COLIN POWELL'S 'JEWISH CONNECTIONS' Posted by Dafna Yee, April 30, 2004.

Yesterday, a member of the Crisis in Israel yahoo group posted an excerpt from Colin Powell's speech at the Israeli National Day Reception in Washington, April 27, 2004 ("Transcript: Powell Says Israeli Withdrawal Offers New Opportunity for Peace", http://www.usembassy.egnet.net.news4.html) My own association with Israel is a personal one as well as a professional one, and it goes back many years. As you heard, I was born in Manhattan and raised in the Bronx, and I grew up in a neighborhood which now would be called multicultural. (Laughter.) Multicultural is not a word we knew in the Bronx. (Laughter.) It was my neighborhood. (Laughter.) And people would ask me over the years, "Well, what was it like growing up as a minority?" I said, "Who knew? We all were minorities back in the Bronx." (Laughter.) I was privileged to grow up in a neighborhood with blacks, Puerto Ricans, people from all around the world, and a very large segment of the population was Jewish. Kaiserman's Bakery was on one corner, Teitelbaum's Drug Store was on another corner, the chicken market was just around the corner. Jay Sickser was the name of a man who became a very close friend of mine, a Russian Jew who came to this country to avoid disaster, and he made a home here and he gave me my first job as a young man at age 14 when I walked past his store one afternoon. And he said, "Mmm, Knabe, come here." And I worked with him for the next eight years, and over those years I picked up quite a bit of Yiddish. (Laughter.) And I have dined out on those few words over the last 50 years. (Laughter and applause.) My next door neighbor, the Klein family, they had the first television in our apartment building in New York, and I still remember the whole apartment building gathering in their home in the evenings to watch Milton Berle or Molly Goldberg, for those of you old enough to remember those shows. It was wonderful, but I got to know and appreciate Jewish life, Jewish culture. And I was about 11 years old in 1948, in May of that year, an impressionable young 11-year-old man, when the State of Israel was brought into existence. And I knew not only by listening to it on the radio, the news as it came over, and seeing it in the newspapers, I could see it in the eyes of my Jewish neighbors and my Jewish friends and my Jewish classmates what the State of Israel meant to them and to their families and what they thought it meant to the world. I, for one, am NOT favorably impressed upon reading the stories of Powell's "Jewish connections" (which are continually being thrown up at Powell's detractors). It is clear that he deliberately uses them as anecdotes to convince people that he is a friend of Israel while, at the same time, working determinedly with Israel's enemies to bring about Israel's destruction. Have Powell's Jewish supporters forgotten that Adolf Eichmann was selected to head the "Jewish Desk" precisely because he had spent considerable time in Palestine, spoke fluent Hebrew, and was considered an expert on Zionism? Here is an excerpt with the source to remind people of the dangers of being gulled by someone's "Jewish connections". "Eichmann was considered a kind of specialist. Before the war, he had visited Palestine and studied Jewish religion and the Hebrew language. His report to the leaders of the SS concerning his travels in the Holy Land convinced them that Eichmann was an expert on the subject of Zionism. Heydrich and Himmler chose Eichmann to become the head of the "Jewish desk" in Berlin, and gave him extraordinary power--nearly absolute power--over the fate of the Jewish people in Germany and in all the conquered lands. From his small office in Berlin, Adolf Eichmann pulled the strings and made the decisions that cost nearly six million Jewish lives." http://www.rossel.net/Holocaust08.htm Powell is no more a friend to Israel than Eichmann was a friend to the Jews! And telling stories about his Jewish friends, even if he tells them in Yiddish, won't change that fact! Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

THE REAL MIDEAST 'POISON' Posted by CAMERA, April 30, 2004.

In an outstanding April 30 column, "The Real Mideast 'Poison'," Charles Krauthammer included factual information and context about key issues, such as refugees, settlements, borders, Arab/Muslim anti-Semitism, and UN double standards, so often lacking in news articles. Anti-Semitism, once just a European disease, has gone global. The outgoing prime minister of Malaysia gets a standing ovation from leaders of 57 Islamic countries when he calls upon them to rise up against the Jewish conspiracy to control the world. The French ambassador to London tells dinner party guests that Israel is a "[expletive] little country . . . why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?" Ah, those people. Kofi Annan's personal representative in Iraq now singles out the policies of the world's one Jewish state -- and only democratic state in the Middle East -- as "the great poison in the region." The Egyptian government daily Al-Gumhuriya is less diplomatic, explaining in an article by its deputy editor that, "It is the Jews, with their hidden, filthy hands, who . . . are behind all troubles, disasters and catastrophes in the world," including, of course, the attacks of Sept. 11 and the Madrid bombings. It is in this kind of atmosphere that Israel offers unilateral withdrawal from Gaza -- uprooting 7,000 Jews, turning over to the Palestinians 21 settlements with their extensive infrastructure intact and creating the first independent Palestinian territory in history -- and is almost universally attacked. Moreover, and much overlooked, Israel will also evacuate four small West Bank settlements, which creates extensive Palestinian territorial contiguity throughout the northern half of the West Bank. The Arabs have variously denounced this as Israeli unilateralism, a departure from the "road map" and a ruse and a plot. The craven Europeans have duly followed suit. And when Tony Blair defied the mob by expressing support for the plan, he was rewarded with a letter from 52 Arabist ex-diplomats denouncing him. This Nuremberg atmosphere has reached the point where, if Israel were to announce today that it intends to live for at least another year, the U.N. Security Council would convene to discuss a resolution denouncing Israeli arrogance and unilateralism, and the United States would have to veto it. Only Britain would have the decency to abstain. It gets worse. The Bush administration has been attacked not just for supporting the Gaza plan but for bolstering Israel in this risky endeavor with two assurances: first, that the Palestinian refugees are to be repatriated not to Israel but to Palestine; and second, Israel should not be required to return to its 1967 borders. Enlightened editorial opinion has denounced this as Bush's upsetting 30 years of American diplomacy. Utter rubbish. Rejecting the so-called right of return is nothing more than opposing any final settlement that results in flooding Israel with hostile Palestinians and thus eradicating the only Jewish state on the planet. This is radical? This is something that Washington should refuse to say? What is new here? Four years ago, at Camp David, this was a central element of the Clinton plan. As was the notion of Israel's retaining a small percentage of West Bank land on which tens of thousands of Jews live. Moreover, the notion that Israel will not be forced to return to the 1967 armistice lines goes back 37 years -- to 1967 itself. The Johnson administration was instrumental in making sure that the governing document for a Middle East settlement -- Security Council Resolution 242 -- called for Israeli withdrawal to "secure and recognized boundaries," not "previous boundaries." And it called for Israel to withdraw "from territories occupied" in the 1967 war -- not "from the territories occupied," as had been demanded by the Arab states, and not from "all territories occupied" as had been demanded by the Soviet Union. Arthur Goldberg (U.S. ambassador to the United Nations), Lord Caradon (British ambassador to the U.N.) and Eugene Rostow (U.S. undersecretary of state) had negotiated this language with extreme care. They spent the subsequent decades explaining over and over again that the central U.N. resolution on the conflict did not require Israel to withdraw to the 1967 lines. Confronted with these facts, the critics say: Well, maybe this is right, but Bush should not have said this in the absence of negotiations. Good grief. This was offered to the Palestinians in negotiations -- in July 2000 at Camp David -- with even more generous Israeli concessions. Yasser Arafat said no and then launched a bloody terrorist war that has killed almost a thousand Jews and maimed thousands of others. The fact is that there are no negotiations because under the road map -- adopted even by the United Nations -- there can be no negotiations until the Palestinians end the terror and dismantle the terror apparatus. To argue that neither Israel nor the United States can act in the absence of negotiations is to give the Palestinians, by continuing the terror, a veto over any constructive actions by the United States or Israel -- whether disengaging from Gaza, uprooting settlements or establishing conditions for a final peace settlement that would ensure the survival of a Jewish state. This is an argument of singular absurdity. And a prescription for perpetual violence and perpetual stalemate. letters@charleskrauthammer.com CAMERA - Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America - monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. Their website address is www.camera.org To Go To Top

ISRAEL'S STRATEGIC FUTURE: THE FINAL REPORT OF PROJECT DANIEL Posted by Fishbein Associates, April 30, 2004.

Dear Friends and Colleagues: We would like to bring to your attention a newly published study entitled: Israel's Strategic Future: The Final Report of Project Daniel now available in the April on-line edition of NATIV, the journal of the Ariel Center for Policy Research (ACPR). The report can be viewed at the following URL: http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/. A print version of Israel's Strategic Future will soon be published by the Ariel Center as ACPR policy Paper No. 155. Authors of the Report: Louis Rene Beres, Ph.D., Professor; Project Daniel Chairman, U.S.A. Naaman Belkind, Fmr. Assistant to the Deputy Minister of Defense for Special Means, Israel. Isaac Ben-Israel, Maj. Gen. (Res.), Israel Air Force; Professor, Israel. Rand H. Fishbein, Ph.D., Fmr. Professional Staff Member, U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, U.S.A. Adir Pridor, Ph.D., Lt. COL. (Ret.) Israel Air Force; Fmr. Head of Military Analyses, RAFAEL, Israel. Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto, Fmr. MK/COL (Res.) Israel Air Force, Israel. Please direct all enquiries concerning Project Daniel to: Project Daniel Chairman, Professor Louis Rene Beres, Telephone: (765) 494-4189, Facsimile (765) 494-0833, E-mail: Beres@polsci.purdue.edu. This is the Executive Summary. The full report is available at Nativ Online (http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/). In the Spring of 2002 a non-partisan panel comprised of six distinguished citizens of Israel and the United States came together to form Project Daniel. Four are retired military officers as well as retired senior officials in the Israeli Government and Knesset, one is a renowned scholar of International Law and one is an expert on the U.S. Congress and American defense policy. All are recognized authorities in the fields of national security and political science. The charge given to the Daniel panel by its Chairman was to examine the changing strategic environment for Israel in the Middle East, a region increasingly threatened by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For indeed, one of the dominant realities facing Israel today is that a surprise WMD first strike by a determined and capable adversary could imperil the national life of the Jewish State. For Israel, a national security policy that relies either on diplomacy or a balance of power to discourage potential attackers is neither a real nor sufficient guarantor of survival in the WMD age. In addressing this challenge, the Daniel team chose to assess the risks and opportunities of Israel formally adopting the "Doctrine of Preemption" as its operational and fully lawful response to one or more hostile states acquiring WMD. If for any reason the Doctrine of Preemption should fail to prevent a hostile Arab state or Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, the Daniel Team advises that Israel cease immediately its current policy of nuclear ambiguity and proceed at once to a position of overt nuclear deterrence. Further to this change in policy, we also recommend that Israel make it perfectly clear to the hostile nuclear state that it would suffer prompt and maximum-yield nuclear countervalue reprisals for any level of nuclear aggression undertaken against Israel. Under certain circumstances, our Team continues, similar forms of Israeli nuclear deterrence should be directed against hostile states that threaten existential harms with biological weapons. The group's deliberations have garnered the attention of Israel's Prime Minister and his senior military staff who have conducted their own review of the report's conclusions. The landmark study, Israel's Strategic Future, argues that due to its small size, demographic density and concentrated military forces, Israel has no option but to deny would-be regional aggressors the opportunity to develop and deploy WMD weapons that pose a clear existential danger to the Jewish state. Nuclear, and certain biological weapons, in the hands of terrorist sponsoring countries such as Iran and certain Arab states constitute the greatest danger to regional stability and consequently, to the future of Israel. It is for this reason that preemption, with all of its attendant political and operational risks, may stand as the only alternative left to a small state when its adversaries clearly fail to abide by the reasonable expectations of diplomacy and self-restraint and are also determined to acquire certain Weapons of Mass Destruction. The situation is made worse by the possible emergence of Islamic "suicide states" -- those who would willingly bring about their own destruction in order to eliminate Israel's national existence. Faced with this seemingly irrational behavior, Israel has no alternative but to act first under certain circumstances, secure in the belief that International law is not a suicide pact. The Daniel authors base their thesis on the fact that preemption, or anticipatory self-defense, is an authoritative doctrine firmly grounded in customary international law. In the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedy, the U.S. formally adopted preemption as a fundamental tenet of its own national security strategy in an effort to address the growing potential of future surprise attacks. Israel, Daniel's authors argue, must do the same. On a public level, the country also must continue to rely on its longstanding policy of nuclear ambiguity to discourage hostile action by seemingly rational states. The Daniel study also breaks new ground in its discussion of the place of nuclear weapons as an adjunct to conventional weapons in the composition of Israel's military arsenal. The authors draw attention to the risks brought on by a critically low Israeli defense budget and how this might contribute to a failure of deterrence. Recent years have seen Israel's qualitative and quantitative military edge eroding. This can be attributed to several factors, not the least of which are: 1.) the ongoing war with the Palestinians, 2.) the quickening pace at which the Arab/Islamic confrontation states are modernizing their arsenals, 3.) the belief that disarmament is possible now that Saddam Hussein has been toppled and Iraq, at least for the time being, does not constitute an immediate threat to Israel, and 4.) a possible overconfidence on the part of many military and political leaders that continue to believe that Israel's superior warfighting abilities will always triumph over what they see as the historic ineptitude of their Arab adversaries on the battlefield. The Daniel report provides a timely assessment of Israel's current strategic position and the growing convergence of its needs and those of the United States in a world increasingly threatened by weapons of mass destruction. It is a sobering analysis, one that already has been recognized by senior Israeli leaders for its seminal contribution to the debate over how their country should address the emergence of new and potentially catastrophic threats to its national survival. To Go To Top

HORROR AND HUMILIATION IN FALLUJAH Posted by IsrAlert, April 30, 2004.

This is a useful and interesting analysis of the psych-war potential. It was authored by "Spengler" and appeared in "Asia Times" (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FD27Ak01.html), April 27, 2004. Those who have crossed With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom Remember us - if at all - not as lost Violent souls, but only As the hollow men The stuffed men. - T S Eliot, The Hollow Men Allah is the Greatest. I bear witness that nothing deserves to be worshipped except Allah. Come to prayer. Come to success. - The Muslim call to prayer, translated by Maulana Muhammad Ali As the American military weighs the reduction of Fallujah, there come into focus the grand vulnerabilities both of the Americans and the Sunni resistance. The West cannot endure without faith that a loving Father dwells beyond the clouds that obscure His throne. Horror - the perception that cruelty has no purpose and no end - is lethal to the West. Europe is dying slowly from the horror of the 20th century's world wars, ending the way T S Eliot foresaw in the poem cited above, "not with a bang but a whimper". Despite its intrinsic optimism, America is vulnerable as well. The Islamic world cannot endure without confidence in victory, that to "come to prayer" is the same thing as to "come to success". Humiliation - the perception that the Ummah cannot reward those who submit to it - is beyond its capacity to endure. Radical Islam has risen against the West in response to its humiliation - intentional or not - at Western hands. The West can break the revolt by inflicting even worse humiliation upon the Islamists, poisoning the confidence of their supporters in the Muslim world. But radical Islam yet may horrify the West into submission, not only by large-scale acts of terrorism against Western countries, but also by provoking the West into mass destruction of life in the Islamic world. By operating in the midst of civilian populations, Islamist radicals put Western counter-insurgency in a delicate position. The Western response must be harsh enough to humble its adversaries, without turning the stomach of the Western population itself. To do this requires intelligence precise enough to target enemy resources without killing too many civilians. I am grateful to Dr Amar Manzoor for the following summary of the issues (as well as praise). He writes from the UK (my excerpts): Having read some of your articles on how radical Islam might win, I am amazed at your bravery in declaring the obvious in the cultural and deep-seated religious exclusivity which we face on a daily basis. The Islamists seems to be carrying a victory. This victory seems to be to prove that radicals are right in the perception of America. Simple fact: they are losing to win (also called the rope-a-dope strategy by [world champion boxer] Muhammed Ali). Each time the United States starts to kill and maim large numbers of civilians, and gory images are blasted to living rooms all around the world, the Islamists are appealing to the conscience of every person on the planet. Once the US does the killing, rape, pillage, murder, and looting, they [Islamists] will have won the hearts and minds of the people. Guess what, Spengler: it looks like it is working and working very well. Dr Mansoor is right, at least in large measure. Just after the fall of the Twin Towers, I wrote: The grand vulnerability of the Western mind is horror. The Nazis understood this and pursued a policy of "des Schreckens" (to cause horror) and "Entsetzens" (terror; literally, dislodgement). Horror was not merely an instrument of war in the traditional sense, but a form of Wagnerian theater, or psychological warfare on the grand scale. Hitler's tactical advantage lay in his capacity to be more horrible than his opponents could imagine. The most horrible thing of all is that he well might have succeeded if not for his own megalomaniac propensity to overreach. America, as Osama bin Laden taunted this week, lost in Vietnam. But it was not military setbacks, but the horrific images of Vietnamese civilians burned by napalm, that lost the war. America's experience in the war is enshrined in popular culture in the film Apocalypse Now, modeled after Joseph Conrad's story, The Heart of Darkness. The Belgian trading company official, Paul Kurtz, sinks into bestiality and dies with these words: 'The horror! The horror!' It was a dreadful film, but a clever reference. At the close of World War I, T S Eliot subtitled his epitaph for Western civilization, The Hollow Men, with a quote from the Conrad story: "Mr Kurtz, he dead." (Sir John Keegan is wrong: Radical Islam can win, Oct 12, 2001). There is of course more to the story, for radical Islam just as well might lose. Were the United States and its allies to carpet-bomb Fallujah in order to destroy Sunni armed resistance, the horrifying result would appall the population of the West and advance the Islamist cause. Crushing the resistance with limited civilian damage would humiliate the Islamists and weaken them. The nicety of this problem no doubt explains why the American command has taken its good time to decide upon a course of action. On the other hand, surgical strikes against resistance leaders, such as Israel's targeted killings of Hamas leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz Rantisi, enervate rather than energize the Islamist side. When the long arm of Israeli vengeance can reach into the heart of the enemy camp, the Islamists are humiliated and thus weakened. Intelligence is the decisive variable in the equation, and the poor state of America's spy agencies, acknowledged by the CIA's George Tenet, has been the Achilles Heel of the coalition, as I argued in Why America is losing the intelligence war (Nov 11, 2003). But I also predicted that America's deficient capacity for human intelligence would make Washington depend more upon Israel. Precisely that appears to be happening. Nations have interests, not friends, observed Otto von Bismarck, and it is commonality of interest that brings Washington and Jerusalem together. A host of Western commentators attacked President George W Bush for taking the Israeli side over settlements and the Palestinian right of return, on the grounds that it humiliated the Arab world, and a plethora of Muslim voices bemoan their humiliation at the hands of the United States. Much, much more is to come. The "rope-a-dope" tactic Dr Mansoor cites can work both ways. Israel offers many things to Washington, including Arab-language translators, intelligence operatives, and tactical expertise in urban search-and-destroy missions. But its transcendent value to American strategy lies not in what it does, but what it is, namely an ever-present source of humiliation to the Muslim sense of self-worth. The price of recalcitrance, Bush has told the Palestinians and indirectly the Arab world at large, is that some part of the Dar al-Islam has fallen to Jewish hands for the indefinite future. Analysts unfriendly to the Muslim world speak of a "pride-and-honor culture", in which the prickliness of the Arab street regarding the Palestine issue and so-called honor killings are supposed manifestations of the same social traits. There is another way to look at the matter. Among the world's religions Christianity and Islam alone have the capacity for mass absorption of converts from different races and ethnic groups. It is hard to tell which of the two is growing faster. One of them will be the world's dominant religion in the 21st century. There is a radical difference between Islamic and Christian conversion. Both seek to supercede Judaism, but in different ways. Christianity offers a New Israel, called out from among the nations by the sacrifice of Jesus. Because God's love for mankind is the premise of the New Israel, there is a limit to Christian tolerance for bloodshed. To propose open genocide, the Nazis had to repudiate Christianity and embrace paganism only. The Christian's participation in the vicarious sacrifice of the Cross offers salvation at the end of the soul's journey. Christian practice puts enormous effort into sustaining the conviction of the promise of the Kingdom of Heaven: prayers, hymns, cathedrals, paintings, and so forth. No such concept of individual spiritual transformation exists in mainstream Islam. The individual submits wholly to Allah, who controls all things without qualification. That is Islam's enormous strength; the individual believer can leave behind the carping self-doubt of the Christians. For the same reason, however, setbacks to the Ummah are a challenge to the faith of every believer, for all events are in the hands of Allah, not those who have submitted to His will. Success therefore is a theological necessity for Islam. Humiliation for Jews and Christians is a chastisement from God; did not Jesus accept his humiliation on the cross? For Islam, humiliation is a refutation of the faith itself. For a generation, Western policy towards the Muslim world has emphasized deference towards Muslim sensibilities, the Bush White House emphatically included. It does not occur to Muslim radicals that their enhanced status in the Islamic world might prompt the West to undertake the opposite, namely to humiliate some aspects and some leaders of Islam, if not the religion itself. The Islamists' vision of the future is audacious, as Dr Mansoor recounts: Irrespective of their color, religion, or culture, we can see that their foothold and leadership methods are taking hold. This has been transferred across the world to China, South America, the Middle East, the Far East, South Asia, as well as the Central Asian republics. The general dismay coupled with the dividing lines of rich and poor in the world and the complexities of culture and capitalism are allowing their message to gain ground steadily. This means more recruits, more audacious plans in the pipeline, and even more difficulty in using third generation forces to counter fourth generation asymmetric threats which appear and disappear like ghosts. The question for me is not the method of implementation, widely regarded as terrorism, throughout the world. This has always been in existence. The question for me is the message and why it is so blindingly powerful. The message provides the impetus to the heart, and perception drives the mind into the court of the Islamist. Again, the opposite may be the case. Muslims of different ethnicity and sect are more likely to fall out when the credibility of the Islamists suffers a reverse. During the past week, the United States has for the first time humiliated the Islamic world openly and without compunction, in the small matter of the West Bank settlements. If it continues in this direction, Dr Mansoor's scenario may not work out as he expects. To Go To Top

UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL PLAN IS GOOD FOR THE ENEMY'S MORALE Posted by Yocheved Golani, April 30, 2004.

"History will not forgive us if we dismantle Gush Katif... Eighty percent of the Palestinian population interprets the proposed evacuation of Azza as a victory against Jews and Israel," Rabbi Shlomo Riskin stressed to an attentive crowd in Bet Shemesh. The April 28 gathering was part of a series of national efforts at the local level for convincing fence-sitting LIKUD members to vote against Prime Minister Sharon's Unilateral Withdrawal plan. Rabbi Riskin established his community in Efrat and Yeshivat Ohr Torah Stone after Peres and Rabin invited Jews to fill YESHA with Jewish life. With the lives of all the Jews who accepted that invitation now at stake, and the four generations of his own family situated in Efrat, Riskin explained the personal anguish he would suffer in the event of a Unilateral Withdrawal. "If a Jewish government forces me to leave Efrat, this will be a private churban bait hamikdash [devastation] for me, let alone a wider tragedy for the Jewish people." The rabbi described the sacrifices that one must halachically make in the event that peace is a viable result of that forfeiture. "That was the situation with Yamit twenty years ago, but the 'Land for Peace' proposal then resulted in the quiet situation we've had with Egypt as a result. Despite the terrible losses of the Jews who lived in Yamit, there was something to be gained by yielding territory. The Unilateral Withdrawal Plan of 2004, however, proposes no advantages to Israel. None. Hamas will take over the area and it would be disastrous for us." He sighed, "Members of the LIKUD have a chance to guide history with their votes in a few days. I wish I were a LIKUD member so I could vote against this ill-advised withdrawal plan." Particulars of the withdrawal plan demand that all Jewish properties remain intact and standing for immediate use by the enemy. "This means that we have to leave the yeshivot, synagogues and sifrei Torah, everything, to be destroyed, " Riskin cried out. He mourned the potential loss of holy objects in the event that the Gush is handed over to those who wish to obliterate Israel and the Jews. Then he described his conversation in a Russian synagogue some years ago. "The rabbi asked me a question. 'Why does the Gemara, in Moed Qatan 26A rule that if a sefer Torah is burned, we are required to tear kria [an intentionally mournful rip of clothing] twice once for the destruction of the parchment and once for the loss of the letters? A passage in the Talmud (Avoda Zara 18a) teaches otherwise. When the Romans murdered Rabbi Hananya Ben Tradyon, the father of Brurya and father in-law of Rabbi Meir, by burning him alive wrapped up in a sefer Torah scroll, he told his students that although the parchment of the Torah was burning, the holy letters were flying heavenwards. - If the letters themselves withstand the burning, why are we required to perform a second kria due to the fact that they were burned with the parchment?' I didn't know, and the Russian rabbi told me the following answer. 'The law requiring one to tear kria twice upon witnessing the burning of a sefer Torah applies only if the sefer Torah is burned by Jews. In such a case, the holy letters do not rise heavenward. We mourn for them separately. Goyim cannot destroy the truth within the letters of our G-D-given Torah. When goyim burn a sefer Torah, the letters rise to heaven. But Jews who desecrate the ideals of that Torah trap those letters. They don't rise. Therefore only one kria is required on account of the destruction of the parchment. '" Riskin underscored the story with the observation, "The holy alef-bet does not rise with the parchment because the action of the Jews themselves caused this manifold chillul HaShem [disgrace before G-D]". If the government of Israel decrees that such a loss will happen, it will be a great, great chillul HaShem! We'll have done this to ourselves." Trying to reassure questioners in the audience who wondered aloud if Sharon would ignore a vote against his evacuation plan Riskin passionately said, "Sharon is not in a position to defy his party. The people of the LIKUD have the power to defeat the proposed exile of our people. This [proposed withdrawal] is a wrong move." Fielding remarks in favor of ceding the Gush from audience member David Eisen, Riskin asked him to explain the potential advantages of withdrawal to the crowd. Eisen instead noted that while serving in the regular IDF as well as in reserve duty, his unit of 500 soldiers was stationed in Southern Gush Katif in 2002. And, inter alia, placed in charge of the defense of three settlements near the Palestinian city of Rafiah, he and the majority of his united were dismayed to learn that of what they considered to be a small number of homes in the area. Those soldiers felt that since the IDF is not blessed with unlimited resources, they were failing their duties to apprehend terrorists and destroy tunnels smuggling weapons and ammunition from Egypt due to the need to concentrate precious resources to the protection of these families. "I think that as in Yamit, the government should raze all the homes and buildings, including the synagogues, as [influential] rabbis decided in 1982, and for Sharon to surrender territorythat other Jews consider to be critical for Israel's defense." Noting that this matter is disputed by the IDF, Eisen stated that "... it is incumbent upon the Israeli government to explain that this action is being made for the nation's security needs... the current borders in Gaza are not defensible..." In response to Eisen's objection that the Torah-land analogy was inappropriate, Rabbi Riskin retracted his analogy equating the dismantling of settlements in the Gush by a democratically elected Jewish government with Jews burning Torah scrolls themselves. Riskin stressed that the situation is much larger than those families and that the deployment of 500 soldiers in that location protected such mainstream Israeli cities as Ashkelon and Tel Aviv, which would need far more soldiers for protection without the Gush as an impediment to terrorism. He maintained that opening the Gush Katif gateway to the rest of Israel would be disastrous. Eisen, however, remained in favor of the unilateral withdrawal. Incredulous at his lack of logic, audience members spoke among themselves that "The purpose of the Yishuvim is to prevail over future terrorism." Riskin summed up the wisdom of Israel keeping the upper hand over terrorism by keeping the land deeded to the Jews by G-D. Citing Biblical verses he concluded, "It's His to give and He gave it to the Jews? Hanan Ashrawi, whose voice is not heard much in public these days, recently said that '[Palestinian] violence has been a failure,' meaning that we almost had them on their knees. Experience shows us that every time Israel withdraws, terrorism only increases. " Riskin ended his presentation saying, "One of the most important things you fight in a war is the enemy's morale. A withdrawal would be a prize for terrorism." The author can be reached at www.yochevedgolani.com To Go To Top

ISRAEL BUS NUMBER 19 RALLY Posted by Kitty Carr, April 30, 2004.

I am a devout Christian, a self-proclaimed conservative, a long-time Republican and former Bush supporter. This is what I wrote to Christians For Israel, who are bringing Bus #19, a Jerusalem bus that was bombed by Arab terrorists to Washington on May 6th. Dear Christians for Israel, I'm not exactly sure what your point is in bringing the bombed Israeli bus to Washington. It could be filled with corpses, and Bush would still speak of "two states living side by side in peace, harmony and luv." (He has a Vision, you know). Dr. James Hutchens, the editor of "Christians for Israel" who is sponsoring this event, has already assured President Bush in his article "Is Bush Boxing With God?" that no matter what Bush does, he can count on Dr. Hutchens' vote: "I voted for you before and fully expect to do so again. I say this as a fellow-follower of Jesus Christ." Dr. Hutchens was certainly right in pointing out that Israel and Jerusalem are not up for negotiation or division, although at Bush's age and as a 'fellow-follower' of Jesus Christ, one might wonder why Bush doesn't already know these things. However, this is the point with which I vehemently disagree: I would never vote a second time for someone whose intention is to betray Israel! It is remarkable that while Bush is promising the Palestinians a state, he seems oblivious to their insanity and never questions their legitimacy. (See for example "Arab-Israel Conflict Facts" by Steven Shamrak on http://tzemach.org/fyi/articles/forgotten_facts.htm.) If the Palestinians are anything but generic Arabs from all over the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them the right of self-determination, then why did they never try to become independent until the Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War? It can no longer be ignored or denied that President Bush is not only protecting the terrorist Arafat, he is financially supporting the PA, courtesy of US taxpayers. Despite Bush's speech on June 24, 2002, in which he said "Today Palestinian authorities are encouraging, not opposing, terrorism," just one year and twenty-six successful suicide attacks later, on July 25, 2003, Bush met with Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, Arafat's hand-picked replacement, (which is BushSpeak for "elected") and established a joint U.S., Palestine Economic Development Group to promote jobs, growth and investment in the Palestinian economy. Bush praised Abbas for his commitment to fighting terrorism. Said Bush, "It is necessary for this good man (Abbas) to fight off the terrorist activity that creates the conditions of insecurity for not only Israel, but for the peaceful Palestinian people." (The good man Abbas, a terrorist, Holocaust revisionist, conspiracy theorist, founding member of Fatah, a member of the Palestine National Council [since 1968] and the PLO Executive Committee, had no such intentions. Terrorist attacks on Aug. 12, 2003 killed 2 and wounded three. Another attack on Aug. 19, 2003 killed twenty-three and wounded over 130 Israelis.) Bush further said, "To meet the goal we have set, we must improve the daily lives of ordinary Palestinians. For just this purpose, I recently approved a grant of $20 million directly to the Palestinian Authority." According to USAID/WBG, (U.S. Agency for International Development/West Bank and Gaza) "U.S. law specifically prohibits cash assistance to the PA.", which is why this "first time ever" cash transfer required a Presidential waiver. (Documents released June 5, 2002 (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/6/ International%20Financial%20Aid%20to%20the%20Palestinian%20Aut), proved that International financial aid to the PA is redirected to terrorist elements. What changed between June, 2002, when the PA was "encouraging terrorism" and July, 2003, when the PA became the recipient of such American largesse and our joint partner in a "Palestine Economic Development Group"?) But $20 million is pocket change. According to the State Department, $120 million was given to the PA through the USAID/WBG in 2003 for "in-kind assistance" and another $129 million went to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. (Palestinian terror activists in the PA areas, who were arrested and interrogated by Israeli security forces during 2002, admitted that UNRWA facilities, equipment and vehicles were used for assisting in carrying out terror attacks. Can you say "Oil-For-Food"?) When Israel tried to protect itself from American-funded Palestinian terrorism by building a fence around its borders, Powell's offices announced that the Administration is going to deduct from its aid package to Israel any money spent on "settlements." Moreover, as part of the U.S. sanctions, Powell and his people have announced that this "settlement activity" includes the construction of Israel's "security fence." (The State Department has never threatened to withhold money from the PA). As Israel was being "threatened" by Powell, the Palestinian Authority [PA] NGOs refused to sign a declaration that they will not use USAID grant money for terrorist purposes, because they don't believe killing innocent Jews is terrorism. USAID is panicked! They won't take our money! Nothing, absolutely nothing, has changed since January 3, 2002, when Israel seized the Karine-A, a ship laden with 50 tons of arms bound for the Palestinian Authority (PA). The United States held out hope that Arafat could still be induced to halt the terrorist attacks against Israel and to fulfill the other obligations he had committed to in the Oslo agreements. The seizure of the Karine-A appeared to be a clear indication that Arafat not only was unwilling to end the violence, he was importing arms to escalate the war against Israel. When Bush learned of the ship's seizure, he called Arafat and asked him to explain the shipment. Arafat acted as though he knew nothing about it. U.S. intelligence verified the Israeli account that Arafat's "money man" had paid for and arranged the arms shipment, so Bush knew that Arafat was lying to him. From that point on, the United States deemed Arafat "compromised by terror," and the administration began to push for his removal as leader of the PA. Incredibly on April 1, 2002, a reporter asked Bush a question - Mr. President, under your doctrine, a terrorist or someone who aids a terrorist is the equivalent of a terrorist. So what's keeping Chairman Arafat -- what's keeping you from labeling Chairman Arafat a terrorist? THE PRESIDENT: Chairman Arafat has agreed to a peace process. He's agreed to the Tenet plan. He's agreed to the Mitchell plan. He has negotiated with parties as to how to achieve peace. And, of course, our hope is that he accepts the Tenet plan. That's what General Zinni is in the Middle East doing, working to get this Tenet agreement in place, which is a series of concrete steps to reduce the violence in the Middle East. (Violence caused by whom? Wasn't the fact that Bush had caught "Chairman" Arafat lying about the importation of arms to be used against Israel enough proof that the "Chairman" is a liar?) In March-April 2002, Israel was engaged in what it called "Operation Defensive Shield" to "root out terrorists from the West Bank. Israeli troops moved into various towns in the West Bank and took measures to arrest or kill terrorists and to dismantle their infrastructure. The United States did not criticize the operation for the first week. It was not until April 8 that Bush publicly demanded that Israel withdraw without delay from the towns the military had entered. Israel did not comply and, for several days, virtually every news report began with a statement to the effect that Israel was defying the president. Israel ultimately withdrew its troops and declared the operation over on April 25." The documents seized during Operation Defensive proved several things: * Yasser Arafat was personally involved in the planning and execution of terror attacks. He encouraged them ideologically, authorized them financially and personally headed the Fatah Al Aqsa Brigades organization; * The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Fatah are One and the Same, and Yasser Arafat is their Leader and Commander; * The Palestinian Authority established close links with the "forces of evil" - Iran and Iraq. These countries supplied funds and terrorist warfare equipment to the Authority; * Syria supplied the Hamas and Islamic Jihad with the funds, enabling them to found and operate the terrorist infrastructure in Jenin; * Saudi Arabia financially supported the families of terrorists, including families of suicide bombers who carried out mass murder attacks in Israel. Documents were captured that indicate direct and systematic Saudi financial support of the families of Palestinian terrorists, including the families of suicide terrorists who carried out lethal attacks inside Israel. In addition, documents were found that show direct Saudi aid to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Hamas, two organizations that have been declared terror organizations by the US. It seems as if the president is almost willing to commit political suicide to protect the terrorist Arafat. How can there be victory in the War on Terror when the most notorious terrorist and exporter of terrorism is declared off-limits? Bush is aware of the connection between the PA, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Yet he refuses to acknowledge these connections because doing so would expose Arafat as the Main Monster Terrorist. And this he refuses to do. In fact he goes out of his way to show sympathy for the "Palestinians". On April 30, 2002, he said "there are a lot of Palestinians who wonder whether life is worth living." Let's see. They celebrate death. They blow themselves up. They encourage their children to seek heroic death (Shahada) for Allah. (Go to http://www.pmw.org.il/new/ to see clips of the PA indoctrination of children - including one of Arafat telling a teen-aged interviewer that children should seek Shahada), plus there were twenty suicide bombings in 2002 before this speech, and yet, Bush wonders. "Clearly," he said, "There are people in the Middle East who would use terror as a weapon to derail any peace process." People? What people? Surely not the Contemplative Palestinians! The Freedonians maybe? Bush specifically identifies the Palestinians as wondering "whether life is worth living", yet it is unnamed faceless 'people' who use terror. Who writes his speeches? James Baker? This is clearly a War on Islamic Terror, yet Bush refers to Islam as a "religion of peace", and a "great religion hijacked by terrorists". He seems blissfully ignorant of Islam's intention to turn America into an Islamic State. Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), said, "I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future...But I'm not going to do anything violent to promote that. I'm going to do it through education." According to AntiCAIR, an organization dedicated to exposing CAIR's ties to terrorism, Omar Ahmed, co-founder of CAIR, said, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." Unfortunately for America, Anti-CAIR reports that "Since September 11th, prominent Wahhabi-backed leaders have been granted meetings with President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and FBI Director Robert Mueller. These meetings are then used to further the notion that Wahhabi-funded organizations like CAIR are fit to represent America's estimated 6 million Muslims. "This strategy has permitted the Wahhabi Lobby, as the collection of pressure groups are called, to become the de facto pool of consultants for government agencies willing to compromise vigilance for ethno-sensitivity in the War on Terror. The true agendas of groups like CAIR are obscured or forgotten in the process, and Wahhabis are given a blank check to oppose anti-terror policies that threaten to expose their connection to the terrorist support network in the U.S." If America forsakes Israel for Bush's Israel-For-Votes plan, Israel will survive, but America will not. In past times, Republicrats could count on Republicans' votes, because "where else are we going to go?" But those days are over. I, for one, am not voting for Bush again. This seems to be a dilemma for Christians who profess love for Israel. Voting for Bush would be good for America, but bad for Israel. Voting for Kerry is unthinkable. What to do? Vote for Bush, whose betrayal of Israel can no longer be ignored? Dr Hutchens and other Christian and Jewish leaders should encourage their readers, groups, whatever, to let Bush know that if he continues on his maniacal betrayal of Israel, they will not vote for him! But I've never heard, not once, anybody say this, and who knows? Maybe one voice is all it would take.Then maybe hundreds or thousands of voices telling Bush "no vote" unless he changes his course - abandon the 'Roadmap', and include Israel as our ally in the war on terror! Our government is determined to establish a Palestinian Terrorist Democracy, and supports Palestinian terrorism with taxpayers' money, which makes me complicit, so my first vote for Bush was my last vote for Bush. I'll sit this presidential election out. To Go To Top

DON'T REPEAT THESE MISTAKES, MR. SHARON Posted by Gush Katif, April 25, 2004.

MY MISTAKE In an exclusive interview with Maariv Ariel Sharon admits (January 11, 1994): "I made a mistake supporting Begin's decision to uproot settlements." A MISTAKE Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in a special interview with Maariv said: "The Oslo Agreements were a total failure. A terrible, historic mistake. A huge error." MR. SHARON, DON'T REPEAT THESE MISTAKES. To Go To Top

THE RETURN OF THE LOST TRIBES Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 30, 2004.

Nachmanides (Moshe ben Nachman, 1194-1270) was one of the greatest Biblical scholars of all times. He attached importance to the subject of the Lost Ten Tribes and spoke of them in several places. In the following articles, Nachmanides gives us some important insights. There were actually thirteen tribes of Israel. The people of Israel include two sections, which are the Ten Tribes of "Israel" and the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin known collectively as Judah. Several Exiles occurred to the people of Israel. The Bible prophesied each one separately. Nachmanides discusses these prophecies and distinguishes between them. Just as part of Judah was exiled with the northern tribes so too did some people from the ten tribes remain with Judah. Their descendants are now to be found amongst the present-day Jews. The overwhelming majority of the Ten Tribes however were exiled by the Assyrians and NEVER returned though they are destined to do so. The Ten Tribes (said Nachmanides in ca. 1260 CE) are still in Tserefath (Gaul and its region) and "at the ends of the north." THE TWO STICKS OF EZEKIEL 37 In Ezekiel [chapter thirty-seven] it speaks of future re-union: [Ezek 37:16] Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and for all the house of Israel his companions: Here it speaks of a FUTURE Redemption for both Judah and Israel. Where it says, "For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions" by "the children of Israel his companions" it means Benjamin who was attached to Judah. Similarly it says, "For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and for all the house of Israel his companions." The section is quite plain. The two kingdoms will unite into one kingdom under the House of David. The Israelites went into Exile and ever since then Ephraim and all [the ten tribes of northern] Israel have NEVER been in the Land of Israel. Concerning the FUTURE it says, "And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore" Behold I will recall a matter that is expressly mentioned many times in Scripture. It is known that with the Return of the Exiles under Ezra only the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin returned. These had been exiled to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. This is what it says concerning the beginning of that Redemption, [Ezra 1:5] Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised, to go up to build the house of the LORD which is in Jerusalem". And on their return it says, [Ezra 2:1] Now these are the children of the province that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and came again unto Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city; When they laid the foundations of the Temple it says, [Ezra 4:1] Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the captivity builded the temple unto the LORD God of Israel; This is the highest level. The establishment of the status of Ezra is expressly mentioned here, [Ezra 8:1] These are now the chief of their fathers, and this is the genealogy of them that went up with me from Babylon, in the reign of Artaxerxes the king. After this, [Ezra 10:7] And they made proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of the captivity, that they should gather themselves together unto Jerusalem; concerning the deportation of foreign women. It says, [Ezra 10:9] Then all the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered themselves together unto Jerusalem Whilst they had settled in the land it says, [Neh 11:1]"And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities." And it says there, [Neh 11:4] "And at Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin. Of the children of Judah; Neh 11:7] And these are the sons of Benjamin;... The cities of their settlement are related," [Neh 11:25] And for the villages, with their fields, some of the children of Judah dwelt at Kiryat Arba, and in...These same cities are also recalled as being in the inheritances of Judah and Benjamin in the Book of Joshua [when they first entered the land]. Together with all this we acknowledge the view of our sages may their memories be blessed and Heaven Forbid that we should not agree with them. They said in the Midrash Seder Olam, Let me clarify the matter for you. You have already noticed that in the Second Redemption [i.e. the redemption of Ezra, the First Redemption was the coming out of Egypt]. Only those returned who had been exiled to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. Over these people had the decree of a seventy-year Exile been made. These are Judah and Benjamin as well as the Cohanim [priests] who dwelt in Jerusalem and who pertained to the Kingdom of Judah. This was as it was written concerning the initial split of the Kingdom between the northern ten tribes and the Kingdom of Judah, "having Judah and Benjamin on his side" (2-Chronicles 11;12), "And the priests and the Levites that were in all Israel resorted to him out of all their coasts" (2-Chronicles 11;13): [The southern Kingdom of Judah encompassed the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi]. The Kingdom of Israel included the ten northern Tribes. These were exiled by Sancheribc as it says, "For he rent Israel from the house of David; and they made Jeroboam the son of Nebat king: and Jeroboam drave Israel from following the LORD, and made them sin a great sin" (2-Kings 17;11). "Until the LORD removed Israel out of his sight...so was Israel exiled out of their own land to Assyria unto this day" (2-Kings 17;12). This is a proof that all the Kingdom of Israel was exiled to Assyria but the Kingdom of David remained as it was until Nebucahdnessar exiled them to Babylon. The Kingdom of David included Judah and Benjamin. It says, "There was none left but the tribe of Judah only" (2-Kings 17;18). This indicates the Kingdom of the Tribe of Judah that included the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin. It also appears from the simple meaning of the text, that before the exile of the northern country by Senacherib there were gathered into the cities of Judah people from the neighboring tribes of Menasseh, Ephraim, and Simeon and these then dwelt in the heritage of Judah. Or . This explains what was said concerning King Josiah, "They delivered the money that was brought into the house of God which the Levites that kept the doors had gathered of the hand of Manasseh and Ephraim, and of all the remnant of Israel, and of all Judah and Benjamin" (2-Chronicles 34; 9). Prior to that time in the period King Asa it was written, "And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them out of Ephraim and Menasseh, and out of Simeon: for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance when they saw the LORD his God was with him" (2-Chronicles 15; 9). Those from the Tribes of Ephraim and Shimeon from Israel that were present (2-Chronicles 35;18) with Judah were they who dwelt in the Land of Judah or perhaps to some degree also those who had dwelt in their own territories adjoining Judah and had fled to Judah. They are referred (in 2-Chronicles 35;18) to in a general sense as "from Israel" and not by their specific tribes since they represented only a small portion of their tribe. These are they who returned under Ezra with the Jews from Babylon. They were not expressly mentioned by their tribes since they were attached to Judah. They all settled in the cities of Judah. There was no Redemption for the Ten Tribes who remained in exile. I will now explain somewhat a clearly expressed section that still requires clarification. It says concerning the genealogy of Benjamin in the Book of Chronicles. It is written about the genealogy of all Israel in this work (1-Chronicles 9;1-3). Judah was exiled to Babylon due to their infidelity. Out of the first to return from this exile were priests ("Cohans") and Levites and the Natins who settled in the cities of Israel. In Jerusalem there settled descendants of Judah and Benjamin along with descendants of Ephraim, and Menasseh: [1Chr 9:1] So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression. [1Chr 9:2] Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were, the Israelites, the priests, Levites, and the Nethinims. [1Chr 9:3] And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh; Our sages (Talmud, Baba Batra 15;a) recalled that Ezra was the one who wrote the Book of Chronicles. His aim was to let us knew the genealogies of those who returned with him from Babylon. Ezra in Chronicles begins his account with Adam at the head and from whom all the genealogies begin. He keeps going in summary manner until he comes to our own tribes of Israel. He then first gives the genealogy of Judah at length. After that he does not give the genealogies of all the other tribes but only some of them and these he goes through in summarized form until he gets to Benjamin. He then becomes apologetic and says, "So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel" [1Chr 9:1]. This is as if to say that he does not need to recount their genealogies at length for they are still in exile. He goes on to say, "And Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression" [1Chr 9:1]. It is as if he is saying that, he really has only to relate the genealogy of one other tribe apart from Judah. The tribe spoken of is the tribe of Benjamin whose genealogy together with that of Judah he has already given. They are the ones who were exiled to babylon and they are the ones returning in the time of Ezra. The other tribes have their genealogies given, "In the book of the kings of Israel" This book [-that has since been lost] is perhaps in their hands in their place of exile. Ezra then goes on to tell of the settlement of those who returned with him: "Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions" [1Chr 9:2]. That is to say, those who were the first to return from Babylon settled in their citie. These included Israelites, Cohans (i.e. priests), Levites, and Nathinim as stated xpressly in the Book of Ezra, "in the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession in their cities, to wit, Israel, the priests, and the Levites, and the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon's servants" (Nehemiah 11;3). [The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah are now separate books but Nachmanides refers to both of both together as "The Book of Ezra."]. He goes on to say, "And at Jerusalem dwelt certain of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin. [Neh 11:4]. He also said, "And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh" [1Chr 9:3]. He only recalls in detail however the genealogies of Judah and Benjamin whose names and family-trees he elaborates upon. Even here he does not give all the genealogies but only a section of them as is the practice in Scripture. He also speaks of the Priestly families and the Levites, whom he says "hitherto waited in the king's gate eastward: they were porters in the companies of the children of Levi"[1Chr 9:18]. That is to so, that with their return from exile they were appointed on the gates of the Second Temple just as they had been so appointed in the First: "All these which were chosen to be porters in the gates were two hundred and twelve. These were reckoned by their genealogy in their villages, whom David and Samuel the seer did ordain in their set office" [1Chr 9:22]. We have explained this section in accordance with the opinion of our sages of blessed memory. These said that in the time of the Second Temple a few refugees from the other tribes also came up. They did not come from all of the other tribes but only from Ephraim and Menasseh. [Another authority however, Tosefot in Arakin 32;a, says that, "from each and every tribe a few returned"]. These few were not enough to be termed a tribe in their own right or even part of a tribe> due to their minority position they were included amongst the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin and dwelt in their cities. This Second Redemption was not meant for the other tribes. Look at the genealogy of the Tribe of Rueben in this Book of Chronicles and you will find that Ezra gives their familial connections until he reaches Beera who was exiled by Tiglathpileser the King of Assyria (1-Chronicles 5). He then stops. All of those other tribes whose family trees he mentions he also does not continue with after the Assyrian Exile. Rueben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Menasseh: "And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day" [1-Chr 5:26]. When re recalls the genealogy of Judah he speaks firstly of the King and of Zerubabel and his sons who were amongst those coming into the Land with Ezra himself. "And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia". [2-Chr 36; 20}. The Book of Chronicles speaks of the exile to Babylon and of the first year of Cyrus,"Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia" [2-Chr 36:22]. The Book of Ezra also speaks of these events in the same way that is additional proof that Ezra wrote Chronicles. Where Chronicles finishes the Book of Ezra begins. They are in effect like unto book concerning genealogies and the Second redemption that took place at that time. We have not revealed very new in the above discussion but by bringing a few scattered verses together we ha clarified an issue. It has been made quite clear from our study that the only ones who returned from the Babylonian Exile were they who belonged to the Kingdom of Judah. Those however who are termed the House of Ephraim, or The House of Israel, meaning the Ten Tribes are still in Exile in Assyria. These Tribes did not have any participants in the Second redemption, as I have noted. The Second Redemption took place with permission of Cyrus, King of Persia. Before then it is known from the Book of Esther the great dispersion and enormous division that existed amongst our people in all the countries of King Ahaserus from India Cush. After this only a few came up with Ezra from Babylon, about 1,500 men. In my opinion it seems probably that the license of Cyrus applied only to those who had belonged to the Kingdom of Judah meaning the people of Jerusalem. Cyrus commanded these wherever they may then have been in his entire kingdom to return to their land. The commandment was directed to these to go forth and to re-build the Temple. "Who is there among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah..." [Ezra 1:3]. If you wish to claim that permission was given to all of Israel as it says, "Cyrus king of Persia...made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom" [Ezra 1:1], meaning that the proclamation also must have reached the Ten Tribes then it may be answered that the other tribes did not wish to go up at that stage since they knew their time had not come. The vision of Obadiah deals with events that were to occur after the exile of Jerusalem to Babylon. [Obad 1:11] In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them. [Obad 1:18] And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it. There are those who say that this prophecy is referring to King Hezekiah in the Second Temple period but those who think this are in error. It is obvious from scripture that this term, i.e. house of Joseph, applies to the Kingdom of Israel who are the Ten Tribes. They should be ashamed not to recognize this fact! The above verse proves it! When was the House of Joseph like a flame devouring the stubble of Esau? Not on Biblical times! The Ten Tribes had already been exiled and they are still in Exile, in the area of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath: "And this first exile of the children of Israel who are [now] from Canaan unto Zarephath" [Obad 1:20]. These places are at the extremes of the north. The verse continues, "and the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the south" [Obad 1:20]. Those who were exiled to "Sepharad" [meaning Spain] were the Jews of Jerusalem who were taken away by Titus and Vespasian when the Second Temple was destroyed by the Romans and not before then. The others were The Ten Tribes who were exiled in the First Exile. These have not returned as has been claimed. It says, [Obad 1:19] And they of the south shall possess the mount of Esau; and they of the plain the Philistines: and they shall possess the fields of Ephraim, and the fields of Samaria: and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. [Obad 1:20] And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel shall possess that of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath; and the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the south. [Obad 1:21] And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD's. "Zarephath" according to Rabbinical Commentators (Rashi, Iben Ezra, Radak, and all Medieval authorities) refers to France or more specifically northern France and probably included present-day Belgium and Holland. The words translated in the KJ as "the captivity of this host" in Hebrew ["Galut HaChail"] can also mean "the first exile" and so was the understanding of Rabbinical Commentators. When did they come back and when were these enormous exiled groups ingathered to inherit the cities of Ephraim and Samaria? When did saviours go up on Mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau? In the time of Ezra only a few returned as pigeons to their dovecotes. It says, "the kingdom shall be the LORD's" [Obad 1:21]. At that time everyone will openly acknowledge the Kingdom of God. "And the LORD shall be King over all the earth" (Zechariah 14;9). This too will happen in the future. The general principle concerning these and all similar verses concerning the Redemption of Israel and the fall of Edom and the like is that it is all for the future. "The punishment of your iniquity is finished daughter of Zion; he will no more carry you away into captivity. He will visit your iniquity, daughter of Edom; he will discover your sins" (Lamentations 4;22). This is all for the future. "He will no more carry you away into captivity," is instructing us about the future redemption. If it was otherwise what would be the point of saying to those in exile that they would no longer be exiled unless it meant that they really are destined to be redeemed from the exile they are in? Also, "he will visit your iniquity, daughter of Edom; he will discover your sins", must be for the future. It could not be speaking of the past for it was they who were beaten by Herod the Edomite in the time of the Second Temple. It all must pertain to the future. It is impossible that this was all conditional, that they did not desrve it, and that the prophecies were spoken for nothing. It is pertinent that at the time of their exile Israel were sinning and transgressing. Even so, it was prophesied, "The punishment of your iniquity is finished daughter of Zion; he will no more carry you away into captivity" (Lamentations 4;22). This was not conditional, meaning to say that on condition that they repented then they would have been redeemed. This is not the way of Prophecies to make such limited conditions. Rather it is all pertyaining to the future. Zechariah lived in the Second Temple period. Zechariah said, "Behold, the day of the LORD is coming," and so on in great detail that without any doubt can only be referring to some future day. So too, were these passages explained by the Commentators and by our holy sages of blessed memory. David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall", His website address ishttp://www.benariel.com To Go To Top

<>bPRAYER TO SAVE GUSH KATIF Posted by Gush Katif, April 30, 2004.

We request that all teachers in all the schools and yeshivot spend time praying with their students, to strengthen the hearts of the voters, that they should vote with faith in G-d and with security in His Holy Name, with love. We pray also to strengthen the hearts of all those working with great dedication over the past few weeks, encouraging those who may be weak and hold up failing knees. May it be His will that G-d should help us succeed. The order of prayer: Those in schools and at home. Say the enclosed prayer anywhere and at any time. Also Psalms and selichot. And in particular, Psalm 119, according to the alef-bet. Reciting the verses of Eretz (alef, resh, tzadi) Eretz Yisrael (alef, resh tzadi - yod, shin, resh, alef, lamed) and Gush Katif (gimel, vov, shin, kuf, tet, yod, pe) And may it be G-d's will to see our failings, will have mercy, and overcome our failings, and redeem us a complete redemption quickly in our days. To Go To Top

DON'T BOMB; ARABS WOULDN'T LIKE US Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 30, 2004.

It is difficult for the West to defend itself, nowadays. Half the Westerners are "progressives." But how progressive is it to support the socially backward Arabs who wish to drag Western social progress centuries backward?. These "humanitarian" "progressives" decry the deaths of Arabs in combat, especially if civilians killed accidentally, but not the deaths of Westerners, even if civilians. The only inconsistency they recognize is Pres. Bush's, not their own. When terrorists murder Iraqis, Arabs blame the coalition forces. The Arabs have a national neurosis over the matter of blame and shame. They fail to blame the perpetrators. The Arabs argue that it is the Coalition's fault for not properly protecting the people. How many Iraqis inform on the terrorists? Those who don't are accomplices. The Iraqi Arabs and some of the "progressives" recently advised the US armed forces not to bombard Iraqi cities in which terrorists and guerrillas are holed up. The reason given is that otherwise Arabs not part of the insurgency would join it. If we bomb the terrorists, the people would come to hate the US. And if we don't, they blame us for not protecting them. Shall we deceive ourselves and imagine that the West is not already hated by the Arab Muslims? We have the right to defend ourselves, but sometimes lack the will. The "progressives" sap it. Their concept of Western bombardment, kept alive by sensationalist newspapers parading US might and technical prowess, is obsolete. In modern warfare, neither the US nor Israel flatten cities. We use precision bombing. Only the immediate area of terrorist fortification is bombed. More humane than that, warfare cannot get. True progressives would praise the US and Israel for such restraint and damn the Arabs for starting wars and their terrorists for waging it in criminal ways as by investing civilian areas. Blame the perpetrators! "COMPENSATE THE P.A. FOR YESHA LAND ISRAEL TAKES" There is a theory that if Israel annexes parts of Yesha, then it should turn over to the P.A. equal parts of Israel. This theory would be unfair if Israel were a large country not threatened by its neighbors, including the very entity it is asked to turn the territory over to. It is ridiculous for a tiny country threatened by its neighbors, including that entity, now making war on it. The notion assumes that Yesha belongs to the Arabs. It does not. As the unallocated part of the Palestine Mandate, it is reserved for Jewish national development. Israel has the best legal claim to Yesha, all of it. That legal claim derives from the Jewish people's historical and religious claim, recognized by the League of Nations and endorsed by the UN Charter. To those claims add: (1) Necessity for national security, which is fundamental to international law and invoked by the aggressive behavior of the Arabs; and (2) Arab forfeiture of their claim due to massive war crimes and crimes against humanity. Many of our contemporaries, ignorant of history, international law, and religious validation except when claimed by Muslims, and perverse about who commits war crimes, have gotten it into their heads that any resolution of the Arab-Israel conflict should be one of "land for peace," as if peace were something the Jews should pay for, rather than are entitled to. Peres, Sharon, and the State Dept. think that Israel should give up land and merely hope the Arabs would make peace. I'm not sure the State Dept. hopes the Arabs would make peace. The other advocates of land-for-peace think Israel should give up land if the Arabs dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. The State Dept. and the Arabs try to get the others to imagine that the Arabs already have abandoned terrorism. They all deem the Arabs are entitled to the Territories. They never figured out that the arbitrary armistice lines forming Yesha have no significance. Neither do they realize how poor a claim to the area the Arabs have. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

FIRST SIGNS OF LIKUD ELECTION TAMPERING Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 30, 2004.

(IsraelNN.com) Some veteran members of the Likud Party, Yesha residents, were less than pleased to learn their names have mysteriously vanished from the party roster, making it impossible for them to vote in the party's referendum on Sunday. Proponents of the prime minister's unilateral Gaza withdrawal plan, the subject of the referendum, are well aware that Yesha residents will be voting against the plan. Included among those unable to vote are attorney Motti Mintzer and his wife Tzvia, residents of the Shomron community of Elkana. The Mintzers have been Likud members and paid their dues for some thirty years. Mintzer inquired as to his polling station and was shocked to learn he and his wife do not appear among those eligible to vote. Mintzer plans to take his case to the Likud Court today. He is requesting that members whom have paid their annual party membership fees be permitted to vote even if they do not appear on the voting rosters. According to correspondent Haggai Huberman, the names of Moshe and Hana Kleinman has been wiped from the party roster. They too live in Elkana. The names of other Elkana residents, Likud members, have also been wiped from the list. A similar situation has been detected in Gush Katif. Residents of Kfar Darom, paid Likud members, do not appear among those eligible to take part in the referendum. Similar situations have been discovered among party members residing in Atzmona and Tel-Katifa, also Gush Katif area communities. To Go To Top

COMMENTS ON THINK-ISRAEL Posted by Dr. Babu Suseelan, April 30, 2004.

Think-Israel is an excellent, constructive and comprehensive and instructive website. You provide the readers tools and information to make critical judgment on complex issues affecting the middle East, Israel and the world. You present a bold and rational analysis on the dangers posed by Muslim terrorists and its disastrous consequences for democratic societies around the world. Leftist media have been distorting the real menace of Jihadi Terrorism and undermining Israel's effort to bring peace, prosperity and security in the Middle East. Congratulations for your systemic analysis on current events. [Editor note: Dr. Suseelan expresses so well what we are endeavoring to accomplish, we couldn't resist sharing.] To Go To Top

THE IMMINENT VICTORY OF THOSE FEIGLINS Posted by Steve Plaut, April 30, 2004.

The question is no longer whether or not Ariel Sharon's "Disengagement Plan" will pass the referendum on it to be held this coming Monday, but rather by which gap the "plan" will be shot down by the Likud voters. The polls in Israel are showing the opponents to the plan within the Likud outnumbering the supporters by between 2% and 7%, and I have a month's salary on a bet saying the gap will actually be in the double digits. All this, in spite of the fact that almost the entire leadership of the Likud has come out to back and support Sharon on the "plan", some albeit half-heartedly. In trying to stampede Likud voters into backing approval for his "plan", Sharon is moving from desperation into Orwellism. Yesterday, in Sharon's first major adventure into the netherworld of Orwellistic Newspeak, he declared that a defeat in the referendum for his proposal would be a "victory for Arafat". By inference, a defeat over Arafat would consist, I guess, of expelling Jewish settlers from their homes and handing over a judenrein Gaza Strip to the PLO in which it will organize rocket factories, training facilities, and from which it will send out countless suicide bombers. And someone forgot to tell the Palestinians that passage of the Sharon "Disengagement Plan" would be a defeat for Arafat. Palestinian Media Watch, a watchdog group that documents the contents of the PLO's controlled "Palestinian" media, issued a report that these media unanimously view a passage of the Sharon "plan" as an enormous victory for their "armed struggle" over the Jewish subhumans and a tremendous achievement, a precedent for the dismantling of all of Israel (Haaretz, April 30). More importantly, this is actually the very first test in Israel of direct democracy, and the very first time a ballot proposition has been brought before even a PART of the electorate (only Likud voters are participating in the referendum, which makes it easier for the lemming politicians to dismiss it as a meaningless gesture). That fact may be even more significant than the actual results of the vote. This could open up incredible new possibilities, if it were to become the precedent for future ballot propositions, in which Israelis actually get to say what they want. Heaven knows where THAT could lead - maybe even to accountability of court judges! The fact of the matter is that every single time, without exception, Israeli voters were offered an opportunity to vote for or against "Oslo", they voted against it. And every single time that they voted AGAINST "Oslo", the politicians then ignored the public will and carried out "Oslo" appeasements and capitulations anyway. It all started when Israelis elected Yitzhak Rabin, who ran on a platform declaring unambiguously, "No Deals with the PLO," and then months later spat on the voters and struck the Oslo "deal." By 1996, Rabin had been assassinated by Yigal Amir, and Shimon Peres was beaten in the next vote handsomely by Netanyahu. Netanyahu then ran for re-election and lost, but that was because voting for him was no longer voting against Oslo. Netanyahu as Prime Minister had out-Oslo-ed even Shimon Peres. In any case, Ehud Barak won largely thanks to the Arab voters supporting him at the polls. When Ehud Barak later ran for re-election, he was defeated in a landslide by voters opposed to Oslo. Sharon was elected simply because the public opposed "Oslo". When Sharon ran again, this time against Amram Mitzna, Sharon trounced him by an even larger landslide. But, like all those before him, Sharon then declared war on the Israeli voters who had elected him to stop Oslo, and he re-dedicated himself to carrying out large parts of the political agenda of the Israeli Left. For twelve years, Israeli voters have been disenfranchised over and over and over again. But they were not cowed by the cynicism of the politicians, as the vote this coming week on the referendum will show. Whenever they are given a chance, they show how thoroughly they reject the "Oslo" program of "land for sound bytes". The intellectual underpinnings for the "disengagement plan" are little more than an insult to the intelligence. Supposedly the "disengagement" will allow the PLO to "prove itself" and its intentions, to impose its will and control over the Gaza Strip and begin "nation building", with US and Euro support. But even if "testing" the PLO's intentions is still regarded as something positive, even if we pretend we do not know what those intentions are precisely, even if we think that allowing the PLO to impose its will over the Gaza Strip is something constructive, there is no reason whatsoever why such a "test" requires the expulsion of Jews who live in the Gaza Strip. The Jews live in two small areas within the Strip. Why can't the PLO impose its will on the rest of the Gaza Strip where Jews do NOT live and THERE prove its intentions? Why can't removal of settlements be withheld as a reward or bargaining chip for AFTER the PLO is put to the test? Why can't advocates of removing settlements propose that this be done as a reward for the PLO AFTER it has complied and shown its peaceful intentions? In other words, even if one believes in the thinking behind the Sharon-Bush initiative for unilateral disengagement by Israel and the supposed forcing of the PLO to demonstrate its commitment to nation building, none of that logically requires immediate Israeli expulsion of Jewish settlers, especially when the expulsion would be long BEFORE the PLO complies with anything at all and after it has violated every single punctuation mark in every one of its past commitments. And that logical fallacy is why Sharon is about to get creamed by his own party constituents. The Left will no doubt denounce Sharon for having planned to lose the referendum all along to avoid making concessions to the PLO, and wouldn't it be heavenly if they were correct. A much more realistic explanation is that Sharon's referendum was a strategic attempt to take the prosecutorial heat off himself and his family by appeasing the Israeli Left, which happens to control the Attorney General's office, the Israeli media and the courts. A victory over the "disengagement plan" will be an enormous victory for Moshe Feiglin and his militant wing within the Likud (militant in the very best sense of the term). Feiglin is already being demonized by the Likud demagogic establishment, who are denouncing "those Feiglins" as fanatics endangering the party. Moshe was the initiator of the anti-Oslo Zo Artseinu movement in the 90s. He was railroaded before a court under Netanyahu's reign and convicted of "sedition" because he and his people blocked a traffic intersection. After doing community service, Feiglin decided to take his fight to the innards of the Likud, challenging the Likud leadership from within. He and his camp won a respectable minority position within the party's central committee. While I have some quibbles with Feiglin over some of his choices of tactics and positions, he is the only truly consistent anti-Oslo activist-leader at this point inside the Likud, although may well represent the rank and file far better than Sharon and Ehud Olmert. Feiglin's people have led the battle AGAINST Sharon's proposal in the referendum, and the defeat of Sharon's plan will make Feiglin a much more significant player in the Israeli political scene. May we be blessed with many many more of "those Feiglins". 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

THEY WERE 'IMPRINTED' Posted by Gail Winston, April 30, 2004.

Dear Friends, Remember the inspiring film: "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"? The people who went to the mountain with the flat top (where the extraterrestials had landed) were "imprinted" with the vision and the need to go there. On Israel Independence Day Yom Hatzmaut, 120,000 people spontaneously drove, walked, bussed, bicycled to Gush Katif in Gaza. They were imprinted with the vision that the 8000 men, women and children who live there for 3 generations and who work there to make our salads green. This is the vision that they are imbued with. True Zionism. True patriotism. True pioneers. They live their lives in a beautiful place - a place given to them by G-d - a place where Abraham and Isaac lived in our Biblical history - a place that was barren sand dunes - a place that they made beautiful. As an avid reader of all the Internet and Email incoming traffic (sometimes 350 to 400 messages a day) I didn't see any notices or flyers about the Gush Katif rally. Yes, there were some speakers planned. But, no one expected 120,000 Israelis of all kinds, religious and not, young babies and older savtas, rightists and probably some Leftists who haven't forgotten what Zionism really is or why the Kibbutzim and Moshavim were built. It was truly a traffic jam that may have saved Eretz Yisrael as David Wilder said, because it proves that all Israelis love all of Israel - from the biggest cities to the least grains of sand that protect the biggest cities. The people voted with their feet. The news media claimed 'only' 70,000 went BUT, they didn't include those who sat in the traffic jam - happily - for 7 hours, just to be a part of it. Or those who left their cars & buses & hiked to the rally point. If you will it, the legend became reality. We dreamed it and became a proud, sovereign nation. We will vote for it and it will come true. VOTE ON SUNDAY TO KEEP ISRAEL WHOLE. GUSH KATIF DEFENDS TEL AVIV, BEER-SHEVA, JERUSALEM & HAIFA. IF JEWS AREN'T SAFE THERE, WHERE WILL THEY EVER BE SAFE. IT'S UP TO ALL OF US!!! LOVE GAIL WINSTON Gail Winston is founder of M.E.I.R., Mid East Information Resource. To Go To Top

AN EXCHANGE ABOUT GAZA Posted by Itamar Weisbrod, April 30, 2004.

Someone sent around a letter to students encouraging them not to attend a rally on behalf of Gush Katif in Toronto, Ontario. I wrote back a response. I was factual but I hope I made the students understand our connection to Gaza and why we must not expel Jews from their homes. The Anti-Gush Katif letter: Hi everyone, I just have a thought that I'd like to share with you with regard to the rally for Gush katif. Ariel Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan and Bush's full (written) support has perhaps brought us the closest ever to a viable resolution to the conflict in Israel between Arabs/Palestinians and Israel and the Jewish people. Never before has the US actually backed Israel's demand that there should be no right of return for Palestinians, that a full return to the 1949 armistice lines is impossible and unrealistic, and Israel's full, unequivocal right to defend itself and its citizens. Settlement blocks like Gush Katif, neve dekalim, chevron, and many others at this time prevent Israel from having any reasonable chance at peace and security. In order for there to be peace in Israel compromises have to be made, even Ariel Sharon, notorious for his idealism, realizes this. Meanwhile, Sharon has secured Israel's ability to retain major west bank settlement blocks with large Jewish/Israeli populations and prevented jeapordizing Israel's status as a Jewish state by disallowing the right of return for 1948 displaced palestinians. Sharon has compromised in a manner that is truly maximally beneficial for Israel and at the same time provides innocent Palestinians a true Palestinian state. Israel will be able to defend itself more efficiently, and upon realizing that they can not and will not be able to destroy Israel and Israel's continued battle against them, Palestinian extremists will eventually lose support and die out. I remember learning in yeshiva that a negative nevuah (prophecy) can always be turned around. A positive one can not. In this light, we don't necessarily need an apocalyptic war to re-establish the nation of Israel in the land of Israel. We don't need soldiers and civilains regularly dying in order to sustain a rigid idealism, holding on to every little ounce of traditional Eretz Yisrael. I believe at a certain point Pekuach Nefesh (the sanctity of life) and Israel's peace and security prevails. Even without bits and pieces of the West Bank and Gaza we can all still return to Zion, build Jersualem and the nation of Israel. Please support Israel and Ariel Sharon in this incredible oppurtunity and let's stand united as one people all realizing the same dream. Thanks for reading, Anonymous [he prefered to keep his name a secret] My Response The rally in support of residents of Gush Katif is an event supported by the Toronto Zionist Council and supported by Mizrahi, a Zionist organization. As we all know, Bnei Akiva believes in Am Yisrael (the Nation of Israel), B'eretz Yisrael (in the Land of Israel), al pi Torat Yisrael (the Torah of Israel). Therefore, it is well within the ideology of Bnei Akiva/Mizrahi to be supportive of the Jewish communities in Gush Katif. Even we didn't have their support, I'd still encourage all to attend, as it is well within the Zionist values within which most of us have been taught since we were kids. I would also like to point out some factual inaccuracies in the letter. First of all, Bush's implicit stance on the issues raised remains just that - implicit. As Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post pointed out this weekend, at no time did Bush explicitly state that Washington's official policy will be that Israel can keep certain settlement blocks. Moreover, this is not the first time that a U.S. President has made such statements. Even Clinton stated that Israel would not be expected to withdraw to 1948 borders. Secondly, I would challenge the accuracy of the letter writer's geographical information. Neve Dekalim and Hevron are not settlement blocks; they are individual settlements. Nevei Dekalim is in the block of Gush Katif, and Hevron in the Kiryat Arba/Lower Gush Etzion Block. This geographical inaccuracy, while it may seem irrelevant, may actually shed light on the educational level of the opinion I am opposing, because this is largely a geographical issue. Additionally, Sharon is planning on withdrawal from Gaza and northern Shomron communities. The 5 settlement blocks that Bush hinted that Israel may be able to hold on to includes the Kiryat Arba block. Sharon hasn't yet planned on giving Hevron away, and it is even on the list of settlements he wants to keep. Attacking the holy city of Hevron by saying that it is "preventing Israel from having any reasonable chance at peace and security" is far from the truth and is void of logic. Blaming Israel's security problems on settlements is buying into one of the biggest lies the Palestinians have sold to the world. It is unfortunate that it was bought by some Jews too. Jewish presence in parts of Biblical Israel is no cause or reason for Arabs to not be able to live there also. The extent to which a "Jewish presence" causes 'difficulties' for the Arab residents of Yesha is not due to settlers, to Jews, living there, it is due to their society's and religion's embrace of terrorism! It is due to their savage murder of Israelis. It is their responsibility to take charge of their society. If they didn't kill and murder and steal and hurt us, if their imams didn't call for jihad, if they didn't send 13 year old's to blow themselves up, they would have all the same civil liberties that we do. Our right to life, our right to exist as a Jewish People in the Land of Israel, supercedes their 'civil right' to freedom of movement when they abuse that right and become murderers. For true equality, they need to take responsibility for their actions. 'Noble' liberals such as Dershowitz or Beilin (laughable) threaten true equality. For them, the belief that Arabs can actually be held responsible for their own society, that Arabs could actually live peacefully with us, is a myth. Therefore, we must separate ourselves from them to ensure 'peace'. We must make sure there aren't too many Arabs in Israel, because aside from the problem of the vote (a question I will leave for another letter), who wants to live next to an Arab? That is the 'liberal' thinking of Israel. I deplore this double standard - this hypocrisy. For them, the 'therefore' is that the Jews abandon their biblical homeland, so they are separated from the Arabs. NO! Jews will stay in Yesha, and the Arabs better just get used to it and accept it, and learn how to get along with us. And if they can't, we shouldn't be the ones who have to leave. Ripping Jews out of their homes, simply because they are Jewish, is discriminatory and racist. It is fascinating that many no longer even feel the need to cloak this discrimination, with many explicitly referring to the need to dismantle "Jewish settlements" and not even bothering to cloak the term by referring to them as "Israeli settlements". What bothers everyone so much about "settlements" isn't the settlements, it is the idea of, the horror of, having to have a Jewish neighbor. For the Arabs, this is out of pure hatred, and for others, especially 'Leftist' Jews, it is the fear of what empowerment and strength will be given to the right and to the religious sectors of Israeli society if Jews are allowed to maintain and keep their roots and attachment to such historic and religiously evocative areas as Hevron and Shechem. Michael Freund, a former advisor to Binyamin Netanyahu, stated this point powerfully in his op-ed in the Jerusalem Post on February 4th, 2004: the desire to expel Jews from Gaza because of their religious and or ethnic identity is pure and simple racism. If there were Israeli Jews, Christians, and Muslims or American 'olim' from Jewish, Christian, and Muslim origin, all would be allowed to stay and live in the "Disputed Territories" except for those that are Jewish. The only identifying mark that is of consequence is their religion, and if you are Jewish, then you aren't allowed to live in certain areas. If Israeli settlers are expelled from Gaza, Israel will not be able to defend itself efficiently, as is pointed out by top army personnel and even by the Chief of Staff himself, Moshe Yaalon. Yaalon came out against the plan for security reasons, claiming that withdrawal from the Gaza Strip will only encourage more terror and make it easier for Arab terrorist groups to perpetrate attacks. Aside from many other top army officials sharing this opinion, the thoughts of the army Chief of Staff should be making it clear enough that it is completely incorrect to think that expelling the Jewish residents of Gush Katif would in any way improve Israel's security. One should not assume there are people more knowledgeable on counter-terrorism tactics than the Chief of Staff of the Israeli army. Also, claiming that Palestinian extremists would lose support because Israel is willing to compromise is nothing more than a pipe dream. Israel has offered to compromise before and give up far more than Sharon is putting on the table now, and that has only resulted in increased terrorism. The letter writer shows a complete lack of understanding of the Palestinian/Arab culture and their history. Never once in the Arab/Israeli conflict has compromise on the Israeli side been met with Arab acceptance and a decrease in Arab terror - in fact, it has had the exact opposite. To deny this is denying factual history and ignoring the lessons from the past. It is correct that an "apocalyptic" war is not necessary to re-establish the Nation of Israel in the Land of Israel. The way to avoid that, according to commentary on the nevua of the final geula, is the return of the Nation to the Land (meaning Aliya). But to say that soldiers and civilians are dying in order to "sustain a rigid idealism, holding on to every little ounce of traditional Eretz Yisrael" is blaming the settlements for Israel's security problems. This is a total fallacy and one of the major lies told by the Palestinians to the world. There has been terror by Arabs against Jews before the state was created, long before the current settlement enterprise. It is wrong to demonize a sector of the nation and blame them for Israel's security problems, when that exact issue was in place long before 1967. This too shows a complete lack of understanding of Israel's history and ignores decades of Arab terror against Jews, and is, quite frankly, a misleading oversimplification. Let it be known right now that Jewish presence in Gaza is NOT causing the deaths of any soldiers or civilians. This is a myth, meant to blame someone other than the actual terrorists for terrorism. The settlement block of Gush Katif is further away from Gaza City (where 1 of the 1.2 million Arabs of Gaza live) than from major Israeli cities such as Sderot, Ahskelon, and Netivot. Between these cities and Gush Katif is the same protection: fences, army and space. When Sderot is rocketed from the northern Gaza, and when Gush Katif is rocketed - why is one met with a call to defend, and one met with a call to retreat? It is because of the myth that the settlements are at fault - a myth which even some Jews choose to pass off as truth. When any Jewish city is attacked, whether it be Gush Katif or Ashkelon, it is because they are JEWISH cities, NOT because they are settlements. Top army officials have even supported certain settlements, citing security reasons. They argue that having a Jewish presence in areas like Gaza and Hevron makes it easier for the Israeli army to operate and do their job. One last thing - it is questionable that the call for unity was sincere since the letter writer singled out and demonized a sector of out nation and called for the expulsion of Jews from their homes. Let's call a spade a spade. If one is in favour of discrimination against a part of the nation, then it is far from a unified vision of a dream. I realize that the opposing ideology is not discriminating against Jewish settlers as an end in and of itself. It is unquestionably a means to an end. It was an empty call for unity, while concurrently advocating fundamentally non-unified acts. David ben Gurion said it way back in 1937. "No Jew has the right to yield the rights of the Jewish People in Israel. No Jew has the authority to do so. No Jewish body has the authority to do so. Not even the entire Jewish People alive today has the right to yield any part of Israel. It is the right of the Jewish People over the generations, a right that under no conditions can be cancelled. Even if Jews during a specific period proclaim they are relinquishing this right, they have neither the power nor the authority to deny it to future generations. No concession of this type is binding or obligates the Jewish People. Our right to the country - the entire country - exists as an eternal right, and we shall not yield this historic right until its full and complete redemption is realised." -David Ben Gurion, at the Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, 1937 B'Ahavat Yisrael, Itamar Weisbrod Itamar Weisbrod is at Bar Ilan University in Israel - in political science and war strategy. To Go To Top

THE PARASITES ARE SALIVATING OVER THE LOOT THEY EXPECT Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 29, 2004.

The talk of the parasites is over the transfer of what the Jews built in Israel with vision, sweat and hardship. But, the parasites have always fed on what Jews create, build and accumulate. We watched the Germans confiscate everything that the European Jews had built: homes, furniture, art, bank accounts, factories and, then when that was all in their hands, they stole the gold fillings from their teeth. Not to be left out, the French did the same. Ask Jacques Chirac about his days as Mayor of Paris when he gave Jewish apartments to his friends, business acquaintances and had stolen art from the Jews hanging on his office walls that had been turned over to the Germans. The same could be said for the Soviets, the Poles, the Lithuanians, the Croatians, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Finns, the Norwegians, et al. All the parasites fed on what they could steal from the industrious Jews. Just leave them alone for while and, when they have built what the predators want, they attack and plunder. When the Jews finally escaped from the graveyards of Europe to Israel, it was the Arabs turn to feed off the Jews. Armies from the surrounding seven nations attacked in 1948 and were ignominiously defeated. They were driven from the field of battle by untrained Jews, some straight off the boat or, at least, those boats the hateful British missed in their blockade. The Arabs, having lost to a rag-tag army of Jews with junk weapons from the scrap yards of Europe, were enraged. So, like hyenas, they fell upon the property of the Jews in their nations, just like the Nazis with whom they tried to partner up with during WWII. So, like the Nazis, they plundered the homes, factories, farms, bank accounts, inventories of whatever merchandise the Jews carried in their stores. Like the scavaging beasts they have always been, they fell on the loot and whatever the Jews had built. They drove their Jews out with only clothes on their back. But, the Jews of Israel who themselves had little, absorbed their 750,000 Jewish refugees forced out by the Arab countries and all those Jewish refugees from the death camps of Europe - unlike the Arabs who rejected their 450,000 or so refugees. Now, with the help of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and, at the insistence of the Bush family and cronies, the Arab Muslim Palestinian terrorist organizations will have their turn to snarl and hiss over whatever the Jews have built which they never could. Meanwhile, the corrupt parasites of the West have taken over the negotiations of how they will distribute the wealth and property of the Jews in Gush Katif, Gaza. Like the Nazis and their co-partners, the Europeans, they will be the overseers for the division of the loot. It was bad enough when the ravenous beasts of Germany gathered the Jews of Europe and plundered all they had - even to the gold teeth of the dead. But, what is worse is that this creature, for I cannot bring myself to call him a Jew, is the traitor who sold the land he did not own and wants to give their property to the lowest level of the Arabs, the Palestinians who have been murdering Jews for peace since 1993. They are a predatory people driven by a predatory religion. This is Ariel Sharon's choice of who is to receive his great gift of perfidy. May all those who feed on the bodies and properties of dead Jews be consigned to be buried in the sewers of Gaza. May their families suffer a thousand fold for their crimes against the Jews. May their nations fail - as have all other nations who fed on the Jews. Cursed be their days; cursed be their nights. Next Tuesday, the infamous Quartet composed of the U.N., the European Union, Russia and the Arabist U.S. Department of State representing the American Administration will meet to decide the fate of the Jews - much the same as the Nazis did at Wannsee. There Heydrich, Eichmann, among others of Hitler's executioners met to finalize their Final Solution to their Jewish Question and plan the confiscation of the assets of the Jews. The State Department wants the Quartet to dispose of the settlers' properties to the Arab Muslim Palestinians. They want this transfer of assets done in an "orderly manner". Translate that to mean that Sharon is supposed to deploy a Jewish army to force the evacuation of 8,000 Jewish men, women and children so the Arab Muslim Palestinian terrorists can occupy the homes, factories, farms with no resistance. The Jews will protest mightily but they will not lift up a violent hand against the Jewish army - although they may take appropriate action if the Arab Muslims try to take what belongs to the Jews by their work on the land, by their historical roots on the land and by the promise of G-d to the Jews for the land. Then the Quartet will try to carve up the Jews' property so the Arab Palestinians will not snarl and fight each other in greedy acquisition of what they could never have built up for themselves. These are the diseased carrion eaters who feed on the carcasses of the dead. I have no doubt that Jews will die defending their homes and all they have built. But, the hyenas, vultures down to the blue flies of the Palestinians' will pour in to feed. May G-d damn their eyes for all eternity. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

STAUNCHLY ANTI-ISRAEL Posted by David Basch, April 29, 2004.

"Traditional Israelis should not fool themselves about what is taking place. The shots that Sharon is firing are directed at the heart of Jewish Israel..." "The fortified and militarily supplied Gaza that Sharon will be creating, ... like Iraq, will have become the magnet for Muslim fighters worldwide...." "It is doubly exasperating that Sharon claims that Israel will be "tougher on the Arabs" after such a surrender.... Israel could be just as tough right now in responding to savage, beastly, Arab attacks and with the same results on world opinion...." It is disappointing to learn that some of the most staunchly anti-Israel forces in the world are none other than Sharon and his government. Sharon not only proposes to ethnically cleanse Jews from their homes and lands but he is engaged as a fervent supporter of Arab propaganda against Israel and as a slanderer of Israel. In Sharon's eyes, Israel is an "occupier" of Arab territory, though the territory Israel holds is the very territory set aside by the Mandate of Palestine for a Jewish homeland. It is not necessary now to go into all the reasons again as to why it is Israel that holds full claim to her lands against the fraudulently made Arab claims to them and to a national existence and history that never was. Sharon, sworn to falsehood, knows all this and is yet surrendering to the Arabs. With Israeli government support of the false claims of the Arabs, is it any wonder that universally everyone, including Diaspora Jews, takes the part of the Arabs in the Arab attempt to steal the heritage of the Jewish people in Israel? Mind you, Sharon does not state that Israel must withdraw from the Gaza territory because of military necessity -- which would be false anyway -- but he declares that otherwise Israel would be occupying Arab territory. What a slander!!! For Sharon's information, not only is there not such a thing as "Arab land" separate from that held by a bonifide Arab nation -- and the motley of Arabs in Israel's territories never in history was a nation -- to the Arabs ALL OF ISRAEL is "occupied Arab territory," a designation that the Arabs hold a priori as Muslim-Arabs and as counter to the categories of history. Thus, Arab views will not change one iota no matter what surrenders Sharon offers until the vanishing of Israel. Sharon ought to know by now that Arab determination to destroy Israel is a constant and that Israel must not to give this enemy any advantage that can be used in pursuing his goal. It is doubly exasperating that Sharon claims that Israel will be "tougher on the Arabs" after such a surrender. The fact is that Israel could be just as tough right now in responding to savage, beastly, Arab attacks and with the same results on world opinion. But the gains for Israel in responding in a firm way, right now, would be that Israelis would know that they fights for what belongs to the nation against those who will not acknowledge this right and that Israel will be undertaking such battles at a time that the Arabs will not be enjoying the enhanced military conditions of a fortified and militarily supplied Gaza that Sharon will be creating, which, like Iraq, will have become the magnet for Muslim fighters worldwide. It is clear to see that the Gaza surrender of land and the ethnic self-cleansing of Jews constitute solid defeats for Israel and her claims in the land of Israel. The Arabs will use this new gain to further bolster their falsely made claims as phony, "historic Palestinians" to demand the heritage of the Jewish people, including what the Arabs call their own, exclusive historic Jerusalem. It is a bad situation made worse by an Israel that insists on shooting itself in the foot. Traditional Israelis should not fool themselves about what is taking place. The shots that Sharon is firing are directed at the heart of Jewish Israel. It shows his contempt for the Judaism of Jewish Israel in the name of a half-baked universalism that is only universal in its hatred of Judaism. This must weaken the fabric of Israel and Israel's claims to world support of Jewry and its supporters on that account. For if Israel is in business for itself as "israel" with small letter "I" and is not the hope of the Jewish people and its heritage, what is it? A secular, Hebrew speaking version of Cuba is a thing unto itself and will reap the harvest of its actions like all nations of history, many of which having vanished into the dust-bin of history. What is to be done? In a nation in which general strikes go on paralyzing the country for what appear to the outside as trivial matters of a few bucks in salary raises, how is it that the traditional Jews of Israel cannot mount a national strike to shut down Israeli operations for the sake of the cause of Jewish Israel and its lands and communities? If the traditional sectors of Israel fail at this time to halt the despicable Sharon policy of turning against the Jewish people, they will be admitting to the ineptitude and incapability of their sector of society, as though being traditionally Jewish incapacitates Israelis in holding power and in influencing their society. It was bad enough that this sector could not in 50 years turn out a credible national leader -- the one that did emerge was roundly delegitimized and dismissed -- but it will have shown that the interests of this portion of traditional Israeli society could be summarily dismissed without consequences to those who flout them. Such a situation of traditional political paralysis should not go on for a day longer. Leftist Israel has for the past decades been in obsessive support of an incompetent and delusional Universalist philosophy that has empowered the Arab enemy. A glance at the record reveals the leftist ineptitude -- if not madness -- that has misread the character of the enemy, failing to see that this Arab enemy is implacably devoted to Israel's destruction. How else but as madness can one interpret the Israeli surrender to a defeated and exiled Arab enemy that was then brought in to inherit Jewish lands? Surely we deal with rank Leftist madness, which madness is even greater than anyone could anticipate since the Leftists have shown themselves incapable of learning from this history. How long will traditional Israel suffer such Leftist enemies of the nation to hold sway in the land without hearing from a solid, separate, traditional political party that finally acts in its own name? To Go To Top

GAZA, SHOMRON "DISENGAGEMENT" LACKS ANY THREAD OF LOGIC Posted by Moshe Burt, April 29, 2004.

By his renewed threats upon Arafat, on the heels of the assassinations of the two Hamas leaders, Arik Sharon has exposed the inconsistencies, contradictions and irrationality of his proposed disengagement and withdrawal from Gaza and from chunk of the Shomron in conclusive, unequivocal terms. And the argument against such a "disengagement" has been helped immeasurably by comments and clarifications made by none other than the administration of US President Gerorge W. Bush. When Prime Minister Sharon stated that "he no longer feels bound by a pledge he made three years ago to US President George W. Bush not to harm Yasser Arafat", he has blown his own arguments and logic to smitherines regarding American "promises" being rescinded if his dismantlement of Gaza and a chunk of the Shomron are not approved in the upcoming Likud referrendum. For if he were sooo concerned about possible cancellation of Bush's "committments or promises", why would he have spoken in a provocative way just now, mere days before the Likud referendum vote, as to perhaps anger or upset the Bush administration? By his own gaffe, Arik Sharon may have IY'H hammered yet another nail into the Disengagement coffin. That is unless Yosef Q. Likudnik can't grasp and sort out all of the lies, deception, contradiction, inconsistency and lack of coherence which is passed off as nice sounding platitudes designed to deceive and lull the masses into false complacency. And his! comments have all of the markings of desperate politician -- desperate to stay in office and out of court. Prime Minister Sharon returned to Israel, Neville Chamberlain-style, only missing the Chamberlain walking stick, clutching in hand his precious letter from President Bush. And they have heralded, as I've already seen written in one Israeli English-speaking newspaper, how "President Bush has once again rescued Israel in it's hour of need"; from a crisis she (Israel) manufactured herself. The Sharon letter alludes to Ambassador Kurzner's jurisdiction in defining "the construction line of each of the settlements." But now it is emerging that Sharon's heralded promises from President Bush, in his letter to Sharon, are merely "suggestions and observations", in the words of an unnamed State Department spokesperson. Consider the words of US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, who said in a report published in one of Israel's English-speaking newspapers, that Bush's position on the diplomatic process "'is unchanged," and that he (President Bush) is "committed to the proposition that all final settlement issues have to be resolved between the two parties" and that the United States is committed to the welfare, benefit, and the hopes and dreams and aspirations of the Arab nations, and especially the hopes and dreams and aspirations of the Palestinian people." Further, the report stated that "On the one hand Bush said it is unrealistic that Israel will be asked to return to the 1949 armistice lines, or that Palestinian refugees would be repatriated to Israel, yet on the other hand he said these are final status issues that will have to be negotiated by the sides. " This means the same old "Prim Rose Lane" of Arab demands followed by American pressure followed by the complaince of Israeli political grasshoppers. And we note how the words of Colin Powell and an unnamed State Department spokesperson closely resemble the words of former Clinton Middle East Envoy, Dennis Ross who wrote in an article entitled "Why are the Palestinians so worried?" for the Los Angeles Times " that although the US might have an opinion on the subject, there can be no final borders drawn without Palestinian approval. Palestinians will be free to insist on arrangements, including territorial compensation, to make a final agreement acceptable to them. Similarly, Bush expressed his belief that a 'just, fair, and realistic' solution would require refugees to be settled in a future Palestinian state rather than in Israel - but he never suggested that there should not be negotiations on the subject. His statement, which frankly reflects a reality that many people on both sides acknowledge privately, is simply an American judgment on the direction those talks should take. In that sense, it is similar to Bush's earlier call for an independent Palestinian state - not American policy prior to this administration - which reflected his belief that there would be no solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without the creation of such a state. " Just what has brought about this "crisis" and this evil decree of a conniving, hard-hearted Prime Minister? Was it the result of immense pressure from Washington, or any other external source? Heck no. The American government has been involved up to it's eyeballs in an election campaign, in the War in Iraq and in trying to secure her military in Iraq against rebellion, bombings, lynchings, etc. There was no desire at present, on the part of the Bush Administration, for deep involvement in another huge tinder box -- the 56 year old Israeli/Arab conflict. That's if one assumes that should an American President demand, Israel must jump "how high?" That's if one has no divine connection with HaKadosh Borchu and assumes therefore, that a President Bush (or whoever occupies the Oval Office) is the ultimate force rather than Shemayim. But, alas Arik Sharon has awakened a sleeping lion. There was no pressure brought by America in the 1990's after Gulf War to force Israel into an Oslo-type accord. But America was all too happy to bring about a signing and photo ops on the White House Lawn. Yitzhak Rabin obm and the entire B'nai Yisrael were snuckered and manipulated by the Labor/Meretz troika of Peres, Beilin and Sarid who were working, and continue to do so, on behalf of their own self-interests (more often than not counter to Israel's national interest). This evil troika has long sought nothing short of uprooting Jews from their homes -- from Our Land, in Gush Katif, then in parts of Yehuda and Shomron, eventually throughout Eretz Yisrael. In their blind hate of Hashem and Yiddishkeit, this troika has tirelessly sought the separation of Israel from it's Jewish history, it's meaning and heritage, it's traditions and it's divine legacy. They have defamed Hashem and The Land of Israel at the cost of Jewish blood, the loss of hundreds of Jewish lives, the loss of Jewish identity and pride and loss of reason for being in and connection with The land of Israel at the cost of Jewish blood, loss of hundreds of Jewish lives, the loss of Jewish identity, pride and self-esteem. So, a decade later, what brought about today's Sharon-orchestrated crisis, this "hour of need" from which Israel had to be "rescued" by President Bush? Was it an armed military invasion or a Mega-Pigu'a from which Israel was compelled to surrender, sue for a cease-fire at any cost? As the late American comedian of John Belushi of "Saturday Night" used to say Nooooo!! Heaven-forbid!! What brought about this orchestrated crisis was the self-interest and continued prestige of one man -- Arik Sharon, who, in his arrogance and egomania, will do ANYTHING to retain the office of Prime Minister and avoid prosecution as alledged accomplice to the alledged graft and corruption of his sons. For, as everyone knows, while the Left does not constitute the current governing majority, in reality the Left controls all of the institutions which run Israel, including Justice and the Supreme Court. And Prime Minister Sharon knows that the institutional power of the Israeli Left can either see him brought to trial for these allegations, thus forcing him from office or can continue his tenure of power; his continued self-interest, self-aggrandizement, vested interests, preservation of his political power and influence by Labor's joining the government following possible resignations by the National Union and/or Mafdal. In his arrogance and spiritual or moral disease, Arik Sharon chooses President Bush, Shimon Peres, etc. rather than choosing Emunah in Hashem, the unity of B'nai Yisrael and the kedusha of Eretz Yisrael. Once again we hear echos of Rabin's Yehiyeh B'Seder as the playout of Oslo threatens yet a worse replay. Sharon seems truly desperate, because court may be exactly where he falls if the referendum fails, if Peres and company no longer have use for him and if the Attorney General files suit in court against the Prime Minister and his sons on alledged corruption, graft and influence-peddling charges. I won't speak here about the basis of our Biblical connection with Gush Katif as part of Eretz Yisrael, but rather will refer readers to a recent article "Gaza Israel: Our Halacha, Our History, Our Security are Tied to Gush Katif" by Menachem Kovacs (It's a feature article in this issue. See http://www.think-israel.org/kovcs.gushkatif.com.) Why did this Prime Minister and his corrupt advisors run to the super-power, to the very tip of the bosom of the annual US aid to Israel fix in effort to create a fait accompli to compell his program? Why? Why has this Prime Minister created artificial, false arguments and double-talk which hold no water, are totally inconsistent, contradictory and totally lacking in coherence, but which sound nice and serve to deceive and lull the masses into further false complacency? Why has he opportunistically undertaken targeted assassinations of Hamas leaders just now, in the midst of this whole "disengagement" affair, if not to divert the people's attention from the abandonment of Jewish land? And why, amongst his senior Ministers, are there no profiles in courage to stand up and call it like it is, to call a spade a spade? How, for instance, can the Prime Minister and his advisors assert that once we "disengage" from Gaza, the weapons smuggling will halt permanently? And how can he claim that by putting the "Philadelphi corridor" under Egyptian control that infiltrations by land and sea will cease? How will Israel defend herself from future attacks and Pigu'im and take retribution for them when they occur without first running to Washington to ask permission? And how can he now refute his own arguments of past years concerning the strategic necessity of Shomron towns such as Homesh? How does Prime Minister Sharon explain the abrogation of Israel's national sovereignty inherent in his letter to President Bush, in essence, ratifying American Ambassador Kurzner as a defacto "governor" over Israel with "yea or nea" power over construction in Eretz Yisrael? How can we measure the losses, in infrastructure investment, in personal investment and sweat equity of Gaza residents and affected Shomron residents in the four towns slated for dismantlement? How do we measure the collective scars, the loss of self-pride, self-esteem and Jewish self-pride and esteem and the massive decline in the national morale of B'nai Yisrael should, chas v'shalom, a part our legacy become Yudenrein? No matter how one slices the bread, Prime Minister Sharon, Defense Minister Mofaz, OC Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Aharon Ze'evi, etc. all come off as serial liars. No profiles in courage here, just perpetuation of the Oslo mentality dressed in sightly different clothing as Jewish blood continues to flow, that Arik Sharon perpetuates his hold on the office of Prime Minister. I challenge Prime Minister Sharon, Deputy Prime Minister Olmert, Bibi, Limor Livnat and the other Likud politicians favoring this abomination to give the B'nai Yisrael clear, full, consistent, concise, cogent answers to all of the above questions concerning the "disengagement" from Gaza and from part of the Shomron. Odds are, they can't. Moshe Burt, an Oleh, is a commentator on news and events in Israel and Founder and Director of the Sefer Torah Recycling Network (http://www.sefer-torah.com). He lives in Ramat Beit Shemesh. To Go To Top

WHY LIKUD VOTERS MUST REJECT SURRENDER TO TERRORISM Posted by Bernard J. Shapiro, April 29, 2004.

There are many reasons Likud voters should reject PM Ariel Sharon's plan to surrender Gaza to terrorist Arabs and expel its peaceful productive Jewish residents. I have broken these reasons into three categories: moral, strategic and security. Also I will discuss the fact that U.S. President George Bush's commitments to Sharon have no practical value and are of little more than "smoke and mirrors" to cover up a flawed plan. Then I will review the guarantees Israel has given Bush to achieve these delusions. When you look at the whole picture, I believe you will agree that all Likud members should vote a resounding NO against this surrender to terrorism plan. MORAL 1. The expulsion of Jews from Gaza is no different from the expulsion of Jews from any country. This includes the expulsions from Israel by the Romans, Assyrians and Babylonians. In Europe Spain, England, Germany, France, Poland and Russia drove Jews from their homes of many centuries. That Jews should be expelled from Eretz Yisrael by a Jewish government makes it all the more morally reprehensible. 2. Gaza is clearly a part of the Holy Land given by G-d to Abraham for the Jewish People in perpetuity. Sharon has no right to take it upon himself to divest all of us of our inheritance. 3. Sharon claims that the removal of Jews from Gaza would strengthen Israel's ability to protect other Jews. This goes against all Torah principles which state that it is wrong to sacrifice one Jew to save another. 4. One of the greatest moral flaws is the attempt to stifle debate on this crucial decision for the future of Israel. Sharon has refused to debate the issue. The media presents only one side, that of retreat. Israeli politicians are blackmailed into thinking that to go against Sharon's surrender the United States would be upset (which it would not). 5. Surrender to terrorism will embolden it and increase the killing worldwide and not just in Israel. STRATEGIC Gaza has always been strategically important. Throughout history it has been the route of invasion from North Africa into Israel and beyond. Egypt has used Gaza to attack Israel during warfare and with terrorism since before the State of Israel was declared. Jutting like a finger into the heart of Israel it sits only 40 miles from Tel Aviv. Rockets and missiles from Gaza, after retreat, will certainly hit Israeli population centers. Already the strategic port of Ashdod has been struck and most areas in the Negev will become front line communities. Worse still from a strategic standpoint will be the absence of good intelligence on the ground in Gaza. This will make impossible the targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders. It will also create a safe haven for the terrorists to do research and development on advanced weapon systems like missiles capable of carrying biological or chemical warheads. SECURITY Israelis are being promised security by leaving Gaza. Unfortunately this will not be the case for a number of reason: 1. Arabs will still enter Israel to work and a certain number will be homicide bombers. 2. The Gaza fence will not be a perfect barrier to infiltration of terrorists into Israel. With the increased motivation resulting from Israeli retreat, they will seek new innovative ways to cross the barrier. For example, their success in building tunnels into Gaza will be re-directed to tunneling into the Negev from Sinai or directly under the fence. 3. Israelis should expect the terrorists to place greater emphasis on involving Israeli Arabs in acts and support of terrorism. There will be no let up in the terrorist pressure despite assurance that leaving Gaza will have beneficial effects. PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATIONS - Are They Binding? Yoram Ettinger recently published a list of American commitments from history that have proven how worthless those promises were "when push came to shove." We should certainly not rely on American promises in our decision to vacate strategic territory and compromise or moral values and security interests. Here is his list of infamy: FACT: According to the US Constitution, no presidential declaration/promise is binding without a Congressional legislation or ratification. FACT: President Bush's statements (Apr. 7, 2004) on the "1967 Lines" and the "Claim of Return" are not binding. He did not oppose the "claim of return", did not recognize Israel's sovereignty over major settlement blocks in Judea & Samaria, and did not support Israel's sovereignty beyond the "1967 Lines." Presidents Johnson and Reagan stated (September 10, 1968 and September 1, 1982) that Israel should not be expected to withdraw to the "1967 Lines", but it has not prevented their successors - and did not prevent them - to expect such a withdrawal. FACT: President Clinton committed (in 2000) $800MN to Israel, to induce a withdrawal from So. Lebanon. Israel withdrew, Palestinian terrorism escalated, but the committed assistance has not been extended. FACT: Saudi F-15s are stationed at Tabuq, south of Eilat, threatening Israel, in defiance of President Reagan's 1981 commitment to Congress and to Israel. FACT: President Bush promised (in 1991) to direct 30% of US bombing to Western Iraq, in order to destroy the Scud missile launchers, dissuading Israel from a preemptive offensive against Iraq. However, only 3% of the bombing were directed at W. Iraq, the launchers were not destroyed, but Israel was hit in its Soft Belly. FACT: President Nixon committed (in 1970) the US to oppose the deployment of missiles, by Egypt, toward Sinai. Missiles were deployed, Israeli complaints were ignored by the US, and the 1973 War erupted taxing Israel with 2,800 fatalities (more than 100,000 in US terms). FACT: President Eisenhower issued (in 1957) Executive commitments to Israel, in return for a full withdrawal from Sinai. In 1967, Egypt violated the agreement with the US and Israel, the Egypt-Syria-Jordan axis tightened around Israel, President Johnson did not implement the 1957 commitments, which paved the road to the Six Days War. FACT: Presidential candidate Bush made a commitment (in 2000) to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem. In 2004, the embassy is still located in Tel Aviv. Presidential Commitments - The Limits FACT: According to the US Constitution, international treaties and commitments assumed by the president must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate, in order to be constitutionally binding. FACT: According to the US Constitution, the Power of the Purse is on Capitol Hill. No presidential financial commitment stands, unless legislated by Congress (which is constrained by rigid budget caps). FACT: According to the US Constitution, the president and/or Congress can rescind any international commitment by issuing an Executive Order and/or by a congressional vote. FACT: A President may bypass Congress by Executive Agreements and Executive Orders, which could be rescinded by the president, by his successors and by Congress. FACT: US international commitments (including NATO) are characterized by ambiguity, lack of specificity and by the absence of automaticity of implementation, in order to preserve the interests of the US (rather than the interest of other countries). THE BOTTOM LINE: The contention that presidential declarations/promises are carved in stone reflects misunderstanding of the US democracy, a dangerous delusion and ignorance of precedents, which have taxed Israel severely. In return for an ambiguous, non-specific presidential declaration - devoid of an automatic trigger - Israel is expected to carry out a specific, certain and tangible retreat, which would constitute - according to Israel's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Dec. 3, 2003) - a tail wind to Palestinian terrorism. ISRAEL'S COMMITMENTS TO BUSH Israel made many commitments to Bush which greatly limit Israel's sovereignty and its ability to act in its national interests. Some of them are listed below: 1. No settlement growth beyond the limits placed on Israel by the Americans. US Ambassador Kurtzer, who has a pro-Arab bias, will determine those limits. 2. Removal of unauthorized outposts. The list of such outposts will be presented to Ambassador Kurtzer within 30 days. 3. Palestinian revenues should be dispersed. This matter is pending in various courts of law in Israel, awaiting judicial decisions. 4. The Israeli government remains committed to the two-state solution - Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security - as the key to peace in the Middle East. 5. The Israeli government remains committed to the road map as the only route to achieving the two-state solution. 6. The Government of Israel supports the United States' efforts to reform the Palestinian security services to meet their road map obligations to fight terror. Israel also supports the American efforts, working with the international community, to promote the reform process, build institutions, and improve the economy of the Palestinian Authority and to enhance the welfare of its people, in the hope that a new Palestinian leadership will prove able to fulfill its obligations under the road map. The Israeli Government will take all reasonable actions requested by these parties to facilitate these efforts. [This is the most ridiculous of commitments. Can you train terrorists to fight terrorism?] THE BOTTOM LINE I hope the Likud voters will review carefully the material presented here. I believe there is an overwhelming case for voting no on the surrender referendum for moral, strategic and security reasons. And also, the commitments of Bush and Sharon do nothing to change the realities on the ground and we should be wary of falling for "nice words" that mask the real issues. The future of Israel is in your hands now, please do the responsible thing. Bernard J. Shapiro is the executive director of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org) and the editor its monthly Internet magazine, THE MACCABEAN ONLINE. To Go To Top

THE EURO-MAN COMETH? Posted by David Vance, April 29, 2004.

Israel's assassination of Hamas terrorist leader Adbed aziz al-Rantissi earned the predictable scorn of the Euro-men, and the gratitude of the rest of us. Listening to the chorus of horrified outrage from European politicians greeting the news that Israel successfully killed Hamas terrorist leader Abdel aziz al-Rantissi, one could be forgiven for thinking that it had been these liberals' patron saint, Kofi Annan, which Israel had somehow targeted! British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, summed up the views of the Euro-sheep when he bleated, "The British government has made it repeatedly clear that so-called targeted assassinations of this kind are unlawful, unjustified and counter-productive." This echoes similar sentiments he expressed on the occasion of the death of Sheikh Yassin. Then Straw informed Israel that "it is unacceptable, it is unjustified and it is very unlikely to achieve its? objectives." Straw is the archetypical Euro-man. Opposed to terrorism in theory, in practice he does all he can do pacify and appease it. Like most dripping wet liberals, Straw has never met a terrorist that he did not want to engage with. He shares the deep-seated illusion with others of his kind that terrorists can somehow be persuaded to turn away from their murderous path by a winning combination of "inclusive dialogue" and a sympathetic "reaching out." Those who have experienced the cutting edge of terrorism know that this laughable notion could not be more far-fetched. Terrorists deal exclusively in fear, mayhem and death, and they only understand resolute political will and crushing military strength. And yet the most cursory consideration of the current realities also confounds Straw's inane comments. For a start, killing all terrorist masterminds is obviously entirely justified and also highly productive. Who, after all, is Jack Straw to tell Israel what is lawful and what is not? Is he the new Moses? From whence does he derive his moral imprimatur? Has Straw noticed, for example, that Sheikh Yassin has not been unable to plan terror strikes in the past month and that now Rantissi has joined him in a period of eternal inactivity! How many innocent lives have been saved by the removal from planet Earth of these malignant killers? The cowards in Hamas now refuse to even name whoever has succeeded Rantissi because they now know the fiery fate that will befall such a person. That's further proof that terrorists do understand force. In summary, killing certain terrorists is a necessary step for a country determined to defend its citizens. The only issue under discussion should be how many and how quickly these terrorist war-lords can be taken out. But back in Euro-land there is only blank incomprehension at this. The crunch issue for all these straw men is that they cannot bring themselves to accept that Hamas really is a bloody "terrorist" organization. Equivocation has entered the very soul of this political class and rendered it incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong. We saw this manifest in their desire to keep Saddam in power and we see it most recently in the result of the Spanish election, when left-winger Jose Zapatero cruised to power on the back of his pathetic pleading for al Qu'eda to please leave his country alone. Thus the likes of the late unlamented Sheikh Yassin are portrayed as "deeply spiritual" men whose only crime was to be Palestinian. The Euro-media conspire in this nauseating fantasy through the repeated description of Hamas members as either "militants" or "activists." The "t" for terrorist word is never mentioned! This nuanced evasion instills the idea that somehow machine-gun toting Hamas thugs seeking to indiscriminately slaughter Israeli men women and children are a legitimate counter to the IDF. Welcome to the land of the Euro-man! By killing the terrorist Rantissi, Israel has done a great service to true democrats everywhere. It has shown that there is at least one nation outside of the United States that fully understands that terrorists must be brought to justice or justice visited upon them. It has demonstrated, once again, that it is a moral beacon in the darkness of the Middle East. For that, it earns the predicable scorn of the Euro-men and the gratitude of the rest of us. David Vance, an economist by qualification and successful UK businessman, has been actively campaigning against the decline in political standards in the United Kingdom. Living in Northern Ireland he has been prominent in opposing all forms of terrorism and is a fierce critic of the British government and its appeasement of terrorists. He has been writing political commentary for a number of years and has been published throughout the UK, Israel, Gibraltar and recently the USA. His website, A Tangled Web, takes issue with the leftist political elite and seeks to promote the upholding of conservative values and the nation state. This article was published in Intellectual Conservative (http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3356.html) and Opinionet (http://www.opinionet.com) He can be reached by email at d.vance1@btopenworld.com To Go To Top

DON'T KILL ARAFAT: A REAL SOLUTION Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, April 29, 2004.

A promise is a promise. If Ariel Sharon indeed gave his scout's honor to President Bush not to kill "the inventor of modern terrorism," then Sharon must surely keep his word and continue to protect Arafat. Is it worth the effort to rid the world of this "architect of modern terror," when Israel already has him under virtual house arrest? Although the word is that he will become a "great martyr" in death, who was the last political leader killed who actually attained such an elite status? The Islamic world has quickly forgotten martyred leaders with names like Nidal, Al-Makadmah, al Qassam, Karmi, Shikalki, Sali, Uday and Quasay, the dead al Qaeda leaders, et al, who have merely become part of "the garbage heap of history." The only terrorists whose pictures and memories are still paraded throughout the fundamentalist Middle East and beyond are the likes of Barghouti, Saddam and bin Laden. It is precisely because these "heroes" are still alive that they are considered martyrs. Attention George Bush and all other Western leaders who love democracy, goodness and freedom. You have it all wrong. "Kill the martyr and you destroy the martyrdom!" Much of Europe and the American left is actually afraid of the Arab/Muslim street and its reaction, because their primary concern is not right and wrong. It is keeping angry, irrational people calm, so that they will not burn our flags or threaten us with terrorism. The liberal/left mentality wants to be "loved," or at least liked, while sitting in coffee shops discussing Marx, Nietzsche and Heidegger. It is much more important for the Islamic world to fear us. Why should anyone even care about being liked by people with such horrendous values. If winning over their passions means caving into decency, why bother? It should be so obvious that highly moral nations should support a tiny democracy called Israel over nations that are totalitarian, autocratic, consider women chattel, suppress all other religions, lie in their press, imprison and kill homosexuals, and seem to be naturally anti-American and antisemitic. The world must not treat both sides equally, when one side is so very wrong and morally corrupt. Support of the Jewish State seems obvious to George W. Bush, but difficult for the likes of Jacques Chirac, Gerhart Schroeder, much of the EU and most Scandinavian countries. Although Churchill and Roosevelt are spinning in their graves, Hitler is probably re-saluting the French and their followers amidst the flames of hell. So how does Israel honor a promise and still do the right thing? How about this for an innovative, non-military, compassionate solution. Don't kill Arafat; capture him. Send a special forces IDF team with their stun grenades and seizure tactics to snatch Yasser for trial. The creative part of the solution would be his unique detention facility. Since the world will be watching this case more carefully than the Nuremberg Trials, Israel must keep the good Chairman in a totally open environment. Otherwise, the pr savvy PA will take a page from the fictitious "Jenin Massacre" playbook and invent some new Israeli torture tactics performed on this poor old "innocent" man. Therefore, Israel must select the largest, most comfortable lion's cage, which would be set up in the lovely Tel Aviv Zoo, so that Mr. Arafat gets a nice view and continuous fresh air. This open air pen with steel bars and "a fence" in front of it, would contain a complete office and sleeping quarters, so that the world can witness his wonderful treatment. With a minimum of 100 cable tv channels including al-Jazeera and a high speed cable modem, his amenities would certainly be a whole lot better than any captured Israeli has ever received, or for that matter any person jailed in an Arab country. The PA leader could meet in full public view with his sophisticated French attorney, Jacques Verges, on the way to meeting his other "moral" client, Saddam Hussein. Human Rights Watch and the ACLU could be stationed there 24 hours a day to insure proper treatment under international law. This brand new incarceration scenario is not just some clever emotional fantasy or satirical editorial suggestion. It is a very real, well thought out solution to allow an overly concerned world the ability to monitor Israel's actions. It remains a mystery why the UN and most countries never seem to be distressed about the genocide in the Sudan or Rwanda, the death squads in Syria and Iran, the human rights abuses in North Korea and China, etc. Nevertheless, Chirac, Schroeder and Kofi Anan will be overjoyed to learn that the Palestinian "leader" will be getting his 3 decent square meals a day. In addition, think of all the fresh fruits, vegetables and candy bars that many concerned visitors will bring to toss into his "special facility" with love. Imagine what this idea will do for the Israeli tourism industry? The man who was most responsible for destroying visits to the Holy Land would now be instrumental in "resurrecting" it. This area definitely needs another resurrection, the way things are going! How many millions of additional visitors will come to view this spectacle in support or opposition? Zoo admissions alone would probably create a new GNP category. Hotels and restaurants would be filled once again with people who wish to see this new "wonder of the world," the so-called freedom fighter who somehow refuses to die. A man who has spent his entire career leading a people into oblivion and receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. After 40 years of Arafat's leadership, the "state" of Palestinians is actually quite horrendous. Obviously, many concerned citizens, especially intellectuals, will question the ethics of this new "zoo prison," and whether it is appropriate for a decent, moral democracy to use such methods for holding terrorist leaders. However, there is a deep sociological and societal response. Terrorists are a special category of non human species. They may look like us, but they are actually a new monstrous breed with human characteristics. Even animals want to live and do not send their children to die purposely. Therefore, Arafat, bin Laden, Rantisi, Yassin and their herd are a new life form that is actually much lower than the animal kingdom. The purpose of a zoo is to display all non human species and creatures for humanity to study. Perhaps we can learn why they seek to blow up babies in pizza parlors, slit stewardesses throats, run airplanes into office buildings filled with innocent people trying to make a living, all for a phony cause that they deem to be right. What President Bush does not understand about Iraq, and Prime Minister Sharon never seems to grasp about the Arab world, is that the key to winning is not only military success. It has virtually nothing to do with an intellectual battle for their hearts and minds. It has everything to do with a totally decisive military victory, so that every enemy of America or Israel feels the pain and fear, and is ultimately grateful for the freedom given by the victor. Secondly, and perhaps even important, is creating a feeling of humiliation, the most frightening emotion in the Arab/Muslim lexicon. Much of the Islamic Middle East would rather be dead than humiliated. Only when these macho men come to live by American Judeo-Christian values, which can indeed be coupled with Islam, will they begin to realize the insignificance of being the strongest, most powerful guy on the block. What is truly important is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness....and taking your family to Disneyworld. Wake up President Bush. The Bronx Zoo has some room for Saddam! Irwin N. Graulich is a motivational speaker on politics, ethics, religion and Judaism. He is also president of a marketing, branding and communications firm in New York City. To Go To Top

THE AMERICAN JEWISH CONGRESS Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 29, 2004.

"The spread of radical Islamic fundamentalism both here and abroad has brought us face to face with a new wave of violent anti-Semitism" - so read the American Jewish Congress Response Form I received, with appeals for contributions. I didn't check $50 or $500, but made my contribution with an asterix in Other, followed with my priceless offer and plea: Solution: 1) Let every Jew make aliyah to the Jewish Homeland and 2) Let Israel REMOVE THE THREAT of Arab terrorism, as taught by Moses and Rabbi Kahana, that they may become holy before G-d in the safe haven of Israel. Anti-Semitism ought to be condemned everywhere, but how can Jews have the chutzpah to ask other nations to do what the Jewish Homeland won't even do for themselves? This has got to change! Will you help it change, or just continue to whine and dine while the stormclouds of another Holocaust, ignited by the fascist EU, cast their dark shadows across the continent? For Zion's Sake David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall". See http://www.benariel.com. To Go To Top

THE LIKUD REFERENDUM Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, April 29, 2004.

This Sunday we will all have a golden opportunity to bring an end to the bloody Oslo decade. The central issue in question is not the fate of Gush Katif but that of all Israeli citizens. A clear decision by the ruling party against the destruction of Gush Katif means a deathblow to the Oslo process. You don't have to read the small print of the disengagement plan to understand that it is the direct continuation of the process of hatred for the land and those settling it, a reward for the murderers of Jews, a denial of the justice of our very existence here, and intensification of the processes of collapse and death that we have brought upon ourselves in the last decade. If the ruling party, the Likud, rejects this bad plan, no future leader (who will naturally come from this party) will dare to propose such ideas. It means the saving of the lives of tens of thousands of Israelis, in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Hadera, and everywhere in the country. Consequently this Sunday must be for everyone a day devoted to a struggle for life. Not everyone in Tel Aviv understands this, but this does not absolve us, the belief-based, realistic public, from responsibility for the lives and fate of all the Jews. Those who plan to go to work as usual on Sunday fail to realize that on that day we are fighting for our lives and that everyone has a task in order to continue to the victory: * Take a day off from work and come to the Likud voting booths near where you live. * Large crowds who stand near the booths throughout the day and demonstrate (in an orderly manner) against the disengagement plan will influence the floating voters, and will cause supporters of the plan to think again. * If there are already enough people at your nearby polling station, volunteer to stand outside other booths. We have a great problem with voting booths in the Arab sector. The family-controlled political machine arranged the voting booths inside the homes of their supporters. We need volunteers to create a presence there, as well as in kibbutzim and remote places. Please call 03-7415849 and be assigned a place. * Volunteer to transport people in your car. Even in Yesha there is a problem of voters who have changed their address without updating the Likud, and of soldiers who can only receive a few hours' leave to go and vote and then return to their units. Please call 1-800-260-240 to be added to the list of volunteers. * Continue to persuade Likudniks until the last moment - this is effective! Return to those you have already visited, and encourage them. Maintain contact with them even after the referendum. And when you've done everything you can, pray to our Father in Heaven. Pray that in this referendum the Jewish people will win. With G-d's help we will all hear on Sunday night the good news that the Jewish people chose to be loyal to their country and not to reject its Jewish identity. If this happens we shall all go at once to Jerusalem and at the foot of the Temple Mount we shall express thanksgiving to the Creator. We shall meet at the entrance to the Kotel Plaza. Our aim: To perfect the world in the kingdom of the Almighty Please help us expand Manhigut Yehudit's membership list. Send our updates to your list as well. Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

SENSE, SENSIBILITIES AND NONSENCE Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, April 29, 2004.

Rumors are rife. A no-vote could mean an end to the Likud party, an end to Sharon's reign, and an embarrassment for President Bush and Prime Minister Blair. It could also spell an end to the UN and the G4's plans for the region. There would be harsh diplomatic, economic and security repercussions. The peace process could be left in shambles. The sky would fall and the stocks would crash. And yet I remain unmoved. The people of Israel have been saturated with political shenanigans, nonsense and negligence, and a good number of us have reached our limits. None of Ariel Sharon's bloated, scheming and meaningless doomsday scenarios touches us like the thought of uprooting even one Jewish community in the Land of Israel. Nothing repels our senses more than the sickening grin that would cross Arafat's face if this were to, G-d forbid, come to pass. Perhaps you were one of the fortunate ones to sense the breath of fresh air that blew in as you answered your door these past two weeks and were greeted by an authentic group of rootin', tootin' settlers. That strange, yet somewhat familiar sensation you felt as you conversed with them was a sense of clarity. Throngs of hard-working, honest people -the salt of the earth-speaking the truth. And it all made so much sense. Sharon declared: "Anyone who believes in me must vote for the disengagement..." Maybe we don't believe in you. Maybe we believe in the those brave, determined people and everything they represent. A lot of us are beginning to ask, is the enemy so formidable or is it our leadership that's been so weak? I mean the paralyzed Yassin and trembling Arafat hardly qualify as Goliaths or Roman legions? Perhaps it's the settlers and their faith and determination that's the only bright spot in what has clearly been an embarrassing chapter for the Jewish people - a chapter that many Israelis are more than ready to close. Maybe that's why the polls are tipped on the side of justice and Sharon is in a panic. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael..com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com To Go To Top

MOVING THE GOAL POSTS Posted by Ted Belman, April 29, 2004.

This is archived a t http://israpundit.com/archives/006013.html#more Bush's letter to Sharon made two declarations as opposed to promises or commitments. The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel. As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, 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 all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities. Having written all that, both Bush and Powell went on to also assert that all issues must be settled between the parties. In an address to the UN, the US Ambassador, James B Cunningham said My government has no intention of prejudicing the outcome of permanent status negotiations. A lasting settlement can only be reached through direct negotiations and mutual agreement between the parties. The problem is that you can't have it both ways. If all issues are to be settled by direct negotiations then assurances such as these have no meaning. In fact it goes without saying that the parties to a conflict must negotiate to reach an agreement. But there is no obligation to reach an agreement and there never is. If either the "Palestinians" or the Israelis won't make the necessary concessions to reach an agreement with the other, then negotiations won't lead anywhere and there won't be a settlement of the issues. The Quartet, including the US, know this and really do not intend to allow the parties to freely negotiate because they know an agreement won't be reached. They also know that the Palestinians will never agree to less than '67 borders with mutual exchanges of land and a right of return in whole or in part of the refugees. So the Roadmap was designed with the intention of forcing Israel to make the necessary concessions. To start with, it mandated the creation of a Palestinian State that is viable and contiguous. Normally these would be matters for negotiations. They were in Oslo. So the Roadmap improves on Oslo to better the position of the "Palestinians" by requiring Israel to ensure that the state to be is "viable and contiguous". Now that Bush has suggested that there won't be a right of return or that demographic realities have to be taken into account, meaning borders other than the '67 borders, the Arabs and the EU are up in arms. They argue that these issues shouldn't be pre-judged and even go so far as to say all the land east of the '67 lines is Palestinian and cannot be taken unless they agree. Anyone can see that to make such a stipulation is to pre-judge the outcome. But that is precisely what they want. They want to start from the position that all these lands are Palestinian lands and that Israel must compensate the "Palestinians" for any it keeps. What Sharon has attempted to do, and what Bush seems to support, is to make demographic realities the starting point and not the '67 armistice lines. This is what the present controversy is all about and why it is so crucial to the whole process. If the parties could agree on the starting point or if it can be imposed on one or the other, the negotiations have a chance to succeed. Another factor that Bush stressed that mitigates against the armistice lines as the starting point is that that the borders must be secure and recognized pursuant to Res 242. Such borders are decidedly not the '67 lines. This resolution was interpreted by its framers as permitting Israel to retain some of the lands so that the resulting border would be a secure one. The Arabs and the EU are adamantly against such interpretation and they prefer, nay, insist, that the '67 lines are the starting point. The Roadmap went so far as to suggest that security for Israel would flow from a peace agreement rather than from land retention. Bush also stressed in the letter that Under the road map, "Palestinians" must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister. The Roadmap stipulates that this is to be done as part of Phase 1 but includes a number of clauses that water down this requirement. I would have preferred that Bush would have reiterated that this must be done and completed before negotiations commence. But at least it is implied. If it were insisted upon then the Palestinians would no longer be able to trade the cessation of terror and incitement for land, otherwise called "peace for land", as they would have to abandon these things before trading started. Then they would be reduced to trading land for land. And the only land available for trading is parts of Yesha. This is the direction Sharon and Bush are heading. This is also a dramatic change from previous US policy. Ever since the Six Days War, the US has taken the position that settlement activity is illegal or at least an obstacle to peace. Furthermore it has always been against unilateral moves by any party which in reality, meant by Israel. In fact the Roadmap stipulates this. This policy, I might add, has been the bain of Israel's existence. It was intended to preserve all the land for the "Palestinians". While Bush still maintains the fiction that the US is still against unilateral moves, Bush can no longer claim that the settlements are illegal or an obstacle to peace. And what I might add is wrong with unilateral moves or on what basis can such a condition be imposed on Israel? This policy was manifestly unjust to Israel and certainly pre-judged the outcome. Unfortunately Bush is still demanding that Israel cease settlement growth. This whole process starts with the assumption that the Arabs and the Israelis can live on this small piece of land in two separate states in peace and harmony once they have reached an agreement. All experience tells us that this is a pipe dream. The Arabs have shown for over one hundred years that they are not prepared to accept the existence of the state of Israel. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that they have changed their minds in this regard. Secondly to work out a sharing of air space, water and other issues necessary for two countries to coexist together in such cramped quarters is bad enough if they get along but impossible if they are enemies. Finally the state to be will never be able to absorb all the refugees and create an economy robust enough to sustain the growing population. It will forever be a basket case and a hotbed of radicalism. To create such a state is not the end of the problem but the transformation of the problem into a bigger problem. Do you think that the Arabs will be satisfied with such a state? No way. They view such a state as a stepping-stone to the destruction of Israel. It is for this reason some of them are prepared to accept such a state. Just as they didn't honour their commitments in Oslo or the Roadmap, they won't honour the commitments, which they will make as part of an end of conflict agreement. Is it too much to hope that a two state solution will ultimately be abandoned? I hope not. Ted Belman is a major contributor to the Israpundit website (http://israpundit.com). To Go To Top

BRAHIMI, BUSH APPOINTEE; UN IGNORES MOST HUMANS' RIGHTS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 29, 2004.

