so interesting was that he was a close friend of Theodore Herzl and concurred with Zionist aspirations, sensitive to the plight of the Jews. He was also the co-founder of the YMCA. So, this humanitarian, who's name was Dunant, spent his years and the family fortune in the pursuit of philanthropic works. Eventually, he lost his money and lived in poverty. His friends sustained him and his financial condition was reinstated by winning the Nobel Prize in 1904. Shortly after, Mr. Dunant died. What Mr. Chernoff and I both question is how ironic it is that the founding of the Red Cross should now be the International Red Cross which is both anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. He was a pro-Zionist, a friend of the Jews, a great humanitarian. I know that they do good work but, for the same reasons I can't ever buy a Mercedes, I don't feel comfortable singing their praises. It bothers me that they can feel the way they do, as a governing body, yet covet my daughters blood. I wonder how much of other Jewish blood has been lost by their previous regulations and reports. I wonder, am I wrong when I tell her, "Why don't you go over to Cedars Siani Hospital. They're Jewish." Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com To Go To Top

NEW SAUDI CITIZENSHIP LAW EXCLUDES PALESTINIANS Posted by Michael Freund, October 25, 2004.

This appeared in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNN.com). Saudi Arabia passed new regulations on citizenship this week that will benefit hundreds of thousands of foreigners living in the desert kingdom, with one exception: the "Palestinians." Saudi Arabia's Council of Ministers passed a series of new regulations on citizenship this week that will likely benefit hundreds of thousands of foreigners living in the desert kingdom, with one glaring exception: the "Palestinians." The new guidelines, which serve to amend Saudi Arabia's previous law on naturalization, entitle expatriates of all nationalities who have resided in the kingdom for ten years to apply for citizenship, with priority being given to holders of degrees in various scientific fields. The rules are likely to help as many as one million foreigners living in Saudi Arabia obtain citizenship, said Nasser ibn Hamad al-Hanaya, undersecretary for civil status in the Saudi Interior Ministry. Another Saudi official, Shubaily ibn Majdoue Al-Qarni, who served as chairman of the security committee which supervised the amendment of the law, said that all foreign nationals working in the country would now be eligible to obtain Saudi citizenship. But citing a report in the Al-Watan newspaper, the English-language Saudi daily Arab News notes that one group will in fact be excluded by the new regulations: the estimated 500,000 Arabs from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza living in the kingdom. This select sector of Arabs will not be allowed to benefit from the new law, says the paper, because of Arab League instructions barring the Arab states from granting them citizenship in order "to avoid dissolution of their identity and protect their right to return to their homeland." The amended law is slated to go into effect in four months. Michael Freund is International Affairs Correspondent. To Go To Top

THE LEGACY OF ELON MOREH Posted by David Wilder, October 25, 2004.