BUSH APPOINTEE FOR IRAQ Pres. Bush appointed a UN official and former official of the Arab League, Lakhdar Brahimi to set up a new Iraqi government. Mr. Brahimi said he came not as representative of the UN (or of the US) but as a fellow Arab. Two years ago, he laid the deaths of a couple of hundred thousand Iraqi children at the feet of UN sanctions. He ignored the decisive evidence that the children were deprived of the plan's financial underpinning by Iraqi connivance with corrupt UN and foreign officials. The US was instrumental in promoting that plan but not in perverting it (Eli Lake, NY Sun, 12/23, p.1). The State Dept. keeps appointing Arabs who stand for what we oppose and oppose what we stand for. The US retains them on the staff until protest forces them off. UN WATCH CHIDES UN UN Watch admonished the UN for its "traditional silence over the violation of political rights in Zimbabwe, women's rights in Iran, and religious rights in China. UN Watch also berated on the floor the legitimacy of the special meeting called by the Human Rights Commission over Israel's killing Hamas chief Yassin. It is an "unending pattern of discussion by this Commission against one state." PS, the UN condemned the "tragic assassination." (What about Rantisi?) In a new strategy, UN Watch introduced to the topic of violation of human rights in occupied Arab territories, the subject of the special meeting, a brief against Syria's illegal occupation of Lebanon and repression of its freedom and human rights. The UN Commission on Human rights, however, passed no resolutions except against Israel (IMRA, 4/22). If the UN were at all decent, it would have take up the plight of the Lebanese years ago. What purpose does the UN serve? Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

THOUGHTS TO PONDER: THERE IS NOBODY LIKE OUR GOD/WHO IS LIKE OUR GOD? Posted by Rabbi Dr. Natan T. Lopes Cardozo, April 29, 2004.

Commentators have noted that the sequence of the famous song-prayer "Ein Keloh-enu" ("Nobody is like our God") sang at the end of the morning service is somehow odd. In this prayer we first state that there is nobody like our God and then continue and ask "Mi-Keloh-enu" ("Who is like our God?"). Would it not be more logical first to ask who is like our God and afterwards continue to state that nobody is like Him? Even more surprising is the fact that the song does not answer its own question. Nowhere throughout the song is there any answer to "Mi-Keloh-enu" ("Who is like our God?") All what one could argue is that the song answers its own question ("There is nobody like our God") before the question is posed! It seems that it is not the answer, but the question that counts. By reversing the obvious order and refusing to answer its own question, Judaism wants to make the point that the recognition of God is first of all an act of faith and only in the second place an act of philosophical inquiry. This is not because reason has no place within Judaism, but because faith is more than reason. The first is absorbed by the brain and is not able to surpass it. When, however an act of faith takes place, it occurs in the form of an upheaval which agitates the whole of man far beyond the limitations of ratio. Faith, while recognizing the importance of reason, is contingent on the courage of the believer in realizing that reason can be abused and be presumptuous. By putting a non-starter kind of answer before the question, the song of "Ein Keloh-enu" asks a most powerful question: "How is reason able to understand which is absolutely different from itself?" For if God is absolutely unlike man then man is absolutely unlike God. But how then can human reason be expected to understand this? Merely for man to obtain the knowledge that God is unlike himself, man needs the help of God. At the same time one should use reason to demonstrate its own limitations. Reason can disclose eternal truths, including the opacity of reason. Its main function is to recognize that there is an infinity of things which surpasses it (Pascal). And just like power corrupts, so reason is able to corrupt, often enslaving all those whose minds are not strong enough to master it. The song of "Ein Keloh-enu" therefore reflects a deep Jewish sentiment. It rejects the traditional so called "rational demonstrations" for the existence of God since they exist of serious paradoxes. Once you prove God's existence, you have brought Him within the limits of reason and as such disproved the matter you wanted to demonstrate. To recognize that there might be something that not only transcends all concepts but even stands totally outside any "concept" is an important dimension of religious truth. "All souls descend from Heaven to Earth", said the Kotzker Rebbe "and once they have arrived the 'ladder' is removed. Then the souls are told that their life task is to find their way back to Heaven, so they start looking for the ladder...Some people give up, after all: How can one ascend to Heaven without the ladder? Others throw themselves to heaven and fall. But wise people are those who know that there is no alternative: What we are called up to try to do we must do. Whatever happens we must continue to strive upward till God Himself will come to our aid". "In the confinement of our study rooms our knowledge seems to us a pillar of light. But when we stand at the door which opens out to the infinite, we realize that all concepts are but glittering motes that populate a sunbeam" (1). This is the secret of "Ein Keloh-enu". Shabbat Shalom from Yerushaliyim, Notes: 1. Abraham Joshua Heshel "Man is not alone": A Philosophy of Religion", Farrar, Straus &Giroux, Inc; N.Y., page 35 (Because of the serious political situation in Israel, leading rabbinical authorities have suggested saying the following Tehilim (Psalms) every day: Chapters 83, 130 and 142.) Rabbi Dr. Nathan T. Lopes Cardozo is a member of the Council of Consulting Rabbis and Torah Scholars, Root and Branch Association, Ltd. He is Dean of the David Cardozo School for Jewish Studies and Human Dignity (Machon Ohr Aaron); This article was distributed by the Root and Branch Society of Jerusalem (rb@rb.org.il). To Go To Top

INTIMIDATION = BIAS Posted by Honest Reporting, April 29, 2004.

An important new documentary film, Jenin: Massacring Truth, debuted on Canada's Global TV last night. The film addresses the grossly irresponsible world media coverage of the IDF's 2002 Jenin incursion, which left an indelible stain on world opinion of Israel. The film includes this revealing exchange between filmmaker Martin Himel and Dr. Tim Benson, founder of the British editorial cartoonists' society that honored the Sharon-eating-babies cartoon with its 2003 'Cartoon of the Year': Himel: My question to you is, why, in all these [images] don't we see Sharon and Arafat eating babies? Benson: Maybe because Jews don't issue fatwas. Himel: What do you mean by that? Benson: Well, if you upset an Islamic or Muslim group, as you know, fatwas can be issued by Ayatollahs and such, and maybe it's at the back of each cartoonist's mind, that they could be in trouble if they do so. Himel: If they do what? Benson: If they depict, uh, say, an Arab leader in the same manner. Himel: Then they could suffer? Benson: Then they could suffer death, couldn't they? Benson's statement is an open admission that Arab/Palestinian intimidation produces an anti-Israel bias among western journalists. When HonestReporting confronted Dr. Benson about his organization's award last year, Benson wrote us: You have all taken this award completely out of perspective and context. Shame on you! We do so much good. If only you looked at our website properly you would have noticed that in fact we promote anti-fascism and educate about the dangers of extremism. Dr. Benson, in this film, educates everyone on one of the dangers of Muslim extremism - the intimidation of his journalist colleagues, cowed into a false portrayal of the Mideast conflict. We now also understand the proper 'perspective and context' of the Sharon cartoon - a threatening environment to journalists who dare portray Arab leaders in a negative light. HonestReporting has long maintained that Palestinian intimidation of the press is a key contributing factor to biased coverage of the Mideast conflict - see our special report on this topic. Perhaps such intimidation contributed to this event, two years ago in Ramallah, related this week by Jerusalem Post reporter Khaled Abu Toameh: With a crowd of international reporters standing around, two Palestinian policemen brought a man out, threw him up against a wall and shot him - right under the window of Arafat's office. When the reporters converged, the policeman seemed bewildered. It was just a simple execution, nothing to get excited about, he said. And no one did. In fact, according to Abu Toameh, no one else even mentioned it. HonestReporting encourages subscribers to contact your local cable companies to arrange broadcasting Jenin: Massacring Truth in your area. The film is available through CanWest. [Here's a good article on Jenin: Massacring Truth from the Calgary Herald.] NEW VERSION OF RELENTLESS Speaking of essential documentaries, HonestReporting has released a new version of our documentary film Relentless: The Struggle for Peace in the Middle East. This updated version includes added footage of current Mideast developments, and interviews with: *  Natan Sharansky, Israel Minister of Diaspora Affairs *  Yariv Oppenheim, Secretary General, Peace Now *  Mr. S. El-Herfi, Palestinian Ambassador to South Africa *  Tashbih Sayyed, Editor in Chief, Pakistan Today See the Relentless site for video trailers, upcoming screenings, and purchase info. Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias. HonestReporting Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167 To Go To Top

ROBBERS DIE TRYING TO HOLD-UP SUICIDE BOMBER Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 29, 2004.

I know I am going to get a few nasty emails on this but this is really funny. No one could have made up a funnier Arab joke. It was a news item on April 27, 2004 in Ireland On-Line (http://212.2.162.45/news/story.asp?j= 42866720&p=4z867xy6&n=42867055) A Hamas suicide bomber blew up two armed Palestinians who tried to rob him at gun point in the Gaza Strip. Hamas claimed the stickup men" worked for Israeli intelligence, while Palestinian security forces said the two were ordinary thieves. Rather than give up his explosives, the bomber detonated them, killing himself and the two robbers near the border fence between Gaza and Israel. Palestinian security officials said the the gunmen were criminals who were involved in a car theft ring that brought stolen vehicles from Israel to Gaza. Hamas said the bomber was on his way to try to infiltrate into Israel, accompanied by another Hamas member and a guide, when they were stopped by the armed men. The robbers forced the bomber to lie on the ground and tried to steal the bomb, but the militant detonated it, killing all three. The other Hamas man and the guide escaped. There have been cases of rival groups stealing each other's explosives, but no group claimed the two gunmen, and their families did not go to the hospital to take the bodies, indicating that the two were not militants, who are revered in Palestinian society. A Hamas official said that whatever their intention, the two should be considered agents of Israel. "Anyone who tries to stop a fighter from doing his work is a collaborator," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Hamas has been threatening punishing retaliatory attacks since Israel killed the founder of the Islamic group, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, in a helicopter missile strike on March 22, and his successor, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, in another missile attack three weeks later. Because of the threats, security was especially tight for Israel's independence day holiday today. Police set up roadblocks on highways, checking drivers, as Israelis crowded public parks and forests for traditional holiday cookouts. Palestinians were banned from entering Israel, as they have been since a double suicide bombing attack that killed 10 Israelis in the port of Ashdod on March 14, idling about 16,000 Palestinian workers who have entry permits. In Gaza, tens of thousands of Israelis streamed to Gush Katif, a bloc of Israeli settlements, to celebrate Israel's independence day and protest at Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw from all of the coastal strip by next year. The members of Sharon's Likud Party will vote on the plan on Sunday, with polls giving Sharon only a slight lead. In an independence day interview on Israel TV, Sharon appeared confident that he would win the Likud vote on his disengagement plan. By this time next year, he said, "we will be in the midst of disengagement from Gaza." In the northern West Bank, Israeli troops raided the Tulkarem refugee camp with jeeps and armoured personnel carriers and conducted house-to-house searches. Soldiers exchanged fire with Palestinian gunmen, killing two and seriously wounding a third. Israeli military officials said one of the dead was Ashraf Nafa, 21, the Hamas leader in Tulkarem. The other was Amjad Amra, 21, from the Islamic Jihad group. The officials said both had links to Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas and planned attacks against Israelis. The wounded man, a member of Hamas, was taken to an Israeli hospital. 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

PROCLAMATION OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE ITALIAN MUSLIM ASSOCIATION Posted by Aryeh Gallin, April 29, 2004.

I would like to bring to your attention the Proclamation of the Italian Muslim Board of Governors praising Israel for the execution of "Saudi" Arabian petro-dollar profit funded Wahhabi Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin. Blessings to you from Sheikh Palazzi in Rome. Shabbat Shalom from Liberated Yerushaliyim, Now Pharoah made himself a tyrant in the land [of Egypt]. He divided his people into castes, one group of which [Children of Israel] he persecuted, putting their [Israel's] sons to death and sparing only their daughters. Truly, he [Pharoah] was an evil-doer. But it was Our will to favour those [Children of Israel] who were oppressed in the land [of Egypt], to make them [Children of Israel] leaders [among men], to make them heirs [of the Land of Israel]; and to inflict on Pharoah, Haman and their warriors the very scourge they dreaded.  [Qur'an, Sura 28:4-6, al-Qasas/The Story] And Korah, Pharoah and Haman! Moses came to them with veritable signs, but they behaved arrogantly in the land [of Egypt and Persia], powerless though they were to escape Us [Allah]: and in their sinfulness, one and all, We [Allah] smote them [Korah, Pharoah and Haman]. On some We sent down a violent whirlwind; others the Cry overtook; some We caused to be swallowed up by the earth, and yet others We overwhelmed by the Flood. God did not wrong them [Korah, Pharoah and Haman], but they wronged themselves.  [Qur'an, Sura 29:39-40, al-'Ankabut/The Spider] And G-d said to Noah: "The end of all flesh is come before Me; for the earth is filled with 'hamas' [violence] through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth".  [Bereshit/Genesis 6:13] The Italian Muslim Association Board of Governors blesses Israeli President Moshe Katsav, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Israel's Government, the Israel Defense Forces and People of Israel for the noble act of justice which cleansed our earth of the unrepentant criminal Ahmed Yasin. We bless the Israeli Government for ending the mischief of one who sent scores of suicide slaughterers to murder hundreds of innocent civilians -- babies, women and men -- and to cripple and permanently maim hundreds more. We bless the United States President, Congress and American People for standing with Israel in this heroic act of self-defense. We condemn the shameless declarations by European Union and United Kingdom Foreign Ministers Solana and Straw "deploring" the execution of mass murderer Ahmed Yasin. Yasin trained an entire generation of people -- ignorant, scarcely literate and degenerate in their understanding of religion -- to commit suicide and murder. The victory of democratic Israel against global terror is a shining light in the war of civilized humanity against barbarian violence. Israel, in a legally and morally just operation carefully planned to avoid harming civilians, acted as a humanitarian democracy able to defend itself. Israel is the opposite of those nations which surrender to terror after a first strike, who run bleating to fulfill the demands of Bin Laden like frightened sheep. Those who raise white flags of fear and defeat after a first shot -- be they political parties or entire nations -- dare not "condemn" courageous nations such as Israel which successfully stand up to terror. Israel cleansed the earth of the bloodthirsty monster Yasin, granting all humanity the possibility of a better future. Yasin's elimination spread chaos and confusion through Middle East terror networks, triggering a deep crisis within the Saudi-funded "Muslim Brotherhood". With Yasin dead, Hamas wobbles. Hamas leadership is now problematic. Each prospective candidate for the head of this terrorist group knows that God's punishment awaits him. In Italy there have been immediate results. A former Hamas supporter from Tunisia who once worked with al-Qa'idah claims to have repented. He now works with the Italian judiciary and police. This change is local, yet it shows how the elimination of Ahmed Yasin makes al-Qa'idah weaker, plunges the "Muslim Brotherhood" into crisis and restricts Bin Laden's manoeuvres. This makes our world safer. In striking down Yasin, Israeli Prime Minister Sharon did justice to all victims of worldwide terror, not only to victims in Israel, but to those of 9/11 in New York and Washington, D.C., in Moscow, Istanbul, Bali, Nasiriyyah and Madrid. A morally opaque individual such as European Union Foreign Minister Solana well represents a country such as Spain, surrendering to terror and running with the bulls away from participation in the war against it. Spain shows terrorists that "our only defense is showing we have no defense". Let Solana escort Spain's immorality to Europe's perpetual political costume ball dressed up in drag as glorious virtue. Let Spain's Cowardly Conquistadores hide their shame in Solana's petticoats. But let them at least be silent in the presence of mighty nations and their leaders, such as Israel and its prime minister, who give humanity victories in our war of light against darkness. All people harmed by mass murderers worldwide thank Ariel Sharon for showing that "united we stand, united we win" when democratic nations have strong leaders. After the victories in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war of free peoples against global terror springs back from Madrid's slaughter with a critical victory. We Italian Muslims thank the People of Israel and their prime minister for freeing our world from one of its most evil criminals. Yasin was worse than Pharaoh. Pharoah murdered Israelite boy babies, while sparing girls, to make Egypt more powerful. Yasin sent women and children from his own people to commit suicide and murder innocent Israelis. Such was Yasin's "work", until the day came when Allah decreed that Yasin's target bank of sin had overflowed, and the penalty due to him finally be paid. We declare that a world without Ahmed Yasin is a better world. We look forward to a future when our world will spit out those who train illiterate and ignorant people, children and even mentally disturbed teens, in hatred, terrorism and apostasy from Islam. A world without Ahmed Yasin draws us closer to the Final Redemption, to a world where people will want to live, not want to commit suicide and murder. Our world today has men and women -- Jews, Christians, Muslims and others -- united in faith that the world war on terror launched after 9/11 will, with Allah's help, be won. The fall of the heroes of Nasiriyyah was followed by the capture of Saddam Hussein. The carnage of Madrid was followed by Israel's victory. Israel's people and their leader gave a practical gift and moral lesson to Europeans who fast forget their recent past. With one blow, Israel and Sharon showed our world that not all nations run like Spain. We thank Israel and Ariel Sharon for enlightening those who claim that mass murderers will overcome us, that our only salvation is through surrender (negotiating under fire). Israel and Ariel Sharon showed that we can fight mass murderers shot by shot, without surrender and flight, by mobilizing deterrence, locking on target to mass murderers and striking them down in places where they once felt safe. With Allah's help, may we all look forward to a redeemed world free of wicked men such as Ahmed Yasin, Osama Bin Laden and those who support them, and free of havens of refuge to which they can run and in which they can hide. Wa-s-salamu `alaykum wa rahmat-Ullahi wa barakatuH (May peace, God's mercy and His blessings be upon you) Board of Governors Italian Muslim Association www.amislam.com mailto:islam.inst@flashnet.it Mr. Aryeh Yosef Gallin is President of the Root and Branch Association, Ltd. He is a Member, Foreign Press Association in Israel and a Member, New York City Chapter, U.S. Society of Professional Journalists. To Go To Top

NEW COMPUTER IDENTIFIES, DESTROYS CANCER By Yuval Dror Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, April 29, 2004.

Friends, Here is an article on the subject of Israel's newest scientific breakthrough. This may turn out to be one of the most significant scientific breaks in a decade. The article was written by Yuval Dror and appeared in Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/421446.html) Researchers from the Weizmann Institute have developed a prototype biological computer that identifies and diagnoses cancerous cells and then releases medication to destroy them. The results, to be published in the upcoming issue of Nature magazine, were presented yesterday by the head of the research team, Professor Ehud Shapiro, at a news conference in Brussels entitled "Life, a Nobel story." The team first reported the development of their molecular computer, which is built of synthetic DNA and various enzymes, in November 2001. However, Shapiro said, that was "a toy computer that didn't know how to do anything medically or computationally significant. This time, we are demonstrating a real use that could have medical applications." The computer makes its diagnoses by testing the concentration of mRNA molecules in the surrounding fluid, as changes in the quantity of mRNA often indicate the presence of cancerous cells. Once it detects the existence of a cancer, it performs additional tests to determine what kind of cancer is involved, and then releases the appropriate medication to cause the cancerous cells to self-destruct. These medications are attached to the ends of the DNA molecules that make up the computer, and are released by activating the relevant enzyme. Since the diagnosis is not always clear-cut, the computer has instructions to release the medication only if the certainty of the diagnosis is above a predetermined level. Though each molecular computer can only test for one type of disease, millions of such computers can be contained in a single drop of solution, Shapiro noted. However, he warned, the prototype computer that he and his colleagues designed is still far from being ready for use. Their product, he said, was built and tested on a solution that contains no proteins, fats or sugars - materials that in real life occur in every living organism, and that could both interfere with the working of the computer and be damaged by the computer. It will take many years, perhaps even decades, of additional work before the computer is adapted to be able to function in a living environment, he said. In addition to Shapiro, the other members of the research team were Dr. Rivka Adar and three graduate students: Yaakov Benenson, Binyamin Gil and Uri Ben-Dor. Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org To Go To Top

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: DOCUMENTS PROVE U.N. OIL CORRUPTION Posted by IsrAlert, April 28, 2004.

U.N. program "one of the world's most disgraceful scams". This was written by Kenneth R. Timmerman. It appeared in Insight Magazine and is archived at http://www.insightmag.com/news/ 2004/04/27/World/Investigative.Reportdocuments. Prove.U.n.Oil.Corruption-657739.shtml A team of international forensic investigators is preparing to blow the lid off the much-disputed U.N. oil-for-food program in Iraq and will present new evidence of corruption at an upcoming congressional hearing that directly will implicate world leaders and top U.N. officials, Insight has learned. Investigators, led by Claude Hankes-Drielsma and the KPMG accounting firm, currently are in Baghdad sifting through mountains of Saddam Hussein-era records seized from his Oil Ministry and the State Oil Marketing Organization that detail payments by Saddam to his legions of foreign friends and political supporters. An Iraqi newspaper, Al-Mada, published the list of 270 recipients of special "allocations" (also known as vouchers) in January. But as Insight goes to press, the testimony of Hankes-Drielsma on April 22 before the House International Relations Committee is expected to provide new evidence of widespread international corruption. In a scathing letter sent to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on March 3, which he made available to Insight, Hankes-Drielsma called the U.N. program "one of the world's most disgraceful scams," and said that "based on the facts as I know them at the present time, the U.N. failed in its responsibility to the Iraqi people and the international community at large." In an earlier letter to Annan, to which he received no reply, Hankes-Drielsma noted that allocations of "very significant supplies of crude oil [were] made to ... individuals with political influence in many countries, including France and Jordan," both of which supported Saddam and his regime to the bitter end. Under the U.N. program, the Dutch company Saybolt International BV was paid hefty fees to inspect oil tankers loading Iraqi crude in Basra, to make sure no cheating took place. "Now it turns out that the inspecting company was paid off," one investigator said, "while on the ground, individual inspectors were getting cash bribes." Saybolt denies it received an oil allocation, although the Iraqi documents show it was down for 3 million barrels. Saybolt spokesman Peter Box tells Insight that the company's own investigation of two known incidents of "topping off" involving the oil tanker Essex in 2001 "found no involvement of our staff at that particular time." Saybolt continues to operate in Iraq today, although it now has an "entirely new group of people," Box adds. Among the revelations at the April 22 hearings, Insight has learned from investigators directly working on the case, will be new details of oil vouchers allegedly granted to Patrick Maugein, a prominent crony of French President Jacques Chirac, said to total 72.2 million barrels. Maugein's involvement in the U.N.-approved oil deals is significant, investigators say, because he is believed to be a conduit for backdoor payments to Chirac and his family. It was Chirac who spearheaded a worldwide coalition last year that opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and tried desperately to keep Saddam in power. When the allegations of backdoor payments first surfaced in a Paris courtroom in 1998, Maugein swept them aside as "pure fantasy." And in a statement provided to Insight, he denies having raised funds for Chirac, his family or his political campaigns. But as more evidence begins to leak from the archives of Saddam's former oil ministry, such denials may become harder to sustain. The vouchers were assigned to two trading companies, identified in the Iraqi documents as Trafigura and Ibex, both of which were involved in the Essex incident. Investigators say they believe both companies are tied to Maugein, either through beneficial ownership or contractual arrangement. Vouchers for an additional 11 million barrels were granted to Maugein business partner Cabecadas Rul de Soussa, according to the original Al-Mada list. The ties between de Soussa and Maugein were first revealed by Therese Raphael of the Wall Street Journal Europe. Asked about the allegations by Insight, Maugein denied he was involved with either company, although he did acknowledge knowing their principals, with whom he had worked as an oil trader with Marc Rich in Switzerland. He insisted that all his dealings with Iraq were legal and conducted through the oil-for-food program. "Patrick Maugein bought oil for his refinery in Mantua, Italy," a spokesman said. "All the oil deals were run by the U.N. They were paid through the U.N. and monitored by the U.N." But those denials might not withstand the onslaught of the documents about to be released, investigators say. "Already we've got details of all the accounts held in the names of individuals," one investigator tells Insight in an exclusive interview. "On these records are exact details of which accounts were held by whom," including the foreign proxies and their ultimate beneficiaries - in Iraq and overseas. The Iraqi documents specifically tie Maugein to the 25 million barrels allocated to Trafigura Beheer BV, a company Maugein claims was a competitor of his own London-based SOCO International. Investigators say other information they have developed shows that Maugein could be a "beneficial owner" of Ibex Energy, a holding company registered in Bermuda that was awarded vouchers for 47.2 million barrels. "That is a very high allocation," an investigator tells this magazine. "If a Cabinet minister gets 12 million barrels, why would Ibex get 47 million barrels unless something much bigger was at stake?" Other French recipients named in the Iraqi documents include former Interior minister Charles Pasqua (12 million barrels), former French U.N. ambassador Jean-Bernard Merimee (8 million barrels) and Lebanese-French middleman Elias Firzli (14.6 million barrels). Firzli acknowledged in a lengthy interview with Insight in Paris that the Iraqis were desperate to meet with Chirac and were willing to pay a high price for access. Shortly before the war broke out in March 2003, Firzli says he introduced Iraqi diplomat Nizar Hamdoon - sent as an emissary from Saddam - to senior French government officials in Paris. But Firzli scoffed at the oil vouchers, calling them "small stuff compared to the billions of dollars people made in the 1980s." Published reports to date have focused on oil vouchers granted to the head of the United Nation's oil-for-food program, Benan Sevan, who has been on an extended vacation since the allegations first surfaced at the end of January. He denied the charges through a U.N. spokesman. And Insight has learned that as investigators pursue the document trail, they believe they are getting closer to world leaders, including Chirac. But can it be proved? "The Iraqi civil service, even under Saddam, was quite excellent. They kept meticulous records. Every order was cross-referenced, initialed and counterinitialed, so nobody could be accused of taking anything for himself," an investigator who recently returned from Baghdad tells Insight. Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee, sent a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Annan on April 1, which committee staffers tell this magazine was intended to "lay down a marker." It called the scandal "without precedent in U.N. history" and urged Annan to make his response "equally unprecedented." Annan has announced that he will name an independent panel to investigate. Fears of a U.N. whitewash run high on Capitol Hill. Hyde urged Annan to take steps to ensure that all documents relating to the oil-for-food program "be preserved and secured," and asked that special measures be taken to protect potential whistle-blowers who could provide testimony on the illicit deals. The United States General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, told Hyde's committee recently that $10.1 billion of the estimated $60 billion handled by the United Nations under the program was paid in kickbacks, bribes and set-asides to Saddam and his cronies. The KPMG forensic-accounting investigators were brought to Baghdad by the Iraqi Governing Council to get to the bottom of the scandal. But Insight has learned that the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), led by J. Paul Bremer, recently took over the investigation, just as the accountants were stumbling over evidence of corruption by Americans working for the CPA. "We were hearing stories of contractors passing envelopes with huge amounts of cash to CPA officials," an investigator says. "As much as $300,000 in cash passed hands." Speaking from Baghdad, an Iraqi official confirmed to this magazine that the CPA was now in charge of these matters, although the Iraqi Governing Council was footing the bill. "We no longer have control over the documents or the investigation," the official said. In Washington, the State Department's Bureau of International Organizations is in charge of relations with the United Nations. In preparation for the April 22 hearing, Chairman Hyde has sent two letters to Assistant Secretary of State Kim Holmes requesting that State provide full documentation of the oil-for-food program, including commercial contracts. Since the United States is a permanent member of the Security Council and a leading member of the U.N. Sanctions Committee, State has access to the full United Nations record but has been unwilling to make incriminating information public until now for fear of angering U.S. allies. France accounted for approximately 25 percent of all U.N.-approved trade with Iraq, according to an estimate by the CIA. "Give France a break," says French ambassador to the United States Jean-David Levitte, writing in the Los Angeles Times. He said allegations that France condoned kickbacks or took bribes "are completely false and can only have been an effort to discredit France, a longtime friend and ally of the U.S." Kenneth R. Timmerman is a senior writer for Insight and author of "The French Betrayal of America", just released from Crown Forum. To Go To Top

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE THIRD TEMPLE! Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 28, 2004.

This was written by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. (iczc@iczc.org.il) Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them, and it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; I will establish them and multiply them, and I will set My sanctuary in their midst forevermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them; indeed I will be their God, and they shall be My people. The nations also will know that I, the Lord, sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary is in their midst forevermore. (Ezekiel 37:26-28) These are truly amazing verses - expounding as they do that Israel will never have a lasting peace with its G-d and with the nations until G-d's tabernacle or temple has first been built on His holy Mount in Jerusalem. The Bible is consistent in this: that only after the Temple has been built will the Messianic age and King Messiah Himself come to this city. All the present movements, such as those wanting 'Messiah now' to come are futile, unless they are coupled with a strong desire and willingness to act to see G-d's house restored on His holy hill. The official Jewish prayer book is full of references to this desire: Be favorable, HASHEM, our G-d, toward Your people Israel and their prayer and restore the service to the Holy of Holies of Your Temple. The fire-offerings of Israel and their prayer accept with love and favor, and may the service of Your people Israel always be favorable to You. Blessed are You, HASHEM, Who restores His presence to Zion. The prophet Ezekiel shows clearly that only after the glorious Temple - which he describes in such exquisite detail - has finally been built upon G-d's hill will the Messiah make his entry from the East, in glory and majesty: And behold, the glory of the G-d of Israel came from the way of the east. ... and the earth shone with His glory. ... And the glory of the Lord came into the temple by way of the gate which faces toward the east. ... and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple. (Ezekiel 43:2, 4-5) This, then, is clear in both the Old and the New Testaments: there will be no coming of the Messiah in glory until after His house or temple has been built upon His holy hill. Listen to the wonderful words of the Psalmist: Why do the nations rage, and the people plot a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, "Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us." He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, and distress them in His deep displeasure: "Yet I have set My King on My holy hill of Zion." (Psalms 2:1-6) In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 the Word implies that there will be no coming of the Lord in glory until 'the temple of G-d' (note, not the temple of Antichrist) has been built even though just before His glorious arrival the man of sin and perdition (very much like Antiochus Epiphanies) will seek to be worshiped in that temple. It is therefore amazing that, among both Jews and Christians, there is so often haziness concerning these facts, and concerning the crucial importance of the restored Temple in relation to the Messiah's coming. If we want Him to come then, like David, we will have to prepare a house in Jerusalem for Him to come to. Without it He will not come! This may be precisely why such a fanatical battle is being waged to keep the Jewish (and Christian!) people from entering that Mount in order to worship the true and living G-d where He once dwelled between the Cherubim, when the Temple stood there. With Rome's destruction of the Temple in AD 70, G-d's presence left this place and it was left desolate for many centuries, trampled underfoot by various Gentile nations, such as those evil minded Muslim Arabs who to this day use this holy place to spew out their hatred and venom against G-d's own people. They even use the minarets of their mosques on this Temple Mount, standing with stones in their hands ready to throw down at the Jews still praying at their 'wall' - calling on their people to 'slaughter the Jews'. These men have not been struck dead for so doing - as they surely would have been had they carried on in this fashion when G-d still dwelled in glory in the Holy of Holies. This just proves that, with His house destroyed on His holy hill, the Shekinah glory of G-d left the place long ago, and for Him to come back as in the days of old, to dwell in this city, we must first welcome Him by building Him His House! If the High Priest himself could only enter the holy of holies once a year - lest he or anyone else who dared to died at the threshold because of the holiness of G-d's presence, then how can hate-filled Muslims run around everywhere on this mountain and yet get away with their lives and not die because of the holiness of the G-d of Israel? If the High Priest Himself could not walk into the holy of holies except on Yom Kippur, how is it that those who hate Israel and despise G-d's choice can walk anywhere they decide to? It is because G-d, together with His Shekinah glory, left this place when His house was destroyed, and He will only come back when that House is rebuilt. Then He will fill that House and the whole city again with His presence and glory! For this reason it certainly is permitted in G-d's eyes for Jews (and Christians) to go up to this hill - even as King David did when it was still a Jebusite stronghold - to worship and pray. It is therefore not right for some Orthodox rabbis to therefore keep their people from entering this mount out of fear they might trespass on the place that once was the holy of holies - where G-d's presence hovered over the Ark of the Covenant. G-d's special Shekinah glory and presence left this place after His Temple was destroyed by Titus, and IT WILL ONLY RETURN TO THIS HILL AND CITY when His House is rebuilt to invite Him and His presence back. This is what the Psalmist so clearly expresses: A Song of Ascents. Lord, remember David and all his afflictions; how he swore to the Lord, and vowed to the Mighty One of Jacob: "Surely I will not go into the chamber of my house, or go up to the comfort of my bed; I will not give sleep to my eyes or slumber to my eyelids, until I find a place for the Lord, a dwelling place for the Mighty One of Jacob." ... Let us go into His tabernacle; let us worship at His footstool. Arise, O Lord, to Your resting place, You and the ark of Your strength. Let Your priests be clothed with righteousness, and let Your saints shout for joy. ... For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His dwelling place: "This is My resting place forever; here I will dwell, for I have desired it." (Psalms 132:1-5, 7-9, 13-14) What an example the young David is to us all - Jews and Gentile believers - in the way he could not be completely happy being in Jerusalem as king without the Lord Whom he loved also close by. This is what made him so close to G-d - a man after G-d's own heart: he could only be glad to reign as king over united Israel in Jerusalem when the Lord Who had sustained him all through his young life was there with him. This is why, dancing and singing, he brought the Ark of the Lord from Kiryat Yearim to his city - the city of David: To have the Lord close by. This is why he instructed Solomon, his son, to build a temple on this hill in which the Lord would make His dwelling place - close by His own people in majesty and glory. If we want Him back, then we must show Him as David did that no religion, no religious building, can take His place; that we - who have been commanded to love Him with all our heart, soul and strength - want Him enough to build His house and so to welcome Him back to His city with "Baruch Haba baShem Adonai." Today, many in Israel desire to receive the world's acclaim and approval, yet what we see is the opposite: New waves of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism spreading in different parts of the world like wild fire. But this verse by Ezekiel that we have already quoted puts it amazingly when it concludes: and the nations also will know that I, the Lord, sanctify Israel, WHEN MY SANCTUARY IS IN THEIR MIDST. It will not be the construction of new synagogues, scientific, cultural or historic centers or places of sin that will cause the, still largely anti-Semitic, nations to respect Israel. What will change them is not when they find something in Israel which they can already find in their own gentile midst, but when they find something that will fill them with awe: when the Temple has been built. It has everything to do with what will soon happen upon this Temple Mount for Israel and all the nations to see, as the prophet Haggai foresaw: "For thus says the Lord of hosts: ' ... AND I WILL SHAKE ALL NATIONS, and they shall come to the Desire of All Nations, and I will fill this temple with glory,' says the Lord of hosts. ... The glory of this latter temple shall be greater than the former,' says the Lord of hosts. 'AND IN THIS PLACE I WILL GIVE PEACE,' says the Lord of hosts." (Haggai 2:6, 7, 9) What a truly, awesome day that will be! But do we love Him enough to want Him and His glory and presence to come back to dwell among us in this His city, the city of the Great King - Melech haOlam? Or are we satisfied with a piece of religion - a Western Wall; a favorite cantor; a preacher in a cozy place of worship? Have we already filled the void He left when His glory and presence departed from this city after His house went up in flames? For in the meantime, rather than longing for Him to return to His city, we have filled the void with all kinds of religious practices which largely have usurped His place? Him, to Whom in the end we owe our utter allegiance and love, as He Himself spelled out as His eternal rule: Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. (Deuteronomy 6:4-5) Who, then, will still require a religious structure or edifice, when the living Lord has descended again to dwell upon His holy hill for the entire world to see? Therefore Zechariah prophesies: And it shall come to pass that everyone who is left of all the nations which (in the past) came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. (Zechariah 14:16) To have Him come again to this earth - to His city, His chosen eternal dwelling place will make all people come up to Jerusalem not to see new historic or other meaningful places, but to see Him - the Desire of all nations - as He has again filled His House with His glory and Shekinah presence! Jan Willem van der Hoeven is Director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. You can support them by making checks payable to ICZC, P.O. Box 49063, 91490 Jerusalem, Israel. Their web-site address is www.israelmybeloved.com To Go To Top

GERMAN COMMENTARY WARNS AGAINST DANGERS OF 'APPEASEMENT' Posted by IsrAlert, April 28, 2004.

This apeared in the Hamburg "Die Zeit" (Internet Version-WWW) in German, April 16, 2004. Isralert's source for this item: MidEastweb for Coexistence http://www.mideastweb.org Richard Herzinger's commentary: "The Open Flank: the 'Cease-Fire' offer From Al-Qa'ida was indignantly rejected by the European Governments. But how resistant is the European public to the temptation of 'Appeasement' in the long term?" The European governments indignantly rejected the "offer" in the statement supposedly from Bin Ladin, according to which Al-Qa'ida would dispense with terrorist attacks in Europe if the Europeans would no longer participate in "attacks against Muslims." That is, if they would withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan and submit to the demands of Islamic fundamentalism in their own European house, as in the question of head scarves. People unanimously say that there must be no negotiations with criminals. This is the only correct response to the brazen offer from the terrorists. The question, however, is whether Europe's steadfastness is really as great as expressed in these statements. After the attacks in Madrid, many commentators rejected the warning against a Spanish "appeasement" policy as absurd. Many disputed that there is any connection at all between the mass-murderous attack and the attitude of the Europeans toward the Iraq War. Accordingly, the terror of the terrorists is irrational and has nothing at all to do with specific political objectives. This view is no longer tenable at the latest after the more recent announcements from Al-Qa'ida. It is becoming clear that the extremists are pursuing precisely the strategy that previous totalitarian powers tried: that of separating Europe from America through intimidation, because they believe that they have recognized Europe as the weak point in Western unity. For this reason, they are linking their murderous threats with the offer of leniency under certain conditions agreeable to them. It should now be clear that Islamist terrorism is not blind with rage but is following a clearly discernible tactical and strategic pattern. Its first tactical goal is to make substantial progress in driving the Americans out of Iraq by forcing their European allies to withdraw from the coalition of supporters. This is also the intention of the hostage-takers in Iraq, who have already murdered one Italian and threatened to kill other Italian hostages if Italy does not soon declare its withdrawal from Iraq. The pattern is clear -- after Spain, now Italy. The big question is whether these murderous attempts at blackmail will really remain for long without effect on the attitude of the European governments. How long will a democratic public be able to stand such mental torture if, for example, the Italian people now see on television the desperate relatives of the hostages waiting for the barbaric slaughter of their husbands or brothers by the terrorists? Could one not be spared this -- so goes the seductive thought -- by withdrawing from a war about whose sense one was unconvinced anyway? The terrorism of the extremists is aimed at precisely this effect. It shows the humanistically sensitive public of the Western democrats that it will not shrink from even the most unbridled brutality to achieve its goal. At the same time, it is sending hypocritical signals that the threat can be avoided quite simply. Whether or not it is correct that the attacks in Madrid led to a change in Spanish policy, it serves as proof to the Islamist extremists that this is a fruitful course. Hence, was the recently affirmed announcement by Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero that he would withdraw the Spanish troops from Iraq at the end of June, if by that time the United Nations has not taken over the military mission, a first gesture of "appeasement?" In strictly historical terms, of course, "appeasement" is not the right word for the motives behind the Spanish election result and the new government's declaration of intention in regard to Iraq. In the "appeasement" policy of the Western powers Great Britain and France in the 1930s, it was a matter of a publicly formulated political strategy of governments with respect to another government and its explicit claims to a change in the status quo in Europe. After 1935, this policy involved a continual retreat from the demands and aggressive acts of Hitler's Germany: the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles were revoked and the unlimited rearmament of Germany and occupation of the Rhineland were accepted, just as was the annexation of Austria. At the Munich Conference in 1938, England and France agreed without the participation of the Czech Government to cede the Sudetenland to the "Third Reich." Even when Hitler violated this agreement and also occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia, the Western powers could not manage a decisive counterreaction. Behind the appeasement policy of England, at least, was more than just the calculation of placating the aggressive upstart by taking up supposedly "legitimate" German demands and preventing a new major war. British Prime Minister Chamberlain and, even more so, his Foreign Minister Lord Halifax harbored scarcely concealed sympathies for the regime of National Socialism -- primarily because of its ability to "deal with" communism. Hence, "appeasement" was not just a sign of objective (military) weakness and subjective indecisiveness on the part of the large European democracies; in its extreme moments, this policy bordered on collaboration with the Nazi dictatorship. Of course it would be bizarre to imply such a thing today for the Spanish and other West European governments. Al-Qa'ida, in contrast to Nazi Germany, is not a powerful state to which Western Europe should feel militarily inferior and with which it must therefore avoid a clash. It is an "irregular" enemy of a new type that combines its acts of violence with no clearly identifiable end objective with respect to power politics -- at least to the extent that the dream of the worldwide triumph of Islam is not viewed as such. The question of the legitimacy of the Iraq War and the presence of European troops in Iraq does not affect the fundamental unity of all Western states that one must also oppose terrorism with force of arms. And if Spain does indeed withdraw from Iraq, it would certainly not be doing so because its new government is deliberating abandoning the terrain to Al-Qa'ida or could even draw anything positive from the goals of this terror organization. One way or another, Spain will continue to participate in the fight against Islamist terrorism. Nevertheless, a comparison between the appeasement of the 1930s and the Spanish attitude -- which in many respects stands for that of all of Europe -- is not completely farfetched. The parallels become more plausible when one takes a look at the general mood, so to speak the collective psychological constitution of the European population. With all of the important differences, it is true for then and now that there is one thing above all else that the overwhelming majority of the European population does not want: to be drawn into a war about which people are convinced that they are not directly affected. A large share of the aggressiveness toward the United States that is being expressed in large parts of the European public is the result of the feeling that the Americans are drawing Europe into a conflict with the Islamic world that really has nothing to do with the Europeans. Precisely this wish (At times bordering on wishful thinking?) to be spared war at almost any price for as long as possible, however, opens up a vulnerable flank of West European democracies that violent totalitarian systems, which have only war in mind, are aiming at with the most extreme brutality. The appeasement policy of the 1930s was by no means only the action of inept or morally questionable politicians. Rather, it received the broad support of the populace. People still remembered the gruesome years of World War I too well to be able or willing to imagine accepting another bloody sacrifice. When Chamberlain told Czech Prime Minister Benes, who protested the Munich agreement, that Great Britain was not prepared to wage war on account of Czechoslovakia, he was speaking on behalf of the majority of the British people. Could one really expect the British to risk their own security on account of a relatively marginal European country? They preferred the illusion that Hitler would be satisfied with the booty that he had already obtained. It was only later that people recognized that this was a fateful wrong conclusion: totalitarianism will always understand retreat as weakness, which will not contain its aggressiveness but only stimulate it more. Just as then, today the prevailing idea in large parts of the European public is that one can avoid the murderous attacks of terrorists by staying out of the conflicts in the Arab region at least militarily. Certainly this reservation was not the only reason for the vehement rejection of the Iraq War by the overwhelming majority of the European populace. One of the arguments repeatedly used by leading European politicians, however, was that the Iraq War would "further inspire terrorism" and "produce even more terrorists." The argument established a causal link between the Western approach in the Middle East and the degree of radicalness of terrorism. The implicit logic of this argument is that if one had not further provoked terrorism through the military intervention, then some attack or other might have been avoided. With this conclusion, however, one has already fallen into the strategic trap of the Islamist extremists. As cultural anthropologist Thomas Hauschild accurately stated, a subliminal thought pattern has become established under which the terror attacks are to be understood as "punishment" for one's own mistakes. Such a projection in dealing with totalitarian movements is absolutely deadly for democracies, however, paradoxically because this projection is based on a key democratic virtue: the capability of sensing the motives of the enemy and the idea that any conflict can be settled by reconciling interests and that the enemy will therefore respond to a signaled willingness to compromise with a similar signal. Precisely this virtue of being able to compromise, however, is negated by totalitarian ideologies, which are intent on the absolute submission or destruction of their enemies. Even beyond that, totalitarian ideologies such as extremist Islamism deliberately consider the existence of such virtues in democratic societies and correctly identify them as their central weakness that must be attacked systematically. The most recent announcements by Al-Qa'ida should make clear the kind of tough test that the Western democracies face in the coming years. It must be expected that the scope and intensity of the violent actions of the terrorists will increase. "Terrorism" is almost a trivializing word for this. We are dealing with a full-blown totalitarian movement, the third totalitarianism, which may be structured differently from its predecessors but is in no way inferior to them with respect to its ruthless determination and cruelty. Its appearance finds the Western, especially the European, societies totally unprepared: they threaten to be overwhelmed by a willingness to engage in violence whose existence they did not imagine just recently. The overcoming of violence as a means to resolve political conflicts was the central credo of their identity. To be able to withstand Islamist violence, the European democracies must now assume a mental structure that can also withstand the heaviest blows. The unsolved and extremely disturbing question is how this can succeed without a degeneration of the democratic virtues in the open societies themselves. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

BURNED ALIVE: AN EXCERPT FOR THE LIFE OF A "PALESTINIAN" WOMAN Posted by Dafna Yee, April 28, 2004.

This woman is not writing about Israel or Israeli "abuses" as she knows nothing about what life in Israel is like and has never met an Israeli. But, the "human rights" organizations who constantly condemn Israel for every conceivable -- and inconceivable -- crime don't find these barbaric practices among the Israelis! Those "peaceworkers" are obviously so busy making their reports of "Israeli atrocities" (which never have any evidence to back them up) that they can't be bothered to take care of genuine victims of horrible abuse -- "Palestinian" women and girls who live under the Palestinian Authority. This is what life is like for thousands of "Palestinian" women and girls. There is a lot written lately about the barbaric practice of using children as "suicide" bombers and how that is child abuse and I agree with that assessment. But, why haven't I read anything about this form of abuse that is carried out under the sanction of Islamic law? Why do people all over the world support giving these barbarians, AKA "Palestinians", their own state? Even more importantly, why do some ISRAELIS -- like Sharon and Peres -- advocate forming "Palestine" out of Israel's land for these people who don't value life and don't build the land? Take a good look at the type of people that the "Palestinians" are and remember that having their own country will not change them into humane, democratic people. If Sharon's nefarious plans go through, Gaza will change from thriving neighborhoods of Israelis to a massive camp of "Palestinians", eager to go and conquer the world! As a teenager in the West Bank, Soauad became pregnant by a local boy. Her 'shamed' Palestinian family condemned her to death and she was set on fire by her brother-in-law. Every year, thousands of women in the Middle East die in 'honour killings'. Souad survived. She was rescued by the Swiss charity SURGIR (Arise). You can send donations to Banque cantonale vaudoise, 1001 Lausanne, account number U 5060.57.74 or to the address on the www.surgir.ch website. This article was edited from "Burned Alive" by Souad (Bantam), published on May 1. (To order for 11.99 Br L plus 2.25 Br L for p&p, call Telegraph Books Direct on 0870 155 7222.) It appeared April 26, 2004 in the Telegraph in Great Britain and is archived at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml= %2Farts%2F2004%2F04%2F26%2Fftburn26.xml He came towards me and said, with a smile: "Hi. How goes it?" He was chewing a blade of grass. "I'm going to take care of you." I hadn't been expecting that. I smiled a little, to thank him, not daring to speak. Suddenly I felt a cold liquid running over my head; I was on fire. I slapped at my hair. I screamed. My dress billowed out behind me. Was it on fire, too? I smelt the petrol and ran, the hem of my dress getting in the way. Did he run after me? Was he waiting for me to fall so he could watch me go up in flames? I'm going to die, I thought. That's good. Maybe I'm already dead. It's over, finally. My name is Souad. My story began almost 25 years ago in my native village in the West Bank, a tiny place, in a region then occupied by the Israelis. If I named my village, I could be in danger, even though I am now thousands of miles away. In my village I am officially dead; if I were to go back today they would try to kill me a second time for the honour of my family. It's the law of the land. It's because I am a woman. A woman must walk fast, head down, as if counting the number of steps she's taking. She may never stray from her path or look up, for if a man catches her eye, the whole village labels her a charmuta, prostitute. A girl must be married before she can raise her eyes and look straight ahead, or go into a shop, or pluck her eyebrows and wear jewellery. My mother was married at 14. If a girl is still unmarried by that age, the village begins to make fun of her. But a girl must wait her turn in the family to be married. The eldest daughter first, then the others. There were four girls of marrying age in our household. There were also two half-sisters, by our father's second wife, who were still children. The one male child of the family, who was born in glory among all these daughters, was our brother Assad. Twenty-five years ago, I spoke only Arabic; I'd hardly been further than a few kilometres beyond the last house on the dirt road. I knew there were cities further away but I had never seen them. I did not know if the earth was round or flat. What I did know was that we had to hate the Jews, who had taken our land; my father called them halouf, pigs. We were forbidden to go near them for fear of becoming pigs like them. My brother went to school, but the girls did not. Where I come from, being born a girl is a curse: a wife must first produce a son - at least one - and if she gives birth only to girls, she is mocked. At most, only two or three girls are needed to help with the housework, to work on the land and tend the animals. Our stone house was big, and surrounded by a wall with a large door of grey iron. Once we were inside, it closed on us to prevent us going out. You could enter by this door from the outside, but you could not go out again. My father and mother went out, but not us girls. My brother went out and came back through that door; he went to the cinema - he did as he liked. A day without a beating was unusual. My father would shout, "Why have the sheep come back by themselves?" then pull me by the hair and drag me into the kitchen to hit me. Once he tied up my sister Kainat and me, our hands behind our backs, our legs bound, and a scarf over our mouths to stop us screaming. We stayed like that all night, tied to a gate in the stable. This was life in our village. The girls and women in the other houses were beaten regularly, too. You could hear the crying. My sister was beaten by her husband and she brought shame on our family when she came home to complain. My mother had 14 children, but only five survived. One day I learned why. I must have been less than 10; Noura, my elder sister, was with me. We came back from the fields, and found my mother lying on the floor on a sheepskin. She was giving birth, and my aunt Salima was with her. There were cries from my mother and then from the baby. Very quickly my mother took the sheepskin and smothered the baby. I saw the baby move once, and then it was over. She was a girl. I saw my mother do it this first time, then a second time. I'm not sure I was present for the third, but I knew about it. And I heard Noura say to her: "If I have girls, I'll do what you have done." That was how my mother got rid of the seven daughters she had after Hanan, the last survivor. From then on I hid and cried every time my father killed a sheep or a chicken. As long as I lived with my parents, I feared I would die suddenly. I was afraid of going up a ladder when my father was below. I was afraid of the hatchet used for chopping the wood, afraid of the well when I went for water. That well was my greatest terror, and my mother's too. I sensed it. Sometimes, coming back from the fields with the animals, my elder sister Kainat and I talked about what might happen: "Supposing everybody's dead when we get home . . . And what if Father has killed Mother? A blow with a stone is all it would take!" The possibility of our mother dying preoccupied us more than the death of a sister, because there were always other sisters. Our mother was often beaten, just as we were. Sometimes she tried to intervene when my father hit us especially viciously, and then he'd turn on her, knocking her down and pulling out her hair. I haven't seen my brother Assad for 25 years, but I would like to ask him one question: "Where is our sister Hanan, who disappeared?" Hanan was a beautiful girl, very dark and prettier than me, with thick hair and heavy eyebrows that joined above her eyes. She was not thin like me. She was dreamy and never very attentive to what was said to her. When she came to help us pick olives, she worked and moved slowly. This wasn't usual in my family; you walked fast, you worked fast, you ran out to bring the animals. I was in the house one day when I heard shouting. My little sisters and I ran to see what was happening. Hanan was sitting on the floor, arms and legs flailing, and Assad was leaning over her, strangling her with the telephone cord. We pressed ourselves against the wall to make ourselves disappear. Assad must have heard us come in because he yelled "Rouhi! Rouhi! Get out! Get out!" When my parents came home, my mother spoke to Assad. I saw her crying, but I know now she was just pretending: I've come to understand how things happen to girls in my land. It is decided at a family meeting, and on the fatal day the parents are never present. Only the one who has been chosen to do the killing is with the intended victim. I don't know why Hanan was condemned to die. Did she go out alone? Was she seen speaking to a man? Was she denounced by a neighbour? It doesn't take much for everyone to see a girl as a charmuta who has brought shame to the family and must die to restore their honour - as well as that of the entire village. As I grew up, I waited hopefully for a marriage proposal. I was 18 by then and had grown to hate village weddings because all the girls made fun of me. No one asked for Kainat, my elder sister; she had resigned herself to remaining an old maid. I found this terribly depressing, because I had to wait until Kainat was married before I could take a husband. Then I discovered that a neighbour, Faiez, had asked for me. "But we can't discuss marriage for the time being," my mother told me, "we have to wait for your sister." Faiez lived in the house opposite ours. Sometimes I caught sight of him from the terrace where I laid out the laundry to dry. He must have had a good job in the city because he didn't dress like a labourer. He always wore a suit, and he carried a briefcase and he had a car. I imagined that we were married, that he'd come back from work at sunset and I'd remove his shoes and, on my knees, I'd wash his feet as my mother did for my father. I would be a woman with a husband! Maybe I'd even be able to put on make-up, get into his car with him, and go into town to the shops. But what to do? I wanted him to know that I was waiting, too. I decided to do everything I could to speak to him, at the risk of being beaten or stoned to death. One morning I heard his footsteps on the gravel outside his house. I shook my wool rug over the edge of the terrace and he looked up. He saw me and I knew he understood, although he made no sign and not a word was spoken. There were regular, secret meetings. One day he placed his hand on my thigh. I pushed it off. He looked annoyed. "Why don't you want to? Come on!" I was so afraid that he'd go away, that he'd look for somebody else. So I let him do what he wanted - without quite knowing what was going to happen to me. He wasn't violent, but the pain took me by surprise. He told me he was in love with me. One morning, in the stable, I suddenly felt very strange. The smell of the manure made me dizzy. And later, as I prepared the meal, the mutton made me feel ill. I tried to find a reason that wasn't the worst one. Of course, I couldn't talk to anyone. If I was pregnant, my father would smother me in the sheepskin blanket. When I told Faiez, his face went blank. He promised to talk to my father. He said I should wait - "Until I give you a sign." The days passed, and he gave me no sign. I was hopeful all the same, every evening, of seeing him appear out of nowhere, as he had before, to the left or right of the ravine where I hid. Three or four months later, my stomach began to get larger. It was my father who came towards me, on a washing day, his cane striking the ground of the courtyard. He stopped behind me. "You're pregnant," he said. I dropped the laundry into the basin. I couldn't look up at him. "No, father," I insisted. Later, I pleaded with my mother, assuring her that I had had my period. There was a family meeting, which of course I wasn't allowed to attend: my parents, Noura and my brother-in-law Hussein. I listened behind the wall, terrified. My mother spoke to Hussein: "We can't ask our son. He won't be able to do it - he's too young." "I can take care of her." Then my father: "If you're going to do it, it must be done right. What do you have in mind?" "Don't worry about it. I'll find a way." I heard my sister crying, saying she didn't want to hear this and that she wanted to go home. Hussein told her to wait, then confirmed arrangements with my parents: "You'll go out. Leave the house. When you come back, it will be done." I couldn't comprehend what I had heard. I wondered if it could have been a dream, a nightmare. Were they really going to kill me? And if they did, when would it be? How? By cutting off my head? Maybe they would let me have the child then kill me afterwards? Would they keep the baby if it was a boy? Would my mother suffocate it if it was a girl? The next day my mother told me that she was going to the city with my father. I knew what it meant. I looked at the courtyard ; it was a big space, part of it was tiled, the rest covered with sand. It was encircled by a wall, and all around on top of the wall were iron spikes. In one corner, the metallic grey door, smooth on the courtyard side, without a lock or key, and only a handle on the outside. If he came, he could only enter by that door. Suddenly I heard it clang. My brother-in-law was there, he was coming towards me. He was smiling. Twenty-five years later I see these images again as if time has stopped. I was sitting on a rock, barefoot in a grey dress. I had lowered my head, unable to look at him; my forehead was on my knees. Then suddenly I was running and on fire and screaming. There were women, I remember, two of them, so I must have climbed over the garden wall and into the street. They beat at me, I suppose with their scarves. They dragged me to the village fountain; I felt the cold water running on me and I cried out with pain because it burnt me too. I heard women wailing over me. "The poor thing . . . The poor thing . . ." I was lying in a car. I felt the jolts of the road. I heard myself moan. Later, on a hospital bed, I was curled up in a ball under a sheet. A nurse had come to tear off my dress. She pulled roughly on the fabric and the pain jolted me. I slept, my head still stuck to my chest, as it was when I was on fire. My arms were extended out from my body and both were paralysed. My hands were still there, but I couldn't use them. I wanted to scratch myself, to rip off my skin to stop the pain. When I woke again I saw two bare feet, a long black dress, a small form like mine, thin, almost skinny. It wasn't the nurse. It was my mother. Her two plaits were smoothed with olive oil, her black scarf, that strange forehead, a bulge between her eyebrows over the nose, a profile like a bird of prey. She frightened me. She sat on a stool with her black bag and started to weep, her head rocking back and forth. She wept with shame, for herself and the whole family. And I saw the hatred in her eyes. Never will I forget that big glass she filled to the top with a transparent liquid, like water. "Drink this. It's me who gives it to you." I was so thirsty I tried to raise my chin, but I couldn't. Suddenly a young doctor - one of the few members of staff who had treated me kindly - came into the room. My mother jumped. He grabbed the glass from her hand and banged it down on the windowsill. "No!" he shouted. He took my mother by the arm and made her leave the room. "You're lucky I came in when I did," he told me when he returned. "From now on no one from your family will be allowed in here." Three or four days later, I still hadn't eaten or drunk anything since being admitted to hospital. I knew they were letting me die because it was forbidden to intervene in a case like mine. I was guilty in everyone's eyes. I would endure the fate of all women who sully the honour of men. They had only washed me because I stank. They kept me there because it was a hospital where I was supposed to die without creating more problems for my parents and the village. Hussein had botched the job: he had let me run away in flames. One night I felt a strange pain, like a knife stuck into my stomach. I could feel something strange between my legs. I didn't realise, at first, that I was giving birth. The doctor heard my cries and came into the room. He leant over and took the baby away, without showing it to me. Later he told me that I had given birth at six months to a tiny boy, but that he was alive and being cared for. I heard vaguely what he was saying to me, but my ears had been burned and hurt so terribly. Someone came into the room once, in the middle of this nightmare. A hand passed over my face without touching it. A woman's voice, with a peculiar accent, said to me in Arabic: "I'm going to help you, do you understand?" I said yes, without believing it. I was so uncomfortable in that bed, the object of everyone's scorn; I didn't understand how anyone could help me. But I said yes to that woman. I didn't know who she was. My second life began in Europe at the end of the 1970s in an international airport. Concealed behind a curtain, my body smelt so much that the passengers on the plane taking me to Europe protested. But next to me, in a cradle, was my son Marouan. I gazed at his face, long and dark, under the hospital bonnet. He had been found in an orphanage, where the hospital had sent him because I was expected to die. The woman, Jacqueline, a worker for a humanitarian organisation, had tracked him down. She had also persuaded my parents to sign me over to her, telling them that she was going to take me somewhere else to die. My father, I later learned, had made her promise that they would never see me again: "NEVER AGAIN!" They would tell the village that I had died, and their honour would be intact. Jacqueline was taking me to the serious burns unit of a Swiss hospital. The day after we arrived I had an emergency operation, to free my chin from my chest and allow me to raise my head. For long months there were skin grafts, 24 operations in all. My legs, which hadn't been burned, provided replacement skin until there was none left to give. At first, my arms hung stiffly at my sides, like a doll's, but eventually the medical staff straightened them so that I could move them. I began to stand, then walk in the corridors and to use my hands. I now live in Europe, where I am married to a good man, Antonio. We have two daughters. When Marouan was five, I signed a paper for his foster-parents to adopt him. We had lived together with this foster family for four years after our arrival; his parents were also mine. I still feel guilty for making this choice, but I knew he was happy, and he knew I was alive. I was 24 and I didn't feel I could stay any longer. I had to work, gain my independence and finally become an adult. I would not have been able to raise him alone. I am still Muslim, but I retain few of the customs of my village. I detest violence. If someone reproaches me for being critical of the Muslim religion I try to help them understand what they haven't understood before. My mother frequently quarrelled with our neighbours. She would throw stones at them or pull their hair. In our country, the women always go for the hair. More than 6,000 "honour" crimes are committed every year - in the West Bank, Jordan, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, India and Pakistan. In Pakistan the custom is an accepted part of national culture. In Jordan, a man who has killed his wife in a state of rage is entitled to the judge's clemency; the same law applies to a man who kills his wife simply because he suspects her of adultery. It is increasingly common for "disgraced" families to hire bounty hunters, so women who manage to escape to other countries are forced into hiding. I have since met many of these women. One young girl has no legs: she was attacked by two men who tied her up and put her in the path of a train. Another girl's father and brother tried to murder her by stabbing her and throwing her into a dustbin. There is another whose mother and brothers threw her out of a window: she is paralysed. I have never met any other burned women. As far as I know, none of them have survived. Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

THE GIVERS, THE TAKERS AND THE LOSERS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 28, 2004.

Regrettably, Jewish leaders have a terrible track record of giving up land and getting little or nothing in return. When then Prime Minister Menachem Begin abandoned the entire Sinai to Egypt, he gave up a $17 Billion investment in infrastructure, development of the oil fields, roads, 2 military bases, a city and several farming towns. What he got was a cold peace which was followed by a $60 Billion build-up of the Egyptian military force with free American tax-payers' dollars. Egypt is now considered a deadly threat to Israel, particularly as it drifts toward radical Islamization. Moshe Dayan, a long term Leftist and Arik Sharon were the lead characters in urging Begin to give up the hard-won Sinai Desert buffer. Sharon has invited Egypt back to supposedly guard its side of Gaza knowing Mubarak has facilitated smuggling arms into Gaza. Moshe Dayan's first act after Jerusalem was recaptured from the Jordanians in 1967 was to give up control of the Temple Mount to the Arab Muslim Waqf. As a non-Jewish Jew Dayan didn't want the Temple returned to observant Jews - lest they start to rebuild the Holy Jewish Temple. Moreover, Dayan thought he could bribe the Arab Muslims by pacifying them with Solomon's Temple - which meant nothing to him and his Leftist, anti-religious Party. In the end, the Arab Muslims claimed that the Temple never belonged to the Jews. Dayan gave away control over Israel's most precious holy place and got nothing for his perfidy. The full story of his treachery has not been told but it is likely that David Ben Gurion of the Leftist Mapai Party influenced Dayan's decision. Recall when Prime Minister Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu similarly tried to bribe the Arab Muslims, Washington and the Europeans by giving away control over most of Hebron. Although he owned nothing and was merely temporarily elected custodian of the land, he gave away most of Hebron - expecting those Jews who lived there to be driven out by Arab Muslim terror. Netanyahu, like Rabin, Peres, Beilin and Barak had little grasp of Jewish history or respect for the Nation's patrimony so he simply gave away Hebron and the burial cave of the Machpelah (the family of Patriarchs and Matriarchs): Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah. (Rachel is buried near Bethlehem.) Later, when it was too late to rectify his grievous misjudgement, he expressed regret for his actions. I do not believe he regrets his decision - except for the political fallout. But, Netanyahu expected gratitude and applause from the Arab Muslims, America and the Europeans. Instead, he too got nothing and was virtually sneered at for his weak appeal for gratitude. His unforgivable betrayal of our Jewish heritage only generated a demand for more concessions by Yassir Arafat and the U.S. State Department. Shimon Peres and his toady, the contemptible Yossi Beilin, went underground to Norway to secretly and illegally plot with the outlawed PLO what came to be known as the Oslo Plan. They, too, stole and gave away the rights of the Jewish people with disastrous results. They gave away land they didn't own to the arch terrorist, Arafat. They resurrected the terrorists who had been exiled from Jordan to Lebanon and from Lebanon to Tunis for creating terror states wherever he existed. For that bit of treachery, the Israeli people got a surge of terror launched from the areas the Leftists gave away - as if they owned and had personal title to the land. "Oslo" became a hunting license to kill Jews with the attacks launched from now safe areas given over by the Oslo gang. All later demands for a full investigation for the many Isarelis killed by what history would judge as treason, was quashed by Shimon Peres. Arafat turned those gifted areas into terrorist bases where they could train, plan attacks, accumulate smuggled weapons and use the thousands of automatic weapons given to them by Yitzhak Rabin, Peres and Beilin. These weapons were, as you have seen, turned against the Israelis, resulting in at least 1500 Jews killed since the Oslo Accords were signed on September 13, 1993 on the White House lawn (with President Clinton standing as guarantor for the U.S.) In addition to the 1500 Jews killed, tens of thousands were wounded, many maimed for life. Here again, giving away the land cost us dearly and we continue to pay the price in murdered and maimed Jews. Even more strange is that Sharon in his withdrawal/retreat commitment to Bush has agreed to train Palestinian Police to control their terrorists. (Bizarre?!) Now we have an elderly General, looking for his place in history. He wishes to give away Gaza and Gush Katif (the 21 Jewish farming communities) which supply Israel with bug-free produce, and export 70% of the produce to Europe. However, the world's experts on terror and intelligence know Gaza will turn into a fully operational international base for terror. Sharon, based on the U.S. State Department planning and a Bush mandate, wishes to leave everything in place so that the incoming Palestinians Arab Muslims have housing, factories, farms, water and even the gardens planted by the Jews. This requirement is so that President Bush will not have to pay for housing the incoming hordes of cast-off Palestinian Arab Muslims. Israel, according to Bush requirement, is supposed to continue providing electricity, water plus allowing the Arab Muslim Palestinians to enter Israel for jobs. The U.S. has stated they do not wish to pay for anything! As Begin chose to absorb the $17 Billion dollars Israel had invested in the Sinai, Sharon will absorb the cost of the Gaza investment which is valued at over $7 to 10 Billion dollars. But, Sharon really doesn't have the funds to pay for this evacuation and so he will merely evict, evacuate and remove the settlers and not pay. There are many stories based upon confirmed history when the Jews gave up land for peace and got nothing in return except for terror, death and destruction - along with broken agreements. If the Jews do not rise up this time and throw this pitiful, befuddled old man out of power, then, sadly, they will deserve the terror that will emanate from the international terror organization that will come from Gaza. The mujahadeen Islamic holy warriors, trained to fight in Afghanistan by the Americans are now infiltrating Iraq and killing Americans. They will move into Gaza, bring in a well-trained, well-armed force, furious at the Jewish infidels, and proceed to attack Israel in force. Perhaps the decline of the government for the people began in earnest when Rabin and Peres discovered that they could dictate government policy without answering to anyone. Not the Knesset (Parliament) and not the people. They discovered they could run the government by 'diktat under the cover of democracy'. From Rabin and Peres onward, the Prime Ministers could dictate policy, relying upon a weak Knesset to rubber stamp their orders. Ehud Barak, without consultation, was ready to gift Arafat every place Israel liberated in1967, including half of Jerusalem. Arafat refused and three months later started the Rosh Hashanah 2000 war (called the intifada) which killed almost 1000 Jews and as many as 45 Americans. Sharon has already said: "Have a referendum but I will not be bound by it." Sharon, in his old age, has become a clear and present danger to the future of Israel. Encouraging the international terrorists that terrorism pays, also endangers all of Western civilization. Sharon leans on the promises of President Bush, not understanding that the purse strings are held by Congress. Sharon has been told that the U.S. will not pay for his retreat/withdrawal - with costs exceeding $7 to 10 Billions of dollars in the first stage to re-settle the 8000 men, women and children who developed and grew three generations on the unwanted, barren, desert dunes, making them bloom and blossom. Then comes the Billions it will cost to keep the millions of Arab Muslims living in a dysfunctional terrorist haven into which all the Arab Muslim countries will dump their Palestinian Arabs. The Arabist U.S. State Department wants Israel to maintain the burden of supporting the Palestinians with jobs but, Israel does not have either the money nor sufficient Jews to sacrifice to further Arab Muslim Palestinian terror. The Jews of Israel have a choice. If they vote to support Sharon's plan of evacuation, uprooting, evicting ethnic cleansing of Jews from their ancient Biblical homeland - then they must pay the price in Billions of dollars and thousands of lives. Israel must choose between the Givers, the Takers and know that they will be the Losers if they vote for Sharon's retreat. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

SHARON HIDING THE DEPTH OF THE CONCESSIONS Posted by Unity Coalition For Israel, April 28, 2004.

This appeared as a news item in Arutz 7 today. Tensions are high in the Likud with only four days to go until its 193,000 members go to the polls to help decide the future of Gush Katif and the State of Israel. It is assumed that those who object to the plan are more motivated and thus more likely to vote. The higher the voter turnout there is, therefore, the more the Sharon camp has room for optimism. Efforts in both camps, though still concentrating on person-to-person visits - Prime Minister Sharon is engaged in phone calls this morning - are now turning to the logistics of "getting out the vote on Sunday." In the meantime, Mr. Sharon and his staffers are said to be hiding the truth from the public regarding the depth of his planned pullback from Judea and Samaria. "If the Likud members would know what Sharon is really planning," Likud leaders told Yossi Elituv of Mishpachah [Family] magazine, "they would be storming his office and demanding his immediate resignation." The Likud seniors told Elituv that Sharon has given the order to "hide the evacuation from Judea/Samaria, and concentrate only on the pullback from Gaza. His purpose is to lull the Likud members, obtain their consent for the disengagement from Gaza, and then to use that to move on to the next stage - a massive evacuation of Judea and Samaria." Specifically, the quoted sources in Elituv's article say, 20 Yesha communities are on the chopping block - involving the expulsion of some 100,000 Jews. This is in addition to the four towns that are to be uprooted simultaneously with Gush Katif, namely, Kadim, Ganim, Sa-Nur and Chomesh. The Likud members quoted by Elituv say that the Prime Minister does not plan another party referendum regarding the next stage of his plan. In confirmation of the above, an Associated Press article published today states, "In promoting his plan of unilateral disengagement from the Palestinians, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is evading a central question: what will happen to about 100 West Bank settlements on the 'wrong' side of Israel's separation barrier? Senior Israeli officials and government advisers acknowledge privately that many - if not all - of these isolated enclaves may eventually be taken down, even without a peace deal, if they become increasingly indefensible... These settlements will be ringed by individual fences. If the Palestinians don't agree to a resumption of peace talks, under terms acceptable to Israel, 'we take out those isolated communities that can't be defended and move on our way,' a senior Israeli official said on condition of anonymity." Prime Minister Sharon himself has said that he plans to leave only five large settlement blocs in place - meaning that all the other flourishing towns and communities in Yesha will be uprooted. Sharon says he wants to retain Gush Etzion, Kiryat Arba-Hevron, Givat Ze'ev, Ariel and Maaleh Adumim, while towns to be dispensed with include Elon Moreh, Ofrah, Shilo, Beit El, and more. WHAT SETTLEMENT BLOCS? Another aspect of the alleged Prime Minister's Office deception concerns the above-mentioned settlement blocs themselves (see previous article). Correspondent Haggai Huberman notes that U.S. President George Bush never said a word about them in his letter of two weeks ago to Sharon. He rather wrote that it "is unrealistic to expect" a full return to the 1949 armistice borders "in light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers." Bush actually made sure to state that he is not endorsing any particular solution: "It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities." Even within the settlement blocs that Sharon says he hopes to keep, construction will be all but curtailed. As Huberman writes, "the only place that construction will be possible in Yesha towns under the Sharon government will be on the lawns between the existing houses or on their roofs." This is backed up by two official letters from Sharon's top aide Dov Weisglass, one from June 2003 and one this month. In the first, Weisglass wrote, "These are the understandings reached between Israel and the U.S. regarding the Jewish settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza: ... No new towns will be built, and construction will be frozen in the existing towns, except for building within the existing building lines - as opposed to the municipal border..." In his more recent letter, Weisglass wrote to U.S. National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, "On behalf of the Prime Minister of the State of Israel, Mr. Ariel Sharon, I wish to reconfirm the following understanding, which had been reached between us: 1. Restrictions on settlement growth: within the agreed principles of settlement activities, an effort will be made in the next few days to have a better definition of the construction line of settlements in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]. An Israeli team, in conjunction with Ambassador Kurtzer, will review aerial photos of settlements and will jointly define the construction line of each of the settlements." In related news, the text of another letter from President Bush - this one to King Abdullah of Jordan - was leaked to the press today, and includes language that seeks to "soften" the American commitments made to Sharon earlier this month. The letter is raising concern in the pro-disengagement camp in the Likud, as it is felt that it further erodes the "accomplishments" of Sharon's evacuation plan. Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top

WHAT IS SO GREAT ABOUT ISRAEL? Posted by Steven Plaut, April 28, 2004.

Israeli Independence Day is just behind us. We spend so much time on the mindless self-destructive insane side of Israel that we may tend to forget the positive aspects of life in Israel. And there are ever so many of those. Here is a small list of some of my favorite things about life in Israel: 1. Israel is the only country in the world where people can read the Bible and understand it. 2. Israel is the only country in the world where, if someone calls you a "dirty Jew", it means you need a bath (old Efraim Kishon quip, but still good). 3. Israel is the only country in the world where formal dress means a new clean Tee Shirt, sandals and jeans. 4. Israel is the only country in the world where one need not check the ingredients on the products in the supermarket to avoid ending up with things containing pork. 5. Israel is a country where the same drivers who cuss you and flip you the bird will immediately pull over and offer you all forms of help if you look like you need it. 6. Israel is the only country in the world with Avihu Medina, Zohar Argov, and Daklon (godfathers of "Oriental Music"). 7. Israel is the only country in the world with bus drivers and taxi drivers who read Spinoza and Maimonides. 8. Israel is the only country in the world where you dare not gossip about other people on the bus in Mandarin, Russian, Hindi, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Polish, or Romanian lest others on the bus understand what you are saying. 9. Israel is the only country in the world with northern European standards of living and southern European weather. It is the only place on earth with an Israeli spring, the most glorious time of year on the planet. 10. Israel is the only country in the world where no one cares what rules say when an important goal can be achieved by bending them. 11. Israel is the only country in the world where a pisher like me can once in a while get invited to give a talk at the parliament, or can get in to speak to a cabinet minister. 12. Israel is the only country in the world where reservists are bossed around and commanded by officers, male and female, younger than their own children. 13. Israel is the only country in the world with Eli Yatzpen (comedian). 14. Israel is the only country in the world where "small talk" consists of loud angry debate over politics and religion. 15. Israel is the only country in the world with Jerusalem, even if Israeli leftists would like to turn it over to the barbarians. 16. Israel is the only country in the world where the coffee is already so good that Starbucks went bankrupt trying to break into the local market. 17. Israel is the only country in the world where the mothers learn their mother tongue from their children (old Efraim Kishon quip but still good). 18. Israel is the only country in the world where the people understand Israeli humor. 19. Israel is the only country in the world where the news is broadcast over the loudspeakers on buses, where people listen to news updates every half hour, or whose people are capable of locating Bosnia on a map of the world. 20. Israel is one of the few places in the world where the sun sets into the Mediterranean Sea. 21. Israel is the only country in the world where, when people say the "modern later era", they are referring to the time of Jesus. 22. Israel is the only country in the world whose soldiers eat three salads a day, none of which contain any lettuce, and where olives are a food and even a main course in a meal, rather than something one tosses into a martini. 23. Israel is the only country in the world where one is unlikely to be able to dig a cellar without hitting ancient archeological artifacts. 24. Israel is the only country in the world where the leading writers in the country take buses. 25. Israel is the only country in the world where the graffiti is in Hebrew. 26. Israel is the only country in the world where the black folks walking around all wear yarmulkes. 27. Israel is the only country in the world that has a national book week, where almost everyone attends and buys books. 28. Israel is the only country in the world where the ultra-Orthodox Jews beat up the police and not the other way around. 29. Israel is the only country in the world where inviting someone "out for a drink" means drinking cola or coffee. 30. Israel is the only country in the world where people who want to go up in an elevator push the down button because they think this makes the elevator come down to get them 31. Israel is the only country in the world with white almond blossoms in January, purple "Judas Tree" blossoms in March, and crocus flowers in October. 32. Israel is the only country in the world where bank robbers kiss the mezuzah as they leave with their loot. 33. Israel is the only country in the world with "Eretz Yisrael Music". 34. Israel is one of the few countries in the world that truly likes and admires the United States. 35. Israel is the only country in the world that introduces applications of high tech gadgets and devices, such as printers in banks that print out your statement on demand, years ahead of the United States and decades ahead of Europe. 36. Israel is the only country in the world that has the weather of California but without the earthquakes. 37. Israel is the only country in the world where everyone on a flight gets to know one another before the plane lands. In many cases they also get to know the pilot and all about his health or marital problems. 38. Israel is the only country in the world where no one has a foreign accent because everyone has a foreign accent. 39. Israel is the only country in the world where people cuss using dirty words in Russian or Arabic because Hebrew has never developed them. 40. Israel is the only country in the world where patients visiting physicians end up giving the doctor advice. 41. Israel is the only country in the world where everyone strikes up conversations while waiting in lines. 42. Israel is the only country in the world where people choose which books to read and which plays to see based on what they plan to discuss with their friends in Friday evening "salon" get-togethers. 43. Israel is the only country in the world where hot water is an event and not a condition ("in" joke; you have to live in Israel to figure it out). 44. Krembos. 45. Israel is the only country in the world where people call an attache case a "James Bond", and the @ sign is called a "strudel". 46. Kumquats. 47. The obsession with sunflower seeds. 48. The kumsitz on the beach. 49. The people who eat watermelon with salt or with salty cheese. The wagons with horses that still sell watermelons on the streets, screaming "watermelon on the knife", whatever that means. 50. Israel is the only country in the world where kids read Harry Potter in Hebrew. 51. Hyssop (zaatar). 52. Where Memorial Day is actually a day for remembering and not buying pool furniture at the mall. 53. Really really good bread! 54. Israel is the only country in the world where there is the most mysterious and mystical calm ambience in the streets on Yom Kippur, which cannot be explained unless you have experienced it. 55. Where kids can really sleep in a Succah because it will not rain on them. 56. Israel is the only country in the world where making a call to God is a local call (old quip, still good). 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

KEEPING WAR A BAD THING Posted by Beth Goodtree, April 28, 2004.

People wonder how the world has gotten into such a mess. The answer is simple, as is the remedy. Unfortunately, implementing the remedy may not be so simple because it goes against the behaviors with which we in the civilized world have been so insidiously inculcated. Back before the insular academic community had so much influence in areas about which they know nothing, war was a bad thing. The consequences of instigating a war were particularly bad if the instigator lost. I remember the good old days when waging war meant loads of civilian casualties, utter destruction of property in the path of combat and horrific outcomes for the loser. These were the realities that made war a thing to avoid. Hirohito immediately conceded when he saw the consequences of an atomic enema administered to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Loss of sovereignty, loss of territory, loss of rights, loss of life, loss of assets; these are all reasons to avoid war. Take away these consequences and waging war is a win-win situation. If you win, you win, and if you lose, you lose nothing and may actually gain something. Want a prime example? The Middle East on two fronts, Iraq and Israel, which actually have some of the same problems. Let's start with the first politically correct, kinder and gentler war in the history of the world. The time was 1991, the war was with Iraq, and the player's names were Saddam, Bush and Colin Powell. For the first time ever, one side of the warring parties did not try to wipe out the other side. The United States, at the behest of the UN (read Islamist-controlled UN), did not wipe out Saddam but let him live to menace and massacre another day. The US also did not wreak punishing attacks on the instigator of the Gulf War -- Iraq -- thus letting the world know that invading another country was no longer such a risky business. Fast-forward 12 years. Despite three elections, even the player's names are the same: Bush, Powell and Saddam. In the US's "war on terror" (which is a defeatist war since terror is merely the symptom -- the true enemy is radical Islam) America determined Saddam to be a threat. After fair warning for Saddam to step down, we invaded Iraq and performed a Saddamectomy. Unfortunately Saddam, like any other tyrant, does not operate in a vacuum. In America's ill-founded goal of making this as painless a war as possible, we left in place the entire war machine that supported Saddam. We are reaping the consequences of that now. The Islamists now attacking the Iraqi reconstruction forces were given a roadmap to the civilized world's Achilles heel. This weakness is our desire to make war as nice and people-friendly as possible. We shudder at the thought that anyone but our very specific target may get hurt. We try to minimize collateral damage. We go out of our way to insure the rights, the well being, and the sensibilities of everyone including our enemy. So the Islamists now use our abhorrence of true warfare against us. They go out of their way to create horror and collateral damage. They don't merely capture soldiers, they torture and kill them and then mutilate the bodies (this has been done to Israeli soldiers too). They also have no consideration for their fellow countrymen. If we hadn't been so nice when we were engaging the enemy, the coalition forces as well as whatever innocent population remains would not be undergoing round two of the war now. Then there is Israel. In an effort to appease misplaced international sensibilities, Israel has been making concessions to the losers/aggressors in all the wars she was forced to fight. Egypt attacked her, lost territory and was given it back in a peace treaty that Egypt breaks on a daily basis with anti-Semitic lies and propaganda. The Arabs now occupying Israeli land that she won when she was attacked are given royal treatment by the world as downtrodden victims. And these people were the aggressors. Now the world insists that Israel give the very people who are trying, thru an asymmetrical war, to wreak genocide upon her land, a portion of which she won when she was attacked. This is rewarding war and rewarding the aggressors. Meanwhile Israel, instead of being allowed to stop this 60 year war with extreme prejudice -- which would probably end the war once and for all -- is prolonging it by being "nice" to the enemy. Israel provides her enemy's citizens (who support the war by an overwhelming majority) with electricity, water, jobs, even medical services when necessary. Therefore, the aggressor in this war has no reason for stopping it. And as if treating the instigators of war in a kind way is not enough, the world wants Israel to reward her attackers with their own country in the heart of her territory. Again, rewarding warmongers and encouraging more of same. And if you have any doubt that the aggressors (Arabs living in Jewish Palestine) have any legitimate claims to back up their genocidal war upon Israel, one of their own leaders makes it very clear that they do not. PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, in an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trouw" (March 31, 1977) stated: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism." Making war a nice thing is the last thing we should be doing if we want to prevent war. It is also the fast track to losing even though you've already won. Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer, with a background in advertising. She writes political commentary and the occasional humor and science articles. To Go To Top

BUSINESS AS USUAL: NO LOVE FOR ISRAEL IN GENEVA. Posted by Anne Bayefsky, April 28, 2004.

Notwithstanding Kofi Annan's anxious disclaimers, U.N. special envoy to Iraq Lakhdar Brahimi's tendentious proclamation that Israel is "the great poison in the region" is no aberration. Assigning blame to Israel for the nonexistence of Arab democracy, the impoverishment of Arab populations, and the human-rights deficit throughout the Muslim world is standard U.N. policy. Indeed, in a subsequent interview, Brahimi affirmed his original incitement, saying "this is a fact - not opinion." The annual six-week ritual of the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva, which ended on Friday, makes the point all too clearly. After more than a month of negotiations, the commission on its final day could no longer avoid the ethnic cleansing in Sudan, which has left 30,000 dead and 900,000 in deplorable conditions. The U.S. proposal to condemn "the grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in Darfur," and to call on the government of Sudan "to ensure all attacks against civilians are stopped" was defeated. Instead, the resolution announced: "the Commission expresses its solidarity with the Sudan in overcoming the current situation." The Sudan result was actually better than the commission outcomes on gross human-rights abuses in China and Zimbabwe. Resolutions on these states were blocked by the success of procedural no-action motions. Consideration of the human-rights situation in Iran didn't even make it to the floor. This was despite a report from one of the commission's working groups describing a legal system with the following features. "[E]vidence by a man is equivalent to that of two women"; punishments for sins "against divine law" are "the death penalty, crucifixion, stoning, amputation of the right hand and, for repeat offences, the left foot, flogging..."; and "criminal proceedings in their entirety are...concentrated in the hands of a single person since the judge prosecutes, investigates and decides the case." Iranian impunity from U.N. concern has practical results. Shortly after a meeting in Iran with the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression in November 2003, one person disappeared. Israel was treated somewhat differently by the U.N.'s primary human-rights body, which is composed of a majority of Asian and African states and whose membership includes countries with such appalling human-rights records as China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Not only were five resolutions adopted condemning Israel, but the commission took three hours out of its schedule to mourn the death of Hamas terrorist leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin. Yassin personally instigated and authorized suicide bombing and exhorted his followers to "armed struggle" against Israelis and Jews "everywhere." A special sitting for Yassin was convened on March 22, 2004, despite the fact that the commission was already in session, and about to consider the only country-specific agenda item at the commission for the past 34 years - on Israel. Although Israel's action was denounced by the commission and the secretary-general as an "extrajudicial killing," the conclusion is not only inflammatory, but incorrect. Both Yassin, and Abdel Aziz Rantissi, were combatants in a war. The legal term "extrajudicial," by definition, applies only to individuals entitled to judicial process before being targeted. Combatants - including the unlawful combatants of Hamas who seek to make themselves indistinguishable from the civilian population - are not entitled to such prior judicial process. International Committee of the Red Cross manuals state that civilians who take a direct part in hostilities forfeit their immunity from attack. Furthermore, judicial process was not an option for Israel since it would have placed both Israeli Defense Forces and Palestinian civilians at much greater risk. The legal limit in targeting combatants like Yassin is the rule of proportionality, or "incidental loss of civilian life" which is not "excessive" (in the language of the Geneva Conventions). In these cases, the outcome was proportionate since civilian casualties were kept to a minimum. What makes the U.N.'s professed interest in the subject even more unconvincing was the commission's total lack of response to a simultaneous report on recent extrajudicial killings in Brazil. The U.N. Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions attempted to raise the alarm on more than 3,000 civilians murdered in Brazil at the hands of military and civil police. Details of "poorly disguised extrajudicial executions...[in which] the lethal shots had been fired from behind and at close range" were provided. Two people brave enough to talk to the rapporteur were shot and killed shortly after the U.N. representative left the country. No mention was made by the Human Rights Commission of Brazil. The Commission Rapporteur on the Right to Food, while noting almost a billion people undernourished, spent his time issuing a special report on a "food crisis" in the "occupied Palestinian territory." He found blame on the "apartheid wall." No reference was made, however, to the inevitable disruption to the movement of goods and workers through passes subject to frequent terrorist attack, or the millions of dollars recently deposited in Mrs. Arafat's bank account. The Commission Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief managed to produce an entire global report without mentioning "anti-semitism." The commission does, however, continue to require the production of an annual report on the "situation of Muslim and Arab peoples in various parts of the world." To his credit, the author of that report suggested to the commission that a report on anti-semitism would also be appropriate. His suggestion was ignored. Perhaps the attitude of the U.N. towards Israeli victims of five decades of war and terror aimed at the destruction of the Jewish state is best summed up by the attitude of U.N. Special Rapporteur on Israel John Dugard. He told the commission "[a]fter the necessary disclaimer of sympathy for terrorism, the report will focus on two issues that...most seriously demand the attention of the international community - the unlawful annexation of Palestinian territory and the restrictions on freedom of movement." The 2004 U.N. Human Rights Commission produced 5,539 pages of documents. Six weeks later there had been 86 separate votes, with the U.S. being in the minority 85 percent of the time. In a final irony, the 2004 commission's last act was to consider that its performance warranted an additional six meetings next year - to be paid for, no doubt, from the U.N.'s regular budget, 22 percent of which comes from U.S. taxpayers. Anne Bayefsky is an adjunct professor of law at Columbia Law School. She is also a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. This article appeared in the National Review and is archived at http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/bayefsky200404261515.asp To Go To Top

THE TRAFFIC JAM THAT SAVED ERETZ YISRAEL Posted by David Wilder, April 28, 2004.

Yesterday morning we left Hebron at about 10:30. The car was full - my wife, daughter and her two small children. The others were on one of the two Hebron buses. The destination: Gush Katif. THE referendum is scheduled for next week - Sunday, May 2. Ariel Sharon is worried. The Hebrew daily Maariv quoted the prime minister as saying, "Whoever votes against the 'disengagement' is voting against me." In other words, Sharon is transforming the referendum into a "no-confidence vote." Arutz 7 posted an article saying that Sharon is considering resigning should the referendum be defeated. In yet another article, Associated Press correspondent Ramit Plushnick-Masti writes: Sharon Plan would remove up to 100 west bank settlements. "Senior Israeli officials and government advisers acknowledge privately that many - if not all - of these isolated enclaves may eventually be taken down, even without a peace deal, if they become increasingly indefensible." Arutz 7 reports: "In the meantime, Sharon and his staffers are hiding the truth from the public regarding the depth of his planned pullback from Judea and Samaria. "If the Likud members would know what Sharon is really planning," Likud leaders told Yossi Elituv of Mishpachah [Family] magazine, "they would be storming his office and demanding his immediate resignation." The Likud seniors told Elituv that Sharon has given the order to "hide the evacuation from Judea/Samaria, and concentrate only on the pullback from Gaza. His purpose is to lull the Likud members, obtain their consent for the disengagement from Gaza, and then to use that to move on to the next stage - a massive evacuation of Judea and Samaria."" Yet it is vital to note that Sharon does not represent all of the Likud leadership. Speaking at Mt. Hertzl on the eve of Israel's 56th independence day, Speaker of the Knesset Rubi Rivlin, basing his speech on the famous words of Theodore Hertzl, "If you will it, it is no legend," said, "These words beat in its heart and drove its wheels, as Zionism succeeded, achieved the impossible, time after time. When we willed it - the legend became reality. When we willed it - the scattered exiles of Israel were gathered in. When we willed it - from a small, fearful community, we became a proud nation. And when we willed it; when we really willed it - the Land was conquered, and nobody stood in our way. But the story has not yet ended. Even today; on the one hundredth anniversary of Herzl's death; in the fifty-sixth year of the Independence of Israel; nothing is self-evident. Even today, every day, we must continue to will it, we must continue to believe." Speaking before lighting the traditional, honorary torch of honor: I, Reuven Rivlin, son of my father and teacher, Professor Yosef-Yoel Rivlin, may he rest in peace, researcher of Semitic languages, and translator of the Koran into Hebrew, and - may she live long - my mother and teacher, Rachel, who today, 6th Iyar, is exactly one hundred years old; seventh generation in Jerusalem; descendent of the Aliyah to Jerusalem, one hundred years before the vision of Herzl, by the disciples of the Gaon, Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna; Speaker of the Sixteenth Knesset; am honored to light this torch, of the fifty-sixth Independence Day of the State of Israel. In honor of - The Knesset, the legislature of Israel, and the temple of democracy! In honor of - the pioneers, the vanguard of those who came to settle the Land of our Fathers, who redeemed the land - from Hanita - to Kfar Darom; from Negba - to Kiryat Arba, that is Hebron! In honor of - The heroes of all branches of the security forces. In honor of - Jerusalem, our holy city, our eternal capital and the heart of the nation. And for the glory of the State of Israel! Rivlin's initial speech most certainly alluded to the challenges of Zionism and the will to overcome - not only 100 years ago, not only fifty-six years ago, but also at the present. Rivlin's words, coming from the Speaker of the Knesset, articulating "the pioneers, the vanguard of those who came to settle the Land of our Fathers, who redeemed the land - from Hanita - to Kfar Darom; from Negba - to Kiryat Arba, that is Hebron!" reflect the true Likud ideology, the true Zionist ideology, which Ariel Sharon has so grossly warped. And Rivlin is not alone. Yesterday, some 150,000 Israelis voiced their opinion, not in words, but in actions, expressing themselves with their feet and with their tires. According to police reports, 70,000 people arrived yesterday in Gush Katif. Our experience has taught us that the "official estimate" is about a half of the "real thing." According to Gush Katif spokesman Eran Sternberg, over 100,000 people managed to get into Gush Katif. Tens of thousands of others, including yours truly, were crowded out. Traffic authorities said this morning on Israel radio that they have never before witnessed a traffic jam as large as yesterday's, tens of kilometers long. We left Hebron at 10:30 in the morning for a two hour ride to Gush Katif. I managed to drive the last 20 kilometers in about an hour and a half and we were still about 10 kilometers from our destination. After not moving for over an hour and having spent a grand total of five hours in the car we decided to pull into a nearby kibbutz, found a nice place for a picnic barbeque (not too far from some Bedouin tents), and camped out for a few hours. But you know something? No one complained. And I'm not talking about us. I'm talking about thousands and thousands of people stuck, just like us. Many of them were more daring than I was - they parked their cars on the side of the road and walked, 10 or more kilometers, in order to reach Gush Katif and participate in the main event at 3:30 in the afternoon. No one really cared how long it took to arrive, because the message was clear. Gush Katif is part of Eretz Yisrael and we have no intentions of leaving, not now, not ever. Over 100,000 Israelis shouted out to Ariel Sharon - "Go ahead, just try and evacuate Gush Katif, go ahead, just try to evict over 7,000 Jews from their homes. Because if you so dare, you will not be evicting 7,000 Israelis - you will have to evict hundreds of thousands of people!!!" Have not doubt: the almost 200,000 Likud members who will be voting on Sunday saw and heard yesterday's events. Many of them participated. I expect that early Monday morning the results will be self-evident. History will definitely remember Ariel Sharon from many diverse angles. But perhaps one of the most unique will be just this: Ariel Sharon initiated the greatest traffic jam in Israel's history, a traffic jam which may turn out to have saved Eretz Yisrael. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman for 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

BLAMED BEFORE BIRTH; ASSERTION WITHOUT RESEARCH Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 28, 2004.

BLAMING ISRAEL BEFORE IT EXISTED Arab culture particularly abhors confession. Arab leaders are defensive about the problems they inflict upon their people. The Arab people are too ashamed to admit that their own society produces these problems. Most Arabs blame outsiders. They want sympathy accorded victims, although their problems victimize others. Whom do they blame? The US and Israel. The Arabs stultify their own economies, but claim Israel is smothering them. They promote terrorism, but attribute it to Israel or at best to Israeli policies. They plot to poison Israelis but accuse Israel, which wouldn't dream of such barbaric tactics, of actually poisoning them in ways that only the Arabs would dream up. Arab blame and accusation is pure assertion, unencumbered by proof. Arab culture doesn't require proof or logic beyond coincidence based on false claims, just belief. If assertion serves their cause, they believe it, no questions asked. The greatest failure of logic is in the Arabs blaming Israel for the problems originating in the pre-capitalist Arab economic, political, and social systems. The failure of Arab society was noted by the Arabs perhaps 150 years ago. Israel is barely more than 50 years old. Its existence has been characterized by a struggle to survive amid world ostracism. Israel has made great strides but has little to do with much of the Arab world it supposedly is influencing. Point is, the Arabs blame Israel for Arab problems that accumulated hundreds of years before Israel was established. When did logic ever enter into Arab criticism of Israel? POLITICAL ASSERTION WITHOUT RESEARCH An Israeli general explained the integrated defensive measures, of which the security fence in Judea-Samaria is one. Unfortunately, some of the others are not being implemented. In discussing this, he drew on experience in his field of expertise. Then he attempted to broaden the notion of defense to include economics. Citing neither experience nor research, he asserted his supposition dogmatically. That may be the usual way to develop failed policy; it is not the proper way to develop useful policy. It imposes questionable "do-good" ideology. With national survival at stake, this methodology is not acceptable. The general's theory is that by employing thousands of Arabs from the P.A., Israel dilutes Arab hatred, lessens participation in jihad, and encourages moderates to swing away from war. Arguments against that theory are based on experience and logic. In the approximately 80 years of modern Zionism, Zionism's economic benefits for the Arabs are denied and have increased Arab hostility. Decades ago, the effendi class recognized the threat of prosperity and example of democracy to its rule, so it led a nationalist offensive. The formerly uneducated Arab mass gained the education, funds, and the leisure to mount a more effective struggle. They migrate to where the work is, thereby increasing the demographic threat. Speculating about moderates is premature, since none have stood up. Polls showing the overwhelming majority favor dispossession of Israelis. Traditionally Arabs emigrate from impoverished areas. They are migrating now. Therefore, a strategy of denying Israeli payrolls and taxes to the Arabs and the P.A. has a practical basis for reducing the force of the Palestinian Arab war on Israel. To help resolve the issue and devise a suitable economic policy towards the Arabs, Israeli social scientists ought to study whether prosperity produces friendship and tolerance or subsidizes a religious hostility that material health does not overcome. Can employment neutralize the totalitarian media and education bombardment of a populace fertilized for bigotry and violence by culture and a still active religious establishment? Alternatively, does poverty cripple the Arabs' means of warfare and motivate them to move to where they might earn a living? Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

UP AGAINST FANATICISM Posted by Jack De Lowe, April 28, 2004.

It is interesting to note that the author, Executive Editor Phil Lucas, never mentions Israel once in his article. The struggle that has now become an open war with fanatical Islam would have occurred even if Israel was never created some 56 years ago yesterday. The fact that Israel has the audacity to continue to survive against their ongoing terror irritates them, but is not the cause of their attacks on non-Muslims world-wide. The sooner all of us face up to this unfortunate reality, the sooner we can all get down to doing what is necessary to begin the struggle to end this threat to all of us. I ask that each of you take the time to read this article carefully and pass it onto those on your list. A special thanks to Phil Lucas for writing it the way it is. This appeared in the News Herald of Panama City, FL, April 4, 2004. It is archived at http://66.21.108.67/interconnect/browser/intercon.dll He can be reached by email at plucas@pcnh.com If straight talk of savagery offends you, if you believe in ethnic and gender diversity but not diversity of thought or if you think there is an acceptable gray area between good and evil, then turn to the funny pages, and take the children, too. This piece is not for you. We published pictures Thursday of burnt American corpses hanging from an Iraqi bridge behind a mob of grinning Muslims. Some readers didn't like it. Mothers said it frightened their children. A woman who works with Muslim physicians thought it might offend or endanger them. Well, we sure don't want to frighten, offend or endanger anybody, do we? That's just too much diversity to handle. I mean, somebody might get hurt. We could fill the newspaper every morning with mobs of fanatical Muslims. They can't get along with their neighbors on much of the planet: France, Chechnya, Bosnia, Indonesia, Spain, Morocco, India, Tunisia, Somalia, etc. etc. etc. Can anybody name three ongoing world conflicts in which Muslims are not involved? Today, where there is war, there are fanatical Muslims. We might quibble about who started what conflicts, but look at the sheer number of them. One thing is sure. Muslim killers started the one we are in now when they slaughtered more than 3,000 people, including fellow Muslims, in New York City. Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state and feckless appeaser who helped get us into this mess, said last week Muslims still resented the Crusades. Well, Madame Albright, if Westerners were not such a forgiving people, we might resent them too. Let's recap the Crusades. Muslims invaded Europe, and when they reached sufficient numbers, they imposed their intolerant religion upon Westerners by force. Christian monarchs drove them back and took the battle to their homeland. The fight lasted a couple of centuries, and we bottled them up for 1,000 years. Now, a millennium later, Muslims have expanded forth again. Ask France. Ask England. Ask Manhattan. Two-and-a-half years ago fanatical Muslims laid siege to us. We woke up to the obvious. Our president announced it would be a very long war, then took the battle to the Islamic homeland. Sound familiar? Let's consider the concept of a "long war." Last time it was 200 years, give or take. Anybody catch Lord of the Rings? You know, the good part, the part that wasn't fiction, the part that drew us to the books and movies because it was the truest part: the titanic struggle between good and evil, between freedom and enslavement, between the individual and the state, between the celebration of life and the worshipping of death. That's the fight we are in, and it never ends. It just has peaks and valleys. There may be a silent majority of peaceful Muslims - some live here - but that did not save 3,000 people in the World Trade Center, the millions gassed and butchered in the Middle East, the tens of thousands slain in Eastern Europe and Asia, the hundreds blown to bits in the West Bank and Spain, or the four Americans shot, burned and hung like sausage over the Euphrates as a fanatical minority of Muslims did the joyful dance of death. Maybe we are so tolerant, we are so bent on "diversity," we are so nonjudgmental, we are so wrapped up in our six-packs and ballgames that our brains have drained to our bulbous behinds. Maybe we're so addled on Ritalin we wouldn't know which end of a gun to hold. Maybe we need a new drug advertised on TV every three minutes, one that would help us grow a backbone. It doesn't take a Darwin to figure out that in this world the smartest, the fastest, the strongest, and the most committed always win. No exceptions. Look at your spouse and children. Look at yourself in the mirror. Then look at the pictures from the paper last Thursday. You better look at them. Those are the people out to kill you. Who do you think will win? You? Or them? Think you can take your ball and go home and they will leave you alone? Read a little history. Start with last week, last month, last year, and every other year back for half a century. Then go back a thousand years. Nobody hides from this fight. Like it or not, that's the way it was and that's the way it is. But many Americans don't get it. That's why I made the case to my boss and fellow editors to publish those pictures. If they jarred you off the sofa, if they offended you, if they scared your children and sent you into a rage at mass murderers or heartless editors, then I say, it's a start. To Go To Top

ON THE ROAD TO GUSH KATIF Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 27, 2004.

Friends, The outpouring of popular support for the threatened communities of Gush Katif reached a pinnacle yesterday. Tens of thousands of Israelis jammed the roads into the area to try to celebrate Yom Haatzmaut. According to police reports, more than 60,000 people were forced to turn around. Many of them went home to write about their experiences. Below are two accounts of the day. Shlomo Zwickler of Kochav Hashachar and his family didn't get to the Gush but made some significant observations along the way ("The Mighty Power Of The Sixth Of Iyar"). The second is by Harvey Tannenbaum from Efrat, whose lucky family celebrated the holiday in Gush Katif ("We Are All Gush Katif"). Enjoy! THE MIGHTY POWER OF THE SIXTH OF IYAR  by Shlomo Zwickler of Kochav Hashachar. There was a great deal of "hulabaloo" made this year about today being Yom Haatzmaut - Independence Day, here in Israel. In reality it should have been yesterday, the 5th of Iyar, on which in 1948 the Jews of the Land of Israel declared their sovereignty over parts of Eretz Yisrael for the first time in nearly two-thousand years. But we celebrated this year on the 6th of Iyar in an effort to avoid unnecessary violations of Shabbat in preparing for the Memorial Day ceremony, which was to be held on Saturday night, twenty-four hours before the 5th of Iyar. So this year, we had Memorial Day on the 5th, remembering the valor of our soldiers who fortified our independence and the sacrifice of the victims of Moslem terror, just before the great celebration, this year on the 6th of Iyar, of the 56th year since the rebirth of Israel within its historical borders. Purists need not worry, though. For if one looks back into the annals of Jewish history, you will find that in actuality, the British Mandate in Eretz Yisrael actually ended on May 15th, 1948 - which was the 6th of Iyar that year. Even back then, the Jewish people managed a collective respect for the sanctity of its traditions and the "governing council" led by David Ben-Gurion actually declared Jewish independence a day EARLY - on Friday, the 5th of Iyar, so as to avoid desecration of the Sabbath from the ensuing festivities. Hence we see that the "ikar ha-nes" (majority of the miracle) was on the 6th of Iyar and not on the 5th as we celebrate every year. It seems that in the 56 year-young history of our Third Jewish Commonwealth, this year - 5764 - was the first time that we encountered the need to push forward Memorial and Independence Days by 24 hours. Perhaps the special spark of the 6th of Iyar, explained above, is what brought about one of the most promising signs that the Nation is not as weak as its leaders seem to suggest of late. This morning, my wife and I packed the kids into our minivan, along with our portable "mangal" (BBQ for those who are Hebraically challenged), and set out from our home In Kochav Hashachar, just north of the Judean Hills, on what we expected to be our 2 1/2 hour journey to make a statement in Gush Katif. We spent eleven hours in our car today. There was simply nowhere to move in Gush Katif, on the roads to Gush Katif or on the SIDES of the roads leading to Gush Katif. It was the "traffic jam of the century" in southern Israel. Cars and buses were bumper-to-bumper all the way out to Ashkelon and at times even back to Latrun on the way to Yerushalayim. The "official" police tally was that 70,000 people made it into Gush Katif and that "thousands of cars and buses" were turned back. Not being too familiar with the roads down there, I called one of the Beit Orot hesder boys who did his military service in the area to try and figure out some back way that would be open. I thought I was so brilliant by choosing to go all the way around to Kiryat Gat - but then Yoni (from Beit Orot) told me that the 2 busloads of families and hesder boys that we sent from our Har Hazeitim location one hour before the Zwicklers - were now right behind me. Great going, bigshot. So we sat in the car and saw what Yitziat Mitrayim (the Exodus from Egypt) must have looked like - only this time it was a "kneisa" (going-into) and not a "yetzia." When the buses and cars just had nowhere to move due to the maxed-out volume of the road, people just started getting out of their buses and cars, right there in the middle of the street. You had yeshiva boys marching through by foot, families doing their "mangal" thing off on the embankments, teenagers singing and dancing. I saw pregnant women pushing baby strollers trying to walk the 10 miles from where we were situated, just to get into Gush Katif. There was an elderly woman with a cane determined to make the trek. The most startling aspect of the experience for me had to have been the appearance of a not-insignificant number of men without kippot and women without head-coverings. After all, as drummed into our psyches by the oh-so-reputable Israeli and international media, I only expected "settlers" at this event (which has become a euphemism for any religious Jew physically present in the 50 mile proximity of a Jewish town across the "Green Line" even if they live in Ramat Gan!). But there they were - "regular", "normal", Israelis! Maybe the dumb-founded media should clue into some recent polls showing that some 80% of the Jews in the Land of Israel classify themselves as "traditional" and perhaps this will unravel the secret of the "settlers." But its not the secret of the "settlers" - its the spark of the Jew that is so baffling. The Jew, pardon me, the Israeli (for all Jews are Israelis, or ought to be) has inside him not just the traditions of his forefathers, but the long history of his People and his Birthright. It should not be confusing that difficulties bring out the best in Am Yisrael. Our Torah tells us "Ka'asher Ye'anu Oto, Kein Yirbei V'Kein Yifrotz" ("The more they are afflicted, the more they multiply and grow," referring to the Jews enslaved to Pharoh in Egypt). We are under pressure. There seems to be a new Arik Sharon, who "does not know Joseph." Some say he's the same Arik Sharon who hasn't changed one-bit, that he's always been a political opportunist who simply "played" the "settler card" when it was good for him. Either way, it makes no difference. As with all the great Jewish leaders of the recent past, even the leaders of the Likud, when you detour from the path of Calev and Yehoshua (Caleb and Joshua - the only 2 of the 10 biblical spies who spoke the truth about the Land of Israel), then Eretz Yisrael finds its way to spit you aside in return. There was a special feeling in the air on the traffic-jammed road to Gush Katif today: an aura of hope, of strength and belief in the justness of our cause. And here's proof: my kids barely complained about sitting in the car for eleven hours - ELEVEN HOURS! Maybe we should call it the power of the "Sixth Sense" being that this all happened on the 6th of Iyar. In reality, it was nothing more than just plain "Jewish sense" finally finding its way front and center. We can beat this. We will beat this. Hashem will help us beat this - but only if we show Him just how badly we want it. In the words of a true Jewish leader, Calev ben Yefuneh: "Let us rise up and posses it, for we are well able to overcome it!" (Aloh Naaleh V'Yarashnu Otah, Ki Yachol Nuchal Lah!). How mighty the power of the Sixth of Iyar. WE ARE ALL GUSH KATIF  by Harvey Tannenbaum from Efrat. Last night, several thousand of us lucky residents of Efrat gathered for the final fifteen minutes of Yom Hazikaron in our main park. As the countdown began from tears to laughs, our Chief Rabbi Riskin told us that "We are All Gush Katif!" Our 1st grader watched as the Israeli flag was being raised again to its full staff from the half staff of Yom Hazikaron and asked his Abba, "Don't we live in Gush Etzion, and not Gush Katif?" "I think Harav Riskin made a mistake and he meant to tell us that we are all Gush Etzion?" As the thousands here began to sing with Pirchei Efrat and watch the honored citizens light the torches of another year of independence, his Abba tried to explain what was meant by the words of "We Are All Gush Katif." This morning, we concluded a meaningful shacharit in our neighborhood synagogue in Efrat. Most of the men and women were wearing black and white or blue and white in honor of the holiday that one can only really feel in Israel in its entirety. The sandwich bags and nosh were packed and plenty of water bottles were being loaded into the car for our journey to Gush Katif in Gaza to join in solidarity with the Jews of Gush Katif, Neve Dekalim, Morag, Kfar Darom, etc. As the country ran to the different barbq locations, we joined 100,000 fellow Israelis to celebrate in a march along the Gush Katif communities and give our surrendering leaders a message that he is 'disengaged' from Am Yisrael and there will not be a disengagement of Jews from their land of Israel. At 10.30 AM, we drove from Kissufim to the Gush Katif entry area. The traffic was beginning to slow down as people, cars, and busses were arriving from as far north as Kiryat Shmona and from Eilat for this Yom Haatzmaut. The 'sitting duck' between Kissufim and the entry to the checkpoint towards Neve Dekalim reminded us in the car of the victims of terror who over the past years were attacked and ambushed on this road by terrorists using their Peres-issued guns. We parked in the Neve Dekalim center of town. On one side was a big stage for the festivities later in the day, and from close by we could see the greenhouses where all of our Gush Katif salads were grown. "Why are we here?" This was a good question for a 7 year old first grader. We began to talk and explain about Jews being moved out of their homes. "Why would the Jews move out of their batim(homes) and give these homes to the Arabs who live in their 'mechuar' (ugly) homes? "Didn't Zayde get moved out of his home in Munkatch when I was a baby?" (Zayde left his house by force to go to Auschwitz, way before our 7 year old was born!) We began to march and walk from Neve Dekalim towards the dirt road leading to Shirat Hayam, adjacent to empty buildings left by the Egyptian army in 1967. Shirat Hayam was founded after the terrorist murder of Ronnie Chefetz near Neve Dekalim several years ago. The walk led us to the Hof Gaza, the ocean front of Gaza. I looked behind us and in front of us and there were thousands of walkers along the sand and fishing area of Shirat Hayam. We reached the Pagoda on the beachfront of Gaza in Gush Katif, rested, had our ices and water and water. Next stop was Agam, which was near the Hof Dekalim Palm Hotel, once a haven for Israeli vacationers. The kids kept stopping to pick up seashells and after two hours of the solidarity march and hike, we got close to Morag and Kfar Darom. As we left the march and returned towards Efrat, we counted over 850 more buses and cars on the highway to Gush Katif at 2PM. The newscasts were all reporting as the lead story the 70,000, 80,000, or 90,000 Jews showing up today to Gush Katif. The traffic jams towards Gush Katif backed up as far as the Yad Mordechai junction near Ashkelon! The kids jumped into the bath at home to clean up from the sands of the beach of Gaza in order to prepare for our traditional Yom Haatzmaut barbq in Efrat with family and friends. The 5.00p.m news reported that the police had to close the highway and require the 30,000 people still stuck in traffic for hours to make u turns and return to all of Israel. The Gush Katif Jews were overwhelmed. The day was sold out and thousands were turned away and there was no charge except to recharge the batteries of all of us Jews that only a Prime Minister will be 'disengaged' from office before we Jews will be disengaged from our land. "Now I understand whey Harav Riskin told us last night that we are all Gush Katif." The closing words of the 1st grader who marched for two hours in the heat along the beach and in the communties of Neve Dekalim, Shirat Hayam, and more were emphatic before his recital of Shma Yisrael tonight. Yes, dear friends, here are some pictures that CNN and BBC will never show you. We're here to stay, and celebration of Yom Haatzmaut in Gush Katif was worth 10 years of aliyah to celebrate another way in our homeland of Israel. Chag Sameach, Plan Your Trip Now to Gush Katif "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com. To Go To Top

GUSH KATIF FILM - A MUST SEE Posted by Dafna Yee, April 27, 2004.

This is one of the most moving films that I've ever seen. Don't miss it. - Dafna This message came from Mordechai and Naomi Spiegelman. Dear All, Arutz Sheva has provided an address on the internet where you can see a movie about Gush Katif. It is a FANTASTIC movie. Please view it and send the address to your friends. http://www.israelnn.com/metafiles/asx/eng-video/gush-eng.asx This movie is in English. To Go To Top

AGAINST TERRORISM BUT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE ARABS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 27, 2004.

The Daily Telegraph's Barbara Amiel wrote a piece against Arab terrorism but had some misguided notions. Here they are, followed by my explanations: 1. "The Palestinian cause is an honorable one, but Hamas and similar groups such as Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, or Yasser Arafat's al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades have no interest in an honorable two-state solution. The terrorists' 'grievance is the existence of Israel.'" The notion of Palestinian nationality was advanced as a fraudulent way to cheat the Jewish people out of its entire patrimony. (Her point 4 implicitly admits this. The Arabs already have a state in Palestine, called Jordan, and 20 other states.) The Arab population there supports this quest and the violence by terrorists, except for excesses that bring bad publicity and threaten foreign aid. Further deception is in signing peace agreements the Arabs do not intend to keep. There is nothing honorable about the cause of jihad, at least not to the victims of its bigotry. 2."Arab terrorism against the State of Israel began in 1948 and never stopped." Realistically, Arab terrorism against Palestinian Jews began about 1920 and never ceased. 3. "Terrorism can be countered with guns or by preventive measures such as Israel's security fence. It cannot be appeased, which is perhaps why the Israeli government was intent on simultaneously assassinating Hamas leaders and announcing its withdrawal plans from Gaza." The fence is more a form of hiding than of defense. Once Israel withdrew, it would be unable to return to liquidate successor terrorist leaders if the area became sovereign or if Israel were unwilling to defy the US, which Israel usually caters to. Therefore, the assassination of Hamas leaders is not counter to appeasement but a face-saving mask for withdrawal, which is appeasement. 4. "Palestine as a political entity has never existed. It has been an area owned or ruled by Turks, Egyptians, Lebanese, the British, and Jordanians." (NY Sun, 4/20, p.9.) She forgot to mention that the area is owned and was ruled by the Jewish people. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

100,000 SHOW UP IN GUSH KATIF; TENS OF THOUSANDS WERE TURNED BACK Posted by Menachem Kovacs, April 27, 2004.

This is a news item from Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). Over 100,000 people showed up in Gush Katif today - and several other tens of thousands were turned back by police for lack of room. Large traffic jams - 8 kilometers long (4.5 miles), in some cases - were registered throughout southwestern Israel - but, as the Gush Katif website Katif.net reports, "the people who were stuck in traffic did not honk and did not lose their tempers. Those who came to show solidarity with Gush Katif did so in the belief that this is what must be done at this time, and that it doesn't matter whether they actually made it or not." Most if not all of the visitors marched in the Gush Katif solidarity march from N'vei Dekalim (Palm Splendor) to Shirat HaYam (Song of the Sea). Many of those who could not make it into the Gush were redirected to Katif solidarity events in Yad Mordechai, Sderot, and Saad. Twelve busloads from Beit El, three hours away, were unable to get in to Gush Katif; at 3:15 they turned around and spent an hour or two in nearby Eshkol Park. Minister Natan Sharansky (Likud) was able to make it by car - taking four hours for a two-hour trip from Jerusalem - but Minister Effie Eitam had a slightly different experience. The traffic jam proved too much for him, and like many others, he parked his car near Kibbutz Be'eri and walked to the Kisufim Junction entrance into Gush Katif, ten kilometers away. Both said that the event was a clear signal to the Prime Minister that Gush Katif can never be abandoned. One Jerusalem family sent a message to friends in Gush Katif: "We also didn't manage to get in today, but still, it was great to be stuck in the traffic together with all of Am Yisrael [the People of Israel]. Be strong and courageous - and add some more lanes to the highway." IDF Soldiers at Kisufim greeted the arrivals with a flower and an ices. Witnesses said that never in history had the Kisufim parking lot held so many cars. Police and army sources said that they never expected so many visitors to arrive. Some 150,000 people thus sent a message to Likud voters, who are being called on to vote this coming Sunday in a party referendum on Prime Minister Sharon's unilateral Gaza withdrawal plan. The scores of thousands expressed their total opposition to any plan calling for the uprooting of the Jewish presence in Gaza.Gaza Regional Council officials say that today's mass event was "just the beginning." Residents will continue tomorrow (Wednesday) morning to travel around the country, meeting with eligible voters and seeking to persuade them to oppose the unilateral expulsion plan. Approximately 7,800 Jewish residents live in Gaza. Some of them moved to Gaza over 20 years ago after Sharon, in his capacity as Defense Minister, uprooted them from their homes in Yamit and other Sinai towns over twenty years ago. They now face a second expulsion. Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. To Go To Top

THE STRUGGLE FOR ISRAEL'S SOUL Posted by Michael Freund, April 27, 2004.

For a nation that rightly prides itself on its humane treatment of its enemies, Israel needs to start taking a long, hard look at how it treats its own citizens. This coming Sunday, the fate of some 8,000 Jews will hang in the balance, when members of the Likud cast their ballots on Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's proposal to withdraw from Gaza and northern Samaria. It is a vote laden with significance, in political as well as diplomatic and strategic terms, one whose outcome will have far-reaching repercussions, both locally and on the international scene. But amid all the debate and discussion regarding the various aspects of Sharon's proposal, there is one key question that has been largely ignored: what kind of society is Israel becoming? After all, it is not every day that a liberal Western democracy considers the mass expulsion of thousands of its citizens from their homes, barring them from living in a certain area because of their ethnic and re. Nor does it happen very often that an entire community finds its right to exist called into question, thereby implying that it is somehow less legitimate or less equal than others. Put aside for a moment your thoughts about the wisdom of Jews living in Gaza, and consider this: what does it say about a society when it is willing to countenance the forcible eviction of Jews? And how does such a possibility mesh with the age-old vision of Zionism, or the modern day conception of the individual's right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? The vote this Sunday, then, is more than just a referendum on Jews living in Gush Katif. It is a vote for Israel's soul, a fateful verdict on the nature of what Israeli society and morality have become, and what they wish to be. Because deep down, we all know that if Gaza's Jews were Palestinians, this would never be happening. Indeed, if a government in Israel arose which sought to put the question of evicting Arabs up to a vote, it would rightly be denounced as racist and immoral. But when it comes to Jews, it seems that a double standard is too often applied. Take, for example, the issue of prayer on the Temple Mount. Week in and week out, thousands of Palestinians stream to Jerusalem's Old City for Friday prayers. Yet Jews who wish to do the same, tax-paying citizens of this country, who seek to exercise their basic right to freedom of worship, are subjected to all sorts of restrictions and limitations. When Palestinians suspected of terrorism are placed into administrative detention, the defenders of freedom and human rights raise a hue and a cry, denouncing the government for resorting to extra-judicial means. And yet, when the very same tool is used against a Jewish settler, an Israeli citizen ostensibly safeguarded by all the rights and protections that civil society affords him, the voices of concern suddenly fall silent. The obsession in certain circles with ensuring Palestinian rights has inevitably led to a lack of resolve when it comes to protecting Jewish rights. Indeed, although the Left likes to assert that the "occupation" is corrupting Israel's soul, the only thing that has truly been tarnished is Israel's treatment of its own citizens. And so, because Jews are not Palestinians, the government feels free to do things to them that it would never even consider doing to our foes. It is time for this to change, before a further erosion in our fundamental rights as citizens takes place. To begin with, the very idea of expelling Jews from their homes should be ostracized and removed from the political dialogue. It should be denounced and condemned and hurled aside with no less force than that with which the question of transferring Arabs has been sidelined. And the notion that because Israel is a Jewish state somehow grants it the right to do things to Jews that would otherwise be denounced elsewhere has also got to go. If Jews were forbidden access to a synagogue in London, Paris or New York because it upset their Muslim neighbors, the outcry would be deafening, and justifiably so. Why, then, should it be any less forceful when it comes to the Temple Mount, in the heart of our ancient capital? If a Jew were to be imprisoned without trial anywhere in the world, rallies and protests would be convened, petitions would be signed, and appeals would be sent to the US State Department. But when an Israeli Jew is taken into detention, denied access to a lawyer or even the right to see the evidence against him, little if anything is done on his behalf. However odious his views, or even his actions, he too has the right to a fair trial, and we should expect nothing less from the Government of Israel. In recent years, the media and others have done their best to demonize and delegitimize certain sectors of society, chief among them the Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Whatever their failings might be, we must never forget that they are no less deserving of precisely the same liberties and protections as their brethren in Tel Aviv, Holon and Beersheba. Despite living under siege from Palestinian terror, Israel has gone to great lengths to ensure that the rights and dignity of innocent Palestinians are not harmed. It must now do the same with regard to the Jews, and stop undercutting their freedoms. Michael Freund served as Deputy Director of Communications and Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. This appeared today in the Jerusalem Post. To Go To Top

TARGET: ARAFAT Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, April 27, 2004.