Shalom. Next week Hebron will celebrate Shabbat Chaye Sarah - when we read in the Torah about Abraham's purchase of Ma'arat HaMachpela, some three thousand seven hundred years ago. Tens of thousands of Jews from around the world will arrive in Hebron for this festive event. However, Hebron is not the only Yesha city to rejoice. This past weekend my family visited, with thousands of others, the Elon Moreh community in the Shomron. This past Shabbat we read in the Torah how Abraham, when he arrived in Eretz Yisrael, stopped first in Elon Moreh, before continuing south to Beit El, and later, Hebron. Elon Moreh, situated just south of the holy city of Shechem, has a rich biblical history. But its legacy does not end in the Bible. Yehuda, Shomron and Gaza were liberated during the June, 1967 Six-Day War. A few months later the Israeli government officially okayed the renewal of a Jewish community in Gush Etzion, about 15 kilometers south of Jerusalem. Gush Etzion had fallen to the Jordanians on May 14, 1948, the day the State of Israel was declared. In the spring of 1968 a group of families arrived at hotel in Hebron to celebrate the Passover holiday. That, in turn, led to the founding of Kiryat Arba in the fall of 1971. One of the early settlers was a young man named Benny Katzover. He studied at the new Kiryat Arba yeshiva, and took an active role rebuilding the land. This past Shabbat I heard Benny Katzover, now a resident of Elon Moreh, speak about those formative years. He stressed that following the establishment of Kiryat Arba, he waited for others to take the initiative, to begin resettling and rebuilding Samaria, the Shomron. Years went by and nothing happened. During the winter of 1974, under the spiritual leadership of Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, a group of people, including Rabbi Moshe Levinger, Rabbi Haim Druckman, Hanan Porat, Katzover, and others, founded Gush Emunim (the Block of the Faithful). One of their first challenges was resettlement of the Shomron. Benny Katzover, seeing that no one had taken up the gauntlet, began to work. Plans were made, people were drafted, and then, it was time to move. It took eight attempts over a period of months, until finally, in the winter of 1975, over 2,000 Jews arrived at Sabastia, in the Shomron, and broke the government's resistance to a Jewish presence in the heartland of Israel. Benny Katzover later became mayor of the Shomron region, and for many years was a leader in initiating, building and developing the Shomron. One of Benny's children, Menora married Ariel Hazani, son of another Yesha pioneer, the late Yehuda Hazani. Hazani, a Torah scholar and student of Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, was one of those rare individuals who knew how to implement spiritual ideas in a worldly manner. He was known for his legendary organizational ability, bringing thousands and thousands of people to rallies, demonstrations, and other such events. Hazani, a true lover of Eretz Yisrael, was not bound by the borders of cities and neighborhoods, loved to travel the country and was an avid mountain climber. Unfortunately, during one these trips, Yehuda Hazani, while overlooking Eretz Yisrael from the peaks, slipped, fell and was killed. His death was a great loss, not only to his family and friends, but also to the continued movement to rebuild Eretz Yisrael. This past Shabbat at Elon Moreh, I was one of the lucky ones who was able to experience a really special event. This past Shabbat we read in the weekly Torah portion how G-d commanded Abraham to walk, to leave his home, his country, and his family, 'to the land which I will show you.' This land is, of course, Eretz Yisrael. As I mentioned, Abraham's first stop in the Land was Elon Moreh, today a beautiful, thriving community with hundreds of families. We also read about G-d's commandment to Abraham to circumcise himself, an eternal covenant between himself, his offspring and the Almighty. A week ago Saturday, Benny Katzover's daughter, Menorah Hazani, gave birth to their first son. So the brit milah, the baby's circumcision, was to be performed eight days later, in other words, this past Shabbat. At the conclusion of Shabbat morning prayers, after reading in the Torah about Elon Moreh, after hearing of Abraham's willingness to perform G-d's commandment to circumcise himself when he was ninety-nine years old, Ariel and Menora Hazani's son was brought into the covenant of Avraham Avinu there, at Elon Moreh, and was named for his illustrious grandfather, Yehuda Hazani. It was quite an emotional event. And I must not neglect to mention that Ariel and Menora live, not in Elon Moreh, but at the community of Homesh, in the northern Shomron, one of the four Shomron communities Sharon has threatened to destroy, together with Gush Katif. People such as Benny Katzover, Yehuda Hazani, and many others, a number of whom participated in the special Elon Moreh Shabbat, were the initiators, founders, the builders. They laid the cornerstone for future generations and paved the path, thereby allowing their offspring to follow in their footsteps. However, as every parent knows, the future is always a question mark. A parent can lay out the roadmap, but whether or not the children will follow the marked route is up them, it's their choice. Ariel and Menora Hazani are perfect examples of traveling a straight line, following the map in the right direction. From Hebron and Kiryat Arba, to Sebastia and Elon Moreh, following in the footsteps of their father's and their father's fathers - all the way back to our Forefathers. When visitors ask me to explain our faith, to explain our optimism, I can readily point to young couples like the Hazanis, who are carrying the torch, sparks of light amongst many shadows. Such sparks are so important and necessary, especially today, with all that is happening. This is the trail followed by Abraham, still traveled by his offspring, almost four thousand years later. From Elon Moreh to Hebron, from Hebron to Elon Moreh - this is the heritage of our people; this is the eternity of our Land; this is the legacy of Elon Moreh. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com To Go To Top

THE JEWS GET IT "COMING AND GOING" UNIMAGINATIVE POLITICIANS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 25, 2004.