After the killing of the appointed Hamas leader, Dr. Abdelaziz Al-Rantisi, three weeks after the demise of his predecessor Sheik Ahmed Yassin, it is apparent that Israeli leaders such as Shimon Peres, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, have finally realized that there is no peaceful way to deal with terrorists. Peres told Israeli TV, "Whoever deals in murder will pay the price, and it will lead to his own death." Ironically, Mr. Peres continues to believe that Yasser Arafat is a "partner for peace" with whom the Israelis can negotiate. However, Peres knows that Arafat is both the founder of modern terrorism and continues to support, fund and direct everyday terrorism against Israelis and Americans. If perchance Mr. Peres is not aware that Arafat is the main driver of Palestinian terrorism, then he should read what Farouk Kaddoumi, the PLO's hard-line "foreign minister", had to say on April 22, 2004. In an interview with the Jordanian newspaper Al-Arab (as reported by the Jerusalem Post), Kaddoumi said that Arafat means 'armed' when he says 'struggle'. Additionally, Kaddoumi revealed that the PLO has given him the "portfolio" of supporting the Iraqi resistance against the U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq. In the same interview, Kadoumi was quoted as saying: "There is no doubt that the Palestinian revolution supports the Iraqi resistance, and we have seen demonstrations in the occupied Palestinian territories backing the intifada and resistance in Iraq." He also admitted that the PLO Charter, which denies Israel's right to exist, has never been changed. Mr. Peres was one of the leaders who claimed that Arafat did in fact change the Charter as a result of the Oslo accords. Unfortunately, Mr. Peres' statement on targeting terror leaders comes eleven years too late -- after the murder of over 1,300 Israelis, the maiming of thousands of people, and tens of thousands of Israeli and Arab/Palestinian lives shattered. Arafat's minions, who include Al-Aqsa Brigades, Tanzim and other factions of Fatah, and even elements of the Palestinian Authority police, are the main perpetrators of terrorism against Israeli and American civilians. Even the European Union, which continues to bankroll Arafat, knows that he is directing the war against Israel. In fact, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, along with other splinter groups, have carried out fewer attacks than the groups under Arafat's personal control. Therefore, one can only conclude that Arafat deserves the same fate as the late leaders of Hamas, that is, if the Western world is serious about eradicating worldwide terrorism. Proportionately, Arafat has done much more damage to Israel than Osama bin Laden has done to the United States. Arafat's Palestinian Authority is now in close cooperation with Hamas. After the killing of Rantisi, Arafat repeatedly phoned senior Hamas officials in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and attempted to persuade them to resume inter-Palestinian talks about establishing joint leadership. According to a senior Fatah official in Gaza, his organization supports giving Hamas and Islamic Jihad a key role in the PA decision-making process: "We can't ignore the role of Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the resistance against Israel," he explained. The newly appointed Hamas leader, Dr. Mahmoud Zahar, told Matthew Kalman (The Toronto Globe and Mail, April 24, 2004) that the assassination of Rantisi by the Israelis "is new fuel for our movement." He also said, "Our motto is very simple: either to achieve martyrdom or to liberate our land." In addition, he reiterated that Hamas will continue to struggle for the elimination of the State of Israel: "We are not willing to accept Israel as a legitimate state in this area." The same message was sent to Western leaders who back Israel, and to the coalition forces in Iraq. He threatened that President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair would suffer the same fate as the victims of the Madrid train bombing. Now, Hamas is in the process of regrouping and cooperating even more closely with Arafat than ever before. Diana Buttu, a legal advisor to the Palestinian negotiation team, told UPI that the Palestinian leadership firmly believes that Israel now intends to force Arafat out of the Palestinian territories and exile him to Egypt (where he was born). She added that Hamas restrained its people from retaliating for the deaths of its two high-ranking officials, but she believes the Islamist group is waiting out the 40-day mourning period, as demanded by Muslim tradition. So, more Hamas and PA terror is imminent. Israel, along with the West, is fighting global terrorism. In its modern form, terror was first utilized by the Arab Palestinians. But we now know that for decades Arafat has been financed and armed by Islamic countries, such as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Arafat has been the pioneer and the point man in the emergence of global terror. Mr. Peres, isn't time to see the reality that Arafat deserves the same fate as the previous leaders of Hamas? Must we wait for more deaths to understand that Israel and the West should have long ago sent Arafat to the dustbin of history? The fact is that it will take all freedom-loving peoples, including those in the Arab/Muslim World, to wake up to the reality of who Yasser Arafat really is. George Jonas understood what needs to be done when he said: "To put the genie of anti-civilizational ruthlessness back into its bottle, to defeat terrorist despotism from the nuclear labs of North Korea to the alleys of Falluja and the caves of al-Qaeda in the Hindu Kush, America will need to reconsider decades of ultra-liberalism and political correctness, and revert to earlier models of national purpose." And this applies to Israel, too. We will have to become as ruthless as our enemy is, and a lot less reluctant to kill its leaders, if we ever want to see an end to the war on terror. The enemy is ruthless and has a heart for the fight. Do we? Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization?s Middle East committee. This article appeared as an Opinion piece in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) today. To Go To Top

FACE TO FACE WITH ISRAEL Posted by Israel National News, April 27, 2004.

This is an Op-Ed by Rabbi Zalman Baruch Melamed, who is the Dean of Beit El Yeshiva Center Institutions and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Arutz Sheva Israel National Radio. It was in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com) yesterday. A Value-Added Campaign The Face-to-Face campaign - that which the residents of Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) are currently waging with the Likud membership on behalf of the Land of Israel - has a value above and beyond that which we see in the polls. In addition to other short-term benefits, the Face-to-Face door-to-door campaign has the value of compensating for and repairing, to some extent, the infamous Sin of the Spies. Our teacher and former Chief Rabbi of Israel Rabbi Avraham Shapira has pointed out that the famous work Eim HaBanim Semeichah by Rabbi Yisachar Teichtal writes some very timely things about this point. House-to-House With the Spies The book in question was written by a learned rabbi in Europe during the Holocaust years. Though he was brought up and schooled in the anti-Zionist yeshivot and ideology of early-20th century Europe, he came independently - but with the help of many traditional Jewish sources - to the realization that as many religious Jews as possible must return immediately to the Land of Israel, despite the irreligious nature of the Zionist movement. In the passage beginning on page 256 of Eim HaBanim Semeichah (p. 396-403 in the English edition, translated by Moshe Lichtman, published by Kol Mevaser Publications, 2000), Rabbi Teichtal quotes the Medrash describing the methodology used by the Ten Spies. The Spies had been sent by Moses to scout out the Land, but instead acted to weaken the nations resolve to enter the Land. Each of the ten - leaders of their respective tribes - went from house to house, acting faint and falling down and crying, explaining that they were sick with worry over the terrible things that would happen to their sons and daughters when they entered the Land - and they would then start crying again, and the household members would cry along with them. And thus they would do in each and every house," Rabbi Teichtal writes, "sparing no effort until every house in the tribe was crying over the entry to the Land of Israel, and all were one unit against the Land. This is what is referred to in the verse, "Our brothers melted our hearts," and when Moshe said, "You murmured in your tents." Rabbi Teichtal continues and writes that the way to repair this terrible Sin of the Spies is to do the same type of thing that they did - i.e., to go from house to house, without being lazy and without calculating the time or trouble it will cost, and to speak to every Jew on behalf of the Land of Israel. If we take this course of action, he writes, then with G-d's help we will be able to turn all of Israel into one pro-Land of Israel sector - and this will be the correction of the Sin of the Spies, and we will thus pay up our debt regarding this bad loan of the this terrible sin. So writes Rabbi Teichtal in Eim HaBanim Semeichah, 60 years ago. And today we see his words coming true, with the Yesha residents' Face-to-Face campaign gaining momentum and piling up good will and positive feedback. What People Are Hearing The results are welcome and blessed. People are hearing for the first time that Prime Minister's disengagement plan is not a disengagement from the Arabs; in that respect, things will remain as they are. Instead, they are learning, the plan calls only for the uprooting of blossoming Jewish communities built and populated by the wonderful pioneers of Gush Katif. When people hear the truth, it makes an impression. People are hearing that Arik Sharon is taking this path because he thinks that the nation has no more strength, that the nation is weak. Sharon himself says he wishes the people were strong, and that then he would be able to take a different path. We must therefore show him that he is wrong, that we are in fact a tough and resilient nation. The media, which are controlled by the extreme left-wing, are that which create the impression of national weakness - but in actuality, whenever we are tested, our true character of strength is revealed. When there was a wide-scale call-up of reserves after the Passover Seder massacre in Netanya two years ago, the response was over 100% - even more people showed up than were called! The press was taken by surprise. According to its reports, no one wanted to fight, and national will and drive had dwindled to nothing. But in actuality, we saw that our nation is strong. As we explained to the thousands of people whom we have met in their homes, we must vote against the evacuation and retreat, and against the uprooting of Jews from their homeland. It appears that every time we strike out at the terrorists and weaken them, ideas begin to fly about agreements and understandings. This is what happened with the catastrophic Oslo Agreements, and the same type of catastrophe can be foreseen with the current ideas of concessions and retreat. It must also be kept very much in mind that the plan as it stands includes a full stop on all development in Yesha communities - a near-total building freeze, and with nothing in return. Providing the Leaders With Strength What we must do is to give strength to the government to be strong - and this can be done by the Likud members who vote against the plan. These true and simple words penetrate the hearts of the Likud members. The way to defeat terrorism is not by giving up, but by settling the Land and by holding fast onto it. This is the path we must take - and this is how we will atone for and repair the Sin of the Scouts. Be of good courage and let us be strong for our people and for the cities of our G-d. (Sam. II 10, 12)) You can subscribe to Arutz Sheva News Service on the http://subscribe.israelnationalnews.com/subscribe.asp page and receive a well-written and insightful daily summary of the news from Israel. To Go To Top

NO MORE APPEASEMENT Posted by IsrAlert, April 27, 2004.

This was written by Joseph Farah, editor of World Net Daily. It is archived at www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38200 Most Americans probably think the Islamic terrorists declared war on the United States Sept. 11, 2001. Actually, it started a long time before - right from the birth of the nation. When George Washington was serving as president in 1784, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin were commissioned by the first Congress to assemble in Paris to see about marketing U.S. products in Europe. Jefferson quickly surmised that the biggest challenge facing U.S. merchant ships were those referred to euphemistically as "Barbary pirates." They weren't "pirates" at all, in the traditional sense, Jefferson noticed. They didn't drink and chase women and they really weren't out to strike it rich. Instead, their motivation was strictly religious. They bought and sold slaves, to be sure. They looted ships. But they used their booty to buy guns, ships, cannon and ammunition. Like those we call "terrorists" today, they saw themselves engaged in jihad and called themselves "mujahiddin." Why did these 18th-century terrorists represent such a grave threat to U.S. merchant ships? With independence from Great Britain, the former colonists lost the protection of the greatest navy in the world. The U.S. had no navy - not a single warship. Jefferson inquired of his European hosts how they dealt with the problem. He was stunned to find out that France and England both paid tribute to the fiends - who would, in turn, use the money to expand their own armada, buy more weaponry, hijack more commercial ships, enslave more innocent civilians and demand greater ransom. This didn't make sense to Jefferson. He recognized the purchase of peace from the Muslims only worked temporarily. They would always find an excuse to break an agreement, blame the Europeans and demand higher tribute. After three months researching the history of militant Islam, he came up with a very different policy to deal with the terrorists. But he didn't get to implement until years later. As the first secretary of state, Jefferson urged the building of a navy to rescue American hostages held in North Africa and to deter future attacks on U.S. ships. In 1792, he commissioned John Paul Jones to go to Algiers under the guise of diplomatic negotiations, but with the real intent of sizing up a future target of a naval attack. Jefferson was ready to retire a year later when what could only be described as "America's first Sept. 11" happened. America was struck with its first mega-terror attack by jihadists. In the fall of 1793, the Algerians seized 11 U.S. merchant ships and enslaved more than 100 Americans. When word of the attack reached New York, the stock market crashed. Voyages were canceled in every major port. Seamen were thrown out of work. Ship suppliers went out of business. What Sept. 11 did to the U.S. economy in 2001, the mass shipjacking of 1793 did to the fledgling U.S. economy in that year. Accordingly, it took the U.S. Congress only four months to decide to build a fleet of warships. But even then, Congress didn't choose war, as Jefferson prescribed. Instead, while building what would become the U.S. Navy, Congress sent diplomats to reason with the Algerians. The U.S. ended up paying close to $1 million and giving the pasha of Algiers a new warship, "The Crescent," to win release of 85 surviving American hostages. It wasn't until 1801, under the presidency of Jefferson, that the U.S. engaged in what became a four-year war against Tripoli. And it wasn't until 1830, when France occupied Algiers, and later Tunisia and Morocco, that the terrorism on the high seas finally ended. France didn't leave North Africa until 1962 - and it quickly became a major base of terrorism once again. What's the moral of the story? Appeasement never works. Jefferson saw it. Sept. 11 was hardly the beginning. The war in which we fight today is the longest conflict in human history. It's time to learn from history, not repeat its mistakes. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

A DISPASSIONATE VIEW OF THE SHARON PLAN: FROM A DISENGAGEMENT PLAN TO A RETREAT PLAN Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 27, 2004.

SHARON'S 'DISENGAGEMENT' = RETREAT I strongly urge you to read this analysis by David Bedein of Prime Minister Sharon's withdrawal plans. As you read, you will see the fingerprints of the Arabist U.S. State Department and the Bush advisors. Note particularly the concept of leaving homes, factories, farms, businesses intact for the Arab Palestinians - all are to remain as if Gaza is a protectorate of Israel and without cost to the incoming recipients or just compensation for the evicted Jews who invested their own money, blood, sweat and tears for 3 generations. Note also the pledge to provide employment, electricity, water, sewage treatment, telecommunications, gasoline - and training of the Arab "Security Forces". What you will likely conclude is that President Bush and the U.S. State Department do NOT wish to take responsibility for what they have provoked. They refuse to finance the Arab Palestinians but rather have Israel surrender the land and all its hard-earned infrastructure. Then they expect Israel to continue supporting the international Terrorist Organizations who will take over after Sharon's shameful retreat. Because this Gaza retreat plan is a direct extension of the failed Oslo plan and the newly re-packaged Geneva plan (all promoted by the E.U., the U.N. and the U.S. State Department) it would wise and prudent to vote against its adoption. PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO YOUR LISTS, THE MEDIA, CONGRESS AND OTHER INFLUENTIALS! The Sharon Plan will be voted on in an unprecedented referendum which will take place among the 200,00 members of the Likud Party in Israel this coming Sunday [May 2]. This is no internal election. The Sharon Plan has become a hotly debated news item in Israel and throughout the world. Essentially, the vote on the Sharon Plan will provide the first referendum on the eleven year Oslo process. Whatever the result, the situation in Israel will radically change. If the Sharon Retreat Plan is ratified, the precedent will be established for the Israeli government to uproot Jewish communities. A new government will be formed. The architect of the 1993 Oslo process, Shimon Peres, once again the leader of Israel's Labor Party, will again assume the post of foreign minister. The Oslo process will continue. If the Sharon Plan is rejected, the Oslo process will be dead in the water. Yet what is even more newsworthy, given the charged emotions that this debate has created, is the fact that very few people across the political spectrum in Israel, and even in the media and diplomatic corps represented in Israel, have bothered to read the Sharon Plan. Even though it is posted on the official web site of the Israeli Prime Minister, at http://www.pmo.gov.il , I repeat, few people have taken the time to read the Sharon Plan. On one of Israel's most popular call-in shows last Friday morning, where everyone calling in had a passionate comment on the issue, the talk show host revealed that not one of the callers had read the Sharon Plan. Likud Party Chairman and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had promised to mail out a copy of his plan to all of the Likud voters. Well, if you take a dispassionate view of the plan, you will understand why he did not send it out. The Sharon Plan is officially called the Disengagement Plan, because, according to the preamble to clause 1, section 1, "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." The preamble goes on to say that "In order to break out of this stalemate, Israel is required to initiate moves not dependent on Palestinian cooperation... Accordingly, it has developed a plan of unilateral disengagement." In other words, after 12 years of negotiations with the PLO, the Israeli government has reached the solemn conclusion that the negotiations have failed completely, and that the PLO is indeed at war with the state of Israel. After more than 22,000 terror attacks and almost one thousand people murdered in cold blood by Palestinian Arab terrorists in less than four years, that would be a seeming understatement. [1500 Jews have been murdered since Oslo in 1993, with tens of thousands injured - many maimed for life.] Yet the paragraph that follows the preamble of the Sharon Plan is a seeming non-sequiter: The Sharon Plan's answer to the PLO terror campaign is that "there will be no Israeli towns and villages in the Gaza Strip" and that "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." Why retreat in the face of PLO adversity? No reason is given. The plan offers an analysis, however, which states that "The relocation from the Gaza Strip and from Northern Samaria will reduce friction with the Palestinian population, and carries with it the potential for improvement in the Palestinian economy and living conditions." Why would the Israeli government suddenly state that Jewish communities in Gaza and Northern Samaria are a "source of friction"? No reason is given. Why would it improve the economy and living conditions to abandon Jewish homes and farms? Again, no reason is given. After all, the Jewish communities in Gaza and Northern Samaria did not replace a single Arab family nor do they encroach on any Arab owned land. They were, in fact, built on vacant land not owned by any individuals, be they Palestinian, Jordanian or Egyptian after 1967 Six Day War. The Sharon Plan does state that now "there will be no basis for claiming that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory," a specious claim that no government of Israel has ever accepted, since Israel does not define itself as a foreign "occupier" of any area of the historical land of Israel. The Sharon Plan continues with a statement that seems to belie the preamble that the PLO is not a "reliable Palestinian partner" by stating that "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." Why would an Israeli abandonment of Jewish communities cause the Palestinians to "break out of a cycle of violence"? It got them all of Gaza and will result in the deportation of Jews. Since the majority of the Palestinians in Gaza, who live in the squalor of UN Arab refugee camps, are nurtured by the ideas of the "right of return" to liberate lands where their Arab villages existed in 1948, why would Israel's dismemberment of Jewish communities established on lands where no Arab villages were lost in 1967 satisfy their political goals? Meanwhile, another premise of the Sharon Plan is that "the process of disengagement will serve to dispel claims regarding Israel's responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip." So why does the plan continue to obligate Israel to provide water pipes, electricity, industrial zones, markets and employment to sustain the Palestinian Arab economy of Gaza? In the words, the Sharon Plan promises that the "Infrastructure relating to water, electricity, sewage and telecommunications serving the Palestinians will remain in place" and that "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 and economic arrangements shall remain in force". 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. Meanwhile, Israel will continue to operate The Erez industrial zone, situated in the Gaza Strip, which employs some 4,000 Palestinian workers." So what the Israeli Prime Minister's office describes as a "disengagement plan" does anything but disengage Israel from the Palestinian Arab population. For whatever reason, the Sharon plan assumes that the PLO will abandon its terror campaign. The plan says, "When", and not "if" "... 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." While the premise of the Sharon plan is that the PLO will not fight terrorism, and with evidence that the PLO continues to run a system based of corruption, what basis does the Sharon plan have for any assumption that the PLO will "fight against terrorism" or institute any "reform"? There is no answer. And when it comes to security issues in other areas, the Sharon plan promises to "evacuate an Area in the Northern Samaria Area (the West Bank) including 4 villages and all military installations, and re-deploy outside the vacated area. The move will enable territorial contiguity for Palestinians in the Northern Samaria Area "while Israel will improve the transportation infrastructure in the West Bank in order to facilitate the contiguity of Palestinian transportation." Israel will provide them buses as they blow ours up? Does this also mean that abandoned villages and military installations will be handed over to a PLO that is "not a reliable peace partner"? Once more, since the Sharon Plan defines the PLO as maintaining a state of war with Israel, why does the same Sharon Plan provide the PLO with the strategic assistance of "territorial contiguity"? No answer is given as merrily we roll along. Meanwhile, the Sharon Plan mandates that the Gaza Strip "be demilitarized and shall be devoid of weaponry, the presence of which does not accord with the Israeli-Palestinian agreements." However, the Sharon Plan does not even allude to the fact that the PLO violated all previous agreements in this regard and refused to implement the agreement with Israel to have their personnel vetted by Israel. Did Sharon forget that the PLO increased - against the Oslo agreement - the size of the agreed upon security force from 9,000 in 1993 to more than 50,000 by 1995, ignoring protestations of the government of Israel? The Sharon Plan that demilitarizes Gaza provides no process to disarm the PLO armed forces now in Gaza. And what does the Sharon Plan mandate in terms of Israeli security? The Sharon Plan asserts that " 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." Incredibly, Israel's right to pursue terrorists into Gaza is not mentioned anywhere. They can shoot at us but we may not go after the terrorists. As far as the security situation in the West Bank is concerned, the Sharon Plan states that "upon completion of the evacuation of the Northern Samaria Area, no permanent Israeli military presence will remain in this area," while another section states that " Military Installations and Infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria will be dismantled and removed, with the exception of those which Israel decides to leave and transfer to another party ..." Does that mean that the PLO security forces, described in clause 1 of the Sharon Plan as "not a reliable peace partner," will now inherit Israel's abandoned IDF miltary bases? Why would Israel cede military installations to an entity with who it is in a state of war? The Sharon Plan also states that "In other areas of the West Bank, current security activity will continue" and that "... as circumstances permit, Israel will consider reducing such activity in Palestinian cities?" and that "Israel will work to reduce the number of internal checkpoints throughout the West Bank." So here we have a situation where Israel moves its forces out of cities and reduces checkpoints and is expected to maintain mobility to respond to the PLO terror war. Perhaps the most amazing issue of all is that the Sharon Plan agrees to provide "advice, assistance and training" 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." The Sharon Plan ignores Israel's decade-long failed experience with security assistance that Israel facilitated for the PLO. The Sharon Plan ignores how military training facilitated by Israel and western countries for the PLO was abused to conduct a terror campaign against Israel in every part of the country for the past four years. The U.S. State Department trained Palestinian policemen for "security" who then used that training to kill Israelis. The Sharon Plan goes on to say that "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." Did Israel not try that already? And weren't guns and rockets smuggled in? In terms of Israel's border area between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, (called the Philadelphi Route), the Sharon Plan only states that "Initially, Israel will continue to maintain a military presence along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt" and that "...subsequently, the evacuation of this area will be considered... dependent, inter alia, on the security situation and the extent of cooperation with Egypt in establishing a reliable alternative arrangement." Why "initially" and "subsequently"? Does Israel expect that situation on the Egyptian border to change? Will weapons continue to be smuggled through tunnels on Egypt's frontier? And how does the Sharon Plan deal with the fate of the 25 Israeli communities that it has slated for abandonment? Three generations of families who worked hard and built productive lives on vacant sand dunes to make a thriving agricultural community? The Sharon Plan makes no mention of the property rights, human rights or civil liberties of the residents and landowners in these communities. Instead, the Sharon Plan relates only to the property values of Jewish owned property in terms of how they might help their new occupants, stating that "Israel will strive to leave the immovable property relating to Israeli towns and villages intact," while "Israel reserves the right to request that the economic value of the assets left in the evacuated areas be taken into consideration" and that "The transfer of Israeli economic activity to Palestinians carries with it the potential for a significant improvement in the Palestinian economy." In other words, terrorism pays. But worse still, the Sharon Plan does not take into account that only the leadership of the PLO would likely take this property for themselves, irrespective of the economic needs of the Palestinian society. The record of corruption of the highest levels of the PLO is a matter of public record throughout the world. Instead, the Sharon Plan states that "Israel proposes that an international body be established (along the lines of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee), 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." In other words, the Israeli government has decided to implement a process designed to confiscate the private property belonging to thousands of people, without any mention of the human rights, civil liberties or the property rights of people who have the rightful deed to their homes, businesses and farms. Instead of recognizing the rights of landowners of the Israeli communities scheduled for abandonment, the Sharon Plan offers hundreds of Israeli homes to the PLO, stating that "Israel will strive to leave in place the infrastructure relating to water, electricity and sewage currently serving the Israeli towns and villages." Finally, The Sharon Plan envisions continued international support for the PLO , " 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 the support for the PLO continues and the terror does not cease? What then? The Sharon Plan provides no answer. So there you have it. The text of the Sharon Plan speaks for itself: Ethnic Cleansing of Jews, strengthening of the PLO, and no disengagement whatsoever. This is not a disengagement plan. This is a plan of hasty retreat that doesn't even include a request of the Palestine Authority to stop endorsing the murder of Jews from their government's Public Broadcasting Corporation shows. What sanctions are listed if the PLO does not comply? Is this not worse than the Oslo Accords? David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

WHEN HALF A PICTURE TELLS ONLY HALF THE STORY OF ISRAEL: Posted by Leo Rennert, April 27, 2004.

This is letter sent to the New York Times, which carried a picture of a soldier grieving at the grave of a fellow soldier: I call your attention to the very moving picture, "Grief and Remembrance in Israel," that encapsulates Israel's Memorial Day ceremonies on Monday, April 27. Unfortunately, the picture tells only half the story. Under a custom that goes back to Israel's founding, Memorial Day is followed immediately by Independence Day, featuring huge celebrations, dances, fireworks, outings to national parks, concerts, etc. The symbolism of twinning Memorial Day and Independence Day represents the essence of life in Israel -- grief over sacrifices to secure its independence, inseparably linked to a huge outpouring of joy to celebrate the vibrant country made possible by these sacrifices. This year, Independence Day began Monday evening and continued until Tuesday. Since there were many photogenic celebrations Monday evening (Monday afternoon NY time) in the same news cycle as Memorial Day events, a twinning of contrasting pictures -- grief and joy -- would have told the real story. Perhaps, next year. To Go To Top

"NY SUN'S" EVOLVING EDITORIALS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 27, 2004.

Alternative views about what Israel should do with Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are: (1) Give them away to the Arabs, and there will be peace; (2) Make peace, or at least get the Arabs to quash terrorism, and then give the Territories to the Arabs; and (3) Keep the Territories, as entitled to and need to, and the Arabs would have less of an advantage in the war they seek. In short: (1) Land then peace; (2) Non-violence then land; (3) Keep land, try for peace. The second view is a sophisticated scam. It professes courage but foretells appeasement. All the Arabs have to do is pretend long enough to have stopped terrorism - the great powers do not hold the Arabs to their commitments - and they get what they have fought for, and then fight again. How ironic! If they suspend their war, they win it. Past terrorism would pay. For Israel, such a position is worse than ironic. It is tragic. It is faithless. The tragedy and infidelity in it lay in failing to fight hard enough to win fast and thereby keep Israeli casualties down, and in failing to make Israel's case against the Arabs. Think about it! Israel decries Arab terrorism but hardly exposes the Arab case's falsity. This half-hearted struggle on Israel's part allows the world to think that the Arabs have a good cause and the better case. This is the position of the "New York Sun" and its columnists, including Daniel Pipes. They defend Israel's reputation from Arab slander and they denounce Arab terrorism. They do not, however, uphold Israel's historical, religious, moral, and legal claim to the core of its homeland, Yesha. Neither do they suggest that the egregious Arab misbehavior and the fraudulent nature of "Palestinian nationalism" forfeit the Arab case for the Territories. For eventual Arab domination of those strategic territories, despite Arab adherence to the Islamist goal of eventually expelling the infidels from Israel, itself, "Sun" and Pipes have infinite patience. That, to me, is not being pro-Israel as professed. It simply is not being as extremist against Israel as the Islamists. I think that the position of the "Sun" is evolving towards the Arab side in the Arab-Israel conflict, though not in the Arab-U.S. conflict. An example is a recent article that explicitly assumes the Arab "cause" is legitimate. Religious hegemony is not a legitimate cause. "Sun" columnists who write about Israel take such a position, however. These and the other columnists take at face value the territorial surrender to the Arabs planned by PM Sharon as beneficial for Israel, though they don't say how. They fall for the implied support for Israel in Bush's letter, although the language of that letter and the US record of breech of promise make the letter a snare. Columnist William F. Buckley, Jr., believes that Bush would let Israel keep some of the communities it built in Yesha, and objects. Indeed, IMRA predicted its points of deception. Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA warned that the letter would in a vague and ambiguous way make those points in order to seem to support Israel, but would be shown later by the US not to support Israel. A White House briefing sooner rather than later assured reporters it does not support Israel. The State Dept. assured Arab governments likewise. Nevertheless, "Sun" staffers think it does. No logic and quotation from me dislodges them from their illusions. These opinion-makers can be impervious to fact and logic. Complicating one's evaluation of the newspaper is its reliance for most of its foreign news upon the Associated Press. The A.P., as I took pains to point out to the "Sun," colors its news green for Islam. That is, it reports Arab false statements as if factual or seriously to be considered. It makes pro-Arab or even-handed descriptions of events, rather than stating what occurred. Further complicating the "Sun's" approach to reality is its excessive partisanship or conservatism. Since George Bush is a Republican and a conservative, the "Sun" people rarely criticize him except for violating those positions. It is enough that he says he supports Israel somewhat. This newspaper, which has a field day ridiculing Sen. Kerry for major, minor, and imaginary inconsistencies give far less scrutiny to Pres. Bush's. This makes it inconsistent. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

REMEMBERING DAVID Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 28, 2004.

Beit El--Every year for the past seven years on Yom Hazikaron (Memorial Day) the 11th grade students of the Mateh Binyamin Yeshiva High School (MBYHS) in Beit El walk out of school, past the 8 foot high protective wall surrounding their building to a modest memorial plaque on the old road into the community. Here the boys commemorate the life of David Boim, an American-born MBYHS student who was murdered by Hamas terrorists as he stood waiting for the bus at this spot with two fellow students on May 13, 1996. David was 17, an 11th grader. David's father, Stanley, always attends the ceremony. His mother, Joyce finds it too difficult, and this year she is in Chicago attending to the family's legal efforts to bring down Hamas front groups in the US. The students, with blue Yizkor (Remember) stickers stuck on their white shirts, carry full size Israeli flags as they gather quietly around the stone plaque. A few hundred yards away are the newly-built spacious villas on the edge of Ramallah. Three jeeps of IDF soldiers, barely two years older than their charges, stand by scanning the horizon. After a few words from their teacher, the boys recite Psalms together and link arms to sing the ancient song of Jewish resolve and faith: Ani Ma'amin (I believe in the coming of the Messiah) Stanley Boim turns toward Jerusalem to recite kaddish for his son, and Moshe Eyal, director of the school, explains to the boys that "David will be with us forever as part of the 11th grade." The boys have to leave to make it back to the courtyard of the school in time for the 11 a.m. siren that marks the commencement of the main Yom Hazikaron ceremony in Beit El. MBYHS hosts a unique memorial event that brings hundreds of kindergarten, elementary, middle school and high school students together with dozens of IDF soldiers and police stationed in the community. On the steps leading to the courtyard, MBYHS students have erected displays with photos and text about each fallen soldier and terror victim in the community. Dozens of Israeli flags flutter alongside flags of the IDF brigades and police represented, as the white shirted students stand to attention for the two minute siren. As the siren winds down, two teenage boys light the memorial torch. Impassively, the MC announces that the brother of one of the boys was killed while serving in the IDF, and the other torch lighter is Dor Hershkowitz,14, whose father Arye was killed by terrorists in January 2001. For four months Dor said kaddish for his father together with his brother, Assaf,30, until Assaf too was murdered at the same spot on May 1, 2001. With all his pain, Dor is grateful to MBYHS. "At Mateh Binyamin I have good teachers. They know what I'm going through and because they know me and my family so well, they know how to help me," says the freckle-faced teenager. Addressing the crowd, one of the rabbis points out that Israel is not only a place to escape the galut when things get bad. "We're building a state that will be a light unto the nations," he says, "and all of you have a role in it. More than 21,000 people paid a heavy price, but in the end, our job is not to just remember their names, but to ask 'why--what is the significance of their sacrifice?'" Geula Hershkowitz, the widow and bereaved mother of Arye and Assaf rises to address the students. Geula is totally composed and exudes strength. The kids have been sitting in the sun for some time, but they're still attentive as Geula recites a poem composed by her daughter-in-law. Several male teachers, a few with pistols tucked in to their belts next to their tzitzit, bring water around. At the close of the ceremony, after the recitation of Kel Mole Rachamim and the Hatikva, the MBYHS students quickly and efficiently dismantle the stage and chairs. A few of the adults linger to shmooze, and the level to which terror has touched our lives is evident. Along with Geula Hershkowitz in this small group of people is Yoel Tzur, Beit El leader and father of Ita and Ephraim Tzur, murdered in December, 1996, as well as the father of one of the young men murdered in Wadi Kelt. Current security concerns have severly impacted the operations of MBYHS on many levels. Originally built to grace the main entrance to Beit El, the school now sits secluded at the back of the community since the main gate had to be moved due to incessant Arab gunfire. The 8 foot wall was erected to allow students to use the outside basketball court in relative safety. When the violence started in 2000, construction of the dining hall was just getting underway. MBYHS students and staff took their meals in a series of large pre-fab buildings on school grounds. After a few months of eating under fire, administrators had no choice but to move the students into the half-finished dining hall. Their new premises have no heat or air conditioning, and exposed concrete and wires are still in evidence. Bulletproof windows, an internal security system and a strong perimeter fence have all been added in the past three years, but there are still strict restrictions on student's outside activities causing some tension for the naturally active teenagers. One outlet is the radio studio for students enrolled in the communications course. In a state-of-the-art studio, some twenty students learn and practise their media skills, leading to the hope that they will one day take their place as sorely needed Torah observant media professionals. Another focus at MBYHS is instilling a love and respect for the land. One large classroom dedicated to this project is filled with the inspiring landscape and flora photography of MBYHS graduate Ovad Pedahel, who died in a traffic accident. The sandbags have been taken down from the Beit Midrash (study Hall), but many challenges still remain for the 11th graders who started their day by remembering David Boim. Foremost among them is living up to the expectations of a school that is struggling to continue to produce Israel's future defenders and leaders. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

RESPONSE TO A CALL TO SUPPORT SHARON Posted by Dafna Yee, April 27, 2004.

I received the article, "Support It" from Isi Leibler, the V.P. of the World Jewish Congress, with whom I've enjoyed a long time correspondence. (see attached) I was positively flabbergasted at the position that he took to support Sharon's "disengagement plan" and wrote this response to him. I'm asking all of you who agree with me to take the time to write your own responses to him as well. His e-mail address is: ileibler@netvision.net.il I am absolutely distraught after learning that you now are in SUPPORT of Sharon's heinous plan to give yet more land to the Arab terrorists in a misguided bid for peace! Your reasoning seems to be that "politics is the art of the possible". I don't agree that this applies to the present situation at all. The very fact that Israel exists at all today is because people were willing to work toward the politically impossible. Political maneuverings involving compromise and "negotiation", when they are with your sworn enemies, are destined to lead to nothing but disaster. But politics with your so-called friends can also lead to catastrophe, and that is what has happened with Sharon's bid for Bush's approval for his Gaza plan. You pointed out that Ben Gurion and the early Zionists did compromise their hopes that all of the Palestine Mandate would become Israel, and they settled for far less than they had been promised when they accepted partition. But look at what they received in exchange for their compromise -- a Jewish State where they would be free to build a real homeland for all Jews! In contrast, Sharon is proposing political compromises that will get Israel nothing but empty promises and more deaths in return for REMOVING all Jews from their established homes. He is also promising that Jews will be forbidden ever to live there again -- land where Jews have lived for thousands of years (until the politics of the 20th century)! Sharon is using Bush's assurances about protecting Israel as guarantees for "Palestinian" behavior as if the promises of the "Palestinians" to halt terror are worth the breath used to make them! NO American president can give surety for Arab behavior even if his intentions are good, so it is stupid for Israel to endanger the lives of its citizens and possibly its very survival on the statements made by any American president. The idea of "land for peace" is intrinsically flawed no matter who advocates it or with whom Israel is negotiating." No matter how sincere that person is, it can only bring more death and destruction to Israel. Any psychologist will tell you that the best predictor of anyone's future behavior is an examination of their past behavior, and that is true for governments as well as for individuals. Retreating from Lebannon did not bring about peace, it brought about more Israeli deaths and set a dangerous precedent. The exact same thing - only worse -- will happen if Sharon's misguided plan to ethnically cleanse all Jews from Gaza takes place. The land of Israel belongs to all Jews everywhere, in this and in future generations. NO Israeli politician, and certainly not an American president, has the right to give away the Jewish heritage that so many people have died to protect. To quote David Ben Gurion: "Israel must discern the needs of the hour in all their cruel clarity, but not, on that account, overlook the needs of generations yet to come. The present situation, with all its grievous dangers from which we draw inescapable conclusions, ought not to limit our visual horizons." Unfortunately, your visual horizons are being limited by your philosophy of seeing politics only through the eyes of the possible. You mentioned that you were surprised at Bush's support for Sharon's plan. Why should you be surprised? Bush's personal goal, which he has reiterated many times, is to create a "peaceful Palestinian State" headed by "Palestinian moderates." These two terms, "peaceful Palestinian State" and "Palestinian moderates," are oxymorons. Sharon's plan to ethnically cleanse (AKA "evacuate") all Jewish communities in Gaza and some from Judea/Samaria is merely one step closer to his own "Road Map"! I do not understand why President Bush's approval of Sharon's plan is considered a good thing, when that same plan has been hailed as a triumph by some "Palestinian" terrorists. Barghouti praised this plan as "the most important achievement of the Palestinians in the intifada." (www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/417205.html) Why would anyone want to support the creation of a country which states in its proposed constitution that no Jews will be allowed to live there? The world keeps accusing Israel of plotting to commit ethnic cleansing against the Arabs living in Israel, when no actual Arabs have been forced to leave their homes (except for the single circumstance when their homes were destroyed because of their participation in terrorist activity). Yet, it seems perfectly acceptable to make Gaza judenrein by forcing nearly 8000 Jews from their homes that have been established for three generations! THIS is the plan that gets Bush's -- and your -- approval! And for what? For Bush agreeing that Israel has the right to exist? Or for Bush agreeing that the "Palestinians" would go there instead of Israel in their mythical "right of return"? Or for acknowledging that Israel has the right to protect its citizens without answering to foreign powers? Would you please explain to me exactly what Israel could possibly achieve by Sharon's nefarious plan that was not already promised many times before, the last time at Oslo. Tell me what would allow me to think that this repeat of giving "land for peace" could possibly do anything but divide Israel into pieces. Moreover, what could possibly make me want to support this plan under these conditions? Many people, including you, are making a big deal out of the fact that Bush did not insist that the "Palestinians" had the "right of return" to Israel. But Bush only said that he believes that the "Palestinians" will want to go to "Palestine" once they have the opportunity; he did NOT say that the "right of return" issue was dead! It was a suggestion to the "Palestinians", not a directive. When talking of the mythological "right of return", everyone ignores the fact that "Palestine" could not handle the influx of millions of impoverished people; it doesn't have the resources to take care of the "Palestinians" now. The fact is that while the surrounding Arab countries could handle them, they have always refused to. (Even today, the "Palestinians" are refused citizenship in every Arab country.) The "Palestinians" are almost totally dependent on foreign donations, which include the UN, the USA, the EU, and even Israel! (Note that Arab countries have never supported the "Palestinians" economically; they just finance their terror tactics against Israel!) The "right of return" demand has absolutely nothing to do with justice for the Arab stateless people; rather, it is part of a deliberate plan to destroy Israel through negotiation which is an intrinsic part of the PLO! That is why the "Palestinians" have never accepted any of the many offers that would have given them their own country years ago! That is also why Arafat is not willing to accept the offer of Gaza. Gaza, even as a gift without conditions, will not accomplish the purpose for which Arafat was granted leadership of the PLO at the Rabat Conference in 1974 -- the total destruction of Israel! The other point that people are making a big deal of is Bush's acknowledgement of Israel's "right to exist". Frankly, I am sick of the expectation that Israel should give up the right for its citizens to live on their own land, or that it should give up the right to protect its citizens from enemy attacks, all for the acknowledgment that Israel has the right to exist. No one put it better than Abba Eban when he said: "Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its 'right to exist.' Israel's right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel's legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgment.... There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its 'right to exist' a favor, or a negotiable concession." Sharon's turning to any American president for approval, even if Bush were the true friend to Israel that you maintain, is establishing another very dangerous precedent. Israel is not a colony of the US, and Israelis do not need anyone's "approval" to operate their government. That would be like Americans taking a referendum of Canadian voters or their Prime Minister for advice on trade issues. Frankly, if Israelis do vote for someone based on their approval rating from America, they will have damned themselves and their country. The same is true for any Israeli who votes to support Sharon position as Prime Minister based on Bush's, or indeed any American president's, approval. The biggest drawback to accepting any of Bush's statements about the situation in Israel, is that Bush still doesn't accept the unalterable fact that the "Palestinians" never wanted another country NEXT to Israel; they want to REPLACE Israel with a 23rd Muslim nation. Please don't forget that Bush still talks of "illegal Israeli settlements being a cause of the conflict" and "occupied Palestinian land." Why is the "land for peace" philosophy applied to no country except Israel? Perhaps because no other country would agree to such insanity. Let us not forget Bush's statement about being "troubled" about Israel's decision to execute Sheik Yassin, or his comments about Israel's antiterrorist fence being a "problem for peace". (Please read the official statement at: http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/ display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2003&m =November&x=20031104182826namfuaks0.2471277&t =usinfo/wf-latest.html Note the comments about the PA retaining control of all "security forces and antiterrorist activity" -- what a joke!) Bush did NOT agree to even one of the Israeli reservations and specifically refused to "allow" Israel to respond to terrorism in Gaza with force after withdrawal. When you speak of Bush's "war on terror", please do not forget that when it comes to Israelis' fight against terrorists, Bush always calls for them to show "restraint"! Here is what counting on American support has done: "After March 31 talks at the White House with President Bush, the Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said Israel accepted Bush's approach to peacemaking with the Palestinians." (www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=16563) Just what "peacemaking activities" is Bush referring to? Another reason not to count on statements of support from any American president, is that a president alone does not control American actions. In addition, a president's personal guarantee means very little in the long-term. Not only do American policies change, but its president does too. How are we supposed to believe in American support against terrorists when Colin Powell, as Bush's official representative, reassures the PLO that American policy defining Israeli -- not Arab -- settlements as illegal is still in force. (www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11073), and calls for BOTH Israel and the PLO to stop terrorist activity! (When was the last time you saw an Israeli "suicide bomber"?) Another factor that you and other plan supporters are not taking into account is Bush's promises to Mubarak, which I suggest that you reread. (http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p= washfile-english&y=2004&m=April&x= 20040413173208ndyblehs8.268374e-02&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html) They are at least, if not more, significant than his verbal promises to Sharon in determining Bush's true state of mind about Israel and the "Palestinians". What is also important to consider is that Mubarak himself is listed as one of the chief backers and formulators of the proposed "Palestinian Constitution." If you read my commentary on that document, you would know that the "Palestinians" confirm the fears of every Israeli who is against the "evacuation"! (www.think-israel.org/apr04bloged.html#apr04.32) Bush is NOT Israel's friend -- NO AMERICAN PRESIDENT HAS EVER BEEN, WHETHER DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN, since America's friends and allies also include those countries who are Israel's sworn enemies. However, being the first American president to actually declare his support for a "Palestinian State", which reverses all former American guarantees on the subject, and who makes its creation a personal project, certainly takes that title away from Bush. Aside from all of his "peacemaking" activities, why hasn't Bush moved the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which Congress voted to do in 1995, if he is indeed "the best friend that Israel has ever had" as you maintain? He gave his "personal promise" to that proposal, too. Seeking American approval has cost more Israeli deaths and loss of land than dealing with her enemies. Remember, Israel won the actual wars; it is the propaganda war that she is losing! Nothing but disaster can possibly come from voluntarily giving away even more of Israel's land to her enemies, from where her enemies can launch more and stronger attacks with complete impunity. Please take a good look at the pictures of Israeli homes in the communities that you have given your support to eliminate at: www.geocities.com/m_yericho/home1.htm. Israel has always advocated destroying the houses of terrorists rather than going after terrorists themselves (the recent assassinations of Yassin and Rantisi notwithstanding). It is extremely ironic that now Israel is contemplating destroying the homes of the Israelis who have been living with terrorism for so many years and whose only "crime" is that they are living in a place that Sharon has now decided to award to these same terrorists (completely reversing his earlier promises). As for "guarantees" that the homes would not be used by the terrorists themselves, they are worth as much as similar "promises" made by the "Palestinians" in the past - NOTHING! (It's been proven that money raised for charitable causes, such as the "destroyed olive groves" cited by that despicable group, Rabbis for Human Rights, actually went to the families of "suicide" bombers! (www.chretiens-et-juifs.org/article.php?voir[]=316&voir[]=2846) The "Palestinians" are not even waiting for withdrawal to show their true intentions. Probably Arafat no longer feels it necessary to even pretend to want "two states living side by side in peace"; he has already stated that without the "right of return" TO ISRAEL, he will not agree to the Bush/Sharon agreement. After all, why should the "Palestinians" accept only part of what they want, when all the evidence shows that if they continue to refuse to accept Israeli concessions, eventually they will get more, until they get it all? This time, Israel is not even making a show of demanding anything in exchange; the "Palestinians" don't even have to make more empty promises! This "right of return" is nothing but the latest (and, indeed, the cleverest) propaganda ploy to eradicate Israel. Israel must not make a single "concession" until AFTER the "Palestinians" cease all terrorist activity, actively work to punish known terrorists, start to build the land they already have control over, and take care of its own people instead of using nearly all their funds for terrorism. Israel must stop accepting "promises" instead of actions! It doesn't matter in the least if Israel's demands are considered "impossible", any more than it matters to world leaders that bringing in millions of poverty-stricken Arabs into the country would bankrupt Israel even if the "Palestinians" were not also determined to destroy Israel by coming there. I'll end with another quote from David Ben Gurion which still holds true today: "No Jew has the right to yield the rights of the Jewish People in Israel. No Jew has the authority to do so. No Jewish body has the authority to do so. Not even the entire Jewish People alive today has the right to yield any part of Israel. It is the right of the Jewish People over the generations, a right that under no conditions can be canceled. Even if Jews during a specific period proclaim they are relinquishing this right, they have neither the power nor the authority to deny it to future generations. No concession of this type is binding or obligates the Jewish People. Our right to the country -- the entire country -- exists as an eternal right, and we shall not yield this historic right until its full and complete redemption is realized." Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

IN THE STRICTEST SECRECY! BUT FEEL FREE TO PASS IT ON! Posted by Steven Plaut, April 27, 2004.

This message is in the strictest of secrecy! Honorable comrade and most merciful friend!: Hi! Do you remember me? I was the guy who single handedly rescued the Oslo "peace process" when I abandoned my Right-wing Knesset faction with my buddy Alex and we agreed to join Shimon Peres' leftist Oslo coalition in exchange for a cushy cabinet post for me! Yes, I am an ex-cabinet minister from the state of Israel. And as you know, there are all sorts of funds missing from the Israeli Treasury, and there are also unaccounted funds from my own drug smuggling business. Those ecstasy pills are worth a fortune! SO here is what I propose. I am stuck here in an Israeli prison, but my friends will transfer to your bank account the tidy sum of 25 million dollars if you just provide me with your bank account number, your credit card numbers, and your PIN numbers for your account and credit cards. And right after that my business colleagues will deposit into your account a cool 25 million bucks, scout's honor! 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

WE'RE RIGHT, THE WHOLE WORLD'S WRONG Posted by IsrAlert, April 26, 2004.

This article was written by Dov Fischer and appeared on the Forward website (http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.04.19/oped3.html) April 19, 2002. "The whole world is demanding that Israel withdraw. I don't think the whole world, including the friends of the Israeli people and government, can be wrong." - Kofi Annan, United Nations Secretary General, speaking in Madrid, Spain At this moment in time, many Jews who love and support Israel hear the soft voice within, asking the question to which Kofi Annan recently alluded in Madrid: Can we alone be right, while the whole world around is wrong? The evidence that we are standing on the other side of the "whole world" is manifest. The Arab League is united in condemnation, and Egyptian students march for an end to their country's diplomatic relations with Israel that were engraved at Camp David. The United Nations Security Council roundly condemns Israel several times in mere weeks, and its human rights commission again takes up the Durban chant against Zionism that was silenced by September 11. The European Union is rife with talk of boycotting the Jewish state. Synagogue attacks in France give vent to the feeling expressed with gentility by the French diplomat who termed Israel "that sh--y little state." All three major political parties in Germany vie to lead their nation in condemning Israel. England accuses Israel of using British-made tanks illegally. Mobs attack Jews from Ukraine to Belgium to the Netherlands. The pope condemns Israel for its military presence outside the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, while armed Arab terrorists repose inside, holding monks and nuns as icons for terror. We Jews are bemused. Are we the only ones who see the unrelenting suicide bombings of women and children at pizza stores, of teenagers at a discotheque, of families at a Seder celebration? After 19 months of slaughter at open-air fruit markets and bus stations and bat mitzvah parties, deadly shootings of motorists, stabbings of school children in caves, has no one seen this but us? Do we alone notice that the attacks target Jewish and Arab civilians alike throughout pre-June 1967 Israel, from Haifa to Hadera, West Jerusalem to Beersheba? The whole world demands Israel take risks for peace with Yasser Arafat - again. Are we the only ones who perceive that, after he was conferred a Nobel peace prize and given authority to create a new polity and a new atmosphere for coexistence, he desecrated the next eight years by wielding television to inculcate grotesque images of murder, radio to disseminate a culture of hate, schools and summer camps to train young people to murder the Jews they were being taught to hate? Can no one but us decipher the receipts he signed, authorizing funds to purchase weapons of terror? The whole world endorses President Bush's call for war against terrorists and those who harbor them. The United States invades Afghanistan to uproot the infrastructure of terror and hunkers down there for seven months, preparing to extend the incursion into Pakistan. Aerial bombs strafe cities. Thousands of civilian non-combatants are believed dead. The Taliban government crumbles, but the incursion continues. We must find Osama bin Laden. We must find Mullah Omar. We must reach Daniel Pearl's killers. And we yet shall begin the mother of all incursions into Iraq. We Jews see this. We also see the same "whole world" roundly condemn Israel for its incursion into a jungle of terror. Israel will not drop incendiary payloads from the air on civilians, so Israeli reservists, husbands and fathers, die in house-to-house fighting in Jenin, where the terrorists booby-trap buildings, station snipers and outfit children as human bombs. Israel asks that Arafat turn over the assassins of an Israeli cabinet minister and the mastermind of the Karine-A affair that tried to smuggle 50 tons of explosives to his minions. But the whole world wants Israel instead to pull back while the bombers of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade and the Tanzim play for time. Doesn't the whole world see what we see? Can we alone be right? Well, yes. If we Jews are anything, we are a people of history. From our first patriarch to Israel's precision-targeted destruction of the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, which laid the foundation for a successful Operation Desert Storm and the rescue of Kuwait, our history provides the strength to know that we can be right and the whole world wrong. We have confronted the question many times. The whole world was polytheistic, and we alone preached belief in one God. We preached a Day of Rest, and the whole ancient world mocked us as lazy people. We were right, and the whole world was wrong. They said we crucified a Jew - as if the Romans would have allowed any of its subjects to do such a thing, as if Jews ever had such a punishment in our code - and we insisted such a thing was beyond impossible. We were right, and the whole world was wrong. In the Middle Ages, the whole world said that we use children's blood to make matzo; we denied it. They said that we poisoned the wells of Europe, and we denied it. We were right, and the whole world was wrong. The Crusades. The blood libels and Talmud burnings in England and France, leading those nations to expel Jews for centuries. The Spanish and Portuguese Inquisition. The ghettoes and the Mortara case in Italy. Dreyfus in France. Beilis in Russia and a century's persecution of Soviet Jewry. The Holocaust. Kurt Waldheim in Austria. Each time, Europe stood by silently - or actively participated in murdering us - and we alone were right, and the whole world was wrong. Today, once again, we alone are right and the whole world is wrong. The Arabs, the Russians, the Africans, the Vatican proffer their aggregated insights into and accumulated knowledge of the ethics of massacre. And the Europeans. Although we appreciate a half-century of West European democracy more than we appreciated the prior millennia of European brutality, we recognize who they are, what they have done - and what's what. We know, if they don't, that they need Arab oil more than they need Jewish philosophy and creativity. We remember that the food they eat is grown from soil fertilized by 2,000 years of Jewish blood they have sprinkled onto it. Atavistic Jew-hatred lingers in the air into which the ashes rose from the crematoria. Finally, the best of Europe truly are wracked by the burdened conscience of what they, their parents and their bubbes and zeides did, or failed to do, in the 1940s. So, instead of confronting a shameful past that belies their self-vaunted Romantic civilization, they seek now to assuage their consciences with the mendacity that Israel 2002 is no different from Europe 1942. Yes, once again, we are right and the whole world is wrong. It doesn't change a thing, but after 25 centuries it's nice to know. Rabbi Dov Fischer, an attorney, is a board member of the Los Angeles Jewish Federation-Council's Jewish Community Relations Committee and national vice president of the Zionist Organization of America. He is the author of "General Sharon's War Against Time Magazine." To Go To Top

IS FORD STILL FUNDING DISREPUTABLE NGOS? Posted by Lise Rubin, April 26, 2004.

These are some NGOs funded by the Ford Foundation and the European Union: - The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), - EIDHR also funds Adalah. -Ford funds Adalah directly and also via New Israel Fund -Ford funds B'tselem. The EU is a major source of funding for B'tselem. B'tselem devotes most of its activities and resources to a specific political agenda, and is closely connected to the most blatant anti-Israel political organizations such as PCHR. -Ford funds PCHR. -Ford funds Miftah. Ford started Miftah, and funded for 4 years, $650,000. - Ford funds UNRWA. EU funds for UNRWA -Ford funds Physicians for Human Rights. The EU Commission Office in Israel and the Finnish Embassy have funded (without public disclosure) Physicians for Human Rights. -Ford funds the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition, either directly or via New Israel Fund. The EU Commission Office in Israel has funded (without public disclosure) the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition. This excerpt is from the NGO Monitor Special Edition: "Summary of EU Funding of Politicized NGOS" (www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/EUSpecialedition/euspecial-conthtm), 22 April 2004. In contrast to the Ford Foundation, which has suspended funding for some NGOs involved in these activities, is investigating others, and has appointed a special investigator for this issue, the EU and the European governments continue to avoid this issue. (NGO Monitor (www.ngo-monitor.org), 8 January 2004) So I wrote this to the NGO Monitor personnel: I have received the newsletter, and the references to EU Funding. Please note that Ford also funds the programs mentioned. It does not appear that Ford has in any way at all addressed the significant harm it has caused. If you do not have the data on this, please ask for it. Who is the Ford "investigator"? Ford is still attacking Israel and Judaism world wide. Furthermore, much of what is perceived as European money actually originates with Ford. Ford just money launders it through the European named operatives. Further, it was Ford who brought the EU into play in the first place. Why are you comparing it favorably? Please respond. I am waiting for a response. To Go To Top

THE LAST LION Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 26, 2004.

William Manchester's book, "The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill; Visions of Glory", is quite remarkable considering its principles pertain to Israel's situation today. Churchill was considered an "enemy of peace" by those who failed to recognize the German threat. He was basically abandoned in a political wilderness until the time came for him to come out in the spirit of the judges of Israel and deliver Great Britain from the Nazi menace. Don't we realize that whenever we warn about the Beast Power rising in Europe that we'll be falsely accused of hating Germans, Europeans, and Catholics? Years ago certain ones on AOL accused my book, "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise & Fall," of hating Catholics and of German-bashing. I replied that it's actually because I LOVE the Germans, the Europeans and the Catholics that I want to help warn them to not blindly follow their leaders! It's not only because I love our British-Israelite and Jewish brethren that the warning message must go out! Both Israelites and Europeans must be warned! I'm of German descent, in part, from the Palatinate in West Germany. I certainly don't hate Germans, but I do hate what the Nazis did and what Bible prophecy clearly says a German-led Europe will do again on an even greater scale! This time their Satan-inspired hatred and murder won't just be against our Jewish brethren but against Joseph: the Anglo-Saxons! Consider this excellent quote from "The Last Lion": Speaking of the type of leader necessary to stand up to Hitler: "England looked for another Alfred, a figure cast in a mold which, by the time of the Dunkirk deliverance, seemed to have been forever lost. England's new leader, were he to prevail, would have to be everything England's decent, civilized Establishment had rejected (sound familiar? those impotent ones who worry about reputation and remaining polite and respectable aren't effective in facing the Challenge)... Their successor would have to be a passionate Manichaen who saw the world as a medieval struggle to the death between the powers of good and the powers of evil, who held that individuals are responsible for their actions and that the German dictator was therefore wicked...Like Adolf Hitler he would have to be a leader of intuitive genius, a born demagogue in the original sense of the word, a believer in the supremacy of his race and his national destiny (not one who has forgotten or miserably doubts his Identity), an artist who knew how to gather the blazing light of history into his prism... Such a man, if he existed, would be England's last chance. In London there was such a man." The question begs to be answered whether or not there's such a man in Jerusalem today; whether Israel will finally have a leader who will boldly reclaim Judaism's holiest site, the Temple Mount, and will refuse to tolerate Amalekites claiming Jerusalem as their capital! A leader who knows and understands that the Holy Land was promised to Israel and not to Ishmael. If not, and Zion and Jerusalem fall to Catholic Europe because we've failed to heed Churchillian warnings, and shamefully despised those Christian-Zionists and Jews who delivered them, then the Messiah will surely save us out of the dreadful "Time of Jacob's Trouble" - but we'll have first suffered the greatest tribulation to strike planet earth. David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." To Go To Top

ISRAELI ART IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER, GOOD TASTE IS NOT Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, April 26, 2004.

If you've wondered lately what's wrong with Israel, just look at the recent winner of the prestigious 2004 Israel Prize for sculpture. It was the proverbial "bad boy" of the Israeli art world, Yigal Tumarkin. He was recognized for his long career and "diverse artistic vocabulary." The Prize Committee called his work, "a central contribution to Israeli art." The judges who decided to grant him the prize wrote, "Tumarkin's monumental works are exhibited at many sites in Israel." The prize is always awarded on Israeli Independence Day. Presumably long years of work, juvenile style, and wide distribution alone entitle him to the prize. As an article in an Israeli newspaper - reviewing the prize offer - commented recently, "Tumarkin already deserved the prize 30 years ago due to his innovation and audaciousness in the Israeli art scene." But not everyone agrees. Three petions to Israel's Supreme Court were filed against awarding Tumarkin the prize, but were ultimately turned down. National Religious Party, Member of Knesset Shaul Yahalom - one of the petitioners - called Tumarkin, an "embarrassment to the nation," and unfit to become a recipient of the prestigious prize. "It is unreasonable that a man, as an artist and as a sculptor, whose actions bordered on criminal activity, who acted violently towards his family, disrespected people and the values of the Jewish people and made racist and anti-Semitic remarks, will receive in a democratic Jewish state the Israel Prize," MK Yahalom wrote in his petition to the court. After the Supreme Court announcement that Tumarkin could be awarded the Israel Prize for Sculpture, Shas Party head, MK Eli Yishai said, "The Supreme Court approved, through its decision this morning, the honoring of a man who, by his expressions, intentionally and inexplicably runs roughshod over sectors of society, with the exception of [those holding] his racist worldview." Referring to Yigal Tumarkin as an "artist of racism," MK Yishai then called on President Moshe Katzav to avoid shaking Tumarkin's hand at the Israel Prize ceremony. Some of his most famous or should I say infamous pieces, include a pig wearing "Tefilin" (phylacteries worn by Jewish men during prayer), and a lithograph of an aerial view of Jerusalem's Old City, with a huge thumbprint superimposed over it. Written in pen on the top is, "From June 1967 Jerusalem started to turn ugly. Why? It's a fact." How profound! As for the "praying pig," back in January 1998, Israeli artist Tatiana Susskin received a two-year prison sentence for drawing a picture depicting the founder of Islam, Muhammad, as a pig. The court considered it an act of racial incitement against Islam and the Arabs. But in Israel, putting a pig - the most disgusting animal by Jewish standards - in "Tefilin" - Jewish ritual objects - isn't incitement, it isn't criminal, it's "art," and worthy of a prize. These themes of degrading the Jewish religion, and all that Jews hold dear, such as Jerusalem, run throughout Tumarkin's work. Among his other "famous" works are "Hu Halach Basadot" - He Walked in the Fields - from 1967, a bronze statue of a torn figure whose innards are exposed and pants are rolled up. It symbolizes the complete opposite of post-Six Day War Israeli self-confidence, and the joy of victory. Evidently he likes to disgust. His troubled personal background is evident in his work and public statements. Tumarkin was born in Germany in 1933, to a Jewish mother and Christian father. His father, Martin Helburg, was an actor. While Tumarkin and his mother fled Nazi Germany to the Palestine Mandate during the pre-state period, Tumarkin's father became a culture officer in the Nazi SS during World War II. Tumarkin spent the 1950s in Europe, mostly Paris and Berlin. He broke the post-Holocaust Israeli taboo of moving back to Germany. When Tumarkin found out about his father's death during a newspaper interview in 1966, he told the reporter that he had no feelings toward his parents, and was sorry that he did not drop his sister when she was a baby. Outrageous statements like this have helped gain him the spotlight throughout his career. Tumarkin returned to Israel from Europe in 1960 to exhibit his works at Jerusalem's Bezalel Museum, the predecessor to the Israel Museum. He exhibited polyester reliefs for the first time in Israel and was hailed as an innovator. The pieces that he created - with screws, forks, junk and bottles - and his combination of painting and sculpture were considered unique and thought provoking at the time in Israel. In the 1960s and 1970s, he was considered to have personified the spirit of modern art, according to many art critics. He became very "prolific" throwing together combinations of junk, and giving them offensive interpretations. In 1992, a comprehensive retrospective of his works was held at the Tel Aviv Museum. Tumarkin, who is very prolific, exhibited a great number of pieces, 120 sculptures and about 150 prints. But Tumarkin has been criticized for shallowness. He has made a name for himself, some say, thanks to works that are considered innovative only to those who don't know about the history of art. He puts out art in a mechanized way. Yet, the cultural supremacy that he radiates, as one of the leading representatives of European Art in the Middle East, allows him to bully the Israeli art world. Tumarkin frequently attacks other artists and has been known to send scathing letters to critics. He's been involved in several court cases and has also been known to threaten lawsuits to shut up criticism of his work. Although he has received many prizes and critical acclaim, and has exhibited in Israel's major museums, Tumarkin claims to be persecuted by the establishment, and has never missed an opportunity to say so, even while accepting the prize. It is no secret that Tumarkin wanted to receive the Israel Prize. In an interview that appeared in Yediot Ahronot in 1997, he said, "The Israel Prize is important to me for one reason, to say what I am now saying from their stage. When I see the Rafi Lavies and the Moshe Gershunis [other Israeli artists], how they sit there so full of themselves, of their art, so politically correct, then either I am too young, or I will die as someone who throws rocks at windows." One only need listen to him, to ask, who really is "full of himself"? Since the 1980s, Tumarkin hasn't gained his reputation for works of art, but for his habit of lashing out at religious Jews, right-wingers, and Sephardim, whoever he dislikes. He once said, he wished he had gunned down Israeli politicians on the right, Raphael Eitan and Rechavam Ze'evi. Tumarkin has also remarked that his "true contribution will be the taking of a submachine gun instead of pen and pencil, and killing the religious settlers on the West Bank." When Shas MK Eli Yishai reminded the public of Tumarkin's slurs against Sephardim. Tumarkin shot back that; "Moroccan Jews are indeed crybabies" and "ought to stop burdening us with so many poor children." In a November 1988 interview with "Tel Aviv Magazine," Tumarkin said, "When you see the "Haredim" - ultra-Orthodox Jews - you can understand why there was a Holocaust." And in response to criticism, he wrote in "Hadashot" later, "The outward strangeness of the Jew and the pretentiousness of the notion that God chose us...caused violent surrounding cultures to clash...with this arrogant minority...The image of the cunning, ambitious scoundrel, lending money at exorbitant interest, turned the bent, hook-nosed bearded Jew into the enemy of civilization...which didn't help belatedly enlightened Jews." Look who's calling other Jews, "arrogant and ambitious"? He's been known to comment that, "The Jewish Holocaust wasn't the only holocaust." Imagine what Israel's response would have been, if an international artist had expressed similar sentiments? Yet Yad VaShem in 1998 almost gave him the Zussman Prize, until there was a public outcry, and they retracted the offer. How is it that they would consider giving it to him in the first place? But this is the sickness of the cultural elites in Israel today. One only has to be disgusting, perverse, degrade all that is holy and beautiful, and have the artistic talent of a four-year-old to get noticed. Become self-promoting, attack the competition, cry foul, attack Haredim and "settlers," and they drown you in accolade. Israeli art is in the eye of the beholder, good taste is not! /font> Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

GAZA WITHDRAWAL COULD REPEL US EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS Posted by AFSI, April 26, 2004.

This was written by Herb Keinon, a Jerusalem Post columnist and appeared on the Jerusalem Post website (www.jpost.com) April 24, 2004. An Israeli withdrawal from the territories could lead to an anti-Semitic backlash among evangelical Christians who are today among Israel's strongest US supporters, said Herbert Zweibon, an American Jewish activist with close ties to the evangelical community. Zweibon, chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel, a US Jewish organization fighting a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, explained that evangelical Christian support is based on a deep belief that God has a covenant with Israel that includes the Jews' return to the biblical Land of Israel. "If the Jews give up on their part of the covenant," said Zweibon, "I think the Christians will walk away from their support for Israel. Why should they stand by it, if the Jews don't?" Zweibon said that if the "road map goes through as stated, and Israel withdraws from Judea, Samaria and Gaza, I think you will see anti-Semitism in America like you have never seen. These people will see it as a betrayal of their own trust." Asked what good the support of this community is if the relationship could so quickly turn from love to hate, Zweibon said, "Every divorce turns from love to hate, often because of a feeling of betrayal." Zweibon was behind an effort last year to place evangelical Christian pressure on US President George W. Bush to ditch the road map initiative. His organization sponsored the placement of some 130 billboards, at a price of $75,000, in the US Bible Belt calling on people to phone the White House to tell Bush to "honor God's covenant with Israel." The billboards read: "And the Lord said to Jacob... Unto thy offspring will I give this land (Genesis 35:11-12). Pray that President Bush honors God's covenant with Israel." The billboard then listed the White House phone number and urged people to call. Although no similar campaign is currently planned to battle Bush's support for the disengagement plan, Zweibon, in Israel for a brief visit, is currently putting together for settlement leaders a tour of churches in a number of states expected to be key in the upcoming US elections. The leaders will urge the evangelical community to press Bush to back away from any diplomatic process leading to a two-state solution. The states to be targeted are Florida, Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri, which all went to Bush in the 2000 elections by slim margins. Zweibon hopes evangelical Christians from these states will make their concerns known to Karl Rove, Bush's political strategist. In 2001 Rove, according to Zweibon, said that prior to the 2000 election the Bush campaign's premise was that 19 million Bible-believing Christians would come out to vote for Bush. In the end, he quoted Rove as saying, four million of these voters never turned up to vote - a real concern now for Bush's reelection campaign. The Israel issue may be a catalyst to get them to the polls, Zweibon said. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. To Go To Top

ISRAELI BUS NUMBER 19 COMES TO THE CAPITAL Posted by Deb Kotz and Warren Manison, April 26, 2004.

This is an opportunity to do something that the Washington Jewish Community Council appears to be unable to do - namely, to support a Christian organization showing the kind of support for Israel that should be foremost in the agenda of the Washington Jewish Community. We encourage everyone to please support this critical event by participating in the Rally on Capitol Hill. Israel benefits from Christian support. Israel benefits from Jewish support. Christian for Israel is an organization that brings in thousands of Christians from all over the country to voice their denunciations of Palestinian terror and to support Israel. Let's us Jews of Washington rally with our friends - all of us in support of Israel. Please pass this message on to others. WHERE: in front of the Capitol Building on the Mall. WHEN: 12 noon until 4 pm. May 6, 2004 SPONSORS: Christians for Israel On January 29, 2004, a homicide bomber boarded bus #19 in Jerusalem and exploded, killing 11 civilians and wounding dozens more. Just three months later, on May 6th, the very same bus will touch U.S. soil for the first time in history when Christians for Israel USA holds a rally in support of Israel during the National Day of Prayer. The rally, scheduled from 12:00 pm until 4:00 pm, will be held in front of Capitol building on the mall. The theme of the Rally will be "Terror, A one way ticket." At the rally, Christians for Israel will bring bombed out Israeli bus no. 19 and place it on display in front of our nation's Capitol, where it will continue to be shown during much of the month of May. Speakers for the May 6 rally will include Carrie Devorah (sister of a murder victim on Bus 19), Gary Bauer, Rev. George Morrison, Rabbi Aryeh Spero, Congressman Butch Otter, Beth Galinsky, Conservative Journalist Ami Horowitz, Holocaust Survivor Lea de Lange, Dr. James Hutchens, Robert Stearns and many more. The homicide bomber that brutally murdered innocent Jews on Bus Number 19 marked the 140th homicide bombing. Thus far, 577 people have been killed and 3,543 injured in homicide bombings throughout Israel. "We hope this historical bus trip brings to light, from a Biblical perspective, the horror that Israelis face on their homeland on a daily basis," said Dr. James M. Hutchens, President of Christians for Israel (USA) and a retired Brigadier General in the U.S. Army. "Many of the everyday activities we take for granted here in the United States - even something as simple as riding a bus - are literally life-threatening activities in Israeli daily life. Both Christians and Jews must stand together with the Israelis in their fight for freedom and peace." Christians for Israel will be taking Bus 19 on tour around the United States throughout the next year. We want to help Americans visualize the terror that Israelis face on a daily basis and to heighten the public conscience in regards to terror. Being able to come close to the bus, to look inside will remind people that this type of violence can occur anyplace, anytime, including right here in America. We hope it brings a refreshed understanding of the evil that the Jewish people and Israel face. This is important. Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are being morphed together against Israel throughout the world. We need to make a united statement of our willingness to stand and support Israel. For updates on the rally and to see the full speakers list please visit www.bus19.org or call toll-free 877-200-7249 with any questions. Christians for Israel (USA) is located in Washington, D.C. Reach them by mail at P.O. Box 20295, Washington, DC 20041. For more information call toll free 1-877-200-7249 or visit their website: http://www.c4iusa.org Deb Kotz and Warren Manison are active members of the Brandeis Chapter of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) Deb maintains an email list to distribute articles of interest to the local (Washington DC and Maryland suburbs) community. She can be reached at DebKotz@aol.com To Go To Top

UPDATE ON SALAH CHOUDRY, PRISONER OF CONSCIENCE Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 26, 2004.

This is a letter written to me from Dr. Richard Benkin about Mr. Salah Choudhury's condition. There is some good news to the extent that he has received some of the medical treatment he needed so badly. On April 11, the High Court ordered the prison authorities to send him to a hospital that would provide treatment for a serious eye ailment. The ailment was confirmed during a visit by Dr. Shahinul Islam (Opthalmology Dept. Dhaka Medical College Hospital). On Thursday, he was sent to the hospital, but had to come back yesterday for further tests. At least that's something. The jail authorities ignored the last court order for treatment. Also, through my communications with him and his family, I can tell you that he remains strong in his faith and in his determination to continue seeking peace and understanding among Jews, Muslims, and Christians. (You know, prior to his arrest, he had visited the two Christian communities outside Dhaka, and we even included some of his impressions of that in the speech I wrote for him.) Thank you for asking after him. [Editor's note: Salah Shoaib Choudhury is a senior journalist and editor of the "Weekly Blitz" in Bangladesh. He was arrested in the airport on November 29, 2003 on his way to visit Israel. He was 'interrogated', tortured and has been in prison ever since, where he receives threats from fundamentalist prisoners. His crime? He believes in "better relations and understanding between Moslems and Jews around the world." In this country, Dr. Richard Benkin has devoted himself to Mr. Choudhury's defense. Dr. Benkin can be reached by telephone at 847-922-6424 or 847-922-6426. Or email him at mailto:drrbenkin@comcast.net] To Go To Top

STATISTICS ON THE NUMBER OF ISRAELIS KILLED BY ARAB AGGRESSION Posted by Bryna Berch, April 26, 2004.

What makes this news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) so appallng - aside from the number of Jewish lives lost to Arab aggression - is that these figures are familiar to Defense Minister Sha'ul Mofaz, who wrote to the bereaved IDF families on occasion of Israel's Memorial Day is "... a day of remembrance and sadness for its heroes, the fallen of the campaigns of Israel, whose bodies and strength of spirit formed for it a protective wall, and whose blood and very lives were a foundation stone for its establishment and existence." Yet he is all set to expel the Jews of Gaza and pull the IDF out of Gaza, making it easier for the Palestinian Arabs to manufacture Weapons of Jewish Destruction (WJD) without hinderance. The number of soldiers and security personnel who have fallen since Nov. 29, 1947, when the UN accepted the partition, thus mandating the creation of a Jewish State, is 20,297. The struggle to re-create a Jewish homeland beginning in the year 1860, when Jews began to move outside Jerusalem's Old City walls, claimed an additional 1,485 victims, for a total of 21,782. Since 1920, over 3,500 Israelis have been murdered in terrorist attacks (see and ). Since last year's Memorial Day, 185 people have been killed. The War of Independence was Israel's costliest war, with more than 6,000 dead and 15,000 wounded. The war consisted of 39 separate operations, fought from the borders of Lebanon to the Sinai Peninsula and Eilat, and ended in 1949. Virtually the entire Jewish population of Israel, then numbering 650,000 people, was mobilized in order to meet the coordinated assault of five regular Arab armies, in addition to the 1,000,000 Arabs living west of the Jordan River. Then followed several years of "relative" quiet - during which there were "1,339 cases of armed clashes with Egyptian armed forces, 435 cases of incursion from Egyptian-controlled territory, and 172 cases of sabotage perpetrated by Egyptian military units and fedayeen in Israel," in which 101 Israelis were killed, as Israeli Ambassador to the UN Abba Eban explained to the Security Council on October 30, 1956. Eban gave these statistics the day after Israel began the Sinai Campaign - its military response to Egypt's violation of international agreements with its sealing off the Israeli port of Eilat, effectively stopping Israel's sea trade with much of Africa and the Far East. A total of 231 Israeli soldiers died in the fighting. In March 1957, after receiving international guarantees that Israel's vital waterways would remain open, Israel withdrew from the Sinai and Gaza - yet the Egyptians still refused to open the Suez Canal to Israeli! shipp ing. The Six-Day War broke out on June 5, 1967. Despite the stunning victories, over 770 Israelis were killed. Then began the period of the War of Attrition. The Israeli death toll between June 15, 1967, and August 8, 1970, when a cease-fire was declared, was 1,424 soldiers and more than 100 civilians. Egypt and Syria attacked Israel on Yom Kippur, 1973. The IDF ultimately emerged victorious, but a total of 2,688 soldiers were killed. In June 1982, in response to continued terrorist attacks from across the Lebanese border, and most specifically an assassination attempt by a Palestinian terrorist group on Israel's Ambassador to Great Britain Shlomo Argov - which left him crippled and hospitalized until his death last year - Israel attacked Lebanese terrorists - who would become organized as Hizbullah - in what was known as Operation Peace for Galilee. Close to 460 soldiers were killed between June and December 1982, and another 760 in daily ambushes against Israeli forces by May 31, 1985. In December 1987, the first Arab "intifada" broke out, lasting for some three years. In more than 3,600 Molotov cocktail attacks, 100 grenade attacks and 600 assaults with guns or explosives against civilians and soldiers, 27 Israelis were killed and more than 3,100 Israelis were wounded. In the years following the signing of the Oslo Agreement in 1993, 250 Israelis were killed up until the beginning of what became known as the Oslo War. Approximately another 937 Israelis have been felled by PA terrorists and gunmen since September 2000. To Go To Top

REBUTTING "WHY I WON'T BE SEEING THE FJORDS THIS SUMMER" Posted by Per Sebak, April 26, 2004.

I came across the article "Why I Won't Be Seeing The Fjords This Summer" by Bennett M. Epstein, posted by Janet Lehr on Feb. 29 and I have seldom come across more rubbish and false accusations towards the kingdom of Norway. [Editor's note: See http:/www.think-israel.org/feb04bloged.html. Bennett Epstein wrote the first of the two essays posted by Janet Lehr. See also http://www.think-israel.org/saperstein.reporters.html in this issue.] I really feel sorry for the people who have had this Mr Bennett M. Epstein as a criminal defense lawyer, and how on earth has he become a professor of criminal justice, having brought the below matter completely out of proportion... (is this normal practice on his part?) As a Norwegian myself and proud of my heritage, I feel obliged to make the following remarks: 1. Yes, some food chains and labor organizations have tried to encourage a boycott of Israeli products in recent years, but this has by no means been any great success and is BY NO MEANS OFFICIAL NORWEGIAN POLICY. This is ABSOLUTELY NOT a sign of ANTI-SEMITISM, and is ONLY a reaction to Israeli policy by some groups in Norwegian society (in Norway we have freedom of speech and are proud of it!). One must be allowed to criticize Israeli Government's policies without being marked an Anti-Semitic, just as one must be allowed to criticize Britain's policies towards Irish-Catholics in Northern-Ireland without being marked "Anti-British", or the government of South-African without being marked a racist. This "sticker business" and "proposed boycott" doesn't really apply anymore anyhow, and believe me, the average customer doesn't pay any attention to it. I personally did not support it, like most Norwegians, as it won't help the situation in Israel in any way. Has trade between Israel and Norway really changed much lately? NO! 2. Norwegians are neither "overwhelmingly Palestinian" or "overwhelmingly Israeli", but we do support and pray for a peaceful solution which both Palestinians and Israelis can endorse. 3. Regarding the supposed "shameful past", this is totally untrue and false propaganda on Epstein's part. No other European country has been more sympathetic to Israeli policies than Norway since World War II. It is only recently that this has changed. You should have been in Norway when Arafat was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, then you would know what I am taking about. Would a supposed Anti-Semitic country have had a Jewish President of Parliament (the person second-in-line after the monarch)? 4. Yes, there was some Anti-Semitism in Norway during the 1920s and 1930s, as was in most other European countries, which was largely a result of ignorance. But there was no violence of any sort against the Jewish community in Norway before the Nazis took power. I agree this part of Norwegian history is shameful, but Vidkun Quisling's party was never of any significance in Norwegian politics, more an outcast of society. After the War, he was charged with treason and hanged. And yes, there are a few people with Nazi views in Norway today, like probably in all countries, but these are minute. I think it is unfortunate that Epstein gives them such free publicity though. 5. Were all Norway's Jews deported to Auschwitz? Another example of terrible propaganda on Epstein's part. Almost half of Norway's about 2000 Jews escaped to Sweden (mostly by the help of Norwegians). Some were also helped across the North Sea by the so-called terrible Norwegians (according to Epstein) to fight the Nazis. Several more were also encouraged to leave the country, but didn't believe there was any danger (just like Dutch Jews, for example). Many Norwegians also hid Jews in their homes, risking certain execution if they were caught. Epstein should have been at the quayside in Oslo when most of the Norwegian Jews were deported. They had no idea where they were going, but several Norwegians tried in vain to help the Jews who were brutally taken on board the ship. Mr Epstein is effectively "peeing on these people's graves", as an expression goes here in Norway. Furthermore, every November ceremonies are held in Norway to remember the 750 Norwegian Jews who were murdered, even in Bergen where there were only about 25 Jews. The national media also makes sure that Norwegians are aware of this, year after year. 6. Fremskrittspartiet (Progress Party) is Norway's second largest party, yes, but it is totally incorrect to claim that they are "extreme right". Anyway, Fremskrittspartiet IS MOST ISRAEL FRIENDLY OF ALL NORWEGIAN POLITICAL PARTIES, so Mr Epstein shouldn't be concerned in that respect (in fact, the leader, Carl I. Hagen, refused to attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony when Arafat received the award). Also, it should be noted that many members of the Christian Party have gone to Fremskrittspartiet only because of their pro-Israeli position. Also, I should mention that the Labor party, which partly encouraged these childish boycotts of Israel, has gone from about 39% to about 27% of the parliament in recent years... Yes, the sad situation in Israel today has entailed much heated discussion in Norway, which has involved much emotion, demonstrations, etc., not least because there are many Palestinians living in Norway today. Such debates are important in a country that encompasses democratic values. Some of the media may, at times, also appear more Palestinian friendly, yes. But I think it is sad when a lawyer/ professor circulates such propaganda about ALL Norway and ALL Norwegians on the Internet only because all Norwegians don't necessarily support his political views.... WELCOME TO NORWAY! [Editor's note: Mr Sebak didn't provide any biographical information. You will have to judge for yourself whether he provided an adequate rebuttal - or confirmation.] To Go To Top

THE OVER-REPORTING OF ISRAEL Posted by Honest Reporting, April 26, 2004.

When was the last time your daily paper didn't include an item on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? With over 900 articles on this conflict emerging on an average day from English-language media outlets, Israel - a tiny nation the size of the state of New Jersey - receives approximately 75 times more coverage than other areas of equal population. In comparison to other nations involved in armed conflict (where world media attention increases), Israel receives over 10 times more coverage by population. As a Jerusalem correspondent from a major American paper recently told HonestReporting, 'My editor wants a story from me every day - even on very slow news days - and that's unique in our international coverage.' Two fascinating new 'real-time' web pages illustrate this phenomenon of the over-reporting of Israel: 1) NewsMap (www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm) represents in graphic format the content of the GoogleNews aggregator. The more stories GoogleNews (http://news.google.com) is currently providing on a given topic, the larger that headline appears on NewsMap's page. Israel nearly always occupies the largest block in the red 'World News' section of NewsMap. A mere statement from an Israeli leader (i.e. 'Sharon Vows to Continue Strikes', 4/21) is enough to overwhelm coverage of actual human tragedies elsewhere in the world. 2) Harvard's Ethan Zuckerman takes another approach - his Global Attention Profiles (http://h2odev.law.harvard.edu/ezuckerman/) maps out what nations of the world the major news agencies currently deem significant. Though Israel is certainly a 'red zone' (very high interest), it's telling that one can't even see the red of Israel on Zuckerman's color-coded world map, since Israel is so small! So click through to the tables format, (h2odev.law.harvard.edu/ezuckerman/results/ap20040426.html) where you find that on the AP wire, Israel and the West Bank's coverage-to-population ratio far outweigh anywhere else in the world (with the occasional exception of Iraq). What does this mean for Israel? The over-reporting of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an important element of anti-Israel bias for two reasons: * DISTORTION OF GEOGRAPHIC REALITY - The prominence granted to Israeli power though massive news coverage distorts the geographic reality: Israel is a tiny nation surrounded by Arab states that, at best, coldly tolerate Israel's existence. To the average news consumer, this key strategic reality is lost behind the barrage of Israel headlines that give one the impression Israel has a large physical presence in the Mideast. In fact, one could jog from the West Bank to the Mediterranean Sea in little over an hour. Israeli leaders communicate this point to foreign diplomats by taking them on a helicopter ride from Tel Aviv, flying east toward the West Bank. After a few short minutes, they turn to guests and say: 'I'll let you know when we've crossed into the West Bank... We already did.' This, to disabuse them of the notion that Israel is much larger than their regular news providers suggest. * EXCESSIVE SCRUTINY OF ISRAEL - Israel's conscientious anti-terror effort is scrutinized by the world press in a manner no other nation is forced to confront. For example, while tens of thousands have been massacred and gross human rights violations have struck African nations such as Congo and Sudan, the over-reporting of Israel focuses far more concern on alleged IDF insensitivity to Palestinians. As Harvard's Zuckerman finds himself asking, "How many Congolese would need to be slaughtered to make the front page of the New York Times?" Then there's the overriding matter: Since Israel is so disproportionately covered, any media bias against Israel of the sort documented by HonestReporting is amplified beyond compare. Another question remains, outside the scope of this communique: Why is Israel so over-reported? Is it the convergence of three major world religions in Jerusalem? Is it the fact that Israel is a Jewish nation? Or is it something else entirely? Please share your thoughts on these matters with other HonestReporting subscribers on our weblog: BackSpin. Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167 To Go To Top

INTIFADA, DISENGAGEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ITEMS Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 26, 2004.

"PEACEFUL INTIFADA?" Daniel Pipes reports that Arafat's Arabs are concluding that warfare doesn't pay. He cites a petition calling for a "peaceful, wise intifada." He wonders whether more of them "will realize the time has come to accept the existence of the Jewish state." (Op. Cit..) "Peaceful intifada" is an oxymoron. When the Arabs refer to it, they mean waging a struggle against Israel by protest marches, riots, rock-throwing, and fire-bombing, with all the current, false incitement to violence against Israel and retention of the goal of displacing the Jewish state with a Muslim Arab one. Therefore, they do not accept the existence of the Jewish state. Which P.A. Arabs does Mr. Pipes suppose accept the existence of the Jewish state? What does he mean by "acceptance"? We would like to think it means accepting the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty and entitlement to exercise that sovereignty in its homeland. What it really means is begrudging acceptance that at present, the Arabs are not able to overthrow the Jewish state. In Arab Muslim ideology, such an acceptance is considered temporary, a truce. In their view, if and when they gain the strategic advantage over Israel, they no longer would tolerate an infidel state in their midst. Meanwhile, they work at gaining that strategic advantage. How? By agreements such as Oslo and Map, which transfer strategic territory, secure borders, scarce water sources, and national history and morale from Zionism to Islamism. The Arabs use the term, "peaceful intifada," in as deceptive a rationalization as "peaceful jihad." Jihad could be peaceful, but it isn't now. It rarely refers to peaceful struggle. Why should there be any struggle, first to wrest Yesha with or without negotiation, and then to take over Israel? ARAB DOUBLE GAME ON DISENGAGEMENT PLAN The US-Israeli double game on PM Sharon's "disengagement plan" is that it is neither a disengagement plan nor would it accomplish what Sharon praises it for. The Arabs have their double game, too. The Arabs: (1) Receive proof from the US that the Bush letter about the plan makes no US concessions to Israel and does not change in US policy; but (2) Ask that US concessions to Israel be offset by concessions to them. They urge the UN to intervene in their behalf. The EU agrees with them that the US changed its policy by "endorsing" the plan. Arab propaganda is like complaining about NOT having cake and eating it too. As the US advised the Arabs, its letter neither changes US policy nor endorses the plan. US policy is to give Israel false assurances, anything to get Israel moving out of Yesha and into Arab hands. The State Dept. may not care that the Arabs hate the US anyway, as they do despite State Dept. goodwill gestures towards the Arabs at the expense of Israeli security. Unfortunately, Congress does not realize or care that US appeasement of the Arabs does not win Arab approval. Appeasement of totalitarians short of surrender never can. The US bars totalitarians from world domination. It does not matter to the Arabs that we toss them Israeli bones, when we are their main enemy, because we represent tolerance, civilization, technical might, and some decadence. WEAKNESS OF ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE Israeli intelligence has had breathtaking successes and spectacular failures. The inability to properly warn of the impending Arab invasion of 1973 imperiled national survival. What causes such a failure? Has Israel overcome the cause? The main cause of the 1973 surprise is well known. Israel's intelligence profession and political rulers did not want the Arabs to make another war on Israel, so they did not think the Arabs would make another war on Israel, so they did not examine whether the Arabs could make another war on Israel, and so they misunderstand the signs that the Arabs were about to make another war on Israel. Wishful thinking guided policy; policy dictated to intelligence gatherers. Less perceived is the subsidiary cause. Israeli intelligence agents in Egypt failed not only to discover that invasion was intended, but also to discover what new tactics Egypt was training in. Egypt surprised Israel with water cannon that deflated Israel's sand bags fortifying the barrier to Canal-crossing, infantry that fired an inordinate number of anti-tank missiles, and anti-aircraft missiles that were impenetrable. Those tactics proved devastating. Israel's intelligence profession and political leadership has returned to a dangerous frame of mind about the Arabs. Again it is based on leftist illusions about the Arabs wanting peace. With this attitude, the guardians of Israel fail to keep their guard up. The politicalized agencies don't do their professional job. National security is too important for them to indulge in leftist illusions. Heads and former heads of intelligence project an unsubstantiated and refuted notion that Egypt's treaty with Israel has taken that major foe of Israel out of the order of battle. Has Egypt spent the past few decades deepening peace? No. It arms for a final battle. It smoothes the way by encouraging a PLO war of attrition against Israel and by using diplomacy to delegitimize Israel (as if the bigoted Arab dictatorships were legitimate) and to deprive it of defensible borders, strategic depth, and morale. Israel's intelligence leaders maintain a naive faith in Arab fidelity to treaties they violate. These leaders tend to oppose strong measures against terrorism, too. They sympathize with the Arabs, whose true menace they don't realize. Former head of Israeli intelligence Ayalon declared that the PLO fights Hamas more effectively than did Israel. He hates the idea of Israel ruling another nationality, regardless that the other one wants to dispossess if not murder his. He shares Peres' "vision of a new Middle East." His concern about violence not the violence of Arab terrorism and war, but that settlers night refuse to submit to ethnic cleansing by Israel. He is pleased with greater Israeli sensitivity to the formerly harsh treatment of the Arabs. He thinks that criticism of Oslo and government policy threatens democracy, and supports judicial activism (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/19, email) repressing criticism. Judicial activism often reverses government policy, when that policy is not leftist. Stifling criticism of government policy threatens democracy. It allows leaders paid or intimidated by foreigners or naive about the Arabs to produce disasters such as being unprepared for the 1973 war. Israel did not treat harshly enough the Arab enemy, striving then and now to destroy Israel. Nor does the PLO fight Hamas, whom it allows to keep attacking Israel. Not recognizing that is a serious deficiency in an intelligence agent, much less in an intelligence chief. Had Peres suggested that his vision of a new Mideast -- tolerant countries interested in mutual improvement and peace - was his hope for development in the next couple of centuries, he would have been considered a prophet. Instead, while they prepare weapons of mass destruction, he insists that the Mideast already has attained that utopia. Obviously he is deluded. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

HERE'S THE PLAN Posted by Mikimia and Herbert Sunshine, April 26, 2004.

(A hypothetical explanation of the plan by the Prime Minister finally to solve the problem of Jews living in Gaza, Samaria and Judea.) "In our "democracy" the people get in the way. Remember how Rabin passed Oslo. We can do as much; secret agreements secretly arrived at. Change the rules of the game. Labor only had to give a Mitsibushi (not even a Volvo) to Goldfarb for Oslo to pass by one vote. Let us not hear any "jewish guilt" about this. Those 8500 settlers in Gaza are not our kind of Jews. There is probably not a single PhD. among them. Recall what Kastner did in Hungary; you have to save the best and forget the rest. Transfer of Jews has a long history and we can be ceretain that the world (America, the EU and the UN) are in our corner. We must begin with the usual disinformation. the press or media will be forbidden to mention the Biblical rights to Gaza; Our education system has kept several generations ignorant of this fact as well. We must never remind Jews that there are legitimate claims to this land. Term the "settlers "thieves; So long as they are deemed "occupiers", dragging them off will appear to be their just punishment. Still, to prevent slip-ups, pictures of our Army and Police using force to evict women and childen, and all photos of the Palestinians moving in to abandoned homes, should be suppressed. Next, the government must cut off the financial support for the Jews. Stop subsidizing mortgages. Suspend all bank loans. Never mind that builders and farmers may go bankrupt. We should never have let such people live there in the first place. The pinch of poverty will loosen their grip on their illegal outposts. Karl Marx taught us that migration follows the economy. Lack of income and jobs will stimulate emigration. Transfer of Jews will have the added benefit of inducing thousands of Arabs to enter Gaza preventing the return of the dissident Jewish elements. To his credit, Attorney General Mazuz hs begun this phase of the plan. It is unfortunte that a railroad line to Gaza has not yet been built. Swiftness and efficiency of the expulsion could be enhanced by employment of rail box cars. Sealed trucks or buses will have to serve the same purpose. I predict that after Gaza is freed from its Jewish occupation, the Palestinian State will build the railroad to connect Gaza to Jerusalem, its Capitol. Holding pens for those rounded up both at the capture point and at the journey's terminus should be constructed in advance of the expulsion. Those with experience in round ups of Jews conducted these operations in the early hours of the morning. Since the Gaza illegal settlements are discontinuous, all must be attacked at once. Telephonic and electronic communications must be terminated to prevent concerted resistance. An unimportant by-product of the plan could be the temporary demoralization of certain elements of the Zionist, "Greater Israel," segment of the population. This element is statistically and politically negligible. Should they resist in any form, their efforts can immediately be stifled by banning their newpapers, e-mail bulletins, pirate radio stations and by administrative arrests of their leaders. Our University Professors have determined that disengagement from the Arabs will end the violence of the Arab freedom fighters and result in the emergence of a peace loving PLO State. No one should view this plan as a withdrawal under terror or as a victory for our current peace partners. No critic has the stature or authority to oppose the Prime Minister, and by so doing to give affront to our special friend, the United States of America. Your Prime Minister has been given iron- clad guarantees in a letter from President Bush that no Arab refugees will return to Israel. Israel is assured of retaining some of our communities in Samaria and in Judea, even parts of Jerusalem. America will permit us to fence our people in for security and we will be allowed to defend ourselves to some limited degree. (We cannot, of course, assassinate President Yasser Arafat.) History, which is written by the victors, will record how this wise and far-sighted plan will bless the Nation withpeace and security. Economic prosperity will inevitably accompany the withdrawal of Jews from large portions of Israel. What will emerge will be a State of all of its people, pluralistic, multicultural, modern and secular, with open borders and liberal immigration. Never again will Israel suffer isolation and sanction from the United Nations or the European Union. No longer a nation that lives alone; Israel, a state like any other state, free at last from Anti Semitism and war." Herbert B. Sunshine is Professor of Law (U.S.). He and his wife live in Jerusalem. To Go To Top

WHY LISTEN TO US Posted by Arlene Peck, April 26, 2004.

We, in the United States have a lot to talk about. We talk, and we talk, and we talk. Committees are continuously set up and conferences held to discuss. Unfortunately, with all that talking, our country carries a big stick, but, talks too softly. In addition, our soldiers are getting killed at an alarming rate by the same savages who have been blowing up the buses and discos in Israel for the past three years. Despite 9/11 it hasn't quite hit our shores yet. The depressing vision of Arab fundamentalism blowing up Starbucks and Macys hasn't happened yet. And, I hope it never does. But they are marching over the hill if you look really closely. Why do I mention this? Well, according to a recent Jerusalem Times (independent Palestinian weekly) US officials are actually leading mediation efforts with the terrorists organization, Hamas. They are trying to achieve a compromise with Hamas who is going to give one of their promises to be really, really good and freeze all anti-Israel attacks, including retaliations to Yassin's and company's deaths. Of course, in return the Israelis agree to halt assassination against Hamas leaders. Hey, I'm surprised that our State Dept. hasn't worked a codicil in there to release a few hundred more prisoners from jails around the country. That is if there are any left after the last amnesty which wasn't so long ago. And, who incidentally have already been responsible for more Israeli deaths. Truly, do any of you see anything wrong with this picture? Is that like sending in the fox to check the hen house? And it's all so cozy. During all of this hustle and bustle of negotiation with the savages, Hamas has voiced it's readiness for joining the PLO. They do state however that "Our position is clear. That is, we don't mind joining the PLO for certain conditions." All of them detrimental for the future existence of the Jewish State. What I find amazing is why on earth Israel would even consider listening to advice from Uncle Sam. Hell, we don't have enough confidence in our county to hire workers from here. It is virtually impossible to call any airline for reservations, or computer company for technical help, without getting someone from India and sometimes the Philippines to help you. Now that tax season is over our own IRS is sending out their business to India. My friends who are out of jobs are complaining that all the work is being 'farmed out'. Here, in tinsel town, emergency meetings are being held by the Screen Actors Guild to complain about 'runaway production' to places like Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Hollywood is alarmed and hey, with good reason. Gas prices are at an all time high and still they insist on driving SUV's and continuing to remain at the mercy at of the Arabs for our nightly oil. It's depressing to read the nightly news and see the multitude of articles expounding on how the world hates the Americans. Gone are the days when all we had to worry about was whether Britney Speers wore implants, people kept their doors unlocked or, whether Ricky Martin was gay. The Arabs have brought to our door fear, loss of innocence, economic collapse and our borders are unchecked and millions of illegal immigrants are filtering through our borders each year. Hey, if I had my 'druthers' I'd take every serviceman that we had around the world defending countries that hate and envy us and bring them back to guard our borders. My disgust with the United Nations knows no bounds. They are ridden with corruption and deceit and these evil and primitive governments have the nerve to meet on a regular basis to vote against Israel. Who cares? I could continue but, frankly, it's too early in the morning to get so depressed. The question that plagues me however, is why on earth would anyone, especially Israel, even listen, much less pay attention to the 'advice' the United States leaders give about anything? One interesting aspect that I've noticed is that since our nightly news, are so filled with scenes out of Iraq and newspapers showing page after page of the savage deaths of our American servicemen, they don't seem to have time to propagandize for the Palestinians. Gone are the platitudes for the "poor, downtrodden Arabs." People, I believe, are finally beginning to wise-up and realize that the Muslims weren't so peaceful after all. It took a year or two of them pounding our boys with 'suicide bombings' to have us wake up and notice that although the Muslim religion might have started out with lofty goals they have been infected with a virus that glorifies death and carries it our with cold, unfeeling and evil calculation. It's now down to "them" against "us". The air-waves no longer fault Israel as I noticed not so long ago. I suppose we've just gotten too busy noticing the problems on our own shores - finally! 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

SOLVING THE IRAQI STANDOFF Posted by Peter Brookes, April 26, 2004.

April 26, 2004 -- SUCCESSFULLY ending the festering insurgencies in Fallujah and Najaf in the upcoming days could be the most important event of the entire Iraqi campaign. Terminating these bold-faced symbols resistance could send the insurgents, terrorists and their supporters reeling, undermine their recruiting of Iraqis and foreign jihadists and keep the June 30 political transition to Iraqi sovereignty on track. Failure could embolden the insurgents and terrorists, lead to more violence and reconstruction disruptions, delay the return to Iraqi rule and diminish the Iraqis'-and the world's - confidence in the Coalition. Arguably, the political and military stakes embodied in these thorny standoffs couldn't be greater either in Iraq - or here at home. The fact that President Bush consulted with his top national security advisers and military commanders in Iraq over the weekend to consider what to do specifically about Fallujah and Najaf is evidence of how critical these matters are. Of course, the situation doesn't have to come to blows in Fallujah and Najaf. A negotiated settlement is still possible and preferable to sending our troops into harm's way. An agreement would be ideal if it leads to the surrender of the terrorists and the insurgents, including radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and the killers of the four American contractors in Fallujah. In fact, the very threat of serious military force could bring the militants to the negotiating table - but, unfortunately, it's unlikely. If the Fallujah civic leaders can't get the insurgents to turn in their heavy weapons as a first step, American and Iraqi troops will likely start to put military pressure on the Sunni city of 200,000. If military action is required, civilians should be encouraged to leave the city in advance of a full-court press by the Marines and Iraqi forces. (One-third of the city has fled since the siege began April 5th.) In Najaf, American and Iraqi troops will likely have to enter the city to crack down on Sadr and his Shi'a al-Mahdi militia. Fighting in Najaf is more complicated than Fallujah because of the sensitivity of Najaf's Shiite holy sites. There is a strong possibility of stirring up religious outrage among Iraq's Shi'a majority (60 percent of Iraqis are Shiite) just by entering the holy city itself. Violating a holy site is another matter altogether. Of course, if a holy site is used for military purposes, it's no longer a holy site - it becomes a legitimate military target. Getting rid of Sadr and disassembling his alliance with his Iranian supporters is critical to pacifying the Shi'a South. But standby for some heavy weather if Coalition forces move into Fallujah and Najaf to root out the insurgents and their terrorist allies. Hopefully the resistance would crumble quickly, but the fighting could turn ugly and rapidly become reminiscent of the street fighting seen in the movie "Black Hawk Down" or the last minutes of "Saving Private Ryan." Door-to-door, urban warfare can be nightmarish. If it does comes to a military showdown in Fallujah and Najaf: * Use Iraqi forces to the greatest extent possible. This is their fight as much as - if not more than - ours. We should be using them wherever we can and accelerating the training of other Iraqi forces for counterinsurgency operations as soon as possible. It's time for Iraqi soldiers to earn their battle stripes in fighting for their country. We've certainly earned ours. * Employ overwhelming force. There has been plenty of debate about the number of American troops in Iraq. It seems we need an upsurge in troops there and the commanders should have them, especially for these operations. We should use maximum violence to end these insurgencies if necessary, but we should be careful to avoid civilian casualties to the extent possible. We need to keep as many Iraqi hearts and minds on our side as we go forward. Security and stability is critical to moving forward in Iraq and getting a handle on Fallujah and Najaf is fundamental to doing so. Even if these standoffs are resolved successfully, dustups with the bad guys will happen from time to time, but, in the meantime, the Coalition has to show the insurgents, terrorists and their supporters - inside and outside Iraq - who's the boss. This was a Press Room Commentary April 26, 2004 on the Heritage Foundation Policy Research and Analysis website (www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed042604b.cfm). It also appeared on the New York Post Online Edition (www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/brookes.htm). Peter Brookes' e-mail is Peterbrookes@heritage.org To Go To Top

US HATRED AMONG THE ARABS Posted by Jeff Jacoby, April 25, 2004.

Hosni Mubarak, the president of Egypt, delivered some unhappy tidings the other day. The US occupation in Iraq, he said, has turned the Arab world against the American people. "In the beginning, some people thought the Americans were helping them," Mubarak told the French newspaper Le Monde. "There was no hatred toward Americans." But "after what has happened in Iraq, there is an unprecedented hatred." Well, if anyone should be up on the latest Arab scuttlebutt, it would be Mubarak, ruler of the world's largest Arab nation. But why didn't he break this bad news a little earlier? After all, a week before his interview with Le Monde, he was with President Bush in Crawford, Texas. Shouldn't he have told him then, face-to-face, just how things stand in the Arab world? When Bush opened their joint press conference on April 12 by hailing "the bonds of friendship" between America and Egypt -- when he called Mubarak "my good friend, Hosni" -- shouldn't the Egyptian ruler have set him straight? Then again, Mubarak might have had good reason to hold his tongue. Bush probably wouldn't have taken kindly to being told a baldfaced lie like "There was no hatred toward Americans" before the Iraq war. Egypt's strongman may not have wanted to give the president an excuse to point out that four of the Sept. 11 hijackers, including mastermind Mohamed Atta, were Egyptian -- as is Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy. Or maybe Mubarak confined himself to diplomatic pleasantries so as not to provoke any rethinking of the nearly $2 billion a year that Washington pours into his coffers. Since 1975 Egypt has received more than $50 billion in US foreign aid -- more than any other country except Israel. "Why should America keep showing such generosity to the world's leading Arab state," Bush might have asked if Mubarak had started talking about Arab hatred, "if it is going to be repaid with resentment and violence?" Bush might have pointed out that while Israel routinely supports the US position in international forums like the UN, Egypt almost always votes against it. If Bush were to demand an explanation for such rank ingratitude, what could Mubarak say? "There was no hatred toward Americans." What a howling falsehood. Arab regimes have been inciting hatred toward Americans for years, and few have done so more consistently than the thuggish autocracy of Mubarak, who has ruled for 23 years. For example, it was Al-Ahram, a newspaper controlled by the Egyptian government, that claimed in October that US pilots flying over Afghanistan were dropping "genetically treated" food into areas booby-trapped with land mines, in the hope not only of making Afghans sick but of crippling or killing those who attempt to gather the food. It was Al-Akhbar, another regime-sponsored daily, that declared in August: "The Statue of Liberty... must be destroyed because of the idiotic American policy that goes from disgrace to disgrace in the swamp of bias and blind fanaticism... The age of the American collapse has begun." Examples of the anger engendered by the Iraq war? Hardly. Al-Ahram and Al-Akhbar published those statements in October and August of 2001. A few months earlier, Al-Akhbar had sneered that Secretary of State Colin Powell "has the brain of a bird" and acts "like a stupid teenager." Ground Zero was still smoldering shortly after 9/11 when a writer in Al-Arabi, a Nasserist weekly, cheered the attacks: "In all honesty, and without beating around the bush," Ahmad Murad wrote, "I am happy about the great number of American dead." (All quotes are from of the Middle East Media Research Institute, whose invaluable website -- www.memri.org -- translates a vast array of material from the Arab and Iranian media.) It isn't only Egypt's media that whip up anti-American animus. Cairo's influential Al Azhar seminary, a government-backed institution, urged Muslims more than a year ago to wage "jihad" against the United States. A popular Egyptian singer has recorded a song accusing the United States of perpetrating the 9/11 attacks. A former Egyptian minister of war compares Bush's policies to Nazism. And Mubarak himself, as the Washington Post recently observed, aggressively opposes the Bush administration's campaign for democracy in the Middle East, denouncing it as an outside imposition. If Americans are hated in the Arab world, much of the blame can be laid to the influence of thugocracies like Mubarak's. Which is one good reason to stop supporting those thugocracies. The man Bush calls "my good friend, Hosni" is responsible for a good deal of cruelty and repression within Egypt's borders. If we truly want to neutralize the anti-American venom that has poisoned so many Arabs, we could begin by breaking off our embrace of the autocrats who oppress them. Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for the Boston Globe. His e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com. To Go To Top

PALM BEACH EAST Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 25, 2004.

At Palm Beach there are no sun umbrellas, no crowds and no traffic jams to impede a drive on a sunny spring day alongside the bright blue waters and the pristine sand. That's because Hof Dekalim (Palm Beach) is in the Gaza Strip, about 15 miles south of Gaza City. But Hof Dekalim is also less than a mile away from the Jewish community of Neve Dekalim in the Gush Katif area of the Strip, and just a few minutes up the beach from the tiny Jewish beach communities of Shirat Yam and Kfar Yam. It's difficult to understand, particularly for anyone who has not visited the area, the real meaning of Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan. The image of a few thousand Jews embedded in communities in the midst of millions of Arabs, guarded by platoons of IDF soldiers are what prevail. The real picture of 21 thriving, economically productive communities peopled by idealistic and industrious Jews, separated from the Arabs of Gaza and living on terrain whose beauty far surpasses that to which East Coast Americans run every winter, rarely emerges. Gush Katif is the micro version of the state of Israel. The country is surrounded by hostile Arabs,as are many Israeli communities, so why the retreat mentality for Gush Katif? Jewish settlement in the area was founded during the Hasmonean Period and continued in Gaza City for two thousand years until the riots of 1929. The remains of the 7th century Great Synagogue of Gaza are supposedly protected by the 1995 Interim Agreement of Gaza-Jericho. To confront the reality, make the two and a half hour scenic drive from Jerusalem that will bring you to the Kissufim checkpoint half way down the Strip. As in Judea and Samaria, Gush Katif residents travel in and out at all hours of the day and night, some in protected vehicles, some in regular cars. There's heavy military presence at Kissufim, despite the fact that Israel actually disengaged from Gaza 10 years ago in May 1994. According to the Gaza-Jericho Agreement, Israeli troops withdrew from the area with the exception of forces protecting Jewish communities. Today, the Kissufim road has been denuded of the trees and Arab houses that once lined the road that provided cover for a series of murderous attacks against Jews driving in the area. Kfar Darom lies to the north of Kissufim on the main north-south road that dissects the Strip. The scene of repeated mortar attacks, Kfar Darom is a main commercial center of Gush Katif (Harvest Bloc). The community's claim to fame prior to Sharon's retreat plan, was for the bug-free produce sold in every supermarket and exported worldwide. At the packing plant, work goes on as if nothing were amiss. New immigrants work at the conveyor belt, shoving romaine lettuce into plastic bags bearing a rabbinic hechsher. Since my last visit more than a year ago, a new row of homes has been built. Thanks to Kfar Darom's openness to resettling immigrants from the Bnei Menashe, the village has doubled in size over the past three years, with 80 families now making their homes behind the concrete barriers protecting them from the neighbors in Deir El Balah. The majority of Jewish communities in Gush Katif are clustered together about a mile south of Kfar Darom, miles away from Gaza City and the Jabalya refugee camp. Unlike many moshavim and kibbutzim in the rest of Israel, Gush Katif communities are economically self-sufficient. The high level of production and state of the art technology has produced extraordinary results. Netzer Hazani farmers lead the nation in cultivation of cherry tomatoes; at Moshav Katif it's the dairy that lays claim to being one of the largest and most modern in the country; Atzmona boasts a thriving nursery that raises houseplants, as well as being the leading producers growing organic potatoes for export. Driving between the villages through the sand dunes, with picture-perfect glimpses of the Mediterranean Sea and stately tall palm trees dotted all around it's hard to believe that this is a place that experiences regular shelling or any kind of violence. We drive on roads forbidden to Arabs, with only the occasional military vehicle in sight. Teenage hitchhikers stand at the entrance to every village, and the general quiet is broken only by the scream of an Israeli jet overhead. Almost every car and the gate to every community is adorned with a blue and red poster proclaiming the slogan that Gush Katif residents are trying to impress on Likud voters: Dismantling settlements is a victory for terror. It's a message that is being carried throughout the country in a systematic door-to-door campaign mounted by the local council. Armed with lists of Likud voters, teams led by Gush Katif teenagers and retirees are fanning out to ask Likudniks to look them in the eye and tell them they're still going to vote to dismantle their homes. Reports coming back to campaign central command indicate that the reaction has been mixed. Neve Dekalim resident Rachel Saperstein, a teacher at the local girls high school, recounts that several of her students are shocked that some people won't even open the door to them. Neve Dekalim, at the center of the group of communities, appears to be command central. It's here that the foreign journalists descend on a daily basis to interview English, French and Spanish speakers and local political figures. Teenage activists man a large blue tent at the entrance to the town and politely hand out background material, CDs and bumper stickers. More than 500 families now live in Neve Dekalim in tidy single-family homes surrounded with gardens bursting with color. There's a central square with small shops, a zoo, a central library, eight synagogues and an industrial zone. Two yeshivot and a women's college complement the elementary and high school educational institutions. Inside the hesder Yeshiva at Neve Dekalim is an artistic interpretation of the 1982 destruction of Yamit, a town of 2,000 families in the northeastern Sinai, given away to Egypt as part of the Camp David peace deal. Then Defense Minister Ariel Sharon was the one who convinced Prime Minister Menachem Begin that Yamit would have to go. Many people from Yamit pioneered settlements in Gush Katif. Among them was Esther Bazak, today a fiery, auburn-haired grandmother and one of the founders of Neve Dekalim. Esther explains that almost every house built in Neve Dekalim has one wall rescued from Yamit. The glass and white ceramic of the Yamit monument opens up to the beit midrash (study hall) of the yeshiva. The meaning is clear. "It's destruction and continuation," Esther says. In the late afternoon sunlight, the courtyard of the two main synagogues is filled with modestly dressed women of all ages quietly reciting Psalms. The women have been gathering every afternoon at 5 p.m as their part of the campaign to prevent the retreat. There's no idle chatter here, just the quiet whispering of ancient words of comfort and hope. A similar atmosphere prevails at the Mechina (pre-military training academy) located in Atzmona, one of the communities closest to the Egyptian border, a little more than a mile south of Neve Dekalim. Two years ago, five students were killed at the Mechina when a terrorist lobbed two hand grenades into a packed classroom during evening study. Eli Adler, the American-born rabbi who was teaching the class that night, notes that applications for places at the remote academy have risen significantly since the terror attack. "Nothing has changed with our boys since then," he says. "We're deepening our roots here," he adds. As he speaks to a visiting group in that same classroom, facing the memorial plaque for his students and the cabinet labeled 'Emergency Equipment,' a heavily armed student patrols the academy grounds. The heaviest visible army presence is reserved for the 13 couples and families living out the fantasy of many a veteran of the 60s and 70s. Who didn't want to be living on the beach, next to the surf, under the endless sun? But the residents of Shirat Hayam have more than sun and fun in mind. Shirat Hayam is a collection of mobile homes, donated by the Norwegian friends of Gush Katif, sitting directly on the beach across the road from Neve Dekalim. The first settlers moved in 2001 to old abandoned summer homes last used by Egyptian officers prior to 1967. The move was a concrete way for several young people to channel their grief over their friends murdered in the Kfar Darom terror attack a few months earlier. Today military guard posts protect their presence there. No soldiers are needed to guard the nearby deserted Palm Beach Hotel, which once accommodated foreign tourists and Israelis looking for an idyllic, secluded, kosher Mediterranean beachside getaway. Doors flap in the breeze, and weeds cover the open-air dining area, tennis courts and mini-golf course. A few local students occupy some rooms, but there's a sad air of abandonment about the place. It's hard to conceive that this will be the fate of one of Israel's most productive and naturally beautiful areas. It's even harder to assess the impact the unprecedented destruction of thriving Jewish communities by a Jewish government will have on Israelis and Jews worldwide. Judy Lash Balint is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen), which is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

THE RIGHTNESS OF TARGETED ASSASSINATIONS Posted by Leo Rennert, April 25, 2004.

I wrote this to Professor Scharf about his article, "The Rightness Of Targeted Assassinations," published in the Washington Post Dear Prof. Scharf: Your criticism of targeted assassinations as reprehensible, ill-advised and counter-productive unfortunately is based on premises and arguments that are so weak and unpersuasive as to fall of their own weight -- or rather the lack of it. Let me explain: In your Washington Post column, you begin by citing international outrage against Israel's killing of Hamas leader Sheik Yassin as expressed in a 31-2 vote of the U.N. Human Rights Commission. When it comes to respect for human rights, the two dissenters (the U.S. and Australia) rate far higher than the majority, which includes some of the worst human rights abusers. The commission has become a farce precisely because of its exclusive obsession with Israel, while it turns a blind eye on far worse examples elsewhere. The commission has demolished its own legitimacy. Why you would use it as an international standard is beyond comprehension. You then go on to acknowledge that targeted assassinations may be legal, so you put forth a variety of political problems supposedly created by targeted assassinations. You make the following points: 1. Collateral damage often results in the killing of innocent bystanders. But Israel and the U.S. are in a war against terrorism and you concede their right of self-defense under the U.N. Charter. As in any war, there will be collateral damage. The issue is not whether surgical strikes can be conducted in totally perfect fashion, but whether every possible precaution is taken to avoid or minimize collateral damage. 2. Faulty intelligence leads to mistakes that are "surprisingly common." But when you're in an existential war, you inevitably will have to depend on imperfect intelligence. I would dispute your allegation that such mistakes are very common in the case of Israel. You can obviously cite a few instances, but Israel's targeted killings have demonstrated overall a rather fantastic accuracy because of a usually reliable intelligence base. 3. Assassinations create cascading threats to world order by fueling more anger against the U.S. (you cite Hamas' sharp anti-U.S. rhetoric after the killing of Hamas leaders). But such anger already was rampant long before these actions. Hamas' paymasters have pursued an anti-U.S. agenda for years. 4. By creating martyrs, you strengthen enemy morale. Wrong. By aggressive pursuit of terrorist kingpins, you put a big dent in their operations. It is precisely Israel's robust anti-terrorist strategy, including targeted assassinations, that has resulted in a sharp decline of suicide bombings and other terrorist horrors. So what's left to sustain your thesis? How are the U.S. and Israel to defend themselves if you handcuff them militarily? Your solution: Go back to the criminal approach by putting the bad guys on trial in an international court and follow with sanctions as we did with Libya. And that's the only evidence you cite in support of your entire position. Except, it's totally irrelevant when it comes to dealing with Al Qaeda or Hamas. The shootdown of Pan Am 103 was instigated by a NATIONAL leadership. The U.S. and the international community could deal with Libya's role as TERRORISM BY A STATE -- not rogue outfits like Al Qaeda or Hamas. The U.S. response was a state-to-state response. Libya could be influenced by being isolated and economically punished. And Qadafi as head of state was was in the cross-hairs and, willy-nilly, he did take international reaction into account. None of this applies to Al Qaeda and Hamas. After 9/11, we actually tried to deal with Afghanistan as a sovereign state. But the Taliban fanatics who harbored Osama didn't care a fig about Afghanistan as a nation, refused to give him up (unlike Qadafi who gave up a couple of his bad guys) and were willing to go down the tubes with him. In the case of Hamas, what nation would you suggest should be put in the international dock or punished with international sanctions? The nation of Gaza? The nation of Palestine? Should Arafat as head of the Palestinian Authority be held accountable since he violated his pledge to forgo terrorism? Would you try him? Would you try Iran for funding Hamas? Would you try Egypt for looking the other way while weapons are funneled for Hamas in Gaza from its territory? The questions answer themselves. It's highly disingenuous to acknowledge that Israel and the U.S. have a right to defend themselves, but then to come up with all kinds of nice-soundings "buts" that effectively would leave them naked to the depredations of Al Qaeda and Hamas. To Go To Top

THE BEAUTY OF THEIR HATE Posted by Beth Goodtree, April 25, 2004.

Israel: Another attempted terroristic genocide/homicide bombing. More rocket barrages on innocent civilians. Again more shooting attacks on commuters. Europe: More attacks on synagogues. Again, attacks on Jewish school children. Again more threats to Jewish-owned businesses. A normal people would despair. A normal people would capitulate. A normal people would have already been wiped out. But not the Jewish people. And herein lies our beauty and their hatred and jealousy of us. We Hebrew people are unique in the annuls of history. If it were not for us there would be no Christianity and Islam. There would be no America as it is today. The American Revolution was successful because it was funded in large part by Jews. In the United States, the law of the land is based upon the 10 Commandments. We gave the world high moral standards not merely through our Bible but by example. We gave the world a system of true justice that did not mean the mutilations of Hammurabi, but the wisdom of Solomon. We gave the world the concept of one God, neither of flesh or blood, but so beyond our ken as to be unimaginable. By our very survival, despite their attempts to exterminate us, we have defeated some of the mightiest empires the world has known. The Romans, The Crusaders, the Catholic Church during the Inquisition, Stalin's Russia, Nazi Germany -- all are gone and we are here. Curiously, time after time, without fail, no nation or group has been successful in the world arena without a Jewish presence that was welcomed. And so groups like the Islamists hate us, for they know that by demonizing and murdering us they also seal their inevitable fate. If you don't believe we are unique, even our detractors prove it in their every move. Israel, as representative of the Jewish people is the only nation not allowed a seat on the UN Security Council. Terrorist nations are allowed seats there. Even repressive, torturing and murderous countries like Syria have chaired it. But not Israel. The Jewish people, well-known champions of human rights, will never hold the chair of the UN Commission on Human Rights unless the UN as we know it today is totally revamped. And yet they claim to honor the very values that we Jewish people codified and set forth. So even without a seat on the Security Council, our presence overwhelms and guides it. Despite their exclusionary and anti-Semitic stance, our influence is supreme. Meanwhile, according to the UN, Palestinian Arab children, as well as all other children should be protected from war, but not Jewish children. In fact, specifically not Jewish children. When a motion was passed to protect the Arab children, it carried easily. When the same motion was put forth changing the words to Israeli children (who, unlike the Arab children are the deliberate targets of Arab/Islamist terror and genocide bombings), it was so altered to exclude Jews and favor Arabs that it had it be withdrawn (1). They are so afraid of us that they want our future generation destroyed. And yet we continue to live and thrive. The bar is always set higher for the Jews. In the past, many countries denied the Jewish people the opportunity for an education. So we studied in secret and as a group, more Jews are educated than anyone else. There are overwhelmingly more Jewish Nobel Prize winners than from any other group (2). And Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin - 109 per 10,000 people -- as well as having one of the highest per capita rates of patents filed (3). Even when Jews were not allowed any occupations but those considered 'dirty' (such as banking) we still succeeded and thrived. Witness the Rothschild success story. We are the valedictorians of the human race. And no matter if they change the grades in the book, alter the test, make separate rules for us, cheat or try to prevent us from even taking the tests, we still prevail. And they will never catch up to us. And this is why they hate us. And their hatred is a glorious and beautiful confirmation of our righteousness, truth and contributions to all that is good and uplifting about humankind. Could 'they' ever win' Certainly. But then, they'd have to become moral, tolerant, virtuous, honorable, fair, educated, and a plethora of other things that are both enlightened and evenhanded. In other words, they'd have to become more Jewish. And in the end, this is why they will lose and we will prevail. (1)http://www.israelnewsagency.com/israelichildren.html (2) http://www.arthurhu.com/index/jewish.htm (note: the compiler is apparently Oriental) (3) http://www.masada2000.org/israel-stats.html and Prof. D. Koller; Institute of Life Sciences; The Hebrew University; Jerusalem 91904, Israel Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer, with a background in advertising. She writes political commentary and the occasional humor and science articles. To Go To Top

SOME MORE INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT ISRAEL Posted by Leo Rennert, April 25, 2004.

Israel, the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can lay claim to the following: The cell phone was developed in Israel by Israelis working in the Israeli branch of Motorola, which has its largest development center in Israel. Most of the Windows NT and XP operating systems were developed by Microsoft-Israel. The Pentium MMX Chip technology was designed in Israel at Intel. Both the Pentium-4 microprocessor and the Centrino processor were entirely designed, developed and produced in Israel. The Pentium microprocessor in your computer was most likely made in Israel. Voice mail technology was developed in Israel. Both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the US in Israel! The technology for the AOL Instant Messenger ICQ was developed in 1996 by four young Israelis. Israel has the fourth largest air force in the world (after the U.S., Russia and China). In addition to a large variety of other aircraft, Israel's air force has an aerial arsenal of over 250 F-16's. This is the largest fleet of F-16 aircraft outside of the U.S. According to industry officials, Israel designed the airline industry's most impenetrable flight security. U.S.officials now look to Israel for advice on how to handle airborne security threats. Israel's $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined. Israel has the highest percentage in the world of home computers per capita. Israel has the highest ratio of university degrees to the population in the world. Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin - 109 per 10,000 people -- as well as one of the highest per capita rates of patents filed. In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest number of startup companies in the world. In absolute terms, Israel has the largest number of startup companies than any other country in the world, except the U.S. (3,500 companies mostly in hi-tech). With more than 3,000 high-tech companies and startups, Israel has the highest concentration of hi-tech companies in the world -- apart from the Silicon Valley, U.S. Israel is ranked #2 in the world for venture capital funds right behind the U.S. Outside the United States and Canada, Israel has the largest number of NASDAQ listed companies. Israel has the highest average living standards in the Middle East. The per capita income in 2000 was over $17,500, exceeding that of the UK. On a per capita basis, Israel has the largest number of biotech startups. Twenty-four per cent of Israel's workforce holds university degrees -- ranking third in the industrialized world, after the United States and Holland - and 12 per cent hold advanced degrees. Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. In 1984 and 1991, Israel airlifted a total of 22,000 Ethiopian Jews at risk in Ethiopia, to safety in Israel. When Golda Meir was elected Prime Minister of Israel in 1969, she became the world's second elected female leader in modern times. When the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya was bombed in 1998, Israeli rescue teams were on the scene within a day -- and saved three victims from the rubble. Israel has the third highest rate of entrepreneurship -- and the highest rate among women and among people over 55 - in the world. Relative to its population, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation on earth. Immigrants come in search of democracy, religious freedom, and economic opportunity. Israel was the first nation in the world to adopt the Kimberly process, an international standard that certifies diamonds as "conflict free." Israel has the world's second highest per capita of new books. Israel is the only country in the world that entered the 21st century with a net gain in its number of trees, made more remarkable because this was achieved in an area considered mainly desert. Israel has more museums per capita than any other country. Medicine... Israeli scientists developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer. An Israeli company developed a computerized system for ensuring proper administration of medications, thus removing human error from medical treatment. Every year in U.S. hospitals 7,000 patients die from treatment mistakes. Israel's Givun imaging developed the first ingestible video camera, so small it fits inside a pill. Used to view the small intestine from the inside, the camera helps doctors diagnose cancer and digestive disorders. Researchers in Israel developed a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood, an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with heart failure. The new device is synchronized with the heart's mechanical operations through a sophisticated system of sensors. Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U.S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25% of its work force employed in technical professions. Israel places first in this category as well. A new acne treatment developed in Israel, the ClearLight device, produces a high-intensity, ultraviolet-light-free, narrow-band blue light that causes acne bacteria to self-destruct -- all without damaging surrounding skin or tissue. An Israeli company was the first to develop and install a large-scale solar-powered and fully functional electricity generating plant, in southern California's Mojave desert. All the above while engaged in regular wars with an implacable enemy that seeks its destruction, and an economy continuously under strain by having to spend more per capita on its own protection than any other country on earth To Go To Top

A FEW WORDS OF ENCOURAGEMENT Posted by Nadia Matar, April 25, 2004.

Over the past two weeks, something wonderful has happened: the people have woken up and have started working hard for the survival of the Jewish State of Israel. I would like to share with those who live abroad, what has been going on: As you know, PM Ariel Sharon has announced that he was bringing his suicidal 'disengagement plan" for a referendum to all 200,000 Likud members - the voting is supposed to take place in a week, on May 2nd, 2004. All national groups and movements have gotten their act together and joined, in one way or another, the struggle to convince the Likud members to vote against Sharon's disastrous plan. Honestly, at the beginning, the fight seemed hopeless: the biased media has been pushing in favor of the plan, day and night, President Bush has embraced the plan; the 3 major Likud ministers, Netanyahu, Livnat and Shalom - caring more about their seat and their fancy Volvo than anything else - have reluctantly agreed to support Sharon too; the polls were showing a 20% advantage for Sharon. Did the opponents of Sharon's retreat plan have any chance? The message was clear: we must at least try. The residents of Gush Katif were showing the way: each and one of the 8000 Gush Katif residents dropped everything and decided to devote themselves totally to the struggle. True, unlike the PM, they do not have the monies nor the media - but they have one big advantage: the knowledge that they are right and a massive network of supporters all around the country, who certainly will volunteer to help. The goal was set: visiting each and one of the 200,000 Likud members and trying to convince them to vote against the retreat plan. All movements and organizations joined in to help. Each community received a different area in which they are supposed to go, knock on the door of Likud members and convince them to vote against. The mobilization has been overwhelming. The willingness of people to volunteer and spend several evenings out of their homes in order to visit other, far-away, cities and convince Likud members to vote against, has been over and above what could ever be expected. If in the past, we saw mainly youth coming out and demonstrate, this time it is the adults who leave their homes in the hands of their bigger children and themselves go and do the work. I can testify that in my own community of Efrat in which till now always the same few activists went to the streets - now, hundreds and hundreds of adults, together with youngsters, have joined the action committee to save the Land of Israel. And the results are tremendous. After one week in which tens of thousands of Likud homes have been visited by activists, the polls have shown that there is only a 4% gap between those in favor and those against the plan. Because the moment one is confronted, personally, with the true facts about this horrendous plan, one cannot get himself to vote in favor. Thursday and Friday, all newspapers and reports, known to be leftists, were panic-stricken: "The opponents of the plan are getting stronger!" "Polls show Sharon is loosing the battle-help!" Women in Green did not need the polls to know that the people are against the plan. On Wednesday, Women in Green members spent several hours in the Likud stronghold in Jerusalem, the Machane Yehuda Market, handing out material against the retreat plan, in favor of the Land of Israel. How uplifting an experience! The vast majority were adamant against the plan. It is important to go to such places to be reminded of what a wonderful people the people of Israel are. It is true that our political leadership is weak and defeatist, but let me tell you: the people are strong, they love their land, they love their heritage and they do not want to give it away! That is exactly the feeling people got, going from house to house to Likud members. The vast majority are against it, and there is a real chance we can win and therefore it is of utmost importance to continue this week with the important work of door-to-door explanations and demonstrations. With all this optimism we must be cautious and realize that Ariel Sharon and his team will pull out all dirty tricks to try and win. They have already started doing so. Likud members related that they had been called by people who pretended to be Gush Katif residents and who told them: "Shalom, I am a Gush Katif resident and I am calling you to urge you to vote in favor of Ariel Sharon's plan because all I want is to get compensations and then leave the area as soon as possible". Others pretended to be victims of terror living in Gush Katif and were also calling Likud members urging them "to vote for Sharon's plan in order to bring more security". All those phone calls were proven to be fake and originated probably from Omri Sharon's team. In addition, there is no doubt that, a day or two before the referendum, Ariel Sharon will try to impress Likud members by eliminating yet one more terrorist leader - who knows, maybe even the mass murderer Yasser Arafat. As much as we all pray for Arafat and other terrorists to be killed - that certainly should not be done in order for people to vote in favor of a plan that will reward terror and create a terrorist state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. To conclude: the national camp has risen to the challenge of fighting for the survival of the State of Israel. The tens of thousands of volunteer activists understand the true meaning of this referendum: a majority in favor of Ariel Sharon's suicidal retreat plan would be a victory for Arab terror and a big blow to the survival of the State of Israel. A majority against Sharon's suicidal retreat plan would finally announce the end of the Oslo era and would be a victory for Zionism, a victory for the right of the Jewish People to its land, a victory for justice and truth. Whatever the results will be on May 2nd, the fight for the Land of Israel will still go on. If we win, please G-d, Sharon has already announced that he will try to bypass the will of his own party and will have the Knesset and Government approve it anyway. If we lose G-d forbid, there is still a long way and lots of possibilities to prevent the implementation of Sharon's plan. But one thing is for sure - this struggle has, on the week of Israel's Independence Day, taken hundreds of thousands of Israel lovers out of their homes to go and spread the simple message that says: The Land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel based on the Torah of Israel- we have a beautiful and wonderful country- never will we agree to give it away! We must do all we can to win-We certainly deserve to win- with G-d's help we will win! The People of Israel Will Live Forever! 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

DO WE BATTLE TERORISM OR APPEASE THE ENVIRONMENT THAT GENERATES TERRORISM? Posted by Israel BenAmi, April 25, 2004.

Hi Jeanne, If we take a close look at the Middle East Arab-Moslem extremism and the prevailing governments in Moslem states, the following facts emerge and must be considered as basic assumptions in planning future strategies in the struggle against terror and the prevention of its growing strength. 1] Moslem terrorism was born in Moslem monarchies and thrives there to this day. 2] Moslem terrorism found convenient bases in Arab dictatorships. 3] Candidates for terrorist activities and suicide bombings came from classes opposed to the partnership of the west with their governments. 4] The terrorists were inspired not only by the Imams, but by a belief that their poverty was the result of being cheated both by their rulers, but also by the Western capitalists. 5] The investments of Arab rulers in London, New York etc. infuriated the masses and made them ripe for revolution. 6] The revolution is fueled by Moslem fundamentalism but this is only a mask and has economic foundations. We, in Israel,are not to blame for the terrorism, as some would have us believe. Bin Laden initially did not consider Israel when he began his campaign of terror. Only now has he jumped on the anti-semitic bandwagon. With Zion's greetings To Go To Top

FOR AOL USERS: AOL UNWANTED CENSORSHIP Posted by Leah Averick, April 24, 2004.

Since a substantial number of friends subscribe to AOL, this is relayed for their information. The item appears in a current newsletter by Fred Langa, a highly respected tech writer whose LangaList goes to 160,000 subscribers. Here is what he says about AOL: AOL Madness (Warn Your Friends) AOL is at it again. This time, it's reading *inside* its members' emails, and preemptively blocking any messages that contain links to sites that AOL doesn't want you to see. Note: I'm *not* talking about simple mail blocks, where a mail is discarded if it originates from a "forbidden" address. No: AOL is parsing the content of its members' emails and blocking them even if they merely *mention* a site that AOL disapproves of. This happened to my last newsletter issue, when I mentioned a perfectly valid and inoffensive link: http://www.codeproject.com/ . It turns out that last summer, in July, AOL put that site on its naughty list for some unexplained reason, and ever since has blocked all emails that even contain a link to that address. AOL's mail system is just this side of insane. Not only does it read inside member emails for links that AOL doesn't like, but - as we've reported before - if AOL members get a little lazy and block a newsletter like this one, instead of unsubscribing, AOL keeps track of the blocks. Last time I looked, if as few as 10 readers took the lazy way out of stopping a mailing, AOL would assume that the mail in question was spam. In my case, if just 10 AOL users out of 160,000 readers - that's 0.00006 of my readers - took the lazy way off the list, all AOL subscribers would have their legitimate issues blocked for some time thereafter. AOL's user-level mail filters are nearly useless because the master filters discard emails before they ever make it to the users' mailboxes and the local filters there. That means AOL members can white-list senders to their heart's content but it will have no effect at all on the pre-filtering that's done by AOL before their mail ever gets delivered. AOL's user-level mail controls are a little like those fake thermostats you sometimes see in office buildings that are meant to give occupants the illusion of local control, when in reality, a central system is making all the real decisions. Noted tech writer Brian Livingston also has been struggling with this, as he reported in http://briansbuzz.com/w/040408/ . Just look at the jaw-dropping failure rates he found. I've written many times that Internet service providers (ISPs) are mishandling the growing menace of spam by imposing crude "junk-mail filters" that delete legitimate messages without notifying the intended recipients of that fact. ...AOL "bounced" about 88% of the newsletters that had been sent to subscribers who use aol.com e-mail addresses. The problem was also severe at subsidiaries owned by AOL, including cs.com (which bounced 88%) and netscape.net (96%). ...[AOL's] filter simply deletes huge quantities of mail without ever delivering it. To Go To Top

ARAFAT PLAYS VICTIM AGAIN Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, April 24, 2004.

Yasser Arafat has just played his finest role, that of the "eternal" hapless victim. I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. "Yasser the Clown" has just turned in another star performance. If he weren't responsible for the deaths of so many innocent people in his over 40 years as terror king, he would rival "the Little Tramp" as the greatest tragi-comedic star of the 20th century. Responding to recent comments by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Arafat's days might be numbered; Yasser addressed a crowd outside his Mukatah "prison" compound saying, "All of us are martyrs-in-the-waiting." This wasn't the first time he spoke of martyrdom. In response, some 4,000 people chanted they would sacrifice their "blood and souls" for their leader. Arafat wants martyrdom, oh really? Is that why just last week he kicked 20 wanted terrorists - from his own Fatah-led al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades - out of his compound in Ramallah, when he became fearful that Israel might storm the building to take them prisoner? Ali Barghouti, one of the leaders of the terrorist group, al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, complained to Agence France Press that he was among those forced to leave and called the expulsion a crime. "Arafat has abandoned us," Barghouti said. "It's a crime, because we are, above all, members of Fatah and he should protect us. At the moment, we are on our own and everyone is trying to find shelter." And this is not the first time that good ol' Yasser has abandoned his "troops" to save his own skin. He wants martyrdom, what a joke. But then again, notice the behavior of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders, crawling into the woodwork every time Israel picks one of them off. They are the "religious Palestinians" who send out other people's children to blow up and kill, then go past stop, collect 72 virgins and... Maybe Hamas and Jihad leaders don't like virgins? Because, they sure don't seem to be in a rush to get there. The funny thing is, most of the children and close relatives of the Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and others in the Palestinian Authority leadership circles, are kept a safe distance from any "martyrdom missions". Arafat's daughter is living in France with his wife who allegedly can't stand Arafat's "stinking little country". But back to Yasser, who assured everyone that he's a "believer" and prepared to meet his maker (just not yet, I suspect). He did have a few more chances in the past. Let's see, the airplane crash in the Libyan desert back in 1992; the chance to stand and fight the Israelis in Beirut instead of leaving for Tunis in 1982; and oh ya, he could have stayed with his PLO fighters in Jordan in 1970 and suffered the same fate as them in King Hussein's "Black September," where the Jordanian army killed an estimated 10,000. Instead he stole away, allegedly dressed as a woman. So much for Yasser's interest in martyrdom... Besides being a terrorist mastermind who has managed to finagle - from those supposedly so smart Jews - a terrorist base right inside their own country; Yasser plays a pretty mean "victim" role. My question, when are we going to see him on CNN, crying about how the Israelis won't let him become a martyr? Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

SCOOP JACKSON ON ASSURING ISRAEL'S INDEPENDENCE Posted by Mordechai ben Menachem, April 24, 2004.

"One hears a great deal these days, from people whose vision is shorter even than their memories, about the wisdom of international guarantees as a means of assuring Israeli security. I can't imagine a more misdirected policy than to ask Israel, which has been the model of the self-reliant ally, to transform itself into an American dependency ... Much of the history of international guarantees is the history of countries who have lost their territory, their freedom and even their sons and daughters ... it is a history that the Israelis, for their reasons, and we, for ours, ought to do everything possible to avoid."-- Senator Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson, December 18, 1973 To Go To Top

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY FROM CONCEPTWIZARD Posted by Udi Ohana, April 24, 2004.

Dear Friends, It is only 56 short years since the fledgling State of Israel was formally recognized by a world intent on relieving its guilty conscience. The dark forces of evil had been attempting to exterminate the Jewish nation, while Western bastions of democracy stood at the sidelines and pretended not to see. In 1948 the pitiful remnants of world Jewry sought a safe haven, a refuge denied them by most of the countries of the world. Where better than the area to which countless generations of Jews have been spiritually and physically drawn since time began - the birthplace of the Jewish nation. Where better indeed? The State of Israel was officially established in the right place - almost three millennia after its birth. Whether the decision was made as a result of guilt feelings, or after pressure had been brought to bear on member states of the League of Nations, or for whatever other reasons is not the point. The fact remains that the Jewish people returned home. Hundreds of thousands of Jews flocked into the tiny State of Israel. Some came as DPs from post-war Europe, stripped of their possessions and homes; others came from the Arab countries, forced to flee for their lives after the establishment of the State of Israel, but also stripped of their possessions and homes; others came from the free nations of the world, seeking a homeland where they did not have to apologize for being Jews. Yet throughout the world today, in 2004, the dark forces of evil are once again at work. Israel's legitimacy and sovereignty are being threatened by a renascent anti-Semitism, cloaked in anti-Israelism, orchestrated and manipulated by Islamic radical factions. The Arab nations have never tasted victory on the battlefield, despite forcing Israel into war on a number of occasions. Now, as long as the Palestinian Arab leadership feels it can make political gain by using terror against the Israeli population, there is no incentive for them to change strategy. What has happened? Why is Israel not allowed to defend itself against the terrorists who have murdered and maimed so many of its innocent citizens? Why is a double standard applied to Israel?s use of defensive measures against terrorism? Why are there terrorists all over the world, but in Israel there are only ?militants?? There is no sovereign state in the world that would endure what Israel has endured over the past three years without taking defensive and offensive measures, unpleasant as these may be for everyone concerned. Fifty-six years is not a long time in the historical plan of things. Those who you who love Israel must now stand up and be counted. Never again will the Jewish people meekly allow itself to be destroyed. Israel is here to stay. Happy Independence Day! Udi and Mal Ohana have created several very excellent graphic presentations on the Arab-Israel conflict and on anti-Semitism. See their website (http://www.conceptwizard.com/info.html). To Go To Top

JEWS BLAMED FOR WORLD TERRORISM IN EGYPTIAN GOVERNMENT NEWSPAPER Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 24, 2004.

Somebody please remind me why Begin gave them all of Sinai, destroyed our advance defence systems and open the door for them to receive billions of dollars worth of American weapons. This was a news item on the World Net Daily website (http://www.wnd.com). Egypt's government newspaper has accused Jews of carrying out all terrorism throughout the world, including the Madrid bombings. "If you want to know the real perpetrator of every disaster or every act of terrorism, look for the Zionist Jews," wrote Abd Al-Wahhab 'Adas, deputy editor of Al-Gumhouriyya in a recent article titled "The Secret Israeli Weapon." The Jews do this to harm and distort the image of Arabs "and represent them to the world as terrorists who endanger innocents," the editor said. But, he insists, "It is the Jews, with their hidden filthy hands, who play their part with expertise in order to harm the Arabs and Muslims and to intensify hatred towards them. They have experience in this area. All precedents attest to this. Their black history is the best possible proof that hatred toward the Arabs and the Muslims fills their hearts and blinds their eyes. They are behind all troubles, disasters and catastrophes in the world." Adas claimed that "after every terror operation they perpetrate, they leave a sign, clue, or traces meant to show that the perpetrators are Arab Muslims," asserting Jews placed the Arabic-language videocassette found near a Madrid mosque and the audio cassettes of the Quran discovered near the bombed train station. "It is obvious that the Jews are the ones who placed these things, in order to prove to the entire world that the Arabs and Muslims are behind the bombings," he wrote "But because Allah wanted to expose them and their games, the Spanish prime minister declared immediately after the incident that the explosives that were used in these [attacks] were of the same type used by the ETA organization in previous explosions!! This in addition to the U.S. statement that the cassette that was found was not genuine and did not belong to the al-Qaida organization, but had been planted [to implicate] them." Adas repeated the oft-published charge in the Arab world, that Jews were behind the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. "Proof of this is what was broadcast by the Canadian news agency on September 17 ... that prior to the events the CIA had received a report that the Mossad would carry out an attack operation on American territory, in a new attempt to divert attention from the barbaric Israeli operations against the Palestinian people," he said. "Further [proof] of this is the news in the American papers at that time, that 4,000 Jews of American origin who worked at the World Trade Center received instructions from the Mossad not to go to work that day." Adas asserted the U.S. has issued a "heavy blackout" on the results of the Sept. 11 investigations because "America knows very well that the Jews and the Mossad are behind these events." "This is so as not to anger its ally Israel and in order to evade the evil of these Jews and of the Zionist lobby that infiltrates and rules the decision-makers in America," he said. "In addition, the ongoing blaming of the Arabs and Muslims gives America justification to escalate and develop this wild attack on the Muslims, even though it is an imaginary charge not grounded in reality." Adas contended the U.S. used these justifications "as it invaded Iraq, occupied its land, and plundered its resources." He called Israel "the worst terrorist state in the world." "It not only engages in terror in the Palestinian territories but exports it to all the countries of the world," he said. "The Mossad plays its terrorist role by means of these bombings everywhere, as it did previously in America. No one knows who the next victim of these Zionists will be." Israel, he continued, "is not settling for its barbaric massacres of the Palestinian people or the ongoing annihilation of everything Palestinian. - Its crimes are spreading outward so that its hand will reach other innocent peoples. This is with the aim of harming Arabs and Muslims, increasing hatred towards them, and slapping them [with the label of] terrorism, so the world remains preoccupied with terrorism and not with [Israel's] barbaric crimes to eliminate the Palestinian people. Terrorism, Adas claimed, "is an Israeli product that Zionism invented in order to establish the state of Israel. Then this state used it [i.e. terrorism] in order to achieve its goals and aspirations to expand and to control the resources in the region." To Go To Top

WORDS OF AN IMAN IN THE PRISON MINISTRY SYSTEM Posted by David BenAmi, April 23, 2004.

This is a true story and the author, Rick Mathes, is a well known leader in prison ministry. Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the 'Diversification' training seminar were not happy with Rick's way of dealing with the Islamic Imam and exposing the truth about the Muslim's beliefs. I think everyone in the US should be required to read this, but with the liberal justice system, liberal media, and the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized. Please pass this on to all your email contacts. Last month I attended my annual training session that's required for maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of their belief systems. I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say. The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video. After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers. When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked: "Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against the infidels of the world. And, that by killing an infidel, which is a command to all Muslims, they are assured of a place in heaven. If that's the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?" There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation, he replied, "Non-believers!" I responded, "So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can go to Heaven. Is that correct?" The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just gotten caught with his hand in the cookie He sheepishly replied, "Yes." I then stated, "Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Dr. Stanley ordering Protestants to do the same in order to go to Heaven!" The Imam was speechless. I continued, "I also have problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me. Let me ask you a question. Would you rather have your Allah who tells you to kill me in order to go to Heaven or my Jesus who tells me to love you because I am going to Heaven and He wants you to be with me?" You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame. To Go To Top

THE USUAL SUSPECTS ROUND THEMSELVES UP Posted by IsrAlert, April 23, 2004.

The US may actually be departing from a long-held policy, which rewarded terrorism by assuring the Palestinians that no matter how much terror they committed they would eventually get all of their territorial demands met. The Arabs are mobilizing also. See the attached declaration signed so far by 141 organizations and 120 individuals affirming "the full individual and collective inalienable Right to Return of the Palestinian Arab People to their homes, property and land of origin." Note the names of some of the usual suspects. This article is a bulletin from the Right of Return Congress for Palestinian Refugees. It is entitled "International Response To The Bush Declaration On The Palestinian Right To Return." In response to the most recent declaration given by President of the United States, George W. Bush, to Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, on April 14, 2004, at the White House, we, the undersigned affirm the full individual and collective inalienable Right to Return of the Palestinian Arab People to their homes, property and land of origin. We assert in no uncertain terms that such a fundamental right is inviolable as it is based on the unbreakable natural belonging of a people to their property and place of origin, as enshrined in international law. Accordingly, we hold that the Palestinian Right to Return is an indispensable obligatory prerequisite for the achievement of any justice and peace. We consider any attempt to weaken, lessen, or alter such a right in any form through any proclamations or agreements between any parties to be counter to the human, political, civil, and national collective right of the Palestinian Arab People. Hence, such an attempt, along with its implications and ramifications, are null and void in total, regardless of the passage of time and the entities entering into such agreements or issuing such proclamations. On November 2, 1917, Great Britain issued the Balfour Declaration that promised Palestine to a European settler colonial movement, amounting to the inevitable dispossession and exile of the Palestinian people. Today, at a time when another Deir Yassin massacre is carried out in Fallujah in an attempt to cement the US occupation of Iraq, the Bush Administration is simultaneously attempting to complete the Balfour project of 1917 by nullifying the Palestinian Right to Return, and by giving an international cover to the creation of a truncated and walled collection of Bantustans that would normalize and legitimize the process of ethnic cleansing. Recognizing this existential and imminent danger, we stand against this new Balfour Declaration, and reaffirm our unwavering position that the Palestinian Right to Return is an inextricable anchor and prerequisite to full Palestinian self-determination, freedom, and liberty. (This public declaration will be submitted to all members of the UN General Assembly and other relevant parties on May 15, 2004. For endorsement, please write to: responsetobush@yahoo.com) Signatories (in formation): 1. Abnaa Al-Ballad Movement, Palestine 48 2. A'idun Group - Lebanon 3. Al-Awda: Palestine Right to Return Coalition, United Kingdom 4. Al-Awda: Palestine Right to Return Coalition, USA 5. BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights, Bethlehem, Palestine 6. Center for Development, Documentation and Information Palestine 7. Children and Youth Center, Shatila Camp, Lebanon 8. 'Diwans' of Palestinian refugees in the camps of: (1) al-Baq'a, (2) Wehdat, (3) Hussein, (4) Amman, (5) Hittin, (6) al-Awda, (7) Zarqa, (8) Madaba, (9) Souf, (10) Gaza/'Jarash,' (11) al-Hussn, (12) Irbid, Jordan 9. General Union of Palestinian Women - Lebanon 10. High Committee for the Defense of the Palestinian Right of Return and its branches in Palestinian refugee camps and communities in Jordan 11. Houleh Club Association, Borj Al Shamali Camp, Lebanon 12. Nabila Brier Social Foundation, Ain El Helwi Camp, Lebanon 13. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Europe 14. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Jordan 15. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Lebanon 16. Palestine Right of Return Congress, North America 17. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Palestine - Gaza Strip Section 18. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Palestine - West Bank Section 19. Palestine Right of Return Congress, Syria 20. Social Care Association, Ain El Helwi Camp, Lebanon 21. Social Communication Center (Ajyal), Beirut, Lebanon 22. Societies and Diwans of (1) Bir es-Sabe', (2) Lydda, (3) Ramle, (4) Salama, (5) Jaffa; (6) Latroun villages of Emwas, (7) Yalo, (8) Bayt Nuba, Jordan 23. The Abu Jihad AL Wazir Institution, Rashidiya Camp, Lebanon 24. The Committee for the Defense of Palestinian Refugees Rights, Palestine 25. The Forum of Palestinian NGO's Working on Refugee Camps of Lebanon (18 NGO's) 26. The Palestinian Human Rights Organization- PHRO, Lebanon 27. Women's Humanitarian Organization, Borj Al Barajnh, Lebanon 28. 20th of March Movement for Change, Egypt 29. Adala - Canadian Arab Justice Committee, Canada 30. Alawda Magazine, USA 31. Al-Bireh Palestine Society, USA 32. Alexandria Association for Human Rights Advocates, Egypt 33. Alliance for Free Palestine, San Diego State University, USA 34. Al-Shorouq Newspaper- Canada 35. American Muslims for Jerusalem, USA 36. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Greater Sacramento Area Chapter, USA 37. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Los Angeles/Orange County Chapter, USA 38. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter, USA 39. Arab Muslim American Federation, USA 40. Arab National Congress (Al-Mu?tamar Al-Qawmi Al-Arabi) 41. Arab Student Union (UCSD), University of California, San Diego, USA 42. Arab-American Press Guild, USA 43. Birzeit Society, USA 44. Canadian Muslim Forum (CMF), Montreal 45. El Nadim for Victims of Violence, Egypt 46. Free Palestine Alliance, USA 47. Kana?an Review, Palestine/USA 48. Middle East Cultural and Information Center (MECIC), USA 49. Middle East Students Association (USC), University of Southern California, USA 50. Muslim Students Association (CSULB), California State University, Long Beach, USA 51. Muslim Students Association (CSUS), California State University, Sacramento, USA 52. Muslim Students Association (UCD), University of California, Davis, USA 53. National Council of Arab Americans (NCA), USA 54. Niagara Palestinian Association 55. Palestine Aid Society, USA 56. Palestine Community Center-Vancouver, Canada 57. Palestine House Educational and Cultural Center - the 1948 Uprooted Palestinians in Canada 58. Palestine Solidarity Group, Chicago, USA 59. Palestine Solidarity Group, Vancouver, Canada 60. Palestinian American Congress, USA 61. Palestinian American Women's Association of Southern California, USA 62. Society of Arab Students (UCI), University of California, Irvine, USA 63. Students for Justice in Palestine - College of San Mateo, California 64. Students for Justice in Palestine (CSUS), California State University, Sacramento, USA 65. Students for Justice in Palestine (UCB), University of California, Berkeley, USA 66. Students for Justice in Palestine (UCD), University of California, Davis, USA 67. Students for Justice in Palestine (UCLA), University of California, Los Angeles, USA 68. Students for Justice in Palestine (USC), University of Southern California, USA 69. The Egyptian Association against Torture, Egypt 70. The National Institution of Social Care and Vocational Training, lebanon 71. Union of Palestinian American Women, USA 72. United Arab Society at UCLA, University of California, Los Angeles, USA 73. A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition 74. Alternative Perspective Media (APM-RAM), Montreal 75. American Educational Trust, USA 76. Americans for A Just Peace in the Middle East, USA 77. Americans for Justice in Palestine-Israel, USA 78. Arab Cause Solidarity Committe (CSCA), Spain 79. Artists Against the Occupation, International 80. Association for One Democratic State for Palestine/Israel - Colorado Section, USA 81. Bay Area United Against War, USA 82. Bend-Condega Friendship Project 83. Boston Coalition for Palestinian Rights, USA 84. Boston Coalition for Palestinian Rights, USA 85. Caf? Intifada, Los Angeles, CA, USA 86. Campaign for Social Justice, California, USA 87. Colorado Palestine Solidarity Campaign, USA 88. Committee Against the U$ Empire (the CAU$E) 89. Defenders of Peace 90. Educational Alliance for Peace - Marin County, California, USA 91. Fellowship of Reconciliation, Louisville Chapter, Kentucky, USA 92. Friends of Al-Aqsa, Cape Town, South Africa 93. GoodHarvest 94. Hammerhard MediaWorks, Chicago, IL, USA 95. Incorruptible Media 96. International Action Center, USA 97. International Socialist Organization, USA 98. Iraq-U.S.A. Committee (Florence, Italy) 99. Irish Human Rights Coalition (IHRC), USA 100. Islamic Political Party of America, USA 101. Jewish People?s Liberation Organization, Canada 102. Jewish Friends of Palestine Project 103. Jews Against Zionism, London, UK 104. Kentucky Interfaith Taskforce on Latin America and the Caribbean, Louisville, Kentucky, USA 105. Kentucky Taskforce on Latin America and the Caribbean, Louisville, Kentucky, USA 106. Knights of the Socially Conscious, USA 107. LAGAI -- Queer Insurrection, USA 108. Latinos Por La Paz 109. Louisville Committee for Peace in the Middle East, Louisville, Kentucky, USA 110. Marina Drummer- Community Futures Collective, USA 111. Middle East Children?s Alliance, USA 112. Muslim Youth Movement of South Africa 113. National Lawyers Guild--Loyola Law School Chapter, Los Angeles, USA 114. New Jersey Solidarity - Activists for the Liberation of Palestine, New Jersey Solidarity, USA 115. New York Committee to Defend Palestine, USA 116. New Zealand Peace Council 117. Niagara Coalition for Peace 118. Niagara region Human Rights Youth Council 119. Palestine en Marche, France 120. Palestine Solidarity Committee - South Africa 121. Partnership for Civil Justice, Washington, DC, USA 122. Poets for Peace, Hamilton, Ontario - Canada 123. Progressive Workers Organizing Committee, Houston-Galveston, Texas, USA 124. Pueblo Insurgente, Republica Bolivariana de Venazuela 125. Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism (QUIT!), USA 126. Sacramento Area Peace Action, CA, USA 127. Shafiq El-Amin, Chief of Education, United Washitaw Nation 128. SNUR-CGIL Trade Union University of Florence, Italy 129. SOAS PALESTINE SOCIETY 130. Students for Social Justice, Chicago, IL, USA 131. SUSTAIN-St. Louis Chapter, USA 132. SWOP (South Western Ontario Poets), Canada 133. The Freeway Twenty, USA 134. The Independent Anglo-Catholic Church of America, USA 135. The National Coalition to Free the Angola Three, USA 136. The New England Committee to Defend Palestine, USA 137. The Peace Foundation, Aotearoa, New Zealand 138. The West Covina Neighbors for Peace and Justice, USA 139. Third World Forum (UCD), University of California, Davis, USA 140. Tri-Taylor Neighbors for Peace, Chicago, IL, USA 141. U.S. Citizens Against War, Florence, Italy 142. Adel Samara, Ph.D., Kanaan Review, Palestine 143. Adib S. Kawar 144. Afaf Shasha, Ankara 145. Ahmed ElAhwany, Ph.D., Cairo University*, The Egyptian Society of Chem. Engineers, The 20th of March Movement for Democracy, Egypt 146. Albert R. Sonntag, J.D., Ph.D., Attorney, Los Angeles, California, USA 147. Ambassador Hasan Abunimah, Former Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Jordan at the UN* 148. Amina Rachid, Cairo University*, Egypt 149. Ashraf Elbayoumi, Ph.D., Cairo, Egypt 150. Azzam Saad, USA 151. Bahija R?gha?, Canada 152. Ban Al-Wardi, Esq., President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Los Angeles/Orange County, USA 153. Basel Bahhour, ADC-LA/OC, FPA 154. Brian Becker, National Steering Committee, International A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, New York, USA 155. Brian Fry, Justice Coordinator, Congregation of St. Joseph*, Cleveland, USA 156. Carl Messineo, Esq., Partnership for Civil Justice, National Steering Committee, International A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, Washington, D.C., USA 157. David Michael Smith, Ph.D., Professor of Government, College of the Mainland*, Texas, USA 158. Dolly Hishmeh, Board Member, Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 159. Donna M. Joss, Professor Emeritus, Worcester State College, USA 160. Dr. William M Speirs, General Secretary, Scottish Trades Union Congress 161. Edward Tawil 162. Elaine Hagopian, Ph.D., Professor Emerita of Sociology, Simmons College*, Organizer of the April 2000 Right of Return Conference 163. Elias Rashmawi, Right of Return Congress, National Council of Arab Americans, Free Palestine Alliance, A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, USA 164. Elizabeth Mayfield, principal, Axiom Media, Ames, Iowa, USA 165. Eyad Kishawi, Divestment Resources Center, USA 166. Faith Zeadey, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, Worcester State College*, Worcester, MA, USA 167. Gail Harper 168. Haim Bresheeth , Ph.D., Chair of Cultural Studies, School of Cultural and Innovation Studies University of East London, UK 169. Hanna Abulghar, Cairo, Egypt 170. Hasan Hajjaj 171. Hend Abu Farie, Sec., Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 172. Hisham Biltagi, Board Member, Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 173. Hisham Shehadih,Vice Pres., Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 174. Hon. Samy Sharaf, Former Minister of Presidential Affairs, Egypt 175. Husam Abusneineh, Free Palestine Alliance, USA 176. Hussein Agrama, Ph.D. Candidate, Anthropology, Johns Hopkins University*, Washington D.C, USA 177. Isma?il Kamal, Muslim Students? Association - National, Washington, D.C. 178. J. B. Neilands, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, University of California*, Berkeley, USA 179. Jaber Suleiman, Co-founder of Ai'doun, Lebanon 180. Jamil Fayez, M.D., Professor, Washington, D.C 181. Jennifer Winkler, Palestine activist, USA 182. Jess Ghannam, Ph.D., Professor, University of California, San Francisco*, Right of Return Congress, Al-Awda Coalition 183. Joanne Abu Qartoumy, Spokesperson/PR, Union of Palestinian American Women 184. Joe Dibsy, Board Member, Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 185. John Batarseh, President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Greater Sacramento Area Chapter, USA 186. John J. Pilch, Ph.D., Georgetown University*, Washington, DC, USA 187. Joyce Hart, Individual, USA 188. K Amer, Professor, Rowan University 189. Kamal Khalaf Altawil, M.D., Past president of the Arab American University Graduates (AAUG), Past president of the National Arab American Medical Association (NAAMA), Pennsylvania 190. Karen Spence, Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, San Diego, California, USA 191. Karma Nabulsi, Ph.D., Professor Nuffield College*, Oxford University, United Kingdom 192. Khaled Barakat, Al-Shorouq Newspaper, Canada 193. Lara Kiswani, Students for Justice in Palestine, Third World Forum, University of California, Davis 194. Laura Whitehorn, a Jewish supporter of Palestinian Human Rights, New York City, USA 195. Lauren M. Anzaldo, Pensacola, FL 196. Mahdi N. Madani, Manager, Business Development, Madani Net 197. Mahmud Ahmed, Free Palestine Alliance, Louisville, Kentucky, USA 198. Mamdouh Aldimassi, Free Palestine Alliance, California, USA 199. Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Esq., Partnership for Civil Justice, National Steering Committee, International A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, Washington, D.C, USA 200. Margaret Grater, Grater and Associates Educational Consultants 201. Marie Claire 202. Marwan Arikat 203. Mary Nazzal-Batayneh, Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign, Al-Awda New York 204. Masad Arbid, MD, President, Arab-American Press Guild; Kanaan Review 205. Michael Gillespie, Vice Chair (2004), Ames Interfaith Council, Ames, Iowa, USA 206. Michael Shahin, National Lawyers Guild-Loyola Law School Chapter (Los Angeles), Free Palestine Alliance, USA 207. Michel Shehadeh, Free Palestine Alliance, Committee for Justice, USA 208. Miriam M. Reik, PhD, USA 209. Mohamed El Sayed Said, Deputy Director, Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Al Ahram Newspaper, Cairo, Egypt 210. Mohameden Ould-Mey, Ph.D., Indiana State University*, USA 211. Mohammed Dalbah, Journalist, Washington, D.C, USA 212. Mounir Megahed, Democratic Egyptian Engineers, Egypt 213. Mounzer Sleiman, Strategic analyst and writer 214. Moutaz Herzallah, National Board Member, Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 215. Mujid Kazimi 216. Muna Coobti, Esq., International Action Center, Free Palestine Alliance, California, USA 217. Munir Akash, Editor, Jusoor (Bridges), The Arab American Journal of Cultural Exchange 218. Musa Al-Hindi, Palestine Right of Return Congress, Al-Awda Coalition, Nebraska, USA 219. Mysoon Shaath, Executive Member, The General Union of Palestinian Women 220. Nader Abuljebein, Writer, Palestine Right of Return Congress, Free Palestine Alliance, USA 221. Nahla Assali, President of Project Loving Care\Jerusalem 222. Najeh Shahin 223. Naseer Aruri, Ph.D., President, Trans Arab Research Institute, USA 224. Nicolas A. Sayegh, Chomedey, Laval QC 225. Nizar Sakhnini, Palestinian writer and activist, Canada 226. Omar A. Sebakhy, President, Alexandria Association of Human Rights Advocates, Egypt 227. Omar Barghouti, Philosophy Ph.D. Student, Activist & Dance Choreographer 228. Peter Eglin, Professor of Sociology, Wilfrid Laurier University*, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 229. Peter Phillips, Director, Project Censored, Sonoma State University*, California, USA 230. Philip Gasper, Ph.D., Professor and Chair, Department of Philosophy & Religion, Notre Dame de Namur University*, Belmont, CA, USA 231. Polly Sylvia, New York Committee to Defend Palestine 232. Prof. Haim Bresheeth, Chair of Cultural Studies, School of Cultural and Innovation Studies University of East London, UK 233. Prof. Nicholas Camerota, Springfield, Massachusetts, USA 234. Rahman Khan, Chairman, Muslim Voters of America 235. Ramiz Rafeedie, ADC-SF, Free Palestine Alliance, USA 236. Randa Farah, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, Canada 237. Rev. Mary Pat Foster, USA 238. Reverend Mother Marcy J. Gordon, Public Intellectuals for Social and Spare Change, USA 239. Richard Becker, Western Region Coordinator, International Action Center, San Francisco, California, USA 240. Rima Anabtawi, founding member of Al-Awda, member of the Right of Return Congress. 241. Robert Kirkconnell, Veterans for Peace, Academics for Justice, Palestine Media Watch, USA 242. Said Abu Qartoumy, President, Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 243. Salem Elhuyazel, Sec., Palestinian American Congress, Southern California, USA 244. Salman Abu Sitta, Ph.D., General Coordinator, Palestine Right of Return Congress 245. Samantha Liapes, Jews for a Free Palestine, USA 246. Samia A. Halaby, USA 247. Samia Saleh, Al-Awda, Washington, DC, USA 248. Senan Khairie, Al-Awda, ADC-SF, Free Palestine Alliance 249. Shafiq El-Amin, Chief of Education, United Washitaw Nation 250. Shouki Kassis, Ph.D., Board member, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Greater Philadelphia Chapter, Pennsylvania 251. Sonallah Ibrahim, writer, Egypt 252. Tarik F. Kazaleh, Oakland, USA 253. Tom Hayes, Columbus, Ohio 254. Waleed Bader, Arab Muslim American Federation, USA 255. Wardeh Abdelmuti,Vice Pres., Union of Palestinian American Women 256. Yacoub E. Yacoub, MD, Chair of ADC-KY Chapter 257. Younis Aljazarah, Right of Return Congress, Chicago, USA 258. Yousef Abudayyeh, Co-Chair Middle East Cultural and Information Center, San Diego, California 259. Zahi Damuni, Ph.D., Palestine Right of Return Congress Co-Founder, Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, San Diego, California 260. Zeina Zaatari, Ph.D., University of California, Davis*, USA 261. Zuhair Sabbagh, Ph.D., Birzeit University, Palestine * For identification only. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

HUMAN RIGHTS TEAM ON THE CHAD/SUDAN BORDER FINDS A "REIGN OF TERROR" Posted by Eric Reeves, April 23, 2004.

For current news analysis on Sudan by Eric Reeves, go to: http://freeworldnow.blogspot.com Reuters is discreet in registering its journalistic coup, but in speaking of a UN human rights investigative report on Darfur, "obtained by Reuters on Wednesday [April 21, 2004]," Reuters is revealing a truly extraordinary document, one that had unconscionably been suppressed by the UN Human Rights Commission. The UN investigative report finds, on the basis of its recent 10-day assessment along the Chad/Sudan border, that "[Khartoum's regular] troops and Arab militias appear to have launched a reign of terror against black Africans in Sudan's western Darfur region," and that the investigative team has found compelling evidence of "human rights abuses, war crimes, and crimes against humanity" (Reuters, April 21, 2004). To understand how significant this is document is, and how shockingly expedient its suppression has been, we must bear in mind the forces at play here. Khartoum's National Islamic Front regime had bargained forcefully for the continued withholding of this document by the UN. Indeed, Khartoum has finally granted (at least nominally) access inside Darfur to the previously obstructed UN human rights investigative team, but only in return for suppression of the team's report from the Chad/Sudan border. The purpose here was to ensure that in today's debate about Khartoum's human rights record, especially in Darfur, this document would not be part of the evidence considered. The UN expediently went along with this deal in order to obtain access to Darfur for its human rights investigative team. As Reuters reports in its April 21, 2004 dispatch: "Some diplomats say the Sudanese pledge late on Monday to let the [UN human] rights team in may have been intended to delay presentation of the report and influence the outcome of a vote on Sudan in the Commission, due on Thursday [April 22, 2004]." (Reuters, April 21, 2004) Human Rights Watch, which is present in Geneva where the UN Human Rights Commission is today scheduled to take up the issue of Khartoum's human rights record, immediately caught on to this shameful bargaining, and in a press release of yesterday circumspectly, but unambiguously, declared: "Unexpectedly, the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights decided yesterday [April 20, 2004] not to release its report [of the UN human rights investigative team] on Darfur to the Commission, which on Friday will conclude its annual six-week session. The decision came at the same time as a move by the Sudanese government, which had denied the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights access to the country for the past two weeks, to finally grant it travel authorization. The Sudanese government had allegedly called for a delay in the release, arguing that the report would be 'incomplete' without a visit to Sudan." As Joanna Weschler, Human Rights Watch's U.N. Representative more forcefully declared: "Denying the United Nations access is one of the delaying tactics the Sudanese government is using to pull the wool over the eyes of the international community. The [UN] High Commissioner [for Human Rights] office has an obligation to present the best available information on Darfur to the Commission while it is still in session" (Human Rights Watch [Geneva], April 21, 2004). What Reuters is able to convey of the now-revealed UN report comports fully with the findings of other human rights investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group, humanitarian organizations, and journalists. The UN team found the same savage weapons of war on civilians, in particular the African tribal groups of the region, primarily the Fur, Massaleit, and Zaghawa: "rape, pillage, torture, murder and arson in villages and towns across Darfur, as well as attacks by helicopter gunships and by aircraft dropping bombs" (Reuters, April 21, 2004). It cannot be stressed too often that the only aerial military assets in the Darfur conflict belong to Khartoum, and that Antonov bombers are actually retrofitted cargo planes, with a highly limited accuracy that makes them primarily weapons for attacks on civilian targets. We must also recall that Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group and others have found numerous, independently confirming reports of close military coordination between Khartoum's regular forces and its Arab militia allies (the Janjaweed), and that these reports relentlessly highlight the vicious racial/ethnic animus in what is overwhelmingly civilian destruction. But still there is something of particular importance in a UN investigative body finding in Darfur a "reign of terror" and compelling evidence of "human rights abuses, war crimes, and crimes against humanity" (Reuters, April 21, 2004). Insofar as the UN claims to be the embodiment of the international community, these findings have both special authority and impose special obligations. If the UN shirks these obligations, and doesn't demonstrate itself worthy of this authority, then its claims about embodying the "international community" are deeply morally compromised. That the first response of the UN was one of shameful expediency---a withholding of the report of its own human rights investigative team as part of some under-the-table deal with Khartoum---is already deeply dismaying and profoundly undermines the credibility of the UN generally, but particularly in its response to the Darfur catastrophe. This expediency also calls into question the integrity of UN responses going forward in responding to "crimes against humanity" in Darfur, indeed genocide. There are immediate steps the UN can take to correct this present course of expediency. If "crimes against humanity" are indeed being committed in Darfur, an area the size of France, then it will take a great many more than the five persons of the present UN investigative team. The UN and others in the international community must demand an immediate and highly substantial increase in both personnel and logistical support. If access is threatened by security concerns in some areas, the UN must be willing to deploy the military forces that can protect human rights investigators---and humanitarian assessment workers, if access is ever secured (Khartoum has twice now denied such access, even as the humanitarian crisis continues sliding towards utter catastrophe). The urgency guiding the investigating team must be dramatically increased, and the mandate very substantially expanded as well. This is especially true in light of highly credible reports of impending exterminations in the concentration camps for displaced African populations. The numerous and highly credible reports of Khartoum's efforts to conceal evidence of genocidal destruction in Darfur also require an increased urgency and dramatically expanded mandate. And again, this can only be accomplished with a much larger, more robust, and fully equipped and well-protected human rights investigating team. There must also be a full complement of appropriate Arabic-speaking translators who have no connection to the Khartoum regime and who will not be at risk when UN personnel depart the areas of investigation. Further, the team must be prepared to stay as long as the investigation warrants: Khartoum cannot be allowed to impose any artificial deadline. Senior UN officials have previously described the realities of Darfur as "scorched-earth" warfare leading to "ethnic cleansing"; the present UN investigating team reports "crimes against humanity," as does Human Rights Watch: "Hundreds of thousands of people have been victims of crimes against humanity committed by government forces and allied militias, and many are currently concentrated in camps and settlements around the major towns, where they continue to be attacked and looted by government-backed militias" (Human Rights Watch press release [Geneva], April 21, 2004) There can be no deadline for this investigation that is governed by anything other than the gravity of these monstrous crimes. Here we must bear in mind that the UN has recently increased its estimate of those displaced in Darfur to over 1 million, with an additional population of well over 100,000 having fled into Chad (UN Integrated Regional Information Networks [al-Fashir], April 19, 2004). This enormous population is at the most acute risk, both from military predations (which continue to be reported in large numbers, despite the April 8, 2004 cease-fire signed by Khartoum) and from the growing threat of famine and disease (see the terrifying assessment from the US Agency for International Development, predicting a major famine by November/December 2004 (US AID "Projected Mortality Rates in Darfur, Sudan 2004-05" (data at http://www.usaid.gov/locations/subsaharan_africa/sudan/cmr_darfur.pdf). These vast numbers, the repeated finding of "crimes against humanity" by the UN and Human Rights Watch, and others, and the compelling evidence that these brutal realities of human destruction and displacement in aggregate constitute genocide---all demand that the investigation in Darfur be dramatically increased in size, be guided by a much greater sense of urgency, and have a mandate to investigate all credible reports of human rights abuses, "ethnic cleansing," "crimes against humanity," and genocide. Khartoum's clear efforts to conceal these crimes must also be vigorously investigated. This is what should be done. But what will be done? An answer here must confront the clear prospect that the Khartoum regime will, in light of the disclosure of this deeply damning report, simply deny access to the UN human rights investigative team presently in the region. The pretext for denial will certainly be outright prevarication, wrapped in an unctuous self-righteousness. But unless the UN and the international community are prepared to respond immediately, the regime's decision will govern. This will provide terrifying incentive for Khartoum to accelerate its campaign of human destruction and the obliterating of as much evidence as possible evidence of genocide. Another possibility is that Khartoum will nominally grant "access" to the UN human rights team, but work to curtail meaningful access. Various locations will be denied because of "insecurity"---as determined by Khartoum. There will be contrived logistical problems. There are a host of measures by which Khartoum can undermine the integrity of this investigation. But the only acceptable response by the UN and the international community, in light of all that is known and for which there is highly credible evidence, is to begin an unfettered investigation immediately with the team presently in the region and prepared to move into Darfur, and to insist on a dramatic increase in the size of the investigating team and to expand the mandate guiding the investigation. Above all, there must be a dramatic increase in urgency: Khartoum's obstructionism, delaying tactics, and time-consuming hindrances must be swept away by clear international resolve to halt "ethnic cleansing," "crimes against humanity," and genocide. If Khartoum refuses to accept immediate entrance of a large, mobile, fully logistically supported investigating team, such a team must be moved into Darfur under substantial international military protection. Such a military force should also be large enough to begin the critical process of protecting those civilians at greatest risk: the African populations in the concentration camps controlled by the Janjaweed (see previous dispatches on these camps by from this writer; available upon request). There are highly credible and extremely alarming reports that the populations in these camps are at risk of "extermination." Given the utterly defenseless situation of these people, huge numbers can be killed in a very short period of time---either violently, or by the total denial of water and food. Conditions conducive to such extermination are already being reported in a number of camps. This is the very moment of truth for Darfur, for the UN, and for the entire international community. Either we intervene to stop what all evidence suggests is genocide, or we will be acquiescing in the continuing perpetration of this ultimate crime. We will also be accepting Khartoum's brutal obduracy in trying to conceal its crimes. Is there an "international community?" We will soon find out; the signs are not encouraging. Eric Reeves is at Smith College in Northampton, MA. He can be contacted at ereeves@smith.edu To Go To Top

HOW THE WASHINGTON POST'S TURNS STATISTICS INTO LIES AGAINST ISRAEL Posted by Leo Rennert, April 23, 2004.

These were the letters I sent to the Washington Post about Anderson's article "Israel's Problems." 1. LETTER TO EDITOR John Ward Anderson cites Israel's "economic downturn" and the "continuing violence" as factors in a decline in immigration ("Fewer Come to Israel, And Many Are Leaving" Apr. 23). That might have been a truer picture a couple of years ago at the height of the intifada, but conditions today are significantly less bleak. According to Israel's central bank, Israel is on a path toward 3.4 percent economic growth this year, after a 1.3 percent rise last year. These numbers stand in marked contrast to annual negative growth of nearly 1 percent in 2001 and 2002. The "downturn" ended after that period. A significant drop in suicide bombings and civilian casualties also led to a rebound in tourism, with Israeli revenues from that source jumping 24 percent last year. Israel is far from out of the woods and unemployment remains high. But it has coped remarkably well under the most trying challenges. In gauging its well-being, immigration statistics are a poor barometer since they often reflect conditions beyond its borders, such as surges in attacks on Jews in various countries. For example, Jewish emigration from France to Israel is on the rise -- for rather obvious reasons. 2. LETTER ON GRAPHICS In addition to the points raised in my letter, I want to call your attention to the highly misleading graphic accompanying Anderson's story. It's been often said that statistics and lies are not mutually exclusive, especially when there's very selective use of statistics. When that happens a graphic -- with an immediate visual bang -- creates an even greater distortion. There are two specific things wrong with the graphic: 1. Putting a bar for 2004 immigration levels at the far end of the graphic makes it appear at first blush (and that's as far as most readers probably will go) that current rates really are headed for the basement. Your excuse undoubtedly would be that the two figures represented by the '04 bar reflect only immigration levels in the first 2 or 3 months of this year and there are couple of footnotes (in very small type) that say so. But that doesn't wash. Visually (and that's the key test of a graphic), the '04 bar is immensely more visible than the two asterisks and the barely visible footnotes. 2. By carefully selecting the years depicted in the graphic, you create a further distortion. Again, the two huge, skyscraper bars at the left represent a visual baseline. The immediate (and probably sole) impact on the reader is WOW! -- Israel's really losing it on immigration because after those 2 years (1990 and 1991), everything's going downhill. No mention in the graphic that these 2 years are highly unrepresentative since they reflect the huge exodus of Jews to Israel immediately after the fall of the Soviet Union. I know the story mentions this, but a graphic ought to have its own integrity. You also would argue, I'm sure, that to the left of the Soviet-exodus bars, there's a 1989 bar that shows a much smaller level of immigration. But visually, the reader has to make a much closer examination of the graphic to get to that point. It would have been more honest to go back a bit farther in history and show the much more modest immigration levels during the entire 80s decade. Instead of a one-sided downhill pattern, the graphic would have shown a bell curve. But that, of course, would have ruined the Israel-on-the-ropes impression you sought to create. FOR SHAME! To Go To Top

PA CONTINUES TO DENY ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO EXIST Posted by Eliezar Edwards, April 23, 2004.

This was a news item on Arutz-7 (www.israelnationalnews.com). Contrary to popular perception, the Palestine Liberation Organization - the forerunner of the Palestinian Authority - has never changed its charter declaring Israel has no right to exist. The PLO's "foreign minister," Farouk Kaddoumi, said as much this week to the Jordanian newspaper Al-Arab. The fact that the charter was never changed is a little-known truth. In April 1996, the Peres government allowed many terrorists to enter Israel for a much-heralded three-day Palestinian National Council (PNC) session on the issue of changing the PLO charter. The clauses calling for Israel's destruction were to be removed, and afterwards, then-Prime Minister Peres called the outcome "the most important development in the last 100 years." In fact, however, as even left-wing politicians later said, what actually occurred was only a bureaucratic decision by the PNC to establish a committee to discuss the matter. Professor Yehoshua Porat, who ran for Knesset on the left-wing Meretz party ticket, said at the time that the entire affair was "an act of deception," and that since Peres "was able to accept the 'changing' of the Palestinian charter as 'the most important event in the last 100 years,' he should not be the one to conduct the negotiations [with them]." The PLO's Kaddoumi also said that Israel should not expect less terrorism if it withdraws from Gaza. Kaddoumi said, according to a Jerusalem Post report, "If Israel wants to leave the Gaza Strip, then it should do so. This means that the Palestinian resistance has forced it to leave. But the resistance will continue. Let the Gaza Strip be South Vietnam. We will use all available methods to liberate North Vietnam." To Go To Top

I SELL CLOTHES WITH JEWISH SAYINGS IN ARABIC Posted by Ronnie Schreiber, April 23, 2004.

I think you'll get a chuckle out of my latest designs. Maybe you could even give me a plug and help a nice Jewish boy pay his rent (or more actually help me pay back my brother who lent me money to pay my rent). I'm selling apparel embroidered with Zionist and Jewish sayings in Arabic. These are what I currently have available: "Am Yisrael Chai" - The Jewish Nation lives "Jew" "Jewess" "Al Kufr" - The Infidel "Dhimmi? Not Any More!" "Ma Fish Falastin" - There Is No Palestine "Israel Defense Force" "Moshe Emmet V'Torahto Emmet" - Moses Is True & His Torah Is True "There Is No God But YKWH And Moses Is His Messenger" "YKWH Akbar" The actual URL is http://www.rokemneedlearts.com/abrahamicapparel/, though the easiest link to remember is www.proudzionist.com , where there's a link to the apparel page. The genesis of these designs started on the campus of Wayne State University, where my son, Moshe, is an engineering student. Talking with him and other Jewish students I discovered that identifiably Jewish students on that campus, for example those who wear a Kippah on their head or a Chai or Star of David pendant around their neck, know the Arabic word for Jew, al Yahud. Wayne State, located in Detroit, Michigan, not far from Dearborn, has one of the largest Arab and Muslim student populations of any American college campus and it seems that many Arab students like to mutter "al Yahud" at Jewish students as they pass by. Simply put, because of the aggressive attitude of Arabs, Muslims and others who support the 'Palestinian' cause, American campuses have become a hostile environment for Jewish students and other supporters of Israel. Abrahamic Apparel is intended to provide some chizuk, support for those students and other Jews and supporters of Israel and allow them to show their Jewish pride and support for Israel in a language that literally the mutterers will understand. Thanks. To Go To Top

FRIENDLY EGYPT Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 23, 2004.

EGYPT WASN'T ENTITLED TO SINAI The Sinai was not an official part of Egypt. In 1905, Turkey made the Sinai a protectorate of Britain, and Britain let Egypt administer the Sinai. To go from the Sinai to Egypt, a Bedouin needed a visa. From the Sinai, Egypt kept making war on Israel. In self-defense, Israel captured the Sinai (and invested a lot in it). At that time, Egypt was unable to make war on Israel. Israel had no need to cede the Sinai to Egypt. The cession taught the Arabs to demand territory that the Jewish state had won at heavy sacrifice. Now they ask, why shouldn't Syria get from Israel the kind of deal that Egypt got (Avraham Shmuel Lewin interview of Shmuel Katz, Israeli nationalist theoretician in Jewish Press, 4/16, p.52). It's not the same thing. The Sinai had not been part of the Jewish homeland, but the Golan had been and was scheduled to be part of the Mandate for a Jewish national home but was not made such for political reasons. Now Egypt again is preparing for invading Israel through the Sinai. Astoundingly, PM Sharon is planning to let Egyptian forces come nearer to Gaza. EGYPT AND SAUDI ARABIA WORRY ISRAEL Israel is concerned over the growing military might of Egypt and S. Arabia. Their forces burgeon with advanced US technology. Egypt got more than $30 billion worth free from the US (besides economic aid). It spends additional sums on expanding its military. Israel got a little more, but consumed much of it in warfare (IMRA, 4/15). Egypt is partly responsible for that warfare. It encourages the P.A. to continue its war of attrition against Israel. Many people suppose that the P.A. is not an existential threat to Israel. It is. This is one way. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

AMERICAN PROMISES Posted by David Ben-Ami, April 23, 2004.

In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower made commitments in order to get Israel to withdraw from the Sinai. In 1967, President Lyndon Johnson failed to implement those commitments and the Six-Day War followed. In 1970, President Richard Nixon made promises to end the war of attrition between Israel and Egypt. Egypt violated the agreement, and the United States failed to live up to its commitments. The 1973 Yom Kippur War followed, which killed 2,800 Israelis. In 1996 and again in 1998, President Bill Clinton promised to refrain from pressuring Israel into making further concessions until the Palestinian Authority altered its Charter that calls for the elimination of Israel. The Charter was not altered, but Israel was expected to honor its promises. In 2000, Clinton committed $800 million in special assistance to induce Israel to withdraw from Southern Lebanon. Israel withdrew, and Hezbollah quickly filled the geographic and military vacuum, increasing terrorist attacks. The promised U.S. assistance never arrived. Now, President George W. Bush has made a new commitment to Israel. The depth of the problem is revealed in a new study by the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace, which has been examining what the next generation of Egyptian children are learning about Israel. In Egypt's regular and religious educational system, the books celebrate jihad, or Islamic war, and exalt those who die in the fight against "non-believers." The center says jihad is described in military terms, not as a spiritual endeavor as so many Muslim leaders claim. "Jihad is encouraged and those who refrain from taking part in it are denounced," says the report. This is in a country that has a formal peace treaty with Israel and whose president, Hosni Mubarak, recently visited with Bush at his Texas ranch and is referred to as a "moderate" and friend of America. To Go To Top

U.S. SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL NOT DEPENDENT ON WITHDRAWAL Posted by Bryna Berch, April 23, 2004.

I understand Sharon finally said he'd resign if the referendum went against him. Is that a promise? Is there a nice way to say Sharon is lying, lying, lying? Read this news item from Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com)/ Prime Minister Sharon's warning yesterday that the rejection of his disengagement plan by the Likud would jeopardize the American promises he recently received is not backed up by American officials - on more than one front. On the one hand, American officials say that U.S. friendship with Israel is permanent and not dependent on a particular event. On the other hand, a State Department spokesperson says that some of the things Sharon views as "promises" are really nothing more than "suggestions" and "observations." Prime Minister Sharon told the Knesset yesterday, "Whoever continues to object to the disengagement plan, let it be clear to him that he is taking upon himself the responsibility of canceling all the American commitments... If the plan is not approved, the agreement [with the Americans] is no longer valid..." Further implying that the American commitments will guarantee Israel's future, the Prime Minister said, "Whoever wants to prevent Israel from being flooded with [Arab] refugees; whoever wants to maintain large settlement blocs under our control forever... - whoever wants all this, must support the disengagement plan." However, Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA asked Paul Patin, U.S. Embassy Spokesman in Tel Aviv, if it is true that America's commitments to Israel's survival are conditioned on Israel implementing the disengagement plan. Patin replied, "Our commitment to Israel is long standing and philosophical, as well as political, and is based on our shared values as well as our shared interests, and is unshakable." On the other hand, a State Department official told IsraelNationalTV.com correspondent Shlomo Blass that the U.S. has not promised as much as Sharon seems to be implying. Blass asked, "Is it true that the U.S. supports Israel's position according to which Jewish settlement blocs such as Gush Etzion and Ariel, will remain under Israeli sovereignty in the final-status agreement?" The State Department official said: "What we are saying, and this is the official White House position, is that any decision regarding the final demarcation of borders will have to be made by the parties themselves... The President said that it would not be realistic to *expect* [emphasis by the spokesperson] that the final-status agreement would include a full [Israeli] withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines... and that these issues would be solved by the sides, period." President Bush himself said the same last week: "All final status issues must still be negotiated between the parties." Blass then asked, "What of Bush's support, as expressed in his letter to Prime Minister Sharon, for the Israeli position that Arab refugees would not return to [pre-1967] Israel?" The State Dept official said: "This is the same type of question. Basically the comments that were made on this issue were a suggestion. All options remain on the table. It was more like an observation." Commentator Caroline Glick, writing in the Jerusalem Post today, sums up: "What this means, as Colin Powell and others have been keen to point out, is that although Bush did state that the US thinks it would be unrealistic to have the so-called Palestinian refugees overrun Israel in the framework of an agreement, Bush did not commit the US to preventing it from happening." Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also warned today that if the plan is rejected, "there will be negative ramifications for Israel diplomatically, economically, and militarily." MK Gilad Erdan, one of the plan's leading opponents in the Likud, said, "Olmert has done us a favor. By issuing such groundless statements and warnings, he is reaffirming our sense that he and his team are beginning to panic." The disengagement-from-Gaza plan calls for Israel to withdraw its forces and evacuate its 8,000 residents by the end of 2005, abandoning the area to the control of the Palestinian Authority with no reciprocal security commitments on the PA's part. The nearly 200,000 card-carrying members of the Likud will vote on the plan on May 2. Mr. Sharon originally said he would abide by the referendum's results - but yesterday, following well-publicized news of a drop in support for the plan, he said otherwise. Sharon told the Knesset that the referendum has "public/moral," rather than "legal," standing, and that in any event the only two bodies with the authority to approve and authorize the plan are the Cabinet and Knesset. To Go To Top

I AM NO LONGER USING AOL Posted by Steven Schwartz, April 22, 2004.

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, my email address is .... One of the major reasons that I changed providers is that AOL has referred to Israel as a nation of "social injustice" . Go to: WWW.aol.com Go to "Find It Fast" Click on "Travel " Go to "Travel Search" WRITE IN: "Israel" HOWEVER, THIS is what you get when you look up Syria: "Admittedly, Syria is still on the US State Department's list of the seven countries sponsoring terrorism, but don't let that put you off." To Go To Top

IS DEMOCRACY POSSIBLE IN IRAQ? Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, April 22, 2004.

From time to time, passions of humankind focus on some tricky question. For a about a century since Percival Lowell found Martian "canals", we kept guessing whether there was life on Mars. When the answer became more or less obvious, we bravely expanded the scope of the mystery. Now we ache to know if we are alone in the universe. The universe is vast; as far as our space travel technology goes, we haven't yet invented the wheel. Therefore, the mystery of our solitude has an excellent chance to keep puzzling us for generations to come. But current events, totally unrelated to astronomy, have directed our collective inquisitiveness to an even more intriguing question: Is democracy possible in Iraq? I can tell you right away that Mars is lifeless; that, for all practical purposes, we are completely alone in the universe; and that democracy in Iraq is not only possible in principle, but practically achievable as well. All we need to do to implement it is move all Arabs from Iraq, including, if possible, Kuwait, to Saudi Arabia, and beg Israel to annex the vacated territory. That's the only way, which is unfortunate, since President Bush's strategy in the Middle East is based on two assumptions. The first one states that deep down Arabs are not that different from us and, therefore, crave the same type of freedom we cherish so much. The other says that any democracy is automatically peaceful and full of eternal love towards these United States. Credo quia absurdum - Christians do it now and then. For us, democracy is merely a way to live free. In order to understand the roots of our freedom, let us conduct an experiment. Suppose, someone in your presence brazenly calls President Bush a moron, while you strongly believe that he is in fact one of the brightest people in the entire generation of baby-boomers. Suppose also that, instead of calmly conveying every proof of our president's superior intellect that you may have at your disposal, you announce to the offender that he has no right to insult out Commander-in-Chief, especially now that the war is going on. Your opponent may choose either of the two avenues to defend himself: he can refer to the First Amendment that guarantees his sacred right to badmouth any elected official, or he can add insult to injury by simply laughing in your face. The latter mode of defense should be interpreted as a reiteration of the fact that he is a free citizen of a free country and, therefore, has a sacred, inalienable right to revile any person he wants, as long as there is no danger of a libel suit resulting from such exercise of his basic freedoms. This raises a deep, philosophical problem: is our attitude towards personal freedom a mere derivative of the First Amendment or, vice versa, the First Amendment is just an expression of our deeply rooted love for freedom? What was there first, the chicken or the egg? At first glance, the First Amendment was first; otherwise, why call it First rather that something else? But at first glance the earth looks flat. Let us recall that the Soviet constitution promised all the same rights as ours, and yet, every time a Soviet citizen had an urge to say "Oy!", he felt compelled to look around him for fear of being overheard and reported to the proper authorities. On the other hand, in Israel, they don't have a constitution now and aren't planning to get one any time soon, and yet, it is much safer there to berate Ariel Sharon than to extol him. Realistically speaking, we can expect that some day Iraq will adopt a constitution that will be based on the sharia laws but, nevertheless, will mandate periodic elections. At best, Iraqi democracy will reach the level of its Egyptian version; most likely, it will be no better than the Syrian one. That is a pretty narrow range of possibilities. But what does it have to do with us? How does it affect our lives? By what criteria can we consider it a victory? Let's not forget that every person has one's own concept of freedom. Several years ago, when the Soviet Union was undergoing perestroika that ultimately led to its collapse, I happened to be present at a conversation between a Black Muslim and a recent immigrant from the USSR. The Black Muslim wanted to know if there was more freedom under the Gorbachev's rule. The Russian explained that Moscow used to be a tranquil city where one could carelessly wander anywhere at all, unconcerned about his or her personal safety, while lately incidents of innocent people getting shot became more and more common. The follower of Lois Farrakhan was satisfied: "So, there is more freedom now." Our own concept of freedom is rather simple: let everyone live the way they like as long as they don't prevent others from doing the same. Unfortunately, our definition of freedom is by no means universal. When the Soviet Union fell apart, sweet freedom briefly visited the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan. The suddenly free citizens began merrily doing what had been an unfulfilled dream for many generations of Azeris: killing Armenians. People were burned alive; pregnant women's bellies were cut open; children too young to be raped were thrown out of windows. Inevitably, it was accompanied by looting, but mostly the people were motivated by their pure love for the murder of the defenseless. Today, Baku is as orderly as Damascus. They have a constitution; they hold elections; their current president is the son of the previous one who had begun his statesman's career as a KGB general. Do you think democracy is possible in Azerbaijan? In 1979, during a failed attempt to rescue American hostages in Tehran, several US military personnel were killed. Their charred remains were for days exhibited in front of the American embassy, target of insults and mutilation. Do you think Iran will ever crave for our kind of freedom? In 1993, a mob of armed savages in Mogadishu managed to shoot down an American helicopter. Bodies of our servicemen were dragged along the streets for several days, while elated Somalis celebrated their historic achievement by mutilating them in front of cameras. Can you imagine democracy in Somalia? In 2000, two Israeli reservists lost their way and ended up in Ramallah. Civilized people, they naively tried to seek help from the local police. A mob of young Arabs easily forced their way into the precinct and tore the two apart with their bare hands. An Italian photographer happened to be nearby, and some images of the event were published. I remember how terrified I was by the contrast between the pure, sweet joy on the faces of Arab youths and the blood of their victims on their hands. Compared to that, the distribution of sweets in the streets of Ramallah marking the successful Arab attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, looked as a Thanksgiving Day parade compared to the funeral procession of Dr. Rantisi. Do you believe democracy is possible in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria as long as they are controlled by Arabs? A similar event recently granted international fame to the completely unnecessary Iraqi town of Falluja. On occasion of war, plenty of reporters were at hand, and unforgettable images of Arab freedom made it to every newspaper, every news report around the world: happy young people tearing apart burned corpses of murdered Americans. Do you believe democracy can be compatible with cannibalism? Do you think American soldiers should sacrifice their lives to achieve that fleeting objective? While you are thinking of a possible answer, please take into account that a society cannot be free even in theory unless it is based on the foundation of mutual tolerance. Consider that the intolerance inherent in Islam is more murderous than the variety that formed the basis of the Nazi ideology. Do not forget that Islam has been doing its non-stop brainwashing roughly 120 times longer than the Third Reich existed. Think how difficult it must be for a person born into slavery and dreaming of becoming a slave owner, to realize that a slave owner cannot be free in principle until he frees every single human being he owns, but first he has to arrive to that conclusion theoretically and then grow to understand its practical necessity, so the slaves have a better chance of becoming free if they take matters in there own hands, but there is no hope for it because they dream not of freedom but of owning slaves. A few good people will object that only a few bad people took part in the celebration of American deaths in Falluja, while the absolute majority of Iraqis not only abstained from but also disapproved of it. The opinion that every nation is basically good is wide spread among members of good nations. Bad nations do not share that superstition. I'd like the good people to specify exactly what symptoms led them to conclude that there was any opposition to cannibalism at all in Iraq. If such opposition really exists beyond the limits of good people's imagination, it did not manifest itself with even a faint wisper. Therefore, we can confidently state that Falluja incident shamed not just those who proudly posed for the cameras with broad smiles on their stupid, happy faces, but the entire Islam. This sad conclusion casts doubts on the entire US strategy in the Middle East. Common sense demands that mortal enemies must be destroyed rather than democratized. And while showing mercy to the enemy is no doubt a noble and laudable thing, it is only appropriate after the enemy has been defeated beyond any possibility of rising against us ever again. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com To Go To Top

NOAM FEDERMAN - THE FIGHT FOR ISRAEL'S SOUL Posted by Jonathan Pollard, April 22, 2004.

This article comes from Independent Media Review Analysis (IMRA) and is stored at http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=20518. Ir was written by Jonathan Pollard who is in FCI, Butner, North Carolina. The imprisonment of Noam Federman, without recourse to due process, blurs the moral distinction between Israel and her non-democratic neighbors in the region. If, without having broken any law, Federman can be deprived of his freedom, his family and his livelihood indefinitely, merely because his belief system differs from that of the largely non-religious, non-nationalist political and security establishment, then no citizen of Israel is safe from persecution. The State of Israel came into being upon the ashes of the Holocaust - which witnessed the humiliation, incarceration and murder of 6 million Jews. The new state was conceived as a haven for Jews, a place where we could finally live without fear of being hunted or persecuted for our beliefs. The incarceration of Noam Federman calls into question the very raison d' etre of the State of Israel. Federman has committed no crime. He was never indicted, never tried. But he has been jailed for two successive terms in "administrative detention" and subjected to the harshest conditions the Israeli penal system can mete out. Administrative detention, a hold-over from the period of the British Mandate in Palestine, is an odious device which allows the State to imprison an individual - without charging him - for up to six months. Every six months the order can be renewed so that an individual can be incarcerated indefinitely without due process. Federman's detention order has just been renewed for another six- month term. If Federman is guilty of anything, it is of being an outspoken religious nationalist, and for many, a symbol of the nationalist camp. Are his religious and political convictions now reason to lock him away without charges? To afflict him? To deprive his family of husband and father? To prevent him from earning a livelihood? To cancel all social security benefits for his wife and children - a punishment that even the families of (Israeli) Arab suicide bombers are not subjected to? According to the political and security establishment in Israel, the answer is "yes." They regard Federman's beliefs as a threat to Israel's national security. For them, that is sufficient reason to keep him locked up indefinitely, without indictment or trial -effectively denying him the right to ever challenge his incarceration in a court of law. Federman is monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. His visits with his wife and children (only 2 visits have been permitted in the last 7 months) were overpowered by the presence of 5 Shabak agents standing over them and listening to every word they spoke. He is housed with dangerous, anti-Israel Arabs and terrorists, and handled as if he were as much a threat to the State as any one of them. The imprisonment of a nation begins with the unjust detention of a single individual. Federman's plight and that of his family is not a private ordeal. It is a test for the entire nation. If Israel ceases to serve the reason for which the State was created - to be a place where a Jew can be free to speak his mind and live his life lawfully according to his conscience - what will become of us? A State, just like a person, has its own body politic. If the State permits its political and security echelons to selectively persecute its own citizens without challenge, it risks degenerating into the political equivalent of an auto-immune disease. In other words, if the State of Israel is permitted to select - according to narrowly defined personal or political interests - whom it will afflict, whom it will uproot, whom it will betray, whom it will abandon, whom it will detain, and whom it will punish without due process, then it will effectively undermine its very foundations. The immediate release of Noam Federman is imperative to assure that Israel remains a safe haven for all of her citizens, maintains its moral high ground in the region, and remains viable as a democracy. The fight to free Federman is the fight for Israel's soul. Noam Federman must be freed, now! Jonathan Pollard is an American who was tried for handing over secret documents to Israel, documents, it turns out, that Israel was entitled to. He received an unusally harsh sentence and is still incarcerated. Many feel his sentence was motivated by politics, not by security considerations. To Go To Top

WHY LIKUD VOTERS MUST REJECT SURRENDER TO TERRORISM Posted by Bernard J. Shapiro, April 22, 2004.

There are many reasons Likud voters should reject PM Ariel Sharon' plan to surrender Gaza to terrorist Arabs and expel its peaceful productive Jewish residents. I have broken these reasons into three categories: moral, strategic and security. Also I will discuss the fact that U.S. President George Bush's commitments to Sharon have no practical value and are of little more than "smoke and mirrors" to cover up a flawed plan. Then I will review the guarantees Israel has given Bush to achieve these delusions. When you look at the whole picture, I believe you will agree that all Likud members should vote a resounding NO against this surrender to terrorism plan. MORAL 1. The expulsion of Jews from Gaza is no different from the expulsion of Jews from any country. This includes the expulsions from Israel by the Romans, Assyrians and Babylonians. In Europe Spain, England, Germany, France, Poland and Russia drove Jews from their homes of many centuries. That Jews should be expelled from Eretz Yisrael by a Jewish government makes it all the more morally reprehensible. 2. Gaza is clearly a part of the Holy Land given by G-d to Abraham for the Jewish People in perpetuity. Sharon has no right to take it upon himself to divest all of us of our inheritance. 3. Sharon claims that the removal of Jews from Gaza would strengthen Israel's ability to protect other Jews. This goes against all Torah principles which state that it is wrong to sacrifice one Jew to save another. 4. One of the greatest moral flaws is the attempt to stifle debate on this crucial decision for the future of Israel. Sharon has refused to debate the issue. The media presents only one side, that of retreat. Israeli politicians are blackmailed into thinking that to go against Sharon's surrender the United States would be upset (which it would not). 5. Surrender to terrorism will embolden it and increase the killing worldwide and not just in Israel. STRATEGIC Gaza has always been strategically important. Throughout history it has been the route of invasion from North Africa into Israel and beyond. Egypt has used Gaza to attack Israel during warfare and with terrorism since before the State of Israel was declared. Jutting like a finger into the heart of Israel it sits only 40 miles from Tel Aviv. Rockets and missiles from Gaza, after retreat, will certainly hit Israeli population centers. Already the strategic port of Ashdod has been struck and most areas in the Negev will become front line communities. Worse still from a strategic standpoint will be the absence of good intelligence on the ground in Gaza. This will make impossible the targeted assassinations terrorist leaders. It will also create a safe haven for the terrorists to do research and development on advanced weapon systems like missiles capable of carrying biological or chemical warheads. SECURITY Israelis are being promised security by leaving Gaza. Unfortunately this will not be the case for a number of reason: 1. Arabs will still enter Israel to work and a certain number will be homicide bombers. 2. The Gaza fence will not be a perfect barrier to infiltration of terrorists into Israel. With the increased motivation resulting from Israeli retreat, they will seek new innovative ways to cross the barrier. For example, their success in building tunnels into Gaza will be re-directed to tunneling into the Negev from Sinai or directly under the fence. 3. Israelis should expect the terrorists to place greater emphasis on involving Israeli Arabs in acts and support of terrorism. There will be no let up in the terrorist pressure despite assurance that leaving Gaza will have beneficial effects. PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATIONS - Are They Binding? Yoram Ettinger recently published a list of American commitments from history that have proven how worthless those promises were "when push came to shove." We should certainly not rely on American promises in our decision to vacate strategic territory and compromise or moral values and security interests. Here is his list of infamy: FACT: According to the US Constitution, no presidential declaration/promise is binding without a Congressional legislation or ratification. FACT: President Bush's statements (Apr. 7, 2004) on the "1967 Lines" and the "Claim of Return" are not binding. He did not oppose the "claim of return", did not recognize Israel's sovereignty over major settlement blocks in Judea & Samaria, and did not support Israel's sovereignty beyond the "1967 Lines." Presidents Johnson and Reagan stated (September 10, 1968 and September 1, 1982) that Israel should not be expected to withdraw to the "1967 Lines", but it has not prevented their successors - and did not prevent them - to expect such a withdrawal. FACT: President Clinton committed (in 2000) $800MN to Israel, to induce a withdrawal from So. Lebanon. Israel withdrew, Palestinian terrorism escalated, but the committed assistance has not been extended. FACT: Saudi F-15s are stationed at Tabuq, south of Eilat, threatening Israel, in defiance of President Reagan's 1981 commitment to Congress and to Israel. FACT: President Bush promised (in 1991) to direct 30% of US bombing to Western Iraq, in order to destroy the Scud missile launchers, dissuading Israel from a preemptive offensive against Iraq. However, only 3% of the bombing were directed at W. Iraq, the launchers were not destroyed, but Israel was hit in its Soft Belly. FACT: President Nixon committed (in 1970) the US to oppose the deployment of missiles, by Egypt, toward Sinai. Missiles were deployed, Israeli complaints were ignored by the US, and the 1973 War erupted taxing Israel with 2,800 fatalities (more than 100,000 in US terms). FACT: President Eisenhower issued (in 1957) Executive commitments to Israel, in return for a full withdrawal from Sinai. In 1967, Egypt violated the agreement with the US and Israel, the Egypt-Syria-Jordan axis tightened around Israel, President Johnson did not implement the 1957 commitments, which paved the road to the Six Days War. FACT: Presidential candidate Bush made a commitment (in 2000) to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem. In 2004, the embassy is still located in Tel Aviv. PRESIDENTIAL COMMITMENTS - The Limits FACT: According to the US Constitution, international treaties and commitments assumed by the president must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate, in order to be constitutionally binding. FACT: According to the US Constitution, the Power of the Purse is on Capitol Hill. No presidential financial commitment stands, unless legislated by Congress (which is constrained by rigid budget caps). FACT: According to the US Constitution, the president and/or Congress can rescind any international commitment by issuing an Executive Order and/or by a congressional vote. FACT: A President may bypass Congress by Executive Agreements and Executive Orders, which could be rescinded by the president, by his successors and by Congress. FACT: US international commitments (including NATO) are characterized by ambiguity, lack of specificity and by the absence of automaticity of implementation, in order to preserve the interests of the US (rather than the interest of other countries). THE BOTTOM LINE: The contention that presidential declarations/promises are carved in stone reflects misunderstanding of the US democracy, a dangerous delusion and ignorance of precedents, which have taxed Israel severely. In return for an ambiguous, non-specific presidential declaration - devoid of an automatic trigger - Israel is expected to carry out a specific, certain and tangible retreat, which would constitute - according to Israel's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Dec. 3, 2003) - a tail wind to Palestinian terrorism. ISRAEL'S COMMITMENTS TO BUSH Israel made many commitments to Bush which greatly limit Israel's sovereignty and its ability to act in its national interests. Some of them are listed below: 1. No settlement growth beyond the limits placed on Israel by the Americans. US Ambassador Kurtzer, who has a pro-Arab bias, will determine those limits. 2. Removal of unauthorized outposts. The list of such outposts will be presented to Ambassador Kurtzer within 30 days. 3. Palestinian revenues should be dispersed. This matter is pending in various courts of law in Israel, awaiting judicial decisions. 4. The Israeli government remains committed to the two-state solution - Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security - as the key to peace in the Middle East. 5. The Israeli government remains committed to the road map as the only route to achieving the two-state solution. 6. The Government of Israel supports the United States' efforts to reform the Palestinian security services to meet their road map obligations to fight terror. Israel also supports the American efforts, working with the international community, to promote the reform process, build institutions, and improve the economy of the Palestinian Authority and to enhance the welfare of its people, in the hope that a new Palestinian leadership will prove able to fulfill its obligations under the road map. The Israeli Government will take all reasonable actions requested by these parties to facilitate these efforts. [This is the most ridiculous of commitments. Can you train terrorists to fight terrorism?] THE BOTTOM LINE I hope the Likud voters will review carefully the material presented here. I believe there is an overwhelming case for voting no on the surrender referendum for moral, strategic and security reasons. And also, the commitments of Bush and Sharon do nothing to change the realities on the ground and we should be wary of falling for "nice words" that mask the real issues. The future of Israel is in your hands now, please do the responsible thing. Bernard J. Shapiro is the executive director of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies http://www.freeman.org> and the editor its monthly Internet magazine, The Maccabean Online. To Go To Top

THE DIFFERENT FACES OF JACK STRAW Posted by Mordechai ben Menachem, April 22, 2004.

This appeared April 19, 2004 in the Jerusalem Post and is entitled "Justified and Productive." http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename =JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1082260242348 "They had the opportunity to hand themselves to justice and answer for their crimes. They refused to do this. It goes without saying that we would have much preferred this, but the news that Saddam's sons are no longer a threat to the security of Iraq will be a reassurance to the Iraqi people." - Jack Straw, July 22, 2003, on the killing, by US troops, of Uday and Qusay Hussein. "One has to treat such claims and proposals by al-Qaida with the contempt they deserve. This is a murderous organization which seeks impossible objectives by the most violent of means." - Jack Straw, April 16, 2004, on the proposal, by Osama bin Laden, to arrange a truce with Europe "Unjustified and counterproductive." - Jack Straw, April 18, 2004, on the killing, by Israeli forces, of Abdel Aziz Rantisi Will the British foreign minister explain why the killing of Uday and Qusay Hussein was justified and "productive," but the killing of Abdel Aziz Rantisi was not? All three are, or were, leaders of what the British government defines as terrorist organizations. Will the minister also explain why it is unthinkable for European countries, including Britain, to negotiate with al- Qaida, while it is not only thinkable, but necessary, for Israel to negotiate with a Palestinian regime implicated in Hamas's terrorism? All bin Laden asks of Europe is what Europe asks of Israel, which is to get out of Arab lands. If that demand is reasonably made of Israel, why is it any less reasonably made of Europe? And will the minister tell us why, in June 2002, after describing suicide bombers as "misguided and depressed," he went on to say that "behind those people are some very evil terrorist leaders who do not put their own lives on the line when they are making sure that others' lives are ended." Was this not a description of people like Rantisi and Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, whose killing last month Straw also condemned in the strongest possible terms? At least former French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin was consistent when he warned that the killing of Uday and Qusay would contribute to the cycle of violence in Iraq. That's a foolish view, but it is not a hypocritical one. Straw's view, however, is hypocritical. It is also foolish and at variance with his previous statements. The minister says Israel may act against the likes of Rantisi, but only within the parameters of international law. That suggests that Rantisi ought to have been arrested and tried, not killed. Well then: Arrested how, and by whom? Maybe we have missed the minister's calls for the Palestinian Authority to meet its responsibilities under the road map to "undertake visible efforts... to arrest, disrupt, and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning attacks on Israelis." But if the minister has in fact issued such calls, he hasn't made them with the force and indignation of his denunciations of Israeli action. Maybe the minister will allow that Rantisi may lawfully be arrested by Israel. But wouldn't that require an unlawful entry by Israeli troops into Gaza City? And would it not also have entailed a much larger loss of life? And possibly the use of military components supplied by Britain? This last the minister is on record as strongly opposing. To follow the minister's pronouncements to their logical conclusion, Israel may take no measure in its self- defense except to arrest suicide bombers when they reach Israeli soil, which is as good as no defense at all. Alternatively, he believes Israel must resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, notwithstanding the failure of the PA to take steps against terrorist organizations and the evidence that it is deeply implicated in terrorist activity. This is foolishness. Either the minister accepts Israel's right to take what efforts it thinks necessary against terrorism, or he must demand the PA do the same and make it pay a price if it doesn't. So far, the minister's government does neither. It is noteworthy that after Saturday's killing of Rantisi, Hamas would not name its new leader. The bravado is gone. They are afraid. This will not prevent future attacks on Israel. But it puts paid to the lie that attacks on Hamas only embolden it. In that sense, Saturday's strike has served a purpose. To Go To Top

CHABAD RALLY FOR GUSH KATIF DRAWS 2000 Posted by Aliza Karp, April 22, 2004.

On Wednesday night more than two thousand people attended the grand rally for Gush Katif held in the main sanctuary of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's Shul in Brooklyn, known as 770. The usual hum in 770 quieted down as everyone gave full attention to MK Professor Arieh Eldad, MD. In his speech Eldad mentioned that when he speaks against the separation plan he has no need to contradict Prime Minister Sharon, because he repeats what Sharon himself said in previous years. In fact, he recently wrote an article that had so many quotes from Sharon, he sent Sharon a check, explaining that he did not want to be a thief by stealing his words. Dror Vanunu, Director of the Katif Development Fund spoke about the positive energy that now permeates Gush Katif. Sharon and his cabinet ministers, all who used to stand by Gush Katif, now want to hand the towns to the murderers of Jewish innocents. The US, the UN, the whole world wants the Jews of Gush Katif expelled from their homes. And yet the reaction in Gush Katif is one of high positive energy. Everyone is helping one another and everyone is doing what they can to save the community. Young mothers have been excluded from canvassing, because they have small children. Seeing this exclusion, the teenagers in Gush Katif have now made it known that they will take care of the children so the mothers can also go out and speak to people about Gush Katif. Neve Dekalim resident, Moshe Saperstein, a sharpshooter who lost his right arm in the Yom Kippur War and whose left hand was wounded in a terrorist attack on the roads of Gush Katif, told of the many miracles that happen in Gush Katif, giving examples of the exploding bombs, and the unusual - miraculous - circumstances that have saved numerous people. Baruch Marzel, who is now campaigning on behalf of Gush Katif in coordination with Chabad leaders in Eretz Yisroel, addressed the crowd by phone hook up from Hevron. Chabad Rabbis spoke about the Rebbe's focused and uncompromising directives concerning the security of Eretz Yisroel and what Chabad is now doing to influence the outcome of the referendum, in particular the success of the large, colorful, anti-expulsion ads on 500 buses in Eretz Yisroel. For technical reasons the video presentation about Gush Katif was not shown. While the technicians were trying to rectify the situation, the Chassidim began to sing the Niggun, Utzu Aitza, which has a lively tune and declares the overturning of evil decrees. At other times also the crowd burst into song, and many times throughout the evening they gave loud and prolonged applause in response to what was being said. As the program drew to a close at 1am, the guest speakers were presented with the two-volume set 'Krati V'Ain Oneh' containing the Rebbe's talks and letters concerning Eretz Yisroel. There are many letters of correspondence with prominent Israeli figures. Organizer Rabbi Yekutiel Rapp said that he feels he achieved his goal of publicity within the Chabad community. "Everyone who attended this rally will be calling the people they know in Eretz Yisroel and encouraging them to speak to everyone they know, and so on. The information shared this evening, through such powerful speakers, will become widely known and reach many members of the Likud." Commenting on the evening Dror Vanunu said he was greatly encouraged by the large, enthusiastic turnout, he said, "When Chabad is on your side, you are in a good position. I would like to give a message to Sharon. Since Chabad is not on his side, he is in trouble." To Go To Top

A JUDENREIN GAZA? Posted by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, April 22, 2004.

... the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families: Ashdod with its towns and villages, Gaza with its towns and villages--as far as the Brook of Egypt and the Great Sea with its coastline. (Joshua 15:20, 47) If the Egyptians "care" so much for the Arabs living in squalor in Gaza that they allow weapons and explosives to reach them through tunnels beginning on Egyptian territory, then why doesn't Israel have the courage to cede the Strip's entire Palestinian population to Egypt - excluding Gush Katif and Netzarim - if it is true that the demographic problem of over a million Jew-hating Palestinians is Israel's concern and problem? Why not call a spade a spade? For in spite of receiving all the Sinai back from Israel, Egypt is still waging war by proxy by permitting these deadly weapons to be transported through tunnels which begin in its territory. Israel should not be afraid to tell the world, and especially Cairo - that as long as Egypt allows such acts of war from its territory it will bear the consequences, and should therefore be shouldered with the full responsibility of caring for Gaza's Arab Gaza population, including providing for electricity, water and other services required by them. Only such a solution would cause Egypt to seriously reconsider its involvement in these acts of war and terror. It would also strip away the mask Egypt wears towards the West, which, especially the U.S., supplies the Egyptians with billions of dollars in military assistance while they continue to diplomatically and militarily fight Israel in every possible way. Imagine if Mexico permitted anti-U.S. forces to dig hundreds of tunnels under the Mexico-U.S. border, tunnels through which weapons of destruction were smuggled in order to murder American men, women and children in buses, restaurants and shopping malls? Would the United States government persist in telling its citizens that, under these conditions, peaceful relations with Mexico could continue? In such an instance, would the U.S. then also parrot the carefully contrived lie that, despite these acts of war, real peace truly does exist between Mexico and America? And would America then be willing to cede New Mexico to the Mexicans, vacating all Americans and their houses and churches in that state for their enemies to occupy and live in these? According to some military analysts, despite having signed a peace treaty with Israel in order to get back all of Sinai, Egypt potentially poses the greatest danger to Israel. Cairo does not at all want to assume responsibility for Gaza's 1.3 million Palestinian inhabitants - but would be eager to cross again into the Sinai mainland to prepare to attack Israel in the next Arab-Israeli war. For such a campaign Egypt would be willing to take over the military responsibility of the Gaza Strip in cooperation with the Hamas-Fatah leadership there, and be ready to attack Israel at the convenient time! It is clear from all that has already been said and written on this subject by political and military experts that these are not pessimistic or unnecessarily alarmist notions. Thus, when Israel decides to give Egypt civil responsibility for Gaza's Palestinian population, this should certainly be borne in mind, lest Egypt use Israel's unilateral military withdrawal as a reason for re-introducing its forces into Sinai - up to Israel's border. Here is Sharon's reasoning in his own words: I also recommended the establishment of several Jewish settlements, Jewish "fingers," as I called them, to divide the Gaza district. I wanted one between Gaza and Deir el Balah, one between Deir el Balah and Khan Yunis, one between Khan Yunis and Rafah, and another west of Rafah - all of them built, like the Judean and Samarian settlements, on state-owned land. Standing with the cabinet members on a high hill of dunes, I pointed out exactly what I thought we needed. If in the future we wanted in any way to control this area, I told them, we would need to establish a Jewish presence now. Otherwise we would have no motivation to be there during difficult times later on. In addition, it was essential to create a Jewish buffer zone between Gaza and the Sinai to cut off the flow of smuggled weapons and - looking forward to a future settlement with Egypt - to divide the two regions. ... The essence of my plan was to get rid of the Palestinian refugee camps altogether. ("Warrior, an autobiography of Ariel Sharon" with David Chanoff, p. 258) We Christians will weep when Gush Katif's synagogues are brutally taken over by Hamas' hate-filled terrorists, either to be destroyed like Joseph's Tomb in Samaria, or to be made into mosques where the 'itbach al Jahuud' ("slaughter the Jews") will be yelled over the then newly installed loudspeakers. This is Israel's Likud-led government's wisdom and policy? A Judenrein Gaza? Where Palestinians will shout like the Egyptians did when Israel gave up Taba: "Today Gaza, but tomorrow the West Bank!" Jan Willem van der Hoeven is Director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. You can support them by making checks payable to ICZC, P.O. Box 49063, 91490 Jerusalem, Israel. To Go To Top

SHARON TRIES PLAYING THE USA CARD Posted by Bryna Berch, April 22, 2004.

What kind of dependency on the United States is Sharon proposing? Here's a guy well beyond his sell-by date who, in his senility, has started a new career - selling out Israel. If Israel leaves Gaza, the United States will come in to make sure the Palestinians have airconditioners and electricity and comfort foods, just like their Iraqi cousins do. And they'll bitch just as loud. And keep right on trying to kill off what's left of Israel. Giving up Gaza won't be of any benefit to Israel - it will no longer be a proud independent country and it won't even be able to depend on getting charity bennies. This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). SHARON: U.S. GUARANTEES ARE DEPENDENT ON PLAN In a special session in the midst of the Knesset's Passover recess, Prime Minister Sharon delivered a diplomatic speech during which he said, "The referendum does not obligate any of the other parties. On the contrary, if the rest of the Knesset decides to vote against the position of the Likud, it is obvious that the Likud's position will not pass." Since it is clear, in light of Labor's stated support for the plan, that it will pass in the Knesset, Sharon was openly signaling that he will make sure to pass the plan in the Knesset even if the Likud votes it down. However, this will be a problematic move for Sharon, as he will be acting against the will of his own party. As if addressing his words to the 200,000 Likud members, Sharon warned, "Whoever continues to object to the disengagement plan, let it be clear to him that he is taking upon himself the responsibility of canceling all the American commitments... If the plan is not approved, the agreement [with the Americans] is no longer valid..." Sharon continued to imply that the American commitments will guarantee Israel's future: "Whoever wants to prevent Israel from being flooded with [Arab] refugees; whoever wants to maintain large settlement blocs under our control forever; whoever wants to guarantee that for as long as the Palestinians don't act against terrorism, diplomatic pressures will not be exerted upon us... Whoever wants Israel to initiate and not be dragged; to lead and not be led - whoever wants all this, must support the disengagement plan." "The diplomatic support we received during my visit to the U.S. is an unprecedented achievement. Never since the establishment of the State have we received such support with such strength and comprehension," said Sharon. "The Palestinians see the Bush letter as the strongest blow they have received since [our] War of Independence." Sharon said that in the event of an Israeli-PA disagreement on any issue addressed by U.S. President George Bush during the recent Bush-Sharon summit in Washington, "the U.S. will side with Israel. This is an unprecedented achievement... The Palestinians are beginning to understand [that] if they don't fulfill their obligations, Israel will continue to act on its own. Their current policy will only lead them to lose further assets and further cards in the final-stage negotiations." Arutz-7 asked MK Tzvi Hendel (National Union), a resident of Gush Katif, to respond to this point. Hendel said, "How are they losing? We're giving them assets! The Arabs are very happy about this disengagement plan - they're only putting on a show of being against in order to help it along. They're thrilled that we want to dismantle Jewish towns and give them over to them. I meet the Arab MKs in the Knesset and that's what they say. In addition, it's not true that this is the first time the Americans have made these promises - [former President] Clinton gave all this to [then-Prime Minister] Barak back in Camp David..." To Go To Top

U.S.FOREIGN POLICY MUST ACCORD WITH BIBLE MORALITY AND G-D'S PROMISE! Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, April 22, 2004.

When Israel wiped out the Iraqi threat of nuclear warfare in 1981, America roared in protest. George Will, in an article recently in the Washington Post on Security Council Resolution 242, notes that the United States finally came around to the view of the formulators of that Resolution 242, only after many years had passed from the time when that doctrine was originally created. What is the message that the above facts tell us? It is that the United States is not a realistic guide of what is right or wrong. Unfortunately, the U.S. is influenced by considerations other than the merits of the matter. The instances of the concept of the "Road Map" and Sharon's plan for unilateral withdrawal from Gaza are two prime examples of the wrong path which America has chosen to take once again. It is utterly unrealistic for the U.S. to think it can change the Arab violence and terror which Moslem Clerics foster in their congregations. It is ignoring what has been going on in the Middle East over the last hundred years. The Arabs will not change their spots, and suddenly live in peace with the Jewish People. As long as Moslem Clerics instigate Moslems to violence, and are intolerant of other faiths, this will not happen. Not only are these Moslem concepts which they preach in defiance of what is written in the Bible, but they create new immoral standards that are foreign to, and threaten to overpower the values of Western Civilization, and those of the Judaic-Christian faiths. The fact is clear that the Moslem religion is intolerant of other religions, and in all Arab countries this intolerance is commonplace. The consequences of such intolerance is that Arabs resent living in, and are by and large disloyal to, the Jewish State of Israel. The prime example of this intolerance is on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which Arab Moslems presently control. They do not permit either Jew or Christians to pray there. Historically, the First and Second Temples were located on the Temple Mount, although the Arabs typically deny such facts. For the Jewish People it is the holiest site of the many holy Jewish and Christian holy sites that exist in Israel. Seemingly, G-d has hardened the hearts of the Moslem clerics to preach intolerance of other faiths, in order that Arabs will be unable to live peacefully with Jews in His Holy Land. Any serious student of history will tell you that self-interest is the determining factor for all nations, rather than what is morally correct. Arab oil and the massive wealth of Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf States greatly influences the relationships of Arab states with other nations. The UN is a perfect example of the bias against Israel as a result of the nations pandering to the Arabs. Such blatant immorality, is indicative of how the nations of the world determine where their self-interest lies. Our clear message then is that American foreign policy is extremely fallible. The "Road Map" and its sundry counterparts must eventually be replaced. A new American policy must accord with the Biblical Promise G-d made to the Jewish People, if the Biblical curse (Genesis 12:3) is not to materialize. 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

OCCUPIED BY ARAB RAGE Posted by Honest Reporting, April 22, 2004.

What do President Bush's endorsement of the Sharon Plan and ongoing Israeli strikes against Hamas leaders mean for Palestinians? The answer is complex, but media outlets are focusing overwhelmingly on one factor alone - raw Arab rage. This week, accompanying pictures of angry Palestinians, were headlines such as: - Reuters: 'Furious Palestinians Reject Bush Pledges' - The Scotsman: 'Hamas Vows Bloody Revenge' - Arizona Daily Star: 'Arab World Seething over U.S.' - BBC: '...Wounded, Humiliated, Threatened' The subtext in these reports is that Palestinian/Arab emotions are of utmost significance, and that this Arab fury will likely result in a backlash of terrorism. Sometimes this is explicitly stated - the Washington Post rationalized a Palestinian rocket attack against Israeli civilians on Wednesday (Apr. 21) as motivated by 'Palestinian rage against Israel and the United States [that] has escalated since the assassination of Rantisi and President Bush's endorsement three days earlier of an Israeli plan.' The Toronto Star editorialized that by killing terror leaders, Sharon is 'more likely to radicalize people, set Arabs against America and Israel, and cost Israel more lives.' But while the media are obsessed with Arab emotion, an entirely rational process has been taking place on the Arab street: * The IDF anti-terror policy is working: Israel's stepped-up campaign against terrorist leaders since early 2003 has resulted in a 50-percent decrease in the number of Israeli terror victims. Palestinian deaths have likewise decreased significantly. * Terror groups are in disarray, their leaders in hiding: Senior Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh told a reporter this week, 'Hamas might have a crisis on its hands after losing its leaders.' Another terror leader said people are 'unaware of the limitations and amount of pressure imposed against the Palestinian combatants.' And as opposed to Rantisi's bravado ("I prefer to die by Apache"), Hamas' new leader is afraid to reveal his identity or location. * Palestinian leaders are getting the message: Yassir Arafat today expelled 21 Fatah fugitives from safe haven in his compound. And after the Yassin strike, 60 Palestinian leaders urged restraint in a prominent newspaper ad, arguing that the suicide bombings have backfired and calling for 'a peaceful, wise intifada.' It seems that the stereotype of Arabs as 'rash' and 'emotional' - as opposed to 'calculating' and 'rational' Westerners - is coloring media coverage of this conflict. This is a variation on the 'soft bigotry of low expectations' that excuses the lack of Palestinian democracy by presuming Palestinians are incapable of reform. In fact, there are plenty of indications that Palestinians and their leaders are thinking with their heads, not only their hearts. Daniel Pipes notes: Mr. Sharon's tough policies have established that terrorism damages Palestinian interests even more than it does Israeli ones. This has led some analysts deeply hostile to Israel to recognize that the "second intifada" was a grievous error. Violence "just went haywire," says Sari Nusseibeh, president of Al-Quds University. An "unmitigated disaster," journalist Graham Usher calls it. A "crime against the Palestinian people," adds an Arab diplomat. Ordinary Palestinians, too, are drawing the salutary conclusion that murdering Israelis brings them no benefits. "We wasted three years for nothing, this uprising didn't accomplish anything," says Mahar Tarhir, 25, an aluminum-store owner. Moreover, the over-emphasis on Arab anger deters essential anti-terror efforts. An analysis by Craig Weiss in the Arizona Republic states: The accepted worldview is that when fighting terror, one must avoid actions that are liable to enrage the Arab world, however effective and justified those actions might otherwise be. Under this principle, however, Muslim extremists have veto power over any effective counterterrorism policy. To summarize, while it is accurate for news outlets to report on Palestinian anger, other concurrent trends are integral to this story, yet rarely covered - Israel's effectiveness in disabling terrorist groups and the growing Palestinian realization that three and half years of terror has been futile. HonestReporting encourages subscribers to contact local editors, requesting they include all aspects of this important issue. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167 To Go To Top

ISRAEL'S ASSASSINATION OF HAMAS LEADER WAS JUSTIFIED Posted by David Holcberg, April 22, 2004.

Israel's targeted killing of Abdel Aziz Rantisi was as justified as would be America's targeted killing of Osama bin Laden. Rantisi was the leader of Hamas, a terrorist organization responsible for the murder and maiming of hundreds of innocents, and he got what he deserved. That heads of state from London to Paris criticized Israel's action instead of applauding it reveals, once again, their utter moral bankruptcy--and their seemingly endless willingness to appease evil. But as logic suggests and history demonstrates, appeasing evil only emboldens it, and those who fail to learn this lesson invariably become targets of evil themselves. David Holcberg is a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) of Irvine, California (http://www.aynrand.org). To Go To Top

SHARON'S PLAN: THE FIX IS IN Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 22, 2004.

"TWO-STATE SOLUTION" Pres. Bush wrote a letter of assurance to Israel that stressed his support for a "two-state solution." In what way that would be a solution never has been explained. It has symmetry between the two sides, and no redeeming qualities. Symmetry in a diplomatic proposal for two sides having asymmetrical societies, such as one being intolerant and aggressive, and the other being tolerant and peace loving, is not esthetically pleasing. It is morally offensive. To be a solution, the proposal must address the problem. What is the problem? By not explaining how the proposal solves anything, proponents imply that two separate peoples claim the same territory of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. That is false for several reasons. First, Arafat's Arabs are not a separate people but part of the Arab nation, as they, themselves have admitted. There are many Arab countries obliged morally to provide for them. Second, Arafat's Arabs and the other Arabs do not claim just Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. They claim all of Israel. Giving them Judea, Samaria, and Gaza could not avert war but confer an advantage upon the Arab aggressors. Some "solution" that favors aggressors and promotes war! Third, the underlying problem is not territorial. The problem is jihad. This holy war is being directed against many countries, including the US and Israel. The withdrawal plan serves jihad, by weakening Israel. Granting sovereignty to the PLO would depriving Israel of defensible borders, early warning points, strategic depth, and water supply. It would enable the PLO to import heavy weaponry and invite Arab armies right alongside Israeli cities, which the Arabs would murderously bombard. Why does the US empower fanatical enemies of the US? SHARON PLAN: THE FIX IS IN Just as Sharon and the State Dept. hoped, the US letter that hedged on support for Israel has been greeted by most Jewish organizations as buttressing support for Israel. Europe reinforces that erroneous notion by complaining about such support, because it wants immediate and full Israeli appeasement. Europe's complaint, if not part of the overall swindle, does not vindicate the opinion of the shortsighted Jewish organizations. The State Dept. does not promote immediate and full appeasement of the Arabs, because then the scmeme would be obvious. Instead, as Barry Chamish points out, Sharon is surrendering piecemeal, just as Peres did with Oslo, starting with "Gaza and Jericho first." The rationale with Oslo was that if the PLO did not stop terrorism, Israel would withdraw no further and rescind prior withdrawals. The PLO boosted terrorism, but Israel withdrew further. Rationales and assurances are offered Israelis, because they fall for it. Israel is a country of duplicitous leaders and duped followers. The Bush letter's support for Israel is alleged to be denying an Arab "right of return" to Israel and newly recognizing Israel's right to keep some of the Territories. Fooled by weasel wording! Israel always had a right to keep all of the Territories and the US had recognized part of that right, when it drafted UN Security Council Resolution 242. 242 calls for Israel to withdraw "from territories." Some UN members wanted the Resolution to read, "from all of the territories." The US refused, explaining that it should not be all. Therefore, this supposed US boon to Israel is old wine. The other supposed boon is imagined from a misreading of the letter. Bush wrote that the refugee problem would be resolved through Arab statehood and the refugees settlng there, "rther than in Israel." "Rather than in Israel" is a preference. It does not rule out foisting those Jew-haters on Israel. For betraying his platform, principles, and people, Sharon is being lionized as a "bold leader" making peace. Surrender is not bold! Empowering terrorists is not peace making. WHAT ENDS A CONFLICT? That depends on the nature of the conflict. The Arab-Israel conflict is part of the Arab jihad. It is a war of religious fanaticism and is anti-Western. Fanatics don't make peace. They either conquer or are conquered. Anything that strengthens them or weakens their foes prolongs the conflict. Hillel Halkin sees it otherwise. Referring to PM Sharon's proposal for a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from some areas, Mr. Halkin wrote: "Short of capitulating to Palestinian (Arab) demands, his disengagement plan represents the only rational alternative to an endless prolongation of the current conflict." (NY Sun, 4/14, p.11.) Unilateral withdrawal is capitulation, on a pay as you go basis. Capitulation is appeasement. Appeasement has been discredited. Therefore, it is not rational. How could it be more rational that victory? Victory would end the conflict. Capitulation cannot - by strengthening the P.A., it prolongs the current conflict. Even Deputy PM Olmert admits that withdrawal would not end terrorism from Gaza. Since it won't end Arab terrorism against Israel, how can withdrawal be an alternative to prolonging the conflict? Mr. Halkin's logic is all tied up in knots. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

IMAGINE ASKING COLIN POWELL TO REPRESENT JEWS AT AN ANTI-SEMITISM CONFERENCE Posted by Dafna Yee, April 22, 2004.

In a message dated 4/22/2004, Am-Yisrael@yahoogroups.com writes: Dear Friends, Act now to fight antisemitism -- urgent faxes to Secretary Powell can really make a difference. In the last two weeks many of our supporters have written to Secretary of State Colin Powell, urging him to attend an important meeting on the rise of antisemitism in Europe. The meeting will take place in Berlin on April 28 and 29. Find out more about the meeting. The presence of a senior U.S. government official at the meeting is critical, yet no senior U.S. official is currently slated to attend. The faxes and emails we have generated are having an impact. To date more than 600 of you have written to the Secretary, and his staff tell us it is making a difference. Secretary Powell is now saying that he wants to attend the meeting, and will do so if his schedule permits. Please help us persuade him to attend. Contact the Secretary of State today. If you have not already sent a fax, please do so now. If you did send a fax -- please do so again. For more information on Human Rights First's efforts, read http://action.humanrightsfirst.org/ct/YpLat1n1I7lt/ in the Forward. I have a question for Am-Yisrael of the Yahoo groups. How in the world will having a flagrant pro-Arabist like Colin Powell help fight European anti-Semitism (which is basically anti-Israel)? Powell has said that Israeli retention of settlement blocs requires Palestinian consent. One quote in particular is very relevant: "Powell also sought to reassure anxious European governments who back the Arabs in demanding Israel retain none of the West Bank. He said after meeting with Javier Solana, the senior EU diplomat, that Palestinian approval was necessary on all big issues." Asking Colin Powell to be a representative for Jews at a European anti-Semitism conference is like asking Walter Mueller, who planned to host the International Revisionist Conference, to speak out against Holocaust deniers! Probably the last American official that I would want to represent Jewish interests in Europe right now is Colin Powell. If he is the only possible name that you can come up with from the current administration to represent American Jewish interests, then Jews -- and Israel -- are in real trouble! Dafna Yee is director of the Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

GONEN ISCARIOT Posted by Steven Plaut, April 22, 2004.

Anyone doubting there is justice in this world of sin should take a fast look at today's headlines about the arrest of Israeli ex-cabinet minister Gonen Segev for drug smuggling (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/418514.html ). Segev (no relation to Israeli anti-Zionist writer Tom Segev) got busted this week for trying to smuggle into Israel a suitcase full of illegal "ecstasy" pills. And so there has now been achieved the comeuppance of the most dishonest and disgraceful politician who helped impose "Oslo" upon Israel. If the Oslo "peace process" ever leads to the destruction of Israel, a respectable share of the blame for this will lay upon the shoulders of this same Gonen Segev. Without Segev and his sidekick Alex Goldfarb, "Oslo II" would never have been passed by the Knesset in 1995. Segev was a veterinarian who got himself elected to the Knesset in 1992 as part of the surprise electoral success of the Tsomet Party slate led by Rafael Eitan ("Raful"), a militantly anti-Oslo party of the Israeli "Right". Segev had in fact gone to school in the Krayot suburbs of Haifa (with my wife, coincidentally), and I have heard him described as Gonen Ish-Krayot (or Iscariot, which means the man from the Krayot). The raison d'etre of Tsomet was opposition to any deal with, or to any concessions at all to, the PLO. After the election, Segev and Goldfarb decided to switch sides, altering their "ideology" by 180 degrees, and joined the Leftist coalition led by Rabin and Peres, all in exchange for political bribery in what will doubtless go down into history books as the greatest act of political prostitution in Israeli history. Shimon Peres was having trouble stampeding the 1995 "Oslo II" deal with the PLO through the Knesset; "Oslo II" was a second round of capitulations and concessions to the PLO after the initial "accord" signed on the White House lawn in 1993. Peres had recruited the anti-Israel Arab Stalinist and fascist Knesset Members to support the deal, but there still were not enough votes to get it through the parliament. So, instead, Peres approached the renegades from Tsomet. Gonen Segev was then made Minister of Energy in the Labor Party government, in exchange for his and Goldfarb's votes in favor of the "Oslo II" accord. Despite the fact that all Tsomet MK's had been elected to the parliament by a constituency that totally opposed Oslo unambiguously, Segev and Goldfarb became hired guns for the Labor Party and were (literally) paid-off Oslo supporters. The background to their split from Tsomet also had something to do with a personal vendetta back then between Segev and party chief Rafael Eitan. Segev was quite literally purchased by Rabin and Peres. Thanks to the political bribery, Oslo II passed the Knesset with a one-vote margin. In exchange for his support for Oslo, Segev was granted the cabinet post of Minister of Energy, with all its perqs, and Goldfarb was also handed some political bakshish. So Segev personally rescued Oslo II and so is personally responsible for the continuation of the "Oslo peace process" after 1995, with all its accompanying bloodbaths. Segev's vote had literally been marketed to the highest bidder. (For more details, see http://www.io.com/~jewishwb/iris/archives/716.html .) But new elections were coming up. Long before the 1996 elections were held, it was clear to all that Segev's colorful political career was about to end forever. Shimon Peres still needed Segev to stay loyal until the last minute to hold his coalition together. So to keep Segev in line, Segev needed to get promised some sort of ready source of income and career advancement for after the 1996 elections, when he would otherwise revert to nothing more than a backwoods veterinarian. This was a bit tricky though, because Israel has "cooling off" laws that prevent politicians and senior civil servants from going to work for special interests right after their stint in their governmental jobs, lest they favor those special interests in exchange for receiving promises of after-the-job retirement "pensions", after leaving their governmental posts. Israel has quite a few wealthy politicized industrialists and corporate executives with ties of different sorts to the Labor Party. They placed pro-Peres or pro-Oslo ads in all the papers when asked to do so. Some of these would get political handouts, cushy contracts or licenses, and other special-interest largesse whenever Labor was in power (the Likud has its own set of cronies from business), favors paid for by the ever-suffering taxpayer, in exchange for business political support. One might call it corporate welfare for businessmen by socialists. One very wealthy industrialist with ties to the Labor Party and a personal friend of Shimon Peres was Shaul Eisenberg, a Japan-raised Jewish billionaire with an industrial empire stretching over 4 continents, and lots of operations in Japan and China. So before the elections in 1996, someone approached Eisenberg and asked him to set up Segev in a cushy job OUTSIDE Israel (and so exempt from the Israeli "cooling off" laws), to go into effect right after Segev passed into the dustbin of political history. Eisenberg complied, and made Segev a senior energy executive for his Chinese LNG operations. There Segev sat for years, while the venom felt towards him in Israel slowly diminished. Out in East Asia he sat, in his executive chair with his keys to the executive washroom, in violation of the spirit (at least) of Israel's "cooling off" laws. There were some nasty outcries in Israel over this "retirement" arrangement. What later became of Segev? He seems to have kept a low profile in recent years; at least I did not hear much of his doings. Until this week. Segev just got busted trying to smuggle ecstasy pills into Israel. Curiously, he has more in common with that drug smuggler whose release from the Hizbollah Israel recently purchased with hundreds of released terrorists. According to one report, the Hizbollah was also trying to kidnap Segev! (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=182824&contrassID=1&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=0 ). Guess Segev was having a problem keeping up his executive lifestyle, or perhaps his veterinary patients were unhappy with his performance? 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. 2 To Go To Top

A SMALL STORY Posted by JINSA, April 22, 2004.

Tnis is JINSA Report #407. What controls on UN shipments if we leave Gaza? You can read the big stories in the newspapers; here is a small story: Middle East News Line (MENL) reports that UNRWA "renewed the distribution of emergency food aid to 600,000 Palestinians registered as refugees in the Gaza Strip. [Ed. Note: what kind of "emergency" lasts 55 years?] The program was suspended on April 1 following restrictions imposed by the Israeli authorities at the sole commercial entry point for Gaza. UN officials said Israeli authorities implemented arrangements that permitted the agency to bring sufficient amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. They said Israeli authorities have insisted that holes be drilled in the two-inch wall cavities of containers leaving Gaza so that they can be searched by mini-camera. Officials said the procedures would add to the costs and the delays in providing food. UNRWA delivers around 250 tons of food aid per day to the refugees in the Gaza Strip." Why the "restrictions" on humanitarian aid? Because on April 1, Hamas used empty cargo containers to smuggle terrorists out of Gaza and into the Israeli port at Ashdod. They killed 10 Israelis in the port - which was small potatoes because they were supposed to detonate themselves alongside the chemical storage units, releasing enough poisonous gas to kill thousands of Israelis. For a small story, it is disgusting at so many levels. It was an intended chemical weapons attack, for starters. WMD. And the intended victims were Jews. The level of perversion involved in planning to gas Jews in Israel in the 21st Century was hardly remarked upon. This is itself disgusting at more than one level. And for Hamas to plan it knowing that Arabs would die as well is cynical beyond belief, except that we have seen this before. It is part of a determination to ensure that the Palestinians become ever more miserable and dependent on Hamas for "services" as their world deteriorates, and that the world sees the Palestinians as "victims" of Israel - ignoring that they are victims first of Hamas. Israel has no choice but to respond to acts of terror, which explains the shipping containers. Once Hamas used them, Israel couldn't continue to allow them into the country without additional security measures. [And Israel was, of course, expected to find a way for Palestinians to get their UNRWA packages - not UNRWA, and surely not the Palestinians, but Israel. For more on Israel's social responsibility, see JINSA Reports #390 and 392.] This is the principle applied when a woman blew herself up at the single point of entry for Palestinian workers into Israel. The result was that a) all women became suspect, and b) the passage was closed for several days - further stressing an already tenuous situation. It is the principle applied as Hamas smuggles explosives into Gaza in small fishing vessels. When Israel catches one, it closes the fishing areas, disrupting the mainstay of many Palestinians' livelihoods. Now, just in case you think maybe Yasser doesn't care about any of this, rest assured that he does. "Let it collapse," he told a PA "consultant," who happens to be a former American diplomat. "It will be the fault of Israel and the Americans." So there in a very small story, you have it. Palestinians planning the most gut-wrenching way kill Jews, expecting to kill some of their own people while ensuring the economic and social ruin of the rest of them, and figuring it's all OK as long as Israel and America get the blame. The JINSA Reports are published by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (http://www.jinsa.org). To subscribe, email info@jinsa.org To Go To Top

FROM TOLEDO TO JERUSALEM Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 21, 2004.

Why would a blond, "non-Jewish" American want to emmigrate to Israel? What's the connection? Especially when so few Jews in the United States are willing to make the move. What force would drive someone to travel to Israel 11 times, serve in 8 kibbutzim and even stay there during the Persian Gulf War, complete with gas mask, with his room designated as cheder atoom - "sealed room" - that other volunteers had to run to whenever the eerie sirens sounded that another Scud Missile was headed for the Promised Land? Why would such an individual risk arrest, defamation and deportation to participate in legal demonstrations in Jerusalem? The first time I visited Israel was with the Worldwide Church of God in 1980 to celebrate Sukkot - the Biblical Feast of Tabernacles. (Some Christians understand that Israel's harvest festival foreshadows the peace and prosperity that everyone will soon enjoy under the Messiah's golden rule). But that whirlwind experience only whet my appetite. I wanted to return for a closer look at Israel than through a tour bus window. That's how I decided to return as a kibbutz volunteer in the fall of 1982. A kibbutz is a collective farm, although increasingly it includes other industries as well. I initially served at Ramat Yohanan near Haifa, in full view of Mt. Carmel, famous for the fiery prophet Elijah's close encounter with pagan Israelites. You could say I have a God-given love for the Jews and the nation of Israel (Isaiah 62:6-7). That sacred bond has been strengthened over the years by the fact that I've been blessed to have lived all over Israel, getting to know its land and people quite well. Apart from 5 months at Ramat Yohanan, I've also stayed at Sdot Yam on the Mediterranean, next to Ceasarea, the site of my first ulpan (intensive Hebrew course), and where Israel's heroine, Hannah Senesh, was from; Regavim, near Zichron Yaakov, where I continued my Hebrew lessons amid its rolling green hills; Reshafim, near Bet She'an, with Mt. Gilboa practically in our backyard, and Jordan's mountains in lovely view out front; Adamit, on Lebanon's border, high up on a mountain, from where on clear days you can see all the way to Haifa's Mt. Carmel; Shoval, a rose in the Negev desert, just north of Be'er Sheva; Dan, way up in the northernmost part of Israel, in between Syria and Lebanon, next to the majestic snow-covered Mt. Hermon, where I was living when "Operation Desert Storm" blew in; and Ha'On, with its campground and ostrich farm on the eastern shores of the Sea of Galilee, across from Tiberias; and last but not least, my beloved Jerusalem, next to my favorite spot on earth: the Temple Mount. But why would I leave the beautiful farms and magnificent greenery of Ohio for a Middle Eastern country? (My ancestors sailed to America from England, including John and Priscilla Alden on the Mayflower). Why would I legally change my name from David A. Hoover to David Ben-Ariel? (Hebrew for: David, son of God's Lion - a nickname for Jerusalem/Isaiah 29:1). Yes, why? 1) Because I am a Christian-Zionist who believes the rebirth of Israel is nothing short of a miracle, and that all Bible-believers must support this fulfillment of prophecy or deny their faith. And 2) because I strongly believe what many are now discovering: the Israelite identity of the peoples of Northwestern Europe. This awareness of our Biblical roots and responsibility hastens the process of redemption. Herbert W. Armstrong was one of the greatest to restore this truth to millions, but I'm friends with Yair Davidiy in Israel, author of The Tribes and Ephraim (www.britam.org), who represents a growing number of Jews who are again accepting the revelation of their brother, Joseph - head of the northern ten-tribed Kingdom of Israel (distinct from the southern Kingdom of Judah). Due to my Anglo-Saxon heritage, as well as descent from the British and Scottish Royal Families, I'm considered of the tribes of Joseph and Judah. (There are twelve tribes of Israel). For people like me, Israel is also our ancient Homeland. I truly feel my return to Zion completes a historic circle in my family's history. Having been to Israel so many times, and written innumerable letters to The Blade (Toledo, Ohio's newspaper), and various articles in support of a Jewish state, I never imagined that one day I would be deported from it! As reported on the front page of the Jerusalem Post (Jan. 8, 1996), the GSS (Israel's Secret Service) sought my deportation on the trumped-up charges of my alleged involvement in a plot to blow up the Al-Aksa mosque. This travesty of justice occurred during the "witch-hunt" that followed Prime Minister Rabin's assassination. Israel's Left was exploiting Rabin's death to squash their legal opposition. Such Stalinist tactics were condemned by former Russian refuseniks and "Prisoners of Zion." Thankfully, Shimon Peres' regime was toppled with the election of Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. Bibi (as Netanyahu's affectionally called) had also been branded as an "enemy of peace" for opposing wholesale surrender to PLO demands. He promised the Israelis "peace with security." As a Christian member of the Temple Mount Faithful, I'd been privileged to participate in their legal demonstrations during my 10-month stay in Jerusalem awaiting citizenship. Israeli television often showed me with my Jewish friends carrying Israeli flags throughout the Old City. I've also had letters published in the Jerusalem Post, the Traveller and other publications about the burning issue of the Temple Mount. Presently that most holy site is under a militant Muslim occupation that forcibly forbids Christians or Jews from praying or reading the Bible there. This despite the fact that both Solomon and Herod's Temple stood there, and Jesus and His disciples taught and prayed there. Israel has a law against such violent religious discrimination, but apparently they're afraid or unwilling to enforce it. Such shameful appeasement rewards the aggressors and punishes the innocent! The Temple Mount Faithful boldly calls for an end to this injustice. In my book, Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall, I've called for the Israeli government to exercise its Jewish responsibility to build the Temple. I wrote that book in the United States before any of this trouble. The book clearly explains that I'm not calling for any individual to remove the mosques, but rather expecting the GOVERNMENT to fulfill its historic obligations. I mentioned this to the police during my six and an half hours interrogation. Later I was imprisoned in Jerusalem's "Russian Compound" for three weeks until my heartbreaking deportation. As my attorney in Israel, Naftali Warzberger, has written, my future is linked with that of the Jews and Israel. That's why I'm confident justice will prevail. Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D. Ohio) has persistently presented this case of religious discrimination and political persecution before our State Department. Senator Mike DeWine (R. Ohio) has inquired on my behalf to return to Zion and was informed that the Ministry of the Interior "has made the decision not to grant the visa and does not offer any information behind their decision." They've since written Senator DeWine that I will not be "eligible for a visa until 2005!" Is it a crime to have an abiding love for Israel? To believe what's written in the Law and the Prophets concerning the Temple and our responsibility to construct it? To mourn that it hasn't been done yet? As the Jerusalem Talmud states: "every generation in which the Temple has not been built is as if the Temple were destroyed in it...." Isn't Israel's state emblem a gold menorah in between two gold olive branches? Must I remain in exile, banished from the Land I love, because my hope, prayer, and dream is for Israel to fulfill what that symbol represents: the Temple and Israel's destiny to become a Light to all nations? David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." His website address is www.benariel.com To Go To Top

GAZA RETREAT PLAN IS A MISTAKE Posted by Morton A. Klein, April 21, 2004.