ASK THIS ABOUT THE SHARON ABANDONMENT PLAN PM Sharon and his supporters have come up with one false "reason" for the plan after another. By now it is obvious that the only reason for the plan must be too shameful to admit. Someone is pulling Sharon's strings. Ask yourself who that may be. Although there is no logic to the plan, just unrefuted criticism of it, some polls claim popular support for it. Either the polls or the people are being manipulated. THE JEWS "GET IT COMING & GOING" After WWII, Western antisemites found the atmosphere too frosty, so they went into hibernation. A generation later, they have emerged from their dens, encouraged by the moral meltdown. They are hungry for prey, and the Arabs provide them with excuses for damning Israel and its Jews. Some people pretend that the moral frost still protects the Jews. For example, they assert resentfully that anyone may berate their ethnic group, unlike the Jews, whom one may not berate without being slapped down. The truth is, political correctness makes it difficult to berate any ethnic group, regardless of cause, except the Jews! Thus it is that antisemites complain that one may not raise legitimate criticism of Israel without being accused of antisemitism. Those antisemites are not frank about their phobia. Jews are both picked on and said to be immune to being picked on. They get it coming and going. Is criticism of an ethnic group ever reasonable? Yes. Ethnic societies have risen and fallen. All nationals have the potential for greatness. At times, a group's culture is evil, like the Arabs and WWII Germans, in general. Is it fair to generalize like that? A popular belief is that one may not generalize. But of course one may generalize! Generalization is a basis for logic, science, and progress. What I stated about the Germans was not true of every last individual, but it was true, in general, by the time the Nazis had purged the democrats in their country. About the Arabs, whose society is more collective, the generalization holds firmer. UNIMAGINATIVE How we human beings take things for granted! Politicians cocoon themselves in circles of advisors and favorite media, too satisfied with their positions. Considering themselves possessors of Truth, they seek only to put their policies over and be placed in perpetual power. Israeli leaders are particularly pig-headed about what they think they know. As they stumble into foreseeable blunders, former generals, such as Rabin and Sharon, blurt out, "Nobody can teach me anything about security!" The ex-generals imagine themselves experts on all aspects of the Arab-Israel conflict, and that there is no wisdom outside their coterie of fools. The stubbornness extends among these leaders to the post-failure period. Thousands of their countrymen become victims of their failure, but they hold on to their wrongful policies. They know no humility, when they should be guilt-ridden. Their people vote them out of office, but they stand recalcitrant. It isn't too late for them to learn, but all they want to do is return to office and repeat their mistakes. People's lives, national security, public resources, and the Jewish patrimony mean nothing to these politicians. They don't realize or don't care that their ignorance and arrogance are harmful. Their lack of values is bringing down the nation, and they want to bring down the Judaism that offers values that could save them. SEC. POWELL ADOPTS ARAB REASONING Sec. of State Powell advised the Arab world to end the P.A. war on Israel, because it was not working. He pointed out that it has not defeated Israel nor moved forward P.A. statehood. The implication is the same one that the Arab enemies of Israel make. They imply that if the Arabs had achieved some goals from it, then their murdering and wounding of thousands of innocent Jews would have been justified. An American Sec. of State should have condemned both the terrorist methods of the P.A. war and the Arab launching of the war after having agreed to a peaceful process of resolving conflict. Shame on Powell! (NY Sun, 10/18, letter). Let the US stand for decency, not expediency. The letter writer is right, but Sec. Powell would offer the patronizing excuse that he was talking in terms the Arabs would understand. That would mean they don't understand decency. Why not press them to be decent? More Arabs are amenable to criticism, these days. THE MURDERED AMERICANS IN GAZA You may recall that Arab terrorists murdered three US aid workers in Gaza last year. The P.A. immediately and periodically asserts that it knows who committed the murders. However, the P.A. neither prosecutes them nor investigates further. The State Dept. complains that the P.A. lacks the will to pursue justice (IMRA, 10/16). Does the State Dept. think that the P.A. involves itself in the pursuit of justice? It was Arafat, head of the P.A., who ordered the murder of two US diplomats, years ago. The P.A. exists for terrorism and graft. Hence it obstructs justice. Why not? The State Dept. falsely advises the President to certify that the P.A. is in conformity with Oslo, and he keeps sending it US funds. OSLO: IDEOLOGICAL OR CULTISH? If the land-for-peace movement, embodied in Oslo, were just a failed ideology, it would have been halted before the disastrous results spread. It wasn't. If Oslo were meant to be an instrument of peace, it would have been tried out in stages. When a stage failed, the experiment would be ended. Stages failed, but Oslo continued. A stage would be considered successful if the PLO/P.A. met its commitments under that stage, and cooperated fully. That would be peacemaking. If designed rationally, the planners would have left Arafat the terrorist leader in Tunis, turned over a small area, and required that the police be unarmed. If the P.A. police needed help taming Hamas, they would have been able to call on Israeli police. A further stage would not be started, if the Arabs did not acknowledge repeatedly to its own people, Israel's right to exist. P.A. textbooks would have to promote co-existence. They don't. The next stage would not be started until the Hamas and Fatah terrorists were extradited to Israel, and the Arab towns in the territories were tranquil. No further territory would be turned over if Arabs threw rocks at Israeli cars and did not preach non-violence. The P.A. preaches violence non-stop. First the Arabs threw rocks, now they shoot guns. If the Arabs attacked Jewish communities in Yesha, a mature Left would conclude that the Arabs do not intend peace and Israel would retake control over autonomous areas. Although the Arabs preach conquest and make war, the Left does not reevaluate its (neurotic) assumptions. Part of the problem is the political culture in Israel. Israeli politicians don't seem to have the educated person's understanding that one doesn't know everything, that propositions require testing, and that they should weigh what critics have to say. (PM Sharon's reply to expert criticism was, "Shut up." I do not bow down to experts, but I would have to be able to rebut them, before dismissing their criticism.) Oso was not undertaken rationally. Being fanatical about land-for-peace, Peres and his clique trusted the (demonstrably untrustworthy) Arabs absolutely. They promised but imposed no tests. They plunged right into a baptism of fire. That is the way of a religious cult. Arafat was given full respect. His thousands of thugs were imported at once (and imposed upon the local Arabs). Israel gave them rifles. Israel made concessions despite Arab lack of compliance. The Arabs have not complied with any major requirement of Oslo. Instead, the Arabs still demand full Israeli withdrawal in return for the same promises made in return for earlier concession, promises unfulfilled for 12 years, now. Persevering in his cultish faith, Peres now asserts that the Arabs need not comply. If it is irrelevant to the Left whether Oslo is working, then the Left is advocating Oslo as if it were sacred dogma. Oslo has taken a heavy toll on Israeli society. The: (1) Left is filled with anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred; (2) Left is trying to hamstring the Army; (3) Number of widows, orphans, and cripples is growing; (4) Israelis often are afraid to leave their houses or go to certain parts of their own country; (5) P.A. is a giant terrorist base, arms manufacturing center, and launcher of rockets; (6) EU denounces Israelis as war criminals and endorses Arab genocide against them; and (7) Peres is likely to regain power (Prof. Steven Plaut, 10/16, e-mail). Case proved, but there is more to it. Other influences are Israeli leaders eager to please the gentiles, and submit to blackmail and bribery. Israelis are poor at long-range planning. Once the leaders committed themselves, they were reluctant to acknowledge failure, even though it was the Arabs' fault. The people were war weary and not well informed by the leftist-biased media. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