The proposal for a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza defies logic. Since Israel's goal is to protect its citizens against Arab terrorism, rewarding the Arabs with territory when they have not halted their terrorism will only increase terrorism because it will prove to them that violence pays. The way to give the Palestinian Arabs an incentive to stop their terrorism is to demonstrate that there will be serious, meaningful, and long-lasting consequences for their actions. Instead of giving them land, Israel should be taking more land. Anything less guarantees more bloodshed as the terrorists, emboldened by their victory in Gaza, set their sights on the rest of "Palestine" because, as they say in their media, in their schools, and on every Palestinian Authority map, all of Israel is "Occupied Palestine" in their eyes. Those who advocate surrendering parts of Israel to the Arabs used to call it land for peace. But now that we see the Arabs have no intention of fulfilling their promises of peace, the idea of giving them land can no longer be called "Land for Peace." A more accurate term would be "Land for Nothing." What makes the current talk of retreat even more alarming is the call for the mass expulsion of Jews from their homes and towns in Gaza, as well as some in Judea and Samaria. Whenever someone has advocated the transfer of Arabs out of those areas, he has been denounced as a racist. Yet for some reason the transfer of Jews is considered acceptable, even desirable. This is rank hypocrisy. If Israeli officials decide to proceed with a unilateral withdrawal, they will risk tearing apart Israeli society if they proceed without a clear majority in favor. Such a withdrawal is no small matter. Ending Israel's presence in territories that have been an integral part of the Jewish homeland since time immemorial is no small matter. Moreover, such a withdrawal will have important ramifications for Israel's national security. In many countries, a referendum is held prior to a major national decision such as relinquishing territory. National referenda often require approval by what is called a "special majority," since a simple majority could mean one side winning by the slimmest of margins, leaving the nation badly divided. For example, in Italy, Ireland, and Lithuania, a national referendum requires a special majority of 50% of eligible voters, rather than just 50% of those actually voting. One should also consider the referenda French Prime Minister De Gaulle held on withdrawing from Algeria in 1961-1962, even though Algeria was far away from France, Algerian terrorists posed no threat to the French homeland (unlike what Israel faces) and Algerian territory had no historical or religious meaning for the French people. DeGaulle announced he would not proceed if the referenda one held before the withdrawal, and another afterwards were approved by a "feeble, mediocre, or uncertain" majority; approval had to be "frank and massive," he said. At the first referendum, voter turnout was 76%, and 79% of them voted yes; the second time, turnout was again 76%, and 91% voted yes. Anything less than such a broad consensus, as determined in a national referendum, would leave Israeli society severely polarized. And that is too high a price for Israelis indeed, for world Jewry to pay. Mort Klein is National President of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). This article was on the ZOA website (http://www.zoa.org) on Mar 29, 2004. Contact the ZOA by phone at 212 481 1500 or by email at email@zoa.org To Go To Top

ISRAEL, BAN THE BOMB: UPDATED Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, April 21, 2004.

Mordechai Vanunu - the Israeli nuclear whistleblower - Israel's own Benedict Arnold, has been released after serving 18 years in prison. He was jailed for spilling the beans about Israel's nuclear weapons program, back in 1986. He's been lionized as a hero by the usual anti-Israel, anti-America, and anti-west crowd, including British actress Susannah York, who flew into Israel special to greet him upon his release. But Vanunu is hated with all the fury that traitors usually are by "Joe Israeli". Vanunu, who worked at the Dimona Nuclear Research Facility, left Israel in 1986, converted in Australia to turn-the-other-cheek Anglican Christianity, and flew to Britain to tell the Sunday Times all his secret nuclear knowledge. Unrepentant about what he did, since just before his release, he's insisted that Israel is illegitimate, and that Jews don't have a right to a Jewish State. Vanunu has called Judaism and Islam "primitive," and claimed that his version of "kill me please" Christianity is more morally developed. I guess he hasn't paid much attention to the news in the last few years. "Christian" America hasn't been too willing to "roll over and play dead" since 9/11. American hasn't chosen to give in to terrorism and Israel shouldn't either. Israel should get rid of its Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programs - its alleged nuclear arsenal - Vanunu and his "Loony Left" friends say. Yet, Iran is working as we speak to get the bomb. Syria has lots and lots of chemical weapons (CW) and missiles to attack with. So does Egypt. In fact, Egypt like its Arab brother Iraq used its chemical weapons in the past. Egypt in the 1960's in Yemen; Iraq in the 1980's against the Kurds, Iraqi Shiites, and Iranians. India and Pakistan have the bomb, so does North Korea. I won't mention the five permanent members of the UN who do too. And Libya? Libya, that on again, off again sponsor of international terrorism since the 1970's, has plenty of chemical weapons - about 100 tons of mustard gas and nerve agents, according to the CIA - and missiles that could hit Israel and most of Europe. The Germans sold the missiles to them in the 1980's. They also have Scuds from North Korea. Libya also has sought dual-use capabilities that could be used to develop and produce biological warfare (BW) agents. But now Libya's leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi - or is that gadfly? - has announced that he will scrap Libya's WMD programs. He promised to put his nuclear facilities under greater international inspection. Sounds like, Iran, huh? So what do all these Middle Eastern "Ban the Bomb" advocates start to do? Commenting on Gaddafi's actions, Libya's state-run press made clear that Israel would have to follow suit with its weaponry. The Al-Jamahiriya newspaper said Libya's decision had reversed the "race" to produce weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and placed "exceptional pressure on Israel" to come clean on its own nuclear weapons, which it has neither admitted to nor denied possessing. Following Gaddafi's announcement not long ago, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher called on Israel to follow Libya's example and get rid of its nuclear weapons program. Maher said, "I hope that other countries in the region...would follow such an example...get rid of and put an end to any nuclear weapons production program," Maher said. Maher did not specifically name Israel, but said, "You know, of course, who I mean." When asked if the international community should start looking at Israel's nuclear capabilities, Maher said: "I said that the steps which Libya took should be a model to follow. This is clear. I won't add anything." The same day, Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa, joined in saying, "The Libyan position confirms the importance of pressuring Israel to comply with all laws banning nuclear proliferation and joining the NPT" [nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]. Moussa added, "It is not logical to make an exception or to be tolerant of Israel on this issue." The Arab states have spoken. Then, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak called on Israel to eliminate its WMD. "We welcome the Libyan decision," Mubarak told journalists during a visit to Sadat City, in southern Cairo. "Israel must also eliminate its weapons of mass destruction." Egypt has for some time called on the Israel to ratify the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and make the Middle East a region free of WMD. Mubarak said that in the mid-1990s he discussed with former Israeli prime minister and current opposition leader Shimon Peres (Labor) the matter of Israel dismantling its nuclear arsenal. Mubarak claimed that Peres - father of the Israeli nuclear program - told him that the issue would be resolved following a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. That's Egypt; former user of chemical weapons itself. That's Egypt, who according to the Monterey Institute of International Studies - which tracks weapons issues - has its own stockpile of deadly Sarin and VX nerve agents, and is believed to working on an offensive BW program as well. Iran also praised Libya’s decision to abandon its WMD program, calling for pressure against Israel to do the same. Iranian officials released a statement that the time has come for the international community to exert pressure on Israel to abandon its nuclear program, referring to Israel as the main threat to the region. That's Iran, the country that not long ago was parading around its new Shahab 3's that could hit Israel - allegedly - with markings on them for "Tel-Aviv" and "Jerusalem". What's with all this concern about Israeli WMD all of a sudden? The answer is that with the fall of Saddam's regime and American occupation, Iraq has been temporarily taken out of the WMD loop, or so it seems. With the Libyan declarations and Iran's recent signing of the additional protocol of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which opens the way for unannounced UN inspections of suspect sites, the door has been opened for increased pressure on Israel. Iran and Syria know there's still a lot of focus on their own weapons programs - US President Bush just signed the Syrian Accountability Act which puts a spotlight on Syrian WMD - so why not try to divert attention toward Israel. Notice the Syrian moves at the UN not long ago calling on Israel to disarm and make the Middle East a "nuke-free zone". Israel has had a frosty "Peace" with Egypt since 1979, and a not much warmer "Peace" with Jordan since 1994. Israel has been in a "Peace Process" for the last ten years with the Palestinians. That "Peace Process" has cost Israel over 1,300 lives from Palestinian warfare. Although the military balance vis-a-vis the Arab-Islamic world has shifted further toward Israel's favor in the last couple of decades - do to its growing technological edge - Israel's "will to fight" or "staying power" has slowly been eaten away in the last decade. Continuous guerilla war and terrorism from the Palestinians, combined with a world-wide propaganda campaign, has put Israel into a defensive posture, and caused it's leadership to refrain from using its substantial firepower. Now, the Arab-Islamic world is trying to pressure Israel to give up its strategic arsenal as well. According to the latest accounting - September 2003 - of the Jaffe Center's "Middle East Military Balance," the Arab League states and Iran - minus Iraq - vastly outnumber Israel in conventional forces; men under arms, tanks, artillery, combat aircraft, transport aircraft, and helicopters. Let's ignore their naval advantage for purposes of this discussion. Take a look at soldiers - both regular and reserves - Israel has about 650,000 troops vs. 2,750,000 for the Arab League/Iran. Israel has 3,675 tanks and 3,900 artillery pieces, against 15,075 tanks and 17,400 artillery pieces for the Arab League/Iran. Despite Israel's highly touted air force, in numbers it's vastly outnumbered. Israel has 537 combat aircraft, 64 transport aircraft, and 239 helicopters. The Arab League/Iran combo has 4534 combat aircraft, 558 transport aircraft, and 1897 helicopters. In conventional terms, Israel is outgunned, period. And I haven't even taken into account the greater Islamic world beyond Iran, or the threat of terrorism. Israel's last line of defense is its non-conventional deterrent. Now it becomes clear why those who would threaten Israel most, have joined the "Ban the Bomb" parade. Israeli policy has always been that it will, "Never be the first state to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East," a policy of ambiguity. But from Vanunu in the 1980's on, cracks have opened in the Israeli "plausible denial" routine. Even Shimon Peres some years back, slipped, and implied that Israel does have the bomb. Most estimates place it more precisely at about 200 bombs on the low end, up to as many as 500-600. In the last few years, Israel took charge of three German built submarines. They liked them so much, that they requested Germany to sell them some more. But do to reports that Israel had modified cruise missiles with nuclear warheads to be launched from the subs, Germany declined. I don't have any "inside" info on that, but I sure hope it's true. That would give Israel the "strategic triad" of land, air, and sea launched nukes. Just what Israel's "friends" need to keep them at bay. As long as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah elements, al-Qaeda, and whoever else wants to destroy Israel; as long as Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya, and whoever, continue their own WMD programs; as long as the balance of forces favors Israel's enemies; Israel needs to continue to build up its own non-conventional weapons capabilities, and be prepared to use them. Israel has a moral obligation; in fact, it was created to make sure, a second Holocaust never happens. Sure Israel should "Ban the Bomb". WHEN THE MESSIAH COMES! Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

UN VERSUS ISRAEL: TELLING STANDARDS Posted by Anne Bayefsky, April 21, 2004.

GENEVA -- The U.N. response to the death of Abdel Aziz Rantissi, and Sheikh Ahmad Yassin before him, exposes a disturbing fault line in the war against terror. Hamas has been declared a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, as well as the European Union, Canada, and Australia. The 1988 Covenant of Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement, speaks for itself. It begins "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." It continues: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Its violent message is invoked in the name of defeating the "plan of World Zionism" "embodied in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion." In Rantissi's words of July 2001: "I urge all the brigades to...target the Israeli political leaders and members of parliament..."; "the Hamas political leadership has freed the hand of the brigades to do whatever they want against the brothers of monkeys and pigs." In plain language, the Hamas aim to obliterate the Jewish state is about pure, unadulterated antisemitism. Rantissi himself (and others, such as Yassin) was named by the State Department as a "specially designated global terrorist." Last month the Bank of England froze the assets of Rantissi because "the Treasury have reasonable grounds for suspecting that...Rantissi, is or may be a person, who commits, facilitates or participates in" "the commission of acts or terrorism." As soon as Rantissi took over the leadership of Hamas on March 23, 2004, after the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) killed Yassin, he called for further bloodshed, "The doors are wide open for attacks inside the Zionist entity." Israelis keeping the grim statistics have counted at least 425 Hamas attacks killing 377 Israelis and wounding 2,076 in less than three and a half years of violence, including 52 separate suicide attacks. Hamas terrorists have blown themselves up among teenagers at a discotheque, families at a Passover seder, in restaurants, in a pedestrian mall, and on commuter buses. Only one day prior to Rantissi's death Hamas claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing which killed another Israeli. The international legal framework, therefore, could not be clearer. Rantissi was a combatant in a war. His killing was not "extrajudicial" because the legal term, by definition, applies only to individuals entitled to judicial process before being targeted. Combatants -- including the unlawful combatants of Hamas who seek to make themselves indistinguishable from the civilian population -- are not entitled to such prior judicial process. Furthermore, the manual on the laws of armed conflict of the International Committee of the Red Cross, states that civilians who take a direct part in hostilities forfeit their immunity from attack. Even beyond that, judicial process in these instances is not an option, since it would place both IDF and Palestinian civilians at much greater risk of harm. The overriding legal limit on the conduct of war and the targeting of combatants like Rantissi is the rule of proportionality. In the words of the Geneva Conventions, an attack on a military target "which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life" is prohibited if "excessive." The likelihood of civilian casualties must be carefully considered prior to taking action. With zero civilian casualties (the only deaths being that of Rantissi and two Hamas accomplices), the Israeli action could not have been more precise, and hence, proportionate. The United Nations response to the legality of the killing of Rantissi (and Yassin) is therefore enormously revealing. "U.N. condemns Israel's assassination of...Yassin...[E]xtrajudicial killings are against international law." On April 17, the identical words were used to condemn the "assassination of Rantissi." Almost immediately following Yassin's death (along with eight others at least four of whom were also Hamas terrorists), on March 22, 2004, the U.N. Human Rights Commission convened a special sitting. This move was despite the fact that the commission was already in session, and at that very moment set to consider the only country-specific agenda item at the commission for the past 34 years -- on Israel. The suffering of Yassin's victims, or the current genocidal plight of Sudanese in the Darfur region -- reported by international agencies to involve 10,000 dead in the past year, and which may now have reached 1,000 dead per week -- didn't move the commission to hold a special sitting. But they did see fit to schedule an extra three hours to denounce Israel over the death of one man -- a man who personally instigated and authorized suicide bombing, ordered the firing of missiles at Israeli communities, and repeatedly exhorted his followers to "armed struggle" against Israelis and Jews "everywhere." Having glorified the terrorist in particular, the commission went on to sanction terrorism in general. On April 15, the commission adopted a resolution, sponsored by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which aimed to condone suicide bombing by referring to "the legitimacy of the struggle [against] foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle" and the "right...to resist." The resolution passed by a large majority. Shortly thereafter, resolutions which would have criticized Zimbabwe, China, and Russia (in relation to events in Chechnya) were either blocked by procedural maneuvers or voted down. The total tally of country specific votes coming from the 2004 Commission now stands at: Israel - 5 Rest of the World - 4 (the other states being Belarus, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Turkmenistan). While those other country resolutions were being considered, the U.N. hosted a two-day meeting on Israel's security fence, April 15 and 16, directly across the hall from the commission. The juxtaposition was staggering. The same facilities were provided for a meeting on Israel as were provided for human rights on the remainder of the planet. And hours before the meeting ended on its second day, the "Final Document" -- condemning Israel -- was distributed to the public claiming to be based on discussions which had not yet occurred. Sooner or later one can only hope a light will go on. Whatever superficial lip service is paid to the contrary, according to the U.N., Israel has no right of self-defense. Everything the U.N. does in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict -- whether it be calls for the return to 1967's indefensible borders, declarations that Jerusalem is occupied territory, demands for the return of Palestinian refugees ending the Jewishness of the state, or efforts to isolate and demonize Israel as the worst human-rights violator in the world today -- emanates from the standpoint that the Jewish side is not entitled to fight back. Anne Bayefsky is an adjunct professor of law at Columbia's Law School. Her op-ed piece appeared on the National Review website (www.nationalreview.com/comment/bayefsky200404200848.asp) April 20, 2004. To Go To Top

BOMBED OUT ISRAELI BUS 19 TO ARRIVE IN WASHINGTON FOR NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER Posted by Tovia Singer, April 21, 2004.

On May 6th, the National Day of Prayer, Christians for Israel will hold a rally from 12noon till 4pm in front of the Capitol building with the theme, "Terror, A one way ticket." At the rally they will bring bombed out Israeli bus no. 19 and place it on display in front Capitol, where it will be shown during much of the month of May. Please come and join your voice with ours. Dr. James M. Hutchens, President and Chairman of the Board of Christians for Israel, and Editor of the magazine "The Jerusalem Connection," is on the forward edge in the battle area of informing, educating and activating America's Christian community on issues related to Israel. Find out what drives Dr. Hutchens' mission for Israel, on the Tovia Singer Show, Wednesday, April 21 from 10 PM to Midnight New York time (Thursday, 5 - 7 AM Israeli time) on Israel National Radio and around the world on the Internet at www.toviasingershow.com To contact the Tovia Singer show, which is broadcast live throughout Israel on a live stream at Israel National Radio, e-mail ephraim@toviasingershow.com or call (888) 620-2384 x83. To Go To Top

BULLETIN #485 TO JEWISH VOTERS Posted by David Ben-Ami, April 21, 2004.

This was spoken by Shmuel HaLevi on Radio Free Israel. Basic, The Nation's future has been mangled for over a decade by experimenters and charlatans and the time has come to ask ourselves: Who do we trust to tell us the truth at this junction. And WHO brought us all to THIS JUNCTION to start with. A final call is before us. Because you KNOW that it is not Gaza and "a few Yosh" Jewish towns... It is the Jewish nature of the State at stake and the lives of hundreds of thousands or more Jewish people that will be forcefully transferred. A faithful hour is before you and me... Do we rely on the word of: Mr. Binyamin Begin OR Mr. Sharon & sons Dr. Uri Landau OR Mr. Olmert Mr. Dov Shilansky OR Mr. Netanyahu Mrs. Geula Cohen OR Mrs. Livni Professor Arens OR Mr. Shitreet Add your choice... When you vote seek deep inside you and remember all you know about from the past and what you see in the future. Then think about this... In the Gaza cemetery are buried dozens of those murdered by the Islamic murderers imported by the Oslo partners. Those are known as "victims of peace". In Gaza live dozens of children and grown ups maimed for life by the same Islamic murderers. Those are known as "victims of peace". Do you wish the dead to be unearthed and the wounded transferred against their will and the will of other Jews of conscience? Do you wish to make them become BOTH "VICTIMS of PEACE" and "PAINFUL SACRIFICES"? Your choice... PM Sharon's plan will also bring the murderers into using the burial plots formerly covering our people and into the homes of those maimed for life? Do you wish hundreds of Industrialists in Erez to be also "painful sacrifices". DO you wish mid range field artillery and rockets two miles away from the Rothberg Power Station and Ashkelon? YOUR CHOICE! REMEMBER THE OSLO PROMISES! Before you vote, REMEMBER... To Go To Top

FEDERMAN "APPEALS" SENTENCE Posted by Bryna Berch, April 21, 2004.

Noam Federman was never brought to trial - probably because the government knew it has no case. So they keep him in 'administrative detention' in jail. It is immoral that he has been kept in jail for months - and off and on for years - but the government released hundreds of potential terror bombers in exchange for one Israeli, a drug dealer. This is a news item from todays Arutz-7. Noam Federman, who is imprisoned in the same Shikmah Prison from which nuclear-reactor traitor Mordechai Vanunu was freed today, has appealed against his administrative detention sentence - but his wife Elisheva admits that it is barely more than a show, "just like the imprisonment itself. We wrote in the appeal that we don't even know exactly what we are appealing. No facts have been presented, no witnesses, no testimony - this is administrative detention with no charges. We cannot defend ourselves against it, and we can never even know when the sentence itself will end. The GSS claims that it has secret information that it cannot divulge - but the judge has no way of knowing or judging if the information is true. He doesn't call witnesses or hear our side, such as whether Noam has an alibi or not - and that's why we think that this is all a show." She emphasized that there are currently no Israelis in administrative detention, including Israeli-Arabs, other than her husband. Elisheva said that the public protests are important in that they show that we "want to live in a democratic country that grants basic rights, such as the right to be informed of the nature of charges against him and to be able to confront the witnesses against him. The public thus shows that it will not accept this. I think that the public in Judea, Samaria and Gaza especially understands this, and especially with the intentions to do what we warned about, i.e., giving over large areas of the Land of Israel to the Arabs - I think that if people dare to object very strongly, then they are liable to also find themselves in administrative detention together with Noam." "I call upon the public not to despair and not to give up," Elisheva Federman said. "Although all our efforts suffered a setback last month when the sentence was renewed for another six months, we must continue to fight this injustice until we are successful, for two reasons: So that Noam will be released, and so that there won't be many more people in similar situations." Elisheva noted that the President has no legal standing in this case, as there was no trial and conviction, "but he can make his opinion known, just like several MKs have done. What astonishes me is that MK Michael Eitan, head of the Knesset Law Committee, invited me two separate times to his committee, which made recommendations regarding the conditions of imprisonment - but both times, the Shabak and the Prison Service simply ignore these recommendations. It's hard to believe that there are organizations in this country that feel that they are simply above the law and answerable to no one." To Go To Top

PEOPLE ARE BEAUTIFUL, THE WORLD STINKS Posted by Linda Olmert, April 21, 2004.

As usual, Dennis Prager puts into words what many of us are thinking. This was on the Town Hall website (www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20040420.shtml) April 20, 2004. If you love goodness and hate evil, this is a tough time to stay sane. Israel has killed Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the Hamas terror leader, and almost every nation in the world and the nations' theoretical embodiment, the United Nations, have condemned Israel for doing so. World leaders and the world organization have said almost nothing about Communist China's ongoing destruction of one of the world's oldest civilizations, Tibet. World leaders have said almost nothing about the Arab enslavement and genocide of non-Arab blacks in Sudan. But they convene world conferences to label Israel, one of the most humane and decent democracies on earth, a pariah. In order to retain my sanity, I ask the reader's indulgence as I use this column to express personal thoughts. I have contempt for "the world." I cherish and admire countless individuals, but I have contempt for "the world" and "world opinion." "The world" has never cared about evils inflicted on human beings. The Communist genocides meant nothing to humanity. The Holocaust meant nothing. With almost no exception, the mass atrocities since World War II have likewise absorbed humanity less than the Olympics or the Miss World Contest. I have contempt for the United Nations. It is one of the great obstacles to goodness and decency on this planet. Its moral record -- outside of a few specialized agencies such as the World Health Organization -- is almost entirely supportive of evil and condemnatory of good. It is dominated by the most morally backward governments in the world -- those from the Arab and Muslim worlds, the Communists during their heyday and African despots. It appointed Libya, a despotic, primitive state, to head its Human Rights Commission, whose members include China, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. Neither the United States nor Israel sits on the Commission. I regard the European Union with similar revulsion. With little opposition, Europe murdered nearly every Jewish man, woman and child in its midst, and a half-century later provides cover for those in the Middle East who seek to do to the Middle East's Jews exactly what the Nazis did to the European Jews. For the European Union to condemn Israel's killing of a Hamas leader, when Hamas's avowed aim is another Jewish genocide, is so loathsome as to board the incredible. For Germany and France (who, unlike America, have almost never shed blood for the liberty of others) to do everything they can to undermine America's attempt to liberate Iraq is similarly repugnant. As for the international news media and journalists, I regard most of them as aides to evil. This is not new. The 1932 Pulitzer Prize, American journalism's highest award, was given to Walter Duranty of the New York Times for reporting from the Soviet Union. In his reports, Duranty repeatedly denied Stalin's forced starvation of Ukrainians that led to the murder of more than 6 million of them. The same "newspaper of record" deliberately toned down reporting on the Nazi annihilation of Jews 10 years later so as not to appear "too Jewish." The Soviet decimation of Afghanistan was so little reported in the international media -- especially radio and television -- that when I talked about its scope and horror on my radio show in the 1980s, listeners kept wondering if I was telling the truth -- they had never heard anything about it. In the last years of the Saddam Hussein regime, according to John Burns of the New York Times, major news reporters refused to write stories about Iraqi mass murder and atrocities lest the Saddam regime remove their press credentials. For most journalists, and their newspapers and television stations, it was better to lie for Saddam and have a bureau in Baghdad than to tell the truth but have no Baghdad bureau. And not one international news organization calls Hamas or any of the other Palestinian terror organizations "terrorists." I love learning and revere the title of "professor," but with few exceptions, universities, too, merit contempt. The vast majority of professors who take positions on social issues are moral fools. They teach millions of students that America and Israel are villains and that the enemies of those decent societies are merely misunderstood victims who are often justified in their hatred. And they loathe the American Judeo-Christian value system that has made the United States the world's land of opportunity and beacon of liberty. In sum, I feel that I am living in a world that is morally sick. Good is called bad, and bad is called "militant," "victimized," "misunderstood" and "the product of hopelessness," but rarely bad. Only those who fight the bad are called bad. I am kept sane by the knowledge that there are hundreds of millions of individuals who can still tell the difference between good and evil; by the knowledge that there was never a time that humanity was particularly decent; and by a strong belief that a good God governs the universe even though He allows evil many triumphs. And I believe this God will judge Osama bin Laden and Jacques Chirac appropriately. To Go To Top

AFSI SOLIDARITY MISSION: IT'S TIME TO PUT FACES ON THE JEWS FACING EXPULSION Posted by AFSI, April 21, 2004.

AMERICANS FOR A SAFE ISRAEL/AFSI invites every caring Jew or Christian, who wishes to see the faces of the children and adults who actually live, work, play, and go to school in the 21 Jewish communities that make up Gush Katif/Gaza, and the threatened communities of Judea and Samaria, to take this last opportunity to sign up for AFSI's May 16-24 Chizuk (Solidarity) Mission to Israel. It's chilling to read a statement quoting Secretary of State Powell about the "Elimination of Settlements:" "For the first time, settlements are being evacuated and being turned over to others for use... And four more settlements are being turned over or released, in the West Bank. This is the beginning of a process... The key thing, the reason we support this so strongly, is because there will be the elimination of settlements." We observe with amazement the euphoria in many camps for this "breakthrough" between PM Sharon and Pres. Bush, that Bush was "kind" enough to take Sharon's offer of expelling Jews from their homes. He was also "kind" enough to accept the idea that some Jews, maybe 90,000 out of 250,000, might be able to remain in the Jewish state. What about the names and faces of each person facing the loss of their homes after roots had been established over three generations? Should we create a monument, like the Vietnam Veterans monument in Washington, DC, or the one being planned at Ground Zero on the site of the World Trade Center disaster, or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, listing the names, one by one, of the victims of this immoral, inhumane, and illegal plan? If there were a daily media feature about one of the families that would be ousted by this expulsion, we would learn some of the small details of their lives. Perhaps we would read about their service in the IDF, how some of them lost limbs and lives to Arab suicide bombers, how some are coping with cancer, high blood pressure, and the flu, and how babies are being born, marriages being held, sports events taking place, and all of the ordinary details of life that everyone understands. The reality is that the people living in the "settlements" in Israel are the same kind of people, going through the same cycle of life experiences that we ourselves experience. Just imagine how New Yorkers might have felt if in response to the terror attack on the Twin Towers, residents of the city would be evacuated by American soldiers so that the city could be turned over to the Arab terrorists. The idea is absurd. It is no more absurd than turning people out of their homes in Israel in order to turn them over to Arab terrorists. Should this happen, it would be a victory for terrorism that would echo throughout the world. THIS IS YOUR VERY LAST OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN AFSI'S MAY 16-24 CHIZUK MISSION TO ISRAEL. WE WILL BE MEETING AND GREETING THE EMBATTLED RESIDENTS OF GAZA, JUDEA, SAMARIA, and EAST JERUSALEM. We will meet Dror, and Rachel, and Moshe, and Chaim, and Pinchas, and Ezra, and Yitzchak, and Tova, and Miriam, and Judy, and Sarah and Noam, and Yifat, and David, and Aryeh, and more and more and more. We will visit them in their homes, businesses, schools and synagogues. We will dine with them, pray with them, and celebrate with them. The numbers will take on faces. You will begin to care about them, just as we care so deeply. We have very few openings left for the trip. Please call the AFSI office, 212-828-2424, to make your booking. The all inclusive cost of $1800 per person must be received by April 30. Don't miss this unique opportunity to experience the real Israel. An outline of the itinerary may be found on the AFSI website: www.afsi.org or send an mail to afsi@rcn.com Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. To Go To Top

SHARON'S "DISENGAGEMENT" ANALYZED Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 21, 2004.

INTRODUCTION The hyperbole about Sharon's plan and exchange of letters with Pres. Bush distracted US reporters from the wordings' ambiguities crafted to appear to support Israel. People were further thrown off the scent by the Arabs' usual complaining. The Arabs complain to make themselves seem the aggrieved party and the underdogs. Their pose obscures how much they are getting, as if since the Arabs find the plan unsatisfactory, it must be unsatisfactory. Actually, the Arab demands are unsatisfactory. The Arabs deem themselves entitled to rule us lesser beings. They want all of Israel. Since the plan carries them only half way towards that goal, they complain. We get taken in by all this posturing, and fail to notice the lack of democracy in PM Sharon's releasing the plan suspiciously soon before the referendum on it, his refusal to debate on it, and his effort to prevent the Knesset from debating it. He is selling a pig in a poke. Most of us don't see that Sharon's method is a poke and don't figure out that the plan he put into it is a pig. SUMMARY OF THE PLAN PM Sharon released a summary of the plan but neither its details nor the side-letter to the US stating further concessions. Did he plan not to release them before the referendum on it by Likud Party members? In any event, they were leaked. (Each point in the summary that I excerpt from IMRA is followed by my parenthetical remarks.) 1. Israel aspires to a "peace process" that establishes "two states for two peoples," as part of Pres. Bush's vision." (For more than a decade of Oslo, Israel thought it had a peace process but got a terrorist war. Jihadists want conquest, not peace. Since they don't want peace, the last thing to give them is sovereignty, with its power to raise armies. Nor are the western Palestinian Arabs a separate people. The operating principle here seems to be, "22 states for two peoples, with the 21 Arab states eventually to extinguish the one Jewish one.) 2. Since Israel has no partner for agreement, "Israel must act on its own," "to emerge from this stagnation." (What does "emerge" mean? It is not defined.) 3. The plan would improve Israel's long-term security. (How is not stated. Israel admits that terrorism would increase. How does an increase in terrorism improve security?) 4. "It is clear" that part of Judea-Samaria will remain part of the State of Israel." (It isn't part of the State of Israel now. It is not clear that it would become so. Sharon's plan suggests it would be, but Bush's letter does not confirm it. Bush refers every point to final status negotiations. Since the Sharon plan defers unctuously to getting US permission for this and that, none of Judea-Samaria is likely to become part of Israel, at least not without a "compensating" concession. Israel is foolhardy in subordinating its national security to a State Dept. that objected to Israel's birth and has tried to whittle it down ever since.) 5. Disengagement would "reduce friction" with Arab residents and improve their lives and economy. (Friction does not arise from contiguity but from jihad. The Arabs are waging jihad to destroy Israel. The proper defense against jihad is to weaken the Arab economic ability to wage jhad, so fewer will remain to wage it. Improving the P.A. economy and living conditions is counter-productive folly. Nor does anybody appreciate it. My fellow Jews delude themselves by supposing that by behaving nicely, they will be tolerated. How could antisemites appreciate Jews, no matter how they behave? The hatred is independent of how Jews behave, because it primarily is a gentile neurosis.) 6. "Israel hopes" the P.A. would "have the sense" to stop violence and rejoin dialogue. (The P.A. violence is PM Sharon's excuse for withdrawing, as the P.A. wanted. From the Arab point of view, violence works. They have the sense NOT to stop it. What good is dialogue, when the Arab goal is the conquest of Israel? Why do supposedly intelligent Westerners overvalue shibboleths such as dialogue and evenhandedness?) 7. This disengagement would end claims about Israeli responsibility for the Arabs in Gaza. (What claims, were not stated. Enemies of Israel, however, do not need a pretext for making claims against Israel, since they willingly lie about it. This supposed advantage of the Plan seems to be another instance of Jews harming their own national interest in order to prove their purity to gentiles. It is shameful behavior.) 8. The existing agreements would continue to "prevail." (Continue to prevail? The Arabs violate all their agreements' major provisions. If Sharon does not know that, he is a fool; if he does know it, he takes his Party members for fools.) THE PLAN IN SEMI-DETAIL 1. Evacuate Gaza, ending basis for claim that it is "occupied territory." (It isn't occupied territory. Instead of evacuating from it to end the basis for a misconception, Israel should have explained the falsity of the claim. But if it gives this reason, then it implies that the claim is true. Therefore, the cry will go up that Israel should evacuate from all of Judea-Samaria, because that is "occupied territory," too. Of course that cry will go up, since its false baying panics the government of supposedly staunch Ariel Sharon.) 2. Evacuate part of Samaria, to give the Arabs territorial contiguity. (This is part of Israel's willingness to set up a P.A. state. Israel should have been annexing parts of Judea-Samaria so as to forestall P.A. statehood. Statehood would extinguish Israeli claims to that part of its homeland and establish an Arab right to an army. What do you think the P.A. would do with an army? Hint: the P.A. has no other purposes than jihad and graft.) 3. Israel would improve transportation contiguity in the P.A. and facilitate economic improvement. (This provision would facilitate the movement and staying power of the P.A. terrorists.) 4. Israel would continue to control land, sea, and air access to Gaza. (The Arabs are considering declaring independence. Who would deny it them, absent the Israeli army? When they get it, they would control access to Gaza.) 5. Gaza would be demilitarized. (Says who? Is Sharon hinting at a thorough smashing of all the terrorist organizations? If done, Israel would have won the war there. Then it may as well reclaim that part of its homeland. Is Sharon offering the pipedream or lure of a supposed negotiated disarmament, which a decade of Oslo proved the Arabs would not honor?) 6. Israel reserves the right of self-defense. That statement hints but does not state baldly that this includes sending security forces back into Gaza if necessary. (The US already has objected to the reservation. If Gaza becomes a sovereign Arab state, Israel could not send its forces back without that being considered an invasion. Given the world's bias, the UN is likely to bring sanctions against Israel, regardless of the justification of the invasion.) 7. Israel may allow Egypt, Britain, the US, and Jordan to gear the P.A. forces up to fight terrorism. (The CIA already has provided such aid. The result was greater ability to detect Israeli agents in the P.A. and snipers murdering Israelis. The four countries mentioned all are enemies of Israel.) 8. If conditions warrant, Israel would consider allowing a seaport and airport for Gaza, under suitable arrangements. (Under pressure, Israel makes defective arrangements. The ports would be set up to import heavy arms. If the Arabs gain sovereignty, Israel would have no voice in this matter.) 9. Israel will turn over abandoned facilities intact but "reserves for itself the right to ask for consideration of the economic assets." (Israel would ask; nobody would pay. Why should they, when Israel plans to turn over whole communities, anyway?) 10. Israel would continue to supply electricity, water, gas, and fuel to the Arabs in the abandoned areas. Israel would continue to allow P.A. workers, trade, and payment of taxes to the P.A.. (A rational plan would declare that since the whole P.A. is engaged in terrorism to drive the Jewish people out of all of its homeland, Israel would not devote any resources to the undeserving P.A., who consider murder "honor" and recreational.) 11. "Israel views very favorably continued activity of the international humanitarian organizations and those that deal with civil development." (The international organizations use the language of humanitarianism to mask propaganda attacks on Israel. Israel should block or counter their efforts.) 12. Israel may give up the joint industrial zone it built, or consider one with Egypt and Gaza. (Israel has an unofficial joint trade zone with Egypt and Gaza -- the arms smuggling tunnels.) 13. "Israel expects broad international support for the disengagement move." This support is needed to persuade the P.A. to cease terrorism and start negotiating." (I would have predicted broad international hostility, but don't have to predict it. It has set in. There is one way to reduce that hostility. That way is if the US persuades the Arabs, as it is attempting to do, that the US is letting Israel disengage but not impose any conditions upon the Arabs.) FURTHER IMRA COMMENTS Israel retain control over Gaza? Hardly. Pres. Bush answered Israel's letter proposing the Plan by referring to the Road Map. That means that the P.A. could get independence and therefore control over Gaza. Israel retain other areas, which is Sharon's supposed purpose of making these concessions now? Questionable. A White House briefing called the retreat "precedent." If Israel gets to keep its centers in Judea-Samaria on the basis of their having been established as Jewish population centers, then Israel would be pressed to cede Arab populations centers in and around Jerusalem or elsewhere. As Israel reduces security measures in order to benefit the Arab population of Judea-Samaria, the US would pressure Israel for more concessions. Send security forces back in, in self-defense? Not with US approval, without which Israel does not do much, these days (4/15). "The US has rejected an Israeli request for the right to invade the Gaza Strip following a unilateral withdrawal," even if the P.A. uses Gaza as a launching site for terrorism. Bush only went as far as to mention Israel's "right of self-defense," which is open to interpretation (IMRA, 4/16). Most Israeli means of defense have been widely criticized by agencies such as the State Dept. that are "understanding" of terrorists. A US official said that he US hopes that with help from Arab states, the P.A. would take responsibility to fight terrorism, as called for by the Map (IMRA, 4/16). The Arab states define terrorism as Israeli defense from Arab attacks against Israeli civilians. Those states would not encourage the P.A. to fight real terrorism except briefly and for show. Sharon's notion of making concessions in advance of negotiations is the most counter-productive means of bargaining with the Arabs. The Arabs would take what they are given without any feeling of obligation, because their jihad is based on their concept of having sole legitimacy. ARUTZ-7 COMMENTS The Bush-Sharon understanding amounts to an Israeli expulsion of thousands of Jewish residents from the communities they had established, in exchange for vague commitments and hopes (that are harmful to Israel and to peace or have been continually dashed by the Arabs). Among them are that the Arabs "must" stop terrorism and incitement, that borders "should" take into account Israel's population centers, that Arab "refugees" "need not" enter Israel, and that the goal is a "viable and contiguous" Arab state." Even a "return" to the P.A. would put demographic pressure on Israel (as over water supply). Despite the deceptive wording, Finance Min. Netanyahu professes himself more or less satisfied that Bush met his conditions for an acceptable arrangement. Bush called the disengagement a first step. He ignored the main problem, how to deal with terrorism. Terrorism is sure to increase after the Israeli withdrawal, according to the heads of Israel's secret service, military intelligence, and almost all IDF generals. Pres. Bush offered no financial help to Israel for its economic sacrifice to its enemies demanded by the US, nor agree to the route of the separation fence (temporary but financially ruinous for Israel, forced thereby to reduce real defense expenditure such as new research projects). Customarily, the US refers to the "pre-1967 Green Line" as the boundary under dispute. This time Bush referred to the earlier 1949 armistice line. He may have reopened the boundary not just of Yesha but of Israel for negotiations and to Arab claims! Egypt and Jordan could reopen their treaties with Israel. This foresees the dismantling of Israel according to the Arab phased plan (4/15). WHAT DOES THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TELL THE ARABS? The Bush Administration has assured Arab states that Sharon's Plan would not impair the "right of return" to Israel! That contradicts PM Sharon's claim, accepted by reporters, about his plan. Sec. Powell and deputies told the Arab leaders that the Plan would get them a state and thousands of Israeli houses (IMRA, 4/14). Sordid of Powell, isn't it! WHAT ISRAEL ASSURES THE U.S. PM Sharon's aide Dov Weissglass, wrote to Dr. Rice that Israel will work with the US ambassador to define the construction line of settlements, unauthorized outposts, and removal of checkpoints. Israel will try to expedite legal decisions on liens on P.A. revenues. Israel assures the US it wants a P.A. state and is committed to the MAP to get them (IMRA, 4/14). It omits Sharon's reservations to the MAP. The reservations were stated just to defuse objection at the time. Israel lets itself be dictated to by the US in behalf of the Arabs, who wish to take over both. ANOTHER SUPPORTER OF THE PLAN Although Education Min. Livnat disparages the Plan, she supports. "Give it a chance," she says, because the people want hope and the PM wants to strengthen settlement blocs (Arutz-7, 4/18). What poor rationalization and leadership! Give a bad plan a chance to uphold the people's misguided hope in it? False hope is the enemy of survival. Strengthen the settlement blocs? ISRAEL WEAKENING THE SETTLEMENTS Attorney General, Menachem Mazuz, instructed the government to stop funding all Yesha Jewish communities. He claims this is to keep any of the money from going to illegal outposts. If so, why does he include Gaza, which has no unauthorized outposts? Why does he exempt Arab villages having tens of thousands of illegal buildings? Collective punishment (Arutz-7 4/15). This may be preparatory to full withdrawal, in the usual underhanded, leftist Israeli way. WHY LIVNAT AND NETANYAHU SUPPORT THE PLAN Mins. Livnat and Netanyahu both dislike and support the plan. Why? To remain positioned to succeed PM Sharon (likely to be indicted). They believe that they are more important to Israel than matters of borders and a sovereign terrorist state (IMRA, 4/18). MORE TRICKS TO THE REFERENDUM Pm Sharon was supposed to debate Min. Uzi Landau over the Plan. Sharon wanted this to consist of just one speech each, his the last word, not rebuttals, and no questions. Since that is not a debate, Min. Landau refused, and so no debate will be held (IMRA, 4/19). Politicians commonly promise debates as if confident of their case, but then set such conditions as to minimize or obviate genuine clash of ideas and putting the opponent on the spot. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE PLAN (1) It rewards terrorism - why else the concession? (2) The reward encourages more terrorism, especially in the absence of Israeli troops. (3) Ceding territory when under attack sets an evil precedent. (4) No reciprocity, so that the terrorists got something for nothing. (5) Contrary to what PM Sharon touts about the plan, Israel does not retain a right to keep part of Yesha, according to Sec. Powell. (6) The P.A. refuses to give up the "right of return," and the Plan doe not require them to agree to give it up. (7) It not only relinquishes Jewish rights to live in another part of the Land of Israel, but the Jews ethnically cleanse their own people (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/16, e-mail). (8) The plan has false premises. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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 HARD LESSONS OF TERROR Posted by Linda Olmert, April 21, 2004.

I wonder how many times this has to be said in order to make inroads on peopl's conscousness? I know the explanations, and still, I cannot reconcile to the need to again and again convince people that we have the same right to self defence as anyone, and to fail to do so each time. This article was written by Melanie Phillips and appeared in the Dail Mail, April 19, 2004 The killing by Israel of the Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantissi has been widely condemned in Britain and Europe. The Palestinians are screaming for revenge. Only America has stopped short of condemnation, confining itself to vague concern about consequences. The Rantissi killing happened days after President Bush publicly endorsed Israel 's policy of retaining some West Bank territory and refusing automatic right of settlement in Israel to the Palestinians. As a result, many in Britain may be inclined to the following conclusions: that Israel killed Rantissi because America has now given it carte blanche to do whatever it likes; that the killing will once again ratchet up the violence; and that instead of building upon America's support by keeping its head down, Israel has displayed its usual arrogance and aggression which has now killed off the chances of a political settlement. This widespread reaction rests upon some profoundly dangerous misunderstandings, not just about Israel and the Middle East but about the wider phenomenon of global terror and what encourages it. The first major error is the idea that Israel is torpedoing a political settlement. There is in fact no political settlement on the horizon. For all Tony Blair's insistence otherwise, the road map is dead in the water because the Palestinian Authority refuses even to attempt the map's first and most basic requirement, that it dismantle the infrastructure of terror. Not only has it refused on the grounds that to confront Hamas would mean civil war, but Yasser Arafat's own militias - and even the PA's own policemen - are repeatedly involved in the human bomb attacks which are being regularly attempted (and mainly thwarted). You can't negotiate a settlement if there is no one committed to peace with whom to negotiate. Next, the idea of a connection between President Bush's statement and the Rantissi killing is demonstrably absurd. Israel decided some time ago that the only way to prevent yet more of its citizens being murdered by Hamas was to kill its entire leadership. Indeed, it tried unsuccessfully to kill Rantissi, the operational commander of Hamas's terrorism, last June, and killed its founder, Sheikh Yassin, a month ago. Since its rules of military engagement forbid it from attacking if there is a risk of large scale civilian casualties, it could only strike when opportunities arose - and these have been rare. In Britain, many see this as aggression. Undoubtedly, targeted killings are troubling. But since the alternative is to wait for more innocents to be blown apart by Hamas, how can that possibly be right? No legal authority in the world requires a state to sit on its hands while its citizens are systematically murdered. When US forces killed Saddam Hussein's sons Uday and Qusay last year, there were plaudits from Tony Blair. Britain and the US are now hunting Osama bin Laden and his principal lieutenants in order to kill them. Earlier this month, at least 600 Iraqis were killed by the Americans in Fallujah with no outcry. Why, then, is Israel judged by a double standard? The problem is that many in Britain simply don't grasp the reality of what is happening in Israel - from where, incidentally, I have just returned after a ten-day stay. Endless TV images of Israelis in tanks demolishing Palestinian houses, with an often hostile commentary, have created an impression of unbridled aggression. In reality, Israel is fighting a war for its own survival that has now gone on for more than fifty years. The Palestinians have repeatedly stated that their aim remains the eradication of Israel altogether. Why is Israel alone deemed not entitled to defend itself? But, people say, killing terrorists surely makes violence more likely. Well, history tells us that the opposite is true. It is the west's weakness and appeasement of terrorism over several decades which have encouraged the terror-masters to turn the screw ever tighter. After all, Palestinian terror escalated during the years of the Oslo "peace process", when a political settlement seemed more likely than at any time. And here lies perhaps the biggest - and most bitterly ironic - error by Israel's critics. For to its Arab enemies, far from representing strength Israel actually embodies a terrible weakness. Sure, Israel is armed to the teeth. And since Israel well understands that, for the Arabs, weakness rather than strength is the trigger for violence, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's decision to withdraw from Gaza has given targeted killings another strategic purpose - to show that Israel is not departing with its tail between its legs. But the Arabs know that Israel is weak in their own terms. This is obvious in the way Israel and the Arabs respectively respond to attack. In 1982, Syria put down a revolt in Hama by wiping out at least 20,000 inhabitants. The Palestinians have been massacred in, or kicked out of, virtually every Arab state in which they have settled. Israel, by contrast, goes in for pin-point targeted killings, or house-to-house terrorist hunts with a relatively severe attrition rate among its own forces. The weakness is embodied in the Palestinian taunt to the Israelis that "we will win because you love life and we love death." And here, the warning for Britain and Europe too could not be starker. For like Israel, we are facing the same "asymmetric warfare", in which conventional military might becomes worthless if countries are not prepared to use it against those who are willing to turn even children into human bombs. The danger lies in not recognising that terrorism is encouraged by weakness, not strength. Al Qaeda attacked America because it perceived the west was decadent and so assumed it was not prepared to fight. It made a big mistake over America, but it got Europe (with the exception of Tony Blair over Afghanistan and Iraq) dead right. The history of modern terrorism is a history of appeasement. From the first Palestinian plane hijacking in 1968, the response of the west was to assume there were legitimate grievances that had to be addressed. From that point, terrorists had every incentive to continue. The Israelis themselves, in deep denial after half a century of annihilatory attacks, have also attempted appeasement - negotiating with the terrorists who have killed them, slapping them down for continuing to kill them and then making overtures again while still being killed by them. Now for the first time, they have said the charade has to stop. But both they and we still face the same hideous dilemma. Terrorism can only be defeated by superior strength. This was shown in Falluja where (whatever other horrors Iraq still harbours) the huge American show of force produced a truce. But in general, are we really prepared to use massive firepower? Are we in the west prepared to compromise our values by creating the carnage that may be necessary to defeat this new kind of terror warfare, which routinely uses human beings as both bombs and shields? If it's a choice between our values and our lives, which course will we take? For in a war between those for whom life is everything and those for whom life is nothing, there's no contest. Our values require us to distinguish between terrorism and self-defence. Moral courage means facing reality and making hard choices. Our survival depends on it. To Go To Top

IF WE CAN'T EVEN NAME THE ENEMY Posted by Beth Goodtree, April 21, 2004.

Israel, the United States, the European Union, India and parts of Africa, as well as Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindis, Animists and many others all have a common problem. Actually three common problems: they are all in a state of war with an organized global entity numbering in the many millions, they refuse to accept this reality, and they cannot even name the enemy. This enemy uses new tactics and fights an unconventional war. No more massing of uniformed troops on their victim's borders prior to invasion. This enemy infiltrates their target using the legal means set up by their targets, hides among civilians, covers their faces when out in the open, and uses lies and propaganda, as well as blackmail to establish a foothold. This enemy has no shame, certainly no morals or a particle of honor. And yet all of the abovementioned nations cannot name this enemy, confusing the symptom with the actual pernicious disease. Unlike Mr. Bush and his compatriots have stated, the enemy is not terror. Terror is merely a symptom of a fatal sickness; it is a warfare tactic employed by the adversary. Therefore, stopping the terror is not feasible unless the enemy, and thus the disease itself, is vanquished. So who is this enemy that everyone refuses to identify? The enemy is radical Islam; what some call Islamism, Islamists, Islamo-fascists or Islamo-Nazis. And what is even worse, radical Islam is becoming the norm instead of the aberration. Politically incorrect as this may be, it is time for the truth to come out. Besides, the evidence is rampant if only people have the fortitude to face it. As much as the purveyors of political correctness may delude themselves into thinking that everyone will behave nicely and everything will be equal and hunky-dory if only we speak in socio-religious-neutral tones, reality doesn't work that way. One has only to examine acts of terrorism for the past three and a half years to see that it is almost exclusively caused by Islamists. America, Bali, Madrid, Kashmir, the Philippines, Pakistan, India, Russia --- no place is safe from the cancer of Islamism. And their hideouts include England, France, Germany, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Canada, South America, the US -- like cockroaches they go wherever they can infiltrate a society. And if one looks at all the wars currently being waged on the planet, it is almost exclusively Islamists on one side of each conflict. In the Sudan they enslave the Christians and Animists. In parts of Indonesia they force conversion to Islam with the threat of having one's head chopped off. Then they sexually mutilate, without anesthesia, the newly converted men and women -- all in the name of Islam [1]. Last month I had the honor of meeting Sheik Abdul Hadi Palazzi, secretary general of the Italian Muslim Association. In our all-too-brief conversation he told me -- in direct contradiction to President Bush's exhortations that most Muslim's in the US are peaceful -- Islam in America has become radicalized. And unlike Mr. Bush and his apparently inadequate advisors, this man is an expert on Islam and its adherents. So I began looking for the evidence. Sadly it is all around me. For example, CAIR (Council on Islamic-American Relations) is unfortunately still a respected and influential lobbying group, even though it has proven ties to Hamas and al Qaeda. It also has no tolerance for anyone other than Muslims as evidenced by the following frightening statement [2] made by Omar Ahmad, co-founder of CAIR: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." And while CAIR may be just one group of Muslims in America, the entire Muslim-American community has at best been silent whenever a Jew is injured or murdered by Muslims for merely being a Jew. No condemnations, no public examinations (as the Catholics are now doing in light of abuse by priests). Those who keep publicly silent are, in fact, showing their support for genocide (killing someone because of their religion) by refusing to condemn it. And living two towns over from Paterson New Jersey, I witnessed the virtual glee and the celebrations in the street with which the mostly Palestinian Arabs treated the news of the murderous attacks of 9-11. Nor are Jews the only victims of Islamism. I have yet to hear any Muslim in America condemn the Islamist killings and desecrations of Christian Arabs and their holy sites. Lebanese and other Arab Christians have been systemically slaughtered for being Christian. They have had their lands confiscated, their holy sites held hostage and their bibles used as toilet paper [3] without any official Muslims in this country condemning the practices or offering assistance to the victims. Even countries that have been officially termed 'moderate' are anything but gentle and accepting. Malaysia has been deemed moderate by the US and yet here is what Malaysia's former leader, Dr. Mahathir had to say [4] at the Organization of Islamic Countries in the Fall of 2003: "We need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships..." And every last delegate there -- from all 57 Islamic countries -- gave that speech a standing ovation. Even the whole concept of an Organization of Islamic Countries is not merely exclusionary, it pits Islam and an Islamist agenda against the rest of the world. Then there is Saudi Arabia; her royal family honored guests for a Bush barbecue. They are the funders and supporters of the founding movement of Islamism --Wahabbism. And they continue to fund it to this day. They also prosecute those who would purge their schoolbooks of material offensive to Christians and Jews and advocating armed jihad. [5] Meanwhile Egypt, another country designated 'moderate,' has official state textbooks exalting Islamic holy war. [6] Until the civilized world gets the moral courage to tell Muslims that certain forms of Islam are unacceptable and merely a cover for a Nazi-like agenda, we will continue being victims, as will the truly peaceful, gentle Muslims who are hiding out of fear. Sheikh Palazzi has said this at risk to his life. It is time for our political leaders to stop being so cowardly and politically incorrect as to put their voting public at risk by refusing to acknowledge the real problem --Islamism -- and make a stand. Footnotes: 1. http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-duin010202.shtml 2. http://www.anti-cair-net.org/ 3. (Note: this is a notoriously anti-Semitic, anti-Israel website) http://www.rense.com/general25/bibles.htm 4. http://thestar.com.my/oic/story.asp?file= /2003/10/16/oic/20031016123438 5. http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/ sns-ap-saudi-extremes,0,5489561,print.story? coll=sns-ap-world-headlines 6.http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/index_me.html Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer, with a background in advertising. She writes political commentary and the occasional humor and science articles. To Go To Top

EUROPEAN LIBELS, MEDIEVAL AND MODERN Posted by Michael Freund, April 21, 2004.

This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post today. It is archived as http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid= 1082438195502&p=1006953079865 Situated outside the Swiss village of Montreux, along the shore at the eastern end of Lake Geneva, sits one of the most impressive architectural relics of the Middle Ages. With its turreted towers and Gothic architecture, the Chateau de Chillon, or Chillon Castle, built on an islet nearly a thousand years ago, projects an image of beauty and serenity, one that is striking to all who come to see it. But the dazzling exterior is deceiving, for beneath it lies a dark and sinister secret, one which says a great deal about Europe's relationship with the Jews, both in the distant past as well as in the present. The year was 1348, and the Black Death was ravaging the Continent, wiping out entire communities in its wake. The Jews of Europe suffered no less from the plague than did their non-Jewish neighbors, but that did not save them from being blamed for it anyway. Slander against the Jews, such as rumors of well-poisoning, spread quickly throughout France and Switzerland, laying the groundwork for massacre and persecution. In September 1348, the Jews of the Swiss town of Villeneuve were taken to the Chateau de Chillon and imprisoned in its dungeons. Horrible tortures were inflicted on them, until a Jewish surgeon named Balavignus finally "admitted" under duress that local Jews had concocted a poison made of Christian hearts and flesh, spiders, frogs, and lizards, topped off with the "sacred host" used in Catholic ritual, with the aim of poisoning Christian wells and rivers. As a result, Villeneuve's Jews, its men, women and children, were burned alive in the depths of the castle. As historian Joshua Trachtenberg writes in The Devil and the Jews, "This tale, in one form or other, spread on the heals of the plague and was eagerly seized upon by the terror-stricken populace as an adequate explanation of its origin." A few months later, in January 1349, 600 Jews in Basel were burned to death, and this horrific pattern repeated itself in all its horror in other communities throughout France, Switzerland and Germany. Back then, Europe's treatment of the Jews was shaped and molded by a ridiculous lie. In that sense, at least, very little seems to have changed. For while Europeans once charged us with the "blood libel", saying we illicitly used other people's blood, they now falsely tar us instead with "land libel", alleging we have taken other people's territory. Just this past Monday, we were witness to this, when Swiss Ambassador to Israel Ernst Iten refused to attend a street-naming ceremony in Jerusalem in honor of a Swiss Righteous Gentile. The reason for the ambassador's rudeness was that the street in question is located in Jerusalem's Pisgat Zeev neighborhood, which Israel took in the 1967 Six Day War, and which Europe considers to be "Arab land." "Unfortunately," the ambassador wrote in a letter to Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupoliansky, "the embassy cannot attend a ceremony for a street that is not located within the internationally recognized territory of Israel." In other words, what His Excellency was really saying was: you Jews are a bunch of thieves because you stole Palestinian land. And this, of course, represents not only the individual view of Switzerland, but that of Europe as a whole, which has long pressed Israel to yield control over Judea, Samaria and Gaza to the Palestinians. Just last week, the EU reiterated its stance on this issue after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon met with US President George W. Bush in the White House. At an April 15 news conference in Brussels, European Commission spokesman Reijo Kemppinen, said that Israel and the Palestinians would have to negotiate an agreement resulting in two "viable and independent states based on Israel's 1967 borders." "The European Union," he added, "will not recognize any changes to the pre-1967 borders, other than those arrived at by agreement between the parties." Now Europe is certainly free to ignore thousands of years of history and archaeology, which prove that the Jewish presence in places such as Hebron and Bethlehem predates that of their own civilization. And if they wish to pay no heed to the Bible and its mandate, which promises the land of Israel to the Jewish people and to no one else, that is between them and G-d. But they absolutely have no right to slander us and cast aspersions on us, falsely accusing the Jewish state of occupying someone else's land. This is not just a question of historical truth, but also a matter of life and death. For just as belief in the medieval "blood libel" legitimized the murder of Jews in the minds of its adherents, so too does the modern European "land libel" lend legitimacy to those who now target us, be they Islamic fundamentalists, Palestinian nationalists, or European anti-Semites. After all, no one likes a land-grabber, and if, as Europe insists, the Jews are pilferers of Arab territory, that would appear to set the stage for transforming them into a justifiable object of hatred and disgust. Over six centuries ago, it was precisely this kind of attitude that led to innocent Jews being burned in the dungeons of Chillon. In its modern-day incarnation, the result is suicide bombings, synagogue desecrations and shooting attacks. And so, despite the passage of hundreds of years, one thing remains unchanged. Then, as now, Europe is no less culpable for what it has wrought. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister?s Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. To Go To Top

MINISTER LANDAU OBJECTS TO SHARON'S DICTATORIAL POLICIES Posted by Aaron Lerner, April 21, 2004.

This is IMRA's unofficial English translation of Minister Landau's Letter to PM Sharon Protesting Quashing of Debate. Dated: 20 April 2004 from Dr. Uzi Landau, Minister Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Jerusalem Mr. Prime Minister, I do not write this letter to you as a politician. As politicians we have disappointed. I write to you as one of the People, who, by right, should have his voice heard even if he opposes your position. I wish to start not with what I, along with most members of the Likud, opposed with our hearts and souls all these years but instead with what I support with a certainty: I am for peace, and I know that there will be compromises for that. I am for that my grandchildren aged one and a half year won't have to still go to war. I am for battling terror to its defeat, as you demonstrated again last week that you can do. I am for a Likud that is based in the principles, wisdom in diplomacy and pragmatism in security of Jabotinzky and Begin. I am for the same Ariel Sharon that helped to build the Likud. And that we all worked hard for in order to elect you as prime minister and as leader of the People of Israel. And I am for our strong ties with our great friend the United States, and with our important friend President Bush. But I am not for the fact that we, the opponents of disengagement, have not received any opportunity in the Likud. I am not for the fact that the democratic process has been shamed, the process that is the basis of our movement and our State. I am not for the fact that the institutions of the movement are crippled for over a year and a half and that there is no proper decision making process. I am not for your decision that a referendum of such dramatic and historic importance should be made in a forceful grab. I am not for the fact that the voting public has been given a total of gross three weeks, that in practice is less than ten days, to study a matter that has such a fateful impact on the future of the Jewish People. I am not for that the democratic Party Election Committee should be pressured from above, without having even one representative of the disengagement opponents, and act as the long arm of the prime minister's advisors. I am not for the way that decisions were made about the having and then the canceling of the debate - exclusively in accordance with the needs of the media advisors of the prime minister and without any consultation with us. I am not for the fact that the prime minister promises party members to accept their decision on his plan,but in practice creates a situation that prevents any possibility for a genuine referendum. And in particular I am not for the fact that a hidden threat is added as if opposition may endanger the strategic ties with the USA, and your status, Mr. Prime Minister. I am not for the disgraceful campaign that your advisors have organized against your opponents, opponents who are saying virtually the same things that you said only half a year ago. And I speak, Mr. Prime Minister, on behalf of many members in our Party. I am not for the fact that our Party, the ruling Party, is driven more by the force of personal interests than commitment to principles and true pragmatism. Mr. Prime Minister, if the path of the referendum that you have imposed on us was not so crushing, it would be only natural that I would argue with you in this letter about the quality of the program and ask you how, of all the people in the world, you should be the one found rewarding terror. I would argue that this is not true disengagement. After all, you know that we are not leaving Gaza as we are not now in Gaza, and the Palestinians will continue to enter to us via the Erez Crossing in their masses to Ashkelon, Ashdod and Tel Aviv, some with bombs strapped to their waists! I would have shown, black on white, that there is absolutely nothing committal in the "benefits", as they were presented in the letter of President Bush, but after all, you knew this already in the middle of the celebratory press conference at the White House. I would also sue for the honor of the Jewish People. Between Holocaust Day Ceremonies and Memorial Day and Independence Day ceremonies the Government of Israel says that "the friction has been reduced" between Jews and Arabs when the meaning of it is the exclusive transfer of Jews and the advancement of a process under which there will be two and a half Palestinian states and barely on complete - ever shrinking - state for the Jewish People. This is moral? This is just? The truth is that from your standpoint the results of the referendum are no longer relevant. The politicians are exhausted. But I want to reveal something to you, Mr. Prime Minister - the Nation is strong! The members of the Likud are strong! My friends and I embarked on an unpopular struggle within our Party, whose institutions don't give any fair chance to. At a time that most of the media has been recruited to support the plan and make no effort, and not even the semblance of an effort, to present our positions in a balanced way. In our eyes, Mr. Prime Minister, this referendum is no longer on the plan that you agreed upon with the Americans before we knew the plan. It marks the beginning of a campaign on the dearest to our heart. On what remains from Judea and Samaria. On Jerusalem. On personal security in Tel Aviv. On a democratic Likud. On principles. On diplomatic wisdom. On clean politics. On the image of the State of Israel. The cancellation of the planned debate between us put an end to the possibility of having - and even just the semblance of having - a public discussion of your unilateral withdrawal plan that is the subject of the referendum. The public has a right to know. It is your obligation to make possible democratic debate. To my great sorry the fact that if you wish - there is a debate and if you don't - it is cancelled, serves witness to the entire referendum process: as a done deal. But despite all this we are in this game in order to win. Respectfully, Uzi Landau Dr. Aaron Lerner is director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) (Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava). IMRA's Internet address is http://www.imra.org.il and email address is imra@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

ARIEL SHARON HIJACKS ISRAELI DEMOCRACY Posted by Mikimia and Herb Sunshine, April 20, 2004.

This article was written by David Bedein and appeared on the website of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies's 'The Maccabean Online' (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). In a democratic system, if a head of state's foreign policy initiative is rejected by his cabinet, government, legislature and the political party of that head of state, such a leader would normally be expected to at least drop his foreign policy initiative, if not resign. And so it is occurring that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's January 2004 initiative to demolish 21 Israeli farming communities in the Katif district of Gaza and hand them over to the PLO, now at war with the state of Israel, was not approved by the Israeli government, the Israeli security cabinet, the Knesset parliament or by the Likud central committee. As Hebrew University Law Professor Eliav Schochetman put it, an Israeli prime minister who wished to demolish or relocate Jewish communities would require a clear majority of the Israeli Knesset to support new legislation in that regard. Otherwise, notes Schochetman, the prime minister simply has no authority to act in that way. Despite this, Sharon brings his Katif demolition plan to the White House this coming Wednesday, openly stating that he wants a situation where the U.S. government will endorse Sharon's program for unilateral retreat and removal of Jews from anywhere in the Gaza Strip. Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was more explicit, saying that if the Israeli Knesset or the Israeli cabinet were to subsequently reject the idea, then the U.S. and other nations would place international sanctions on Israel. And since Olmert oversees the Israeli government-controlled radio and television, he has seen to it that the Israel State TV and Israel State Radio, known as the Israel Broadcasting Authority, drum into the heads of the Israeli people that the 8,500 Katif residents live "in the heart of Gaza", even though the Katif farming communities were developed on sand dunes located far from the city of Gaza or from the UNRWA camps dominating the Gaza Strip. Sharon and Olmert have engaged the services of PR experts to market the idea of the Jews in Katif as being a "burden on the people of Gaza" to both the American government and to Jewish organizations throughout the U.S. They do this to galvanize support for their plan. For the first time since the Israeli Labor Party left power in February 2001, the Israeli government will work with the Americans for Peace Now to lobby Congress to support a program that calls for unilateral eradication of Israeli communities established in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Sharon's closest friends and colleagues have abandoned him. Sharon's closest friend in the media for the past 55 years, Uri Dan, issued an open letter to Sharon on the day before Passover, in which Dan posed ten questions to Sharon which challenged the wisdom of the plan for the removal of the 21 Jewish farming communities of Katif. One of those questions warned Sharon that the vacuum left by a unilateral retreat could very well transform Katif into an Arab terror haven. Sharon has not responded to the hard questions put to him by Uri Dan. But Sharon has a new friend and advisor: Dov Weisglass. Weisglass acts as Sharon's lawyer and office manager. Before directing Sharon's affairs in government, Weisglass acted as the lawyer for the Director of PLO finances, Muhamad Rashid, and as the lawyer and head of investments for the PLO's casino in Jericho. In his position, Weisglass has renewed Israeli financial transfers to the armed forces of the Palestinian Authority, which are directly involved in terror actions against Israeli citizens throughout Israel. To make matters worse, the man responsible for running the terror operations of the PLO for the past four years, Jibril Rajoub, will also be coming to Washington this week to ask the U.S. for appropriate weapons to help him take over the Gaza Strip once Israel withdraws its civilians. Rajoub is the same PLO official who requested and received sophisticated weaponry from the U.S. during the first stage of the Oslo process, under the pretext that the PLO was going to fight Islamic terror groups. Israel was then under the leadership of Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, both of whom went along with the idea. However, Rajoub openly incorporated Islamic terror groups within the PLO security forces, who then launched a terror war against Israel; all while introducing police state control of his own people. Today, the situation is repeating itself: Rajoub asks for weapons from the U.S., again under the pretext of controlling Islamic terror, and proclaims he has the support of the Israeli security establishment and the Israeli government to take over Gaza. In other words, Rajoub intends to ethnically cleanse Gaza of its Jews -- with the approval of Ariel Sharon. And since the PLO claims the Negev and Israel's coastal region under the premise of the "right of return" to lands lost in 1948, Rajoub's army will not stop with Katif. Katif will be only another step to taking the rest of Israel, as Hamas has said it will do all along. Sharon's office was asked if the Israeli Prime Minister would deny giving sanction to arming the Palestinian warlord, Rajoub. Sharon's office would not deny giving such sanction. The Israel Foreign Ministry and Israel Defense Ministry also refused comment. Most recently, Rajoub addressed the board of governors of the American Jewish Committee and, indeed, endorsed terrorism against Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines, in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria or Gaza. The director of the AJC Jerusalem office would issue no statement attacking Rajoub, saying that Rajoub's appearance was approved by the Israeli government. The question remains whether the Bush Administration will accept a situation of an Israeli government ruled by the arbitrary decrees of Ariel Sharon and a Palestinian Arab entity ruled by a thug. President Bush has long stated that his purpose is to see a democratic Palestinian Arab entity co-exist with Israel, the only democratic state in the Middle East. If President Bush welcomes Sharon's imposed initiative and arms Rajoub, the American government will snuff out one democracy and create yet one more Arab totalitarian regime in the Middle East. Will this path only further serve to set the world on fire? To Go To Top

HAMAS' NEXT TARGET: THE US? Posted by IsrAlert, April 20, 2004.

This was written by Erick Stakelbeck, who is senior writer for Investigative Project, a Washington, DC-based counter-terrorism research institute, whose executive director is Steven Emerson. Call 202 363 8602 or send an email to articles@ctnews.org This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at /www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1082345145731&p=1006953079865 Saturday's assassination of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi represented a victory not just for Israel but also for the US in its ongoing war against radical Islamic terrorism. Like his predecessor Ahmed Yassin, who met his demise courtesy of an IDF missile last month, Rantisi spoke often of expanding Hamas's operations to include US targets. One of Rantisi's last public appearances came on Easter weekend, as thousands of Palestinians took part in rallies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in support of the armed rebellion against US and coalition forces in Iraq. Speaking at an event in Gaza, Rantisi called on Iraqis to "strike and burn" US and coalition forces, and "teach them the lessons of suicide actions." Rantisi's comments - which came amid chants of "Death to America" and the burning of American flags by onlookers - were the latest in a long line of threats made by Hamas leaders toward the US. Yet, up until Israel's assassination of Yassin last month, the consensus among American media was that Hamas was concerned solely with the destruction of Israel, and had no intentions of targeting the US. This state of blissful ignorance has been shattered, at least momentarily, in the month since Yassin's death, with media outlets nationwide expressing shock at Hamas's "unprecedented" threats against the US, including comments by Rantisi that the US had "declared war against God," and would be defeated "by the hand of Hamas." Indeed, Hamas has been an avowed enemy of the US for years, as evidenced by its incendiary public statements and alliances with terror-sponsoring states like Syria, Iran, and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. But if recent events are any indication, the group's animosity for the US may have reached a new level. On April 3, Muqtada al-Sadr, the extremist cleric behind the ongoing Shi'ite uprisings in Iraq, vowed to serve as the "striking arm" in the region for Hamas and Lebanese Hizbullah. Given that only US and coalition forces - and not Israeli troops - are presently stationed in Iraq, it's obvious whom al-Sadr intends to "strike" in Hamas's name. BUT AL-SADR'S comments merely echoed those made by Yassin himself shortly before the US invasion of Iraq last March, when he issued a fatwa (religious decree) ordering all Muslims to kill Americans wherever they were found if US troops dared set foot on Iraqi soil. As recently as November 2003, Yassin spoke of "striking the United States in the appropriate place," a statement hardly befitting a man eulogized by a large segment of American media as an "elderly quadriplegic" and "spiritual leader." But for sheer anti-US vitriol, it is difficult to top Rantisi, who wrote an article published on a Hamas website in April 2003 titled, "Why shouldn't we attack the United States?" In the article, Rantisi argued that attacking the US was not only "a moral and national duty - but, above all, a religious one." In another piece published soon after, Rantisi openly called for "terror against the United States." Even before Rantisi's comments, however, Hamas had solidified its anti-American credentials by supporting the ousted Ba'athist regime in Iraq. In September 2002, Israeli agents videotaped a ceremony in Gaza City in which Yassin and other Hamas officials presented certificates and checks from the Iraqi government to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Yassin spoke at the rally, exhorting Palestinians to support Iraq in its confrontation with the United States. Tellingly, the participants stomped on American and Israeli flags upon entering the hall, and chanted pro-Saddam slogans. Hamas has done much more than merely preach violence against the US, though; it has also targeted American citizens directly. In December 2003, Israeli authorities charged Jamal Akal, a Canadian citizen born in the Gaza Strip, with receiving weapons and explosives training from Hamas for use in terrorist attacks on Jewish targets in Canada and New York City. And last April, two Hamas suicide bombers blew themselves up inside Mike's Place, a bar located next to the US embassy in Tel Aviv that is frequented by US government employees. While previous Hamas attacks in Israel have claimed the lives of more than a dozen American citizens, these two incidents represent a troubling escalation in Hamas activity against the US. High-ranking Hamas officials have already managed to infiltrate the US, the most notorious example being Musa Abu Marzuk, a senior Hamas leader now based in Syria. Marzuk, who had been living in northern Virginia, was detained by US authorities for 22 months and deported to Jordan in 1997. Following Yassin's death, Marzuk warned his former host country that "currently the US is not a target (of Hamas), but in the future, only God knows." Despite the media's reluctance to catch on, Hamas's recent statements and actions regarding the US make clear that the future Marzuk spoke of is now. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

THE STRUGGLE FOR THE PROMISED LAND OF ISRAEL IS CONSTANT AND INCREASING Posted by Women in Green, April 20, 2004.

The biased media in Israel is portraying the Bush-Sharon meeting as a "historic achievement", not telling the public that President Bush said nothing new and that Sharon really got nothing tangible. At the contrary, the meeting was basically a new "White Paper' against the Jews of Israel, calling for the uprooting of Jews from Gaza as a first step, with the intent to continue with the Road Map, i.e. the additional uprooting of the Jews of Judea and Samaria and the creation of a PLO state in its stead. Bibi Netanyahu and Limor Livnat, on the Day of the Observance of the Holocaust(!), have betrayed their principles and have joined the list of weak leaders of the Likud who intend to implement the Hamas platform: uprooting of Jews from the Promised Land of Israel, ethnic cleansing of Jews and handing over of entire Jewish communities to the Arab enemy. This is no time for despair, this is the time to act! For it is true our political leaders are weak- but the People of Israel are strong. Women in Green urge all to join the different activities for the survival of the Land of Israel: 1) In exactly 2 weeks, Likud members will be asked to vote for or against Sharon's suicidal withdrawal plan. We urge all our members and friends in Israel to join the efforts of "Manhigut Yehudit" and Moetset Yesha in convincing the Likud voters to vote against. Call Moetset Yesha (02-5810624) and you will receive a list of Likud members to visit and convince. 2) Last week's Women in Green's demonstration (on the day of the Bush-Sharon meeting) was very successful. Pictures of our opposition to the withdrawal plan were seen in tens of different newspapers in Israel and abroad (of course, as usual, without mentioning our name). Despite it being very last minute, many people joined and held signs saying "The people are with Gush Katif"- The land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel, etc. This week, Women in Green will go and demonstrate at a place where mostly Likud people can be found: the Jerusalem Marketplace of Mahane Yehuda. WEDNESDAY, April 21, 2004 at 10:30 am we will meet at the entrance of Mahane Yehuda Marketplace from the Jaffa Road side- holding signs saying: "A real Likudnik votes NO" [to the disengagement plan] "A real Likudnik refuses to transfer Jews" "A real likudnik loves Erets Yisrael" "A real Likudnik does not give terror a prize" Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green) is an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

COMPASSION IN IRAQ IS SELF-DESTRUCTIVE Posted by Yaron Brook and Elan Journo, April 20, 2004.

The bloody siege in Fallujah and the standoff against a religious warlord, Moktadr al-Sadr, and his militia indicate that the war in Iraq is worsening. Things are going badly not because--as some, like Sen. John Kerry, claim--the United States is arrogant and lacking in humility, but because it is self-effacing and compassionate. The Bush Administration's war in Iraq embraces compassion instead of the rational goal of self-defense. Such an immoral approach to war wantonly sacrifices the lives of soldiers and emboldens our enemies throughout the Middle East to mount further attacks against us. Morally, to fight a war in self-defense requires that one soundly defeat the enemy while safeguarding one's forces and citizens. But America's attention has been diverted to rebuilding Iraqi hospitals, schools, roads and sewers, and on currying favor with the locals (some U.S. soldiers were ordered to grow moustaches in token of their respect for Iraqi culture.) Since the war began, Islamic militants and Saddam loyalists have carried out random abductions, devastating ambushes, and catastrophic bombings throughout the country. That attacks on U.S. forces (including those engaged in reconstruction efforts) have gone unpunished has emboldened the enemy. Stark evidence of the enemy's growing audacity came in March with the grisly murder and mutilation of four American contractors. America's response to the attack confirmed the militants' expectation that they can get away with murder. Following the attack, U.S. forces entered the city of Fallujah vowing to capture the murderers and punish the town that supports them. But such resolve was supplanted by compassion. In the midst of the fighting the United States called a unilateral ceasefire to allow humanitarian aid in and to enable the other side to collect and bury its dead. The so-called truce benefited only the enemy. The Iraqis, as one soldier told the Associated Press, were "absolutely taking advantage" of the situation, regrouping and mounting sporadic attacks: as another soldier aptly noted, "It is hard to have a ceasefire when they maneuver against us, they fire at us." As the siege wore on, the goal of capturing the murderers quietly faded--and the enemy's confidence swelled. Not just in Fallujah, but throughout this war the military (under orders from Washington) has been purposely treading lightly. Soldiers have strict orders to avoid the risk of killing civilians--many of whom aid or are themselves militants--even at the cost of imperiling their own lives. Mosques, which have served as hideouts for terrorists, are kept off the list of allowed targets. Military operations have been timed to avoid alienating Muslim pilgrims on holy days. By confessing doubt about its moral right to defend itself, America has encouraged further aggression. There is no shortage of aggressors lusting for American blood, and they grow bolder with each display of American compassion. Consider the shameful tenderness shown toward the Islamic cleric Moktadr al-Sadr, who aspires to be the dictator of an Iranian-style theocracy in Iraq. An admirer of the 9/11 hijackers, Sadr has amassed an armed militia of 10,000 men (right under the noses of our military), and demanded that Coalition forces leave Iraq. On the run for the murder of another cleric, he took refuge with his militia in the holy city of Najaf, which has been surrounded by U.S. troops. Rather than attacking, however, the United States agreed to negotiate. It is as absurd to negotiate with and trust the word of a villain such as Sadr as it would have been to negotiate with Nazis bent on wiping out Allied forces in World War II. It is shockingly dangerous that the United States has allowed a mediator from Iran--part of the "Axis of Evil" and Sadr's ideological ally--to assist in the negotiations. For the enemies of America, Iraq is like a laboratory where they are testing our mettle, with mounting ferocity. The negotiations with Sadr and now with the leaders of Fallujah; our timid response to the insurrections throughout Iraq; American's outrageously deferential treatment of its enemies--all of these instances of moral weakness reinforce the view of bin Laden and his ilk that America will appease those who seek its destruction. If we continue to wage a compassionate war, it will be a matter of time before Islamic militants bring suicide-bombings and mass murder (again) to the streets of the United States. Though Washington may be blinded by the longing to buy the love of Iraqis, our service men know all too well that (as one put it): "When you go to fight, it's time to shoot--not to make friends with people." In its might and courage our military is unequaled; it is the moral responsibility of Washington to issue battle plans that will properly "shock and awe" the enemy. Eschewing self-interest in the name of compassion is immoral. The result is self-destruction. Dr. Yaron Brook is executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI). Elan Journo is a writer for ARI in Irvine, Calif. The Institute (www.aynrand.org) promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead". Send reactions to reaction@aynrand.org To Go To Top

TIM SEBASTIAN'S INTERVIEW WITH HAMAS'S KHALED MESHAAL Posted by Leo Rennert, April 20, 2004.

David Goldberg, Director of Research and Education, CIC Board of Directors, Toronto, Ontario, send this to the CIC Board of Directors. He writes: This is the transcript of an interview conducted yesterday by the BBC's Tim Sebastian with Khaled Meshaal, who has taken on full leadership of Hamas, at least outside of Gaza and the West Bank, after the targeted killing of Abdel Aziz Rantis. (After the elimination of Hamas's Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, Meshaal and Rantisi had shared leadership.) Operating from various Arab capitals -- usually Damascus or Beirut -- Meshaal is an avowed extremist with known ties to Iran and Hezbollah. Meshaal's first task, beyond perfunctorily threatening reprisal against Israel for Rantisi's death, will be to establish control over local Hamas leaders in Gaza, some of whom are reportedly reassessing their options in light of the IDF's successful counter-terrorism measures. BBC, "HARDTALK," April 19, 2004: Tim Sebastian's interview with Hamas's Khaled Meshaal This interview was conducted in an undisclosed location in Beirut under intense security. Mr Meshaal spoke in Arabic and his text has been translated to English. This transcript was done from a vhs recording of the interview. We have made every effort but cannot guarantee total accuracy. TIm Sebastian's Introduction: I'm in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, at the end of an extraordinary day for HARDtalk. We were invited here to meet the leader of the Palestinian group, Hamas, labelled by Europe and America as one of the most dangerous terrorist organisations in the world. It's leader had come here specially from Syria amid meticulous security. We had to change cars, and locations, we ended up travelling in a van that had sealed windows to an undisclosed location. So when we finally caught up with the man in the wake of the assassination of his spiritual leader, Sheikh Yassin, which way is the movement, Hamas heading? TIM SEBASTIAN - Khaled Meshaal. A very warm welcome to the programme. In the wake of the Israeli assassination of Sheikh Yassin, is Hamas planning yet another cycle of pointless revenge violence? KHALED MESHAAL- In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful. Bloodshed in Palestine is going on because of the Israeli crimes before and it didn't begin after the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. The Zionist crime requests a Palestinian response. This is something very ordinary. This reciprocity is acknowledged by all human and spiritual laws and legislations. TS - Where does it get you? Where does it get you, this retaliation? It doesn't change anything. It doesn't get you anywhere does it? More people die. More of your people die, more Israelis die. No progress is made. Haven't you got anything else to offer to the process? KM: Our goal is to end the occupation and not kill people. If the world was able to be fair with us and give us back our land and rights, we won't need anymore fighting and resistance TS - And when you take this revenge and you see the bodies of Israeli women and children on the streets, does that make you feel better? KM: We feel better when the occupation ends. We hope that no blood will fall in Palestine but the one who began with aggression is the one to be held responsible for it. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was a religious cleric paralysed and despite that, he was targeted by Zionist missiles which are American weapons. The Palestinian people have the right to respond to this aggression. TS - Sheikh Yassin is a man who ordered killings of civilians - Israeli civilians. You can hardly complain when in a war he himself is killed can you? KM: Sheikh Ahmed Yassin didn't order anyone. The resistance has a military specialised wing that fights on the ground. It is a natural right. TS - He sanctioned the killings didn't he. He sanctioned them. KM: The resistance operations don't need anybody's decision. Every Palestinian knows his duty. Any Palestinian who sees the Israeli crimes would act normally. The military wing in Hamas like the military wings in other factions knows their duty. They are doing their job in defending their people, responding to the Israeli aggression and resisting the occupation. TS - Mr Meshaal, you're not defending anybody are you. Your tactics are not defending your people at all. There is not one single Palestinian you can defend against Israeli attacks from F16's and from tanks, can you? KM: We are defending our people even if the balance of power is unequal, even if the Israeli weapons are much ore superior. The Israeli occupying enemy must understand that each crime from their end would bring a Palestinian response. TS - You target women and children. That is terrorism of the most brutal kind. KM: We are not targeting civilians and we are not targeting children. >From the beginning the Palestinian resistance was focusing on military targets and on settlers TS - So the suicide bombs on buses aren't for civilians? The children and women who die on buses? I don't notice the suicide bombers allowing civilians off the bus before they blow it up. KM: I didn't complete my answer. I said the Palestinian resistance focused in the beginning on military targets and on settlers. But Israel committed crimes against civilians in the Aqsa mosque in 1990 and in the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron in 1994 against innocent civilians who were praying in the mosque. TS - What are the conditions for a ceasefire? A new ceasefire. KM: Let Israel withdraw first, and after that we will negotiate. This is our land this is our natural right TS - A withdrawal to the '67 borders. KM: We consider this positive step but we have the right in all Palestine TS - You don't say, Sheikh Yassin said that Hamas would agree, he told a German news agency, January 9th, Hamas would agree to a temporary peace with Israel in exchange for the establishment of a Palestinian state on the basis of the 67 borders. Are you saying that doesn't stand anymore? Or it does stand. Would that lead to a permanent ceasefire? KM: We believe in what Sheikh Ahmed Yassin said in Hamas movement. But the question is does Israel accept to withdraw? Ask the occupying side first. Let it withdraw. Let it says I am ready to withdraw to the 67 borders then ask Hamas to hold a ceasefire... TS - I'm asking what your conditions are. KM: I said let Israel withdraw first. It is the one that began the aggression. Let it stop occupation and then everything can be negotiated. TS - They can withdraw but you promise nothing. You promise nothing. They must withdraw but you promise nothing. KM: I have said what Sheikh Ahmed Yassin has said. You have quoted Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. What he said concerning the withdrawal to the '67 borders. If this happened we might have a truce with Israel. We believe in this in Hamas. TS - There could be but you're not saying there definitely would be a truce if Israel withdraws to '67 borders. KM: Perhaps but Israel has to withdraw first. Israel is refusing it. It didn't abide by Oslo. TS - It's the other side that has to move first. KM - Of course TS - The other side has to move first. You think that's good negotiation? You think that's going to produce some results? You know very well that isn't going to produce any results. You're offering nothing in return. You want the withdrawal but you offer nothing in return. KM: We offered positive initiatives. We proposed an initiative to put aside civilians. We proposed that Israel withdraws to the borders of 1967 and then there would be a possibility for truce between us and Israel. We offered several initiatives but Israel which is stronger militarily and is backed by America and whose crimes the world refuses to speak about refuses to withdraw. It refuses to recognise the Palestinian rights. TS - Mr Meshaal the record is different. The record is different. You fought every attempt at peace. You fought Oslo, you were against Madrid, you even condemned the Geneva Accord, you were against the Mitchell document, the Tenet document, your organisation has been against every attempt at peace. KM: Because those initiatives don't lead to peacemaking and the proof is the factual present. What did Oslo do? Did it achieve peace? You are saying the 67 borders. All those agreements that you have mentioned did not bring peace. On the contrary they legitimise the occupation and give it a chance for expansion. The settlements grew bigger under Oslo TS - You want a commitment from the international community but you're not giving any commitments at all. You still have a charter dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Your charter says, Palestine in it's entirety alone is an Islamic (INAUDIBLE).An Islamic endowment. Where's the room for Israel? KM: I want to ask you one question. Arafat gave you clear and repeated commitments and what did you do with him? Did you respect his commitments? TS - Why are you raising the question of Arafat? You don't care about Arafat at all. In 2002 you said "If we want reform, lets start with the leadership. Most of the leaders in the PA need to be changed. What's the point of having a Palestinian Authority if it's incapable of defending it's people". You don't want the Palestinian Authority anymore than Israel. You're on the same side there aren't you? KM: On the contrary there is no problem between us and the Palestinian authority. We are different politically but we negotiate and hold talks. TS - There are huge problems between you and the Palestinian Authority. Huge problems. KM: The biggest problem is between us and Israel. TS - So why did you say that? Why say that in 2002 that you wanted them out? KM: No not at all. This is not true. We have disagreed.. TS - You did say that. In the Daily Star newspaper in Beirut. May 2002 "What's the point of having a Palestinian Authority if it's incapable of defending its people". KM: Yes we criticised the corruption of the Authority and its surrender of the Palestinian rights but we don't call for a struggle with the authority. We call for reforms and we ask to have Palestinian correctness on all levels and an attachment to the Palestinian right. TS - Let's face it, this is just a power struggle between you and the Palestinian Authority. You want to push them aside don't you? They offered you a place in the government, you turned them down. They offered you the hand of cooperation, you turned it down . You don't want the Palestinian Authority anymore than the Israelis do. KM: No, don't put us on the same side with the Israelis. The Palestinian Authority was mistaken when it bargained on the Palestinian rights and when it made mistakes and was hit by corruption. We stood against this because this was against the interest of the Palestinian people. TS - So you condemn them? You condemn them and then you're prepared to do business with them at the same time? The two don't go together. KM: To tell them they are mistaken doesn't mean to be in a struggle with them, I hope you understand this. We might disagree with them in the political point of view or program but that doesn't mean a struggle. TS - Dalal Salama, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, member of the West Bank Fatah committee, said on January 7th, "The differences today between PA and Hamas are deeper than they appear. And not just relating to Israeli/ Palestinian questions but also to the character of Palestinian decision making. Deep differences. KM: Yes we are different politically but we agree on many other matters. We agreed about the intifada. We agreed about resistance. You see Hamas, Aqsa martyrs, Jihad factions and others, we agree on several issues. We agree on the Palestinian right but disagree in interpretations and some political programs. This is very natural. TS - The proof of your willingness to unite with the Palestinians is the fact that you refuse to serve in Yasser Arafat's cabinet. That's the proof of your intention isn't it? Those are your real intentions. KM: The way is not to join a cabinet where Yasser Arafat is. We have proposed to the brothers at the authority and in Fatah movement to participate in the decision making, we are one people, common factions in the intifada and resistance and it is our right to participate in decision making. This is the democracy that you want in Europe and that America wants. TS - If you believed in democracy, if you yourself believed in democracy, why do you get your money from countries, go to countries that have no democracy whatsoever to finance you? Like Saudi Arabia, like Iran, like Syria, not one jot of democracy. What do you care about democracy if you go to these countries? KM: First we are practicing democracy and consultations inside Hamas by ourselves. Second we are not taking any money from countries. We are taking money from people. And the people are the ones who elect and give decision and legitimacy and give us money as well. TS - Five million dollars from Saudi Arabia. KM: Give me the proof. Do you have any proof? TS - Do you deny it? Do you deny it? KM: I don't deny anything that does not exist. TS - You were a guest of King Fahd in Riyadh two years ago. You were personally hosted by King Fahd in Riyadh two years ago. KM: We are visiting the Arab countries and meeting with Arab leaders because they believe in Hamas line and in the resistance movement and stand by the Palestinian right. But that doesn't mean that we took money. TS - The EU needs you to denounce violence otherwise they can't help you. They're not going to help you. KM: The Palestinian resistance is not terrorism neither violence, and therefore we can't surrender our rights. TS - You're the only one with that view Mr Meshaal. You're the only one who thinks that. KM: Do you think I am the only one? What about those people who are resisting occupation and condemning Israel and America? Do you know that 43% of the American people consider the US the biggest danger to world peace? There is an international terrorism led by the US and Israel. TS - A lot of people may be criticising Israel but they're not supporting you. Just because they criticise Israel doesn't mean they support you. KM: It is enough for me that Arab and Islamic people support us and stand with us and all the free people in the world stand with us and a part of the international official position that supports Israel and shuts up on its crimes is a part of the hypocrisy of this phase. I tell you that Israel will be a burden for you in Europe and a burden even for the US. TS - You accuse the West of contradictions but look at your contradictions. You say you want democracy in the region, so it's in your interests that America should succeed in Iraq because if Iraq is democratic, then that's presumably what you want so why do you have Abdul Aziz Rantissi, your representative in Gaza, calling for the creation of martyrdom cells in Iraq so that more people can blow themselves up and sabotage the democratic process. Why? KM: leave Dr Abdul Aziz Rantissi and look to the Iraqi people. Did the Iraqi people accept the US democracy? TS - I'm asking you why Hamas is not supporting the democratic process in Iraq. That's what I'm asking you. Mr Meshaal, you know perfectly well that this is first chance at democracy the Iraqis have had in decades. They had no chance whatsoever when Saddam Hussein was the leader. This is their first chance. Why don't you do everything you can to help them instead of sabotaging? KM: What the US is doing in Iraq is not democracy. It is an occupation and there are killings right now. TS - Do you speak for the Iraqi people? KM: What is going on in Iraq is not our business. We don't participate in its failure or success. But what is happening in Iraq is not democracy and the proof is that you should go to the Iraqi people and do a survey. Do they accept the US occupation? Do they believe in the US pretended democracy? They do not. The Iraqi people don't trust the US promises and don't trust its democracy. We, as Arabs and Muslims, have a long history in democracy. TS - Do you speak for the Iraqi people? KM: I don't speak in their name. I just tell you go to the Iraqi people and ask them. You will hear the true Iraqi position. TS - What if it succeeds. If democracy succeeds in Iraq, will you apologise? KM: I hope democracy would succeed. But I tell you no democracy will succeed with the US tanks. The democracy succeeds when... TS - The voice of doom from Hamas? The voice of doom? Haven't you got anything better to offer than that? No more encouragement than that "It's not going to succeed"? You want the failure, don't you? You want it to fail because the Americans are involved in it. That's why you want it to fail. KM: Do you want to tell me that the problem in Iraq is caused by Hamas movement? The problem in Iraq is much more complex. TS - The Israeli's are going to withdraw from Gaza. They say they are going to withdraw. Are you going to allow this to happen peacefully? Are you going to work in cooperation with the Palestinian Authority or make trouble at Gaza? KM: When Sharon declared that he will withdraw from Gaza, who escalated the violence? Did we or did they? Who killed Sheikh Ahmed Yassin? When did the Apache helicopters assassinate Sheikh Yassin? Wasn't it after Sharon had promised to withdraw from Gaza? TS - Will you work with the Palestinian Authority? Will you cooperate with the Palestinian Authority? KM: Yes we will cooperate with the Authority and with Fatah and all the factions. We agreed on a very clear title. We are partners in the decision making and partners in managing Gaza after the Israeli withdrawal TS - And when the PA condemn suicide bombing, you will just turn away? You won't listen to them. You're not going to obey them are you? KM: Don't interfere in our internal Palestinian matters, we can agree. The problem is not between us as Palestinians. It is not between Hamas and Fatah or Hamas and Arafat. The problem is between us and Israel. Stop the Israeli aggression; oblige Israel to withdraw from our land TS - Your problem Mr Meshaal is that the Palestinian Authority is telling you to stop the suicide bombings but you won't do it. That's not an internal problem. That belongs to the rest of the world. KM: I tell you when the authority asks Hamas or any other faction or Aqsa martyrs to stop it, it knows that the problem doesn't lie in this side, the problem is with Sharon. We stopped several times. We presented more than one truce TS - You're avoiding the question. KM: I am not avoiding it. I am answering you. I am saying the problem is not with us. We presented more than a truce. Last year in Cairo we have declared a truce that lasted for 50 days, who destroyed it? Sharon. TS - How are they supposed to trust an organisation that still has a charter that's dedicated to the destruction of Israel? When you renounce that, when you get rid of that charter, maybe you can create some trust. Why should they do business with someone who is dedicated to destroying them on paper? KM: If he doesn't trust us how do you ask me to trust him? He is occupying my land and killing my children and destroying houses and stealing lands. He is practicing killings and assassination everyday. Then Arafat gave them such declarations and positions and despite this they didn't stop. Didn't Arafat take those positions? And despite this Arafat doesn't have their confidence. TS - Answer me just one question. Does Israel have the right to exist in peace? Do you acknowledge the right of Israel to exist in peace? KM: We consider Palestine our land and this is our natural right and the occupation must end. Occupation cannot be divided. TS - Answer the question, yes or no, does Israel have the right to exist? It's a very simple question. KM: I am saying we have the right to our land and we have the right to be freed from occupation. Any occupation even if time goes by doesn't become legitimate. TS - So the answer is no. Israel does not have the right to exist. That's what you're telling me. KM: The occupation doesn't become legitimate even after a long time. You are talking about a fair and comprehensive peace. The Palestinian who was forced to leave his land in Haifa and Jafa, if he doesn't return to his land, how do you say this is fair? Why do you stick to your rights in Europe and the whole world while you ask us to drop ours? TS - So Israel does not have the right to exist. Let's just clarify this once and for all. You're saying Israel does not have the right to exist. TS - So you're not going to answer my question. Let's just clarify that for the sake of the viewers, you're not going to answer my question because it's too difficult. KM: This is not difficult. I answered in the spirit of the situation. Occupation must end regardless of the duration. Therefore, it is our right to hold on to our land. TS - How can anyone negotiate with people who will not give a straight answer to a straight question? How? KM: Didn't you understand my answer? TS - I don't think the rest of the world will understand. KM: People will understand it. I am asking you one question. Before 1948 what was happening on the land of Palestine? There were a people living peacefully on its land. TS - Mr Meshaal, you want to go backwards when the rest of the world wants to go forward. You always go back. KM: I am telling the truth, if you want to deal with a present situation you must look to its roots. TS - Mr Meshaal, you came from Syria to do this interview here in Beirut and a lot of people might expect that you would have something new to offer. Something apart from just the same old cycle of violence. Do you really have nothing new to offer to this process? KM: I will summarize very clearly Hamas position. First to adopt it in Europe and oblige America to do so. It consists of putting aside civilians in the struggle. If you were pitying the circle of killings in occupied Palestine oblige Israel to accept to put aside civilians in the struggle from both sides. TS - Put aside the civilians as a first step. KM: I am telling you let us stop the bloodshed from both sides. Let us put aside civilians in the struggle and let it just be between resistance from the Palestinian side and the Israeli forces and settlers. You are refusing this. When you are refusing our initiative to put aside civilians, you are allowing continuing the bloodshed. Why do you want to make pressure just on us and you can't do any pressure on Israel? TS - And the second step? KM: After that if Israel is convinced and sees the necessity to withdraw from the occupied territories, then this is a good step and then I would think the violence and killings in the region would stop even for a period of time, then coming generations would continue their own vision. But at least let us do a first step. Let us stop the struggle between civilians, let Israel withdraw first then tell the Palestinian people we gave you a state. TS - Khaled Meshaal. Thanks for being on the programme. To Go To Top

SHARON EXPLAINS - 10 YEARS AGO - WHY NOT TO WITHDRAW FROM GAZA Posted by Deb Kotz, April 20, 2004.

THis is quite telling and shows how short our memory is. If the PA over the past 10 years took the hundreds of millions in U.S., European and Arab donations and developed themselves into a respectable nation that does not tolerate terrorism, Sharon would now have a leg to stand on. Unfortunately, the same arguments he made after Oslo hold true today. Yet, Sharon himself is advocating for just such a terrorist state. This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). Today is Yamit Day - the 22nd anniversary of the uprooting of the northern Sinai city of Yamit and a dozen neighboring communities. The evacuation and uprooting, which was carried out in the framework of the peace treaty with Egypt, was overseen by then-Prime Minister Begin and then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. The day will be marked in the Hesder Yeshiva of N'vei Dekalim - and probably nowhere else - beginning at 5 PM. Yeshiva head Rabbi David Gavrieli will deliver a Torah lecture and a film on the evacuation will be shown. The evening will be capped off with a talk by Col. (res.) Rabbi Moshe Hager, who heads a pre-military yeshiva academy in Beit Yatir and was a leader of the 1979-82 Movement to Stop the Withdrawal in Sinai. Precisely ten years ago, on the 12th anniversary of the Yamit pull-out, Sharon was interviewed on Arutz-7. The then-Knesset Member explained why a withdrawal from Gaza, Samaria or Judea was totally unacceptable. Excerpts: A-7: "Some of the public remembers you, MK Sharon - possibly to your consternation - as the man who evacuated Yamit. Can you take us back to this day 12 years ago? Where were you, what did you do?" Sharon: "First of all, I would like to note that it was very hard to separate from Sinai, an area in which we fought during the Six Day War, the War of Attrition and the Yom Kippur War, and an area whose horizons we came to know. It was especially painful to evacuate the communities and their residents. This was very painful. We made great efforts with the Egyptians to retain these areas, but it was impossible to do this and at the same time to make peace with them; we tried many other avenues, including an exchange of territory, but these did not succeed. On the one hand it was very sad, but it also aroused not a small amount of jealousy to see how the Egyptians related to their sacred values..." A-7: "Your formulation at the time was, 'Peace in exchange for territory" - something we are hearing now as well [in the framework of the six-month-old Oslo agreement, to which Sharon and the Likud strongly objected - ed. note]." Sharon: "I think it is very hard to compare that which occurred in Sinai, or what we could have done then, with what we face now. Sinai was a land far from our population centers, and we were able to reach an agreement that an area 200 kilometers wide would remain demilitarized forever. In addition, we signed an agreement with a sovereign country that controls its territory - and not with a terrorist organization that cannot and does not want to control terror organizations, nor even its own internal factions that continue to employ terrorism. In addition, Egypt had no other territorial demands [other than what we gave them], and this is different than the present situation." It is interesting to note that every one of the four points Sharon made in comparing the Sinai agreement with the Oslo Accords work to the detriment of the disengagement plan he is now promoting: * Gaza is close to Israeli population centers. * No agreement on demilitarization has been reached. * No agreement has been signed with a sovereign country; in fact, no agreement is to be signed at all! * The entity that will be taking control of the area still has major territorial demands upon Israel. Deb Kotz is an active member of the Brandeis Chapter of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) and maintains an email list to distribute articles of interest to the local community. She can be reached at DebKotz@aol.com To Go To Top

ARAFAT AND SHARON MANIPULATE; AMERICA MAKES WORTHLESS PROMISES Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 20, 2004.

ARAFAT AUTHORIZED MURDER OF YANKS IN GAZA Last Year, P.A. Arabs ambushed a US embassy convoy in Gaza, killing several Americans. A US investigation found that Arafat had approved the attack in advance, as a warning to the US (IMRA, 4/13). Arafat had four people arrested for that ambush, and tried secretly, shortly after the US announced a big reward for the murderers' capture and it threatened to freeze aid to the P.A. if the P.A. did not start cooperating in serving justice. The US believes that the trial was held merely to persuade the US to continue the subsidy. The US also believed that the accused, whom the P.A. released, were known to be innocent from the start (Arutz-7, 4/4). Arab deception of the West includes insincere negotiations, going through the motions of reform, and false promises to prevent violence. Arafat authorizes the terrorism and then pretends to punish it! Cynical, but typical of his culture. This treachery has not gotten enough publicity in the major media. It should be emphasized, because it demonstrates the anti-Americanism of the P.A. and the unreliability of pacts with the Arabs. It shows us where to direct our war on terrorism rather than our tax revenues. It also brings into question the patriotism of our government. Regardless of the Party in power here, the US government has been promoting PLO sovereignty, with all the implications for military aggression implied, regardless of the PLO murder of Americans, including the two US diplomats whom Arafat ordered murdered decades ago. Our government condones the murder of its citizens, when by these Arabs. That should be investigated. The news brief does not explain what warning Arafat's ambush gives the US. My guess is that the P.A. is warning the US not to establish a presence in the P.A. nor to station troops there to prevent the P.A. from clashing with Israel after a supposed peace agreement. Garrisoning US peacekeepers in a country of terrorists certainly would place our forces at risk. PRES. BUSH BREAKS U.S. PROMISE TO ISRAEL First the US got S. Arabia to agree that the advanced US planes to be sold to it would not be stationed at the Tabuk Saudi base, only 150 kilometers from Israel, and the US promised Israel that those planes would not be moved to Tabuk. Second, S. Arabia nevertheless deployed the planes there. Third, the US lifted the restriction. Pres. Bush's reason is that S. Arabia has a "need to defend its air space." (IMRA, 4/15.) From whom to defend it, was not specified. When the promise was made, the US did not qualify it, "unless S. Arabia has a need to defend its air space." The US promise was unqualified. It turned out to be worthless. Earlier, the US had sold S. Arabia advanced warplanes provided they not be enhanced with certain features such as extra fuel tanks to extend their range. The US reassured Israel that the great quantity of US arms sold (and given) to the Arabs would not reverse the strategic balance. S. Arabia made the enhancements it had agreed not to. The US did not insist that S. Arabia adhere to its agreement. Another worthless US diplomatic reassurance to Israel. It may yet dawn on the Israelis, who admire the US as much as the Arabs hate the US, that they cannot rely upon US promises and assurances. With these and other precedents of US failure to keep its commitments to Israel, the Arabs surely surmise that they are not expected to adhere to future restrictions they agree to in writing. Meanwhile, much s made of Bush's vaguely worded assurance to Sharon. PM SHARON'S RATIONALE VS ARAB REACTION A P.A. official suggests that if the Gaza withdrawal works out, foreign countries would demand more withdrawals - by Israel (IMRA, 4/12). PM Sharon argues that by making this concession now, the world would feel constrained not to demand a greater further withdrawal than he wishes. Sharon may not be naive enough to believe his unrealistic scenario, but he supposes his Israeli audience is. The world does not operate with compunction, and antisemitism is intensifying. The world wants to turn the Jewish homeland over to the Arabs. This proposition is doubly immoral: (1) The Land belongs to the Jewish people; and (2) The Arabs not only do not deserve it but they are waging jihad against the rest of the world. It behooves the world to whittle down Arab power instead of Israel's ability to resist it. U.S. PROMISES Pres. Bush wrote the expected vague letter that does not meet Min. Netanyahu's three conditions for support for Gaza withdrawal but hints to the gullible that it might. Pres. Bush wrote in generalities, Min. Netanyahu itemized tangibles. Bush's theme was to set up a PLO state, which he says won't be terrorist. (It inevitably would be, since it is terrorist now, and the US helps finance it anyway.) The U.S. promised that if Israel withdrew from Gaza, there would be no further international pressure for more Israel concessions until terrorism ended and the P.A. reformed. However, the P.A. already had agreed to end terrorism. Why should Israel pay again for it? The assurances that PM Sharon gives his people are based on "iffy" US conditions. Pres. Bush's statement is not binding, just something to be "taken into account." (Arutz-7, 4/13 & IMRA, 4/15.) The US cannot make promises about international pressure, only about its own. A President cannot make promises for his successor to keep, and there may be a successor soon. This successor has as his chief advisor a leader of Americans for Peace Now, which is anti-Israel. Suppose that despite the US never insisting for a whole decade that the P.A., in conformity with its signed commitments, end terrorism, the terrorism now ended. In what way would that justify either the withdrawal from Gaza or further territorial concessions by Israel? ISRAEL AGREES TO WORSE CONDITIONS In his note discussing the withdrawal plan, Pres. Bush declared it a step in the Road Map. He did not mention acceptance of PM Sharon's 14 reservations about the Map. Neither did PM Sharon. This amounts to the Arabs still not having to end terrorism, just having to denounce it and "begin" operations against it, which is all the Map calls for (IMRA, 4/14). (Sec. Powell had declared those reservations merely advisory. Since the Quartet is pro-Arab, Israel's reservations would get short shrift. Does PM Sharon have the conceit to imagine otherwise, or is he taking orders from the US, whom he sometimes displeases because he cannot surrender to all its dictates entirely and retain power. He pretends to be looking out for Israel's interests, but his dropping of the reservations is evidence of the pretense.) SHARON MANAGES THE NEWS Hours before the Bush-Sharon announcement on the withdrawal program, Radio Israel, under the control of Min. Olmert, gave Min. Olmert extensive time to extol the plan, without asking him serious questions. It is scandalous that Olmert, who always praises the plan, also admits that he does not know its provisions and has not studied its implications. Other people also were interviewed, almost all supporting the plan (IMRA, 4/14). Such a biased selection that omitted the Cabinet members who oppose the plan, had to be deliberate news management. For that, alone, the plan should be defeated. Israelis must gain democracy and independence. Olmert misrepresented the Bush letter as an achievement for Israel. He credited PM Sharon for the Bush agreement that Israel need not withdraw from all of Yesha. That, however, has been the US position all along. That is the jist of UN Security Council Resolution 242. The US, which wrote 242, explained its clear English language meaning (before the Council adopted it). (242 states that Israel need not withdraw until final peace is negotiated. That was not yet negotiated.) (The real question is how much is Israel expected to withdraw, if there is peace. Who decides there is peace? Why should a Security Council resolution be recognized as binding, coming as it does from a tainted source?) OPPONENT CRITICIZES THE PLAN Min. Uzi Landau noted that not only is Pres. Bush's letter not a permanent US commitment, but that the US broke previous promises to Israel. He cited the example of Saudi F-15s near Eilat. The letter ignored Israel's 14 objections to the Road Map. Bush did not make ending terrorism a prerequisite to Arab statehood. Neither does the letter rule out Arabs flooding into Israel, just that it would be preferable to them to go into the P.A. (which is bad enough, considering that the P.A. remains the enemy of Israel.) The sequence that Bush states and Sharon accepts is: (1) Withdrawal; (2) P.A. statehood; (3) Maybe an end to terrorism; and (4) Negotiations for more withdrawals (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 4/15). (Although I don't approve of Arab statehood in the Jewish homeland under any circumstances, I suggest the order be: (1) Destruction of terrorist infrastructure; (2) Negotiations to resolve all the stated objections to Israel; (3) Some withdrawal after negotiations. The Arabs would have an incentive to end the terrorism. Since they are in a permanent state of jihad, however, a cessation of terrorism would be only temporary. Israel should claim its homeland for itself.) BRITAIN ACCEPTS PLAN, TO PROMOTE P.A. TERRORISM Britain endorsed Sharon's proposed retreat. It may send troops to Gaza, to fill the vacuum. Britain first would want the P.A. to incorporate all the militias, not disarm them (though the Map, that Britain also endorses, requires their disarmament). The militias would be coordinated but not centrally controlled (so the P.A. could disclaim responsibility for continued terrorism). Britain assumes that the resulting stability would calm down the conflict and tame Hamas The plan was devised by the same intelligence officer who trained the Muslim resistance to the USSR. (His Arab veterans went on to wage international jihad.) He tried to persuade the P.A. terrorists to suspend (just suspend) attacks on civilians (only) inside (not outside) Israel, so negotiations (to empower the terrorists) could proceed (as if a peace process). The US disapproves of this incorporation, for it considers Hamas terrorist. (What about the terrorist P.A. forces?) In turn, the terrorists would agree (for now) not to shoot the British. Britain asks of Israel that it not take "unilateral" security action and to remove hundreds of al Aqsa Brigade terrorists from its wanted lists, so they can serve as "security" forces in Gaza. (IMRA, 4/14.) Freeing terrorists and protecting them from Israel does not make Israel secure. Religious fanatics don't get tamed. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

INTEGRITY OUT OF THE CLOSET Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, April 20, 2004.

"When a leader commits a sin by inadvertently violating a certain of G-d's commandments....he must bring...a sacrifice" ( Leviticus 4:22-23) Benny Begin, the man too honest to be a politician, has stepped into the fray. There are few people in this nation who doubt Begin's sincerity, intelligence, or the pure Zionist heart beating inside of him. This potential white knight holds a key that no other Israeli has in his or her possession. He has the ability to correct a false precedent by setting the record straight. His father, Menachem Begin, was Israel's most loved Prime Minister. Other leaders have been admired and respected, or have become cult heroes. But nobody could captivate and unify a nation like Begin. And most trusted his judgement when he endorsed a land for peace formula at Camp David in 1978. In 2004, Egypt, a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism and a main source of the weapons being supplied via tunnels to Palestinian terror groups, remains a thorn in our sides. Benny Begin spoke on radio (see http://israelnn.com/news.php3?id=61157) and rejected any attempt to compare the peace agreement endorsed by Prime Minister Begin at Camp David with the unilateral retreat presented by Prime Minister Sharon. But many of us feel that this is not the time to split hairs. Camp David, Madrid, Oslo, Wye, The Road Map, Geneva, and the Unilateral Disengagement Plan all share the common and erroneous denominator of land for peace. On national television Benny Begin claimed our leaders are "soft like pizza, and they fall like dominoes." (see http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=61155) What kind of stuff are you made of, Benjamin Ze'ev Begin? Are you able to stand the test? You have shown courage by stepping back into a political scene you despise. You're definitely one of the few against the many, and we welcome you back in the ranks. But, could you please slaughter the sacred cow - which could save this nation from further catastrophe? Could you with great care, love and respect admit that your father committed a grave error? I admit that asking a son to sacrifice his deceased father's historic footnote is a bit beyond the pale. But then again, we have our ancient roots tied to a father who was willing to sacrifice everything his son represented for a greater cause. Rather than dishonor your father, it would help rectify a great mistake - and there could be no greater tribute to Menachem Begin's memory. Does a very determined Dr. Benjamin Ze'ev Begin, a man with enough confidence and ego to declare on national television that "I was right. I am right again", have enough humility to stand the test and admit that his father and the nation were wrong 25 years ago. If the younger Begin can face this challenge, then maybe we can all face a new beginning. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com To Go To Top

DISENGAGEMENT ILLUSIONS Posted by Nadav Shragai, April 20, 2004.

The Supreme Being is a legitimate, indeed desired, player in the mosaic that makes up daily life in Gush Katif. The 4,016 Qassam rockets and mortars that landed in the area, causing relatively few casualties and little damage, could not defeat the residents' spirits. Nor did the al-Batr missile sow despair with its relatively large, five-kilo, warhead that landed on the Zadok family's roof in Neve Dekalim. Only destruction. In Kfar Darom, Hannah Bart, a paralyzed victim of a terror attack, gave birth to a healthy baby. Everyone is convinced it is a miracle. In Atzmona, the residents are taking loans to continue developing their thriving farms as if there's no evacuation on the horizon. But these people are not cut off from reality. They understand politics, are well-informed about the political and military reality, and are not deceiving themselves. The real illusion they regret is the disengagement plan, which regards the destruction of their homes and their expulsions as something formative, from which something real will emerge. With much regret and anxiety, they are correct. It was the withdrawal from Lebanon that created the Palestinian awareness that led to the second intifada, which should be known as the "Oslo War." Former Southern Command Maj. Gen. Yom Tov Samiya, thinks so, as do a long list of distinguished past and present senior IDF officers. The disengagement from Gush Katif will be perceived by the Palestinians as an Israeli escape, and will refill the sails of terror with wind. More densely populated areas in the south of the country will be exposed to long-range Palestinian weapons - not only the Gush Katif and western Negev, but also the area encompassing Sderot to Ashkelon. When that happens, will we reconquer Gaza? Another terror region will open up in northern Samaria, and Israel will find it very difficult to preserve its intelligence and operational capabilities in the territories that are evacuated. Those who doubt this should take a look at recent history, the history of "Oslo," which still smashes us in the face nearly every day. The terror state that already exists in the Palestinian Authority areas will only upgrade its capabilities. And if that's not enough, then according to the disengagement plan, Israel once again agrees that in coordination with it, "the Palestinian security forces will be granted guidance, aid and training for fighting terror." If that's not an illusion, then what is? But the mother of all these illusions is the cornerstone on which Sharon is basing his public relations strategy against the disengagement opponents. Evacuating Gush Katif, he says, will save the large settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria. In other words, we're cutting off a branch or two to save the entire tree from dying. The truth is the precise opposite. It won't take long, maybe weeks or perhaps months, after the evacuation (or perhaps the destruction) of one of the most successful settlement areas in the country, until the pressure on Israel to evacuate more "blocs" increases. That evacuation, as far as the Palestinians, the U.S., and certainly some leftist elements like Peace Now are concerned will grant legitimacy to the demand to evacuate more settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria. For those who have forgotten, Gush Katif is also a settlement bloc. It could also be connected to Israel, just like Ariel, if the government wanted. Even the argument that the U.S. promised to recognize, or has already recognized, the large settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria is a fable. Secretary of State Colin Powell hurried to clarify this weekend that President Bush's letter does not a priori determine that settlement blocs will remain under Israeli control in the future. But that clarification was unnecessary. It was self-evident from the commitment Sharon undertook to free construction in the settlements, including the large settlement blocs, which he pretends to "rescue;" to redefine, in coordination with the U.S., the new constriction line for the settlements, including the large blocs; and to evacuate dozens of outposts, some of which, meanwhile, have been turned into settlements. And the U.S. vetoed the original intention to resettle the Gush Katif residents in Judea and Samaria. And here's another petty matter: the political graveyard, where the minister of history buries friendly statements by American presidents to Israel, is already populated by quite a few such watersheds. Bill Clinton, for example, provided Ehud Barak with exactly the same merchandise that Bush is now giving Sharon. Bush, how embarrassing, even made sure to say in his letter to Sharon that the fact that he doesn't expect Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders is practically an historical fact: "all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion," wrote Bush. The main difference between all the previous presidential declarations and the one given by Bush is that no Israeli prime minister in the past ever considered initiating a unilateral withdrawal, and certainly not during a war, just to win such a statement from the U.S. This article appeared in Haaretz today and is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hazen/spages/417240.html To Go To Top

VANANU AND THE ISRAEL JEWISH LEFT Posted by Steven Plaut, April 20, 2004.

I am often accused of being "too hard" on the Israeli Jewish Left when I describe them as treasonous and as Quislings. They are just foolish and naive, I am often reproved. Well, are they? For anyone thinking I am too hard on the Israeli Left, just observe the choice by the Israeli Left of its current supreme hero and spiritual guru - Mordecai Vananu. If anyone things the Israeli Left is NOT treasonous, then explain why the Left is so affectionate and devoted to Vanunu, Israel's most notorious convicted traitor! Indeed, I sometimes think the adoration and deference of the Israeli Left towards nuclear traitor Vanunu resembles the emotions displayed by the Lubavitch movement towards the late Rebbe. I half expect the Left to put up billborads celebrating the arrival of the "Messiah King" - but in their case with photos of Vanunu getting released from the klink. Vanunu was a communist spy employed (insanely) by Israel in its Dimona nuclear facility, and was arrested and jailed when he tried to reveal Israel's nuclear secrets to the world. He is now to be released from prison, and his release (scheduled for today) is the very best possible way to show the stupidity of Israel not having capital punishment. What was good for the Rosenberg spies in the US would have been good for Vanunu. While in prison, Vanunu converted to Christianity, not because he had a religious awakening but because he thought this would be an effective way to demonstrate his contempt for all Jews. The Neonazi Left and the Jews for a Second Holocaust have long celebrated Vanunu and even proposed he get a Nobel Peace Prize. Haaretz celebrates him in its editorial today. Here is the paper for the thinking Israeli on Comrade Vanunu's treason: "The Vanunu issue has long since transcended the matter of leaking his secrets to a newspaper in exchange for payment. In the eyes of his supporters, the conditions of his imprisonment and the obsession about keeping him silent have turned into symbols of an oppressive Israel that is no less and indeed possibly more problematic than the arsenal of deterence that it may or may not have. Indeed, it is entirely possible that the ongoing over-reaction to Vanunu has damaged Israel much more and longer than the one-time publication in the Sunday Times." In recent years, Vanunu has become the favorite son of many parts of the Israeli and Jewish Left. The fact that the Israeli Left so openly shows its identification with espionage against Israel and treason speaks volumes. See for example www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/417201.html Speaking of open identification with treason, in the week before Israeli Independence Day, Haaretz - which is the main Palestinian newspaper published in Hebrew - decided the time is right to celebrate Israel's worst anti-Zionists and pro-terror extremists. It devotes a large article in today's paper (first in a series) to these critters. (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/417258.html) The article celebrates Israel's "Post-Zionists", meaning anti-Zionists, and its "New Historians", meaning pseudo-historians. In particular, it features Ilan Pappe with a huge poster photo of the great hero of Haaretz. Pappe has openly called for Israel to be destroyed, compares Zionism with Nazism, fabricated the now-infamous story of a make-pretend "massacre" of Arabs at Tantora by the Hagana in 1948, and otherwise is probably the most extremist hater of Israel in all of Israeli academia, and that is saying quite a lot! Pappe spends most of his time these days endorsing the Palestinian "Right of Return" and its right to destroy Israel. You might find this web site amusing: http://www.masada2000.com/pappe-pop.html 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

UNCOVERED CHECK: BUSH'S PROMISES TO SHARON HAVE ELECTORAL VALUE ONLY Posted by Bryna Berch, April 20, 2004.

This article was written by Zvi Lavi and appeared on Globes Online April 15, 2004 and is archived at www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/DocView.asp?did=788437&fid=980 Two heads of state, both lame ducks, exchanged crutches in Washington yesterday, each leading the other toward pending votes of confidence from their voters. The exchange of letters lacked anything whatsoever in proposing a creative solution for getting out of the dead end of this historic conflict. President George W. Bush's statements, each of which sounded important and unprecedented, have no more weight than election campaign promises. Any attempt to link Bush's to a long-term sovereign commitment can be categorized as an "Eshkol promise", after the Israeli prime minister who set the principle, "I promised, but I didn't promise to carry out". The history of US-Israeli relations are full of worthless commitments, such as President Dwight D. Eisenhower's promise of freedom of the seas in the Red Sea, given in exchange for Israel's withdrawal from Sinai in 1956, and President Bill Clinton's promise of an $800 million grant in exchange for the withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000. Apropos Eshkol and the value of words spoken by US presidents: President Lyndon B. Johnson told Eshkol after the Six-Day War in 1967, "Don't see me as tall as I seem. Without the support of Congress, I'm quite small." The same is true for the Bush letter. Without the support of Congress, it's only good for tricking Likud ministers and functionaries and American Jews. In a grocery, the US constitution makes it an uncovered check. Therefore, we ought to close a small financial account before we consider other values in Bush's support for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan. Who is supposed to pay for moving the settlements? The answer whispered into every Israeli's ear - the US, of course - was hinted by the prime minister's aides before the exchange of letters. They mentioned possible US aid for "developing the Negev", or, more vaguely, "substantial benefits" as a kind of offer that Likud functionaries cannot refuse. President Bush did not only emerge looking righteous, but also cheap. Sharon asked for $5 billion in US guarantees, if not an outright grant. Bush made no promises. He will not risk more than lip service. In the end, Israel will be left with terrorism and a diplomatic dead-end, and maybe another emergency economic plan over the horizon. To Go To Top

STOP HOLOCAUST DAY IN ISRAEL OR STOP THE HYPOCRISY! Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, April , 2004.

For more than ten years now - since September 13, 1993 to be exact - I've had an increasingly hard time observing Yom HaShoah - Holocaust Remembrance Day. Put another way, I can't stand the bloody hypocrisy of those who cry out about what happened more than 60 years ago, but either contributed to what's been happening in Israel the last few years, or who are still working to bring "peace". "The peace of the grave," to paraphrase Arafat. When thinking about "peace," the Roadmap "to hell" and other senselessly suicidal ambiguities of modern Jewish life in the Jewish State of Israel, I stop to wonder. How is it that almost 1,500 Jews have been killed since our "peace partner" Yasser Arafat declared an end to the armed struggle on the White House lawn that September day? How is it that almost one thousand Jews have been killed in more than three and a half years of warfare in our homeland? How is it that people aren't up in arms, rioting in the streets everyday, or at least, after every suicidal genocide bombing? In any normal country, they might have burnt down the parliament or strung up the prime minister by now. And lastly, how is it that our so-called "leaders" including a man that made a career out of defending the Jewish People, rooting out terrorism - including from Gaza - and has been known by such appellations as the "Butcher of Shabra and Shatilla," suddenly decided to introduce elements of the "Holocaust" - i.e. roundup and expulsion of Jews from their homes - right here in Israel, with his Gaza plan, and many people are supporting him? Why do people find it easy to worry about dead Jews from 60 years ago, but not the live Jews getting killed every day now? If I were in charge, I would take drastic action to send a clear message of positive Jewish values to the Jewish People and the world. I would: 1. Forbid all those - "leaders" - connected to the Oslo process, from participating in any Holocaust Day ceremonies. 2. Forbid all those who haven't been actively spurning the "peace" - i.e. death - process from participating in any Holocaust Day ceremonies. 3. Forbid all those who support turning the Gazan Jewish community into another casualty - i.e. Holocaustizing them - from participating in any Holocaust Day ceremonies. Positive Jewish values, meaning, excluding those people who haven't learned anything in 60 years of crying; positive Jewish values, in excluding those people who continue to contribute to our destruction. Think back to 1942, somewhere in Eastern Europe. Some small sleepy village has just been rudely awakened by the rumbling of trucks, jeeps and the shouts of frenzied soldiers. Jews are roused from their beds and at gunpoint forced to march to the edge of town. First a few, five, ten, then more are hurriedly rushed to the trucks; Einzatzgrupen, the murder trucks. Three, four, seven people are stuffed into the back of the truck. The pipe from the exhaust is connected to an opening in the door. Jews, mothers, fathers, children start to scream and gasp for air. The soldier driving the truck presses down on the gas pedal while in neutral, the engine screams as the fumes make their deadly way into the closed back compartment filled with innocent people condemned to death, simply for being Jewish. Ten minutes, twenty, soon its over. The soldiers open the back of the truck and order some of the Jews shivering in the cold, standing on the side, to collect the bodies and bring them to the large truck nearby. Twenty-three are killed that morning, 23 holy souls extinguished like a candle blown out by a chilling winter blast. Now, lend me your attention just a moment longer. It's now 2004, somewhere in Israel, an average afternoon, or maybe just after Shabbat. People are walking around town, some doing shopping, some meeting friends. Jews, out in their cities, just as anyone else in the world could be. Without warning, BBBOOOOMMM!!! People hear the blast from blocks away. Eyewitnesses from across the street describe seeing body parts flying in the air. People with bloodied faces, arms and backs crying out for help. Ringing, ringing, ringing in the ears of those many meters away. Those are the lucky ones, the ones who survived this attack. Soon we hear on the news, 23 killed and 67 injured. Later, we hear that there is rejoicing and parties in Ramallah, Jenin, Tulkarm, and across the Gaza Strip. Suicide Bombers, Homicide Bombers, Genocide Bombers, whatever you call them, the result is the same, innocent people condemned to death, simply for being Jewish. Palestinian Nazis are still at it. Holy souls extinguished like a candle blown out by a chilling winter blast. But the enemies without have accomplices... The transports came roaring up the road, kicking up dust as they rocked from side to side. The Jews had been baking all morning, waiting out in the scorching June sun. They were rounded up early by the soldiers and told to line up in an orderly fashion. But how long could that last? Babies were crying, and little children were running this way and that, playing, while frightened mothers kept one eye on their kids and another on the soldiers guarding them. The trucks pulled up to the crowd and stopped. Several soldiers got out and walked over to the huddled, frightened group of mothers and children. The soldiers barked orders to all the children, to get back in line by their mothers. The crying grew louder. The commanding officer walked over to the group and ordered them to take out their ID cards. "This is the last check before leaving," he said. "We wouldn't want to leave anybody behind..." Somewhere in Europe in 1944? No, this is the Gaza Disengagement Plan in 2004... Virulent anti-Semitism grows worldwide - attacks against Jews, Jewish property and symbols - while so-called "Jewish leaders" ostrich-like stick their heads in the sand while mouthing platitudes about "Never Again". And here in the Jewish State, created from the ashes of the Holocaust to protect Jews, Jews are killed almost every day. Israel - a supposedly independent state - fights vicious nazi-like terrorism with one hand tied behind its back and the other hand holding an olive branch. Now, to pacify our enemy's hatred of us, the brilliant plan to destroy Jewish communities and expel Jews from their homes has been created, by our own government. Will future Jewish historians brand the present and recent Israeli governments, "Nazi Collaborators"? Are we beginning a period of Auto-Genocide? I'd rather be a live Jew that everybody in the world hates, than a dead Jew everybody cries over. Stop Holocaust Day or Stop the Hypocrisy! (c) 2004/5764 Pasko Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations and Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

PALESTINIAN HOLOCAUST Posted by David Frankfurter, April 19, 2004

It never ceases to amaze me how the Arab propaganda machine has been able to take the Jewish experience, adopt its terms and then convince the world that the outrages were committed against the Arab people. It started with the term Palestinian. Before 1948, when one spoke of a Palestinian, one meant a Jew. There were Palestinians and Arabs. Then there were Palestinian Arabs. Then there just Palestinians. And now Israel has usurped that made-up country 'historical Palestine'. (When was it founded? Where were its borders? What was its capital? What was the title and name of its first ruler?) Then there was a Palestinian 'diaspora', 'holocaust', 'ethnic cleansing'.....the list goes on. And somehow, the Palestinians have managed to shift the emotions related to all these words onto themselves. They have become the long-suffering underdogs in almost every media report. As this Holocaust Remembrance Day (Yom HaShoah) comes to a close, let me share with you the latest in this adoption of Jewish suffering. Palestinian Media Watch (www.pmw.org.il)) latest newsletter reveals that the Palestinian Authority official television - long a source of holocaust denial - ran a children's play showing dead children, claiming that Israelis kill Arab children by baking them in ovens. (You can download and see the play from the PMW link.) How long will it be before the world believes that 6,000,000 Palestinian Arabs were cremated in concentration camps run by Jews, and that the Nazi holocaust is a fiction? Based on the track record of Arab propaganda - not long at all! David Frankfurter is a writer on the Middle East conflict. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Contact him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com To Go To Top

GUSH KATIF, GAZA: FACTS IN BRIEF Posted by IsrAlert, April 19, 2004.