FOR SHARON, ONE HURDLE OVERCOME, HIGHER ONES AHEAD Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, October 25, 2004.

What a strange and demented "security establishment" we have. In the midst of planning and preparing for the extermination of Jewish life in Gaza they are worried that if something goes wrong later with the Arabs they might just punish the wrong Arab. "If that happens {attacks against Israel}," an Israeli security official asks, "what can Israel do? Who is there to punish?" This is from the DEBKAfile (http://www2.debka.com/article.php?aid=923) The bill grading compensation rates for evacuated Jewish settlers scraped past its first hurdle at the cabinet meeting Sunday, October 24, by a vote of 13 ministers to 6. That was the prologue to Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan. But at least five of the ayes were halfhearted, cast by ministers fearful of burning their bridges into government by throwing in their lot with the Likud anti-evacuation rebels. The split in Likud is deepening as the pro-Sharon and anti-evacuation camps pull hard against each other in the 48 hours running up to the Knesset vote Tuesday, October 26, on the main body of the plan to remove 8,000 settlers from the Gaza Strip and eliminate four West Bank settlements. The prime minister is counting on 65-66 supporters in the 120-member house. A large portion will come from the left-of-center opposition that will plug the hole left by the 17+ rebels of his 40-member Likud and their right-of-center supporters. But even if a Knesset majority favors disengagement, the Likud rebels will fight on. They are preparing steps to topple the Sharon government complete with his disengagement scheme by defeating the 2005 national budget when it comes before parliament in the next week or two. The danger is real. Before the rebellion, the Sharon government rested on a parliamentary minority of 58, which the rebels threaten to shrink. The opposition Labor and Yahad are committed to supporting disengagement. But their safety net is not large enough to spread out under the budget. The 21-member Labor is divided on many of its clauses while Yahad (6) is flat opposed. On the right side of the spectrum, the call by the spiritual leader of ultra-religious Shas, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, to oppose disengagement as a danger to national security, is eroding support even outside the 11-member Shas party. After Sunday's cabinet vote, pro-settlement social welfare minister Zvulun Orlev of the National Religious Party buttonholed three likeminded Likud cabinet members - finance minister Binyamin Netanyahu, education minister Limor Livnat and foreign minister Silvan Shalom. He urged them to climb down off the fence and accept his formula which he said gave the government a chance to last full term until 2006. Their would promise their votes for the disengagement motion (minus the removal of settlements, which will be put to the vote separately) at the crucial Tuesday show of hands, in return for the prime minister's pledge of an immediate national referendum on the entire disengagement-evacuation package. Orlev may hope the Likud trio will put his suggestion before Sharon as an ultimatum on the lines of: if you don't accept a referendum we'll cast our votes against disengagement and wipe out your majority. Even if the Sharon government weathers the disengagement storm, it will continue to skate on extremely thin ice. The irreparably fissured Likud poses an invitation to opposition parties to wait at every corner for a chance to bring the ruling administration down. Sharon is further vexed by the circumstances under which he first came up with his plan to throw the Gaza Strip overboard sliding out from under him - mostly as a result of Yasser Arafat's machinations. If Arafat is able to exploit his health crisis and escape his three-year confinement in Ramallah to a supportive overseas haven, he will bequeath Israel a territory in shambles and a dysfunctional Palestinian Authority and security mechanism. The Palestinian leader has gone to great pains to transform the Gaza Strip into a furious hotbed for terrorists and warring gang leaders. Two unpublicized developments demonstrate the hopeless situation in the territory: 1. Communications have broken down completely among the chiefs of Palestinian security and intelligence services, Hamas, Jihad Islami and the Popular Resistance Committees. They are all in hiding in well protected havens or working underground - in fear of one another. Amin al Hindi, head of Palestinian General Intelligence, for instance, sleeps, eats and lives in his closely guarded office at intelligence headquarters for fear of assassins. Mussa Arafat, commander of Palestinian armed forces in the Gaza Strip and chief of military intelligence, never moves across the shortest distances without a 20-vehicle convoy and 100 armed bodyguards, who clear the streets of cars and pedestrians ahead of his passage. According to DEBKAfile's intelligence sources, the Strip's heads of services and gangland chiefs are preparing for all-out war against their rivals. A wholesale war of reciprocal liquidations is around the corner and could rage for months. Israel and its army would find themselves in an impossible situation. All the groups and gangs are deeply involved in the machinery of terror against Israel and will resort to attacks, including Qassam missile barrages, to score points in their feuds. "If that happens," an Israeli security official asks, "what can Israel do? Who is there to punish?" The preferred arena for this brand of warfare is densely populated urban areas. This battleground was forced on Israeli forces when they fought terrorists in the Zeitun district of Gaza last May, in the subsequent Rafah operation to seal smuggling tunnels and, more recently, in the 16-day offensive in Jebalya, Beit Lahiya and Beit Hanoun, to eradicate the Qassam missile launchers besetting Israeli towns. The terrorists lurked behind women and children. Much of the death and destruction suffered by the Palestinian population during these incursions was caused by the booby traps and mines which the terrorists packed closely in and around civilian homes and street corners. Yet the international outcry for the damage was directed against Israel - as it will be in the future, whether or not Israeli settlers and forces pull out. 2. In the last few weeks, Arafat's headquarters has been a hive of activity to duplicate the mayhem of the Gaza Strip in West Bank towns. The disintegration of governance, law and order, and military and intelligence frameworks, well advanced in Gaza has begun in West Bank too. DEBKAfile's Palestinian sources report that Arafat's objective is to create a roiling, formless mass in place of organized authority, so that not only Israel, but the United States, Arab governments - primarily Egypt, and the Europeans have no one to engage on the Palestinian side in any diplomatic process. The calculated breakdown of the Palestinian administration begat diplomatic impasse in two incidents in as many weeks. Israeli and Palestinian security officers came together informally last week at a secret overseas venue. Under the American aegis, they were supposed to explore ways of synchronizing the various stages of Israel's disengagement from the Gaza Strip, including the orderly handover of Jewish residential locations and public utilities after the settlers' evacuation. The Israelis presented an organized time table for the pullout; the Palestinian side had nothing coherent to contribute to make their side of the process go smoothly because, they admitted, no organized steps were possible in the current state of anarchy governing the Gaza Strip. The meeting broke up without results. While that rendezvous did at least take place, a second more high-profile encounter was called off altogether. Our sources reveal that a mini-conference organized by British premier Tony Blair was scheduled to open in London on the same day as Tuesday's Knesset debate on disengagement. Israel and Palestinian Authority representatives were due to have gone to work on the security arrangements for putting in place in the Gaza Strip after Israel's withdrawal. Late last week, the event was cancelled. British intelligence agents who had spent months in the territory informed 10 Downing Street there was no point; the Gazan Palestinians were incapable of putting together a proper delegation. Egypt, which has meanwhile backed out of any role in disengagement, also advised London to cancel. Officially, the conference was postponed until after the US presidential election on November 2 for better results. Yasser Arafat, who initiated the lawlessness and abuse of Palestinian security and intelligence in the service of terrorism against Israel, is the only one with enough authority to put a stop to the distortions and the violence. Even he will not find it easy to put the genie back in the bottle at this late date. However successfully Sharon pushes his plans past the formidable opposition at home, he will come up hard against this reality when the time comes to pull out of the Gaza Strip. Under international law, Israel may not disengage unilaterally from the Gaza Strip. Its responsibilities as occupying power remain in force for as long as there is no legitimate recipient willing to take over. By making sure that no one will touch the unruly territory with a barge pole, Arafat has cut Sharon's disengagement plan adrift. Whoever attempts to bring it to life will discover that the withdrawal of every last settler and military post is no panacea for Israel's security woes at the hands of Palestinian terrorism. Israel will find it has no choice but to send the army back into the Gaza Strip again to hold in the violence and anarchy and prevent it from spilling across the border. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. To Go To Top