This was in today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com). * 21 communities, most of them founded some 20 years ago * close to 8,000 residents * over 20 yeshivot, schools and other educational institutions (not including nurseries and kindergartens) * 900 acres of greenhouses growing bugless lettuce, cherry tomatoes, organic vegetables, spices, flowers, plants and more * $60 million a year in exports - an average of $7,500 for every man, woman and child * manufactures 70% of all of Israel's organic produce grown for export * has faced over 4,000 mortar shells and Kassam rocket attacks, as well as 10,000 shooting incidents, at the hands of Palestinian terrorists over the past 3.5 years * a 10% growth in population since the Oslo War began in September 2000 IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

PRESIDENT BUSH'S APRIL 2004 SPEECH - A DISASTER FOR ISRAEL Posted by Nadia Matar, April 19, 2004.

Shalom, this is Israel Radio News. The time is 10 a.m., April 14, 2006. Today is the second anniversary of President Bush's speech in Washington, but instead of celebrations, more funerals are being held for "disengagement victims." The security forces, Magen David Adom, Zaka [Disaster Victims Identification], and many volunteers continue digging in the attempt to find signs of life in the ruins of the Azrieli Towers that were razed in a terrorist attack, after the Palestinians fired a salvo of sophisticated rockets from Gaza to Tel Aviv. The grim forecasts of the opponents of disengagement have come to pass, and despite all the painful concessions by the Israeli government, the quiet that we sought after is not on the horizon. To the contrary - since Prime Minister Sharon uprooted all the settlements of Gush Katif and the area was handed over to the Palestinians, Israel's southern cities have been under constant attack. Day after day, the Palestinians continue to fire Katushas at Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Beersheva, with large numbers of casualties. The IDF is incapable of defending Israeli citizens. In addition to the troubles from Gaza, there are serious problems from the Palestinian State in the east. A quarter of a million Arab refugees - men, women, and children - are marching towards Jerusalem to pray on the Temple Mount. From there, they intend to march to Sheikh Munis (north Tel Aviv) and other villages in the Gush Dan area that their families abandoned in the '48 war. We are waiting for an update by our correspondent on this mass march. The IDF soldiers are powerless to respond to this march. Teargas for the dispersal of demonstrations cannot be used to disperse hundreds of thousands of people. Shooting at the refugees is not an option - live fire by IDF soldiers against unarmed marchers would be condemned throughout the world. The refugees have succeeded to destroy the fence completely. They are continuing to march on to Jerusalem with nothing standing in their way. Our other correspondents are reporting that masses of Israeli Arabs have taken to the streets to greet their brothers from the Palestinian state. Just as in the October 2000 riots, the Arabs are attacking every Jew they encounter, and are destroying Jewish property whenever possible. This time, the disturbances are not limited to the Galilee area, but are breaking out everywhere. Magen David Adom and the police are not capable of dealing with the masses of rioters and the mounting casualties. After the 2004 Bush speech, the Arabs pretended to be incensed with the American President, but the truth, of course, was completely different. Our correspondent in the south reports that half a million Gaza Arabs have just begun marching onto Gush Dan. The security forces don't know how to stop this human flood. We're returning the broadcast to the studio, for further reports. We want to remind our listeners that, in his April 2004 speech, President Bush stated: I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states living side by side [...] and to the roadmap as the route to get there." This meant that after uprooting all the Jews from Gaza, the settlements in Judea and Samaria will be completely razed, including the settlement blocs in Gush Etzion, Ariel, and Maaleh Adumim. Prime Minister Sharon indeed did attempt to stop the destruction of the settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria. He relied on President Bush's 2004 speech, which said: "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, 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." Israel understood these statements to mean that President Bush favored the annexation of these settlement blocs. However, Bush later clarified his statement, to stress that what he was referring to were the Israeli population centers in Ramat Eshkol and French Hill in Jerusalem. The American refused to include the neighborhood of Gilo, in view of the strong opposition of the Arabs in Bethlehem. Some two million Arab "refugees" have come to the Palestinian state on the West Bank, since its establishment in August 2005. The refugees have no place to live, to work, no livelihood and nothing to eat. Hundreds of refugee camps have sprung up everywhere. Jordan has erected a fence to prevent the entry of the refugees into the kingdom. The international community has demanded that Israel intervene and solve the humanitarian problems of these refugees, and that is should agree to open its gates to allow these refugees to live and work in Israel. As of now, Israel has refused this demand, since the demographic threat would lead to the elimination of the Jewish State of Israel. "Shalom, this is Israel Radio News. The time is 10 p.m., April 14, 2006. All the Jewish residents of Israel are to enter the shelters and remain there until further notice." "Salaam aleikum, this is Ishmael Radio News. We, the jihad [holy war] army of the Arab refugees, proudly announce that al-Quds [Jerusalem] is ours. We will soon also conquer Lod, Ramle, Jaffa, and all Palestine, from the sea to the Jordan. We are currently broadcasting from the studios that used to belong to Israel Radio." *** The above scenario is what will likely occur as a consequence of President Bush's April 2004 meeting with Prime Minister Sharon. In the event, G-d forbid, there is a majority in the Likud referendum, the residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and their supporters, will have to save the country. How? By declaring throughout the entire world: We do not accept the results of the vote. No majority in the world is entitled to deport Jews from Eretz Yisrael and to hand it over to foreigners. Just as a majority in the Knesset and the government cannot compel Sabbath observers to violate the Shabbat, so too, no majority is entitled to give over the Land of Israel to foreigners and to transfer Jews from their homes. If the residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza stand firm on this question of principle and do not consent to leave their homes, nor succumb to the temptation of compensation and demagogic speeches about "the importance of democracy and the will of the majority," the government will not be able to uproot them. In this manner the residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza will save the entire country from the dangers of the disengagement plan. The residents of Judea, Gaza, and Samaria have been entrusted with the historic task of demonstrating that the only plan that will bring peace and security to the region, is the divine plan that appears in the Bible. It is the repetitive Promise that the L-rd made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, beginning with the Promise made to our forefather Abraham: For I give all the land that you see to you and your offspring forever." (Genesis 13:15) Nadia Matar is Chairperson of Women in Green. She and Ruth 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

UNITY COALITION TRIP TO JUDEA AN SAMARIA FOR KNESSET AIDES Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, April 19, 2004.

Jerusalem - The Jerusalem Liaison Council (JLC), a division of the Unity Coalition for Israel, announced today plans for a series of trips that will take Knesset Aides into Judea and Samaria to acquaint them with communities there. The trips will begin on May 9th, 2004, with a visit to Ariel where the College of Judea and Samaria will be their local host. All of these trips will link Knesset Aides to residents in Judea and Samaria and promote a better understanding of the significance and strategic importance of these communities. By providing interactive meetings, seminars and tours of the area, Aides will become familiar with each city. Upon returning to Jerusalem, they will be given opportunities to share their experiences with others through feedback sessions. Judith Nusbaum, Director of the Jerusalem Liaison Council, explained, "We feel it is significant for the Knesset Aides to meet people who live in Yesha, to have the opportunity to interact with the residents, to tour communities and to become fully aware of the role they play in the defense of Israel." Ms. Nusbaum continued, "This is the first of several trips that we have planned. As educational, on-site experiences, these trips will enable the Aides to communicate their knowledge to their members of the Knesset." The sponsor of these Yesha trips, the Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI), was established in the United States in 1991 by Esther Levens, who remains CEO. The UCI established the Jerusalem Liaison Council in October 2003 immediately following the First International Jerusalem Summit. (UCI was a co-sponsor of the Summit, along with the Municipality of Jerusalem, the Ministry of Tourism and the Michael Cherney Foundation.) Today the UCI comprises more than 200 Jewish & Christian member organizations, representing millions of people world-wide, that are pro-active with Congress, the media and college campuses in support of Israel. Central to the purpose of the JLC, the important new Israeli base for the Unity Coalition, is to enhance communication and understanding between the Knesset and the U.S. Congress. Judith Nusbaum, of Jerusalem, and Margy Pezdirtz, of Oklahoma City and Jerusalem serve as Directors of the Council. Together they coordinate activities between the U.S. and Israel offices. For more information about the May 9th trip and other trips to follow, please contact Judith Nusbaum by phone at 011-972-2-581-7064 or by email at etzion76@netvision.net.il. Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top

ISRAEL NEWS AN VIEWS WEBLOG UPDATED Posted by Stephen M. Asbel, April 19, 2004.

Hello everyone. I am back after an excellent two week trip to Israel. Hopefully, you all remembered to keep checking the web site where I have been posting some of my first hand notes, views and observations from Israel. In case you did not or want to be reminded, I have below a list of my postings from my trip. My only other suggestion to all of you is go to Israel - despite everything going on, the country is as beautiful as ever. My family and I had a great time and you will too. The Yeshayah (Isaiah) 62:1 Israel News and Views weblog has MOVED and has been RENOVATED. Log on at http://www.bermanlaw.com/weblogs/sma2 Please remember you can post comments to items on the blog with the online comment posting feature, get updated news from the ticker, view video reports and get updated Israel weather. These are some of the current essays: Visiting the remains of the Temple At the site of a terror attack, one might never know it had happened Jerusalem - an adventure in navigation Some Economics of Eilat Shabbat dinner in Eilat Sea Life Welcome to Eilat Journey Through the Negev In the footsteps of ancient Jewish fighters Restoring Ancient Forests Hey, what time is it? First hand view of part of the security fence Pesach in Israel Interesting Times, Eat Kitniyot by Saul Singer Shalom from Israel Stephen Asbel is with the law firm of Berman Asbel & Berman, LLP, in Media, PA. To Go To Top

HOLOCAUST ABUSE IDEOLOGY IN THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY Posted by Itamar Marcus, April 19, 2004.

Introduction Abuse of the memory of the Holocaust is a common theme in Palestinian Authority (PA) teaching. The abuse ranges from Holocaust denial to libels accusing Jews of planning and carrying out the Holocaust. The following are examples of Holocaust abuse from the Palestinian Authority over recent years. 1. The PA daily taught the libel that Zionist leaders participated in the Holocaust for two purposes: to eliminate Jewish opposition and to force Jews to run from Europe and go to the Land of Israel (British Mandate Palestine). " . . . If coming back to the suffering and tribulations (caused) by the Nazis, we would read hair-raising things about the entanglement of the Zionist leaders in the "sacrifice" of many Jews in order to kill two birds with one stone: to be rid of those who disagreed with them (meaning Jews opposed to Zionism) on the one hand and, on the other, to push all the Jews to immigrate to Palestine, since Europe had become an unbearable Hell . . . I would like to say that, based on the above, the Jewish - or more accurately Zionist - willingness to sacrifice Jews for the above mentioned cause is a known historical tradition." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 24, 2003] 2. A children's play broadcast on Palestinian Authority TV features a horrific scene of child actors portraying "dead" Palestinian children, accompanied by narration saying that Israelis burned Palestinians in ovens. "They are the ones who did the Holocaust, their knife cuts to the length and the width of our flesh. . . They opened the ovens for us to bake human beings. They destroyed the villages and burnt the cities. And when an oven stops burning, they light a hundred [more] ovens. Their hands are covered with the blood of our children." [PA TV, March 25, 2004] 3. The figure of six million Jews cremated in the Auschwitz death camp is a lie for propaganda purposes: "The issue of the Holocaust rises again. It defies disappearing over its half-century because the Zionist propaganda has converted it into a means to produce political and economic benefit... A recently published book by an American researcher, discusses the Holocaust. Employing scientific and chemical evidence, it proves that the figure of six million Jews cremated in the Nazi Auschwitz camps is a lie for propaganda, as the most spacious of the vaults in the camp could not have held even one percent of that number ... The question now discussed in the halls of the universities and the renowned publishing houses in the world's capitols is: Has this hen reached its expiration date, which lays golden eggs for the Jews everywhere? ... Of course there are those who claim that the Jews actively participated in directing European feelings against them [to resist assimilation] When Zionism cannot find an enemy to separate and repel the Jews, it invents such an enemy; and so was the case with the Holocausts. Its need for it [Holocaust] is imperative... We are concerned that these dramatic cries regarding the Holocaust, whether for or against, are intended to cover up the corresponding Holocaust, that which Zionism is now producing with missile and tank, against the Arabs in Palestine." [Article entitled "Marketing Ashes," by Hiri Manzour, official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Apr. 13, 2001] 4. The Holocaust is a lie: Dachau and Auschwitz were "cleansing sites." "...Lies surfaced about Jews being murdered here and there, and the no Dachau, no Auschwitz! [They] were cleansing sites and unfounded claims. No Chelmno, no Dachau, no Auschwitz! [They] were cleansing sites.... What I am saying is they began to publicize in their propaganda media that they were persecuted, murdered and exterminated... Committees acted here and there to establish this entity [Israel-Ed.], this foreign entity, implanted as a cancer in our country, where our fathers lived, where we live, and where our children after us will live. They always portrayed themselves as victims, and they made a Center for Heroism and Holocaust. Whose heroism? What Holocaust? It is our nation which is Heroic, the holocaust was against our people... We were the victims, but we shall not remain victims forever..." [Educational program "Pages From Our History" Dr. Issam Sissalem, history lecturer, Islamic University Gaza, Palestinian expert on Jews and Judaism, PA TV, Nov. 29, 2001] 5. PA leader on TV: Jews planned the Holocaust. Dr. Ibrahim Madi teaches on PA TV that Jews planned the Holocaust: 5. PA leader on TV: Jews planned the Holocaust. Dr. Ibrahim Madi teaches on PA TV that Jews planned the Holocaust: ADSL users: http://www.isratv.com/video/10newadsl.asx 56K users: http://www.isratv.com/video/10new56k.asx 6. In a PA TV interview with Ismail Elbakawi the PA taught the following "facts" about World War II: A.The Nazis did not specifically plan the killing of Jews. B. Jews, Germans, Gypsies, and Poles were all killed in World War II, as happens in war. C. If Hitler planned any extermination, it was of disabled Germans. D.The term "Holocaust" in its human sense refers to experiences of the Palestinians, the Gypsies. E.The "Holocaust industry" is a financial scheme of the Zionist leadership that has generated billions of dollars in profits. The following is the PA TV interview with Ismail Elbakawi, discussing a book called: The Holocaust Industry and his statements are supported by the interviewer. Elbakawi translated the book: The Fundamentalism of the Jews in Israel. Elbakawi: "[The Holocaust] was a real event that occurred from 1939 to 1945. However, it did not just affect the Jews in Europe, but also other nations including the Poles, the Hungarians, the Russians - as you remember, 20 million Russians were killed and Germans, and Gypsies. They were annihilated and killed as a result of the war, and not due to a prior plan . . . It is possibly true that Hitler planned the extermination of disabled Germans. It is likely that these things are true, I don't know . . . This is the historical truth: the true Nazi Holocaust. I apologize for using the word "Holocaust." This is a word that they try to attach only to the Jews who were killed, but I use this expression in the human sense. It can also be used to refer to the Palestinians and the suffering that the Israelis [have caused] them. The Palestinians also have their own private Holocaust, and this is also true of the Gypsies, etc. What the Zionist leadership in general and the Americans in particular have tried [to do] is to turn this truly tragic historical event into an industrial enterprise, an enterprise that will bring them a lot of capital, a fortune of wealth. For example, they started in Germany in the 1950s with what they called "reparations" and suddenly, in the second half of the 1990s they turned, after Germany to Austria, they turned to Switzerland and began to invent their lies, according to which, the Swiss bought the gold fillings of the Jewish victims that the Nazis had taken from the teeth [of the Jews] ...The Holocaust enterprise forced the Swiss government to approve [the sum of] one billion and 250 million dollars. ..[Why do] so many of the Swiss support Palestinian rights ...? Because Swiss society is very hurt by having discovered the robbery [of the Jews.]" [PA TV, May 27, 2003] 7. "Israeli snakes spread their venom" of Holocaust lies. "...This right [of the Austrian nation after Heider's winning the election] got shaken or tried to immediately shake it when the Israeli snakes spread their venom in the cloak of the Holocaust lies and started to threaten calamity and catastrophe if the extreme right wing [chosen by the Austrians] got into the government." [Al-Hayyat al-Jadida, Feb. 7, 2000] 8. Crossword Puzzle in official PA daily: The Holocaust is a lie. Clue: "Jewish Center Commemorating the Holocaust and the Lies" Solution: "Yad Vashem " [Israel's Holocaust Memorial Center ] [Al-Hayyat al-Jadida, Feb 18, 1999] 9. The Jews transformed their "burnt bodies" into a hen laying golden eggs. "The Jews transformed what people think is the smoke of their burnt bodies into gold. The Nazi rooster, they already transformed it to a hen laying golden eggs". 10. Exaggeration of the Jewish Holocaust has exceeded all limits. "Many of the enlightened and the politicians of Europe and America have already been disgusted by the extortion of the Jews and it is quite clear that they have a deep tendency to be free of the yoke of memory which is mixed with terror, especially after it has been known that the Jewish explanation exaggerating the Holocaust, has exceeded all limits and reached a level of imagination of things that could never happen." [Al-Hayyat al-Jadida, Sept. 19, 2000] 11. Jews fabricated the story about gas ovens and the Holocaust to arouse admiration. "The winds blew in their favor, when the persecution against them by the Nazi Hitler started. . . then the show began. They began to distribute horrific pictures of mass shooting being committed against them and to fabricate the shocking story about gas ovens, [in] which, according to them, Hitler would burn them [the Jews]. Newspaper columns began to fill up with pictures of Jews being cut down by Hitler's machine guns, and of Jews being led to the gas ovens. In these pictures they concentrated on women, children and the elderly. And they took advantage of this in order to arouse admiration for them, while they demand a monetary compensation, grants and contributions from all over the world. The truth is that the persecution of the Jews is a false fable that the Jews called the disaster of the "Holocaust" . . . and took advantage of it in order to arouse admiration . . . And although it is possible that Hitler's attack against the Jews hurt them slightly, it also serviced them to the point where still today they reap the benefits and it was the main door to her winning the American and European admiration and to realizing their dream and their plans . . . When we survey the news agencies, the newspapers, the journals and the world television stations, which the Jews control in the West, it becomes clear to us the extent of their media influence in the world [and their control] of a number of world news agencies, French and British newspapers, and among them the Times newspaper which Zionism controls by means of its buyout by the Jewish millionaire of Australian citizenship, Rupert Murdoch . . . " [Sayf Ali Al-Jarwan, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July, 2 1998] 12. The list of "Great" Europeans includes Holocaust deniers and a Nazi officer. This Palestinian daily described a paper of a research center which gives prominence and support to "great" Europeans who withstood the lies of "world Zionism." This list of Europeans includes two prominent Holocaust deniers, a Nazi officer in World War Two and the leader of an extremist right wing political party. "The Zaid center . . . published a new research paper titled: 'These are the people who challanged Israel in the last 50 years.' This research surveys the honored. . . European leaders, politicians, and thinkers - against world Zionism and Israel.... Five of the most famous personalities who were known for their opposition to the Zionist pressure: the French leader Charles de Gaulle, past general secretary of the UN and the president of Austria, Kurt Waldheim [a Nazi officer] and the famous English historian David Irving [a Holocaust denier], the new Austrian leader Jorg Heider and the writer and thinker Frenchman Roger Grudie [a Holocaust denier]. ... The center points out at the beginning of the paper which was defined as an historical paper for the Arab reader, and in it a thanks, appreciation and recognition to these people and others, among those who defend the rights and justice in the world." [ Al-Hayyat al-Jadida. Feb. 6, 2001] 13. Israel far worse than the Nazis. "Father Yosef Jabaran Sa'ada 'With these actions they have been far worse than the actions of Nazism during the Second World War. However, the difference is that they do it now after many laws, agreements and conventions have been published to protect man even in war . . . " [ Al-Hayyat al-Jadida, Jan. 15, 2001] ".....We are concerned that these dramatic cries regarding the Holocaust, whether for or against, are intended to cover up the corresponding Holocaust, that which Zionism is now producing with missile and tank, against the Arabs in Palestine." [Hiri Manzour, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Apr. 13, 2001] 14. Palestinian Ministry of Information Web Site, March 18, 2001: "If the Israeli occupation siege continues on the occupied Palestinian territories, the camps will turn into concentration camps similar to those the Nazis created for the Jews with one difference, the Palestinians were not driven by trains to concentration camps, Jewish soldiers came and encircled Palestinian areas turning them into such camps." Itamar Marcus is founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il). To Go To Top

THE VANUNU MYTHS AND ISRAELI DETERRENCE POLICY Posted by IsrAlert, April 19, 2004.

This article (Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 3, No. 22) was written by Gerald M. Steinberg, who is a Fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and director of the Program on Conflict Management and Negotiation at Bar-Ilan University. It is archived at http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief3-22.htm *The concept of "whistle blower" refers to individuals who go public with information on corrupt practices and violations of the law, enabling the constituted authorities to hold the culprits accountable. In contrast, by seeking to impose his personal views of Israeli security requirements on the elected representatives of the Israeli government, Vanunu acted in violation of the law and the core principles of democracy. *The development of Israel's strategic deterrent capability resulted from the threat to national survival posed by Arab and Islamic rejectionism, and any decision to dismantle this deterrent depends on the end of this threat. *Vanunu's supporters do not offer any pragmatic alternatives or strategies to prevent attacks against Israel, or evidence to support claims that if Israel were to give up its nuclear deterrent, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and other regional powers would cease to be threats. *Israel's nuclear option is credited with forcing Egypt and Syria to limit their attacks in the 1973 war; with bringing Sadat to the realization that he must make peace with Israel; and with deterring Saddam Hussein from using chemical warheads in the 1991 missile attacks against Israel. *Unlike Iran, Iraq under Saddam, and Libya, Israel did not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has not violated any of its terms. Israel has not tested nuclear weapons and declared itself officially to be a nuclear power. Increasing attention in the Arab world and Europe is being devoted to "nuclear whistle blower" Mordechai Vanunu, scheduled to be released this month at the end of his 18-year prison sentence. Therefore, a review of the facts and context of the Vanunu case may be helpful in order to clarify Israel's nuclear policy. For the past three decades, Israel's nuclear deterrent is widely credited with offsetting the asymmetries that encouraged major attacks, creating a degree of stability, and convincing some Arab leaders, including Sadat, of the need for peace. Unlike Iran, Iraq under Saddam, and Libya, which blatantly violated the terms of the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to seek illicit weapons, Israel did not sign the treaty, and has not violated any of its terms. Furthermore, unlike India and Pakistan, Israel has not tested nuclear weapons and declared itself officially to be a nuclear power. Vanunu undermined the core security policies of the democratically elected government of Israel, and, with external assistance, sought to transform his private views into national policy. In this context, the accolade "whistle blower" is entirely inappropriate. He violated the terms of his employment at Israel's Dimona nuclear facility and sold information to journalists. This was the basis for his trial, conviction, and prison sentence. Israeli Strategic Deterrence and the Vanunu Case The ostensible reason for Vanunu's revelation of Israel's "nuclear secrets" is his opposition, on what he claims to be moral grounds, to Israel's nuclear deterrence strategy. On this basis, Vanunu's cause has been adopted by anti-nuclear campaigners around the world, who have also nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize. Yet this messianic crusade is based on a very unrealistic view of history, in which wars, terrorism, and Arab threats to destroy Israel have been conveniently erased. Vanunu's supporters do not offer any pragmatic alternatives or strategies to prevent attacks against Israel, or evidence to support claims that if Israel were to give up its nuclear deterrent, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and other regional powers would cease to be threats. In contrast, a large majority of Israelis support Israel's current nuclear policy. [1] They view the development of a nuclear option as necessary to deter the possibility of combined Arab attacks, as have occurred in the past. All Israeli prime ministers have realized that the geographic and demographic asymmetries in the region leave Israel quite vulnerable to attack. Its tiny size prevents the possibility of "strategic depth" - the ability to absorb a first strike or surprise attack and then launch a counter-attack. Geographically, Israel appears to be a very weak state, wide open to attack by any external enemy. As British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently noted, the threat of extinction "places Israel in a different security category from any other country in the world." Similarly, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, "Israel is a small state with a small population. It's a democracy and it exists in a neighborhood [where many] prefer it not be there and they'd like it to be put in the sea. And Israel...has arranged itself so it hasn't been put in the sea." [2] The Logic of Deterrence Based on the uniqueness of the Israeli threat environment, David Ben-Gurion authorized the development of a strategic deterrent designed to overcome the inherent geographic asymmetry by demonstrating that an attack that endangers Israel's survival would trigger a counter-attack that would have a parallel impact. The logic of deterrence is based on the assumption that Israel's enemies - Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. - would recognize that they could not destroy Israel without causing their own destruction. This threat did not have to be explicit - rational decision-makers would understand the implications and act accordingly, even without overt declarations and nuclear tests. The core of this policy of "strategic ambiguity" is the Dimona nuclear reactor, where construction began in the late 1950s, providing Israel with a clear potential for retaliation. At the same time, the low profile meant that this did not trigger a nuclear arms race in the region, and also allowed for reduction of friction with the United States over this issue. Since the mid-1960s, when Dimona became operational, Israel's ambiguous deterrence policy has worked well, and has enjoyed consistent and wide support from all political and military leaders, as well as the Israeli political consensus. With the singular exception of Vanunu, no one has taken it upon himself to reverse this strategy through unilateral action. Israel's nuclear option is credited with forcing Egypt and Syria to limit their attacks in the 1973 war; with bringing Sadat to the realization that he must make peace with Israel; and with deterring Saddam Hussein from using chemical warheads in the 1991 missile attacks against Israel. If, as expected, Iran's fundamentalist Islamic government, which repeatedly declares its goal of destroying Israel, succeeds in acquiring nuclear weapons, Israeli planners will rely on deterrence to prevent Iranian aggression. [3] Israel's policy of deterrence based on nuclear ambiguity - neither confirming the existence of a weapons capability, nor denying it - is dependent on keeping the details out of the spotlight. Vanunu's tale and the accompanying photographs had exactly the opposite impact. International attention was suddenly focused on exposing "Israel's nuclear secrets," raising questions of the size of the Israeli nuclear stockpile and the nature of its weapons. Vanunu gave away few, if any, real "secrets." Most of the information that he divulged was either already known among experts or was of questionable reliability, concerning areas and details to which Vanunu - a low-level technician - had no access. (Indeed, some foreign analysts and conspiracy enthusiasts claimed that Vanunu was really a Mossad agent, and that his "revelations" were really part of a clever plot to boost the credibility of Israel's deterrent.) The decision of the Israeli government under Prime Minister Shimon Peres to lure Vanunu to Rome and then bring him to Israel for trial added to his credibility and helped to confirm the reliability of the newspaper interviews. In retrospect, it might have been better, in terms of Israeli interests and policy, had Vanunu's revelations been ignored and ridiculed, although this might have been seen as weakness, and allowed for more self-styled crusaders to sell their secrets to journalists. In recent years, in international frameworks such as the UN and NPT review conferences, Israel has come under increasing pressure, largely led by Egypt (particularly during Amr Musa's tenure as foreign minister), to end the ambiguity and deterrence capability. The simplistic campaign to tie the image of Israel to nuclear weapons and mass destruction is consistent with the efforts to delegitimize and isolate Israel in the international arena. Arab officials, [4] European government representatives, UN diplomats, journalists, and NGOs that are spearheading the demonization of Israel in other dimensions are also active on the nuclear issue. [5] From this perspective, the campaign in support of Vanunu and against Israel's nuclear deterrent policy is an important instrument in the broader political war against Israel. The Myth of the "Whistle Blower" Beyond the critical issues of deterrence and survival, the use of "whistle blower" to describe Vanunu is entirely inappropriate and false. The concept refers to individuals who go public with information on corrupt practices and violations of the law, enabling the constituted authorities to hold the culprits accountable through due process of law. Real whistle blowers have been instrumental in publicizing and ending illegal pollution of the environmental, secret kickbacks paid to politicians for government contracts, and similar violations. In contrast, by seeking to impose his personal views of Israeli security requirements on the elected representatives of the Israeli government, Vanunu acted in violation of the law and the core principles of democracy. Vanunu never claimed that his former employer - the Israel Atomic Energy Commission - violated any statutes or obligations, or acted illegally or without authorization. The primary claim voiced by Vanunu and his supporters (most of whom are not Israelis) is that in maintaining a policy of ambiguity regarding its nuclear option, Israel has infringed on moral principles and norms. This is a personal position - an opinion - and no individual, including Vanunu, has any right to impose his views on others. But this is exactly what Vanunu attempted to do. After Vanunu left his job at Dimona, he began to travel and ended up in Sydney, Australia, without funds or skills. In 1986 he converted to Christianity, and church officials there, learning of his "unusual" background, got in touch with journalists. The Sunday Times flew him to London, negotiated a substantial payment, and published the information and photos that Vanunu provided, as well as considerable speculation and mythology. Of the many Israelis who have been involved in Israel's nuclear program since the 1950s, only one - Vanunu - has violated the rules of the game and gone public.[6] This makes his singular betrayal of trust all the more unacceptable to the vast majority of Israelis. Given the continuing messianic self-image of Vanunu and his supporters, and the readiness of Arab, Iranian, and other officials to seek to use this case to strip Israel of its strategic deterrent, efforts to restrict his movements are understandable. Vanunu might provide information not previously revealed, such as the names of his co-workers. As a result, after his release, Vanunu will be barred from leaving the country, speaking to journalists or diplomats, and his freedom of movement will be limited and monitored. There is concern that he will try to seek asylum in a foreign embassy or church, and Jerusalem Anglican Bishop Riah Abu El-Assal (a Palestinian Arab) declared his readiness to assist. A Middle East Free of Nuclear Weapons - Dreams and Realities The development of Israel's strategic deterrent capability resulted from the threat to national survival posed by Arab and Islamic rejectionism, and any decision to dismantle this deterrent depends on the end of this threat. As long as the open hostility of these regimes continues, the concept of a Middle East nuclear-weapons free zone (MENWFZ) remains very far-fetched. The continued Iranian efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, in violation of its undertakings under the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and the failure, to date, of the International Atomic Energy Agency (charged with verifying the treaty) to halt this activity, highlights the continuing dangers. Notes 1. Poll of Israel Public Opinion - National Security Survey - 2002, Almidan/Mahshov Research Institute, Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, Tel Aviv University, 2003. 2. http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040207-0432.html. 3. Gerald M. Steinberg, "Parameters of Stable Deterrence in a Proliferated Middle East," NonProliferation Review, 7:1 (Fall-Winter 2000); http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~steing/conflict/armspapers/ Parameters_of_Stable%20Deterrence_in_ a_Proliferated_Middle_East.htm. 4. For example, Amr Mousa, who served for many years as Egyptian Foreign Minister and led the anti-Israel campaign during the 1995 NPT Review conference, is also active in the delegitimization activities as head of the Arab League. The Arab press is also active in promoting the Vanunu myths; see http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/680/re103.htm and http://www.palestinemonitor.org/takpoints/the_man_who_ knew_too_much_mordechai_vanunu.htm. 5. For example, Robert Fisk of The Independent (UK) is one of the leading anti-Israel publicists campaigning against Israeli defense against Palestinian terrorism, and is also very active in promoting Vanunu and condemning Israel's nuclear policy. Among the NGOs, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are also active in both dimensions, and HRW sponsors the screening of films "exposing the secrets of Dimona." See http://www.hrw.org/iff/2003/london/dimona.html. 6. Unlike Vanunu, Avner Cohen (author of Israel and the Bomb) was not involved in nuclear policy on an official level, but violated the pledge to submit the manuscript to censorship that he made when interviewing officials. In another case, Brigadier General Yitzhak Yaakov, who had held high-level positions in the security structure, was tried for attempting to publicize his own role in the development of the nuclear deterrent, which is also very different from the Vanunu case. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

A REMINDER FROM ISRAEL'S INDEPENDENCE DAY, 2000 Posted by Steven Plaut, April 19, 2004.

Israel's 56th Independence Day is coming soon. I thought it worth re-posting a message sent out 4 years ago for Israeli Independence Day. At the time, Ami Ayalon was wrapping up his military career, having headed "military intelligence" towards the end of it. The fact that he ran "military intelligence" says volumes about why Israel has allowed itself to be pushed to the brink of destruction. Ayalon then went on to compete against Beilin in terms of who could produce the more defeatist "Spanky-and-Alfalfa-Negotiate-Peace-with-the-PLO" make-pretend peace "deal". Around the time of the posting, he was retiring from the army, and before officially diving into his new career as Israeli defeatist, Ayalon published an Op-Ed in Haaretz: Here is my posting: The Israeli military is as blinded by the loss in perspective as the rest of the country. The military leadership is - if anything - ahead of the rest of the country in saying amen to Oslo and backing the suicidal instincts of the politicians. The military brass was louder than the media in demanding a unilateral unconditional surrender of Israel in Lebanon and relinquishing of the Golan. After explaining for three decades that Israel cannot survive militarily without Mount Hermon, the generals have suddenly discovered that the Hermon is "just another mountain". A proof of this pudding as good as any is Ami Ayalon, about to retire as head of the Shin Bet General Security Services. Ayalon no longer is reticent about his Leftist views and spills them out in Haaretz today (May 9, 2000). I have long argued that Oslo would not be possible without Israel's intelligence services having abandoned all intellectual seriousness in their efforts to suck up to the Labor Party establishment and support Oslo suicide. Carmi Gillon, the previous head of the Shin Bet, believed anti-Oslo demonstrators were a far greater security threat than Arab terrorists and suicide bombers and so turned the Shin Bet into a partisan wing of the Labor Party, used to bash the Opposition in anti-democratic fashion. Ayalon now declares proudly that the PLO is today fighting against the HAMAS far more effectively than Israel ever did, an astonishing admission that should in and of itself justify the court martial of Ayalon and Gillon. He rants on, like Gillon, about the cancerous threat to Israeli democracy from having people criticize Oslo and government policies. He supports judicial activism. He declares himself a "bleeding heart" proudly (yafe nefesh) who cannot abide the idea of Israel ruling over "another nation", although the threat that this other nation now seeks to perpetrate a second Holocaust does not seem to disturb his sleep. He declares he "is a great believer in the New Middle East vision of Shimon Peres," which means he is blind as a bat and dumb as an ox and that a new Pearl Harbor-like surprise of Israel is just waiting to happen. His fear of violence in the future is confined to violence by settlers being forced to submit to ethnic cleansing to appease the PLO, not from Arab terrorism and new Arab wars launched against Israel. He celebrates the fact that Israelis today are far more aware of the crimes and injustices Israel committed against the po' Palestinians, making them more sensitive (meaning, less likely to resist Oslo national suicide). When Israel has been wiped off the face of the map, I suspect the Fascist Arab state of Palestine will issue a postage stamp with the portrait of Ami Ayalon. To celebrate its Independence Day. (end of earlier posting) 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

WHO WILL BE NEXT Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 19, 2004.

[Background: Minister of Education Limor Livnat said on Sunday that she supported Sharon's Gaza Withdrawal plan. She said she feels torn. Benny Begin commented: "[She said that she] heard that the public wants quiet, "so she immediately provides them with an illusion. These people [the senior government leaders who support the plan] know with certainty that this plan is only an illusion:] This was said by Shmuel HaLevi on Radio Free Israel DEMAND THE MAP... NOW!!!! Demand the original cabinet-approved "fence" location map and also demand a map of the "fence's" present location. Seek actual, on site, details to evaluate the built-in permanency of the "fence". NOTICE: The so-called Fence, in places the traitors intend to abandon later, is made of concertina barbed wire only. About ten minutes to roll it back and run. The generals here have vast experience on those maneuvers. Miss Livnat said: "painfully we must follow the will of the people"... At the risk of being disingenuous allow some words about how come "the people want" you liars to run... again! I do not worry too much about Miss Livnat ever having to fez up because she "filters" out some folk... The "you want jobs!?!" lass is a phenomenal chameleon. VOTES from the UnJews and money from overseas: If to get those votes and perks, they have to shed tears for the "painful sacrifices", then that's what they will do! They are exchanging the destruction of 20 thousand Jewish families for 300000 votes from unJews. Neat! They will destroy families, heritage, honor, the State and its future for a few votes. If Jews in Yesha still count on those tramps, they are bound to be destroyed. About "the people" asking Livnat to betray the Nation: - The people are zombied. That is a fact. But why Livnat, why? Because, me lady, because you willingly, knowingly and systematically gave all the tools to traitors to have the Jewish Nationalists mercilessly murdered into submission by Islamists, people intentionally imported and armed for that purpose - imported by Peres, Beilin, Rabin and other co murderers. You know who the people that imported and planned that are and have done nothing to correct the situation. Not only that, Livnat, but you meet and plan with them to join in jolly "unity". See Livnat, it works this way. If you tie up a guy and then have a gang of criminals repeatedly beat the poor fellow up, in time the Vic will come to agree with whatever you want him to agree with. Simple, isn't it? The people has been brain washed. The Jewish Nation has been brain washed by experts using a methodic, systematic plan set in place by a "media" completely controlled by your and Arafat's "partners". Ask the IBA all about planning and subliminal work. Systematically, the will of the people was destroyed by its "leaders" by various other means not limited to those provided by an intentionally deformed "education" system, biased self-elected courts, "G SS judensektion" methodic assaults and finally by a monstrous "economic plan". The latter was meant to decimate the supporting pillars of the Nation on behalf of money lenders. Lets talk about your expertise or one you so claim to have, Miss Livnat. Education... You have got to be kidding, don't you? That deviant circus you call a school system methodically dismembers our Heritage and persecutes anyone detected to be inclined to uphold our value system or history, student or teacher. MEGA YAMIT IS ON ITS WAY. Because some unJews asked for it, all of Yesha and Jerusalem as well. will be abandoned! Not just Gush Katif and all other Gaza Jewish locations. ALL of Yesha and Jerusalem as well. Jews by the tens of thousands or more will be transferred or otherwise disposed of, either now or later and that while that ever shifting "fence" is retreated back to the 48 and earlier markers. That is our forecast and it remains so. Read the letter from Weisglass to Miss Rice. There is a perfect division of work. As we disclosed long ago. The whole corrupt setting was borne from the unholy mating of unJews and foreign planners dedicated to DISMANTLING our Nation. And Miss Livnat is part of that jolly union. That was the Plan originally joined by Peres continuing the Nazi enterprise. And a special task force selected and co opted others to that traitor's plans. MEGA YAMIT STAGE #A: The taxpayers budgeted money allocated to YESHA was cut a few days ago. MEGA YAMIT STAGE #1: The unJews operational milestones led by the Sharon unJews call for the disposal of ALL the Jews and Heritage in Gaza and "only" five communities in Yehuda & Shomron, Yosh. They will isolate and destroy individual families and small communities first. Ben Gurion's expertise perfected in the computer era. Jobs, health care, banking services, schooling, tax systems and the ever there "G SS "Judensektion" lads and lasses will be carefully used to destroy the people they want to eliminate first. Gaza has been cordoned off so "selected" Jews could be flown out or disappeared... anytime now... MEGA YAMIT STAGE #2: "international" forces will enter Gaza and Yosh. USA, EU and UN forces have trained "Islamic" to work with them on that and are all ready. There are huge staging areas and equipments ready. MEGA YAMIT STAGE #3: According to secret agreements hundreds of millions were advanced days ago to kibbutzim in the form of "housing" and land and to Arafat on cash allowances. MEGA YAMIT STAGE #4: The actual Yosh Mega Yamit assault will start AFTER the "fence" is slowly bumped to match the 1948 line. MEGA YAMIT STAGE #5: Following the next "elections" the so called "right wing" will be joined by Peres, Sarid, Beilin and Lapid and the islamics, of course. They WILL then dispose of the rest of the Jews and Heritage and of Jerusalem. In a few weeks the half of Jerusalem will go back to Arafat. You are probably aware of the State Radio reporting that pained "right" wing ministers Netanyahu and Livnat are going along with Sharon's plan. Retreat under fire, complete dismantling, transfer of Jews. AKA "itnatkut". "Severing"... That is not surprising and was expected since none of them is really identified with our Heritage. Those people seek just the benefits and privileges of being in high State jobs. We have been certainly more accurate with our forecasts regarding the ultimate intents of the cadre in question than most researchers. Well over 1600 Jews or other innocent persons became murder victims but are identified as "painful sacrifices", "victims of peace", "hepuke is koah victims" and vics of other expertly designed wordmanship labels. Added to the murdered ones there are over 14000 maimed victims as well. Plus over 30 billion dollars in damages and losses. My friends and fellow JEWS, time is running out... Theatricals notwithstanding, the following are facts. 1. RIght Of Return: Not even arch enemy of Judaism Beilin ever accepted "right of return", so what is the big deal about President's Bush earthshaking note? The '49, NOT '67, limits are not sacred. Classic USA policy. Nothing new on this either. Barak already offered to trade pre '67 land with his Islamic partners. Sharon wanted Barak as his "defense minister", remember? It is time to RECONSTRUCT. Reconstruction means to completely dismantle the unJewish holds and elect, freely elect. a new State leadership and elect, as well, a completely new State configuration. We will call for a National election of a Jewish National Assembly. Jews and friendly allies ONLY may be part of the Assembly. Following that, an election of a Constitutional Court will be called for. There must be jeopardy, physical jeopardy for those "sacrificing" Jews, Jewish homes and heritage. We do not advocate stupid violence but rational, equal, equal and reciprocal "sacrificing" prospects. If a D-9 is used to demolish a place of prayer or Jewish homestead by the unJews, those involved on the atrocity must know that they jeopardize by so doing, their "social clubs", homes, pig farms, whorehouses, Wagner-playing orchestras and respective halls and other properties. The unJews must feel that their "sacrificing" of what is National Heritage can and will result in rigid responses against their interests and facilities. Elections must be free and without foreign moneys in any form or shape and without the unJews and their wind bag generals involved anywhere. The elections must be called by the Jewish PEOPLE and friends. The Nation must rise to the challenge posed by foreign paid traitors. What is being cooked should not be much of a surprise since those co conspirators are the same persons that repeatedly have lied, conspired, defrauded, bribed and committed other crimes since 1948 and even earlier. Lets fix it in our minds. Those that stole Yemenite children or otherwise demeaned and assaulted immigrants in general should have been expected to import islamics and arm them and should also be expected to import foreign workers to "replace" those now wiser african Jews. Rabin was a trained general and must have KNOWN that Arafat and his criminals would murder in mass. So did all of those that are still part of the Oslo treason plans. But of course we must have known that persons without a connection to Judaism would eventually act on their foreign controllers behalf and against Jews. The Nation must recognize its danger and act to elect new leadership. Act immediately. Shmuel HaLevi Radio Free Israel To Go To Top

THE RETURN OF WEIMAR Posted by David Wilder, April 19, 2004.

Annually Israel marks the Shoah, the Holocaust, mourning six to seven million Jews, slaughtered by the Nazis during World War Two. The date chosen for Yom HaShoah, or Holocaust Memorial Day, is quite significant, coming a week after Passover, the holiday commemorating the birth of the Jewish people, and a week before Yom Ha'azmaut, Independence Day, celebrating the rebirth of the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael with the founding of the first Jewish state in two thousand years. The enormity of the holocaust is practically beyond human comprehension. We can easily picture one person, ten people, one hundred people, a thousand people, or even 10,000 people. Huge sports arenas can contain tens of thousands of people. Let's take Yankee Stadium in New York. It has a capacity of almost 58,000 people. Imagine one hundred and twelve Yankee Stadiums, filled up with people, to the brim. And then, all at once, delete them from existence, erase the people in them. In an instant, they are all gone. The men, women, children - be they rich or poor, religious or secular, good people and not such good people - with one thing in common. In the blink of an eye they cease to exist. Well, not really. Because their family and friends remember them, miss them, mourn them. Maybe it's difficult to conjure up 112 Yankee Stadiums. Perhaps I can present an example closer to home. Picture 2,167 World Trade Centers - with 3,000 people filling each them. That is about six million five hundred thousand people. That is how many people were butchered between 1941 to 1945. All gone, with the blink of an eye. Obliterated from existence. But don't err. That is how many people were lost - but that is not the holocaust. Hitler's plans included not only killing people. Rather they represented a final solution, an eradication of a people, obliteration of a culture, annihilation of a religion. These numbers are only partially accurate. In reality, the picture is quite different. In 1933 European Jewry numbered about nine million five hundred thousand Jews. Remove from that six or six and half million. What remains? About a third. Two thirds of European Jewry was wiped out. So forget the examples presented above. Can you picture two-thirds of the United States gone? One would expect, following such a cataclysm, that certain lessons would be learned and internalized. Sixty five years should not be long enough to forget. Perhaps we did not forget, perhaps we never learned in the first place. One of the most important lessons we should have learned is who to trust, who to depend on, who believe in. Or, better phrased, who not to trust, depend on, or believe in. Quite simply, the Americans and the Europeans did nothing, absolutely nothing, to stop and prevent the carnage. Today, in Israel, if a person witnesses an attempt to harm someone and does nothing, he or she can be tried and convicted in a court of law. Non-action is a crime. Maybe we cannot put the United States and Europe on trial. But trust them? Rely on them when our very existence is at stake? An apparent contradiction in terms. Unless you're Jewish - unless you're an Israeli, especially an Israeli leader. Ten years ago Israel placed its fate in the hands Bill Clinton's signature and Arafat's good will. When the Hebron Accords were signed over seven years ago, we were told point-blank, "your security is dependent upon palestinian cooperation." Today, where is Clinton - where is Arafat? And how many Jews are dead, maimed and/or psychologically wounded. Today Bibi and Limor, shadows of Sharon, tell us of our good fortune - "look at the promises we've received from the President of the United States!" Watch George W. Bush closely. Where will he be on January 21, 2005? At best, where will he be on January 21, 2009? The "hitnatkut" - Sharon's "disengagement," the plan to flee from Yesha, from all of Judea, Samaria and Gush Katif, beginning in Gaza, the intention to transfer tens of thousands of Jews from their homes, is classic demagoguery, appealing to the masses "we must sacrifice a few for the many and save whatever we can." I cannot help but feel nauseated by the fact that on the day preceding Holocaust Memorial Day two of Israel's premier politicians, Education Minister Limur Livnat and former Prime Minister, presently the Treasury Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu announced their support to abandon Gush Katif. And this afternoon, Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom, one of the fiercest opponents of the plan, also surrendered to Sharon's pressure and declared his support. Bibi Netanyahu, who apologized for deserting Hebron, and Limur Livnat, one of the staunchest supporters of Yesha, have done an about-face, and together with Sylvan Shalom, are now willing to participate in evicting over 7,000 Jews from their homes. And this is only the start. Sharon promised a "strong Gush Etzion - a strong Kiryat Arba - a strong Hebron." Let's see how long it takes for Hebron to receive building permits, allowing new construction on Jewish-owned land. Let's see how long it takes for Kiryat Arba to receive a building permit allowing construction of a permanent synagogue called Hazon David on presently uninhabited state-owned land in or around Kiryat Arba. My guess: don't hold your breath! The early 1930s witnessed considerable political instability in Germany. On January 30, 1933, German president Paul von Hindenburg, an old, tired general turned politician, appointed Adolf Hitler Reichskanzler, or chancellor of Germany. "Although he was fiercely anti-Nazi and had defeated Hitler in the 1932 presidential election, he reluctantly agreed to von Papen's theory that, with Nazi popular support on the wane, Hitler could now be controlled as chancellor. The date is commonly seen as the beginning of Nazi Germany." [http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Paul von Hindenburg] Sharon's government is a mirror-image of the Weimar Republic's tragic collapse. Appeasement - The Hindenburgs, the Chamberlains, the cynical utilization of democracy as a tool of mass destruction, - it's all being repeated before our eyes. Sharon, Netanyahu, Livnat, Shalom and all the others are marching Israel down the road of calamitous disaster, which, if not diverted quickly, will lead us straight into Aushwitz II, otherwise called the Mediterranean Sea. World Jewry might then, one day in the not too distant future, mark Yom HaShoah, Holocaust Memorial Day, as the beginning of the end of the Jewish State. David Wilder is spokesman for 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

PHONY REFERENDUM IN ISRAEL Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 19, 2004.

PM Sharon has asked for a Likud referendum to be held three weeks later. He has not revealed its details to Cabinet, Knesset, media, or the public. The referendum committee head would get the plan details by 4/18, take some time to disseminate them, and take a vote on 4/28. Considering the holidays in that period, he left very few days for analysis and discussion of a plan still not publicly disclosed. Likud members would be voting in haste and with misconceptions. The referendum question, itself, would have no specifics (IMRA, 410, 4/11). It is speculated that Sharon would release a draft of the plan first to journalists known to favor it in principle. The Broadcast media, largely under government control and entirely under leftist control, would get just government handouts making one-sided claims about the plan and Pres. Bush's reception of it (IMRA, 4/11). #10579 reports one-sided interviewing. That is manipulative. That is the way Rabin rammed Oslo down the Knesset's throat. What a blunder that proved! Israel ought to try democracy. Couldn't be worse. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

HOLOCAUST REMEMBERENCE DAY Posted by Communaude-Juive-France, April 19, 2004.

This article is from yesterday's Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1082190339643). The sirens of Holocaust Remembrance Day wail tomorrow, April 19, over the destruction of European Jewry, and Israelis will stop in their tracks in silence. After 59 years, as the nation comes to this eerie standstill, what should we be thinking about? For Zionists, the transcending lesson of the Holocaust is that Jews must be strong enough to defend their survival, come what may. If the Shoah was the culmination of Jewish powerlessness, then Israel is the embodiment of Jewish power. It is strength - not supplication - that must guarantee our survival in a hostile environment. That Israel chose the 27th day of Nisan to remember the Holocaust and its martyrs makes perfect sense. The Hebrew date, corresponding to the month of April, falls between the beginning of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising on the first day of Pessah in April 1943 and Israel's Independence Day on 5 Iyar. It was in April 1933 that the Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany began. By April 1936, the Arab Revolt in Palestine had further restricted the possibility of asylum and survival. In April 1940, Auschwitz was established near the Polish town of Oswiecim. And by April 1942, the Einsatzgruppen, or mobile killing squads, had wiped out the Jews of the Crimea. On the other hand, it was in April 1944 that two Jewish prisoners escaped from Auschwitz and passed on to the papal representative in Slovakia a detailed report on the killings in the camp. Finally, it was in April 1945 that Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and most of the other camps were liberated. What ought we to do with these recollections as the siren pierces the silence? Reflect, perhaps, on the tension between the universal and parochial implications of the Holocaust, over the way Holocaust symbolism has been hijacked, over the Holocaust and Jewish identity, and about what the Shoah means in the context of the Arab-Israel conflict. Jews have been tireless in using the Holocaust to teach about man's inhumanity to man. Has it made a difference? Ask the 1.7 million Cambodians slaughtered between 1975-1979 by communist lunatics. Ask the over 800,000 Rwandans cut down by machetes - in a mere 100 days - in 1994. Clearly, efforts to universalize the lessons of the Holocaust have utterly failed. Would a forced visit of Hutu killers through Washington DC's Holocaust Museum saved a single Tutsi? No one predisposed to genocide will be shamed into human decency by exposure to Schindler's List. More than that: Even humanists who mourn Hitler's Jewish victims have, in the blink of a relativist eye, condemned Israel for eliminating Ahmed Yassin, though he was single-mindedly committed to a new genocide. The disconnect is both glaring and instructive. Then comes the issue of victimization. Through books, museums, memorials, and cinema, the Holocaust has become a universal metaphor of victimization - invoked by everyone from AIDS and anti-abortion activists to African-American nationalists (who define slavery as the "real Holocaust"), and pro-Arab propagandists portraying Palestinians as the true inheritors of Nazi-era victimization. And yet, since last Holocaust Remembrance Day, the sense of Jewish isolation in the Diaspora has grown. Europe has regressed to bouts of violent street anti-Semitism. That the source is largely Euro- Muslim is small comfort, for it shows European society has failed to acculturate its Muslim population to the values of modernity. In America, Jews discovered they were uniquely out of sync with the majority over Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, even if they didn't leave the theater feeling the film was anti-Semitic. Where was the sensitivity we thought we had inculcated? Within the community, some Jews have used the Holocaust as a misguided source of Jewish identity. The good news is this fad is ebbing. The bad news is it may have been replaced by ephemeral types of affiliation such as pop-Kabbala. The lesson? Continuity can't be bought on the cheap - through guilt or fads - but only through the hard work of Jewish education connecting a new generation to its civilizational heritage. Applying lessons from the Holocaust to the Arab-Israel conflict is a tricky business. We are loathe to equate today's foes with the Nazis. But as Yad Vashem's Yehuda Bauer has argued, "Nazism, Stalinist communism, and radical Islam are different from each other, but they also have a certain similarity: All three aim, or aimed, at exclusive control over the world, all three oppose or opposed all expressions of democracy, and all three attacked Jews..." On this day, it is worth remembering that in Mein Kampf Hitler predicted terrorism and force would be victorious over reason. The battle continues. This was distributed by the Jewish Community of France (Communaute-Juive-France-owner@yahoogroupes.fr). Their website address is http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/Communaute-Juive-France/ To Go To Top

MUTILATING AMERICAN CIVILIANS IN FALLUJAH AS REVENGE THE CRIMINALITY OF TERRORIST "RETALIATIONS" Posted by Israel BenAmi, April 19, 2004.

This was written by Louis Rene Beres, Professor of International Law in the Department of Political Science at Purdue University. He is the author of many books and articles on terrorism and international law. Earlier this month a previously unknown Arab/Islamic terror group claimed the murder and mutilation of four American civilian contractors in western Iraq as "retaliation" for Israel's prior assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. "This is a gift from the people of Fallujah to the people of Palestine and the family of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was assassinated by the criminal Zionists," read the statement from the Brigades of Martyr Ahmed Yassin. Now that Israel has also succeeded in eliminating Yassin's successor, a pediatrician who devoted his professional life to blowing up Jewish children in buses and nursery schools, it is vital to understand what should already be obvious: terrorists have absolutely no rights of retaliation under international law. There can never be any legal or moral equivalence between permissible acts of anticipatory self-defense against a leading terrorist, whether it be Sheikh Yassin or Dr. Rantisi, and the jubilant dismemberment, burning and hanging of American noncombatants carrying food supplies to hungry Iraqis. The fact that various Arab/Islamic terror groups now see no difference between such expressions of force - indeed, that they openly subordinate the most evident civilizational limits of humanitarian international law to the ritualistically primal pleasures of random slaughter - only reveals just how dangerous these groups have now become. By definition, terrorists are criminals under international law. They do not have any rights of reprisal. When a police officer shoots a fleeing murderer to protect human life, that action is certainly not comparable to the felon's own prior criminality. The latter is an obvious instance of law-violation, one that must be circumscribed and punished. The former is an obvious example of law-enforcement, one that is indispensable to providing public order and security. The fact that both instances involve the use of force does not make them the same. They are not merely different actions from the standpoint of legality; they are diametric opposites. The leaders of Hamas and its sister terrorist groups always urge "retaliation" for Israel's self-defense policy of targeted killings - a policy now similarly followed and codified by the United States. With such misuse of language, the terrorists and their sympathizers acknowledge no legal difference between the essential use of force by states to protect against terrorism and the steadily escalating terror-violence that inevitably elicits such force. Recently the frenzied Hamas cries for Jewish and "Crusader" blood have been formalized in a widely-circulated deck of cards containing the pictures of Israel's democratically-elected leaders. In a grotesque parody of the current American program to identify most- wanted Iraqi war criminals (criminals who are enormously popular heroes to Hamas and to other Palestinian terror organizations), these cards seek nothing less than to equate law-breaking with law-enforcement. Normally, assassination is a crime under international law, by whomever it is committed. There are residual occasions, however, where assassination may be not only permissible, but altogether law-enforcing. One such case is state-authorized counter-terrorism, so long, among other things, as the assassination is directed at the target terrorist as meticulously as is operationally possible. By definition, on the other hand, assassination BY terrorists of a state official or of an ordinary citizen is always murder. It is true that in certain extremely rare circumstances the assassination of a public official by insurgent forces could be construed as law-enforcing - circumstances called "tyrannicide" in political philosophy and jurisprudence - but these are surely not such circumstances. Here, in the matter of Hamas vs.Israel and the United States, Palestinian forces have repeatedly declined diplomatic methods of conflict resolution while simultaneously murdering the most fragile noncombatants with intentionality and cruelty. To better understand this point, let us consider an eye-opening and altogether plausible scenario. In addition to Operation Iraqi Freedom and its associated plan to kill or capture leading Iraqi war criminals, the United States is now also conducting various other military operations in reprisal for the acts of terror of September 11th. An explicit major objective in these operations is the assassination of Bin Laden himself. If these operations should eventually succeed, and Bin Laden is "removed," al Qaeda's successor leadership might then decide to murder an American high official, say Secretary of State Colin Powell or National Security Advisor Condolleza Rice. If, following such a murder, the United States were to respond with purposeful targeted assassinations, would any civilized person see "equivalence" in these reciprocal killings? Rather, wouldn't it be perfectly clear that the violence by al Qaeda was entirely criminal while violence by the United States was entirely law-enforcing? Israel has been conducting necessary operations for many long and painful years against Palestinian terrorists. A major objective in these operations has been the targeted killing of criminals who plan barbarous attacks on Israeli women and children. Whenever Israel, in the most controlled and precise manner possible, targets the perpetrators of these heinous crimes, Hamas and its fellow "freedom fighters" initiate yet another spasm of utterly indiscriminate murders. There is a "cycle of violence," to be sure, yet there is anything but equivalence. Impatient with all civilized limits, Hamas and its terrorist group partners now seek not only to reinvent language, but also to transform violation into punishment. This transformation, which unhesitatingly replaces law with vengeance, threatens to sacrifice ever-larger numbers of defenseless Israelis and Americans in the relentlessly desperate "martyr's" search for immortality. Only a vast collective Jewish and American agony defines the Hamas idea of justice, an idea that handily masks genocide as "retaliation," but no amount of linguistic manipulations can turn crime into law. No cause on this green earth can ever justify the jubilant maiming, disembowelment, charring and murder of children on an Israeli schoolbus or adult American civilian contractors delivering food in Iraq, and no terrorist public relations campaign - no matter how slick and well-funded from Saudi Arabia or even parts of Europe - can ever succeed in portraying monstrous defilement as sacred goodness. To Go To Top

THE ARABS ARE INCENSED. NOW THERE'S A SHOCKER! Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, April 19, 2004.

The headline of the Associated Press report in The Daytona Beach News-Journal on 4/16/04 spoke of widespread rage among the Arabs following President Bush's positive reaction to Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza disengagement plan. Papers all over the world were carrying similar stories to tell. There is plenty of rage in Israel as well over Sharon's plan - although I don't see it making the mainstream media's headlines. Many Jews (and others as well) see Sharon's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the "West Bank" as a reward to Arab rejectionist terrorism. Indeed, the main thing the Arabs were supposed to do for their part on the "roadmap" - fight terrorism - they not only did not do, but actually financed and supported more of. The vast majority of Arabs refuse to accept a 9-mile wide, microscopic Israel. So why is there a surprise or is it "headline news" when they refuse to accept a revision of that suicidal existence for the better? An earlier Cox News Service article which appeared on April 14th as an "Analysis" piece, "Bush, Sharon meet as Iraq fighting flares," read like a press release provided by either Hamas' or Arafat's press secretary - and was about as factually reliable as well. While it was fair to write about perceptions equating Israel's conflict with the Arabs with America's fight in Iraq, the unquestioning way the article was written simply made the case for that equation. It belonged more on the op-ed pages, not the "news." Where was the "analysis" of this important issue? The article was simply a restatement of standard Arab propaganda. Unfortunately, it was not too different from many other "news" reports offered elsewhere covering Arab-Israeli issues. Repeating the Arab line that Bush is allowing Israel to grab "Arab" land on the West Bank is one very important example. Seldom, if ever, does it appear in the mainstream media (except in the words of angry readers' or listeners' responses) that those lands in Judea and Samaria - known as the "West Bank" only in this past century due to British imperialism and Transjordan's illegal seizure of the west bank of the Jordan River in its attack on a reborn Israel in 1948 - were unapportioned areas of the original Mandate for Palestine open to settlement by all peoples - not just Arabs. These lands were mostly state lands, passed on from the Ottoman Turkish Empire (which ruled it for over four centuries) to the British after World War I, and then onto the Jordanians and Israel after 1967. Purely Arab Jordan was created itself from some 80% of "Palestine's" original post-World War I land. The British separated the Mandate's territory east of the River in 1922 in the creation of Transjordan, partially as a reward to their Hashemite Arab allies. The name "Palestine," itself, was the name Rome gave to Judaea after the Judaeans' (Jews') second of two major revolts, recorded by the Roman historians themselves, for independence in 133-135 C.E. Tacitus, Dio Cassius, etc. speak of Judaea - not Palaestina - in their accounts. Listen to this one telling quote from Tacitus: It inflamed Vespasian's resentment that the Jews were the only nation who had not yet submitted (Vol. II, Works of Tacitus). To squash their hopes supposedly forever, Emperor Hadrian renamed the land after the Jews' historic enemies, the Philistines (of David and Goliath fame), a non-Semitic sea people from the eastern Mediterranean or Aegean area. There never was an Arab country of Palestine. When the Arabs ruled the land - as a result of their own imperial conquests of the region from the 7th century C.E. through the 9th - it was out of their two imperial Caliphal capitals, Damascus and Baghdad. Jews lived on the disputed lands currently in question until their massacres by Arabs in the 1920s. Many, if not most, so-called "native" Palestinian Arabs moved into those territories from other Arab countries. Indeed, Hamas "patron saint," Sheikh Izzedine al-Qassam, was from Aleppo, Syria. Strong evidence exists that Arafat was from Egypt...although he claims his birth records "got lost." Due to the Jews, there was booming economic development going on in the Mandate, so Arabs poured in from all over. The Records of the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission show scores of thousands of Arabs entering just from Syria alone over just a few months' period of time...Arab settlers setting up Arab settlements.The British chose not to officially record Arab immigrants...just Jewish ones. But they did record this Arab movement in numerous private and secret correspondence files and other mandatory correspondence. Evidence for this abounds, and this was preceded just a bit earlier in the latter 19th century with many thousands of soldiers with Muhammad Ali's army from Egypt staying and settling in the area after their invasion. Listen to just a few of many quotes: "In the last few months, from 30,000 to 36,000 Hauranese (Syrians) entered Palestine and settled there( Tewfik Bey El-Hurani, 8/12/34, La Syrie)." "It is certain that many of the inhabitants of Syria and the Lebanon enter Palestine without formality (Palestine Royal Commission Report, pp 291-292)" Countering the Arab claim that the Jewish presence was detrimental to them, Winston Churchill responded in 1939: "...So far from being persecuted, Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied..." It's been estimated that many more Arabs entered Palestine under the cover of darkness and were simply never recorded. So the lands in Judea and Samaria that Jews came to "occupy" as a result of war being forced upon them in June 1967 (having been blockaded by Nasser's Egypt, a casus belli, etc.) were not "purely Arab lands." That Arabs call it that is no shock. They call Berber North Africa, Africa's Sudan, Kurdish lands in Iraq and Syria, etc. "purely Arab patrimony" as well - not to mention all of Israel proper. But the Western media doesn't have to promote this chauvinistic lie, as the 4/14 Cox report and others have done. When you don't offer a counter to the claim, or simply repeat as fact Arab "truths," that is what essentially happens. Israel was never expected to be a 9-mile wide rump state. Yet that's how the U.N.-imposed armistice lines left it in 1949 - a constant temptation to those who would destroy it. And Arabs repeatedly tried to do just that over the years. As a result of the Arabs' attempt in 1967, things backfired bigtime. And Israel found itself in the "occupied territories." U.N. Resolution #242 was hotly debated after the '67 war. The final draft refused the Arab demand that Israel be forced to withdraw to the artificially-imposed armistice lines of 1949. On the contrary, 242 states that those armistice lines were to be replaced by "secure and recognized borders." Most of the settlements have been established on non-Arab, strategic high ground areas to provide just what 242 envisioned - a bit more of a buffer separating Israel from its would-be executioners. The Arab claim that those settlements are "illegal" is simply wrong, and only for a brief period of time - during Carter's term in office - did the U.S. buy into that claim. The Arab use of the Geneva Conventions' Article 2 as "proof " falls apart because that article pertains only to "cases of...occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party" by another such party. The occupation by Egypt and Transjordan (subsequently renamed "Jordan" since it now held both banks of the River) of Gaza and the West Bank was illegal and neither country had lawful or recognized sovereignty. The last legal sovereignty over these territories was that of the League of Nations Palestine Mandate which stipulated the right of the Jews to live in the whole of the Mandated territory. President Bush's recent endorsement of Israel's right to something better than a 9-mile wide existence - while also supporting the Arabs' right to a 23rd state, and second one in Palestine - is consistent with the United Nations Security Council resolutions dealing with this issue...whether his own State Department's Arabists like it or not. While I welcome President Bush's recent remarks about Israel not having to return to those 1949 armistice lines (and, for the first time, in public, I heard him call them just that...not "borders"), I wish he would have explained this to the world that was watching him on television in these terms...not simply as "new facts on the ground." The territorial adjustments which Israel deserves has to do with justice...not simply the imposition of power. Any 23rd Arab state that might be created - and second, not first, Arab one within the original 1920 borders of "Palestine" - must not emerge at the expense of the security of the sole, miniscule state of the Jews. The other issue of Arab "rage" - that dealing with their expectation to overwhelm the Jews in their sole, microscopic state with real or alleged Arab refugees - was also, at long last, dealt with openly by an American President for all to clearly hear. Half of Israel's Jews were refugees themselves from "Arab" /Muslim lands, and they didn't have two dozen other states to potentially choose from. Not a single Arab refugee would have been created in the first place had Arabs not attempted to violently nip a nascent Israel in the bud after 1947. So, like hundreds of millions of other refugees who have been resettled elsewhere, the Arabs will finally have to deal with their own refugee problem - which they themselves created - via another solution besides using their own people as pawns in their anti-Zionist games and/or expecting Israel to commit national suicide. Furthermore, is an Arab moving from one part of Mandatory Palestine to another part of Mandatory Palestine really a "refugee?" Is he the same as a Jew, for example, literally fleeing for his life (many having been butchered, hung, etc. in Arab pogroms) from Arab Yemen, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, etc. - as half Of Israel's population did? Jews were commonly known as kelbi yahudi - Jew Dogs - in Arab lands. Predictable Arab anger must be dealt with delicately but unabashedly...not pandered to. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

APPEAL TO READERS OF STEVE PLAUT'S COMMENTARIES AND OTHER FANS OF STEVE Posted by Jonathan Steinman, April 19, 2004.

As one of Steve's long-time readers and fans, I would like to ask you to join me in coming to Steve's assistance regarding the malicious "libel suit" that has been filed against Steve by Neve Gordon, the radical lecturer from Ben Gurion University. As you probably know, Gordon was upset because Steve criticized Gordon's extremist writings and especially Gordon's singing the praises of Norman Finkelstein, almost universally recognized as a vicious anti-Semite and Holocaust Denier, a man whose writings are celebrated by all Neo-Nazi and Holocaust Denial web sites. (Gordon had compared Finkielstein ethically to the Prophets in the Bible.) Steve also criticized Gordon when Gordon entered Ramallah illegally in the middle of Operation Defensive Wall, to serve as "human shield" and show his solidarity for Arafat and the PLO, who were at the time hiding wanted terrorists (including the murderers of an Israeli cabinet minister) in Arafat's offices, the very same offices where Gordon was protographed in his now-famous embrace with Arafat (can be seen at www.nevegordon.blogspot.com, along with other background material). Gordon has filed a libel suit in Nazareth court, because he wanted an Arab judge to hear the case. He knew that no Jewish judge could read what Gordon writes without becoming physically nauseous and would summarily toss out his nuisance suit against Plaut. Gordon's suit before the Nazareth Arab judge is really for purposes of harassing Steve and forcing him to bear many thousands of dollars of legal costs to defeat this litigational aggression by Gordon. Beyond just harassing Steve, this is meant to be part of a broad assault against the freedom of speech in Israel for non-leftists, being launched by the worst leftist extremists in the country. (Several other suits against non-leftists by leftist extremists are also being filed and fought at this time in Israel.) If this suit against Steve succeeds, no one's free speech in Israel will be safe. Freedom of expression will be protected only for those seeking to lead the country to its destruction! Steve is fighting not only for his own pocketbook but for freedom of speech for all of us in Israel. If you would be willing to help Steve in defraying some of these costs, you can send him a contribution towards these costs, to Prof. Steven Plaut, Graduate School of Business, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905 Israel. Every little bit helps! Alternatively, if you prefer, you could send a contribution to Steve's lawyer directly (just attach a note saying the check is for Steve's legal expenses) to: Dr. Haim Misgav, 24 Pinkas Street, Tel Aviv 62661, Israel. If you can only make a donation via a tax-exempt channel (tax exempt in the US), contact Steve directly (steven_plaut@yahoo.com) and he can tell you how to arrange that. And one other thing. If you have not yet done so, please write a letter to Professor Avishay Braverman, President of Ben Gurion University, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel, email avishay@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Fax: 972-8-647-2937. Be sure to tell him, in your own words (polite but forceful), what you think of Neve Gordon's columns and articles calling Israel a fascist, terrorist state and an apartheid country, what you think of Neve Gordon listing himself as representing Ben Gurion University every time he defames Israel, what you think of Gordon listing his anti-Israel propaganda on his resume as if it is academic research and scholarly publication, what you think of Gordon praising Norman Finkelstein and illegally serving as human shield for Arafat. Every email helps, and printed letters help even more! (If you want, send a carbon copy of your letter to Vivien Marion is the Executive Vice-President. phone: 212-687-7721; fax: 212-302-6443; email: info@aabgu.org). Thanks in advance on behalf of all of us supporting Steve's valiant tireless campaign to rescue Israel from the stupidity of its own policies and from the self-hating Israeli Left. Cordially yours, Jonathan Steinman To Go To Top

DOV WEISSGLAS' LETTER TO CONDILEEZZA RICE Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 19, 2004.

Who is he working for? Who is Sharon working for? And wasn't stopping terrorism the first order of business under Bush's "Road Map"? [emphasis in the letter are mine.] Dr. Condoleezza Rice National Security Adviser The White House Washington, D.C. Dear Dr. Rice, On behalf of the Prime Minister of the State of Israel, Mr. Ariel Sharon, I wish to reconfirm the following understanding, which had been reached between us: 1. Restrictions on settlement growth: within the agreed principles of settlement activities, an effort will be made in the next few days to have a better definition of the construction line of settlements in Judea & Samaria. An Israeli team, in conjunction with Ambassador Kurtzer, will review aerial photos of settlements and will jointly define the construction line of each of the settlements. 2. Removal of unauthorized outposts: the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense, jointly, will prepare a list of unauthorized outposts with indicative dates of their removal; the Israeli Defense forces and/or the Israeli Police will take continuous action to remove those outposts in the targeted dates. The said list will be presented to Ambassador Kurtzer within 30 days. 3. Mobility restrictions in Judea & Samaria: the Minister of Defense will provide Ambassador Kurtzer with a map indicating roadblocks and other transportational barriers posed across Judea & Samaria. A list of barriers already removed and a timetable for further removals will be included in this list. Needless to say, the matter of the existence of transportational barriers fully depends on the current security situation and might be changed accordingly. 4. Legal attachments of Palestinian revenues: the matter is pending in various courts of law in Israel, awaiting judicial decisions. We will urge the State Attorney's office to take any possible legal measure to expedite the rendering of those decisions. 5. The Government of Israel extends to the Government of the United States the following assurances: a. The Israeli government remains committed to the two-state solution 'Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security' as the key to peace in the Middle East. b. The Israeli government remains committed to the Roadmap as the only route to achieving the two-state solution. c. The Israeli government believes that its disengagement plan and related steps on the West Bank concerning settlement growth, unauthorized outposts, and easing of restrictions on the movement of Palestinians not engaged in terror are consistent with the Roadmap and, in many cases, are steps actually called for in certain phases of the Roadmap. d. The Israeli government believes that further steps by it, even if consistent with the Roadmap, cannot be taken absent the emergence of a Palestinian partner committed to peace, democratic reform, and the fight against terror. e. Once such a Palestinian partner emerges, the Israeli government will perform its obligations, as called for in the Roadmap, as part of the performance-based plan set out in the Roadmap for reaching a negotiated final status agreement. f. The Israeli government remains committed to the negotiation between the parties of a final status resolution of all outstanding issues. g. The Government of Israel supports the United States' efforts to reform the Palestinian security services to meet their roadmap obligations to fight terror. Israel also supports the American efforts, working with the international community, to promote the reform process, build institutions, and improve the economy of the Palestinian Authority and to enhance the welfare of its people, in the hope that a new Palestinian leadership will prove able to fulfill its obligations under the Roadmap. The Israeli Government will take all reasonable actions requested by these parties to facilitate these efforts. h. As the Government of Israel has stated, the barrier being erected by Israel should be a security rather than a political barrier, should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues including final borders, and its route should take into account, consistent with security needs, its impact on Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities. Sincerely, Dov Weissglas Chief of the Prime Minister's Bureau Link: http://tinyurl.com/2wtga To Go To Top

TURNING A VICIOUS HAMAS KILLER INTO A DASHING HERO Posted by Leo Rennert, April 18, 2004.

These letters were written to administrators and writers at the Washington Post. Letter 1. In a front-page report on the killing of Hamas leader Abdel Rantisi, the Post calls him a militant who "launched vitriolic assaults" on Israel. Vitriolic? You might as well describe Osama bin Laden as a propagandist who launches bitterly sarcastic (Webster's definition of "vitriolic") broadsides against the West. Why not get real? Like Osama, Rantisi was a mass killer who orchestrated scores of terrorist attacks that killed hundreds of innocent people. While depicting Rantisi's heroic stature among Palestinians, you downplay his real, lethal objectives. On the front page, you seek to turn him into an acceptable figure by asserting that his beef was merely with Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Why did it take another 20 paragraphs, near the close of the article, for the Post to finally acknowledge on an inside page that his real aim was NOT to liberate the West Bank and Gaza but to destroy all of Israel? And why make your readers wait until the very last paragraph to find out that a few hours before the missile attack on Rantisi, one of his suicide bombers killed an Israeli border guard and injured three other Israelis? Reading the article, one might conclude that Rantisi, after a glorious career of opposing Israel, fell victim to brutal Israeli aggression - not that he was a murderous terrorist and that Israelis were the real victims. Letter 2: While my letter speaks for itself, you might also want to take a look at the NY Times, which ran a fair, even-handed news report and analysis on the killing of Santisi. Unlike the Post, the Times, in a front-page subhead and in the second graf, immediately calls attention to a lethal suicide bombing just hours before the attack on Santisi. Nor did the Times try to downplay Santisi's real agenda. Early in the Times story, he is quoted as wanting to take over the whole of Palestine - not just the West Bank and Gaza, as the Post asserts high up in its account. The Times also doesn't mince words right off the bat that Hamas is committed to Israel's destruction. As you know, the Times is perhaps even more anti-Israel in its editorials than the Post. And its news reports occasionally drift into anti-Israel political correctness. But in the Santisi story and in its overall coverage of this protracted conflict, it is miles ahead of the Post. As professional journalists, you ought to ask yourselves why you consistently bend and warp stories to give readers a one-sided, pro-Palestinian picture. To Go To Top

THE GRANITE OF MAUTHAUSEN Posted by Ben-Menachem, Mordechai, April 18, 2004.

LGF (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog) reader Ronnie Schreiber posted this powerful letter by Fred Friendly, who would become the president of CBS News, written in 1945 when he was a master sergeant with the American Army unit that liberated the Mauthausen concentration camp. May 19, 1945 Dear Mother, In just a few days I will be in an airplane on my way back to the APO to which you write me. Before I leave Europe, I must write this letter and attempt to convey to you that which I saw, felt and gasped at as I saw a war and a frightened peace stagger into a perilous existence. I have seen a dead Germany. If it is not dead it is certainly ruptured beyond repair. I have seen the beer hall where the era of the inferno and hate began and as I stood there in the damp moist hall where Nazidom was spawned, I heard only the dripping of a bullet-pierced beer barrel and the ticking of a clock which had already run out the time of the bastard who made the Munich beer hall a landmark. I saw the retching vomiting of the stone and mortar which had once been listed on maps as Nurnheim, Regensburg, Munich, Frankfurt, Augusburg, Lintz, and wondered how a civilization could ever again spring from cities so utterly removed from the face of the earth by weapons the enemy taught us to use at Coventry and Canterbury. I have met the German, have examined the storm trooper, his wife and his heritage of hate, and I have learned to hate - almost with as much fury as the G.I. who saw his buddy killed at the Bulge, almost as much as the Pole from Bridgeport who lost 100 pounds at Mauthausen, Austria. I have learned now and only now that this war had to be fought. I wish I might have done more. I envy with a bottomless spirit the American soldier who may tell his grandchildren that with his hands he killed Germans. That which is in my heart now I want you and those dear to us know and yet I find myself completely incapable of putting it into letter form. I think if I could sit down in our living room or the den at 11 President, I might be able to convey a portion of the dismal, horrible and yet titanic mural which is Europe today. Unfortunately, I won't be able to do that for months or maybe a year, and by then the passing of time may dim the memory. Some of the senses will live just so long as I do - some of the sounds, like the dripping beer, like the firing of a Russian tommy gun, will always bring back the thought of something I may try to forget, but never will be able to do. For example, when I go to the Boston Symphony, when I hear waves of applause, no matter what the music is, I shall be traveling back to a town near Lintz where I heard applause unequalled in history, and where I was allowed to see the ordeal which our fellow brothers and sisters of the human race have endured. To me Poland is no longer the place where Chopin composed, or where a radio station held out for three weeks - to me Poland is a place from which the prisoners of Mauthausen came. When I think of the Czechs, I will think of those who were butchered here, and that goes for the Jews, the Russians, Austrians, the people of 15 different lands, - yes, even the Germans who passed through this Willow Run of death. This was Mauthausen. I want you to remember the word... I want you to know, I want you to never forget or let our disbelieving friends forget, that your flesh and blood saw this. This was no movie. No printed page. Your son saw this with his own eyes and in doing this aged 10 years. Mauthausen was built with a half-million rocks which 150,000 prisoners - 18,000 was the capacity - carried up on their backs from a quarry 800 feet below. They carried it up steps so steep that a Captain and I walked it once and were winded, without a load. They carried granite and made 8 trips a day... and if they stumbled, the S.S. men pushed them into the quarry. There are 285 steps, covered with blood. They called it the steps of death. I saw the shower room (twice or three times the size of our bathroom), a chamber lined with tile and topped with sprinklers where 150 prisoners at a time were disrobed and ordered in for a shower which never gushed forth from the sprinklers because the chemical was gas. When they ran out of gas, they merely sucked all of the air out of the room. I talked to the Jews who worked in the crematory, one room adjacent, where six and seven bodies at a time were burned. They gave these jobs to the Jews because they all died anyhow, and they didn't want the rest of the prisoners to know their own fate. The Jews knew theirs, you see. I saw the living skeletons, some of whom regardless of our medical corps work, will die and be in piles like that in the next few days. Malnutrition doesn't stop the day that food is administered. Don't get the idea that these people here were all derelicts, all just masses of people... some of them were doctors, authors, some of them American citizens. A scattered few were G.I.s. A Navy lieutenant still lives to tell the story. I saw where they lived; I saw where the sick died, three and four in a bed, no toilets, no nothing. I saw the look in their eyes. I shall never stop seeing the expression in the eyes of the anti-Franco former prisoners who have been given the job of guarding the S.S. men who were captured. And how does the applause fit in? Mother, I walked through countless cell blocks filled with sick, dying people - 300 in a room twice the size of our living room as we walked in - there was a ripple of applause and then an inspiring burst of applause and cheers, and men who could not stand up sat and whispered - though they tried to shout it - Vive L'Americansky... Vive L'Americansky... the applause, the cheers, those faces of men with legs the size and shape of rope, with ulcerated bodies, weeping with a kind of joy you and I will never, I hope, know. Vive L'Americansky... I got a cousin in Milwaukee... We thought you guys would come... Vive L'Americansky... Applause... gaunt, hopeless faces at last filled with hope. One younger man asked something in Polish which I could not understand but I did detect the word "Yit"... I asked an interpreter what he said - The interpreter blushed and finally said, "He wants to know if you are a Jew." When I smiled and stuck out my mitt and said "yes"... he was unable to speak or show the feeling that was in his heart. As I walked away, I suddenly realized that this had been the first time I had shaken hands with my right hand. That, my dear, was Mauthausen. I will write more letters in days to come. I want to write one on the Russians. I want to write and tell you how I sat next to Patton and Tolbukhin at a banquet at the Castle of Franz Josef. I want to write and tell you how the Germans look in defeat, how Munich looked in death, but those things sparkle with excitement and make good reading. This is my Mauthausen letter. I hope you will see fit to let Bill Braude and the folks read it. I would like to think that all the Wachenheimers and all the Friendlys and all our good Providence friends would read it. Then I want you to put it away and every Yom Kippur I want you to take it out and make your grandchildren read it. For, if there had been no America, we, all of us, might well have carried granite at Mauthausen. All my love, F.F. To Go To Top

WHERE WILL ALL THE FLOWERS GO? Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 18, 2004.

Where will all the flowers go? Will they have to leave Netzarim, too? Do they have Jewish roots? Geraniums? Pansies? Impatiens? Wandering Jews? Will they have no more greenhouses to house you? What will happen to the GreenNationalProduce? Where will all the flowers go and the basil, too? What of the strawberries endowed by do and duty? Will Bedouins workers be killed by those that will not live with Jews? Where will all the flowers go? Where will all the graves go? Will the killers kill our killed, too? Weeds will replace them everyone. Weeds will willow into sand, again there'll be a fallow land. Jews again will be refugeed as Egyptians claim they're Palestinians together with mercenaries from Sudan, Algeria, Tunisia. Where will all the flowers go? Will they move the greenhouses with the Jews in the business of greenhousing and the synagogues moved from Yamit or will they leave them to become bomb factories or to warehouse weapons of mass destruction? Where will the billion geraniums go? Where will the bugfree lettuce grow? Will the Sharon Desert last for forty years until the false Jews disappear? Will the true Jews return again to plow and plant after the terrorist implant blows itself out? Will the Jews wear striped pajamas when they lose their homes in Gaza and Shomron and Judea next for firsts that didn't work? Will they want the punished innocent Jewish re-settlers in Tel Aviv or in Washington, D.C.? Where will all the flowers grow? I hear the Christians who have fled Jihad are gardening the way they learned from Gaza's Jews in Mexico and Central and South America? Where will all the flowers grow when weapons are all the rewarded Jihad in-migrant knows? Will children in the suicide state just spread hate? Why do they keep chasing Jews out, off and away? Why did Sharon unilaterally choose to unchoose the chosen for what so resembles Hitler's Master Plan, next by next. Will the miracle of gardens in the desert really disappear when fertilizer is used to explode and not produce? The prophet Isaiah surely wouldn't replace geraniums with grenades. Why should all the flowers go? Why doesn't everyone just say, No! Sharon has made a big mistake. "Let the Jewish people stay. There's no reason to expel the man with the rake and hoe just because he is a Jew and has come back to where he was when King Solomon reigned." Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

NO MORE ETHNIC CLEANSING Posted by IsrAlert, April 18, 2004.

This article was written by Joseph Farah and is archived at www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38066 President Bush did the right thing this week when he told Palestinian refugees they can forget the so-called "right of return" and any future plans to move to Israel. Their future lies only in "the establishment of a Palestinian state and the settling of Palestinian refugees there rather than in Israel," he said. The president twice referred to Israel as a Jewish state. Any plan that would entertain the notion of millions of Arabs settling in Israel would, of course, alter the fundamental character of the country. Bush did not explicitly say that the United States supports Israel keeping some of its large Jewish communities on the West Bank - home to about a quarter million Israelis - but he endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw the few thousand settlers from the Gaza Strip. Why is it important to dispense with the idea of "the right of return"? And why is it important for Israel to maintain Jewish communities on the West Bank? Any other alternative would amount to a green light for anti-Semitic ethnic cleansing in the Middle East - something the region has witnessed far too much over the past 50 years. Yasser Arafat has promoted the "right of return" as one more tactic in his ultimate goal for the destruction of the state of Israel. He knows it is impossible for millions claiming Arab refugee status to prove claims their property was ever taken from them. He knows the tiny Jewish state could easily be overwhelmed by Arabs laying claim to real estate or citizenship in Israel. He knows that the so-called "right of return" amounts to his "final solution" - a one-state solution that would permit the vastly out-numbered Jews in the Middle East to be voted out of their own country. Likewise, it is imperative for Israel to protect its well-established Jewish communities in the West Bank, traditional Jewish lands, because the Palestinian Authority is on record as insisting no Jews be allowed to live in its future Palestinian Arab state. This is one of the great untold stories of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Arafat and his allies demand that all Jews get out of the country they are attempting to create. In any other part of the world, this kind of racist, anti-Semitic effort at ethnically cleansing a region would be roundly condemned by all civilized people. Yet, because most people simply don't understand the clear, official plan by the Arab leaders to force out all Jews from the new Palestinian state, Arafat retains a degree of sympathy, even political support, from much of the world. Think about what I am saying: It is the official policy of the Palestinian Authority that all Jews must get off the land! Why is the United States supporting the creation of a new, racist, anti-Semitic hate state? Why is the civilized world viewing this as a prescription for peace in the region? Why is this considered an acceptable idea? Is there any other place in the world where that kind of official policy of racism and ethnic cleansing is tolerated - even condoned? Why are the rules different in the Middle East? Why are the rules different for Arabs? Why are the rules different for Muslims? Would America consider it acceptable if the new Iraqi government said the few Jews remaining in Iraq would have to leave? Would America consider it acceptable if the new Iraqi governing council said Christians would have to go? Of course not. So why - even before a Palestinian state is created - why do we accept as a fait accompli that Jews should be forced off their land in the coming state of Palestine? Why are U.S. tax dollars supporting the racist, anti-Semitic entity known as the Palestinian Authority? IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

ITEMS: GLOBAL RENAZIFICATION AND SHARON AT THE WHITE HOUSE Posted by Steven Plaut, April 18, 2004.

1.GLOBAL RENAZIFICATION AND YOM HASHOAH Tomorrow is Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Commemoration Day. As usual the Jewish Left will strive to commemorate the Holocaust by trying to promote a second one.... It has become fashionable in certain quarters, including among some self-hating Jews, to challenge the uniqueness of the Holocaust, to argue that it was just another in a long list of human savagery and mass barbarism, no different from the deaths of Armenians in WWI or of Cambodians or of Rwandans or of Gypsies. (The Cambodian genocide was made possible in part by Noam Chomsky serving as promoter and apologist for the Khmer Rouge and denying throughout that the Khmer Rouse was annihilating millions of Cambodians. Talk about "Holocaust Denial"). According to this "approach", there was nothing unique about the Holocaust, no reason why it should be regarded as sui generic, and hence Jews should stop all their "yapping" about it. What is one to make of such people? It is certainly true that there have been other cases of large-scale mass murder. But the comparisons with the Holocaust are absurd. There are many reasons why this is so. But I was struck by the fact that in today's Haaretz, one of the worst Oslo Leftists managed to put his finger smack accurately on what may be the most important of these reasons (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/416431.html ). The most important difference is very simple. When Noam Chomsky's friends were murdering millions of Cambodians, the world (other than the doctrinaire Stalinists) was horrified, demanded that something be done, and denounced the atrocities. When the Rwandans were butchering one another, the civilized world was horrified, tried to stop the murders, tried to intervene, and denounced the atrocities. When the Jews of Europe were being annihilated, the "civilized world" was indifferent, and much of it was downright supportive of the annihilation. Large segments of the "civilized world" collaborated with the genocide. Very few in the "civilized world" demanded serious military efforts to end it. The "civilized world" sat in silence in the decade leading up to the Shoah, while Hitler expounded his plans openly. Many in the anti-Semitic West sympathized with his program. I mention all this, because I think that one of the best litmus tests of the extent of re-nazification of the planet is to observe the reactions of the world to the assassination of the Gaza Nazi, Rantisi. All those denouncing Israel's hit on Rantisi as "state terrorism", as a crime, as a violation of "international law", as violating Palestinian "rights", as aggression, as itself "nazism", ALL such people are today's most visible illustration of global re-nazification. ALL of these people are in fact in favor of the random mass murder of Jewish children. ALL of these people oppose every form of Jewish self-defense except capitulation to Nazism and passive Jewish marching into the gas chambers. All of these people would cheer if the Islamofascists ever succeed in building concentration camps for Jews. The Leftists Jews who will no doubt now denounce the assassination of Rantisi, with all the usual lame "reasons" (bad timing, will just bring forth worse extremists, violation of Palestinian "sovereignty", creates more motivation for terrorists, etc. etc.), should be formally dubbed the Jews for a Second Holocaust. And right on schedule, the British government and the British Israel-Bashing press, especially the BBC, denounced Israel's verminating Rantisi as a "crime". Now let me see if I have this correct. Only days after the British, as part of the Allied anti-Islamofascist coalition in Iraq, participate in the extermination of over a thousand Iraqis in Fallujah and elsewhere, many of them innocent civilians, and now the British declare that when Israel recycles a nazi mass murdering Islamofascist who has murdered hundreds of Israeli civilians, many children, this constitutes a crime and violation of "international law". It appears that it is only a matter of days before the chief Shi'ite terrorist in Najaf Iraq will be terminated by the good guys, including the Brits. Will the BBC also regard that as a crime? Probably it will! Don't get me wrong, by the way. I endorse the Allied actions in Iraq. But did you notice that the mowing down of the thousand Iraqis was the Allied response to the murder of four Americans and the hanging of their corpses on a bridge? And the greatest hush-hush secret the media are refusing to report this week is that the killing of the thousand resulted in near tranquility this week in most of Iraq! Perhaps there are military solutions to the problems of terrorism after all? 2. "A BOLD GAMBLE FOR APPEASEMENT" by Mike Evans in World Net Daily, April 16, 2004. President George W. Bush welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the White House Wednesday. At a press conference following that meeting, and with these words, the president endorsed Sharon's plan to withdraw from Gaza: I commend Prime Minister Sharon for his bold and courageous decision to withdraw from Gaza and parts of the West Bank. I call on the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors to match that boldness and that courage. All of us must show the wisdom and the will to bring lasting peace to that region. Mr. Sharon was delighted with the president's endorsement of his plan, and said it foreshadowed "a new and better reality for the state of Israel." Will this move, in fact, be the answer to Israel's security woes, or will it send an entirely different signal to the terrorist enemies of both Israel and the United States? The prime minister is, surely, fooling himself. This is not "his" plan, it is a State Department plan - it is a European Union plan, a United Nations plan and, as painful as it is to admit, it is also President Bush's plan. If it were not, then the president should have just said, "You've got to be mad. I'm being attacked on every front because I'm fighting a war on terrorism, and you are asking me to bless your plan to capitulate to unrepentant terrorists that are on our State Department list." The so-called "Quartet" must be laughing in derision over what is now being labeled "Sharon's plan." It is simply their Roadmap plan wrapped up in shiny, new paper. The truth is that the president's endorsement of Sharon's plan to scrap 21 Jewish settlements in Gaza (an area of approximately 140 square miles) and four settlements in the West Bank, and turn that territory over to the likes of Hamas could be a violation of U. S. anti-terrorism statutes. The perception that he is caving in to the demands of terrorists could cause catastrophic damage to the war in Iraq, and could seriously undermine Mr. Bush's bid for re-election. Mohammad Dahlan, the school bus bomber, and former Gaza security boss under Mahmoud Abbas, planned the deadly attack on a busload of Jewish children and teachers in Gaza. Two teachers were killed, and the Cohen children were seriously injured. Orit Cohen lost a foot, her brother, Yisrael, lost half his leg, and older sister, Tehilla, lost both legs. Will the Cohen's home now become the property of the terrorists who attacked them? Two years ago, Vice Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert wrote (Wall Street Journal, June 3, 2002) of Dahlan, who is considered to be a "Palestinian prince-in-waiting" and a possible successor to Yasser Arafat: Mr. Dahlan, along with his assistant Rashid Abu-Shabak, are the primary suspects in the terror attack on an Israeli school bus in Kfar Darom in November 2000. The bombing left half a dozen children maimed ... No democratic state should ever allow itself to do business with those individuals who deliberately target a school bus. According to the US Department of State Anti-Terrorism guidelines, no U.S. citizen, business or agency are permitted to engage in any activity that contributes to a relationship with the organizations on the terrorist list. The president of the United States is not exempt from those guidelines. Does President Bush's endorsement of Sharon's disengagement plan bespeak of a relationship with the terrorists who now reside in Gaza, and have used every horrifying action available to drive the Jews from their land? Will it appear as if the president is assisting in the establishment of a terrorist state in the very heart of the Middle East? Has the president been pressured by Tony Blair (who has a large population of Muslims on his doorstep)? Or, is he trying to appease the Arabs to ensure a drop in oil prices? After 9-11, President Bush called for the terrorist-supporting and terrorist-harboring states to "show their cards." This is a dangerous card for the president to play, at the worst possible time. America's tolerance for terrorism is being severely tested in Iraq. The president is in the midst of the 9-11 Commission investigation, and it looks like someone has reshuffled the deck. Sharon had said before his meeting with the president that he would not present his plan to the Knesset for approval without Mr. Bush's endorsement. Now, the prime minister can go forward with his proposal. President Bush, on the other hand, is left with trying to explain to the American people why it was vital that the terrorist infrastructure in Iraq and Afghanistan had to be destroyed, while Hamas and their cohorts in crime in Gaza are being rewarded with "land for peace." This is the perfect excuse for terrorist organizations worldwide to redouble their recruitment efforts. Israel has bowed to terrorist pressure, and is withdrawing from Gaza. Will America succumb to terrorist tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan, and withdraw U.S. troops? It is strangely coincidental that Egyptian President Hosni Murbarak preceded Prime Minister Sharon, in a meeting with President Bush on Tuesday - Prime Minister Blair of England is meeting with the president on Friday, and will be followed closely by Saudi Prince Abdullah. Can it be that Mr. Sharon was overcome by a spirit of generosity, and just decided to give Yasser Arafat, the PLO, and Mohammad Dahlan a gift? Was he stricken with remorse after the assassination of Ahmad Yassin, the spiritual leader of Hamas? The real question is this: Who has a foot on Prime Minister Sharon's neck, and is twisting his arm to force this issue? In an attempt to be a broker for peace in the Middle East, President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon may have just sent a totally conflicting signal - that the United States is not a opponent of terrorism, but is, in fact, an accomplice. This endorsement may prove to be as deadly to the president's re-election campaign as the asp in Cleopatra's bosom, or Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal. And even more deadly, it could signal an open door for more terrorist attacks against both Israel and the United States. The call to arms is loud and clear: Come on over, terrorism works! Gaza is proof! 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. Michael D. Evans is the author of "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," an Amazon No. 2 and a New York Times best-seller, and founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, Jerusalem Prayer Team.org. To Go To Top

HAZON DAVID SYNAGOGUE VICTORY Posted by Hebron Community, April 18, 2004.

1. Hazon David Synagogue Victory At a meeting with Hebron leaders, Hebron Brigade Commander Col. Haggai Mordechai announced an internal IDF decision to stop evicting civilians from the site of the Hazon David Synagogue. Mordechai noted that the daily evictions would end, as would the daily destruction of stone walls constructed around the area of the synagogue. He said that this decision was based on three principals: 1) there would be no injury to people in the area; 2) there would be no damage to property in the area; 3) there would be no 'substantial changes in the area's infrastructure' (i.e. the continued building would not exceed 'acceptable limits'). He added that should the third condition be violated, the construction would be destroyed, 'but not necessarily immediately.' Hebron-Kiryat Arba leaders expressed limited satisfaction at the revised Hazon David status. They have repeatedly stated that their goal is to rebuild the destroyed synagogue and will not settle for less. This has not changed. However, the fact that the repeated, almost daily violent evictions, including beatings and arrest, will come to an end, is considered to be positive. Kiryat Arba-Hebron youth continue to remain at the site, placing stone upon stone on the newly-constructed wall. Daily prayers are conducted three times a day, as well as Torah classes and other lectures. The youth have vowed not to give up, and intend to eventually rebuild the synagogue. Should the building again be knocked down, they say that they will just build it again. "This is the answer to the politicians who plan on transferring Jews from their homeland. We will just keep coming back until they don't have the energy to deal with us and give up!" 2. Hebron Colonel fined 90,000 NIS (From: Arutz 7-INN [http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=60966]) An IDF brigade commander has been fined 90,000 shekels in a civilian court for having sent a soldier to prison for no reason. The incident occurred last July, in the Machpelah Cave in Hevron. As reported on Arutz-7 at the time, a reserves soldier was leading a routine prayer service when, in the words of Hevron spokesman Noam Arnon, "suddenly, police and soldiers came wildly through to escort the Moslem muezzin into his room, shoving aside all those who were praying there." The soldier, Erez Pel, a father of three, was in the midst of the Amidah prayer - the central part of the service, requiring the deepest concentration - and therefore did not move. At one point, the police shoved him roughly aside - and several hours later, he found himself on trial for having "led the disturbance." Brigade Commander Col. Haggai Mordechai summarily sentenced him to 28 days in prison. Hevron community leaders, as well as the local military doctor - under whose command Pel served as a medic - made many pleas to Col. Mordechai, and even showed him pictures (www.hebron.com/news/erez.htm) proving that the soldier did not act wildly as accused - but Mordechai did not budge. Pel said today that he asked him at the time if he had seen the video footage, "and he said yes - but I realized from his answers that he in fact had not seen it." One week into the sentence, the Chief IDF Prosecutor called Pel to apologize and tell him he was free to go home. The Prosecutor told Pel that following a plea by MK Sha'ul Yahalom and others, he had looked into the matter and found that there was insufficient evidence to convict him. Pel later sued in court, and Col. Mordechai was ordered to pay him 90,000 shekels for the wrongful imprisonment. The IDF did not send a representative to the trial. 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

MOUNT OF OLIVES PROJECT, 2004 Posted by Arieh King, April 17, 2004.

As you know, when Jordan invaded the new state of Israel in 1948 and took the eastern piece of Jerusalem, the Jews there were killed or forced to flee. In 1968, after the Arab countries again struck at Israel, Jerusalem was reunited. But the secular leaders of Israel didn't force the Arabs to return Jewish property to the Jews. Instead, the Arabs who'd moved in from 1948 on, continued to squat in these Jewish homes - without even paying taxes - or build illegally on Jewish property. Over the past years several groups have been attempting to reclaim Jerusalem. The Ateret Cohanim's Jerusalem Reclamation Project is one of these. You may know me. I was involved in the project that completed an apartment house in Ras-al-Amud in east Jerusalem. Even though we built legally and on land owned by Jews, we were opposed by those who seek to give a large part of Jerusalem to the so-called Palestinians. The US State Department prefers Arabs that come into Israel - many of them illegally or through phony marriages to Israeli Arabs - to Jews. This is the third project that I am trying to finish at the Mount of Olives. Project of 2001: A ruin was rebuild and eight singles moved to the reconditioned building. They still live there and they are serving the public as a free security guards. Project of 2002: A ruin that was next-door to the first project was also renewed, we found 18 grave stones inside the ruin. The Arabs, who used the ruin as a house till 1998, used Jewish gravestones as shelves, toilet, pavement and more. In 2002 a Jewish family moved in, The Filtz family has two boys. I hope that when we will finish the next project (2004) we will be able to bring a second family to live near the Filtz family and the singles. This is what it cost us. First project (2001): $18,000 US. Second project (2002): $30,000 US. Now I'm doing a campaign of raising $36,000 US for the 2004 Project: If you are interested in helping us reclaim land at East Jerusalem in general and at the Mount of Olives especially, please call me direct: 972-2-6277525 or 972-5-5501182 I will be happy to take you to the Mount of Olives, and to explain our aims. I will appreciate it if you will send this message to your friends or any other person who might want to help us, helping us is helping to keep Jerusalem United! [Editor's note. I met Mr. King on a trip to Yesha and the settlements. You can read some of what his group has accomplished in my article entitled "The Settlements Revisited", in the November 2002 Think-Israel issue (http://www.think-israel.org/afsitrip.html).] To Go To Top

RANTISI IS DEAD. SEND A CONDOLENCE CARD TO A JEWISH LEFTIST Posted by Eliezar Edwards, April 17, 2004.

A news item in Haaretz written by their correspondents, Amos Harel, Yoav Stern and Arnon Regular, is entitled "Hamas leader Rantissi killed in IAF strike in Gaza City." "Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi was killed in an Israeli helicopter missile strike on his car Saturday evening. Two other people were killed in the strike, witnesses said. "A burned, destroyed car was left on the road near Rantisi's house and one badly burned body was removed from the car by paramedics. Witnesses said there were three people in the car at the time. "Palestinians ran into the street following the strike and called for revenge. "Rantisi was the newly-appointed head of the militant group in Gaza, following the assassination of Hamas founder and spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in a similar Israeli strike last month." He was also a physician, a loving father and a disgusting monster, whose lust in life was to kill Jews. He constantly declared that compromise with Israel was impossible and the only "solution" was Hitler's final solution. Decent people can't help but be pleased by his death - there's one less murderous psychopath walking around. Whether they say so or not, they feel like Steven Plaut, who wrote: Yes, gang, Hamas "activist" Rantisi has been "deactivated". What a wonderful day! Anyone ever see that time on "Married With Kids" where Al Bundy's daughter becomes the "Verminator", a pest exterminator? In case you are wondering, the proper blessing for such good news is "Baruch Ata Hashem, Hatov V'Hameitiv." And after saying Amen, add "May Arafat be next!" You will have to excuse me but my poetic juices are running: There once was a turd named Rantisi, A nazi all covered in fleasies, He went for a drive, But just never arrived, Cause that missile flew right up his Teezie.* (* Teez is Arabic for Tuchis) Last month - when the IDF killed Sheikh Yassin - Shimon Malkiel (March 22, March blog-ed page) suggested we send condolences to the Jewish leftist anti-Semites - the only Jews that would sorrow over Yassin's departure. I think we should do it again, this time for Rantisi. Simon Malkiel's letter, with change of name, is still appropriate: We would like to extend to you my deepest condolences for your loss. We know that Dr. Rantisi represented everything you believe in and everything you support. We know you must feel empty and alone, now that the one person most clearly embodying your ideas is gone from us. You are not alone in your grief. We hope you will somehow find a way to get over this horrific tragedy and blow to your agenda. Among the many people to whom you could send this message are: Baruch Kimmerling at mskimmer@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il Colman Altman at phraltm@techunix.technion.ac.il Jacob Katriel at jkatriel@tx.technion.ac.il Tamar Katriel at tamark@construct.haifa.ac.il Oren Yiftachel at yiftach@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Emanuel Farjoun at forjoun@math.huji.ac.il Dan Bar-On at danbaron@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Aharon Eviatar at arkee@frodo.tau.ac.il and arkee@post.tau.ac.il Moshe Zimmerman at mszimm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il Hanna Herzog at hherzog@post.tau.ac.il Uri Hadar at uri-h@freud.tau.ac.il Tanya Reinhart at reinhart@post.tau.ac.il Linda Ben-Zvi at lindabz@post.tau.ac.il Ilan Pappe at pappe@poli.haifa.ac.il Avraham Oz at avitaloz@research.haifa.ac.il Amiram Goldblum at amiram@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL Micah Leshem at micahl@psy.haifa.ac.il Zalman Amit at amit@csbn.concordia.ca Anat Biletzki at anatbi@post.tau.ac.il Ran Greenstein at rangreen@sn.apc.org Yehudith Harel at ye_harel@netvision.net.il Ran HaCohen at hacohen@post.tau.ac.il Gila Svirsky at gsvirsky@netvision.net.il almas at almas@bezeqint.net Yigal Arens at arens@ISI.EDU David Bartram at d.bartram@reading.ac.uk Oded Schechter at oschecht@midway.uchicago.edu pnina feiler at pnina-f@inter.net.il Shmuel Amir at amir_h_s@netvision.net.il Shraga Elam at elams@dplanet.ch Adam Keller at otherisr@actcom.co.il Anat Matar at matar@post.tau.ac.il Michael ardon at ardon@ vms.huji.ac.il tirtza tauber at trn1@zahav.net.il Lev Grinberg at lev@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Bilha Golan at bilhagolan@bezeqint.net Neve Gordon at ngordon@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Yuval Yonay at rsso231@soc.haifa.ac.il Mikey Lerner at rabbilerner@aol.com Arthur Waskow at awaskow@aol.com Noam Chomsky at chomsky@mit.edu To Go To Top

THE GAZA WITHDRAWAL AND THE WAR ON TERROR Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 17, 2004.

Maybe Bush does not realize the implications of this plan but his State Department does. They are willing to suffer some losses in American lives and property just as long as part of the outcome is the destruction of the Jewish State. Their consistent policy is that no price is too high to pay for Israel's destruction. So what is another terror state to them. This is from the writing of Professor Ya'akov Golbert. If Bush had the intelligence to realize what Sharon's plan of unilateral retreat from the Gaza Strip means for American interests, he would absolutely forbid it. In the short term, it might mean that he will gain some points with the Arab potentates with whom he is on such close terms, although the Arab;s first reactions have been vociferously negative. Past that, even Bush seems to realize that the results would be negative or he would not have leaned on Sharon to put off implementation until after the US elections in November. Sharon had said that he intends to carry out the operation by May 1 of this year; meaning immediately. The forecast by intelligence sources all over the world is for a dramatic upsurge in terrorism worldwide once the Israelis are out of Gaza. That would not be good for Bush's reelection bid. Immediately upon Israeli withdrawal, or perhaps even while the Israelis are withdrawing, the 'Palestinians' will declare a state within the borders of the Gaza Strip and the world will immediately recognize it. There may be a power struggle among the various factions but that matters only to them, not to the rest of the world. Whoever emerges on top will request UN 'peacekeepers' and the UN will comply. The European Union is eager to send troops and insert itself directly into the Israel-Arab conflict. The UN will play the same role it plays in Lebanon and Hebron. It will protect the terrorists against Israeli reprisals or other defensive incursions. Given the fact that the Palestinian factions are in close league operationally with Hizbullah and even Al Qaeda, it means that there will be a sovereign base for international terrorism under UN protection. Could anything be more absurd for the US government to support? 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

FOR TRAUMA SURGEONS Posted by Isaac Judah, April 17, 2004.

This article appeared in The National Post, a daily newspaper circulated across Canada, in early February, 2004. It was written by Brad Evenson. Four years ago, during a struggle in a remote Arctic village, a suspect shot RCMP Constable Paul Descoteaux in the arm with a hunting rifle. The bullet tore the 27-year-old's elbow apart and pierced his brachial artery. As his partner raced him to medical help, fluid pooled inside the stricken arm. By the time he reached a hospital in Iqaluit (also in northern Canada) five hours later, the arm was swollen thick as a firehose. Soon the pressure would cause circulaton to stop. Starved of fresh blood, his muscles would begin to die. He would face amputation. So, like hundreds of Canadian patients each year, he got a fasciotomy. Surgeons cut a deep trench down his arm to relieve pressure. By the time Ottawa plastic surgeon Michael Bell saw him a week later, the wound measured 16" long x 6" wide. Ordinarily, such patients get skin grafts to cover their gaping surgical wounds. But skin grafts heal poorly and look bad. Recovery can take months or years. Instead, Bell sewed two rows of metal clasps along the wound. Then he cinched them together with elastic tubes, somewhat like a Victorian corset, pulling the skin together. Within 10 days the wound's pink edges had kissed, a remarkable feat. In a world of high-tech medical devices and million-dollar equipment, the contraption, unpoetically called the Wound Closure System by its creaters, Canica Design Inc of Ottawa, is a remarkably cheap and simple tool. The wound closing system is more than a surgical novelty. In pilot use at the Ottawa hospital, coservative estimates say the reusable $840 (Can.) device saves between $7000 and $8000 a patient, allowing patients to leave hospital on average five days earlier. They also require less nursing care at home. Nor is the device simply a better mousetrap. "In wound closing," Bell said. "there's really no alternative." The distance between the place of the accident in the Arctic village and Ottawa (the capital of Canada) is approximately 3,500 km! Canada, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, is 5,000 km long. If any surgeons in the USA or Canada or Israel would like to make inquiries about this system, they may contact me by e-mail (isaacjudah@yahoo.com) or by telephone at 514-830-8791. I would prefer e-mail. Does anyone know an administrator in Magen David Adom, who might be interested? To Go To Top

TEXTBOOK ON ARABS REMOVES BLUNDER Posted by Dafna Yee, April 17, 2004.

This is an article by George Archibald that appeared in the Washington Times. Someone commented on the Arab claims: "These guys must've written the Soviet's history books too" Maybe we ought to contact this tribe to learn their secret of getting the lies out of texts. Many people, including myself, have been trying for years to get erroneous, distorting, and just plain wrong "facts" about the "history" of "Palestine" out of textbooks used in American schools without success! Of course, teaching that Israel didn't exist in ancient times but "Palestine" did and that Israelis are "occupying Palestinian land" by committing "atrocities" against "Palestinians" does not deserve the same attention to detail as the history of Algonquins' marriage lines! Also, it apparently hasn't occured to Ms. Shabbas or anyone at the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC) that if the Muslims could be so wrong about this one thing then they just might be wrong about the rest of their "history"! An Indian tribe has forced distributors of an Arab studies guide for U.S. teachers to remove an inaccurate passage that says Muslim explorers preceded Christopher Columbus to North America and became Algonquin chiefs. Peter DiGangi, director of Canada's Algonquin Nation Secretariat in Quebec, called claims in the book, the "Arab World Studies Notebook," "preposterous" and "outlandish," saying nothing in the tribe's written or oral history support them. The 540-page book says the Muslim explorers married into the Algonquin tribe, resulting in 17th-century tribal chiefs named Abdul-Rahim and Abdallah Ibn Malik. Mr. DiGangi said the guide's author and editor, Audrey Shabbas, and the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC), a Washington advocacy group that promoted the curriculum to school districts in 155 U.S. cities, have been unresponsive to his concerns since November. But Ms. Shabbas said this week the passage was removed immediately from subsequent copies, and that she was "giving careful and thoughtful attention" on how to notify the 1,200 teachers who have been given copies of the book in the past five years. "As the editor of the 'Notebook,' when I heard from Mr. DiGangi that a citation in the work was not borne out by either Native American written records or by oral traditions, I was grateful that the statement could so easily be removed," she said. She did not explain how the false information got into the curriculum. "There was no [scholarly] peer review," said Mr. DiGangi, who says he was never contacted after lodging his complaint. "It was so outlandish. It never should have gone to press." Jon Roth, MEPC's program manager, yesterday said the group has decided to remove the two-page chapter called "Early Muslim Exploration Worldwide: Evidence of Muslims in the New World Before Columbus." "It is not, nor has it ever been, our intention to spread lies or untruths," Mr. Roth said. Meanwhile, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation this week issued a report that is critical of "Arab World Studies Notebook." The study, titled "The Stealth Curriculum: Manipulating America's History Teachers," reviewed many curriculum supplements and "professional development" programs aimed at schoolteachers. "It appeared that the creation and dissemination of these materials, often through professional development institutes and [teacher] in-service programs, had fallen into the eager hands of interest groups and ideologues yearning to use America's public school classrooms to shape the minds of tomorrow's citizens by manipulating what today's teachers are introducing into the lessons of today's children," the Fordham study concluded. Mr. Roth said the "Arab World Studies Notebook" is the primary reference text used in the council's program of teacher workshops conducted by Ms. Shabbas, which have numbered more than 268 in 155 cities since 1987. The book, offered at a markdown of $15 from $49.95, has 90 readings and lesson plans covering the history and culture of the Arab world, the broader Middle East and Islam worldwide. "A lot of teachers use it," Mr. Roth said. Chester E. Finn Jr., Fordham Foundation president, said the new "cottage industry" of "predigested supplemental materials" and professional development for history and social studies teachers was intended to help teachers who had little or no background in certain areas, and because textbooks are often insufficient. "How could we expect them to handle complicated and emotionally charged subjects like the Holocaust and figure out what lessons to learn about it? To escort youngsters safely through the thicket of political correctness and ethnic politics that now surrounds such benign holidays as Columbus Day and Thanksgiving?" he asks in the preface of the foundation's report. The void in teachers' knowledge and instructional materials has been filled by publishers, universities, research groups and think tanks, advocacy groups, cable networks, film producers and itinerant teacher trainers, Mr. Finn said. "We know staggeringly little about how good these materials and workshops are ??? how accurate they are, whether the information they present is balanced and accurate. We know even less about the efficacy, value or intellectual integrity of innumerable workshops, institutes and training programs in which teachers participate," he said. The report, written by Sandra Stotsky, former senior associate commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Education, described the "Arab World Studies Notebook" as "propaganda." The chapter written by Ms. Shabbas and Abdallah Hakim Quick claims that Muslims from Europe were the first to sail across the Atlantic and land in the New World, starting in 889, the report says. "The idea that English explorers met native Indian chiefs with Muslim names in the middle of the Northeast woodlands sounds almost like something a Hollywood film writer dreamed up for a spoof," the report says. The current 1998 edition of the "Notebook" has "no evidence or documentation to support key historical 'facts' that serve to advance their political views or religious beliefs," the report says. "One can only wonder if this has ever been questioned by the teachers who use its materials, or if they feel they must agree to any claim made by Muslims as an 'alternative perspective' or risk being labeled insensitive, Eurocentric, or racist." Dafna Yee is director of the Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

GETTING WHAT YOU WISH FOR Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 17, 2004.

BACKGROUND The Arabs who migrated into Palestine in the early 1900s came from all over the Middle East to find work when the Jews returned to their ancient homeland beginning in the late 1800s. The Arabs came from the areas that either were then states like Egypt, Saudi Arabia or from the areas that the Allies conquered from the Ottoman Empire in 1917, WWI, and divided along arbitrary lines into Arab entities. Some were protectorates; some were kingdoms and most eventually became independent states, courtesy of the Allies victories in 1917. The Sykes-Picot Agreement between the British and French government devised a plan to divide the regions of the Fertile Crescent into their own spheres of influence. In May 1916 and obtained mandates to take control of the Fertile Crescent under article 22 of the League of Nations Charter. In the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 Britain established her intent to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine and for the Jews to "closely settle the land". Britain received mandates for Iraq, Palestine (both sides of the Jordan); France received mandates for Syria and Lebanon in April 1920. Britain put Emir Abdullah as ruler of Transjordan, 75% of the Jewish homeland in Palestine. (1) At some point the Arabs adopted the name "Palestinian" which was the name given to the land of Judah by the Romans after they expelled the Jews in the first century C.E. The Romans tried to erase any trace of Jewish identity. "Palestine" or "Filastin" in Arabic was a derogatory word actually because it was similar to the Philistines (which meant "invader"), the violent, barbaric tribes who lived on the coast during the rule of the Romans. Under the British Mandate the British referred to the Jews as Palestinians in the land of Palestine. The Jewish newspaper in English was the Palestine Post, etc. Before the Jews came in any significant numbers, the land was sparsely settled. The few Arab fedayeen (Arab peasantry) farmed the land primarily controlled by absentee Arab landowners in Syria, Egypt and elsewhere. When Mark Twain toured the region in 1867 and eloquently described it as: "...a desolate country who soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds - a silent mournful expanse...A desolation is here that not even imagination can grace with the pomp of life and action...We never saw a human being on the whole route...There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and cactus, those fast friends of the worthless soil, had almost deserted the country." (2) The best history of the migrations of Arabs into the Jewish homeland is "From Time Immemorial: the Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine" by Joan Peters. (3) What the Arab Muslim Palestinians want or wish for is the gift of the now developed land which is green with trees, crops in soil and sand brought back to life by the Jews. In Gaza, the Jews took arid, sandy land, often covered with drifting sand dunes and made homes, farms, greenhouses - producing crops for export to Europe with off-season crops. They invented a method to grown bug-free produce in sand that is a boon to the Orthodox Jews who are forbidden to eat vegetables with possible insects. With all this development by the Jews came jobs, education and health care. The Arabs came in greater numbers to find work and bring their families. It was a good exchange for both sides. When the Arabs were left alone, they had good relationships with their Jewish neighbors, visiting, working and celebrating life's events together. In Gaza, before Oslo, the Jews were teaching the Arabs how to farm the sand they way they did. Arabs worked on Jewish farms for good wages before the Oslo intifada caused Arab workers to kill their Jewish co-workers or employers. Now, the Jews do most of their own work with some foreign workers assisting. The seven wars and the unremitting terror in between changed that positive relationship. Terrorists used the cover of other workers to make their way into Israel to kill Jews. Ordinary workers who had close ties to Jewish bosses, ate at their tables began to kill their bosses "in honor of Islam". Soon, the Arab Palestinians were not welcome. IF THE ARABS GET WHAT THEY WISH FOR If they get what they wish for in Gaza and the Jews go away, there will be no more jobs for the teeming city of Gaza. Most of the Gaza Strip is very empty - except for that city and the Gush Katif area of bountiful crops and 8,000 Jewish men, women and children. The Palestinian Authority (out of the PLO), Hamas and all the other terrorist groups do not build industry, put sweat equity into farming. Wherever the land has been turned over to the Arab Palestinians, they do not build as do the Jews. The terrorists bleed the economy to keep themselves in luxury apartment, fancy cars and weapons of ever-increasing lethality. If you are an Arab businessman, you instantly have a terrorist partner who expects his cut of your profits. The donor money coming in from Europe, American, the U.N. is quickly skimmed, leaving little or nothing for the intended population. But, the money keeps rolling in and disappearing as fast as it is deposited. There is no transparency or accountability despite pledges and mandates to do so. When the Jews leave Gaza at the behest of President Bush, it is America, Europe, the U.N. who will become the deep pockets for a permanent welfare state. The same would be true for Judea and Samaria where President Bush wishes to place another Arab Muslim Palestinian State. But, there will be no commerce or jobs in Israel because the Palestinians have made it absolutely clear that terror will continue. The jobs that brought the Arabs into this region will fade away. The World will have to care for another Arab Muslim Palestinian State that is very likely to be a burgeoning center for International Terrorism. President Bush will probably lose his election because he pushed Israel to give up parts of her ancient homeland - as did his father. The U.S. State Department and even other Arab nations have begun to realize their blunder. Without a Jewish presence, there are no jobs. Nor will such nations as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon or Kuwait welcome back Arab Palestinian workers. Recall that Yassir Arafat's Palestinians who worked in Kuwait, betrayed their host to Saddam Hussein's soldiers and 350,000 were subsequently forced out of the country into Jordan. At the same time, Saudi Arabia kicked out a similar number of their Arab Palestinians into Jordan as a high risk, subversive population. Egypt keeps a tight fist on any Arab Palestinians who happen to be in Egypt. No Palestinians from Gaza are allowed to cross the border except under unusual circumstances. I don't think that the Palestinians can look to any Arab country for jobs. The Palestinians had a good thing going with Israel. They had industry and agriculture in Gaza, Judea and Samaria and even in Israel's cities. Jobs were plentiful when terrorists didn't mingle with workers. Bush and the U.S. State Department, realizing that Israel was the bread basket for the Arab Palestinians, pressured Israel to lift their border closures after Terror attacks forced their closures even when Terror was ramping up. They came to the realization that without Jews, America would have to pay for what they had insisted on. Sometimes it is said: "We get what we wish for" and then hate what we get. Strangely, little Israel could have been the small engine that "could". If it wasn't for the aberrant behavior of the "Jihadists" and wild clerics, Israel could have pulled the Arab nations into the 21st Century with remarkable prosperity. The Arab nations have the raw resources, manpower and unbelievable riches from oil - most of which is wasted or underdeveloped. All of their potential went into making war on a minuscule nation. Instead their people are locked into a primitive, backward way of life by the mullahs (Islamic clerics). The Jews understand how to create the spark of industry in the Levant and have proven it on their own little slice of land, 300 miles long and 50 miles wide. Perhaps a Mahdi will one day arise to make peace with their Jewish half-brothers out of Abraham's line. ### 1. "Defining Middle Eastern Borders: Timeline" http://www.teachersfirst.com/lessons/mideast/timeline.cfm 2. "The Innocents Abroad" by Mark Twain London: 1881 (New American Library, 1997) 3. "From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine" by Joan Peters Harper & Rowe NY 1984 Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

QUESTIONS ABOUT PALESTINE Posted by Dafna Yee, April 16, 2004.