THE BEILINIZATION OF THE LIKUD IS NOW COMPLETE Posted by Steven Plaut, October 25, 2004.

1. The Beilinization of the Likud is now complete. Yesterday the Likud government cabinet ministers voted in favor of the Mitzna capitulation plan for Gaza, in which Gaza will be turned over to the Islamofascist terrorists and its entire Jewish population expelled. The vote was 13 to 6. Netanyahu and his people voted in FAVOR of the plan. There will be no national referendum. The Likud showed its contempt for its own voters, who rejected the same plan last spring by 60% to 40%. Those expecting Netanyahu to be "rewarded" by Sharon, who promised to support Netanyahu's structural reforms of the economy as quid pro quo for Netanyahu endorsing Sharon's "plan", should not hold their breath. The plan will evict the entire Jewish population of the Gaza Strip. There will be no offsetting movement of Arabs. The plan does not, for example, specify that the entire population of Jenin will be moved to the Gaza Strip as part of the lowering of confrontation and tension in the Middle East. 2. There have been moves in recent years for victims of PLO atrocities to try to sue the Palestinian Authority in Israeli courts and place liens on PLO funds. But the PLO now has a new White Knight who is protecting it from all such moves to place attachments and liens against its wampum. The White Knight is the leftist Attorney General of Israel appointed by Sharon but a longtime associate of Beilin, Manny Mazuz (Haaretz Oct 25). Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

SHARON'S NEXT SET OF DIRTY TRICKS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, October 24, 2004.

Israel is sliding into a democratic dictatorship as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon orchestrates the Knesset (Israel's Parliament) vote on his "Disengagement Plan" scheduled for Tuesday, October 26th. Sharon has threatened anyone from his Likud Party with being fired if they disagree and vote against him. I guess they are lucky Sharon isn't following the typical methods of removing legislators, followed by their Middle East neighbors. Sharon's plan is to have the "Disengagement" document accepted without review and with no questions asked. Sharon's key trick will take a first vote out of three readings as a mandate to do pretty much as he pleases to the settlers. Sharon wants to give new life to centuries of "Wandering Jews". His threats and plans to attack the settlers are similar to those used against attacking Arab Muslim Terrorists. Using a vote in the Knesset in concert with the Left, he will declare he has a mandate to use the most cruel methods to make Gaza/Gush Katif Judenrein. But, to achieve this he must first force through a first vote with no substantive review or questions. The "Plan of Disengagement" seems to be almost the same plan Ehud Barak prepared for the negotiations with Arafat at Taba with the assistance of the pro-Arab State Department. With some modifications it is loaded with technicalities, making it extremely difficult to read and understand by the average Knesset member. (Deliberately so.) Normally such a document would go to a Committee of Experts in Law, Defense, Intelligence, etc. so they could analyze the risks vs. the benefits. Then, they would present their questions to the government for answers or rebuttal. Somet