Someone wrote me: "This is the same thing I keep hearing. What I don't hear is that most of the "Israelis" are from europe or russia and that a majority of them are first or second generation in ther middle east, let alone Palestine." Actually, at least half of all Israelis are from Middle Eastern countries and their population is growing rapidly! (You can check the census records for yourself!) Their parents and grandparents were forced to leave their homes (and all their belongings) where they had lived for centuries when the Arab governments either made it too difficult for them to live there or actually evicted them en masse. "The various efforts for peace between Israelis and Palestinians have overlooked an important factor concerning the Arab - Israeli Conflict. The displacement of 850.000 Jews from Arab countries, the loss of all their assets and property, and the hardships accompanying their migration and emigration to Israel, constitute an aspect of the Middle East refugee problem which has been neglected. As almost half of the Jewish citizens of Israel, together with their descendants, are from Arab countries, peace research and future peace efforts should take this important part of the history of the conflict into account, and to address it, in all its complex aspects." (http://www.hsje.org/forcedmigration.htm) Another fact that you are ignoring is that the vast majority of "Palestinians" also came from Arab countries and have no relationship to Israel's land (including Judea, Samaria, and Gaza) prior to a generation or two at most! "Much of the Arab population in this area actually migrated into Israel and Judea and Samaria from the surrounding Arab countries in the past 100 years. The rebirth of Israel was accompanied by economic prosperity for the region. Arabs migrated to this area to find employment and enjoy the higher standard of living. In documents not more than hundred years, the area is described as a scarcely populated region. Jews by far were the majority in Jerusalem over the small Arab minority. Until the Oslo agreement the major source of income for Arab residents was employment in the Israeli sector. To this day, many Arabs try to migrate into Israel with various deceptions to become a citizen of Israel." (http://www.science.co.il/History-Palestine.asp) There are also a great many Israelis who can trace their ancestries back for 10 or 15 generations of unbroken residence in their Homeland, especially those who live in Jerusalem. And, until the Arabs massacred the Jews of Hebron in 1929, and the British forced the survivors to leave (much like Sharon is contemplating now in Gaza and Judea/Samaria) the same was true for the Jews there. And, if you are so sure that "Palestine", the country, goes back through most of recorded history, I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about the country of Palestine. (Don't forget to include your sources.) When was it founded and by whom? What documents are available to verify this? What were its borders prior to 1947 when Israel was formed from the Palestine Mandate? Why are the "Palestinians" not claiming Jordan as their country since it was also formed from the Palestine Mandate and they actually received the vast majority of the land in the partition? What was its capital? What were its major cities? What constituted the basis of its economy? When were its oldest institutions of higher learning established? Where are the foreign embassies located? Which countries exchange ambassadors with Palestine? What was its form of government prior to the Palestine Mandate? Who did the "Palestinians" trade with at any time prior to the past 50 years? Can you name at least one "Palestinian" president before Arafat (who is an Egyptian!)? Was Palestine ever recognized as a separate country by any nation that was not Arab itself? What date did that recognition take place? What does getting a passport from the country of Palestine require? What did it require in the 1920's? In the 1850's? What are the cultural variations that differentiate Palestine from all other Arab countries and how did they develop over the centuries? What was the name of its currency prior to 1967? What is its currency today? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date. Since there is no such country today (otherwise, what are you supposedly fighting for?), what caused its demise and when did it occur? And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call "Palestinians" are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over - or thrown out of - the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, then why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War? The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. The collective Arab countries have never abandoned their dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having tried time and again to achieve their evil goal through military means and failing miserably - losing more land every time - they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically and deliberately called it "the Palestinian people" and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the "West Bank" and Gaza, respectively? The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood on that land than that Native tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so-called "Palestinians" have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel, and, frankly, that is not sufficient to consider them a "nation" - or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization with an excellent propaganda machine. In fact, there is only one way to achieve peace in the Middle East. All the Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side, should pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of the PLO - their terrorist front group - from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. Then the "Palestinians" could decide either to live in ISRAEL under Israeli laws or go to some other country and live under their laws. (Oh, I forgot. No Arab country will give the "Palestinians" citizenship! Did you ever wonder why?) And all the Israeli victims of "suicide bombings" should receive adequate compensation from the Arab countries who have financed the "Palestinians" for the past 40 years of their existence. That will mark the end of the "Palestinian people". You still have not proved that there was a beginning prior to 1964. Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

"16 WOUNDED", PRO-PLO ISLAMIC PROPAGANDA, COMES TO BROADWAY Posted by Jerome Gordon, April 16, 2004.

A friend of minje active in the New York theater world saw a production of "16 Wounded" by a young Jewish playwright, Eliam Krieam. What the play amounts to is pure unadulerated PLO and Saudi Wahhabi Islamism with an aging Jewish holocaust survivor and Kapo as a dhimmi. Outrageous you say? Well look who's starring in it, Judd Hirsch as the aging Jewish baker in Holland and former concentration camp Kapo and the protaganist is a young Palestinian terrorist. I don't know who the angels were for this production, but it is a "cartoon" of a scenario that the NY Times drama critics took as serious drama. "16 Wounded" had a life on the road prior to going off broadway that included a stint here in Connecticut last year at the Long Wharf Theater, where Martin Landau played the Jewish lead and was protested vigorously. So we have selb hass Juden portraying selb hass Dhimmi Juden in a play written by a selb hass Juden. Give me a break. And this passes for serious dramaturgy? I sure hope the PA bankrolled this dog. Because it won't hunt except among the left radical anti-Zionist crowd on the west side of Manhattan. Read the comments of my theater maven - G.OMalley - and please pass it along. "Sixteen Wounded" by Eliam Krieam at the Walter Kerr Theatre on Broadway. First off - it's a bad play, in a bad production. How - after a year of development at The Cherry Lane, then a Long Wharf production - it arrived on the Great White Way in this sorry condition is beyond me. It's replete with all the clumsy, lugubrious monotony of a 9 scene play (or maybe it's 10 and I just lost count) of a neophyte in a Playwriting 101 course. The play is a series of almost identically structured scenes that all lead up to what is meant to be "the pay off moment," and there's no coin drop. It tries very hard to be drama, but there's no real ignition of its dramatic elements: one melodramatic scene leading up to the point where drama actually maybe could ignite, but no ... slow fade with music, and jump to the next scene to start it all over again, and ... oh ... just add more anti-Israeli diatribe. Judd Hirsch plays a Jewish baker living a totally insular life in Amsterdam in 1992. He's a sorry character. He never goes out. His only relationship apart from the girl ho works for him, is with a Russian whore. Hirsch's performance is abysmal, and I wonder if his portrayal of a self-hating Jew who stoked the ovens at a concentration camp as boy to survive the Shoah, and changed his name to hide from his parents because he didn't want to be Jewish has anything to do with the muted; half swallowed performance he puts in. Semitonically the play is about a self hating Jew attempting to somehow "save" himself from his own racial "betrayal" by adopting a young Palestinian guy (who blew up a busload of Israelis and is in hiding) who is a walking, talking, litantist of Israeli "horrors" visited on him, his family, the whole nine yards of victimhood of the Palestinian people. There is not one word in the play that defends Israel's existence. They are the hated ocuppier/oppressor breaking people's backs in police interrogations, killing people's mothers (the Palestinian guys', we and he find out in the play) and it's unrelenting. UNRELENTING. The point I did want to walk was when Judd Hirsch kneels by the pregnant womb of the Palestinian's girlfriend, (the girl who worked for him in his store when the Palestinian guy - literally - came flying through his window after escaping a "gang of Jews") and sings the Adhan. This is the song that is sung into a newborn Muslim baby's ear shortly after birth that tells him "There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is His prophet." (This is later explained by Hirsch's character as being simply a prayer about love and life, not the pre-committment to Islam, its prophet and all it entails.) His kneeling had been set up earlier in one of the endless cascades of scenes. Hirsch tells a story about being with his father in a Christian church as a boy, and being about to kneel when his Dad grabbed him by the scruff of his neck and told him "We are Jews. We do not kneel!" After that set up, the sight of him on his knees canting away in Arabic the commitment to Islam was meant to be a "kumbaya" moment; I found it repulsive on its own merits, and in the context of the setup: horrifying. Of course, there's a bomb, a brother from Gaza who shows up and reminds the Palestinian guy about his family "duty," and that his other brother will be killed by Hamas, maybe, or maybe Shin Bet, or Mossad - take your pick - if he doesn't plant it. Of course, he is to leave his infidel girlfriend and rendezvous with his handsome, three piece suited brother in Amman. We see him "torn" in an "Edge of Night" fade down at the end of the scene, but of course, in the next scene, the rip-tide's abated, and he's made up his mind. We see the bomb, of course - as does Hirsch's character - and there is what tries to be some sort of "take me instead" scene that never actually engages. And of course, the kid finds the only way out of this extremely concocted, unbelievable "trap" by walking the bomb into the Amsterdam synagogue and blowing it, himself, 10 Jews and "sixteen wounded" up. It is 150% PLO propaganda and Hamas, The House of Saud et al should award playwright Eliam Krieam a small sand dune and a caliphate-ette. I tried to be as objective as I possibly could be, then finally gave up when it was clear that the playwright was making no such effort, or displaying any pangs of consciousness in handling the subject. The lyrical, maybe sexy - certainly cutsie - Palestinian murderer was the hero of the play, and if we did not get that by the final scene, the playwright had him walk off to murder more Jews and blow himself up in an act that was intended to be received as self-sacrifice. There is absolutely no counterbalance whatsoever to the reams of indictments against Israel made in the play. Israel (and also read "Jews") - are as hobbled at loving as the Baker; theifs; torturers, wanton unconscionable killers; victims only of the Nazi's and themselves; brutal occupiers and oppressors. From what he's written, Jews are either warped, emotionally collapsed people still reacting to the world from the horrors of the Shoah, or the heartless armies of a country that behaves like the Reich that attempted to destroy their people completely. There is one feeble attempt somewhere in the miasma of Act Two where the Palestinian calls the Refugee camps "concentration camps," and Hirsch's character refutes him with one line; gets cut off; attempts to continue, then it's dropped; the comparison never fully denounced for the lie it is, and someone goes upstage and rolls some dough or something. The off stage supersonic explosion - while faked, of course - was the only honest moment in the play. The good news (as I said earlier) is that it really is a badly wrought play, in a terrible production: lugubrious, turgid, melodrama for drama, really bad acting, and I'd be very surprised in the city NY Times critic waxed on about it as gushingly as their CT guy. I also suspect that the producers have kept it in Previews for so long to rake in as much as they could from the NYC audience prior to reviews. Let's pray it closes by weeks end. It opens tomorrow night. As for Eliam Kriaem? What can I say? He's a young, Jewish guy who could not find one kind word to say about Israel or present its case as it is understood by the tens of thousands who have fought, suffered, died, and are being blown up weekly. Not a word. The applause was "polite." Friends? Well-wishers? I don't know, stood. Maybe ten of them; all twenty-somethings. I groaned: this had gone down like mother's milk to the juvenile, the uninformed, the blind. I did feel how uncomfortable a larger section of the adults around me were, so someone was thinking. The Theatre is the place for the whole range of perspective on what's going on in the world, and I for one celebrate its diversity. I also know what it won't stand for. I don't think I was alone last night in feeling I was having loaf after loaf of very spoiled, polluted bread shoved down my throat, but unlike Judd Hirsch's guttural, choking performance - I could spit it out. I worry for those who chewed it up and asked for more. The best thing that could happen is that it receives no protests (publicity) from anyone, and just goes away. To Go To Top

FRIEDMAN MISREPRESENTS BIBLICAL ISRAEL Posted by Menachem Kovacs, April 16, 2004.

I wrote this Letter to the Baltimore Sun. Both Thomas Friedman's column and The Sun's editorial of April 15 continue to misrepresent much of the Biblical Holy Land of Israel which G-d gave to the Jews as being improperly "occupied" by the Jews. This includes but is not limitited to Judea, Samaria and Gaza. So whose Israel is it? Jewish British comedian Ivor Dembina recently returned from a visit to Israel and reports that he told one Arab there: "This land belongs to the Jews because it was given to them by God." The Arab replied, "That's nothing. It was given to us by Great Britain!" Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. To Go To Top

I WENT TO GUSH KATIF IN GAZA Posted by Gail Winston, April 16, 2004.

I took a trip to Gush Katif in Gaza Tuesday. You should, too. You'll be amazed! Many buses are available through YESHA, although this was a media tour with 3 international film crews. I wanted to see it again before Prime Minister Sharon gives it away to the international terrorists. I wanted to give chizuk (strength and support) to the 8,000 men, women and children who live there. They gave it to me. I remembered the Gaza Strip from a dozen years ago when I went there with a group of new Ethiopian olim (immigrants) on Tu B'Shvat to plant trees on the sand dunes in our land. Today, the changes are extraordinary. Areas inhabited by Jews are green. Gush Katif means Block of Harvest. Everything else is empty. Miles and miles of empty. You can see Gaza City on the Mediterranean from the road one mile to the east. It looks like a normal city but, it is probably a run down slum because the Arabs refused to allow the Jews to help them improve their living conditions. Their Arab brethren wanted them in festering slums (euphemistically called "refugee camps") to nurture their hatred against the Jews. Despite that, Jewish presence did bring improved health conditions and jobs. Arabs worked on the burgeoning Jewish farms, until Arafat's terror gangs forced the workers to begin to kill their Jewish neighbors and bosses. The Oslo Accords revived Yassir Arafat, resurrected him from exile, brought him back from oblivion in Tunis to where he was evicted for causing the 12 year Civil War in Lebanon that killed 100,000 Muslim and Christian Arabs. Soon, his terror gangs who entered Gaza with him began to train, indoctrinate and brainwash the young men and even the children as young as 3 years old. Then, he armed them and sent them forth to kill. Gaza will be the perfect area for terrorists to train, receive weapons from the sea and from Egypt and launch major attacks against Israel. Most people begin to count the deaths of Jews from the Rosh Hashana 2000 War (called the "intifada" by the Arabs and the world Media). But, there were countless terror attacks and murders before that, even before Oslo. However, since the Oslo Accords were signed on the White House lawn with President Clinton as the guarantor for America, as many as 1500 Jews have been murdered by Arafat's hydra-headed terror organizations - with hundreds of thousands more wounded, many maimed for life, too many new orphans and widows. Gush Katif was established by Labor and Likud governments. Some came from the Sinai evacuation (by Gen. Ariel Sharon) after the Camp David Accords gave up all Sinai in 1979. Many came from within Israel and from the Diaspora abroad. We met several extraordinary individuals on our tiyul (trip). A beautiful lady they call "The Granny of Gaza", Anita Tucker - born in London as a refugee from Germany and Poland, she is now the matriarch of children and grandchildren born and raised on the sand dunes of Gush Katif. She stands in a football field sized greenhouse full of organic celery which is only one of the many she has planted and harvested. Gush Katif has invented a method for growing bug-free produce - very important for the observant Orthodox Jew whose Kosher laws forbid the eating of bugs. We were invited to eat the celery and didn't even need to wash it. Delicious! Anita Tucker speaks of the many Media people who come to her year after year and ask: "What are you going to do? The ---- government [you fill in the blanks] says you will have to evacuate!" She tells them with a warm smile and a laugh: "Look, you come to me every year. Come again next year and we'll have this same discussion and I'll invite you to my house for coffee. I have lived her for 3 generations, 30 years. I don't think anyone can move me from my land. When we came, these were barren sand dunes. The local Arabs welcomed us and said: "Take them. We don't want them." So, we did. Now, we have hundreds of dunams of hothouses, growing vegetables, fruits - much of it organic - and flowers. We export millions of dollars worth of produce to Europe and even America." The Gaza Strip has a rich Jewish history as an inseparable part of Eretz Yisrael. Abraham and Isaac lived and farmed there as did Samson. Jews settled in Gaza City which was founded during the Hasmonean period, led a vibrant life during the Second Temple Period and following. Jewish settlement in the city continued almost without interruption for two thousand years, until the Arabs rioted and the Jews were ousted in 1929 from Gaza City and from Kfar Darom in 1948 by the Egyptians. Settlement was renewed in Gush Katif (which means "harvest") shortly after the Six Day War in 1967 by the Labor government. Since the outbreak of the Oslo War in September 2000, Gush Katif residents have been bombarded with 4000 of mortar shells, Qassem rockets and rocket-propelled grenades. In the morning of Tuesday, April 13, the day we visited, 3 squads of terrorists tried to invade Netzarim to lay bombs on the roads and in the greenhouses. The IDF killed two, the others ran off. Our route was diverted until the IDF was sure all was well. Should the Jews be forced out by Bush and Sharon, the terrorists will pour into Gaza by the thousands as they now do into Iraq. The young women, Dina, greeted us and apologized for the delay. She told us that she came to Netzarim because of Oslo. She said that everything was a normal life inside her farming community. It was just getting in and out that was difficult because of the attacks by the Arabs - and their frequent bombardments at 4 am. Leaving and entering Netzarim had to be coordinated with the Army. She was right. It was beautiful and peaceful inside a farming village that had been attacked by terror that morning. The children and the flowers were blooming. Another woman, mother of 6, and six months pregnant was our next guide. She showed us their greenhouses of organic cherry tomatoes. I have had big gardens with organic vegetables, including cherry tomatoes but, I never saw a technique like this. They string the plants from their sandy earth up to high long clotheslines. The plants grow at least 20 feet tall and the tomatoes hang in gorgeous and scrumptious clusters all up and down the vine that clings to the supporting lines attached to the high wires. Again, we could eat them without washing. What a treat! Next we met the Deputy Mayor of Neve Dekalim, one of the two cities of Gush Katif. He assured us they are not moving out so fast. Their population is now 8,000. New families are moving in. Despite the 4000 bombs that have fallen in this tiny strip, no one is leaving and, miraculously. there has been only one tragic casualty. Then we met Rachel and Moshe Saperstein, whose frequent essays I have so enjoyed. Rachel and Moshe are seniors, grandparents of many, from New York on aliyah 30 years ago to Jerusalem and to Gush Katif because of Oslo, in 1997. Moshe is some kind of hero. His right arm was shot off in the Yom Kippur War. He was hit by a terrorist in February 2002, who shot off 3 of the fingers of his remaining left hand and damaged the sight in right eye and scarred his face. But, what a sense of humor - a bit trenchant and cutting but, he's got the facts and the right feelings to go with it. Rachel tells us that people are refurbishing their homes, painting and decorating, adding a second floor. New families are moving in. She says, "You can only attribute our survival under 4000 bombs to HaShem and His miracles. There is no other explanation." And "People aren't leaving. New people are arriving. We are truly living a miracle." Now, tell me. Do you think the 8,000 and growing population of the 21 farming communities in Gush Katif are going to be uprooted? Or is Sharon going to lose his referendum, his vote and his seat in office - as happened to everyone who tried to evict Jews from their homes? If the Jews of Gush Katif aren't safe, if they are expelled and the Gaza Strip becomes a hothouse for international terrorism, how safe will Jews be in any city or town of Israel? How safe will Jews (or anyone non-Muslim) be in any place in the Free West? Remember Madrid, 3/11? Remember 9/11? They say they will strike us everywhere. They mean what they say; and they say what they mean. I believe them. Like Hitler, they have written their "Mein Kampf" and remember: we didn't believe Hitler. Anyone who doesn't believe the Arab Muslims when they say they will eradicate Jews from Israel has no respect for them and is, therefore, a racist. Gail Winston is founder of M.E.I.R., Mid East Information Resource. To Go To Top

SO WHAT'S SO BAD ABOUT THE SHARON-BUSH "DISENGAGEMENT" PLAN? Posted by Steven Plaut, April 16, 2004.

Ariel Sharon has presented his "disengagement plan" to the White House, and it has been endorsed by George Bush. The Sharon political machine, backed by the Labor Party's machine and the Israeli Left, is flooding the Israeli media with ads and promotions for the "disengagement plan". Many in Israel are presuming that because the Arab terrorist groups and the fascist Arab states are screaming in outrage against the plan, then it must in fact be a positive constructive plan that can reduce violence and produce peace. Polls are showing that even the majority of Likud members endorse the "plan". The Arab critics of course are outraged because the plan does not provide for the immediate liquidation of Israel and its population and they oppose all plans that are missing those essential genocidal clauses. While the Sharon-Bush "plan" has a few positive features and aspects, it augurs badly and embodies existential dangers for Israel. So what is so wrong with the plan? 1. It rewards terrorism. Ever since signing the first Oslo "Accords", the Palestinians showed their devotion to its clauses as well as their unwillingness to comply with any of their written commitments by engaging in endless daily terrorist atrocities and by mass murdering 1300 Israelis, equivalent to 22 September 11ths when measured proportional to population. The "plan" rewards the terror by delivering to the terrorists and Islamofascists a Gaza Strip ethnically cleansed of Jews. Guess how the Iraqi terrorists shooting Allied troops will understand and interpret this "deal"! 2. The "plan" is a recipe for escalated terrorism and atrocities. If Israel has trouble suppressing the terror even today, when the Gaza Strip is full of Jews and Israeli soldiers, what will happen once they are evicted? What will stand in the way of the PLO escalating the violence, firing hundreds more rockets into Negev civilian communities, and sending out dozens of new suicide bombers? What does Ariel Sharon think the PLO will do in Gaza once the "settlers" are evicted, take up knitting? 3. It is an evil precedent. It signals that Israel is willing to conduct "talks and dialogues" even while it is under daily attack by the PLO's terrorists and its civilians are being daily murdered. It signals that Israel is willing ultimately to abandon the West Bank and Gaza to the PLO without the PLO ever having to comply with a single thing. 4. There is no "conditionality" at all in the "deal". Israel's concessions and capitulations are to be carried out without the smallest gesture from the PLO, and without the requirement that the PLO comply first with a single clause in any of the accords that it has ALREADY signed in the past! 5. While Sharon and his people have hailed the "deal" with President Bush as effectively recognizing Israel's rights to maintain "groups of settlements" where they are concentrated, such as around Ariel, Colin Powell is already backing off from this publicly and declaring there is no such US acknowledgement of Israel's rights. 6. While the "deal" and joint announcement are being touted by Sharon's people as declaring there is and will be no such thing as a "Palestinian Right of Return" to Israel, Arafat and his minions have already denounced this and re-pledged that there will be no ceasefire until this "right", which is nothing more than the Sudeten-like "right" of Palestinians to dismantle and destroy Israel, is accepted in full. Nothing in the plan is conditioned on Arafat and the PLO publicly renouncing this "Right". And the US cannot be relied upon in this regard. There was a time when the US was "firmly and permanently committed" to refusing to consider anything more than limited autonomy for the "Palestinians" and certainly no "state". Look where we are now. 7. The "plan" relinquishes Israel's moral claim to the rights of Jews to live anywhere they wish within the Land of Israel. The plan ethnically cleanses Jews from the Gaza Strip and parts of Samaria. There is nothing in the plan that limits the rights of Arabs to live anywhere THEY wish in the Land of Israel, including in Israel's own capital city, Jerusalem. Incredibly and mindlessly, Israel has allowed a huge wave of Arab migration to Jerusalem in recent decades. The plan PERMANENTLY relinquishes the rights of Jews EVER to live in the Gaza Strip, REGARDLESS of any Palestinian misbehavior or violations of any past or future "deals". The plan has Israel renouncing all "permanent" military installations in the Gaza Strip, including its radar facilities, needed to locate Palestinian smuggling boats, and this "permanence" is not conditional on such delicate niceties as the PLO halting rocket firings from Gaza into Jewish civilian areas or its sending out suicide bombers. 8. Israel largely renounces its right to operate checkpoints and inspections to deter and fight terror. This makes the mass murders of Israeli civilians all that much easier and it damages Israel's abilities to do anything to block the movement of terrorists. 9. While the joint statement states that the Gaza Strip will be "demilitarized", one does not know whether to laugh or cry at this. Previous "accords" with the PLO said the same thing and there were never any Israeli nor American attempts to force compliance. Since the PLO is not even a party to this Sharon-Bush "deal", this clause is little more than an insult to the intelligence. And note that the demilitarization is not a CONDITION for anything. Israeli concessions are not conditioned on demilitarization and Israel may not abandon its "permanent" concessions when it turns out Gaza is NOT demilitarized. 10. Israel once again agrees to the PLO operating an army. Guess against whom this army will be used. If you think it will be used against the Hamas and Islamic Jihad, then I have a nice bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. 11. Israel agrees to demolish all "illegal Jewish settlements", but there is nothing that would allow Israel to expel Arab squatters living illegally on lands they do not own or in structures illegally built. 12, Israel foregoes the possibility of responding to mass murders and other forms of violence committed by Palestinians by shutting off the power and phone lines for the villages or neighborhoods involved. 13. Israel pledges to continue to allow large numbers of Palestinians to enter Israel daily as "day workers" and this is a guaranteed program for many new suicide bombers blowing up Israeli buses. 14. Israel pledges to continue to bankroll the terrorists, and this financing is conditioned on nothing. No conditionality on compliance by the PLO with anything. No conditionality on ending the atrocities. Nothing. 15. The destruction and abandonment of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, with no PLO quid pro quo, provides enormous encouragement to those Arabs who believe that violence and atrocities are the only way to make gains for themselves. It is an open declaration that no act of violence by Arabs will ever go unrewarded. It sets the most dangerous precedent imaginable. Clearly every future "deal" will now be based on this precedent and will involve unilateral Israeli depopulation of its Jewish civilians with no Arab quid pro quo whatsoever. Eviction of Jews from large swaths of their homeland while never evicting a single Arab from anywhere has become the guiding principle for all future diplomacy. 16. While the Sharon team has been blustering that the deal means that Washington agrees that the 1967 "Green Line" will not again become Israel's future border, there is no actual such acknowledgement in the deal and Washington has never agreed to any such thing. In fact President Bush has repeatedly referred to the "1949 Armistice Lines", meaning Israel's pre-1967 Auschwitz Borders (which is what they were called by Abba Eban). 17. While President Bush acknowledges Israel's "rights of self-defense", these are not spelled out and in most cases where Israel has exercised its legitimate rights in recent years, such as by assassinating terrorist leaders, the Bush Administration has denounced these Israeli actions. So it appears that the only form of Israeli self-defense that is considered legitimate will remain self-defense by means of capitulation to terrorism. 18. While criticizing the PLO's "lack of action" against terror, which is a bit like condemning Hitler for his lack of action to stop the Holocaust, the joint announcement does not explicitly denounce Arafat for LEADING and ordering and initiating most of the terrorism. There are no American sanctions against the PLO for its non-compliance with any of its previous commitments, nor any sanctions against it for the endless mass murders it has committed. 19. The plan envisages Palestinian "refugees" being resettled in Arab states, including the future "state" of "Palestine". The word "only" is conspicuously absent. 20. Nothing in the agreement is conditioned upon the PLO ending its campaign to destroy Israel, nor upon any PLO acknowledgement of Israel's right to exist. 21. The "plan" utterly abandons the "Land for Peace" formula imposed on Israel by its leftist governments of the past, and replaces it with "Land for Good Press Soundbites," which is to say - "Land for Nothing". 22. The plan is anti-democratic. Sharon ran for office OPPOSING just such a plan being touted by the Labor Party under Amram Mitzna. Voters elected Sharon on that platform and because they opposed Mitzna's plan, yet here is Sharon implementing it by fiat. 23. Maariv April 16 reports that the plan has secret unpublished clauses involving Israeli agreement to additional concessions not stated in the public "deal". The White House knows the contents of this document. Israeli voters do not. What does that suggest to you? The full English text of the "plan" appears at http://www.jpost.com/ servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1081998818390 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

HALF WARS ON TERRORISM Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 16, 2004.

ARE WE AT WAR ON TERRORISM? The US wages war but ties its own hands. Starting out by winning, the US is eager to withdraw half if not all its troops, before securing the victory. The enemy counts on US impatience. The US would prefer to rely upon deterrence, but one cannot deter seekers of "martyrdom." The initial US show of strength in Iraq impressed other countries to offer to relinquish programs for developing weapons of mass-destruction. Warfare deters (or prompts dissembling). The cry went up: prove which countries committed 9/11 and which had weapons of mass destruction. This approach to terrorism mistakenly assumed that one always can find out. Enemy regimes may deliver weapons of mass-destruction anonymously. Unable to deter the enemy, and unable to detect the enemy in a specific instance, the US must war preemptively on all these related enemies. If the US waits until able to prove which enemy has weapons of mass destruction about to be used, he may fire them while the US still is adjudicating. The US would rather try moral suasion than fight. Unfortunately, moral suasion does not work with terrorists who flout humanitarianism. It is enough that the US enunciates democracy as one of its goals. US policy is to spread democracy, in the US national interest. Preferring to have allies, the US defers excessively to "international legitimacy." International legitimacy means getting the approval of the enemy's suppliers and sycophants. The US should not need the approval of anti-Americans to liberate 25 million Iraqis. Many of the Americans who called for UN approval did so because they knew it would not approve. They called for getting the sanction of the "international community," because they knew it was unattainable. The "international community" chafes under US predominance. This "international community" includes Britain, Cuba, Yemen, and Zimbabwe. They have nothing in common but UN membership. The UN comes up with international protocols to which nobody adheres Jewish Political Chronicle, 3/2004, p.5 from Charles Krauthammer at a dinner). IS ISRAEL AT WAR ON TERRORISM? Israel has eliminated from Judea-Samaria all but one Hamas leader and a few of his gunmen. As a result, most of the attacks on Israel from Judea-Samaria are by Fatah. In Gaza, Hamas has more than cells. It has a growing militia. The militia potentially could take over Gaza. It seeks a mass-suicide-bombing capability, to shock Israel into worse defeatism. The IDF credo of limited conflict drags out the bloodletting and enables terrorists to recruit new blood (IMRA, 4/9 from Ehud Ya'ari of Jer. Rpt., 4/19). Since Fatah is carrying out the missions Hamas formerly shared but cannot, due to its extensive liquidation by the IDF, it behooves Israel to set the IDF to decimating Fatah, too. I do not believe it accurate to call the credo of limited conflict an IDF code. The IDF takes its orders from the political echelon, i.e., from PM Sharon. PM Sharon marks time and issues condolences. To Go To Top

STATE DEPARTMENT TIPPING THE SCALES Posted by Bryna Berch, April 16, 2004.

Agreeing to the expulsion of the Jews from Gaza and leaving it to the Arabs is being touted as a fantastic change in American foreign policy - the pundits make much of isolated words and ignore the obvious. Even good guys like Dore Gold and William Safire think it's great. So along comes Colin Powell to let us know that America hasn't changed course. A Jewish government expelling Jews from their ancient homeland is demoralizing. Leaving Gaza in the hands of the various terrorist factions is insane. And Israel doesn't even get a pat on the back from the American government. This is a news item from today's Arutz-Sheva (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com). The United States State Department has already begun whittling down whatever Israeli "achievements" there were in U.S. President Bush's letter to Sharon this week. Secretary of State Colin Powell made clear yesterday that there is no change in American policy in the Middle East, and that the future of the settlements and the Arab refugees will be determined only in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher was asked yesterday if Bush's remarks about "new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers," represent a departure from long-standing U.S. policy that "settlements are an obstacle to peace." Boucher's long answer did not relate at all to Bush's words about the "major Israeli population centers," but rather concentrated heavily on the Road Map's "freeze on settlement activity" and the welcome "prospect that that, for the first time, Israel will evacuate settlements." In fact, Boucher mentioned this withdrawal no fewer than six times. Meanwhile, Bush administration officials are hoping that Sharon's disengagement to which Bush gave a boost this week will lead to the collapse of the present Israeli government coalition. So reported The New York Times today, quoting an unnamed senior administration official. The Americans hope that the National Religious Party and the National Union will make good on their threat to quit the government in the event that the expulsion plan is passed, thus paving the way for the Labor Party to enter the coalition. The Times says this will "create a political climate the Palestinians might consider more hospitable." Mr. Sharon, on the other hand, wants the NRP to stay on - or so he says. He met with NRP leader Housing Minister Effie Eitam last night, and requested that the religious party remain in the government, even in the event that the Cabinet approves the uprooting plan. Correspondent Haggai Huberman reports that Sharon attempted to persuade Eitam of the plan's positive points, but that Eitam remained unconvinced. "The plan has security dangers," Eitam told Sharon, "and the expulsion of the residents will lead to a social catastrophe in Israel. The NRP will not be able to be a partner to a government that makes such a decision." To Go To Top

THE CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE GOLDEN CALF Posted by Moshe Feiglin, April 16, 2004.

The right of return of Palestinian refugees never appeared on the agenda, not even in the darkest days of the Oslo festival. Non-binding recognition of the fact that changes have taken place in the region since June 1967 is also nothing more than American acceptance of a reality that cannot be changed. How, therefore, can a single, vague declaration confuse so many Likudniks, and cause them to sell the security and future of their children for such a pottage of lentils? The Likudniks are the Israeli Nation We must realize that the Likudniks, for good or bad, are the Israeli nation. They are the last national group that hasn't split into factions and doesn't represent a single sector. The average Likudnik is the faithful representative of the Israeli public that is still linked to its Jewish identity. He is neither the rightist, leftist, or religious branch. The Likudnik is the trunk itself - the Jewish nation. And as our sages taught us, when the Jewish people is called on to contribute to the Temple, it gives, and when called on to contribute to the golden calf - it also gives. The American Calf No-one has ever called on the Likudniks to contribute to the Temple (in its broadest sense). However, they are constantly being called on to contribute to the golden calf. No-one has ever come to the Likudniks (or to the Jewish people) and said to them: You are holding on to a great truth, you are the descendents of the wonderful nation of the Prophets, your very existence is a historical wonder that points to a Creator observing and watching over you. Don't be afraid ? just be yourselves and the G-d of Israel will pave your way through the tortuous paths of history and will protect you from harm. No leadership has ever spoken in such words to the poor Likudniks. The sole anchor left to them is the American calf. After all, the existence of the Jewish people without G-d is totally unrealistic. How long can we really exist here, a single sheep surrounded by seventy wolves? So when Sharon obtains some kind of undertaking from a transient, war-weary president, the poor Likudniks think that they have really received something. The alternatives for them are the G-d of Israel, or Bush. When the religious public decided not to aspire to leadership, they left the Likudniks with Bush only. The Light At The End Of The Tunnel It seems that the Jewish national basis of the Likudniks is very significant. Even without belief-based leadership the Likudniks are drawn naturally in the right direction. In order to get his destructive program approved, Sharon had to give them a consolation prize in the form of an insurance policy for blocs of settlement in Judea and Samaria. Sharon doesn't entice the Likudniks with money or benefits, but with a deceitful presentation in which he apparently retains all the remaining areas of Eretz Israel. The day after the Weissglass show in Washington, and despite the intensive media brainwashing following it, a large mass of Likudniks still oppose the plan for uprooting the settlements. It is amazing that the Likudniks, none of whose political leaders is capable of explaining to his children why it is worthwhile remaining in this country, are still basically loyal to Eretz Israel and their Jewish identity. Manhigut Yehudit We need hardly explain today how right Manhigut Yehudit was, both in its basic assumptions and in its political action resulting from them. It is difficult to imagine what would be our situation without the core of Manhigut Yehudit members in the Likud. With G-d's help we will all meet after the referendum at the foot of the Temple Mount for a ceremony of thanksgiving to the G-d of Israel who delivered us from this tragedy. But, even if this time the trend towards the golden calf gains the upper hand, and Sharon succeeds in getting his plan approved in the referendum, there is emerging in the Likud, inside the basic kernel of Israeli society, an opposing force, one calling for contributions to the Temple. When the time comes the Jews will give them. Moshe Feiglin was a cofounder of Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Feiglin has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

A SPECIAL PRAYER FOR YESHA Posted by Menachem Kovacs, April 16, 2004.

Shalom Chaverim, Please say this Tefilah for Yesha and request that it be said in Shul after Krias HaTorah on Shabbat. May He answer our prayers favorably! Shabbat Shalom, Leading Israeli rabbis have agreed that a special prayer on behalf of the Jewish settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria and Gaza should be recited tomorrow, and every Sabbath, following the public Torah reading. The prayer was composed by Rabbi Chanan Porat of Kfar Etzion, and has received the blessing of Rabbis Chaim Druckman, Yaakov Ariel, Shlomo Aviner, Tzfaniah Drori, Dov Lior and others. The Hebrew text of the prayer: "אבינו שבשמים צור ישראל וגואלו! ברך את בניך אהוביך היושבים בכל מרחבי ארץ קדשך, ומחוננים את עפרה, מנגב ועד גולן ומירדן ועד ים, ובהם בניך היקרים הנאחזים במסירות ובהתמדה ? בחבלי יהודה, שומרון וחבל עזה. אבינו מלכנו, השב (ha-shav) שבות עמו ומשיב בנים לגבולם! אנא חזק את רוחם ואמץ את לבם, לעמוד איתן, נוכח אויבינו הקמים עלינו לבקש את נפשנו. וכל החושבים עליהם רעה ומרימים ידם לעקור בנים מגבולם, מהרה הפר עצתם וקלקל מחשבתם, למען יחלצון ידידיך וישבו לבטח בארצם . רבונו של עולם, הודע שיש לך אהובים בעולמך! וקיים בנו את הדבר שהבטחתנו ע"י עמוס נביאך: 'ונטעתים על אדמתם ולא ינתשו עוד מעל אדמתם' מעתה ועד עולם". An abridged English translation of the prayer: "Our Father in Heaven, Rock of Israel and its Redeemer, bless your beloved children who dwell throughout Your holy land, from the Negev to the Golan, and from the Jordan to the Mediterranean - including your precious children who cling with dedication and perseverance to the lands of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. "Please strengthen their spirit and fortify their hearts to stand strong in the face of our enemies who wish to destroy us. All those who wish to harm them and try to uproot children from their borders, speedily incapacitate their counsel and impair their plan. "Master of the Universe, make it known that You have loved ones in Your world! Let Your promise spoken by Your prophet Amos be fulfilled: 'I will plant them on their Land and they will never be uprooted.'" Rabbi Porat explained that the prayer is designed primarily to express the Jewish tradition that "Repentance, Prayer and Charity will cancel the evil decree," but also to "help us internalize that the struggle for the settlement enterprise in the Land of Israel is not only a diplomatic and military one, but chiefly a spiritual effort for that which is sacred to our People and the fundamentals of our faith." "It's possible," Rabbi Porat said, "that the public recitation of this prayer will help imbue the recognition that uprooting Jewish communities from their Land harms not only those who live there, but also Jewish tradition and the longings of generations for the fulfillment of the Biblical promise, 'the sons will return to their borders.'" Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. To Go To Top

REMOVE THE JEW WATCH WEBSITE Posted by American Chin High, April 16, 2004.

Full of hate and empty "info", 'Jewwatch' is an obsessive attempt [by Neo Nazis (Yes, no matter how much Nazis hate all 'non whites,' they manage to "cooperate" in this 'unholy' alliance) and Islamo-Radical Fascists combined] to put any dirt on anything Jew or Jewish, from the most silly "conspiracy" theories to any case throughout history - throughout the entire world - that may or may not involve a person with any relations to Jews. Nothing about a supposedly "organized Jews' culpability" can ever be made [as oppose to serious research: www.jihadwatch.org, http://www.dhimmi.org, www.geocities.com/arabracismplusjihad and others targeting militant organized crimes.] Anti-Semitic site bumped off Google's top spot http://www.geocities.com/fightinghate/RemovejewatchJP.html email to: help @ google.com Re: 'removejewatch' http://www.geocities.com/fightinghate/Removejewatch-emailgoogle.html To Go To Top

HIGH ADVENTURE AND LOW HUMOR Posted by Moshe Saperstein, April 16, 2004.

I had hoped to devote this letter to last week's adventures getting the car registration straightened out. Or straitened out, more accurately. Instead, sitting here under a tree on the lawn in front of our bungalow at Kibbutz Alumim on this second Intermediate Day of Passover, trying to ignore a bone-chilling wind and the happy shrieks of our grandchildren as they stab each other with crayons specially provided by their grandmother, and if this sentence weren't already absurdly long I would add the whining of our grandchildren's parents and the stuff falling on to this computer from the branches above which falling stuff is, thank God, solid and not liquid or it would splatter on the screen, not to mention the other guests who come by and bang into me with their walkers or canes and ask me what I'm doing, to which it takes all my willpower not to say "baking matzah" or "performing open heart surgery", instead - I'll start with Pessach. Early Monday morning, packing to leave Neve Dekalim for the Seder with Ari and Efrat in Maale Adumim, our phone rang. It was the gentleman who runs Israel Resource News Agency in Jerusalem, and who has been bringing busloads of journalists to us since the present crisis began. "Will you and Moshe be available to talk to a busload of reporters on Tuesday, the day after Pessach?" "Yes" said La Passionara in a resigned voice. "Will you and Moshe be available to fly to Washington Tuesday night for a series of press conferences?" La P was speechless. "You'll be flying Business Class both ways" he added to break the silence. "Let me talk to Moshe." She hung up. Of course their conversation had been much more detailed. We talked. And we talked. And we talked. We agreed that neither of us has the physical strength for this trip. We agreed that neither of us wants to go, though the prospect of flying Business Class once before getting our very own permanent wings is tempting. We agreed that we have no choice but to go. [aside: Please don't get the idea that we have an exaggerated sense of our own importance. Or that we think we can actually influence events. It's just that, for our own peace of mind and irrespective of the outcome of the struggle, we have to feel we did whatever we could.] What disturbed me about the proposed trip is that the whole weight of it seemed to be on us. So I called Mr. IRNA and said it was too big a job for just Rachel and I, and suggested two other people to spread the burden: Anita Tucker, the lady farmer from Nezer Hazani, and Dror Vanunu, from the Gush Katif Information Service. Dror is not a native English speaker but is learning fast, and Rachel has been training him in Western manners and mores. More important, he is young and good looking and exudes sincerity. This last more than makes up for any lapses in English. Within an hour we were informed that the Gang of Two was now officially the Gang of Four. And that following Washington we would be staying on for the Magical Mystery Fund Raising Tour that was supposed to have taken place before Pessach. Our two-day jaunt is now extended to ten days. In a state of alternating shock and hysteria we finished packing, picked up two teenaged girls we were supposed to drop off in Jerusalem, and set off. Comforting ourselves with the hope that the trip might yet be cancelled, and that the Lord would put everything right without the need for our sacrifice. We had been on the road for about an hour, the two girls in the back chattering on cellphones while Rachel and I discussed Important Matters of State, when it happened. Just outside Moshav Otzem, on a two-lane road a few kilometers from Kiryat Gat, traffic flowing at about 110 k.p.h., two rocks flew off the top of a truck and hit our windshield directly at my eye level. One, the size of Mike Tyson's fist, struck without effect. The second, the size of Mike Tyson's head, cracked the windshield. Thank God it didn't shatter the windshield, or we would had have crashed. Certainly it would have drastically rearranged my already disarranged features, and opened a window of opportunity in my head. As it is, there is a silver-dollar-sized black spot and a beautiful lattice of cracks to impede my vision. Fortunately I don't see much anyway, so this hardly makes a serious difference. In fact, sunlight by day and headlights at night travel along the cracks like sparklers. Quite beautiful, really. OK, back to the accident. We signaled for the driver to stop but he sped off in a direction opposite to the one we needed. We noted his license plates, and a telephone number stenciled at the back with the words "call this number if this vehicle is involved in an accident or is being driven recklessly". One of the kids in the back called the number and was told to file a complaint with the police. Which we did, making a detour into Kiryat Gat. Fortunately we had the girls with us to fill out the complaint forms. The whole thing delayed us for an hour, and had the beneficial effect of removing our projected trip from the list of Things to Discuss. At least for a little while. The Seder was wonderful. Ari, the perfect host; Efrat, the perfect hostess; Doriah, Alumah, Akiva, Yehuda and Chanale the perfect grandchildren. We couldn't have had a better time. I found it interesting that the fate of Gush Katif is a constant subject of conversation. Clearly the people of Maale Adumim, which is just outside Jerusalem, are aware that their fate is dependent upon ours. Would that the rest of Israel's Jews, imagining themselves secure within the so-called Green Line, realized it also. It is Friday afternoon and we are surrounded by all the children and grandchildren. Kibbutz Alumim is beautiful, the weather is perfect, the food is edible, the natives are friendly. We will all be here until Monday night. Rachel and I are hoping to recharge our batteries for what lies ahead. Two drawbacks to being here: The first, the many dogs that freely roam the grounds. They are all patient, good-tempered, let the children pet them at will. Unfortunately the younger ones poop where they please. And one has pooped just where our grandchildren are playing barefoot on the lawn. I'm watching the scene as I type this: four grandchildren are getting their feet scrubbed, and two adults are attempting to scrape the bottoms and sides of their shoes. Everyone is maintaining the holiday good humor spirit. I am thankful my nostrils are clogged. The second drawback is of far greater import. The salt-free, sugar-free, taste-free, pleasure-free food regimen we have been following is almost impossible to keep here. This is driving Rachel mad and, difficult as it will be for you to believe, I am sympathetic. This is because she has lost considerable weight, which is of no interest to me as I have always felt the more the merrier, and is delighted with her progress, which is. Her mood is so good as she keeps putting on clothes that haven't fit for the longest time, and they fit perfectly. Many are even loose. The fly in the diet ointment is that dieters think their diets are of interest to others, and discuss the details endlessly. Sometimes I find myself seated between La P and Tamar, who is into health food, and in minutes I am contemplating committing Harry Carey with a sharpened carrot stick or celery spear. It drives me crazy that Rachel is constantly asking me "Aren't you feeling better?" When I'm writing and it is going well, I'm happy. When I `m writing and it isn't going well, I'm less happy. When I'm not writing, I'm miserable. Still it pains me to admit I can now button the Fat Shop shirts. I can't sit down in them. I can't even breathe in them. But at least there is hope. [Hope of what? That my pall-bearers won't get herniated? Who knows.] We've learned there was some excitement on Neve Dekalim in our absence. On Seder Eve several Thai workers decided to burglarize homes in which they had been working and whose owners would be away for the holiday. Someone saw broken windows and figures moving in homes that were supposed to be empty. The assumption was that this was a terrorist attack and the army and police went into action. The Thais were caught. I'm amazed they weren't killed. They are to be deported, to the special delight of the stray dogs and cats and land crabs who were staples of their diet. Sunday, 4am I awoke half an hour ago and stepped outside to cremate the remains of a cigar stashed on the front porch. Everything was shrouded in fog, and the orange lamps on the pathway glowed as faintly as fireflies. My agitation [see below] had largely evaporated and I was enjoying the view, or lack of view, when I became aware of the sound of rain. A patter, but steady. I stepped off the porch expecting to have my bald pate shined, but there was nothing except for the sound. A few steps down the path and I felt several drops. A few steps more, and no drops. Alternating patches of wet and dry on the walkway confused me further, until I realized the patter of rain was the patter of dew falling off the leaves and branches. The effect was magical and I enjoyed it until the cigar was reduced to ash. Shabbat was wonderful, though I gorged myself at lunch - the first time I've overeaten since commencing the diet - and am paying the penalty for gluttony. Shortly after Shabbat ended Rachel was on the phone for updates on our travel plans. To learn that they have been canceled. Mr. INRA couldn't get the funding, and the YESHA council wouldn't waste money sending nobodies. Rachel was relieved. I should have been relieved, but I was devastated. Yes, it's all ego. And yes, I suppose I do have delusions of grandeur. But ever since we were asked to go my brain has been in overdrive formulating speeches and statements and arguments and ripostes. All suitable for the Washington press conferences. To appear at the same time and in the same city as Sharon is appearing, to go head-to-head, as it were, the semi-private vs the general, to find out if I am as good as I think am. Now, we are told, there may be a fund-raising trip later in the month. A trip in which I can play my accustomed role as Heroic Cripple, waving my bloody stumps and making my mock-modest jokes. It is a role I have come to loathe, however effective I am. Unlike Rachel, who properly keeps her eye on the goal, and adapts to whatever best serves that goal, I appear to have turned into the clown who wants to play drama. No fool like an old fool. Like Edgar Bergen's Charlie McCarthy, I am folded up and put back into the box, to be used as needed. So why aren't I consoled by the fact that, from time to time, I am needed? later Shortly after 5:30, stir-crazy and still upset, I grabbed a bag of dirty laundry and drove home to Neve Dekalim only thirty minutes drive away. Laundry generally calms me, and it worked wonders. That, and being surrounded by the familiar. We think of Neve Dekalim as an oasis in the desert, and it is. But comparing its plants, flowers and trees, struggling to survive in the sand, with the almost tropical lushness of Kibbutz Alumim makes my heart overflow with appreciation for what the people of Gush Katif have accomplished. By 8 I was back at Alumim, and in the midst of a minor crisis as Dafna's Gur, four years old going on twelve, disappeared. He just went off exploring, and by the time he reappeared half the kibbutz had been enlisted in the search. Where he had been off to is a mystery. He won't say. Our relief is matched by our annoyance. And now, the vehicle registration saga. Springtime in Tel Aviv: A Farce in Four Acts. Act 1: I tried to avoid having to go to the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv to get the document that would permit the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue a vehicle registration form to replace the one I had allowed to lapse. Phone calls, faxes, special prayers involving human sacrifice - all to no avail. With Pessach - when government offices become even more inert than at regular times - fast approaching, and the prospect of extended driving in an unlicensed vehicle hanging like a black cloud over us, only active and personal intervention would do. So, two weeks ago Monday morning at 6am I boarded the armored bus in Neve Dekalim which took me to the central bus station in Ashkelon where I boarded an "express bus", ie, only eight stops along the way, to Tel Aviv where, against every cheap fiber in my penny-pinching soul, I took a taxi to the Defense Ministry offices, arriving at 10am. There, amazed to find only three people ahead of me and a smiling and sympathetic staff to greet me, I explained the problem. I even made certain, in as un-Israeli a gesture as can be imagined, to emphasize my own culpability. Forms were filled out, signatures were X'd, rubber stamps were applied, DNA tests were made, and the document was complete. Or so I thought. As I extended my hand to take it, the pretty, blond soldierette said "We'll mail it to you." "Why mail it? Why can't I take it now?" "Because" she said, "it isn't official until the doctor has signed and stamped it." "So?" "The doctor isn't here today. He's ill." "When will he be in?" "Maybe tomorrow. Maybe the day after. Maybe after Pessach." Trying to suppress the scream forming in my throat, I asked to speak to her supervisor. A woman with lifeless eyes and lips turned up in what might have been a smile but was more likely a grimace of constipation said "The doctor is ill." "But I'm running out of time. I have to have that document." "The doctor is ill" she repeated, and this time I saw that my desperation had elicited a genuine smile. Of pleasure. "Isn't there another doctor?" "The doctor who is ill is substituting for a doctor who is ill." This was delivered with a broad grin. "If I come back tomorrow, will it be signed?" "You can come back. But I don't know if it will be signed." "What do you suggest?" A shrug. "Do what you want. We don't receive the public again until Wednesday." A phenomenon of physics: the four hour trip home took twice as long as the four hour trip to Tel Aviv. Time was running out. Act 2: Wednesday, 6am, Neve Dekalim. I see the bus to Ashkelon approaching, but a station wagon pulls up first. "Hey, Moshe, want a ride to Tel Aviv?" Is this a sign of good fortune, or am I being set up for another fall? I am at the Defense Ministry by 8:30, only to find that today the Defense Ministry doesn't torture the public until 3pm. I felt a mixture of consternation and relief at the delay of the inevitable, and decided to spend the time visiting Tower Records. In the tradition of `the condemned man ate a hearty meal'. But Tower didn't open til 10am and it was just 9, so I crossed the street to the Tel Aviv Promenade and stared at the water. The beach - a nice touch, I thought - is called Jerusalem Beach, and despite the early hour by Tel Aviv standards Promenade traffic was heavy. Grim-faced power walkers, joggers, bicyclists, the rare baby carriage, oldsters straight out of central casting playing shesh-besh, dominos, cards, checkers. Several benches away four professional ladies - were they coming off the late shift or starting the early shift? - were either relaxing or trolling for sardines. The beach itself was sparsely peopled; an old man with a white beard down to his toes, some exercisers, one character walking backward at high speed and falling over one obstacle after another every few yards. After all this Tower was a letdown, nothing I wanted and the lone salesman - I was the lone customer - glaring at me as if I had come in just to ruin his morning. While at the Promenade a sound truck with a large poster advertising something called The Monte Carlo Circus had passed repeatedly, going so quickly that no more than two consecutive words were intelligible. By the sixth or seventh drive by I had caught most of the message, and now as I left Tower Records the truck sped by once more. With four and a half hours to waste before the Defense Ministry office opened I decided to walk there in a circuitous route. Which is crazy, because I generally can't walk more than a block or two without cramps in both legs. Perhaps because I was preoccupied with what I had to face in the afternoon I was able to walk and, because the Tel Aviv Municipality is concerned for its largely geriatric population and has placed benches in all residential areas, to sit whenever I felt tired. My route took me the length of Sheinkin Street, the heart of secular, leftist, bohemian Tel Aviv, which I enjoy because the young women who crowd the street are apparently too poor to be able to be fully clothed. And there is a record store, The Third Ear, which has a smaller offering than Tower but with many of the off-beat items I adore. Alas, on this day only Cinderella's ugly stepsisters were on the street, and The Third Ear's classical department had been waxed out of existence. I was making my fifth or sixth pit stop, sitting on a bench and enjoying the fumes as heavy traffic rolled by, when the accident happened. An adult, mid-forties, was riding a child's bicycle, weaving in and out of traffic, steering with one hand while the other held a huge boom-box balanced on his shoulder to one ear. The bicycle was so small that as he pedaled his knees came up to the level of his head. A parody of Latin music blared from the box - perhaps the tape had stretched - and the cyclist was singing along at the top of his voice. Seconds after he passed me I heard a crash, and a chorus of car horns. I walked toward the noise and saw that he had run into the back of The Monte Carlo Circus sound truck. He lay on the ground, the bicycle barely visible under the truck, the boom-box silenced, but he was still singing. Nobody seemed much concerned, and at least I was able to hear the entire tape, including dates, times, prices and a description of the acts, without interruption. By noon, incredulous that all my dilly-dallying shilly-shallying lolly-gagging bench-warming peregrinations had eaten up so little time, I arrived at the Defense Ministry and seated myself in the waiting room where two post-army service civilian guards stared at me for the miscreant that I am. They soon adjudged me harmless, bringing me water which I accepted and offering newspapers which I declined. My legs were trembling with exhaustion and I stayed glued to the chair. I tried to doze but the noise as Defense Ministry personnel passed to and from lunch, particularly the harsh sound as they were buzzed through the electronic door, made it impossible. At 2:30 the pretty, blond soldierette - hereinafter PBS - stuck her head through the doorway, noticed me, said "The doctor isn't here" with a stricken look, and disappeared back inside. Though I interpreted this as A Very Ill Omen I, always a glutton, even for punishment, decided to wait another half hour for the formal death sentencing. Which was first delivered by Lady Dead Eyes. When I complained that such a situation is absurd she gave me the Official Bureaucratic Comfort Speech: "You're right" she said, and lifted a stack of authorization forms awaiting Dr. Cronkite's signature, "and you're not the only one waiting. Do you want to know how many others are suffering just like you?" I asked to see her supervisor. Oozing sympathy and sincerity as I was ushered into his cubicle he seemed about to cry as I told my tale of woe, and I couldn't help feeling he was going to offer to drive me around until my own vehicle was available. His pain was clearly so much greater than my own that I had to control an increasing desire to comfort him. I was well aware that I was being conned, but my admiration for this bravura performance was genuine. What a waste that such a great artist is forced to ply his trade in such a dismal setting, and on such an unworthy audience. "So we'll see you after Pessach?" he smiled, choking back the tears, as I slunk out of the office. Thus demolished, utterly, wondering whether to return home or simply walk into the sea, I turned to leave when PBS, flushed, ran up to me paper in hand. "Here it is" she said. I had a thousand questions but her eyes signaled a warning and I left with a whispered "Thank you!" Once outside I walked several blocks til I found a florist and sent PBS a bouquet for the holiday. She had certainly earned it. A phenomenon of physics: The four-hour bus ride home took only half as long as the four-hour bus trip to Tel Aviv on Monday. Act 3: Thursday, 7:45am, found me at the Vehicle Registration Bureau in Beersheba, surrounded by a crowd of Arabs and Russian immigrants waiting for the 8am opening. My blood pressure was probably going through the roof from anxiety. Though I now had the proper documentation I just knew something would go wrong. To further increase my anxiety, everything seemed to go well. Until the clerk said "The Defense Ministry hasn't updated the computer list. Your name still doesn't appear", and she went off to consult a supervisor. I know this is crazy but my heart leapt with relief. The blow had fallen and I no longer had to cringe in anticipation. This is very much like Rachel's inability to fall asleep until she has heard an explosion or two and can stop anticipating the attack. "It's okay" the clerk said upon her return, and continued processing the forms. My legs shook so badly I had to sit down. With two and a half hours before the van back to Neve Dekalim was due to leave I looked for a post office so I could pay the license fee. Unfortunately it was the first of the month and every post office was jammed with Arabs collecting their welfare payments. Hundreds and hundreds of burka'd women looking like masked bank robbers, and a smaller number of males who probably were bank robbers. What can I say about the - ambience? I was glad that I hadn't showered since before going to Tel Aviv and was able to give as good as I got. When I finally got to a window to pay the clerk said "You didn't have to stand in line all this time", to which I replied "And miss out on the smell?" Act 4: Papers in order, the car passed its physical the next morning. All's well that ends well. Back to Pessah. One day my brother and sister-in-law came up from Jerusalem, bringing my mother and a very close friend from New York. We enjoyed their visit, as we did that of the former kibbutz nurse who had changed my bandages daily the Pessach after I was wounded. Over the years we have become friendly with various kibbutz members, and in fact most of the people are - quite uncharacteristic for kibbutz members - good natured and helpful. Still - for all their friendliness and sympathy their political views are closer to those of their secular kibbutz neighbors than to ours. And if they are far too decent ever to express open hostility, a barrier remains. A highlight of these stays on Alumim are Grandma Rachel's parties on the lawn for all the grandchildren. This year there were two, on Shabbat and Monday the last day of Passover. Cake, cookies, candy, potato chips, even ice-pops, Rachel organizes it all and the kids adore it. Attendance not being compulsory for parents, adults appreciate these parties almost as much as the kids. Monday night, the holiday ended, everybody packed and took off for home. We, with the shortest distance to travel, were the last to leave. May we be permitted to do this again next Pessah. 14.4 Some thirty reporters, photographers and hangers-on were in the house yesterday. We performed well. After the general meeting an AP reporter and photographer interviewed Rachel in the house, parts of which interview were shown on Israel TV's English news this afternoon. She was magnificent. At the same time I was interviewed on the lawn by Sky News' Emma Hurd, who has been here before. A snippet appeared on Sky News this evening. I flatter myself that I'm as clever as Charlie McCarthy. Unfortunately I came across as Mortimer Snerd. Tomorrow we get visitors from the New York Times and Reuters. I am not optimistic. We'd get a fairer shake from Al-Jazeera. Early this morning I drove to Beersheba to get the windshield repaired. Beersheba is very spread out, with a dozen clumps of garages and workshops called `industrial areas'. The instructions I had gotten were unclear, and even if they had been accurate and detailed I would have gotten lost because the realization is starting to seep in that I should be in an old age home. But that's another subject. It took forty-five minutes to reach Beersheba, then ninety minutes of blundering before I found the repair shop. Then one minute to learn it is the wrong shop. The other shop, the one that accepts my insurance, took only another thirty minutes to find because unlike the Arabs who wouldn't say or the Russians who couldn't say I finally found an elderly Yiddish speaker who gave me directions in language suitable for the directionally disabled. Only to find they didn't have my windshield in stock. Nor was it in stock in Ashkelon or Ashdod. The part was ordered - it is being delivered late this afternoon - and I will be back Friday morning to have it installed. I would prefer doing it tomorrow, but the NYTimes is coming. After watching the Bush-Sharon Show tonight I sunk into a terrible depression. Though Bush gave him nothing concrete, the Sharon spinners and the leftist media are showering orgasmic congratulations on our Prime Munster. Then I remembered an interchange yesterday with Mitch Potter from the Toronto Star. He asked if we weren't disappointed by the lack of support from our fellow Israelis. I replied that we weren't here to win a popularity contest, but to fulfill a Biblical commandment. And that He who determines whether or not we stay doesn't consult Bush or Sharon or the pollsters. The reward for a difficult mitzvah, I have to keep reminding myself, is much greater than for an easy mitzvah. To my amazement and delight the people here, usually so laid back they are laid out, have been energized into activity. Everyone is on this committee or that committee and hustling and bustling to the point where just watching them makes my head spin. May their efforts be rewarded. The trip to North America is on again. We are supposed to leave Sunday night. I have no details as to itinerary and length of stay. And I won't believe it until we are cruising at an altitude of 40,000 ft. Anita Tucker was supposed to go but she has a child who is ill. Even Rachel is wavering. At this point I don't know who/what/when/why/how. Chaos has its comforts in that the uncertainly keeps you from focusing on your fears. 15.4 Helicopters overhead before 6am, no explosions but lots of machine gun fire. A virtual war, like the virtual American guarantees. I keep thinking about the Bush-Sharon Show. Sharon doesn't disappoint me because I never expected anything from him. But Bush? how does a believing Christian aid and abet the expulsion of Jews from their Biblical home? The NYTimes cancelled its visit. Not surprising, as their editorial the day before yesterday urged Bush not to offer Sharon even the appearance of support, stating that only an Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 boundaries will bring `peace'. With that editorial position, do you imagine they would print a sympathetic story about `settlers'? So, leaving Rachel to deal with Reuters, I returned to Beersheba to have the windshield replaced. Garages are noisy both from the machinery in use and the shouts of those working there. Add the office phones, piped in music from a local rock'n'roll station, a toilet that made a thermonuclear noise when flushed, and you have the ambience of the place. But I had brought a book to read, ALEPPO TALES by Rabbi Haim Sabato, and it made me oblivious to my surroundings, transporting me to a world of beauty and holiness. Rabbi Sabato wrote ADJUSTING SIGHTS, about the Yom Kippur War, that I recommended. ALEPPO TALES, totally different in subject and atmosphere, is no less wonderful. It is published by The Toby Press [www.tobypress.com]. Do yourselves a favor and read it. When told the car was ready I was filled with disappointment at having to stop reading. I got home to find that Rachel has decided not to make the trip. She has a bad back and seventeen hours in coach - Tel Aviv-Milan-Toronto - would have killed her. Her purpose in going was to baby-sit me, and she feared I'd be baby-sitting her. Besides, she is needed to deal with the foreign press in Israel. Here is our group's itinerary, correct as of this writing: 19th Toronto Cong. Shaarei Tefilah 20th Toronto private gathering 21st New York One Israel Fund offices Brooklyn Lubavitch gathering 22nd Brooklyn public gathering, site being arranged by Helen Freedman of AFSI 23-24 Five Towns Shabbat appearances 25th Five Towns Rabbi Billet's congregation flight home It is almost midnight and this letter seems to have gone on forever. Not only am I suffering from end-of-letter melancholy, but the prospect of the trip - particularly without Rachel guiding me through the shoals - has me terrified. Some of you will criticize me for mixing the high drama of our present situation with my meandering tales of little consequence. It is these tales that keep me from turning into a basket case. It is smoking cigars, however injurious to my physical well-being, that helps me preserve my mental well-being. It is the beautiful sunset over the sea that keeps me from drowning myself in the sea. Late this afternoon, thinking of the forces arrayed against us, I deflected despair by weeding the garden. This mundane act, this silly act given the circumstances, was my assurance that the garden would remain mine. In light of the above I can tell you I've resumed feeding the cats. Scraps only, not on a regular basis, away from the house. They remain as loathsome as ever. But feeding them fills a need in me that is greater than my dislike of them. It is unlikely that I will write again before leaving early Monday. So Shabbat Shalom and take good care of yourselves, my friends. And, if you're into praying, spare one for us. moshe Neve Dekalim, Gush Katif Moshe Saperstein lost an arm while fighting in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. A resident of Neve Dekalim in the Gush Katif area of the Gaza Strip, Moshe was wounded in a February 2002 incident when he drove his car into a terrorist who had just shot and killed a young mother traveling in the car in front of him. He writes frequently of his physical and emotional struggles. His wife, Rachel (La Passionara/La P.) teaches at the Neve Dekalim girl's high school (ulpana) and published a booklet last year for families dealing with terror victims. To Go To Top

JERUSALEM: ISRAEL'S CAPITAL SINCE ANCIENT TIMES Posted by Mike D. Evans, April 15, 2004.

"...I have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be there: and have chosen David to be over my people Israel." (II Chronicles 6:6) For centuries the Jewish people wandered - exiled from their homeland, exiled from their beloved Jerusalem...city of David...city of God! Listen! You can hear the weeping and wailing of the children of Israel down through the centuries as they dreamed of returning to the Promised Land. A salty river of tears flows through the ages as God's people prayed for deliverance, and cried out, "Next year in Jerusalem." From the frozen wastelands of Siberia...from the hot sands of the Ethiopian desert, they cried out. Jews were marked for destruction in Treblinka...Bergen-Belsen... and in the ovens of Auschwitz...yet, their cries echoed down the corridors of heaven, "Next year, Jerusalem." America turned her back on that cry during World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt was the last American President that could have taken action that might have prevented the deaths of so many Jews during the Holocaust, yet even into the middle of the war when over three million had already been executed he was still eerily silent on the matter. It appears that the man considered America's greatest Democratic President was also part of our darkest hour as a nation. In December of 1939, Roosevelt appointed Breckenridge Long to the position of determining who would and would not receive American entry permits from Nazi Germany. Long's philosophy was simple: Keep them all out; they are all troublemakers. When once questioned about what should happen with the Jews trying to escape Hitler, he replied by strafing the room using his hands as an imaginary machine gun. Evidence suggests that Roosevelt and the State Department knew something definite about Hitler's "Final Solution to the Jewish Problem" sometime in 1942. With the United States already in the war, it seems likely that either the U.S. would have done something to find a safe haven for the Jews or else at least have used the information about German atrocities against the Jews as a rallying cry for the war. Neither happened! And still the desolate cry rang out from inside the Nazi death camps, "Next Year, Jerusalem." Jews in Muslim countries were hanged in public squares in an attempt to stop that cry. Still it rang out, "Next year, Jerusalem." Through the centuries, Jerusalem has been besieged by nations, trampled underfoot and leveled to the ground five times, and still the cry rings out, "Next year, Jerusalem." According to the U. S. State Department, it has been foreign policy since 1948 not to recognize any part of Jerusalem as "Israel" unless the entire Arab world does so first. This includes the part of west Jerusalem that has been in Israel since 1948, and that will remain under Israeli control under any Arab-Israeli agreement. The 104th Congress passed public law 104/45, the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995. This document officially recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Public Law 104/45 also allocates $25 million to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. Why does the United States government not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital when, in fact, it has been the capital of Israel for 3,300 years - since the days of King David? Why has this been postponed by a presidential waiver every six months since it was passed in Congress? The premise is that implementing the move of the embassy to Jerusalem, and recognizing one of the oldest capitals in the world, would cause a national security threat in the U.S. The real reason is plain and simple: Arab bigots do not want the U.S. to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. In doing so, it would constitute recognizing Israel's right to exist. The U. S. State Department policy regarding Israel was influenced by the late George C. Marshall, the Secretary of State under Harry S. Truman. It is well documented that Marshall was strongly, even rabidly, against Truman recognizing the Jewish state. During a policy meeting regarding the recognition of Israel, Marshall went so far as to tell the President: "If you follow [Clark] Clifford's [Truman's Secretary of Defense] advice and if I were to vote in the election, I would vote against you." Those were strong words from a Secretary of State to a sitting President. Clifford said in his memoirs, "Officials in the State Department had done everything in their power to prevent, thwart, or delay the President's Palestine policy in 1947 and 1948..." The bias in the State Department is paramount in the recently released human rights report. Only a short portion of the document is dedicated to the attacks against Israel by terror groups. The balance of the document explicitly details Israel's "failures" in the area of human rights. No mention is made that many of the supposed infringements on human rights are essential to protect Israeli citizens from the onslaught of suicide bombers. One American couple whose son was born in Israel has filed suit because the U.S. State Department will now allow them to register the baby's place of birth as "Jerusalem, Israel". In any other instance, the place of birth is determined by "shown on the application" - or in accordance with the applicant's wishes. Apparently, only in Jerusalem does the U.S. State Department refuse to accede to the applicant's wishes. It is time for another Harry S. Truman to stand up for the State of Israel, and for the city of Jerusalem. Each time the national security waiver is signed, we are saying to terrorists and bigots, "You win." America needs the blessings of God more than favor with Arab bigots. No longer should America allow terrorists to threaten our nation into choosing political expediency over moral clarity. If Rudolph Giuliani had the courage to say, "No, thank you," to an Arab sheik that wanted to create linkage between 9/11 and Israel, President Bush needs to have moral clarity to do the same. America is in a state of moral decay. It is time for our President to let the godfather of world terrorism, the architect of the Munich massacre, the financier of murderous suicide bombings know that the party is over. It is time to allow the Jerusalem Embassy Act to become law, and move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem! Please forward this to everyone on your list, and ask them to pass it on. Michael D. Evans is the founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, the www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move." To Go To Top

SHARON'S BETRAYAL AND OUR ADMINISTRATION'S DOUBLE VISION? Posted by AFSI, April 15, 2004.

In response to the exchange of letters between Prime Minister Sharon and President Bush on April 14, Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, asserts, "In order to shore up his flagging political fortunes, Israel's Prime Minister has betrayed the Zionist principles on which he served the nation as general and on which he ran for public office." Zweibon continues, "President Bush, so resolute in Iraq, displays a double vision. With one eye he clearly sees that Arabs recently liberated from a murderous regime have turned their violence and primitive hatred to the very forces which attempt to bring stability and a better life to their country. With the other eye he has the 'vision' of a democratic Palestinian Arab state accepting Israel, renouncing terrorism and living peacefully side by side with a Jewish state." "The paltry 'victory' of keeping some of the Jewish towns of Judea and Samaria and refusing Palestinian Arabs the so-called right of return to Israel is mere gift-wrapping on a box of explosives. "There exists within the 1967 borders a large Arab population, which can easily be mobilized by the prospect of driving the Jews out. An Arab sovereignty in the high terrain of Judea and Samaria, fueled by jihad, supported and armed by all Arab nations, and encouraged by the entire Moslem world could easily overrun the remaining communities (reduced to "enclaves" by Sharon's retreat) and commence a deadly war against the Jewish state. In fact, with Gaza in Arab hands, Syria in control of the north, an enthusiastic partner in Egypt from the south, Israel will be caught in a pincer movement of Arab troops." AFSI's chairman calls on all Israel's supporters to denounce and reject this ill conceived and dangerous plan. "It abrogates Israel's patrimony and its historic rights. It glosses over the expulsion of 8,000 Jews who built their homes and livelihoods in Gaza at the behest of various Labor governments. The plan also calls for the expulsion of over 150,000 more Jews from Judea and Samaria, placing the state in existential danger. Every time Israel makes concessions, the result is an escalation of terrorism, flouted agreements, and more demands. The deadly results of Oslo should have set the bar, but utopians here and in Israel just keep moving the bar lower." Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. To Go To Top

POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY, MEDIA PHOTO OPS AND MORAL DEPRAVITY Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 15, 2004.

Seems politics has nothing to do with reality. Seems people see some pictures and are blind to others. Seems they might keep G-d in The Pledge of Allegiance but too few do not pledge to uphold the basic laws of civilization. They shall kill and be rewarded. They shall steal and be applauded. They shall bear false withness and the bare facts dance naked in the faces of those who see through the looking glass. Seems it might pay to be bad because those with moral clarity and are moral activists are the scapegoats. Yes, the Jews are being exiled from Gaza, but the Christians have already fled Lebanon and Bethlehem. Seems Isaiah across the street from the UN is out of place "And they have turned their swords into plowshares and they shall learn war no more." War no more? How do you get peace when you bulldoze gardens to make room for ballistic missiles and exploding teens under the guidance of men who are spiritually excused from spiriting hate and fuming the earth? Political expediency is about to wipe out the Garden of Eden. Where will Mrs. Jewish Gaza with asthma ever breathe so well again? Where will we get bug free lettuce and basil? Where will Mr. Rabbi get to pray and plant? Where will the displaced Yamit get to be replaced on the way to be erased again? In the whirlpool of politics will there be irrigation? An example of nothingness? nihilism? Camus? Today, dread, the Land of Israel and the People of Israel are going to be refugees again. Does that give anyone a hangover, especially since the Arabs of Palestine are burning Jewish libraries in Canada? The pictures of smiling Sharon and Bush look pretty, but beneath the surface there is nothing and the tools to make more into nothing. The liberal left accuses President Bush of doing nothing to stop the attacks of September 11, 2001 and so, apologetically, Bush has started to undo something for nothing. Wasn't it because of liberalism that murderers, thieves and liars were not challenged? Didn't Bill Clinton, adulterizing in the White House, sign agreements with the terrorist murderer Arafat al Husseini, the Egyptian who was convicted and evicted again and again? Why aren't the agreements kept. Why is each exception made an exemption for the law-a-siding and a prerequisite for the lawful? Isn't Bush following in the footsteps of his father and ignoring the Forefathers who are backed by those who backed him? Isn't Bush burning his chances of re-election like his father because all the freedoms America developed included religious freedom and rights for everyone to live in America the American way. Well, there are no rights for Jews in Jewish Gaza; they are to be excluded for the terrorist's way. And, furthermore, those poor Bedouins who worked for the Jews may be murdered, foodless, tentless. Will they be able to fly off to Central America where the good self-exiled of Christian Palestine are trying to be Hispanics? How many more kids will explode in the infrastructure of masked bandits making Israel fall and America fail. Are those jihad dancing in Gaza the only masked bandits? What masks do our politicians wear? How many in their closets? Does anyone realize those kids may not have to explode when suicide is mutual. Will they be laughing all the way to the UN, NYC where they have changed Isaiah's message to say, "Peace stripped; terrorists have traded plowshears for weapons and fertilizer for bombs and there is worldwide war." Will the Jews wear striped pajamas as they walk through the desert that was their garden that fed the world vegetables and gave lovely flowers to express love, love, love. Will warlords win when there's no one to crook, bake and burn for them? What will they strip next? So, moral depravity is the authority in the present. Sharon, unaccountable for the Greek Island Affair because of a relationship with Bush, unaccountable for shaking the hand of those breaking him in Iraq and Afghanistan in Gaza stripped, all paid for with the tax money of those who believe in the work ethic, honesty and accountablility. How does a house built on ethics check the imbalances that minus the majority? Time rectifies all wounds and politicians do not fool; they fail. Failing Sharon failed Bush who fails himself. They took a nice picture but the Bible and the land of the Bible will not be ambushed by fools and the empty pictures of shortlived men who dance with murderers, thieves and the morally depraved. Does anyone know that the Arabs hate Jibril Rajoub for robbing their businesses and gang raping their livelihoods? He is coming to the White House? As the innocent Jewish gardener of ancient Jewish Gaza is the scapegoat, will another murdering, crook be invited into the picture of the politically expedient? No thank you, I will never take a picture with him or him or him and I will cut those who have cut their own words into lies out of my pictures because they are not who they claimed they were and can never be again. There is no reason to be proud of a picture with Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Limor Livnat, President Bush, President Clinton. When there are no leaders, it is better to stand alone, one person, unimplicated, under G-d, working for the Redemption. Blessedly, there are many more than ten times ten. Bless those who are steadfast in their morality, humanity, kindness, work ethic. The Bible Believing are an eternal picture, the morally refined, the Salvation of Civilization. May they be refined and multiplied. May they never resign. In shame, the rose of Sharon will fall and Bush will burn out of the history they so unhistorically revised. Let the innocent scapegoats of their mistakes take their place. The Garden of Gaza will only bloom when the Jews return. Eretz HaKodesh will survive this too. We've milleniums to go and promises to keep and be kept.. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, because their hearts are softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

BITS AND ENDS Posted by David Ben-Ariel, April 15, 2004.

This was written by Shmuel HaLevi rfi and was sent Saturday, April 10, 2004. Just came back from two days fact finding visit to the "fence" and Gaza. IRAQ and the local islamics: There is recruiting going on amongst the nearby Islamics. Near Karmiel that is. Volunteers are offered trips to Europe... And from there they are or will be ferried to Syria and Iran and then routed to Iraq. I do not know who is doing the field work on behalf of the USA as to what to expect there, but evidently they are not getting the whole picture. What we are seeing in Iraq is NOT, repeat, NOT the assault but a patrol in force testing of the troopers in there. We estimate that the real jihad will go into high gear on or about the 4th of July... That is what we hear from the field. They also intend to go for all the marbles against what is left of Israel. The news are in the open about the 800 shahidim ready to start on or about April 27. Independence Day... here. NOTE: The Libyan maneuver was part of the brilliant Islamic plan. ISRAEL I cannot detail information likely to aid even more the enemy than what the generals here do by themselves. But this is factual data we gleaned during the trip... We, more than just me that is, sought info as to what is in store and why. By whom all know. There are special troops in place here. When one travels for days in a closed, bullet proof bus with a group of people you can and they can easily slide into probing talk. Out of a bus load of 51 professionals part of the trip, we identified three "newspaper folk" and/or boys from the... company... staff... Though for us it is not news, I must assure that all of those with the Jewish Nation's best interest in mind know the following as well... a. The (Leftist) post-Jewish camp is intent of destroying YESHA since it poses imminent danger to their MAPAI plans to inherit the kibbutzim-held lands and State privileges. (From a Professor, part of a group visiting Gaza. The person is a Senior Professor in Haifa and is part of the inner core of the Haifa Labor-Shinui entente). He was worked over good by our people and he lost control... he also added that "we will bring more Russians, (AKA UnJews) and foreign workers and "palestinians" until we break you people down..." He directly said... "You will not have a land base from which to project Jewish ideas..." "You must go..."... b. The "fence" is an intentionally designed... colander... and it is ONLY meant for the military to hide behind it and not to protect the population. c. There should be no doubts that the generals WILL use deadly force against Jews and certainly against National Heritage. There are fleets of dozers already strategically placed and huge transport staging areas READY as well. Shmuel To Go To Top

ANALYSIS OF SOME OF BUSH'S LETTER BY THE DEBKAfile Posted by Bryna Berch, April 15, 2004.

Sharon is acting like the producer of a Broadway show that's bombed but he needs to use some quote for a promotional ad. He extracts a couple of mild to meaningless phrases and ignores the rest. DEBKAfile wrote about what some of Bush's statements will lead to if Israel is crazy enough to leave Gaza. This summary was in today's Arutz-7. The DEBKAfile website (www.debka.com) raises the question why Bush used the phrase "1949 armistice lines" and departed from the usual phraseology of the "pre-June 1967 Green Line." Debka writes that the 1949 agreements - a temporary settlement meant to stand only until a final-status arrangement - "left open, or as demilitarized zones, large and highly strategic areas of pre-1967 Israel, including the Hamma intersection of the Israeli, Jordanian and Syrian borders; the Nitzana region south of the Gaza Strip and abutting on Sinai in the Israeli Negev; and the eastern half of the Israeli Aravah from Tsofar south of the Dead Sea up to Eilat at its southernmost tip." Debka continued, "Putting these large chunks of Israel back on the negotiating table would provide a pretext for Egypt and Jordan to re-open its peace treaties with Israel and lay fresh claims to more territory. An even more dangerous twist could come about if the leaders of Israel's two peace partners decided to renounce their claims in favor of enlarging a Palestinian state. "Therefore, whereas Sharon may have gained partial endorsement from Bush of some of the larger West Bank Jewish settlement blocs - 'existing major Israeli population centers'" - it came with a price tag that is far too steep for Israel to safely countenance: payment for those settlements by turning the clock back to a time when large tracts of territory in pre-1967 Little Israel were claimed and fought over by its Arab neighbors." Haaretz military commentator Ze'ev Schiff made a parallel point, saying that Israel's achievement on the territorial front is "only partial, and Israel would do well not to ignore Bush's words. The American leader again promised the Palestinians a viable state, and a state cannot be viable when it is made up of patches of territory... "Bush did not mention settlement blocs, but Sharon will want to latch onto the president's comment that 'new realities on the ground' will have to be taken into account. The settlement blocs are part of the new reality, but we must not forget that this reality has another side to it: the growth of Palestinian Jerusalem and the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have settled in the Jerusalem area and neighborhoods... One can't expect that Maaleh Adumim will be recognized as part of Israel because there has been a change in the reality on the ground, while the Palestinian neighborhoods in the Jerusalem area that have expanded will be part of the state of Israel. The meaning of the 'new reality on the ground' in the area of Jerusalem cannot be that the whole of the city will be Israeli." To Go To Top

TERRORISM AND SECURITY Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 15, 2004.

WHOM TO BLAME FOR 9/11 DISASTER In journalese, the question, "Who in the US failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks" is abbreviated to, "Whom shall we blame for the 9/11 attacks?" The precise answer to the stated question is, "The Islamists." Always blame the perpetrators and their assistants. Failure to take appropriate precautions against the crime is a lower level of guilt. Punish the criminals; reform the failure. The quest for answers to US lack of preparedness generally has come down to a search for a scapegoat. The issue has descended to campaign politics. Democrats miss the major issue when they focus on whether the incumbent President had advance warning of the specific attack. Of course he did not. If he had, he would have thwarted the attack. That action would have been popular. To suggest he declined to act is defamatory. One suggested answer makes sense, as far as it goes. This answer is that the investigative agencies were not allowed by law to coordinate. We have known that for some time, however. The answer has too narrow a scope. A more profound answer is that the US government either did not understand international terrorism or it did not know how to get the people to understand it. It terrorism were properly understood, we would have launched a war on terrorism and Islamism. We are not doing that even now. We still are coddling S. Arabia, a font of terrorism against the West. "NO WAR NOW" A bumper sticker declaring "No war now," reflects ignorance of the nature of war and what has happened to the US. When one is attacked, whether at Pearl Harbor or New York Harbor, war is not a matter of choice. It is a matter of self-preservation. Not to fight against the modern, brutal totalitarians, whether the Japanese Empire, the Third Reich, or Islamist jihad, is to invite one's own conquest and oppression. Worse, nowadays, is the Islamist drive for weapons of mass destruction. If we don't wipe them out, they mean to wipe us out. Read their threats and note their studies of the means! ISRAELI MILITARY ADVICE ON SECURITY ISSUES IDF officers have found the Jewish communities in Gaza important for defense of the whole country. Those towns afford a commanding position over main roads and open spaces. They retard enemy movements and conceal some IDF movements, enabling the Army to blend in and furnishing a jumping off point for operations. They willingly take a daily mortal risk, only to be defamed by the Left, whose towns in Israel would be the next line of Arab attack, if the settlements were evacuated. Such views rarely get a public airing. Why? As an erstwhile democracy, a country's elected leadership must control the Army. Generals may not challenge government authority. In Israel, the general staff is limited in what it is allowed to discuss with the media. (In the US, exceptions are made for Congressional hearings that call upon general staff testimony.) The government does not elicit Army views. The political echelon tells the generals that they don't know the whole story, and that diplomatic policy takes precedence over military strategy. As a result, the country seems to be lurching toward withdrawal. Once having had a reputation for being strong and courageous, Israel now seems weak and confused. Any withdrawal would be followed by Arab attacks on Israel and a sinking reputation for the attacked (Jewish Political Chronicle, 3/2004, p.21 from Yossi Ben Akharon of Maariv, 2/13). Actually, military strategy helps determine whether diplomatic policy is feasible. It is the political echelon that does not know, or want to know, the dire military consequences. Israelis suffer from repression of experienced commanders' observations. ARE TERRORISTS BRAVE? People argue whether Arab terrorists are brave or cowardly. Terrorists are thought to be brave because they kill themselves in combat, and cowardly, because they mostly pick on helpless civilians. Which is it? Few commit suicide bombing out of bravery. Most do it because they have been manipulated (by terrorists who don't do it) to think it glorious and eternally rewarding sexually, it gains subsidy for their families, they have gotten into trouble and take this is the "honorable way out," or they are afraid of a normal death so they choose this clerically guaranteed path to paradise. Let us hear from the Arabs, themselves, as recorded by James Taranto (NY Sun, 4/9, p.7). "'The Americans think we are afraid, while we recognize them as cowards,' said the young man, the commander of this small band of fighters in this village. 'We have many heroes who are standing here and elsewhere. We will not be afraid of their tanks and their weapons and their other equipment.'" "'We will stay here until we defeat them.' Suddenly the gunmen scattered, unnerved by the sound of approaching US helicopters. Villagers who had been standing in the street fled into their shops and houses and, within seconds, the crossroads was deserted." RATING THE ISRAELI WAR ON TERRORISM Casualty figures show that Israel is defeating P.A. terrorism. Since the IDF was ordered into the P.A., the Israeli casualty rate dropped drastically. (The IDF reduced the terrorist infrastructure, captured leading terrorists, killed many before they could carry out further attacks, and kept others from entering Israel. Hail closure!) Conclusion: Israel's defense against terrorism cannot be won by remote control. Israel needs to retain control over Gaza (Jewish Political Chronicle, 3/2004, p.21 from Moshe Arns, Haaretz, 2/2004). P.A. SOCIETY BREAKING DOWN? The arbitrary, corrupt, and violent P.A. government and allied militias and people's ready access to weapons has turned people more violent against each other as well as against Israelis and made family feuds deadlier. The Arab PHRMG human rights group asserts, "widely unreported domestic abuse of women, and rape" afflicts the P.A.. The subject is taboo to discuss, but women are seen as possessions of men, even by unrelated men who rape and murder (IMRA, 4/9). Are these the Arab "family values" that Pres. Bush finds admirable? War has its hidden price, internal destruction. SYRIAN WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION Western intelligence asserts that Syria has been smuggling missiles and weapons of mass destruction to Sudan, since January. Anticipating the same type of international pressure felt by Libya to open its WMD industry to Western inspection. Syria wants to conceal its own weapons. The government of Sudan assumed that the goods being stored in warehouses in its country were part of normal trade (IMRA, 4/9), intelligence tells us. Libya was developing weapons of mass destruction. Syria already had developed chemical weapons. The question is whether it received some from Iraq, at the start of the war there. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

HALF AND HALF Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 15, 2004.

The latest Mid East conspiracy theory: Arik Sharon is in cahoots with the European Basketball League (ULEB). On Tuesday night, just as PM Sharon was settling in to Washington before his meetings with George Bush that decided the fate of hundreds of thousands of Israelis, upstart basketball team Hapoel Jerusalem beat Real Madrid, the most successful club in European basketball history, to claim the ULEB Cup. In this news crazed country, even the hourly news was suspended as every radio station broadcast the game live from Belgium. The nation held its collective breath as our boys in red managed to hold off the Spanish team to claim a 83-72 point victory. At the moment of victory in this lovely diversion, the roar of the crowd watching the game by satellite at the Teddy Stadium here in Jerusalem swelled over the southern part of the city, quickly followed by hundreds of car horns blaring into the night. This morning, Sharon's visit to Washington was a footnote on the frontpage of the two most widely read daily papers. Ninety five percent of the page was filled with pictures of the triumphant players and the headline, Jerusalem of Gold. Radio announcers waxed poetic all day, with expressions of gratitude to the Hapoel team for restoring pride and a winning attitude to the Holy city. Tonight, travel is free of charge on Egged buses heading to the victory party in the center of town, where a few thousand fans decked out in Hapoel red greeted the victorious team. The crowd is boisterous, but there's no trace of anything remotely resembling the hooligan activity that accompanies sports events in many European cities. Teenagers with kippot wave gigantic red and black flags and police turn a blind eye to the haphazard parking of fans who pull their cars up onto every available inch of sidewalk space within half a mile of the party in Safra Square. Oh, what a pleasant distraction. Anyone would think that Israelis have nothing else to worry about. But while half the country gets carried away with the sports victory, the other half is furiously campaigning, scheming and organizing for or against Sharon's so-called disengagement plan. In a strange mutation of democracy, the powers that be have decided that only the members of his Likud party will take the fateful vote on the Sharon plan. Some 200,000 registered Likud members will have their say on May 2. Originally scheduled for April 29, the vote was moved because of concern for low voter turnout due to Maccabi Tel Aviv's participation in a key game in the European Final Four basketball championships. Likud ministers on both sides of the issue are calling meetings with various Likud officials to try to persuade them - and are simultaneously using the opportunity to jockey for position should Sharon fall as a result of his corruption scandals. Former Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert, now serving as Minister of Industry, Trade and Labor, is a staunch Sharon loyalist. He summoned 30 Likud mayors to his office on Tuesday night to consolidate support for the unilateral withdrawal plan. Meanwhile, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, another supporter of the plan, has created his own team of like-minded Likud thinkers. The Mofaz group includes Ministers Livni, Ezra and Boim. On the opposing side, Minister Without Portfolio Uzi Landau, a Likudnik with impeccable reputation and credentials, is set to debate Sharon next week. And out on the streets, the YESHA Council representing more than 200,000 Jews living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is mobilizing with all its strength. For the past few weeks, teenagers who were drafted to man every major intersection, have handed out thousands of bumper stickers and informational booklets decrying the eviction of Jews from their homes. Banners across highways proclaim the slogan: Uprooting Communities is a Victory For Terror. Full page newspaper ads directed at Likud party members warn that a yes vote will force the right wing parties out of the coalition, bringing the leftist opposition leader, Shimon Peres back into the government. As news of the exchange of letters between George Bush and Ariel Sharon filters out, some sharp-eyed analysts point to a key contradiction. In his statement, President Bush says: "It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities." Yisrael Medad, a veteran political activist and former Knesset aide asks: "How does that jive with Sharon's current unilateral plan?" But lucky for Sharon, the lull in terror activity brought about by the elimination of Hamas leader Yassin seems to have caused half the country to ignore such details and focus on basking in the glory of the Hapoel Jerusalem win. Judy Lash Balint is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen), which is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

THE HAZON DAVID SYNAGOGUE AND HEBRON HEROS NEIGHBORHOOD Posted by the Hebron Community, April 15, 2004.

Yesterday, as George Bush and Ariel Sharon were meeting at the White House, residents from Hebron and Kiryat Arba reestablished the Hazon David synagogue and the Hebron Heroes neighborhood, on worshiper's way. At 5:00 in the afternoon, a group of about 100 youth constructed a small shack on the site of the Hebron Heroes neighborhood. Shortly afterwards, police and other security forces arrived in an attempt to evict people from the area. At least one teenager was arrested. Simultaneously, a large group of Kiryat Arba-Hebron residents, intending to reestablish the Hazon David synagogue, found themselves locked into Kiryat Arba. Security forces put the community under siege, refusing to allow people in or out of the west gate. A tremendous scuffle erupted and several residents were injured. An ambulance, arriving from Hebron to transport one of the wounded, was refused entrance into Kiryat Arba and was surrounded by Border police. Finally the commander of the Hebron brigade, Col. Haggai Mordechai, arrived at the scene. He was approached by two young women, who serve on the Kiryat Arba emergency medical team. They immediately complained about the violence used by the security forces against the civilians, and also about the stranded ambulance. Mordechai's reply: "I think we have to increase the violence against you." A short time later he told several of the Hebron-Kiryat Arba leadership that he was considering using tear gas to disperse the crowd. Following very harsh reactions to this idea, Col. Mordechai backed down and a short time later ordered the Kiryat Arba gates opened. Youth quickly went to work, and after a short while stone walls again surrounded the area of the destroyed Hazon David synagogue. A large contingent of security forces arrived at the scene and began systematically arresting various people present at the site. At about 10:00 pm, a compromise was reached between community leaders and the Colonel. It was announced that the demonstration was over, that people could go home, and that the rebuilt walls would be left alone and not destroyed. In the early hours of the morning a bulldozer arrived at the area and plowed down the walls. Later in the morning Col. Mordechai called Kiryat Arba mayor Tziv Katzover and 'apologized,' calling the destruction 'a mistake.' Youth from Hebron and Kiryat Arba began work immediately, to rebuild the fallen walls. Hebron Mayor Avraham Ben Yosef and Kiryat Arba Mayor Tzvi Katzover are presently attending an emergency meeting with the commander of forces in Judea and Samaria, Brigadier General Gadi Eizencott, concerning the deteriorating situation and continued clashes between security forces and civilians. Hebron spokesman David Wilder issued the following statement: Ariel Sharon has declared war on Eretz Yisrael and the Israeli citizens living in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Security forces are acting contrary to guidelines drawn up by former attorney general Eliyakim Rubenstein governing 'eviction' of citizens from 'illegal outposts or communities.' It is forbidden to utilize soldiers to evict civilians. That task must be undertaken only by police. This rule has been disregarded. It is forbidden for males to physically evict women. That task must be undertaken only by women. This rule has been disregarded. It is forbidden to arrest "passive' resistors of eviction. They may be removed from the site but not incarcerated. Only 'active' resisters may be arrested. However, at the Hazon David synagogue, as well as the Hebron Heroes neighborhood, virtually all of those arrested were 'passive.' In a special session of the Knesset Interior Committee yesterday, it was revealed that the newly-appointed attorney general, Menachem Mazuz overruled Rubenstein's guidelines, thereby allowing the security forces to use just about whatever measures are necessary in order to ensure 'success of the mission.' Knesset members on the committee, shocked at these revelations, have vowed to prevent soldiers from participating in evictions 'because of the deep disagreement within Israel concerning this issue.' Last night, during the eviction from, and destruction of several buildings at the Maon farm, seven people were arrested. A short time ago one of them told me, "we were taken to an army base and incarcerated. It reminded me of the POW camps we saw on TV that the Americans used for captured Iraqi prisoners. We were held in rooms without mattresses and weren't given food. When we were taken for questioning, our hands were cuffed behind our backs and we were physically dragged to an interrogation room. There were only seven of us, but it looked like they had prepared room for about 100 people. Remember, only a few weeks ago we heard that they are preparing 'detention camps for settlers.' We were told that we were arrested for violating an order issued by the commander of the Central Region, but the order was never shown to us. A few hours later we were unconditionally released." This is nothing less than a declaration of war. But we have no intentions of waving a white flag. Determination, love of Eretz Yisrael, hard work and prayer will defeat Ariel Sharon's plot to abandon Gush Katif and most of Judea and Samaria. Sharon may order continued destruction, but we will continue to build. Sharon may order continued evictions, but we will always return. Neither Sharon nor Bush, nor anyone else will ever be able to take the Land of Israel away from the Jewish people. We have a G-d-given right to our land, an inheritance which we will not forsake. 2. Rabbis visit Hebron Over the past few days, two important Rabbinic figures visited Hebron: Rabbi Dorfman, one of the elders and leaders of Breslev Hassidim in Israel, and the Rebbi from Sedegora. Both worshiped at Ma'arat HaMachpela and visited Hebron sites and residents. 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

SHMUEL KATZ ON SHARON; JAMES TARANTO ON RACHEL CORRIE Posted by Steven Plaut, April 15, 2004.

1. "Sharon Is Either Drugged Or Off His Rails - An Interview With Zionist Pioneer Shmuel Katz", 4/14/2004, by Avraham Shmuel Lewin, Jewish Press Israel Correspondent. (http://jewishpress.com/news_article_print.asp?article=3615) TEL AVIV: Born in South Africa, Shmuel Katz immigrated to Israel in 1936 and became one of the most active members of the Irgun underground. Together with Menachem Begin he founded the Herut party and served in the first Knesset. In 1951 he retired from political life. After Begin became prime minister in 1977, he asked Katz to become his adviser on information (propaganda). Following Begin's signing of the Camp David accords, Katz left the government and never spoke to Begin again. A brilliant biographer and essayist, Katz has written several books (including the definitive biography of Revisionist Zionist leader Zev Jabotinsky) and various political articles published in a variety of newspapers. Katz turned 89 recently, and although he suffered a stroke and had been confined to a wheelchair, he is back on his feet again. The Jewish Press: You left the Begin government because of the Camp David accords. Looking back after all these years, there has been no fighting on the Egyptian border since then and, as people say, a cold peace is better than a hot war. Do you still feel the Camp David accords were so bad? Katz: There was no threat of war with the Egyptians at that time. Egypt was not capable of forcing a war on us then and there were no preparations for that - they might have used terror but thats all. Do you give away a territory like all of Sinai after we had been attacked from Sinai three times? The people who at that time believed in Eretz Yisrael Hashleima were attacked by the opposition and by Begin supporters as well. They claimed that Sinai was never part of Eretz Yisrael. That is true, it wasn't part of Israel before, but we were attacked from there. Also, the Sinai was never officially Egyptian territory either. Egypt only had an administrative role in Sinai. People don't remember that England and Turkey in 1905 made it a dependency of Britain, although Egypt had the role of running the show. They never did anything there. If a Beduin who lived in Sinai wanted to go to Egypt, he had to get a visa. So there was no problem of taking away anybody's land, and they had attacked us, so there is no reason to give it back. I, at any rate, never trusted the Egyptians from the point of view of war. In addition to the peace treaty there were, I think, some 38 sub-treaties on all kinds of subjects like trade and refraining from propaganda. Not one of them was kept by Egypt. Egypt has caused us more harm than any other country except for Saudi Arabia. They are both experts in anti-Israel propaganda. The Egyptians are against us every time in the UN, and we have no friendly relations with them. As I said, Egypt wasn't able to go to war with us then, so why should we have given them the Sinai? Also at that time there was a very important strategic reason for Israel to remain on the banks of the Suez Canal. This was at the time when there was a cold war with the Soviet Union. The Soviets were supporting North Vietnam against the United States, and using the canal for its own purposes. So for national reasons and also because we should have done what any other country would do in such a case, it was imperative for us to hold on to the territory for which we our childrens blood was shed three times. And it didn't belong to Egypt in the first place. They didn't have a sense of sovereignty over Sinai. Q: Did you ever meet with Begin after you left him? No, not even once. Q: In all those years it didn't occur that you should happen to meet together at some kind of function or event? No. You see, I never spoke about it, but what happened between Begin and me was a case of insulting behavior on his part. He didn't mean to be insulting but he wanted to create a barrier between us. He had made a commitment, not only to me but to the nation at large, to deal with the hasbara (public relations) problem. Now, you know what the hasbara problem is - it still exists today, much worse than it was. Begin wanted to appoint me as a minister primarily because he had learned from me some of the proportions of the hasbara problem that I had picked up from my visits to America. When he was elected he was bitterly attacked in the U.S. and elsewhere. He was denounced as a hooligan. Everything that the Left in Israel had been saying about Begin all those years then appeared in the American press. There was a panic among the Jews in America - this is what I was told when I got there people asked how we could support a Jewish state that has such a lowlife for a prime minister. Time magazine at that time used a very nasty line about Begin - Begin (rhymes with Fagin). That was approximately the level on which he was attacked. All the dirt that Israeli leftists had thrown at Begin all the years was now being highlighted. Q: Would you say that Israel's problems today are rooted in Begin's decisions at Camp David? Well, the Arabs learned that the Jews are prepared to give up territory that they won and for which they lost lives. When Anwar Sadat came to Jerusalem and spoke in the Knesset, he spoke of Palestine which belongs to us. He didn't speak only about his agreement with Begin. He spoke about the land of Palestine. The Arabs would never give up an inch of territory if they could possibly prevent it, and here were the Jews giving up a lot of strategic area all for nothing. The other agreements of trade and peaceful relations don't mean anything to them. I think that ever since then, the Arabs say, 'Why can't Assad get what Sadat got?' The land for peace formula that Israel itself introduced immediately after the Six-Day War has become so embedded in the mindset of Israelis on both the Left and the Right as well as in much of the rest of the world. Do you see any way there could be a change in this mindset say, replacing land for peace with peace for peace? I don't see it unless you keep on saying it. The trouble is that so many Jews also say land for peace. Our politicians never resisted it, except for Golda Meir. Golda attacked it when she was asked what she would give for peace? She responded, What do you mean, what I would give for peace? I would give peace! Why should I give more than peace for peace? Is my peace cheaper than any other peace? Q: But wasn't it her government that created this whole idea of trading land for peace? I think she disagreed with her colleagues on that. In any event, when she was asked that question directly, that is what she answered. Q: When the Likud was formed, did you express any opposition to the party's embrace of Ariel Sharon, who up to that point had been a Laborite? And do his actions now surprise you? I was never asked about taking in Sharon. What's happened to him now I don't know. He is a great opportunist. When he joined the Likud it didn't surprise me because I was accustomed to quite a lot of people not only joining a party but actually changing their views. When I came in to the Greater Land of Israel movement, I found all the Mapainiks there, like Natan Alterman, Moshe Shamir, etc. I had problems with my colleagues in Herut who said, 'Who are all these people?' I responded, 'Isn't that what Jabotinsky wanted?' So when Sharon came in, it didn't surprise me. But the fact is that he has now made a complete turnaround. It's very complicated. He acts these days in a strange fashion, as if he is drugged. Look, just now when he is about to go to the U.S. to deal with the disengagement plan, he suddenly comes out with an idea that he wants to bring an aliyah of a million [laughing]. Anyone who deals with the aliyah situation knows that it is a very difficult problem. People are not coming in the masses like they did once upon a time. So simply to talk about a million people in 5 years is ludicrous. It is obvious from the way he said it that he hadn't sat down with statisticians and psychologists or gathered information from various countries to see whether there could be an aliyah of a million people. So I think there is something wrong with him. After all, he is not a fool. I think he is a little bit off the rails. I just can't understand him. Take the road map peace proposal. I read it. The road map in total is a very bad thing for us, even though it starts off with the requirement of stopping terror. Now, stopping terror is no small feat. I don't know whether Sharon accepted the plan as is, but when he saw that his cabinet didn't want to accept it, he introduced 14 reservations. He then presented to the U.S his reservations and was told that we shall give due attention during implementation to these reservations. That means you have to first start implementing, and then theyll think about our reservations. But then Colin Powell said there would be no changes in the road map. At that point the Israeli government should have said an emphatic no. Later on Sharon was still speaking of his commitment to the road map. And I didn't see the cabinet making any effort to put a stop to it. So as far as Sharon is concerned, he seems to be in a kind of trance. Q: What is your response to Labor's claim that holding on to all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza would mean controlling millions of Arabs and would cause Israel tremendous problems and in time would erase the Jewish character of the state? It is a question which isn't easy to answer because the facts are very difficult. But the answer should be some action on our part. First of all, we need to encourage a large immigration and encourage a higher birthrate in Israel, just as France did after World War I. There are other ideas which I myself have been thinking about, and I'm sure other people are giving the matter a great deal of thought as well. But generally speaking, I think that instead of simply crying about what might happen, we should do our part in working for a more positive future. Q: Is there still a Likud in your opinion? I would say the party should take down Jabotinsky's picture from the wall in Likud headquarters and at least relieve him of the pain as he watches what they're doing. Of course, the Likud has disappeared in any meaningful form. I don't even know what kind of a party it is. It has lost all signs of any ideology at all. I can't find anywhere any identifying sign of any connection to the historical Likud or Herut parties. 2. James Taranto from the Wall St Journal (http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004826) writes: Rachel Corrie and the Boy Bomb: A year ago today, terror advocate Rachel Corrie of Olympia, Wash., died in a bulldozer accident while trying to obstruct an Israeli operation against Palestinian weapons-smuggling tunnels. Corrie didn't deserve to die any more than any other accident victim does, but neither does she deserve to be lionized as a martyr for peace - as she is, predictably, in her home state's two big papers, the Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer ("Intelligent as a post!"). In contrast, Ruhama Shattan has a clearheaded tribute to Corrie, which our friends at the Jerusalem Post generously allowed us to reprint. Here's a sample of the Post-Intelligencer's tribute, written by one Molly McClain, who works for an outfit called the Palestine Solidarity Committee: "Some people blamed Rachel, a student at Evergreen State College, for her own murder; they accused her of everything from being an impressionable, idealistic kid who had been brainwashed to a defender of terrorists. "It is hard to imagine what life is like for people in Palestine, and I cling to the hope that it is this lack of imagination that leads so many to believe that all Palestinians are terrorists or that Rachel was either brainless or evil." Well, a picture is worth a thousand words, so check out the photo of Corrie burning the American flag a month before her death. A look of utter hatred is on her face, as a crowd of Palestinian children look on. Here's an example of what this culture of hate produces: "Fatah Tanzim activists in Nablus attempted to use an 11-year-old boy to smuggle a bomb through an IDF roadblock on Monday, and tried to detonate the bomb when soldiers stopped him," the Jerusalem Post reports: "The men gave the boy a bag containing a seven-to-10 kilogram bomb stuffed with bolts. They promised him a large sum of money if he would carry it through the roadblock and hand it to a woman waiting on the other side. "Israeli soldiers rescued the boy, whom Yasser Arafat's men were preparing to murder. Ha'aretz, meanwhile, reports that Arafat yesterday "refused his cabinet's call to use the Palestinian security forces against terror organizations." Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994. And, and as we noted at the time, Corrie's parents met with Arafat last September and presented him with a picture of their daughter. Martyr for peace indeed. 3. "Dear Professor, I do Not Believe You" http://jewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=3619 by Steven Plaut. You claim that it is unfair of people to accuse you of being anti-Israel, and all the more so of being an anti-Semite. You say you are merely endorsing the positions of some Israeli leftists, and you name Uri Avnery and Shulamit Aloni. You say you endorse a complete withdrawal of Israel to its 1967 borders, removal of all settlements, and creation of a Palestinian state with half of Jerusalem as its capital because you love Israel and want it to live in peace. I do not believe you. I do not believe that you love Israel. I do not believe that you desire Israel to survive and live in peace. I do not believe that you believe that your prescription will bring peace. Suppose someone a non-American would announce that he is not anti-American, but he merely endorses the political positions of people like Noam Chomsky and Louis Farrakhan. Suppose he insists he is in fact pro-American, just pro-positions of "dissident" America. Of course, such a claim would be ludicrous. Such a person would be supporting people driven by hatred of America. Such people`s "ideology" is nothing more than anti-Americanism, and foreigners supporting such people would in effect be admitting that they themselves are anti-American and wish America harm. Your support of Uri Avnery and Shulamit Aloni is exactly the same thing. Israel`s leftist extremists are motivated by anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism in exactly the same way that the extremist campus Left in America is motivated by hatred of America. Moreover, your own positions unmask your pretended love for Israel. When you support sanctions against Israel and against Israeli academics because you disapprove of Israeli government policy, you are revealing your hostility to the existence of the country, not to this or that policy. You are not trying to influence Israel`s decision-making, you are delegitimizing all of Israel and exhibiting a desire to see Israel destroyed. When you encourage those who are organizing mutiny and insubordination in Israel`s army, you are showing that you wish Israel to be destroyed. You are also showing your fundamentally anti-democratic proclivities. If Israel`s leftists wish to try to persuade the rest of the country of the correctness of their ideas, they are free to do so. But such mutiny is anti-democratic and designed to divide and paralyze Israel`s military and prevent Israel from making decisions about its own self-defense in a democratic manner. But your position is even more untenable. At least Israel`s extremists will bear part of the costs of the foolish policies they advocate if such policies are adopted by their country. They have already borne parts of the costs of the Oslo debacle and they are at risk every time they go outside their homes, thanks to their own policies having been pursued. You bear none of those costs or risks. You are seated on your comfortable suburban sofa over there and spouting advice. And if your advice turns out to be harmful, you can just sit back, say ooops, and switch the channel. But there are other reasons why I do not believe your protestations of affection for Israel. Israel has already applied your philosophy and your approach. It already turned most of the West Bank and Gaza over to the PLO, agreed to the establishment of a PLO state, offered the PLO parts of Jerusalem, and at Camp David Ehud Barak offered the PLO its entire wish list: partial "return" of Palestinian "refugees," the Old City of Jerusalem with the Western Wall, virtually all of the West Bank and parts of pre-1967 Israel. You know the result perfectly well. For the past ten years, every single step Israel has taken to implement your philosophy and your vision of peace has produced escalated violence and bloodshed. You have had more than ample empirical proof that your approach is simply incorrect. Israel`s goodwill gestures and flexibility have produced Arab atrocities, not reductions in Arab hatred and violence. Israeli moderation always produces Arab aggression. Israeli niceness is interpreted by the Arabs as weakness and destructibility. This is not a matter of "ideological disagreement" but of empirical proof. The fact that you still advocate endless Israeli submission to Arab demands can be interpreted in one of two ways. Either you are too stupid to acknowledge the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of empirical proofs demonstrating that your approach to settling the Arab-Israeli conflict is incorrect, or you in fact understand perfectly well that your approach is really designed to produce the destruction of Israel. I happen to believe the second explanation for your behavior is the correct one. You continue to oppose all forms of Israeli self-defense short of capitulation, since you are willing to allow Israel nothing short of its complete submission to the Arab world`s dictates. You would have Israel place its neck in a noose and trust the Arabs not to pull the rope. And that is why I do not believe that you are simply disagreeing and supporting Uri Avnery and his ilk; that you do so because you have a dissident understanding of what Israel`s real needs are; or that you are acting out of true affection for Israel. I do not agree that you are a real Jewish patriot. I think you are a Jewish Taliban John, a Jewish Uncle Tom. I think you really want Israel weakened and even destroyed because it would permit you to posture and feel righteous; it would allow you to save face and avoid embarrassment when youre hanging out with your leftist friends. Steven Plaut is a professor at Haifa University. His book "The Scout" is available at Amazon.com. He can be reached at steven_plaut@yahoo.com. To Go To Top

FROM BUSH TO FEIGLIN Posted by Manhigut Press, April 15, 2004.

Here was the headline in the Maariv newspaper from this past Tuesday: (April 13th): "From Bush to Feiglin" The sub-headline read as follows: "The semifinals have begun; It's Sharon and Bush vs the Feiglinites" With headlines like that, is there any wonder why Manhigut Yehudit is the fastest growing grass-roots organization in Israel today? We have CORRECTLY identified the "playing field": The Likud We have CORRECTLY identified the root of the problem: The lack of authentic Jewish Leadership We have CONSISTENTLY offered the ONLY solution: Moshe Feiglin and the Manhigut Yehudit movement Read what we have to say. Take some time and review our platform. Let us hear your comments. Our website (in Hebrew, English and Russian) is: www.manhigut.org Our co-founder and International Director, Shmuel Sackett, is currently in the USA. He is available to speak in your area. Please REPLY if interested in making this a reality. Moshe Feiglin was a cofounder of Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Feiglin has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

THE BUSH LETTER: SPINNING A DISASTER FOR ISRAEL Posted by Gail Winston, April 15, 2004.

This was written by David Bedein, Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. Israeli government radio and TV offered an instant analysis that Sharon had made a major accomplishment following his meeting with President Bush. In the four hours before the Bush memo to Sharon was issued for the press and public to read and peruse, Israel government airwaves featured tens of commentators who lauded what they surmised was a formal Bush commitment to endorse some Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), and that President Bush had committed the U.S. to abandon support for the "right of return" for Palestinian Arab refugees to go back to live inside Israel's 1948 borders. This followed a build-up by Israeli government radio and TV commentators who boasted that ,indeed, the President of the United States would use the full weight of his office to help Israel in its time of need. The PLO public relations people reacted according to script, and denounced the results of the Sharon-Bush meeting as a sell-out by the Americans. PLO spokespeople appeared on CNN, BBC, Sky news and every other TV outlet possible to make their protestations heard. And the more the PLO attacked the Sharon-Bush meeting, the more the Israeli new commentators affirmed that, yes, Sharon must have made a valuable achievement with his friend, George W. Bush, because the PLO was so angry. It would seem that Sharon's new spin masters were hard at work to make Sharon look like a hero. All that was BEFORE anyone released the Bush memo to Sharon. And anyone who reads the memo will understand that Sharon accomplished nothing new in the US-Israeli relationship. In fact, he may have hurt Israel tremendously. Bush's letter does note that Israel may now wish to "further develop the Galilee and the Negev", yet without offering any assistance to help Israel resettle anyone there. Meanwhile, Bush's letter made it quite clear that the U.S. will accept none of the fourteen Israeli reservations, such as a guaranteed end to terrorism, so vital to Israel's survival, a proviso the Israeli government had conditioned for its acceptance of the road map. The letter explicitly stated that "The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan." Surprisingly, Bush's letter also does not reject the "right of return" of Arab refugees to the sovereign state of Israel. [Emphasis mine. - GW] Instead, the U.S. simply encourages Palestinian Arab refugees to settle in a future Palestinian state, "rather than Israel". [The PLO and all the Arafat-led terror groups plan for their Palestinian State to cover ALL of Israel with ALL of Jerusalem as its capital. See their maps. - GW] Bush could have said "only" in a Palestinian state. He did not. All this occurs exactly at a time when the US has added $26 million to its allocation for UNRWA, which operates UN refugee camps that run intense educational programs that mandate the "right of return" to homes and villages from 1948, inside Israel, effectively calling for Israel being dismantled. What the Bush letter does say explicitly is that Israel would be able to deal with "regarding control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages" only after Israeli withdrawals take place. And for whatever reason, the Bush letter surmises that the U.S., working with Jordan and Egypt, will build "Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations," despite ten years in which the PLO has done nothing of the kind. While the Bush letter empowers the PLO to fight terrorism, as Clinton did eleven years ago, the Palestinians have consistently refused to do so even up to now. In other words, the Bush administration is reenacting the 1993 Clinton-Rabin-Peres formula of arming the PLO to fight terror, even though all Palestinian fighting factions are today united and coordinated under one command under Yasser Arafat, even Hamas. It is as if the Bush letter does not take into account what has transpired over the past ten years and the trail of dead Israelis and Arabs that was wrought. Were it not for the Israeli and PLO spin masters, Jews and Arabs in Israel would read the text of the Bush letter to Sharon and know the truth. Instead, in the hours after the Bush-Sharon press conference, the PLO is bitterly criticizing and attacking the Bush Sharon meeting. And as Sharon returns to Israel to pushing his unilateral retreat while under scathing attack of the misinformed PLO, he finds a way to convince his Likud party's membership to support his plan and policy. After all, Sharon's people are saying, if the PLO is attacking Sharon, he must be doing something right. The reality, however, has not changed. Sharon seeks support to conduct the unilateral retreat and eradication of 21 prosperous Israeli farming communities in the Katif district of the Gaza Strip, an action the PLO and Hamas will later laud as a victory as a step to take all of Israel. Meanwhile, Sharon can now obfuscate his retreat policy by showing how the PLO attacks Sharon as an aggressor, not another Neville Chamberlain leading the world to more strife. April 14, 2004 His Excellency Ariel Sharon Prime Minister of Israel Dear Mr. Prime Minister: Thank you for your letter setting out your disengagement plan. The United States remains hopeful and determined to find a way forward toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states living side by side in peace and security as the key to peace, and to the roadmap as the route to get there. We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank. These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution towards peace. We also understand that, in this context, Israel believes it is important to bring new opportunities to the Negev and the Galilee [AT ISRAEL'S EXPENSE - GW]. We are hopeful that steps pursuant to this plan, consistent with my vision, will remind all states and parties of their own obligations under the roadmap. The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents. I therefore want to reassure you on several points. First, the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan. [NO ALLOWANCE FOR ANY RESERVATIONS - GW]. Under the roadmap, [WHAT THE PLO WON'T DO - GW]: Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. [WHAT THE PLO WON'T DO - GW]: The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. [WHAT THE PLO AGAIN WON'T DO - GW]: Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister. Second, [WHAT THE PLO WON'T DO - GW] there will be no security for Israelis or Palestinians until they and all states, in the region and beyond, join together to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations. The United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and strengthen Israel's capability to deter and defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats. Third, Israel will retain its right to defend itself against terrorism, including taking actions against terrorist organizations. The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means. The United States understands that after [WHAT'S THIS MEAN "AFTER" - GW]: Israel withdraws from Gaza and/or parts of the West Bank, and pending agreements on other arrangements, existing arrangements regarding control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages of the West Bank and Gaza will continue. The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel. [NO EXCLUSIVE DIRECTION OF REFUGEES - GS]... As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, 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 all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities. I know that, as you state in your letter, you are aware that certain responsibilities face the State of Israel. Among these, your government has stated that the barrier being erected by Israel should be a security rather than political barrier, should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues including final borders, and its route should take into account, consistent with security needs, its impact on Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities. As you know, the United States supports the establishment of a Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent, so that the Palestinian people can build their own future in accordance with my vision set forth in June 2002 and with the path set forth in the roadmap. The United States will join with others in the international community to foster the development of democratic political institutions and new leadership committed to those institutions, the reconstruction of civic institutions, the growth of a free and prosperous economy, and the building of capable security institutions dedicated to maintaining law and order and dismantling terrorist organizations. A peace settlement negotiated between Israelis and Palestinians would be a great boon not only to those peoples but to the peoples of the entire region. Accordingly, the United States believes that all states in the region have special responsibilities: to support the building of the institutions of a Palestinian state; to fight terrorism, and cut off all forms of assistance to individuals and groups engaged in terrorism; and to begin now to move toward more normal relations with the State of Israel. These actions would be true contributions to building peace in the region. Mr. Prime Minister, you have described a bold and historic initiative that can make an important contribution to peace. I commend your efforts and your courageous decision which I support. As a close friend and ally, the United States intends to work closely with you to help make it a success. Sincerely, George W. Bush Gail Winston is founder of MEIR (Mid East Information Resource). To Go To Top

MOBILIZE FOR THE REFERENDUM Posted by Professors For A Strong Israel, April 14, 2004.

STATEMENT TO THE PRESS From: Benjamin Svetitsky bqs@julian.tau.ac.il The price that Prime Minister Sharon managed to extract from President Bush consists of a minute quantity of security - a recycled recognition of Israel's right to self-defense - in exchange for a substantial retreat from national territory and from basic values of Zionism. Professors for a Strong Israel sees this as a total failure of Sharon's policy of running away from responsibility. This policy was nothing more than the old Labor idea of trading land for terror, marketed through bypassing the democratic institutions of the State and of the Likud. In view of the collapse of his position, we call on the Prime Minister to resign before any referendum is held. The baton must now be passed to a leader who is untainted by defeatism, who will recognize the current state of affairs for the war that it is, who will direct that war correctly, and who will be guided by the basic principles of democratic and honest government. The country must be ruled by democracy, not by transatlantic lobbying. Dr. Ron Breiman, Chairman of PSI Tel 050-518.940 PARTICIPATE IN THESE ACTIVITIES (a) From: Freddy and Donna Moncharsh, einkerem@barak-online.net Anyone interested in making phone calls (about 30-50) to current Likud members in Jerusalem in order to see where they stand as far as Sharon's Plan in concerned, is requested to email me at einkerem@bezeqint.net - Fred Moncharsh (b) WANTED: LIKUD MEMBERS TO BE LOCAL "CONTACT PERSON." If you are a Likud member, and your name can appear on the national list as a contact person against hitnakut in your area, please send name, address, telephone number to Susie Dym - sddym@bezeqint.net As a "contact person", you are ready to spend at least a few hours of election day May 2 from 10 AM to midnight sitting at a table outside the kalfi, and to have your name and telephone number on the national list (which will be given to moetzet yesha, moatza ezorit gush katif etc) as somebody to whom they can send stickers, etc., and somebody who volunteers to get jobs done. (c) FROM HEBRON: hebron@hebron.org.il If you read Hebrew, go to www.likud.co.il. On the bottom left corner is a box. The first item is "moadon haverim." After clicking on this you will find a link to "snifei halikud." Here you will find addresses and phone numbers of all the Likud chapters in Israel. Write to them, call them, let them know what YOU think. We will try to post such a list in English, together with a list of all voting Likud members who are eligible to vote on May 2. Your voices must be heard - the Likud must know how important this issue is to ALL OF US - WHEREVER WE ARE! (d) Visit the website http://www.mate.321.cn/ * Ask shwartzy@shwartzy.co.il for an Excel file of the Likud voters in your area. Divide it into chunks with 200 names each. Ask a few friends to call them and the Likud members: * Ask each of the latter: "Can we count on you to help us by coming to vote against nesiga (retreat) from Gush Katif?" (e) LECTURERS NEEDED. Please contact gadi.eshel@ptk.co.il or 04-953.3135; 054-497.477 (f) HALUFAH MANPOWER RECRUTING AND PLACEMENT: From: postmaster@manhigut.org Michael Fuah 064-202884, Tel-Aviv 03-537.3972, Rishon Le'Zion 03-9699.155, Ariel 03-906.0053, K'far Saba 09-766.7501, Ashkelon 08-675.8850, Ramlah 08-925.4797, Netanyah 09-8333.644 (g) From: Susie Dym (Mattot Arim), sddym@bezeqint.net Call, ASAP, Minister Israel Katz's office 03-948.5800, Fax 03-948.5835, sar@moag.gov.il Give your details, and express your readiness to volunteeringly help! (h) From: Adi Ginsburg y_hillel@bezeqint.net http://www.jewsite.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2694 (i) From: Noki noki@netvision.net.il Sign the Petition http://www.katif.net/altakor Tuesday, Erev Rosh Chodesh Iyar, April 20, 2004. (a) CIRCLING THE GATES IN YERUSHALAYIM From: gross shay dr-gross@actcom.co.il ASSEMBLING AT THE KOTEL AT 19:00 CHARTERED BUS TRANSPORTATION FROM ALL PARTS OF ERETZ YISRAEL AT 50 NIS PER PERSON ROUND-TRIP. DISCOUNTS FOR FAMILIES DETAILS AND REGISTRATION: 04-823.0005 BUS STOPS: HATZOR (13:00), TZFAT, MERON, TZEMACH JUNCTION, BEIT SHEAN, MA'ALOT, NAHARIYA, ACCO (13:55), KIRAYOT, HAIFA (14:25), ZICHRON, HADERA, NETANYA, HERZYLIA (15:45), TEL-AVIV LEAVING YERUSHALAYIM FOR RETURN TRIP AT ABOUT 21:00 [Editor's Note: Lists of Knesset Members and their email addresses are available in these Think-Israel Blog-Eds: Bernstein and Wilder All members of the Knesset are listed at www.knesset.gov.il American Jews can contact their organizations and ask why they are not strongly speaking out for retaining biblical Israel. Retreat is not the way to peace - except, maybe, the peace of the grave.] To Go To Top

WE NEED AMERICAN JEWS TO HELP Posted by Susie Dym, April 14, 2004.

I feel it is a great pity, to put it mildly, that the pro-Israel organizations in the United States are not loudly and publicly for the record protesting (a.) the present Israeli government making plans to give up Biblical Israel, without the consent of the Jewish people. (b.) using Pres. Bush's name as collateral for its misguided policy. Pro-Israel organizations need to publicly insist that President Bush set the record straight for Likud voters here. This is a plan that has never been presented to the Israeli cabinet. For the American president to trample, sidestep or muzzle the Israeli political system speaks ill of America's claimed loyalty to the principle of democracy - and it will undermine America's worldwide struggle due to a blatant lack of integrity. And if President Bush has been honorable and not encouraged Israel's proposed expulsion of her own people from their homes, we need to know it, so Sharon can not deceitfully claim Bush actively backs him or is prodding him into a suicidal retreat. If your organization or you personally has done anything or intends to do anything along the above lines, could you please let me have a copy to distribute here. Thank you. Susie Dym 972 8 9471273 sddym@bezeqint.net To Go To Top

IT'S IRAN, STUPID. Posted by Morris J. Amitay, April 14, 2004.

During the 1992 Presidential Campaign the defining issue was succinctly identified as "it's the economy, stupid". In the current race for the White House the case can be made that it should be "it's Iran, stupid". Not Iraq - but Iran. This is because it has become increasingly evident that the Iranian regime is a major force behind the Shiite uprising and the influx of foreign terrorists battling coalition forces. And thus, it could be argued that the road to Baghdad goes through Tehran. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps press office recently warned "A fate more horrifying than Vietnam awaits America in the morass of Iraq." And Iran is actively involved in turning this dire prediction into bloody reality. The terror masters in Tehran are undoubtedly hoping that the "morass" becomes relevant to American voters before our November elections in order to influence the outcome. Predictably, a State Department official reacted to the multiple reports of Iranian involvement by asserting there was no "hard evidence". But not everyone in Washington chose to overlook the obvious. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in his usual direct manner has had no compunctions about fingering the Iranian role. "We know the Iranians have been meddling," he told reporters last week, as reported in Time magazine. This assertion was echoed by Gen. John Abizaid, the head of the U.S. Central Command who cited "signs of Iran's involvement" in the Al-Sadr-led Shiite uprisings in the south, and in an understatement also noted Iran's "unhelpful actions" in Iraq. Reports in the Arabic press (courtesy of MEMRI) offered details of Iran's role in the attacks initiated by Moqtada Al-Sadr and his Shiite followers. According to the London-based Arabic daily Al Hayat: The direct Iranian presence in the Shi'ite areas of Iraq in the political, security, and economic affairs can not be ignored anymore. This presence is accompanied by a vigorous Iranian effort to create bridges with different forces in Iraq; first, by material and logistic aid to parties other than the Shi'a, and secondly through the traditional Iranian influence in the religious seminaries and in the [religious Shi'a authorities'] institutions. Al Hayat went on to name the recently appointed chief Iranian agent in Iraq, an officer in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and reported that Al-Sadr had met in Iran with Hafshemi Rafsanjani, head of the powerful Expediency Council, and with the head of Revolutionary Guard intelligence. You can bet they weren't meeting in order to swap their favorite verses from the Koran. Another Arabic newspaper, Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, interviewed the former Iranian intelligence official in charge of activities in Iraq who had recently defected. He told the paper that the infiltration into Iraq started long before the U.S. assault and was not limited to Shiite areas. He described the Iranian operations in detail and stated that the ultimate goal was "to turn Iraq into another Iran." In addition, there has been the increasing presence in Iraq of the Iranian Hizbollah, and Iran's permitting Ansar-al-Islam, a terrorist group linked to al-Qaeda, to cross into Iraq. In the face of this undeniable challenge from Iran, what are we doing about it? So far, it looks like not enough, as we are apparently turning to negotiations to give al-Sadr a graceful exit. Such a solution sends an entirely wrong message in a region where the name of the game is to wind up on the winning side - not necessarily the more righteous one. Attempts to negotiate with a weaker enemy will only bring a temporary end to the violence, and will be interpreted as American weakness. What is even more disturbing were reports that we have enlisted Iranian Government assistance to calm things down. Iranian Foreign Minister Kharazi was quoted earlier this week stating, "Naturally, there was a request for our help in improving the situation in Iraq and solving the crisis, and we are making efforts in this regard." This is really scary. By now Iranian duplicity and deviousness is so basic, it boggles the mind why any U.S. policy-makers are still willing to play the role of Charlie Brown, with an Iranian Lucy holding the football! Instead of counting on the mullahs to bail us out, we must make Iran pay a price for its destructive role. One relatively painless way of putting pressure on Khomenei and company in Tehran is to exploit the growing discontent with the regime emanating from Iran's young and restive population. An entire generation is chafing under the onerous restrictions of the mullahcracy and is eager for regime change and contact with the outside world. While numerous private radio stations here in the U.S. provide entertainment, music, news reports and call-in shows in Iran, signal strength and program content varies widely. The VOA's Persian service produces a highly successful television program, News and Views. But because of budget constraints, it only broadcasts one half hour daily. For several million dollars more, it could provide viewers with much more news and programs on human rights, women's issues, and in depth analyses of what is happening in Iran. This would help galvanize opposition to the regime and make it concentrate on growing internal dissension instead of exporting terrorism. Or, if we really wanted to show we were serious, it has even been suggested "unleashing" the anti-clerical MEK forces (now under US control in Iraq) to attack targets in Iran as they had done under Saddam. Although using an organization on our own terrorist list to fight other terrorists might not go down well, it could yet serve as another form of pressure. Simply put, what is needed now is a consistent, focused effort to put the screws on Iran. It would hasten the reconstruction of Iraq, send the right signal in the region, and save American lives. In dealing with Iran we must first abandon the wishful thinking of "engagement", recognize the nature of our enemies, and acknowledge the role of Islamic extremism. If the President states the truth about Iran and acts accordingly, the American people will give its support. But if we do not act, we will all be in deep, deep trouble. Morrie Amitay is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com). To Go To Top

WAITING FOR THE BUSH LETTER Posted by Bryna Berch, April 14, 2004.

This was a news item in today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) today. 1. WAITING FOR THE BUSH LETTER Tensions amidst the Israeli delegation in Washington are high, in anticipation of the letter that U.S. President George Bush will supply to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon this evening. The negotiations over the precise contents continue even at this very hour, as the American and Israeli teams seek a formulation that will not anger the Arabs, endanger Bush's electoral chances, or leave Sharon high and dry in his quest for popular support from his Likud party in the upcoming referendum. It is currently assumed that the letter will state that the U.S. "assumes" that Arab refugees from 1948 will "return" to areas under Palestinian Authority control - as opposed to pre-1967 Israel - and that the U.S. further "assumes" that the Green Line will not mark the final border, in accordance with "demographic changes" - i.e., the Jewish settlements - that have taken place. However, the letter will say nothing about the "settleme! nt blo cs" that Sharon wishes to include. The question that remains to be answered, after the letter is finally publicized, is how it will affect the Likud ministers and voting public. Will Netanyahu and others accept it as having fulfilled their minimum conditions enabling them to approve the disengagement plan, or will they see the letter as mere verbiage without sufficient guarantees that the unilateral withdrawal will not merely lead to more terrorism and international pressure? And how will the Likud membership react in the upcoming referendum on the withdrawal plan? Dr. Ita Bick, a Political Science lecturer in the Judea and Samaria College in Ariel and an expert on American-Israeli relations, told Arutz-7 today that the purpose of the letter is "to strengthen Sharon's standing in the Israeli public. It does not reflect any great change in American policy over the years. It could be that today's timing, as well as the clear expression of support for little changes in the borders, will strengthen Sharon's standing. But this is not really new; the U.S. said in Camp David in 1999 that it would recognize such changes..." Asked if she thinks, in diplomatic terms, that such a letter is of equal value to the withdrawal that Sharon wishes to execute, Dr. Bick responded, "Actually, no. I don't think that a vague letter that somewhat satisfies all the sides, but does not even obligate the Palestinians, is of sufficient value for us to withdraw from Gaza." 2. HOUSE-TO-HOUSE TO LIKUD PARTY MEMBERS "As a member of the Likud Party, you have the privilege of deciding the fate of the lives of my family and of my home. Please give me five minutes to talk with you before you decide." So will say thousands of Gush Katif and other Yesha residents when they visit the homes of many of the 200,000 Likud Party members in the coming weeks. The goal: to educate them as to the dangers of the unilateral withdrawal so that they will vote against it in the referendum on May 2. The Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) Council has embarked on its campaign entitled "Achim Lo Mitnatkim - Brothers Don't Separate" - a Hebrew play on the word used for "disengagement." The centerpiece of the program features home visits by Yesha volunteers to Likud members all around the country. "It's important to talk candidly, not condescendingly, and to turn 'to their hearts' in order to persuade them," state the Yesha Council instructions. "We must emphasize the positive aspects of Gush Katif and the settlement enterprise." The instructions assume that an approval of the withdrawal plan will lead to the formation of a left-wing secular government, with Labor replacing the National Religious Party and the National Union. The dangers of this are great, the visitors are instructed to say: "The plan as it currently stands will certainly undergo changes, and if it is approved, then the changes will largely be determined with the Labor Party at the center of the decision-making process. Fact: Operation Defensive Shield would not have been undertaken without right-wing ministers in the government. Fact: With Labor in the government, we would not have killed Sheikh Yassin. Fact: With the left-wing in the government, terrorism will once again go wild." Other sound-bites recommended for use: "The Likud says: Were against retreat without peace, and against surrender to the Hamas, and against a return to a government with the left-wing. The detachment plan! will bring the left-wing back to power." To Go To Top

PRESENTING A NEW VISION OF PEACE Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, April 14, 2004.

The Unity Coalition for Israel endorses the following 3-D Vision of Peace. This plan was developed at the First International Jerusalem Summit held in October, 2003. The conference was co-sponsored by the Municipality of Jerusalem, the Israel Ministry of Tourism, the Unity Coalition for Israel and the Michael Cherney Foundation. The 3-D Vision of Peace presents a viable response to unilateral retreat from Gaza, Judea and Samaria, which would set a dangerous precedent of surrendering to terrorism. Evacuating territory and displacing 8,000 Israeli Jewish citizens from Gaza, would begin a "vicious cycle" - inviting more and more terror to gain more territory. Additionally, Americans may be expected to pick up the cost, in the billions, to resettle the displaced population. Taxpayers in the U.S. would resent the expenditure of their funds and those who receive it. Instead of retreating, let's look carefully at the 3-D Vision of Peace put forth by the International Jerusalem Summit. A 3-D VISION OF PEACE: AN ALTERNATIVE TO UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL FROM GAZA, JUDEA AND SAMARIA Demilitarization of the Palestinian Authority. Co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians requires dismantling of all terror groups and the disarming of all the "security services of the PA," which are, in effect, legalized terror groups. These groups were armed under the Oslo Accords to fight the terror of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aksa Brigades, Tanzim, Fatah, etc. Instead they use their weapons, supplied by Israel, for terror attacks, and to support criminal activities, rape and suppression of political opposition. Democracy for Palestinians. An open-ended transitional period for building a basis for democracy is mandatory. During this time the education and propaganda systems of the Palestinian Authority (PA) should undergo de-jihadization similar to de-nazification of the post-WWII Germany, as a prerequisite for building genuine peace in the region. This is required because Israel faces the Palestinian Authority (PA), an implacable foe that, as part of global radical Islam, glorifies and promotes suicide bombing through formal school education, and its media and clergy systems. The PA has had anti-US and anti-Jewish hate education in place at all grade levels since 1994. This education has corrupted the minds of Palestinian youth for the next few generations. Palestinians have to be freed from a tyrannical corrupt regime that brings its culture of death to both Jews and Arabs. De-facto Peace. True and lasting peace will be built only on Israel's deterrent capability - military control of the tiny area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean (40 miles) which is essential for regional security - and for freeing Arab nations from tyrannical regimes. No peace can rest on the false paradigm of "Land for Peace". This doctrine demands that Israel, the only democracy of the region, give up the only thing that it lacks - land - to its much larger totalitarian enemies. In exchange, these dictatorships promise the one and only thing that they lack: - a commitment to peace. Peace between Israelis and Palestinians should be built in a modular fashion. It has to take firm hold on the ground, become a fact of life for an extended period of time - and then it will translate into a signed agreement. Not vice versa. ACTION ALERT: PRESENTING A NEW VISION OF PEACE We oppose Prime Minister Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan and endore the 3-D Vision for Peace, an alternative. CLICK HERE to automatically send this powerful alternative plan to President Bush. Dear President Bush, I oppose the Unilateral Disengagement Plan. I agree with the declaration by you, our President, when you said on March 19, 2004: "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations... It is in the interest of every country, and the duty of every government, to fight and destroy this threat to our people..." The government of Israel can do no less. I also agree with the following plan that was developed by a forum of top international Middle East experts at The Jerusalem Summit of 2003. Outstanding scholars and public leaders from the US and Israel agreed upon these 3 principles as a basis for a permanent solution to the Middle East conflict: A 3-D VISION OF PEACE An ALTERNATIVE to Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza, Judea and Samaria Demilitarization of the Palestinian Authority. Co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians requires dismantling of all terror groups and the disarming of all the "security services of the PA," which are, in effect, legalized terror groups. These groups were armed under the Oslo Accords to fight the terror of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aksa Brigades, Tanzim, Fatah, etc. Instead they use their weapons, supplied by Israel, for terror attacks, and to support criminal activities, rape and suppression of political opposition Democracy for Palestinians. An open-ended transitional period for building a basis for democracy is mandatory. During this time the education and propaganda systems of the Palestinian Authority (PA) should undergo de-jihadization similar to de-nazification of the post-WWII Germany, as a prerequisite for building genuine peace in the region. This is required because Israel faces the Palestinian Authority (PA), an implacable foe that, as part of global radical Islam, glorifies and promotes suicide bombing through formal school education, and its media and clergy systems. The PA has had anti-US and anti-Jewish hate education in place at all grade levels since 1994. This education has corrupted the minds of Palestinian youth for the next few generations. Palestinians have to be freed from a tyrannical corrupt regime that brings its culture of death to both Jews and Arabs. De-facto Peace. True and lasting peace will be built only on Israel's deterrent capability - military control of the tiny area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean (40 miles) which is essential for regional security - and for freeing Arab nations from tyrannical regimes. No peace can rest on the false paradigm of "Land for Peace". This doctrine demands that Israel, the only democracy of the region, give up the only thing that it lacks - land - to its much larger totalitarian enemies. In exchange, these dictatorships promise the one and only thing that they lack: - a commitment to peace. Peace between Israelis and Palestinians should be built in a modular fashion. It has to take firm hold on the ground, become a fact of life for an extended period of time - and then it will translate into a signed agreement. Not vice versa. Mr. President, I respectfully ask that you recognize the moral and practical merits of this 3-D Vision of Peace. Giving up land for a non-existent peace is a losing gamble for both the U.S. and Israel. Signed, Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top

THE BRAVERY OF SURRENDER Posted by Mikimia and Herbert Sunshine, April 14, 2004.

Dear Messrs. Bush and Sharon, At your Press conference unveiling the plan to liquidate the Jewish presence in Gaza, you were both enthusiastic at the "brave" step you have taken for "peace." Can you tell the residents of Israel why retreat, withdrawal and surrender are "brave?" Perhaps you can explain why the United States does not withdraw from Iraq as an act of bravery. Since when is the surrender of one's homeland praiseworthy? Mr. Bush, the U.S. has less historical right to Texas than Israel does to Gaza. The Landlord of the World gave Israel to the Jewish people and neither of you can contravene that. Further can you explain meritoriousness of removing Jews from their homes when the transfer of Arabs, under the laws of Israel is a "racist" (and criminal) act? A final uncomfortable question for Mr. Sharon: How does the selection process of Jews to be transported differ from that used by the Hungarian Jewish Capos who saved their families from the death camps at the expense of the "other Jews"? "Man proposes and God disposes." With love of Israel and with fear for its survival after the "disengagement" plan. Herbert B. Sunshine is Professor of Law (U.S.). He and his wife live in Jerusalem. To Go To Top

ETHNIC CLEANSING TALKS IN THE WHITE HOUSE Posted by IsrAlert, April 14, 2004.

This was written by David Bedein of the Israel Resource News Agency (media@actcom.co.il), Beit Agron, Jerusalem. "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor - he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation - he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city - he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared."... Cicero, 42 B.C.E. This day on the date that marks 139 years to the date of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the American president who issued the Emancipation Proclamation, 'Ethnic Cleansing' talks began at the White House between President George W. Bush and Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. At the White House on this day, Sharon proposed the unilateral expulsion and ethnic cleansing of 8,000 Jews from 21 prosperous and productive farming communities that were pioneered more than thirty years ago in the Katif district of the Gaza Strip on sand dunes where Arabs had laid no claim. Until this time, only totalitarian regimes had suggested such forced policies of ethnic cleansing, which in this case would quash the most fundamental human rights of families in Katif who are simple, productive homeowners and farmers. If Sharon proposed such a unilateral ethnic cleansing policy to exile residents of an Arab city or Arab farming community, there would be an outcry of every possible voice in the world of human rights advocacy. Is this because we are dealing with the proposed ethnic cleansing of Jews, where other standards of human rights may apply? Human rights advocates have forgotten about the ethnic cleansing of Jews when the old city of Jerusalem was under Arab control from 1949 until 1967, when UN guarantees were ignored and when all Jews were expelled, all synagogues were burnt to a crisp, and even the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives was defiled by the construction of a hotel and army camp on the grounds of that cemetery. Meanwhile, international human rights advocates demand that Israel should once again cede the old city of Jerusalem to Arab control, while the openly declared intention of a proposed Palestinian Arab entity to ethnically cleanse any Jews from a future Palestinian Arab state does not seem to bother those who claim to support of human rights in the world community. On April 13th, 2004, Moshe and Rachel Saperstein, residents of Neve Dekalim in Katif, met reporters and asked how it is that a government can make an arbitrary unilateral decision to expel citizens from their homes. Moshe Saperstein, who lost his arm in the Yom Kippur War and two fingers in a PLO terror attack in Katif, said matter-of-factly that he had no intention of willingly leaving his home. Rachel Saperstein put it succinctly, that "if you think that this will stop here, you are mistaken. This would be a precedent. Jewish communities anywhere in Israel or anywhere in the world could then be uprooted"in Hebron, in Jerusalem, or in any other country. They can always say "You see, Arik Sharon expelled Jews from their homes. We can do that too." Israel was founded as a refuge for the Jewish people as "a land for a people for a people Without a land." Yet now, even a Jewish national leader has embarked on a program of the deportation of Jews to appease the barking dogs of world opinion. The world desperately needs to understand this. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

9/11 INVESTIGATION COVER IS OVER Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 14, 2004.

The 9/11 Investigating Panel of 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans have carefully avoided opening up the well hidden involvement of the U.S. State Department in pre-9/11. Although the Panel interrogated Secretary of State Colin Powell, there was an artful avoidance of probing the State Department's role as the 'Gatekeeper' who allowed in Arab Muslims from known rogue terror states for decades. This invidious partnership with Arab rulers worked through American embassies has made the State Department a biased representative for Arab interests in the U.S. - despite the damage such collaboration can cause and has caused. Known terrorists were invited in by then Ambassador Dennis Ross during is tenure at State, to be escorted around Washington with complete protection by the State Department. In several interviews of major players before the 9/11 Commission hearings, the statement was made that: "Al Qaeda was already here in America." (By the way, it is strange that Ambassador Dennis Ross is briefing the Media about the Bush/Sharon summit before it takes place.) Clearly, both State, the FBI and the CIA, as well as the NIS (National Immigration Service which is controlled by State) knew that these terrorists were here, embedded in the American Muslim population. Anyone attending colleges or universities in the past 10 to 20 years could have told you that. The questions that should be asked of operational figures deep in the State Department are these: Who at State sets the policy for opening American borders to rogue or suspicious characters from the Middle East? Which Presidents, Secretaries of State, Directors of FBI knew or enabled State to open American borders to hostile Arabs? Why did State pressure the FBI/CIA not to investigate Arab Muslims in America - or face their wrath? Was it a known fact among FBI/CIA agents that to investigate any Arabs was a bad career move? (Put that question to field agents who will fear lying to the 9/11 Commission.) Why did the FBI/CIA (at the direction of the State Department) reject the applications of a hundred or so native Arabic speaking Jews when they knew they needed interpreters to decipher the streaming data picked up by the NSA (National Security Agency) - especially after 9/11? Did the State Department develop an Arabist culture which saturated State and became the policy of avoidance in the FBI/CIA? What role did the oil companies play in directing and influencing State policy on Arab nations, particularly the oil nations, resulting in ease of entry of Arabs into America? Are the members of the 9/11 Commission avoiding the questions that will not only probe the State Department role in pre-9/11 but the chain of command from various Presidents and even members of Congress? Has there been an executive decision within the 9/11 Commission to artfully avoid anything touching on the State Department role and policy for the last 30 years up to and beyond 9/11? While the 9/11 Commission have questioned high profile and articulate members of government, they have clearly avoided questioning those who staffed the Middle East desks at State. Clearly, operational people are less articulate and more likely to tell the truth than seasoned politicians like Powell, Louis Freeh (FBI), John Deutch (CIA), President Clinton, Janet Reno (Justice), Madeleine Albright (State) John Ashcroft (Justice), George Tenet (CIA). It has been no secret in Washington that the U.S. State Department has been in bed with the Arab oil nations for more than 35 years. It is a known secret that many of our Middle East diplomats already work for the Saudis - in anticipation of future employment as civilians. As an example, while yet employed as U.S. diplomats, some cash in when they leave the service and become high paid agents for a foreign nation. They then use their former contacts to lobby the government. They not only represent the financial interests of their Arab employers but, carry their hate-filled teachings and bias right into the heart of our government. John Ashcroft in testimony before the 9/11 Commission on April 13th stated plainly that the Justice Department, including the FBI/CIA were blinded and walled in by government rules, laws, restrictions. Enter the State Department who influenced and lobbied for these restrictions which protected their Arab "employers" both off shore and in America. The FBI, while woefully inadequate in covering Arab Muslims pre-9/11, are taking a disproportionate share of the blame given that their hands were often tied by the State Department. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

U.S. ASSUMPTION ABOUT THE P.A. Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 14, 2004.

The past three Presidents assumed that the P.A. leadership abandoned hope of destroying Israel and was ready to make peace. All that was needed was negotiation. That assumption is false. The P.A. has made clear that its conditions are designed to weaken Israel enough so it easily would be destroyed thereafter (while the Israeli Left promotes such enervation on the grounds that Israel is strong enough). The same false assumption underlay US approaches to Iran (Jewish Political Chronicle, 3/204, p.10, from David Frum and Richard Perle, Wall St. J., 1/7/04). The authors attributed the US failure to stubbornness and naivete. It think the failure with the P.A. is due to US bad faith. The State Dept. has been anti-Zionist for generations. I think the State Dept. knew that the Arabs did not abandon intolerance and fanaticism. The State Dept. seeks not peace but a reversal of Zionism. Astoundingly, Israeli officials came close to signing agreements to do that. They still are trying to do so in a face-saving manner. The State Dept. keeps trying, in the apparent hope that eventually, the Arabs will sign what locks those unthinking Israelis into their own destruction. In Ariel Sharon, State has found an Israeli official who seems ready to roll back much of Zionism without any quid pro quo. Did the US buy that protege? Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

HOW LOW CAN WE GO? Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, April 14, 2004.

On August 4th of 1994, the Jerusalem Post published a 530 word letter of mine which described my transition from being a liberal humanitarian with a global agenda to a Zionist zealot dedicated to her people. A part of that letter lamented the idea that my children would be faced with the challenge of growing up in a universally apathetic and "normalized" world where sports would soon be featured on our front pages and murders would be buried in some insignificant column in the back of the newspaper. Eight years later my worst dreams were realized - in living color -as I watched Channel Two's Television coverage of a terrorist bombing. It was shortly after Shabbat when all hell broke loose on March 2, 2002 in Jerusalem's Beit Israel neighborhood. Just when you think your insides can't take any more, the 2nd channel splits the screen and offers-up simultaneous coverage of a soccer game. I hear it was an important game. So, as the Zaka and MDA teams scraped the red pavement and tended the wounded to the background of pain-filled screams and blaring ambulance sirens, another two Israeli teams concurrently kicked the ball down the green field to the accompaniment of cheers and whistles. I believe the final score was Zaka 12 (dead), MDA 50 (wounded). I didn't hang around to hear the final soccer scores. Our teams. Our media. Our disgrace. At the time, I remember thinking that we as a people must have reached the 49th level of defilement required before redemption. How low can we go? And so I prayed, "G-d, save us all now. Please, do it before the half-time break." That night, I removed the television from our home. Surprisingly, none of the children protested. I'm hoping that it was because they are sensitive and were also offended. But, in all honesty, it could have been the furious smoke that was emitting from their mother's ears and nostrils that evening that shut them up. So I had a sort of recall reaction when I heard that a basketball game will push the Likud referendum on Sharon"s disengagement plan to May 2nd. I hear it's an important game. It seems that the Euroleague semi-finals between Maccabi Tel-Aviv and CSKA Moscow, which was scheduled to take place the same day as the referendum, might cause a low voter turnout. Prime Minister Sharon was concerned that his loyal constituency would care more about the game than exercising their civic duty. He's probably right. But we should all be alarmed that there are more than a few among us who would opt to passively watch a game rather than actively play a role in determining the future of the Land and State of Israel. To be fair, it should be noted that opponents to Sharon's plan had petitioned the elections committee to postpone the vote by three weeks in order to provide the voting members time to review the plan and to allow for a proper debate. Sounds reasonable, but the basketball logic (sic) won out. In the larger scheme of things, one has to wonder just how much the votes of Sharon's diehard basketball fans will weigh in the heavens and on earth when placed next to the ballot and prayers of one who has their priorities and heart in the right place. For the record, many loyal sports fans love their land, but would gladly miss the game in order to cast their crucial ballot. We're all rooting for Maccabi Tel Aviv and wish them well. And, we're proud of last night's victory by Hapoel Jerusalem in the European Basketball Championships. But to paraphrase and old song: "Take me out of the ball game" and take me back to a time when our leaders and our public were sensitive, dignified and ready to defend their land. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com To Go To Top

WHITE HOUSE LESSONS Posted by Michael Freund, April 14, 2004.

This is an article of mine from the Jerusalem Post about the meeting between Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President George W. Bush regarding the proposed Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Perhaps the best thing Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush can do prior to their meeting today to discuss a possible Israeli withdrawal from Gaza is to take a quick tour of the White House. The stroll down memory lane will not only give the two men a chance to take a short break from the daily demands of their jobs, it just might help to put the folly of retreating from Gaza in the proper perspective. While wandering the halls of the great building they might wish to stop and peek into the Lincoln bedroom, which is said to contain the ornate bed where the great president himself slept. This brush with history would enable the two leaders to ponder the events that took place exactly 143 years ago this week, when Abraham Lincoln, shortly after his inauguration, faced his own dilemma over a question of withdrawal. The year was 1861 and seven southern states had seceded from the Union, forming the Confederacy and choosing a president and vice-president of their own. The breakaway states were busy forming an army, preparing to wage war and threatening to tear the United States apart. The federal army, under Lincoln, still maintained isolated military garrisons in the southern areas, including Fort Sumter, located in Charleston Harbor, South Carolina. Under the command of Major Robert Anderson, Fort Sumter was both of symbolic and strategic importance, as it sent a clear message to the rebellious South about the Union's determination to hang on and prevail. But supplies were running low at the fort, and Lincoln faced the question of whether to withdraw his forces or attempt to resupply the fort and keep the Union flag flying. Secretary of war Simon Cameron and secretary of state William Stewart, as well as the commander of the army, general Winfield Scott, all pressed Lincoln to retreat, arguing that maintaining the fort was not worth the effort involved, while withdrawing it could lay the ground for peace with the rebel states. But Lincoln rejected their advice, recognizing that weakness could hardly serve as the basis for a lasting solution. Instead he insisted on sending an unarmed flotilla laden with provisions to resupply the fort. On April 12, 1861, the Confederate forces responded by opening fire on Fort Sumter, setting off a struggle that led to the defeat of the rebels and the rescue of the Union. Thanks to Lincoln's bravery, and his unwillingness to capitulate in the face of terror, the United States survived to become a unified and cohesive nation. But if going back that far in history is too much of a stretch for Bush and Sharon, they need only look to the events of more recent years for reminders of why giving ground to terror is simply not an option. They could start with a leisurely walk through the Rose Garden, which might just jog Bush's memory and bring to mind the speech he gave there on June 24, 2002. "A Palestinian state will never be created by terror - it will be built through reform," Bush said. "Today, Palestinian authorities are encouraging, not opposing, terrorism. This is unacceptable. And the United States will not support the establishment of a Palestinian state until its leaders engage in a sustained fight against the terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure," the president added. In the nearly two years since Bush made those remarks, have the Palestinians changed their tactics one whit? Have they ceased using terror as a tool to murder innocent Israelis and to try to achieve their political objectives? No, they haven't. If anything, they have intensified their campaign, adopting even more ruthless measures, such as dispatching young children to become suicide attackers, and even attempting last week to set off a bomb laced with AIDS-infected blood. So there is simply no reason for Bush, let alone Sharon, to now embrace the idea of handing over territory to Palestinian control. BUT IF the Rose Garden doesn't do it for them, then perhaps a swing by the White House's Cross Hall would strike a chord with the two leaders. For it was there, on March 17, 2003, that President Bush delivered his televised ultimatum to Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq within 48 hours or face war. Speaking to a global audience, Bush declared, "If our enemies dare to strike us, they and all who have aided them will face fearful consequences. We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be far greater." Recalling the lessons of history, Bush invoked the danger of appeasing terror. "In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth." Those stirring words apply no less equally today, when, according to the head of the Shin Bet, Palestinian terrorists are reportedly seeking to build long-range artillery guns as well as delivery systems for chemical weapons to be used against Israel (Ma'ariv, February 24). Prudence demands, therefore, that Israel reinforce its hold on Gaza and clean out the terrorist infrastructure there rather than withdrawing and allowing the Palestinians to enhance their arsenal of destruction. Moreover, it was just last month, in a March 19 address delivered from the East Room of the White House on the first anniversary of the start of the Iraq war, that Bush himself underlined the dangers inherent in retreat. "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence and invites more violence for all nations," Bush said. That same day, in a phone call with Polish President Alexander Kwasniewski, Bush was even more emphatic. "Those who are pulling out, showing their weakness, are very naive to expect to be guaranteed safety and be spared terrorist attacks," he asserted. These remarks echoed what Sharon himself was saying only eight months ago, when he told interviewers on the eve of Rosh Hashana: "Any unilateral step, without an agreement, will result in Israel withdrawing in the face of terror. Terror will continue." With so much now riding on Sharon's meeting with Bush, and the future of Gaza possibly at stake, one can only hope that the two men will not ignore the lessons of the past. But if history won't be their guide, the least they can do is heed their own rhetoric from recent months and reject the idea of a unilateral Israeli retreat under fire. For were such a move to come to pass it would not only hurt the Jewish state, it would undermine the global war on terror, sending a message of weakness and vulnerability at a crucial juncture. And that is something which is not in either of the two countries' best interests. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. To Go To Top

VIEWS: WHAT TO DO ABOUT GOOGLE GIVING AN ANTI-SEMITIC SITE PROMINENCE Posted by Lazar Fuerst, (separately) Dafna Yee and (separately) by Leo Rennert

If you ask Google for sites about 'Jews', the website in the Number 1 spot is Jew-Watch (http://www.jewwatch.com), a very nasty anti-Semitic site. A petition was started to convince Google to remove the site from its database. Leo Rennert provided most of the material for this Blog-Ed. Lazar Fuerst writes: Steven Weinstock, a former Telshe Yeshiva (in Cleveland) student has set up an online petition site at http://www.removejewwatch.com/ Please consider viewing the sites and, making your voice heard. Please follow this up and investigate it for yourselves.... I did, and YOU will not believe your eyes. THIS IS THE SCARIEST THING I HAVE READ IN A VERY LONG TIME, WE ALL MUST PROTEST. Dafna Yee writes: "According to this article, Google will not change its putting the hate site JewWatch in the #1 spot, petition or no petition. (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/614911.cms) Apparently, Google's statement that it would do so if enough signature were acquired was nothing more than a diversion and a deliberate lie. Apparently, the ADL believes the lie because it has come out with a statement defending Google (http://www.adl.org/rumors/google_search_rumors.asp). But, if Google is really UNABLE to change its rating system, then how could it do so if enough people signed a petition?!!!! http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001 So, I suggest that we all use another search engine. Here is what I've learned about the others big ones: AltaVista (which is where I learned about the above article!) does not list it for at least its first 10 pages; it used to list it fourth! Apparently, THEY were able to change their order! AskJeeves doesn't have it on its opening pages at all, My Way also lists it first!!!!, Look Smart doesn't list it on at least through page 16, All the Web doesn't list it at all MSN Search lists it as #60 So, you see there is no reason to continue to support Google unless we choose to. Personally, I'm willing to go through a little inconvenience in order to show Google that I am serious and we are all a force to be reckoned with.http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001 Kol tuv, Shirley Anne Haber writes: It seems that I opened up a can of worms by sending out the Google petition to remove jewwatch.com, however, a lot of good has resulted. The NYTimes article below explains the attitude and responses of Google and how the petition came about (you will need to click on the URL to read the whole article). By the way, DON'T sign the petition ? it is useless! One of our experts in technology, Alistair Gordon, has the best explanation of why jewwatch gets such a high rating and what can be done. His explanation follows and if anyone wants more information from him, contact me and I will pass your name on to Mr. Gordon. We also checked with another search engine, Yahoo, to see if jewwatch.com was high up on it's list - it was down. So our issue is with Google. It is worth reading the explanation from Google if you haven't already - the link is in Mr. Gordon's letter below. And by the way, we should be aware that there are many sites who "pay" to have a special placement in the list of Google and other search engines but they are usually listed separately. Below are two other innovative suggestions, one by Gabrielle Goldwater in Switzerland and another by Chuck Chriss in the US. A quote from Joy Wolfe in the UK: "The fact is, Google is a BLESSING for Jews. Think how many more Jews visit it every day and find magnificent Jewish sites (mine is among them) as a result of its service. Not to mention all the other sites in the world." Alistair Gordon writes on "How Google Ranks a Site" It isn't just the number of hits that causes Google to raise the ranking of a site. The main ranking parameter is the number of links to a given site. For example, Google indexes about 4.2 billion web pages. It tabulates the number of times a link to a given web page is found in other pages. So a web page is deemed "important" (higher ranking) if hundreds of other pages have included links to it. If nobody is linking to it, then it doesn't matter how many hits it gets, it will get a low ranking. If you type Jew into Google now, you'll see that JewWatch is now number 3. If you then see how many pages link to the top 4 sites (using Google Advanced Search), you get the following: Number 1 - 758 other web pages link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew Number 2 - 527 other web pages link to http://www.jewfaq.org/ Number 3 - 55 other web pages link to http://www.jewwatch.com/ (The bad guy) Number 4 - 94 other web pages link to http://www.cjf.org/ So as you can see, number of links is a strong determinant of ranking (but not the only one). Ranking of a site is also determined by the ranking of the sites that link to it. Here's is Google's explanation: http://www.google.com/technology/archives/oldindex.html All the Arab sites seem to have links to JewWatch, which is exactly what you would expect from them. The ways to counter JewWatch's high ranking are: 1. Identify several (say, 6) web sites that you would like to see ranked above JewWatch. 2. Contact the webmaster of each identified site and encourage them to use the term 'Jew' as many times as possible within their site (they can even hide 'Jew' so it isn't always visible, but it gets counted by Google). 3. Then contact the webmasters of dozens of other friendly sites, and encourage them to insert links to these 6 sites in their web pages. Get everyone linking to everyone else. 4. Then check Google for about 4-6 weeks (the time it takes for another massive re-indexing of the world's 4.2 billion web pages), and these 6 sites should rank higher because so many other sites point to them. 5. Or even better, get the 35,000 people who signed the petition to bombard the site so that the web hosting provider takes them off the web. It can all be done automatically using http://friedspam.net. I know that FriedSPAM has already shut down hundreds of spammer sites. It is the most effective tool available, and very satisfying. An article April 13, 2004 in the New York Times by Laurie J. Flynn was called "Google Says It Doesn't Plan to Change Search Results." SAN FRANCISCO, April 12 - Google Inc., the leading Internet search engine, said Monday that it had no plans to alter its search results despite complaints that the first listing on a search for the word "Jew" directs people to an anti-Semitic Web site. The dispute points to one of the most difficult challenges that has plagued Web search engines: what to do when the results of a search are offensive to some, but legal? To read the entire article click on: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/technology/ 13google.html?ex=1082862657&ei=1&en=048671424d3af39b Chuck Chriss from Jewish Internet Association (JIA) writes: To ask Google to fix this would be asking them to put censoring filters into their searches. The best response to this problem, as JIA has long advocated, is to build more websites that present Jewish points of view. More and more high quality sites that build understanding of Jews and Jewish life and support Israel are needed. Then we had a follow up the next day, March 22: Jewish bloggers are striking back! An organized effort is working to put a responsible definition of Jew onto the top of Google's ranking for that search term. Here is an explanation of what is going on: Google Bomb http://www.jewschool.com/ 2004_03_01_archive.php#107951205677851436 Search for "Google" on the above page. If you have a website and want to help, use this link to Wikipedia to define the word Jew on your site. If enough pro-Jewish sites do this, Jewwatch and other objectionable links will be pushed down in the rankings and will be replaced by Wikipedia. Wikipedia Definition of Jew http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew Petitioning Google to remove the link is essentially a boycott, a very dangerous two edged sword. How many petition signatures do you think Arabs could generate if motivated? Gabrielle Goldwater writes on "How to Search for Information on an Offensive Web Site" from Geneva Switzerland. Search-engines such as Google... don't drop websites, Their engine works be system searching in letters that correspond to the same letter in any website. THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR WEB-CONTENTS. Otherwise all Arabs would get every single Jewish website off Google.... including my website. First you establish who runs the website, using Traceroute, Ping, Domain Name Server (DNS) Lookup, WHOIS, and DNS Records Looku http://network-tools.com/ Then you establish the hate issue. Check whether it falls under the Freedom of Speech act in the USA. Make sure it really has some Racism, Hate, harassment, etc...content. There are different methods: THE BEST STEP TO TAKE, INSTEAD OF GOING AFTER GOOGLE: You ask for help from the right people: Here are addresses you may want to ask for help, and report hate sites etc...: (By the way, note that the website - www.jewwatch.com - has been already reported) 1)Richard Eaton, Simon Wiesenthal Center researcher who monitors hate groups worldwide: reaton@wiesenthal.com 2)ELECTRONIC FIGHT SYSTEM webmaster@jewishinternetassociation.org http://www.jewishinternetassociation.org/ The Jewish Internet Association Chuck Chriss President 3)Internet Haganah: Confronting Islamist Terrorism and its Supporters Online aaron@haganah.us Haganah B'Internet: Defending Israel and the Jewish People http://haganah.org.il/haganah/ 4)ELECTRONIC WEB POLICE http://www.web-police.org/ http://www.intergov.org/forms/wp_crimereport.html It's important to use the right channels to remove websites. Shalom AN EXAMPLE TRACE ROUTING PARTIALLY DONE BY MYSELF ON www.jewwatch.com :: Query from dns.consumer.net to get an authoritative nameserver NameServer used for query: iserver.stormfront.org Answer records www.jewwatch.com    1   CNAME jewwatch.com   28702s   jewwatch.com   1 jewwatch.com   1   NS iserver.stormfront.org   28702s Additional records iserver.stormfront.org 1 A 206.160.0.11 172700s It leads as it looks to the same people: Stormfront White Pride World Wide http://www.stormfront.org/ Questions or comments? Write: comments@stormfront.org Stormfront, PO Box 6637, West Palm Beach, FL 33405. Tel: 561.833.0030 Don Black (http://www.stormfront.org/dblack/) http://www.stormfront.org/dblack/ - this will throw you - look at it You can search further To Go To Top

NO TO EGYPT AND AMERICAN GUARANTEES Posted by Helen Freeman, April 13, 2004.

Articles about President Bush's meeting with President Mubarak of Egypt marking the "30th anniversary of the normalization of relations between America and Egypt" and the April 14 planned meeting of Prime Minister Sharon seeking guarantees and assurances from President Bush about U.S. commitments to Israel, cry out for response. There is so much deception, hypocrisy and ignorance of history in these meetings taking place between three important leaders. Why would anyone trust Egypt's position in regard to Israel or America? Despite the fact that the U.S. has poured $50 billion of military and civilian aid into Egypt since 1980, and currently provides $1.3 billion in direct military aid annually, the vitriolic anti-American hatred that comes out of the Egyptian press is more vicious than any in the Middle East. Two weeks before 9/11, an article in the government-run paper Al Akhbar wrote, "the Statue of Liberty, in New York Harbor, must be destroyed" and "the age of the American collapse has begun." As for Egypt's relations with Israel, there is a long history of wars Egypt has launched against Israel. Today, despite the "peace" treaty between the two countries, Egypt continues to arm Israel's enemies. An Israel National News report tells us that another "large arms-smuggling network from Egypt to Gaza has been uncovered...Among those arrested over the past two months...were five Egyptians...The criminals smuggled drugs, prostitutes and foreign workers as well as 140 rifles, two RPG rocket launchers, and much ammunition." As for the issue of U.S. guarantees, former Israeli liaison to Congress, Yoram Ettinger, reminds us of Clinton's promise to Barak of $800 million in exchange for withdrawal from Lebanon. The Israelis withdrew, the Israelis never got the money, and Hizbollah now controls the area. In 1981 President Reagan promised that F-15 jets sold to Saudi Arabi would not be stationed within striking distance of Eilat - but that is where they are. (There are countless other examples, too numerous to mention here.) On Dec. 18, 1973, former Senator Scoop Jackson said, "Much of the history of international guarantees is the history of countries who have lost their territory, their freedom, and even their sons and daughters..." Conclusion - Egypt does not deserve the trust and respect due a true partner in peace. It should certainly not be considered a guarantor of Israel's security in any discussion of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. No U.S. guarantees should be accepted as justification for Israel to withdraw from one inch of its precious holy land, nor to have any "negotiations" with terrorists. Helen Freedman is Executive Director, Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI. AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. To Go To Top

DIVIDING UP GAZA Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 13, 2004.

Hamas and Yassir Arafat are already negotiating and salivating over the loot of the Gaza Strip after Sharon retreats. These negotiations are reminiscent of Biblical Prophecy when the invaders made their way up to Jerusalem where they start to divide the loot when G-d intervenes and slaughters the invaders. Hopefully, we will see that happen soon and speedily and in our time! But, it is not only Arafat and Hamas terrorists who are dividing up Gaza, Judea, Samaria and - likely - the Golan Heights and Jerusalem. Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and America's President George W. Bush have engaged in secret negotiations to betray Israel and reject G-d's words. These are two leaders who are bringing a curse, most certainly, to themselves and to their own nations, clearly, they do not deserve to lead their countries. On Israel Radio April 13th David Ze'ev, said that an advisor of Sharon revealed that 5 months ago US officials [a.k.a. the U.S. State Department] decided that since the Road Map wasn't moving, they would pressure Israel [to give the end-stage of the Road Map without getting anything in return]. Therefore, they [State] met with authors of the unofficial Geneva Accords led by Yossi Beilin [financed the European Union]. Then they threatened Sharon that if he didn't move the dead peace process/Road Map forward, they would agree to the Geneva Accords [which were probably designed by State although they were disapproved of by Bush]. In a secret meeting in Italy, Eliot Abrams, a U.S. official, told Sharon he'd better do something to move the dead 'peace process/Road Map' forward. Not surprisingly, we see Bush conspiring with Mubarak of Egypt who represents the Arabs' national aspirations coveting the Jewish State of Israel. I feel certain that even now there are experts in law, gathering evidence for Sharon's perfidy when he is placed on trial at some future time for treason to his people and his country. Negotiating secret deals with foreign governments, bypassing the Knesset (Parliament) which results in weakening the Jewish State during War cannot be defined as anything but high treason. Sharon must be removed from office, along with all those who aided him in what is clearly another Oslo appeasement manipulation and, no doubt, with the same results. Gaza will become the launching pad for more vicious terror attacks, first on the coastal cities of Israel's South and then further inland. Gaza has always been the route invaders took to conquer and capture Jerusalem. Sharon's behavior is too much like King Herod's who invited the Romans in to protect his throne, savaging the nation in the same way and for the same reason. Sharon shows evidence that he is clearly an irresponsible leader who should have his term of office cut short. Sharon, in a clever plan to divide and conquer, made a speech the night he left for America where he tried to enlist the larger communities in Judea and Samaria of Ma'ale Adumim, Givat Ze'ev, Gush Etzion, Ariel - adding a strong Hebron/Kiryat Arba by claiming the Gaza retreat would ensure their communities would stay strongly inside Israel. He clearly want their silence and collaboration when he moves against the other 140 settlements - until he comes for them in the next round. Sharon knows that he cannot deliver on his tricky promises - even with a vaguely worded agreement from President Bush. So Sharon came up with his disengagement plan that forces Israel is expel and ethnically cleanse Jewish homes, farms, factories, schools, colleges, infrastructure. If Jews are forced from their own lands by terror, no one is safe anywhere. Didn't Madrid prove that? Don't we see the terrorists in every country where the Arab Muslims reach a critical mass? The Arab Palestinian Prime Minister Qurea (Abu Ala), representing Arafat has plainly stated they would not recognize U.S. guarantees of any kind. He demands total withdrawal from all cities, towns and settlements of YESHA. Sharon is not merely typical of a flip-flopping politician but he appears to be a pre-meditated liar as well as a clear and present danger to the Jewish nation of Israel. The leaders of YESHA (Yehuda, Sharon and Gaza) have shown themselves to be inept or they have been promised future benefits by Sharon to silence their protests. Either way they too should be unceremoniously thrown out of their offices. A Prime Minister who seems to have run amok will endanger all of YESHA, as well as the coastal cities and Beer-Sheva. As for President Bush, he is in the process of fulfilling his father's promise to the Saudis that his son will do the right thing for the Arabs. For this reason alone, he will also fall from office, limiting his presidency to one term - as was his father's - for pressuring Israel to give up assets to irredentist Arab Muslims. As Avraham says in the Bible: "I will bless those who bless you; and curse those who curse you." Let us examine any document drafted by the U.S. State Department packed with loopholes and escape clauses for plausible deniability both for Bush and for Sharon. Each sentence will be carefully drafted with deniability allowing both Bush and Sharon to say: "I don't mean that" when the retreat/withdrawal turns into a killing field. Sharon is asking for language from Bush that will sooth objectors in his Likud Party and to trick the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) to rely upon U.S. assurances which cannot be carried out. The "cooked" language assures the Israeli electorate that the Arab Palestinians will cease their demands and plans to return some now 3-5 million so-called Arab Palestinian refugees to Israel proper. Saudi and Egyptian fingerprints are all over this document. What exactly will America do in the next decade when, NOT IF, the Arab Palestinians continue their claim to ALL of Israel and Jerusalem as the capital of only the new Arab Palestinian State? Of course, this includes the return of hostile Arabs to Israel's heartland. If the words "absolutely nothing" come to mind, you would be correct. America and its Arabist State Department has no intention of confronting the Arabs should they decide to close in on what is left of Israel. The Arabs have broken most of the co-authored American deals and America has done nothing in response. When Gamal Abdul Nasser invaded the Suez Canal, closing the Straits of Tiran, the Johnson Administration - despite prior agreements and a lot of bombast, did absolutely nothing. When the U.S. brokered and guaranteed a cease fire with Egypt after the 1967 Six Day War, insuring that Egypt would not militarize the Sinai Desert, the Americans did absolutely nothing when Egyptian mobile missiles were moved into firing range. When Israel complained and asked for remedial action, the State Department lied and said nothing was happening that required American intervention. When the peanut farmer, Jimmy Carter brokered the Camp David Accords which were supposed to be the start of a real peace agreement, America did nothing when all that happened was the absence of war. Egypt broke all 60 side letters of intended trade, normalization and cooperation. There was (and is) an ice cold peace while the U.S. armed Egypt with at least $60 Billion in the best American equipment and made little or no effort to force Egyptian compliance. There is a long list of American sponsored accords which were broken by the Arabs and zero response by the U.S. Sharon has long since left his role as honored general and has joined the ranks of perfidious political thieves. Now he wishes to steal the nation's security for a plan which none of his generals or intelligence advisors agree with. Only the political maggots he has gathered to his side who feed from his hand agree with his plans. As the French and English sold Munich to Hitler so, too, Bush and Sharon, with the connivance of Egypt, are selling the Jewish nation to a band of pagan terrorists, telling the Jewish victims to be, that "all is well" and "there will be peace in our time." Right now there is a bi-partisan committee meeting in Washington, investigating why Bush failed to protect the nation from 9/11 when 3000 Americans were murdered by Arab Muslim terrorists: 15 from Saudi Arabia and 4 from Egypt. In Israel there is no investigation of Peres and Beilin over Oslo and the resulting 1500 murdered and hundreds of thousands wounded, many maimed for life. When a Knesset member asked for an investigation of Oslo, Shimon Peres went ballistic, threatening resignations if such an investigation were to take place. Sharon stopped the idea lest it be shown that Oslo was fabricated in partnership with Europeans and the U.S. State Department making it a treasonable offense. Now Sharon is in the same mode of placing the future of the nation in the hands of foreign nations whose interests often are linked to the Arab markets and oil. Hopefully, one day there will be a peoples' court, modeled on the Nuremberg courts and justice will be meted out to those who would betray a nation at war with Global Terror. Jews who sell out and betray other Jews carry the appellation of "Judenrat". Regrettably, Sharon has, in my opinion, joined this infamous category. He is working hard to give his perfidious legitimization to his withdrawal/retreat by bribing and threatening the Likud Party, dragging them down with him. Perhaps, the Likud Party will reject him, his plan, and the appeasement of Bush, Arafat and the Arab leaders. Likud will surely become the same untrustworthy party as Labor. Both will fade from power as new parties arise out of their weakness. Meanwhile Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has just met with President Bush at his Texas ranch. At the conclusion of these two presidents' discussions, Mubarak states that he is willing to assist Sharon's abandonment of Gaza if the follow-on, with the blessings of Bush, results in a contiguous Arab Palestinian State. They have already pocketed Sharon's retreat/withdrawal and say they are expecting the rest of Judea and Samaria. Of course, the Golan will soon be on the carving board. You haven't heard a whisper about the Golan Heights lately, but it is in play. Bush has done absolutely nothing with the Syrian Accountability Act despite Syria's continued intervention in Iraq as a conduit for terrorists and weapons. The State Department continues to push appeasement of Syria as it has since the time of Hafez al Assad and now his son, Bashar. Take that to mean that all of YESHA must be abandoned to Arafat or his terrorist partners. This has been what was anticipated from the beginning by those who care and dare to see. Clearly, the Jewish nation cannot accept a Munich type of agreement, decided at a ranch in Texas. If Sharon is allowed to retain office then the Jews of Israel's have chosen their fate. Sharon has flown to America to massage the egos of the American Jewish leadership so easily swayed by attention and false promises. He will also seek the support of the Arabist U.S. State Department and a few pro-Arab leaders in Congress. This is the schedule prepared for him by his toadies like Ehud Olmert, Dov Weisglass, etc. In effect, "Chamberlain of Israel" comes to sell his "peace in our time" even as the Muslims are blowing up the world and swearing to eliminate Israel. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

ISLAMIC PRIDE AND PREJUDICE Posted by IsrAlert, April 13, 2004.

This article was written by Aminul Hoque, and appeared in Independent News Headlines (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?story=510778) 12 April 2004. The attack on the Twin Towers; the train bombings in Madrid; the discovery of ammonium nitrate: these are just three of the reasons why Islam is being demonised by sections of the British media. But, as I've discovered over the past few months, pride in their Islamic identity is stronger than ever among young British Muslims. For the most part, this country's two-million-strong Islamic community expresses that pride in a wholly positive way. But as I walked the streets talking to hundreds of 15- to 30-year-old Muslims for a BBC radio documentary, it became all too apparent that there is a tiny - and I must reiterate, tiny - minority who are taking the religion of Islam to a sinister new level. And this small fringe element, which includes the radical al-Muhajiroun organisation, is making its presence felt more strongly than ever. They openly advocate terror, regard Osama Bin Laden as a "scholar of Islam" and their radical and militant views strike a chord with the impressionable, angry and frustrated youth of East London and other urban centres. I approached one 16-year-old lad in London's Whitechapel Road after I witnessed him sign himself up at an al-Muhajiroun stall. I asked him if he knew what he was doing, and I was horrified by his response. "I am willing to give up my life for my Lord," he said. And it's not just those who are affiliated to this fringe element who are attracted to the idea of death, either. An 18-year-old man from Upton Park, London, who wishes to remain anonymous, attends a full-time Islamic boarding school - known as a madrassa - in the north of England. He told me how he and his friends have been influenced by some of the more extreme videos and literature that are secretly distributed among the students there, without the knowledge of their teachers. He wished to engage in violent "jihad" one day, he said, explaining that this life is a "prison for the Muslims" and means "nothing" to him. I sensed that he was simply regurgitating somebody else's words - that he did not genuinely want to engage in violent jihad, but that he felt it was his "obligation and duty" as a Muslim to do so. He seemed extremely dejected with his life, and his whole attitude was driven by a belief that his present life is simply a test and that, as a Muslim, he will enter paradise in the afterlife. This rationale drives the mentality of countless of the other young people I came into contact with. Most worryingly, my research opened up my eyes to the fact that people whom I know very well - friends, family, colleagues - possess opinions that are enough to send shivers down the spines of most people. These are ordinary people who have well-paid jobs, are educated and seem very pleasant in conversation. During a secret al-Muhajiroun conference in Euston that attracted more than 600 men and women, I was greeted with a friendly tap on my shoulder by a close cousin of mine. To see him at this conference, organised by a group who openly support terrorist acts outside of the United Kingdom, was shocking to say the least. He is family-orientated, has a very good job and travels around the world. I have known him since 1996 and he was the last person I would expect to see there. My cousin's departing words still echo in my mind. Knowing I was there for journalistic reasons, he told me to be "careful" about what I wrote as I would be "judged on Judgement Day". Judged on what? Exactly what was I doing wrong? I think he was troubled by the fact that I did not conform to his way of thinking. When he said those words to me, I myself forgot about the fact that we were related. In that split second, we became strangers. All the memories of happy family get-togethers and dinner parties disappeared in a moment. Nevertheless, he is as entitled to his opinion as I am mine. Another interesting incident occurred outside the East London Mosque when I overheard a heated debate between two Muslim mosque-goers. Protagonist number one was handing out leaflets reminding everybody about the hijab awareness day - a reaction to the French ban of the Muslim headscarf - while protagonist number two was telling him to go back to his country of origin if he wanted his daughters and sisters to practise their religion properly. This dialogue was between two Muslims, yet the views of the second man would easily have fitted in at a British National Party rally. This bizarre conversation highlighted the extent of Muslim discontent with British society; my trusted friend obviously felt that he and his family could not practise their religion in so-called multicultural Britain. It must be stated at this point that I do not profess to be the voice of the Muslim community of Britain. I am not a member of any Muslim bodies, nor is my Islamic knowledge as extensive as that of some of my contemporaries. But having been brought up in a Muslim family and a predominantly Islamic community, I feel I have a right to comment on what is happening around me. Please don't get me wrong: I have no complaints about my upbringing, and I think that the religion of Islam has taught me many of the morals and disciplines that guide me on a daily basis. Like me, many of the young people I talked to hold their Islamic identity in high esteem but, interestingly, they also feel that their religion has no place in British society. "I have been called Osama Bin Laden because I have a beard... This makes me feel like an outsider," recalled one 24-year-old youth from Brick Lane. Since September 11, the Government's anti-terror laws have led to the arrest of 548 people, of whom only 91 have been charged, most with minor offences. If anything, the application of these laws has convinced many to develop a siege mentality and practise their religion even more rigorously. Young people also now have access to a vast amount of Islamic literature and websites in a language that is common to them - English. The academic Benedict Anderson argued that, between 1500 and 1700, European countries established their national identities through the medium of print, creating an "imagined community". Perhaps the availability of literature and the internet is making more people conscious of their Islamic identity, creating an "imagined" Islamic community in the process. Websites such as islamonline.net and Islamicawakening.com are hugely popular with young Britons. And hundreds of Islamic conferences now take place around the country, providing a platform for Muslims to congregate, share opinions and remind each other of the global Muslim struggle. Perhaps, the single biggest reason why Islam is being practised more strictly is that many Muslim youngsters have adopted a "victim" mentality and a "them vs us" state of mind. Coming from the same minority background, I know how it feels to face discrimination and to be excluded on the basis of your skin colour, appearance or religious beliefs. It's easy to feel second-class. Adopting a more overt and spiritual Islamic identity transforms this exclusion into something positive. It makes you feel safe and part of something bigger - a part of the Muslim international family, the Ummah. And this appeal is not just confined to those from Islamic backgrounds. Abu Khadeeja, a leading spokesman from the Salafi group based in Birmingham, suggests that eight out 10 converts to Islam are youths from Afro-Caribbean backgrounds. They are disillusioned with British society and Western values. Although its nature is separatist, I was inspired by the Salafi group's success with young people who have been in trouble with the law. Abu Hakim is an Afro-Caribbean convert who runs the al-Nur bookstore in Erdington, Birmingham. Explaining how his life had changed since he became involved with the Salafi group, Hakim said: "There isn't really a crime that exists that I was not involved in one way or another." His troubled past is now apparently over, due to his strong belief in Islam. Sitting cross-legged in his baggy kameez and his Prada spectacles, Hakim went on: "Islam is a religion that promotes self-discipline... and this helped me to focus on the really important things in life." The adoption of the Islamic dress code has even become trendy in some circles, with hijabs and kameezes worn alongside designer label accessories. As trendsetter Ruji Nessa said: "As long as I am covered appropriately, it does not matter if I wear my headscarf with the latest trainers." There are now hundreds of retail outlets catering for this new look. Wearing traditional clothes in no way marks you out as an extremist, but there's no ignoring the militant views of some young Muslims. I recall one conversation I had with Abdul and Jalaal in a Whitechapel cafe. As we sat there, I felt as if we could almost have been brothers. Like me, they were of Bangladeshi origin and in their mid-twenties. But when I asked them about their opinions of September 11 and the recent Madrid bombings, I realised that we were polar opposites. "Whether it be through a bomb on a train or a natural disaster... Muslims are always happy to see the enemies of Allah being killed," suggested the stern-faced Jalaal. His al-Muhajiroun sidekick Abdul nodded in agreement. They were an almost comical double act - had it not been for their bloodthirsty views. I could not help feeling that most of their discourse, as with the majority of the people I interviewed, simply sprang from youthful bravado: it's cool to be radical, angry, different and violent. It must be remembered that the journey from rhetoric to violent action is a long one. However, as a community we need to acknowledge the presence of the radical minority and we need to address it now. More and more young people are being sucked in by the extreme literature and powerful rhetoric of groups that have hijacked the religion of Islam to pursue their own political agendas. Finally, any form of criticism of a vibrant and close-knit community is hard to take - and criticism from within can be even more intolerable. But let's not kid ourselves: we have a problem and we need to wake up to it right now. How we can deal with it remains to be seen, but acknowledgingthat the problem exists has to be a good start. 'Islamic Pride' is being aired on BBC Radio 1XTRA (Digital Radio) on Wednesday 14 April at 5.30pm IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

THE NEXT THREAT Posted by IsrAlert, April 13, 2004.

This appeared on Tech Central Station (TCS) - http://www.techcentralstation.com/032904F.html This article was written by Jack Birnbaum, a physician and the author of the recently published novel "The Winter of Visions and Forgetting." He recently wrote for TCS on "Europe, Lost." While the "News Cycle" focuses its attention on a mid-level functionary's startling revelation that, had only everyone listened to him, this whole terror thing could have been averted (that is, had they listened then to what he's saying now, not to what he said before... oh well, never mind), let us avert our eyes from the posturing and finger-pointing for a moment and consider what to do about the next threat: a nuclear-armed Iran. For those who haven't been paying attention to the danse macabre that has been going on between the Mad Mullahs and the International Atomic Energy Agency, a short review: *  At Bushehr, they are building a light-water reactor with the aid of the Russians, which (even if our Slavic friends are sincere in their promise to monitor it faithfully and recover all spent fuel) will be a source of practical expertise for the Iranians and allow them to claim they need to have a uranium enrichment capability to ensure fuel supplies. (These reactors run on uranium that has been enriched from the natural 0.7% U-235 to 2-5%; but if you just keep running the same enrichment plant, you can keep going to above 80%, which will work as the core of a nuclear bomb.) *  They've recently been caught red-handed and forced to admit that they have been developing two separate secret uranium enrichment programs for the better part of two decades. *  At Natanz, a secret gas-centrifuge uranium enrichment plant has been discovered, and traces of highly-enriched (weapon-usable) uranium were found there. *  At Arak, a secret (have you noticed the "secret" trend here?) heavy water production plant has been uncovered. Heavy water is used in the type of nuclear reactors that can run on natural, unenriched uranium (so if the enrichment part goes sour, they're still in business), and which are especially suited to produce plutonium (which, of course, is the other potential nuclear bomb core.) *  Iran has purchased parts for advanced uranium-enriching centrifuges and probably actual bomb designs from A.Q. Khan's Pakistani Nuclear Warehouse. As a matter of fact, it's beginning to look like they have a club membership card and are eligible for discounts and special members-only offers. *  The Iranians, of course, claim they have no plans to build nuclear weapons. No sir. They are merely spending billions of dollars to develop nuclear power as an alternative energy source for when their oil runs out, say, somewhere around the year 3015. I won't bore you with more details of the straight-faced lies of the mullahcracy and the semi-credulous pronouncements of the international monitoring agencies, and of whether inspectors are being allowed in today, because it will change by tomorrow. If at this point you don't believe that Iran is on its way to a nuclear capability, you can stop reading and go check out today's comics page. For the rest of you, the question now becomes: What strategic problems does this bring, and what to do about it? First, a nuclear Iran becomes a bigger player in local politics. It may make it harder for the U.S. to continue increasing its influence among the new states of Central Asia, and may, if and when alliances and times of conflict line up right, complicate things in the Indian-Pakistani conflict. But these are the least of our worries. Perhaps less likely, but more importantly if it does eventuate, would be increased influence in Europe. The Shahab-4 missile, developed with the kind assistance of North Korea, could carry a plutonium-core nuclear bomb from Iran to Central Europe. Even the mullahs aren't crazy enough to do that, but just the existence of that capability may well affect European decision makers when they next discuss immigration, or headscarves, or the middle east conflict, or cooperation with the United States. But the critical issues are not those. They are: the survival of Israel, and the threat of an untraceable nuclear attack on America. Israel, of course, though they refuse to confirm or deny their possession of nuclear weapons, is widely understood to have a significant arsenal, estimated as perhaps 200 warheads, including some on submarines to ensure that they are not vulnerable to a first strike. But there is a terrible asymmetry here. Not in numbers of warheads and delivery capability; it will be a long time before Iran can match up. Rather, in geography. One or a few nuclear detonations could kill a significant percentage of the Israeli population and destroy much of its infrastructure; it would effectively be the end of the Jewish state, a second Holocaust. Iran, of course, is huge, its much larger population spread over a wide area. If and when the Lunatic Caucus in Tehran gets control of some nukes, they may decide that the glory of destroying the Zionist entity is worth the retaliation. As a matter of fact, in 2001 former Iranian president Rafsanjani explicitly and openly made that very threat. And now, to us. Even Shahab-4's can't reach us; that isn't the threat here. The threat, of course, is that terrorists acting either independently (or as agents of Iran) will be supplied with fissile materials. While making an implosion-type bomb is likely to be well beyond the technical expertise of a terror cell, and plutonium bombs can only work that way, building a gun-type device (similar to what was dropped on Hiroshima), using highly enriched uranium, is relatively simple. (I could tell you exactly how easy it is, but then you wouldn't be able to sleep.) Another option would be to furnish the bombers with a ready-made device, but that would be a trickier proposition for the supplier, because if it is discovered before exploding it could be traced back to its origin. So, then, what to do? The Israelis well realize that an Iranian bomb poses an existential threat, and may decide to act just as they did in Iraq in 1981. But because of the greater distance and the multiple sites that would need to be taken out, a pre-emptive attack would be more difficult, less assured of success and result in more civilian casualties than the brilliant strike against the Osirak reactor. And they would have to also weigh the effects of the world condemnation and further isolation that would surely follow. (See the invective following their taking out of a known terrorist leader this week, and multiply a thousand-fold. It's quite a burden they bear, the Israelis.) Forceful action by a coalition of nations united against terrorism was, of course, the original plan... Afghanistan and al-Qaeda, then Iraq, then pressure backed up by the credible threat of force to disarm the threats from Iran and North Korea. But it has all fallen apart, and it couldn't really have held together much longer, not really. Too many separate interests, too many ambitious politicians and sensationalizing media outlets, all now taking advantage of the missing WMD's in Iraq, not thinking through or caring about the consequences of their opportunism. But that's human nature, it has always been this way, and we have to deal with things as they are, not as we wish they were. Support for a popular uprising against the theocracy in Iran has been part of the plan all along, and maybe it will still happen. If it does it will probably start out of nowhere, a butterfly flapping its wings in Isfahan, leading to a great storm that brings down the mullahs and restores freedom to the Iranian people. But we can only do so much to encourage it, and we have to be careful not to promise more support than we can deliver (see: Hungary, 1956; Kurds.) We can and should wish for it, but wishing is not a policy to stake our safety on. Of course, we can just continue to play the inspections and diplomatic pressure game, and hope that the voices of reason in Tehran will gain the upper hand. But they haven't yet, and soon the mullahs will have their bomb. What then? We will need to communicate to the Iranian government that a nuclear explosion anywhere on the soil of the United States or its allies that does not clearly originate elsewhere will be considered prima facie to have originated in Iran, and that we will respond accordingly with massive nuclear retaliation. (North Korea could be included as well.) We could make the promise publicly; this would evoke widespread hand-wringing and condemnation, but will have the advantage of making the threat more credible and enshrining it as part of official U.S. policy (thus making it harder for a new administration to retract.) On the other hand, such a public policy would leave itself open to the criticism that an American nuclear strike on Iran could be intentionally triggered by a third party, which could even be true (the Iranians of course will claim the Zionists would do it; but back in the real world, it is conceivable that a group such as al Qaeda could trigger their long-hoped-for confrontation between Islam and the West this way.) Or the threat could be made privately, avoiding some of the complications but possibly lessening its effectiveness. Any other ideas? IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

A PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM ESTHER LEVENS OF THE NATIONAL UNITY COALITION FOR ISRAEL Posted by George K. Bernstein, April 13, 2004.

The National Unity Coalition for Israel is a fantastic coalition of Jews and Christians that I have worked with for more than 10 years. They are among Israel's truest supporters and have more clout with the Administration on that issue than any other group. This message is from Esther Levens of the Unity Coalition. Please consider strongly signing the petitition - George This is a personal appeal asking you to forward this ACTION ALERT to your e-mail network. We are calling upon our partner organizations to make a major response to Prime Minister Sharon's visit to the U.S. to get President Bush to support the plan of unilateral surrender to Palestinian terrorism. This ACTION ALERT needs broad exposure throughout the pro-Israel, Christian and Jewish communities. We need to reach President Bush with as many emails as possible, telling him of our opposition to this plan to reward years of Palestinian terrorism - without making any attempt to remove the PLO terrorist infrastructure and without removing Arafat from power. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR FORWARDING THIS ACTION ALERT TO YOUR ENTIRE MAILING LIST WITH THE HOPE THAT WE CAN GENERATE A RESOUNDING RESPONSE. PRESIDENT BUSH MUST KNOW THAT HIS CORE CONSTITUENCY OPPOSES THIS CAVE-IN TO TERRORISM AND THAT IT RUNS COUNTER TO U.S. POLICY. Esther (Levens) This is an URGENT CALL TO ACTION, because Prime Minister Sharon is in the United States to meet with President Bush. He is trying to convince him to support Israel's unilateral surrender to Palestinian terrorism - without making an attempt to remove the PLO infrastructure and leaving Arafat in power. Rewarding Palestinian terrorism by relinquishing territory to the very terrorists who are perpetrating hideous acts of brutality against the citizens of Israel is morally unacceptable. We cannot turn the Israeli flag into a white flag of surrender to the forces that will not stop until Israel is eradicated. In this ACTION ALERT, you are asking President Bush not to ignore this major concern of his core constituency. If you have not already signed the ACTION ALERT, please do it NOW. We ask that you also forward it to your e-mail network. Your letter to President Bush will be sent with copies to his Cabinet, leaders of Congress, Prime Minister Sharon and his Cabinet, and leaders of the Knesset. CLICK HERE to send the following message. You may change the wording as you see fit. (For those who receive 'text only' emails, highlight the following link, then cut & paste it into your web browser, then press 'Enter'.) http://www.israelunitycoalition.com/html/action.php?who=leadership&date=2004-04-12 Dear President Bush, For many years Israel has been in the forefront of the global war against radical Islam. Palestinian terrorism has spearheaded this war. On March 19, 2004, you pronounced the U.S. policy on countering Islamic terrorism: "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations...It is in the interest of every country, and the duty of every government, to fight and destroy this threat to our people..." Please do not encourage Israel to retreat from Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, which would invite - in your own words - "more violence for all nations." Israel has to remain, at least as determined as is the U.S., in its war on terrorism. Mr. President, please do not follow in the footsteps of previous failed plans - the Oslo Accord, Mitchell, Tenet, Zinni and Camp David. It could fail your own presidency! Be wary of the potential downside of getting involved - inadvertently - in Israel's unpredictable political system. We implore you to encourage Israel to stand strong and not retreat in the face of Palestinian terrorism. Israel must follow the lead of the United States by defending her innocent civilians from further butchery. Signed, Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" George K. Bernstein is a prominent lawyer, President of the Brandeis District of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) and a member of the National Board of Directors of ZOA. To Go To Top

WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE AN ISRAELI WOMAN Posted by Malka Harati, April 13, 2004.

This is from an Israeli woman. I think this is very potent, and so I'm forwarding it. Pass it on. I am not the least afraid to go any place, By bus or to a mall. I didn't change or stop doing anything I used to do before this mess began! People tend to forget that twice the casualties From terror get killed on the roads! More people still die From heart attack, cancer, And other things, They just don't show them on TV. Don't misunderstand me, There is a war going on, It's not pleasant, But, lets face it: WE HAVE NEVER BEEN BETTER OFF!!!! It's only TV and the media That make people think That the end of the world is coming. Only 60 years ago, They were leading Jews to their death Like sheep to the slaughter! No Country, No Army. 55 years ago!! Seven Arab countries declared war On the small Jewish State, Only a few hours old!! We were then 650,000 Jews! Against the rest of the Arab world! No IDF [Israel Defense Force]. No mighty Air Force, Just tough people With nowhere to go. Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, attacked all at once. The country the UN "gave us" Was 65% desert. The country started from scratch! 35 years ago!! We fought The three strongest armies in the Middle East, And wiped them out in six days. We fought against Different coalitions of Arab countries, With modern armies, And masses of Soviet Russian weapons, And we still won!!! We have today A country, An army, A strong Air Force, A Hi-Tech Economy, exporting millions. Intel - Microsoft - IBM develop their stuff here. Our doctors win world prizes For medical developments. We made the desert flourish, Selling oranges and vegetables to the world. Israel has sent its own satellite into Space!! Three satellites all together!!. We sit proudly, With the US, with 250 million people, With Russia, with 200 million people, With China, with 1.1 billion people, With the Europeans - France, England, Germany, with 350 million people, The only countries in the world To shoot something into space!! Israel is today In the world nuclear power family With the US, Russia, China, India, France, and England. [We don't admit it, but every one knows...] To think that only 60 years ago, We were led, Shameful, With no hope, To our death!! We crawled out of the burning ashes of Europe, We won our wars here with less than nothing in our hands, We built an "empire" out of nothing. Who the hell is Mr. Arafat To make me Scared? To make me be Terrified? You make me laugh! Passover was celebrated; Let's not forget what the story is all about. We overcame Pharaoh, We overcame the Greeks, We overcame the Romans, We overcame the Inquisition in Spain, We overcame the Pogroms in Russia, We overcame Hitler, We overcame the Germans, We overcame the Holocaust, We overcame the armies of the seven Arab countries, We overcame Saddam. Take it easy, folks, We will overcome The present enemies too. No matter Which part of human history you try! Think of it, For us, The Jewish people, Our situation has never been better!!! So, Let's Lift our Heads High, Let's Remember: Any nation or culture That tried to mess around with us Was destroyed - while we kept going!!! Egypt? Anyone know where their empire disappeared to? The Greeks? Alexander of Macedonia? The Romans? Does anyone today speak Latin? The Third Reich? Anyone heard any news about it lately? And look at us, The Nation from the Bible, >From Slavery in Egypt, We are still here, Speaking the same language!! Right here, right now. The Arabs don't know it yet, But, they will learn that there is one God. As long as we keep our identity, We are eternal. So, sorry for not worrying, Not bitching, Not crying, Not being scared. Things are O.K. here. They surely can be better, But still: Don't fall for the media junk, They won't tell you That there are Festivals going on, That people keep on living, That people are going out, That people are seeing friends. Yes, our morale is low, So what? It's only because we weep for our dead While they enjoy the blood. This is the same reason why, We will win, after all. You can forward this e-mail If you choose. To the whole Jewish community, And to people throughout the world. They are part of our strength. It might help some of them To keep their heads up high. Tell them That there is nothing to worry about. Tell them to think BIG, and To see the whole picture. "See You Next Year in Jerusalem." To Go To Top

DEFYING THE WILL OF G-D Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, April 13, 2004.

President Bush and Ariel Sharon are meeting on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 with the sole purpose of Defying the Will of G-d. In His Place and Stead they will be conspiring to fulfill the Saudi Road Map Plan and to destroy the Jewish State in His Holy Land. It is fortunate that neither President Bush nor Prime Minister Sharon will not succeed. No matter the wealth of the Saudis, the Prophets of Israel will have the final moral word. The Promise the L-rd made to the Jewish People in His Bible will prevail. Therefore, Women in Green, along with those from Kiryat Arba and others, will demonstrate at the time that President Bush and Sharon are meeting at the White House. The equivalent time at Paris Square In Jerusalem is Wednesday, April 14, 2004 at 6 P.M. Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza, Judea, and Samaria is equivalent with the Jewish People committing suicide. We cannot and must not allow that to happen. With G-d's Help and your initiative, this sacrilegious madness WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO OCCUR ! 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

WASHINGTON POST PANDERS TO PALESTINIAN VIOLENCE Posted by Andrea Levin, April 13, 2004.

i> The Washington Post has won itself sorry distinction in recent years as a publication that regularly skews its Middle East news - against Israel. A snapshot of coverage in March captures the problem. On the 17th, many newspapers reported - some on the front page - the story of Abdullah Quran, an 11-year-old Palestinian boy tricked by terrorists into carrying a bomb to an Israeli checkpoint. By luck, the unwitting child accomplice and the intended Israeli victims were spared when the explosive failed to detonate. Even B'Tselem, a human rights group rarely critical of Palestinians, was prompted to denounce the use of the child as "in and of itself a war crime." The page-one Boston Globe story noted the Quran episode "seems likely to revive long-standing concerns on both sides about the willingness of Palestinian terrorists to involve children in their operations." An Israeli official was quoted stating: "Anyone who says that the roadblocks provide no security and only humiliate the Palestinians received proof today just how wrong he is." The Washington Post omitted the story entirely - along, of course, with such apt observations about the conflict as those in the Globe. Eight days later, another equally dramatic instance of Palestinian child exploitation made the front pages in other newspapers. A teenaged boy strapped with explosives and promised a quick trip to paradise by his terrorist handlers was caught at a roadblock near Nablus and saved by Israelis. The New York Times ran five color photos of the event on its front page, and an inside story headlined "Israeli Soldiers Thwart A Boy's Suicide Bombing Attempt." This time the Washington Post carried a short wire service story on page 20 under a headline with no hint of a connection to the Middle East: "Teen With Bomb Sets Off a Tense Encounter." WHILE THE paper avoids reporting candidly and fully on the savagery Israel faces - as reflected in these incidents - when Israel acts against those who dispatch terrorists, the publication finds its voice. Israel's killing of Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin prompted thousands of words on March 23, along with front-page prominence and eight color photographs (which didn't include scenes of terrorist carnage inflicted by Hamas on Israeli men, women and children). The focus, as so often in the Post, was on sympathetic rendering of the feelings of the Palestinians and the allegedly lamentable, short-sighted conduct of the Israelis. Multiple stories reiterated the sentiments of Yassin's supporters, who deemed him "charismatic" and "moderate" as well as "a man of peace," "like a prophet" and, of course, a "spiritual leader." A side-bar with "key dates" offered brief mention that Hamas "rejects the existence of Israel," and only a sentence or so in the long text alluded to the annihilationist goals of the group. There were no comments from Israeli survivors of Hamas' terror onslaught. Policy "experts" quoted on the diplomatic implications included only critics of Israel, one being Robert Malley, a leading proponent of the view that Israel was not sufficiently forthcoming in the Camp David/Taba negotiations of 2000-2001. He contended the assassination of Yassin "has implications" for other nations in the Middle East, as well as Europe and the United States. He claimed "Hamas has not targeted American or other targets outside the occupied territories. That might change..." In fact, Hamas carried out the terrorist attack on Hebrew University's Frank Sinatra cafeteria in the summer of 2002 that killed mostly Americans. The perpetrator was an Arab handyman and Hamas member employed by the university who knew foreigners, in particular Americans, congregated in the area. Shortly after the event, a team of FBI agents was dispatched to help investigate the attack. But Malley's distorted observations blaming Israel for some possible new targeting of Americans were printed without Post caveat. Writing on the death of Yassin, Fouad Ajami, Director of Middle East Studies at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, offered a view of reality absent from the Post's strikingly tilted portrayals of events in March 2004. Ajami said: "It is easy to see that [Yassin] had no mercy for Israelis. But a harder truth can be read into his life: He had no mercy for his own either. Those children, reading their wills and testaments on their way to homicidal missions, are proof of the cruelty and the indifference and the waste of it all." The Post can't seem to see it that way. It buries or omits events in which the "cruelty" of the Palestinian war against Israel engulfs the lives of its own young, and it passes over lightly the truth that a supposed "spiritual" leader wrought death and destruction. Andrea Levin is Executive Director of CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America To Go To Top

NO TIME FOR AMBIGUITY OR FOGGY DOUBLESPEAK Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, April 13, 2004.

Sharon will be visiting Washington shortly. He brings with him a controversial plan to yield Gaza - used since the days of the pharaohs to bring death and destruction into Israel proper - and some other areas in Judea and Samaria as well to those who will surely continue to murder Jews and aim for the destruction of their nation even after such a proposed withdrawal takes place. Sharon had hoped to receive some assurances regarding the rest of the disputed territories. No deal... A somewhat more promising earlier report in Haaretz was headlined, "Bush to assure PM: Israel won't have to withdraw to Green Line." Reading a bit further, however, it soon became apparent here as well that America is still determined to remain non-committal on this crucial issue and won't get down to specifics. The usual explanation is that we don't want to prejudice negotiations. This is precisely the wrong approach this late in the game. And it is late. While the Foggy Folks have been trying to virtually rewrite the final draft of a hotly debated and meticulously worded U.N. Resolution #242 at least since the days of Secretary of State William Rogers back in 1969, the authors of that resolution themselves - Eugene Rostow, Arthur Goldberg, and others - have pointed out that Israel was not required to withdraw to its indefensible, artificially-imposed armistice lines of 1949. Nations have acquired vast tracts of territories as a result of wars, yet the world expects the sole State of the Jews to return to that 9-mile wide existence...a constant temptation to those who would destroy it. As has been pointed out many times, #242 clearly states that any Israeli withdrawal was to be made to "secure and recognized " borders to replace those suicidal armistice lines. While it was not envisioned that Israel would retain a large percentage of the lands conquered from those who repeatedly tried to end its life, having already given back most of this territory upon concluding an iffy peace with Egypt, territorial compromise was in order for the remaining lands in question. There is nothing comparable to the desert of the Sinai Peninsula separating Israel from its other surrounding would-be executioners. It's down hill all the way for Syria from the Golan, and right in Israel's backyard for the others in Judea and Samaria. The latter were unapportioned areas of the original Palestinian Mandate legally open to settlement by all residents of the Mandate, not just Arabs (many, if not most, of whom were also newcomers), that came to be known as the "West Bank" as a result of British imperialism and British officer-led Transjordan's illegal seizure of these territories in that country's assault on a reborn Israel in 1948. These were not exclusively Palestinian Arab lands. Until they were largely massacred by Arabs in the 1920s, Jews had lived and owned land in these areas long before the Arab conquest in the 7th century C.E. That the European and Russian hypocrites expect Israel to cave in to all that Arabs demand is no great shock... they who have fire and carpet bombed enemies and incorporated other entire nations when their own security and interests were at stake. The stench from the crematoria has long since subsided, so the temporary respite from age-old, ingrained antipathy towards Jews has simply reemerged. No surprise. Make no mistake about this. While legitimate criticism of Israeli policy is in order, for far too many, Israel has indeed simply become - as many have written - the Jew of the nations. It sounds better, after Auschwitz, to call yourself "just" an anti-Zionist. Denying Jews that which, with few exceptions, such as the Kurds, you won't deny to almost all other peoples is somehow legitimate for these folks. Israel is always under a high power lens. Kurds are slaughtered in "Arab" Iraq and Syria, Berber language and culture is outlawed in "Arab" North Africa, Copts are suppressed in "Arab" Egypt, and millions of Blacks are killed, maimed, enslaved, etc. in "Arab" Sudan, but the U.N. has a trial in Geneva for Israel's security fence designed to keep Arabs from disemboweling its kids. What is needed now from Washington is a clear statement to its tiny beleaguered ally and to the rest of the world - especially the Arabs, too many of whom still maintain their "destruction in stages" goals vis-a-vis Israel. Having been blockaded (a casus belli) by Arabs and attacked as well in 1967 (Egypt and Syria calling for a war of extermination up to the days prior to Israel's forced defensive preemptive strikes in June '67), it was obvious to all fair observers in the aftermath of that war that Israel deserved something better. If there is to ever be any real hope for true peace in this region, an American President must once again have the courage to stand up to his own State Department. Harry Truman did this when he recognized the Jewish State in 1948. If it was up to the Arabists-tied-to-Big Oil Foggy Folks, there would be no Israel today. Much of this hostility remains. For one thing, there's a wealthy revolving door between multinational businesses and State. Complicating matters further, the current Presidential family itself, along with its closest friends and allies, have huge ties to Big Oil. Nevertheless, leadership must indeed come from the Oval Office on these matters. A strong President must tell the Arabs point blank that there will be a territorial compromise that will take into consideration Israel's legitimate security needs. No doublespeak or blurred phraseology... Any 23rd Arab state that will be created in an area that really doesn't have room for one must not come at the expense of the security of the sole state of the Jews. Paying merely lip service - as surfaced in the Haaretz report - to this crucial issue won't cut it. Only when Arabs are convinced that Israel is not going to be offered up on a silver platter a la Chamberlain's disgraceful sacrifice of his Czech "friends" for "peace" (and there were lots of ethnic Germans in the Czech Sudetenland) on an earlier allegedly small territorial issue, will there actually be a better chance at arriving at a peace settlement. All parties will at long last know where they really stand and what is and what is not possible via negotiations. And if the Arabs can't handle this, then so be it. Israel must then take the gloves off. In short, Arabs must learn that compromise is truly a two-way street. Up until now, it's simply been a game of what unilateral concessions they can get the world - including America - to pressure the Jews into giving in the good cop/bad cop game the Arafat and Hamas teams have been playing. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

NATIONALISM AND INTERNATIONALISM: EVIL OR BENIGN? Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 13, 2004.

Having experienced bloody world struggles arising from predatory nationalism, much of the world and especially Europe had turned against nationalism. European ruling elites are trying to subordinate their individual countries to a collective government. They look upon Jewish nationalism as another evil to be beaten down. Having experienced bloody world struggles arising from predatory internationalism, much of the world, and especially Europe, has failed to turn against internationalism. Nearly submerged under international Communism, Europe is being pulled under by international Islam. To those menaces, Europe is not sensitive. Actually, nationalism can be benign, as it has been in many places. Countries may be more manageable than conglomerations (Hillel Halkin, NY Sun, 4/7, p.8) The EU is getting increasingly unmanageable, as its bureaucracy grows and its rules multiply. The UN is an example of evil internationalism. There may be some objection in Europe to Jewish nationalism in Israel, but how sincerely it is an opposition to nationalism and not to the Jewish people is put into doubt by the great support Europe gives for the fraudulent "Palestinian" nationalism. The PLO and the P.A. are as bloody as any dreaded nationalism. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

RACHEL CORRIE, ONE YEAR LATER Posted by Steven Plaut, April 13, 2004.

The one-year anniversary of Rachel Corrie's demise has arrived. For those whose memories fail them in this matter, let me refresh things. Rachel Corrie was a young fanatic college student from Washington State, who decided she could make the world a better place by showing her solidarity with Middle East terrorism and Palestinian mass murderers. She joined the International Solidarity Movement, a communist-anarchist group who openly support Palestinian terrorism. Corrie set up shop in the Gaza Strip, where she and her ISM comrades spent their days trying to harass and provoke Israeli troops and interfere with Israel's anti-terrorist military operations. They would set up obstacles on roads to prevent Israeli troops and vehicles using them and otherwise assist and defend the terrorists. In one such confrontation, Corrie was trying to block an Israeli army bulldozer that was knocking down homes of terrorists and buildings hiding tunnels through which weapons and explosives were being smuggled into the Gaza city of Rafiah from Egypt to Palestinian mass murderers. Corrie and her ISM comrades wanted to help protect the Gaza tunnels, and to protect the "right" of Palestinians to continue to mass murder Israeli civilians. In the confrontation, Corrie put herself in a position where the bulldozer driver could not see her, and she was dragged under the heavy machine. She died in a PLO ambulance or hospital shortly thereafter. The ISM then issued a host of "eyewitness" reports about the accident, claiming it was in fact cold-blooded murder, which turned out to be fabrications. The simple fact of the matter was that Corrie had figured the Israeli bulldozer driver could be cowed into backing off if he saw her blocking his access to the terrorist house, and she probably even figured the operator correctly, except he did not see her from his limited-visibility window on the rig. Ever since her stupidity led to her death, Rachel Corrie has become the matron martyr saint for the pro-terrorism Left around the world, the Jean D'Arc of Palestinian terrorism. Her ISM friends declared she was "murdered" intentionally by Israel. Her death has been exploited by the Bash-Israel movement and by anti-Semites all over the world, as a means to delegitimize Israel. The PLO adopted her as mascot, declaring that she died "fighting Israel's security fence", and never mind that the building of the security fence was begun only well after she was dead. After Corries demise, other ISM pro-terrorists were also injured when they put themselves in the middle of firefights, triggered by PLO assault teams. Like Corrie, they were injured and one died trying to protect those terrorists from Israelis shooting back. In another fatal incident involving an ISM member (Tom Hurndall), the ISM led a world-wide campaign to demonize the soldier who shot the pro-terrorist interfering with a military operation. The soldier was an Israel Arab Bedouin patriot serving in the Israeli military. Corrie's own parents have gone on their own revenge-jihad against Israel, touring the world to fan the demonization of Israel, and representing daughter Rachel as a "victim of Israel's illegal occupation." They and other ISM supporters have been organizing a boycott of the Caterpiller Corporation because it sells machines to Israel, including the one with which Corrie chose to play "chicken" a year ago. All this reminds me of those people who sue McDonald's because they are obese. In their anniversary statement, Rachel Corrie's parents declared that Rachel "believed that the nonviolent activism that she was doing and supporting would make not only Palestinians but also Israelis and Americans more secure - by supporting Palestinians who practice nonviolent rather than armed resistance." But Rachel and her ISM friends believed in nothing of the sort and were doing nothing of the sort. The ISM should probably stand for "I Support Murderers." The official ISM web site endorses "armed struggle" by Palestinians, which means random mass murders of Israeli children and other living things. Corrie died as a result of her own obtuseness. She was in Gaza to help promote Palestinian terrorism and to prevent Israel from protecting its own citizens. She died protecting the illegal tunnels into Gaza from Egypt, through which the suicide bombers obtained their materials. The most lasting images of Corrie was of her face contorted with rage as she burned an American flag. When Reuters reported that Palestinians "honored" her after her death in a "symbolic funeral" by flying US flags, James Taranto from the Wall Street Journal remarked that if Corrie were still alive, no doubt she'd have burned the flags. Even the Far-Leftist Mother Jones magazine considered her a dangerous and deluded little twit . The Israeli army investigated the death and concluded that Corrie had effectively committed suicide. Taranto also suggested that Corrie be awarded the "Idiotarian of the Year Award". A Darwin Award is in order. The ISM is not simply an innocent, if evil, fringe debating society. Within Israeli territories, its members have actively collaborated with terrorists. They hid weapons and wanted terrorists in their offices. The local ISM offices hosted two Moslem suicide bombers from the UK, who had entered Israel as "peace activists", and who then blew a Tel Aviv bar to smithereens the next day. The ISM is so closely coordinated with the PLO that it is for all intents and purposes a PLO front group. More recently, ISM trouble makers have been trying to sabotage Israel's security fence, lest the fence prevent some Palestinian mass murderers from conducting atrocities and blowing up Israeli children and other civilians. Yet despite the open endorsement of terror by ISM, it continues to enjoy US tax-exempt status as a "charity" and continues to enjoy gifts of megabucks from the usual culprits who fund the hate-America left. The liberal press continues to coo over the ISM as if it were a "peace group". The Israeli government has been too pusillanimous and cowed by its fear of bad press to send the ISM pro-terrorists a-packing. While the ISM demonizes Israel, the very fact that it has been allowed to continue to operate its provocations within Israeli-controlled territory attests to how liberal and tolerant Israel has been. It is no coincidence that the same ISM people protecting homes of suicide bombers in the Gaza Strip and West Bank would never dare place themselves in jeopardy by blocking, say, US troops arresting Saddam Hussein in his Tikrit rat-hole or by protecting al-Qaeda or Taliban facilities in Afghanistan, or the terrorist headquarters in Fallujah, Iraq. The Corrie parents are not urging other deluded young undergraduates to rush to Fallujah to defend the homes of Iraqi terrorists under siege by American GIs to protest American "occupation" of Iraq. The ISM designer-jean "revolutionaries" and mall-Marxists would be mowed down mercilessly if they tried interfering with anti-terrorism operations anywhere in the world but in Israel. In the past year Corrie and the other ISM supporters of terror who got themselves injured fighting for Palestinian terror were beatified constantly by the Western media. The Europeans and the American liberal newspapers continue to commemorate Rachel Corrie through attacking Israel every time it tries to deter terror by knocking down the home of a suicide bomber or by tearing down houses protecting smuggling tunnels or Gaza rocket production workshops. (Over 200 Palestinian rockets were fired into Israeli civilian areas from the Gaza Strip last year alone.) Shortly after Rachel Corries death, columnist Dennis Prager wrote: "So, Olympia, grieve for Rachel Corrie's parents, but spare us the hagiography. Rachel Corrie died fighting for the International Solidarity Movement, a Palestinian group dedicated, in its own words, to armed struggle against Israel. She ended up being a useful idiot for, and one more victim of, Palestinian terror." Nothing could sum things up better. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. This article appeared today on Front Page Magazine (www.FrontPageMagazine.com). To Go To Top

CHECK YOUR FACTS Posted by Dafna Yee, April 13, 2004.

Someone wrote me, "They have the Intifada and this insurgency will never go away as long as Israelis and Jews like you fail to see the other side of justice. It was not a country without a people and those people were Palestinians." This is No, that is nothing but another piece of revisionist "history" and frankly, I thought that you would have been smart enough to recognize blatant propaganda when you read it! They have the intifada and this insurgency because the world excuses their acts of terrorism as long as they perpetrate it against Jews. Alternating terror and "negotiation" has given them what they want, so naturally they continue using those tactics. The terror tactics will go away when the Israelis wake up to the fact that they can't "negotiate" with terrorists and make it too expensive for them to continue. Every time the Israelis believed the "Palestinian" lies about peace (which have always been nothing but deliberate political ploys to achieve their stated aim - the destruction of Israel; they don't want a real peace) and made concessions, both in land and in "goodwill gestures", the "Palestinians" reacted by an increase in terror. That is the only "peace" that the "Palestinians" will accept (and as far as I'm concerned, they can take their "peace" and shove it up their collective asses.) And, what excuse can you find for them for the terror tactics used before Israel was an independent country? The same well-worn ones that they use? They are the only group that reacts to "humiliation" by training their children to be "martyrs" (which they can only become by killing as many Jews as possible; never mind that these Jews are not doing anything but going about their own lives in peaceful ways like riding buses, eating dinners, dancing at a disco, etc.) There are plenty of people who have much harder living conditions than the "Palestinians" who live in Israel who do NOT act in that barbaric, perverted way. (The "Palestinians" who live under the PA do have it pretty bad - about equal to the Arabs in the 22 Arab countries - but the people responsible for their poor conditions is the PA, NOT Israel!) BTW, the "Palestinians" who lived in Israel BEFORE they began living under the PA and started their intifada had the highest standard of living and the lowest infant mortality rate of any Arab group in the Middle East!!! (Like the Watts riots in the 60's when the Blacks destroyed their own people's stores, the "Palestinians" are hurting themselves more than they are hurting Israel! http://www.danielpipes.org/article/994) Just for the record, it is not just "Jews like me" who are aware of these facts; millions of Christians (and even some Arabs - have you ever read anything by Joseph Farrah? If you haven't, you should!) recognize the Jews' right to Israel (both for biblical and pragmatic reasons) and agree that the "Palestinians" are nothing more than a hate cult led by barbaric murderers and their supporters! Here is some genuine history for you. There was NEVER an independent country called "Palestine" (Jews and Arabs living under the Mandate government were British subjects and traveled under a British passport)! Arabs didn't call themselves "Palestinians" until Arafat started the PLO in 1964 (just before the Jordanians kicked him out after killing more than 5000 of his followers during Black October - more than the Israelis have killed in the past two years of the intifada!!!!) The collective Arab countries convinced the reluctant Jordanian King Hussein to recognize Arafat's leadership of the PLO in 1974 at the Rabat Conference after Arafat convinced them that his way of "negotiation" would completely eradicate Israel after the Arabs failed to do so by attacking Israel in 1973. The Arabs AT THAT TIME - 1974 - agreed that Arafat would create a country called "Palestine" in the territory that Jordan occupied in 1947 - Judea and Samaria (aka "West Bank") and Gaza that the Israelis TOOK BACK in 1967 after they were forced to go to war again. Another fact that you're choosing to ignore is that most of the land that you incorrectly call "territories" not only wasn't a separate country, it was empty and barren until the Jews came and built it up, just like they did in the rest of Israel. In addition, more "Palestinians" have immigrated to the "West Bank" in the last 40 years from outside of Israel than Jews have! The most important point is this: IF THE "PALESTINIANS" HAD REALLY WANTED THEIR OWN COUNTRY NEXT TO ISRAEL WHERE THEY COULD LIVE IN PEACE AND RAISE THEIR FAMILIES, THEY COULD HAVE HAD IT ALREADY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS! BUT, THEY DON'T WANT A COUNTRY IN ADDITION TO ISRAEL; THEY WANT ONE IN PLACE OF ISRAEL AND THAT IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!! Apparently you need to learn some history instead of Arab mythology; there are plenty of places and books that I could recommend if you want to check it out. Everything that I wrote is documented and verifiable and I will be happy to provide you with the sources. Dafna Yee is the director of the Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

PROFILES IN COURAGE OR PROFILES IN COWARDICE? Posted by David Wilder, April 13, 2004.

On December 8, 1941, U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt referred to the previous day, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, as "a date which will live in infamy." It was on that day that the United States of America came under direct enemy attack, thereby endangering the future of that country. Roosevelt concluded his historic address by declaring, "The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implication to the very life and safety of our nation.As commander in chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us." There are days which, for one reason or another, are eternally remembered. There are leaders, who, for one reason or another, will be perpetually recollected, for words they said, or for deeds they did. Many of these historic events are virtually spontaneous, coming about as a reaction to a certain event, as were FDR's words that day in Congress. Yet, occasionally, one can almost predict the significance of a certain happening. That is very possibly the case today. It has been decided that on Sunday, May 2, (the 11th day of Iyar, according to the Jewish calendar - the 27th day of Omer) approximately 200,000 people will take to the polls, and their vote may be an overridingly decisive factor in the future of the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael - in the land of Israel. I know, this sounds overly melodramatic, an exaggeration, at best. I honestly wouldn't mind if such were the case. However, as things stand today, that's the way it is - for real. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon today landed in Washington for talks with President George W. Bush and his senior staff. On the agenda is Sharon's proposal to unilaterally abandon Gaza to the PA terrorists, while forcibly transferring some 7,000 Israelis from their homes. Sharon is also offering Bush an additional plum. Last night, speaking in the Jerusalem suburb of Ma'ale Adumim Sharon declared that he is willing to surrender all of Judea and Samaria, excepting six "settlement blocks," to Arafat. Those six, according to his speech, are, Ma'ale Adumim, Givat Zeev (also a Jerusalem suburb), Ariel (in Samaria) Gush Etzion (just south of Jerusalem), Kiryat Arba, and Hebron. In other words, Sharon is committing Israel to compulsorily evict hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes, while deserting a vast majority of Judea and Samaria to our deadly enemy. This morning a journalist asked me if I felt relieved that Hebron was on the "good list" - one of those places to remain under Israeli control. My answer came it several parts: 1. Of course I'm not relieved. Sharon's plan affects the entire state of Israel and has nothing to do with one or two cities, here or there. What difference does it make to if Sharon uproots me from Hebron, my son from Shavei Shomron, my friends in Kfar Darom in Gaza, or people I don't know in Beit El and Shilo? We are all in the same boat, to sink or swim. 2. Concerning Hebron, (as Shimon Peres so aptly asked during a radio interview) how are people going to get to and from Hebron? 3. Lastly, Sharon knows all too well that he will never get everything he asks for, so more than likely something on his list is going to get cut. And who do you think that might be? It was just over a year ago that Sharon overwhelmingly defeated left-wing Labor party leader Amram Mitzna for the Israeli premiership. Mitzna's campaign platform unashamedly included a total withdrawal from Gaza. The Israeli electorate put its collective foot down and said no - no acquiescence to terror. Now Sharon is twinning Mitzna, adopting the very policies that his own supporters rejected. This morning's headlines read: Tragedy Averted: An AIDS Terror Attack. Israeli intelligence forces recently arrested a Tanzim terrorist ring which planned on exploding an AIDS-filled bomb in a heavily populated area in a major Israeli city. Can you imagine the effect such a headline would have, printed, say, in the Washington Post, and not in the Israeli daily Ma'ariv? And if the perpetrators, were not Tanzim Arabs, but, Iraqi extremists? And if the city to be afflicted was not Tel Aviv, but Washington DC or New York? And can you imagine how Americans would react if, the President, the same day the story broke, suggested a compromise with the same Iraqi leaders who backed such an attack? This is exactly what is happening. Sharon is offering to give our enemies a gift for their creativeness. Today, these headlines appeared in the Israeli press. Tomorrow, Sharon will present his planned surrender to Bush. Hard to believe - but true. Due to heavy political pressures here at home, Sharon has been forced back to the polls, this time a referendum, for or against his proposed plans. The decision-makers are his own Likud party members. They will have to vote - I agree or I disagree - with the suggested catastrophe. Should Sharon win, it is unlikely that his cabinet or the Knesset would not follow suit. A few days ago, during a conversation with famed activist-attorney, Kiryat Arba resident Elyakim HaEztni, he said to me, "now we will see if the Likud is really Likud, or if they have decided to be Meretz." In other words, will the Likud party members remain true to themselves, to their ideology, to their beliefs, or will they betray themselves, their land, their people? It is an understatement to say that there is a great deal riding on the answer. How can you help? If you read Hebrew, go to www.likud.co.il. On the bottom left corner is a box. The first item is "moadon haverim." After clicking on this you will find a link to "snifei halikud." Here you will find addresses and phone numbers of all the Likud chapters in Israel. Write to them, call them, let them know what YOU think. We will try to post such a list in English, together with a list of all voting Likud members who are eligible to vote on May 2. Your voices must be heard - the Likud must know how important this issue is to ALL OF US - WHEREVER WE ARE! John Kennedy wrote a book called "Profiles in Courage," "accounts of eight U.S. Senators who risked their careers, incurring the wrath of constituents or powerful interest groups, by taking principled stands for unpopular positions." Presently we are facing, not eight people, rather 200,000 people, whose choices will determine whether May 2 will be remembered as a "date of infamy" or a "date of honor?" Will those people be profiles in cowardice, or will they be profiles in courage? With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman for 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

SHMUEL SACKETT IN DENVER, LA, LOS VEGAS AND NY Posted by Manhigut Press, April 13, 2004.

With the vote on Gush Katif (Gaza) just days away, (scheduled for April 29th). Shmuel Sackett - co-founder and International Director of Manhigut Yehudit will be travelling to the "West Coast" explaining what Jews can - AND MUST - do to insure that a STRONG Jewish presence remains FOREVER in these areas. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is talking about PERMANENTLY REMOVING 25 Jewish cities (21 in Gush Katif and 4 in the Shomron) leaving over 8,000 Jews HOMELESS!! Expelled from Spain in 1492 by Christians... and in 2004 from Israel by JEWS. Stop the madness! Hear about the ONLY alternative to this national suicide from the most exciting speaker today: April 19 - Denver - 8:00 PM Please call Natalie Eilam (303) 388-7950 for exact location April 20 - Los Angeles - 8:00 PM Shaarei Zedek - 12800 Chandler Blvd - West Hollywood April 21 - Las Vegas - 8:00 PM Please call Avi Rosenberg (702) 325-2100 for exact location April 24 (Shabbat afternoon) - Staten Island, NY - 7:00 PM Young Israel of Staten Island For more information, write postmaster@manhigut.org. Shmuel Sackett was a cofounder of Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Feiglin has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

ARUTZ SHEVA ON THE GAZA GIVEAWAY Posted by Bryna Berch, April 13, 2004.

These news items from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) give a better picture of what's going on re the Gaza giveaway than the New York Times does. 1. PROTESTS ABOUND AS PM PRESENTS VISION OF CONDENSED ISRAEL Several hundred protestors stood alongside the Route 1 Highway from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv last night, shortly before Prime Minister Sharon took off for the United States. Their message was two-fold: "You Have No Mandate" regarding the evacuation/expulsion plan, and "Bring Pollard Home!" (regarding Pollard, see separate article below) Sharon first attended the traditional post-Passover Mimouna celebration, choosing the east-of-Jerusalem city of Maaleh Adumim as his venue. In between the music and rich un-matzah-like foods, Sharon presented his vision of the future of Judea and Samaria - which includes no more than five blocs of Jewish presence. The five areas that are to remain Jewish are Ariel and satellite communities such as Kedumim and Emanuel; Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem; Kiryat Arba/Hevron, south of Gush Etzion; Givat Ze'ev, north of Jerusalem; and Maaleh Adumim. Everything else, presumably - including such areas as Kiryat Sefer; Beit El-Ofrah; Dolev-Talmon; the southern Hevron Hills; Elon Moreh; and more - is to be abandoned, according to the Sharon vision. Even the five blocs that Sharon says Israel should keep are not guaranteed, however, according to the Prime Minister. "Only an Israeli diplomatic initiative" - such as the retreat from Gaza - "will enable us to maintain our presence in these large settlement blocs," Sharon said last night. Sources in Yesha (Judea and Samaria) reacted with cynicism to Sharon's words. "As those who have heard in the past from Sharon that Gush Katif will forever remain Israeli," said Gush Katif spokesman Eran Sternberg, "it is clear that the people of Maaleh Adumim - which Sharon now promises will always remain in our hands - must now start to worry. Sharon's 'forever' and 'always' are generally a matter of a year or two, it appears. But the residents of Gush Katif promise to struggle together with those of Maaleh Adumim in order to guarantee its future." Sharon will meet in Washington tonight and tomorrow with U.S. President George Bush and his National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice, finalizing details of the disengagement plan and what the U.S. will give Israel in return. Bush has already made a statement in support of the withdrawal, saying that an "evacuation of occupied territories is always a good thing." He emphasized, however, that the retreat is not in place of the Road Map plan, but a part of it, and that the "two-state solution" is still the goal. However, this stands in opposition to remarks made by Prime Minister Sharon last night and on other occasions. He said last night that he sees the withdrawal plan as a "short stop" that will prevent Israel from reverting to the 1967 lines. Sharon also said before the Passover holiday that the U.S. has promised that if Israel in fact retreats from Gaza, there will be no further international pressure on Israel to make further concessions until terrorism stops and until a reformed Palestinian Authority leadership emerges. "Mr. Sharon is thus arranging to pay yet again for the same goods originally promised in the Oslo Accords over ten years ago," noted Arutz-7's Yosef Meiri, "yet this time the price is all of Gaza, the expulsion of 8,000 Jews, and a surrender to terrorism." On Sunday, some 2,000 protestors - residents of the Negev and of the Katif bloc - stood outside Sharon's Shikmim Farm with signs reading, "The Gush [Katif Bloc] is not Dependent on Bush," and "No to Expulsion - Yes to Zionism." Sderot Mayor Eli Moyal announced that he will establish a Southern Region Mayors Task Force to fight the disengagement plan. 2. RUSHING UP THE EXPULSION REFERENDUM The Likud referendum on the evacuation/expulsion plan will be held, it was decided this afternoon, on May 2. The Sharon camp had expressed last-minute regrets at the original date chosen for the vote - April 29 - fearing that apathetic Sharon-supporters would rather watch the Euroleague Final Four basketball competition that night than go out to vote. These objections were originally overridden by Likud Elections Board Chairman Tzvi Cohen, who said that the date of the Final Four was known in advance and that there was no justification to reopen the matter. In addition, no other day that week is appropriate for the referendum, as April 26 is Memorial Day, April 27 is Independence Day, and April 28 is a Druze holiday. [ed. note: Many calendars mistakenly show Memorial and Independence Days on their regularly-scheduled dates of April 25 and 26, Sunday and Monday, respectively. A change was instituted this year, however, in order to avoid the Sabbath des! ecrati on that would ensue were Memorial Day commemorations to begin on Saturday night.] However, this afternoon Cohen decided, following a telephone poll of the Elections Board, to change the date to Sunday, May 2. The polls will be open from 10 AM to 10 PM. Minister Uzi Landau of the Likud - an outspoken opponent of the withdrawal plan - told Arutz-7 today that he is certain that the evacuation plan will not be approved. He said he bases this confidence on his talks with Likud members and the "panicky" reactions of the Sharon camp. Together with MK Michael Eitan, who does not oppose the plan, Landau has submitted an appeal in party organs against what they call the "undemocratic" and hurried manner in which the referendum was scheduled altogether. Minister Landau said that two debates on the matter of the withdrawal are likely to take place in the coming three weeks, though he is not happy with the fact that Sharon himself will apparently take part: "I don't want there to be the slightest hint that this is a fight with the Prime Minister himself." The Likud's Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz is also very much against the evacuation, and has even established his own task force to enlist opposition to the plan. He, too, was careful to state today that he will not attack Sharon personally. Housing Minister Effie Eitam (National Religious Party), one of the leading opponents of the plan, sharply attacked Prime Minister Sharon and his rush to hold the referendum. "Sharon is not coming with clean hands, from two standpoints," Eitam said. "For one thing, he is going to the Americans to summarize things even before he presents the plan to the Cabinet and Knesset, and is thus telling the Likud voters, 'How could you vote against something that I already promised the Americans, thus causing untold international ramifications?' In addition, he knows that the State Prosecutor has already prepared a draft of an indictment against him, and that it is only awaiting Attorney-General Meni Mazuz's final decision. Sharon is thus telling Mazuz, 'When you make a decision on my case, don't judge it only on its merits, but also take into account that we are in the midst of a process with international ramifications.' This is very unacc! eptabl e behavior." Prime Minister Sharon has had a number of one-on-one discussions with Likud MKs and local Likud branch leaders, in an attempt to rally their support for his plan. He met late last week with Health Minister Dan Naveh, and with MKs Michael Ratzon, Moshe Kahlon, and Yaakov Edri. The first three oppose the separation plan - and Deputy Minister Ratzon, specifically, said he came away from the meeting with Sharon even more steadfast in his opposition. Ratzon told Sharon he fails to understand why Gush Katif should be evacuated without receiving anything in return from the Palestinian Authority. He further said that a unilateral withdrawal of this nature would create a precedent for abandoning other areas - including even within pre-'67 Israel. MK Kahlon said he still does not see what benefits are to be received from the Americans - but he left the door open for Sharon to return from Washington with something concrete in hand. This does not appear to be happening, however; see next article. 3. U.S. OFFICIALS NOT FORTHCOMING FOR SHARON Though Prime Minister Sharon will meet with US President Bush tomorrow, the Israeli Government delegation in Washington has thus far failed in its efforts to obtain American promises of substance in exchange for the withdrawal from Gaza. Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu set the stakes when he said last month that he would support the plan only on three conditions: * The Americans must issue public declarations against the so-called 'right of return' for Arabs who left Israel in 1948. * The Americans must also agree that the counter-terrorism partition fence include settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria, and that the entire fence be completed before the retreat begins. * Israel must control all entrances and exits to the Gaza Strip, including the Philadelphi route separating Egypt and Gaza. From what is now known, however, it appears that U.S. President George Bush will issue only a vague statement regarding these issues, stating that the final-status statement will "take into account the demographic situation in Judea and Samaria" and that the 'right of return' will be implemented within the boundaries of the designated Palestinian state that Bush hopes will arise. Difficulties in formulating the exact extent of American support for Sharon's positions even led to a several-hour delay in his departure for the U.S. last night. A senior Israeli official explained his consternation with Sharon to the Maariv daily, saying, "It would have been better if we requested things that the US is able to provide. The Americans will not be able to provide the requested political declarations regarding annexation of settlements." A New York Times editorial today explained why it is not in the interests of those who support the Road Map and a Palestinian state to agree to the Netanyahu conditions. The paper, not known for being a Bush supporter, wrote, "Mr. Bush did exactly the right thing yesterday by giving advance notice that he's not willing to pay [the price that Mr. Sharon is asking]." The paper continued setting forth its view - and apparently that of Bush - of the situation: "While there is no effective Palestinian Authority to deal with right now, ultimately there can be no realistic substitute for a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. That will never happen without Israeli withdrawal of most of its settlements. The United States cannot allow Mr. Sharon to maneuver it into sanctioning an indefinite Israeli occupation of the West Bank. "[Bush yesterday] reaffirmed his commitment to the creation of a Palestinian state, and [Egyptian President] Mubarak said it was not acceptable to talk about a withdrawal from Gaza alone. Mr. Bush might tell Mr. Sharon that it is his job to persuade his countrymen that withdrawing from Gaza is in their own best security interest. A withdrawal from Gaza must start a process, not end it." Contrary to Sharon's hopes, it appears that the two leaders will not hold a joint press conference after their meeting, but will rather suffice with "diplomatic statements." Former Israeli liaison to Congress Yoram Ettinger said that even low-level Bush promises are not something to get excited about: "If he says that Israel will not have to return to its pre-1967 borders, so what? Many American Presidents have said this in the past - such as Johnson in 1968 and Reagan in 1982. And even if Bush promises lots of money, he cannot guarantee it. For instance, Clinton promised Barak a few years ago $800 million in exchange for the withdrawal from Lebanon - but this money has not yet arrived. This is because Congress has to approve it, and this is a very long process - and that's the way the American democracy works... It's not a monarchy. For instance, Reagan promised in 1981 that the F-15 jets sold to Saudi Arabia would not be stationed in the Tabuk base within striking distance of Eilat - but in fact they are stationed there right now..." Ettinger said that US Vice President Cheney has said several times that he would rather that Sharon not come to Washington, because Sharon has disappointed him: "Cheney sees the withdrawal from Gaza as a blow against the Americans' war on terrorism. This is because he sees the withdrawal from Lebanon as having turned Hizbullah into a major player in the anti-American terrorism in Iraq, and a withdrawal from Gaza will only make it worse. And the fact that this move is being promoted by the Israeli Prime Minister, Cheney feels, further undermines the American efforts." 4. PERSON-TO-PERSON PREPARATIONS FOR THE REFERENDUM With the Likud referendum on the disengagement plan only three weeks away, the Yesha [Judea, Samaria and Gaza] Communities Council is embarking on a campaign entitled, "Achim Lo Mitnatkim - Brothers Don't Break Away [Disengage] From Each Other." The Council convened its "operational task forces" today to plan its strategy for the few days that remain before the referendum. The objective is to have thousands of Yesha supporters visit as many of the 200,000 Likud members as possible in their homesnd explain to them the dangers of the disengagement plan. Talking points include: * withdrawal in the face of continued terrorism * giving up parts of the Land of Israel * the danger of a secular government being formed with Labor and Shinui in place of the NRP and the National Union * the expulsion of 8,000 Jews from their homes * the establishment of a precedent of withdrawal The referendum is not binding, but Sharon has promised to abide by its results. Even if the Likud members OK the plan, it will still have to be approved by the Cabinet and the Knesset - possibly even the week after the referendum. However, Cabinet ministers will hesitate to vote against the evacuation/expulsion if it has been approved by the party membership. David Saadah of the Yesha Council-associated "We are on the Map" organization told Arutz-7 today that activists are "already on their way" to the various regions. "We can't visit personally each of the 200,000 members, but we'll do what we can," he said. "We'll concentrate less on Yesha, and more on central Israel." " 5. "SHARON, BRING POLLARD BACK WITH YOU!" Supporters of Jonathan Pollard are determined not to let the opportunity of Prime Minister Sharon's visit to the U.S. slip by. Some of them demonstrated last night before Sharon's departure to the U.S., while others made their voices known in Maaleh Adumim, where Sharon was celebrating the post-Passover Mimouna holiday prior to his departure. Their message was the same: "Don't Come Back Without Pollard!" In addition, a major demonstration will be held this afternoon at the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv at 5 PM, demanding that Sharon insist on Pollard's release. Pro-Pollard protestors recalled Sharon's efforts during the Wye Plantation talks of 1998 on behalf of Pollard. It was there that Prime Minister Netanyahu - accompanied by his Foreign Minister, Ariel Sharon - obtained the consent of then-President Clinton to release Pollard; the promise was retracted almost immediately afterwards at the behest of CIA head George Tenet. Sharon's attitude towards Pollard since becoming Prime Minister has stood in blatant contrast to his efforts of six years ago. He has refused a request by former Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu to allow him to make a personal entreaty to U.S. President Bush on Pollard's behalf, and "forgot" to take with him a petition to Bush signed by every non-Arab-party Knesset Member - 112 in all - on one of his previous visits. Of late, Sharon announced outright that he would not visit Pollard and would not bring up the matter of his continued incarceration during his upcoming visit with Bush. Two prominent Pollard supporters - former Soviet Prisoner of Zion Yosef Mendlevitch and Eli Joseph - interrupted Sharon's speech in Maaleh Adumim last night for several minutes with their demands for Pollard's release. The two were finally arrested, and were asked for identification. When Mendlevitch produced his Prisoner of Zion card, a man assumed to be a plainclothes policeman came over and ripped up the card, saying it was not proper identification. When Mendlevitch and Joseph were released from police custody shortly afterwards, Mendlevitch told the crowd of supporters who came to demand his release, "I am free now because I am in a Jewish state. But Pollard is still sitting in prison, for more than 18 years, on foreign soil, and we must not rest until we achieve his release." To Go To Top

YOM HA'SHO'AH Posted by Merav Lotem, April 13, 2004.

This message asks you to do one small act to remember the six million (6,000,000) Jewish lives that were lost during the Holocaust. Send this Remembrance message to everyone you know who is Jewish. If we reach the goal of reaching six million before the Holocaust Remembrance Day, we will fulfill and give back to G-d what He gave to us: 6 Million Jews who are alive today who remember those who perished. To Go To Top

THE ETHOS OF ISLAM Posted by Michael Gropper, April 13, 2004.

This article was written by Mordechai Nisan and appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post. Nisan's latest book is "The Conscience of Lebanon: A Political Biography of Etienne Sakr (Abu-Arz)." I thought the article explains the perspective about Islam that many westerners don't grasp - they just don't get it. In 1992, the socialist government in Madrid promoted legislation that recognized Islam's ancient tradition in the country, considering Spanish identity harmoniously interwoven with the Koranic religion. But the Muslim interpretation of Islam in Spain, beginning with conquest in 711 and ending in 1492, had a more militant twist. Scholar M. Amir Ali commented that Spain had actually been liberated by Muslim forces and its tyrants removed. Reflecting on March 11, as Muslim terrorism killed 200 and wounded 1,400 in Madrid, one wonders whether one day this event will also not be commemorated as a liberating moment. Central to the attitude in the West concerning Islam is the fear to define global terrorism as Muslim terrorism. US President George W. Bush's reticence, a combination of caution and error, has been representative of all Western leaders. Islam's conceptual lexicon and emotional code are radically different from that conventionally understood and practiced in the West. Yasser Arafat and Ahmed Yassin, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Hassan Nasrallah, and Osama bin Laden, register as dramatic personae who relentlessly link religion with war against Jews and Christians, devoid of any remorse or shame. The mind-set of Islam was etched into theological axioms with the appearance of the Koran in the seventh century. This book is its explicit and enduring guide. The Koran is, among other things, a war tract calling upon "the believers" - there are only Muslim believers - "to fight for the cause of Allah" (4:74-76). This is a war for truth; God is One and Muhammad his true prophet and messenger. The infidels must be punished (16:126-8) for their haughtiness and stubbornness in rejecting Muhammad (6:158), and will burn in the fire of Hell (4:55). The Muslims must fight the infidels, primarily Jews and Christians, with "the sword of Muhammad." The religion of Muhammad will triumph because the Muslims love death, accepting any individual sacrifice, while the enemy loves life. At Qadisiyya in 637, Arabs seeking paradise defeated Persians longing for the earth below. Yet more than the Muslim shahid (martyr) is willing to die, the Muslim mujahid (fighter) has a passion to kill. This is his religious mission and life's purpose. There is no reason to pity the infidel or feel culpable for his demise. The Koran commands the believer not to trust or befriend the humiliated dhimmis, those Jewish and Christian scriptuaries, who must suffer timorously the heavenly sanctioned rule of Islam. Islam's supersessionary religious doctrine catalyzed relentless destruction, oppression, and abuse of Christians in eastern lands. While there were moments of laxity and civility in applying the robust strictures of domination, Islam did not recoil from razing churches in ancient Damascus and slaughtering Christians in Mesopotamia, inflicting atrocities in Aleppo and exterminating Armenians in their homeland. Arab colonization of the Middle East and the Islamization of its peoples were acts of conquest and conversions that define the region until today. The 14th-century Muslim theologian Ibn Taimiyya explained the root of this sweeping campaign. "Infidels," he wrote, "forfeit their persons and their belongings which they do not use in Allah's service to the faithful believers who serve Allah and unto whom Allah restitutes what is theirs; thus is restored to a man [Muslim] the inheritance of which he was deprived, even if he had never before gained possession." THE MUSLIM dehumanization of non-Muslims profoundly colors the problematic relationship wherever the two sides meet. People who innocently take a train in Madrid, a plane in Washington, a bus in Jerusalem, or go to the theater in Moscow, can be wantonly murdered with no Muslim afterthought. The Koranic precept "to slay them [infidels] wherever you find them" (2:191) is the religious gunpowder filling mosque sermons in Mecca, Cairo, and Gaza. The believers call upon Allah to help the warriors of Islam in Kashmir and Chechnya, Palestine and Kosovo. The believer is fortified by the belief that any martyrdom operation against haughty Jews and misguided Christians pleases Allah. It is that act which brings honor to the martyr's family. This religious delirium, with the Muslim's mental universe pining for the heavenly whorehouse of 72 virgins awaiting him in paradise, cannot be apprised through conventional categories of Western humanism. The Muslim mosque, for prayer in Bradford, Rennes, and Granada, potentially transforms faith into a closed herd mentality, and spirituality into formulae for ineluctable conquest. The socio-religious processes of demographic growth and conversion, with more than 15 million Muslims inhabiting Western Europe today, constitute alternative and non-violent modes for the Islamic proliferation in Europe. In two generations, half of Holland will be Muslim and a third of Denmark; more than a tenth of France already is. During the history of Muslim takeover of the Christian lands in the ancient Middle East - which is now being repeated in the Christian lands of Europe - public space was to be cleansed of infidel presumption, if not presence. This is a process whose signs are emerging in Western countries, as police protect shoppers and travelers, as strategic targets are endangered. Muslims and their sites are free of menace. IT FOLLOWS, then, that mourning in Madrid and panic in Paris constitute a thoroughly proper state of affairs. The infidel "domain of war," to use an Islamic legalism for non-Muslim lands, must inevitably fall to Islam. Sheikh Jamal Shakir, in a mosque harangue in Amman on March 5, said: "O God destroy your enemies, the Jews and Crusader enemies of Islam." While Israel has fought tenaciously against Islamic terrorism, Europe has adopted escapist routes: blaming Israel and its war with the Palestinians as responsible for Muslim terror, and bowing submissively as dhimmis must to Muslim violence, threats, and ultimatums. Witness appropriate European cowardice and venality, with the rise of anti-Semitism and the shameful Spanish election results. Exhausted by two 20th-century continental wars and the long Cold War, now confronting a multifaceted Islamic War, Europe is deluded and divided. That the Muslims take their religion seriously and literally appears beyond the grasp of European comprehension. The Americans understand better, and Israel smack in the eye of the storm hits back without remorse or shame. To Go To Top

DERSH ON PESTILINIAN RACISM: PALESTINIAN RACISM EXPOSED Posted by Steven Plaut, April 13, 2004.

This article was was written by Alan Dershowitz, is a professor of law at Harvard. His latest book is "The Case for Israel." It was published in the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com) yesterday. Recently, a young student at the Hebrew University was gunned down while jogging through a mixed neighborhood of Jews and Arabs in north Jerusalem. The Aksa Martyrs Brigade, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement, joyously claimed credit for the killing yet another innocent Jew. When it was later learned that the jogger was a Jerusalem Arab and not a Jew, al-Aksa quickly apologized to the family, calling it an accident. But the killing of the innocent young jogger was not an accident; the murderer had deliberately taken aim at his head and midsection, intending to end his life. The only thing accidental about the murder was the religion of the victim. Al-Aksa had sent the assassin to murder a Jew any Jew, so long as he was a Jew. This is racism, pure and simple. And despite efforts by supporters of Palestinian terrorism to justify the murder of innocent civilians as national liberation or by any other euphemism, this case proves that the Palestinian terrorists' targeting of Jews and only Jews as many as possible is little different in intent from other forms of lethal or exterminatory anti-Jewish murders. (I don't use the term anti-Semitic only because some Arabs claim that because they too are Semites, they can't be anti-Semitic.) Obviously the numbers are different, because Israel is capable of defending its Jewish citizens, but if it were not, the goal of Palestinian terrorist groups would not be very different from that of previous groups intent on murdering as many Jews as possible. The Web sites of various Palestinian terrorist groups proclaim usually only in English and almost never in Arabic that they have no quarrel with the Jews, only with the Zionists. Yet they target every Jew, regardless of his or her individual political views, and they apologize when they accidentally kill a non-Jew, regardless of his political views. The racist acts of these terrorist groups speak louder than their sanitized English-only anti-Zionist Web sites. YET THE international community including the UN, the Vatican, and the European Union claims to see no difference between Palestinian terrorists who target random Jewish civilians and the Israel Defense Forces that target specific mass murderers, such as Ahmed Yassin. It's all part of a "cycle of violence" in which both sides are morally equivalent, according to the double standard consistently applied against Israel by people who should know better. The preventive killing of the mass murderer Sheikh Yassin received much more negative attention from the moral leaders of these organizations than did the racist attack that accidentally killed the young Arab. This failure or refusal to distinguish murder based on religious affiliation from preventive self-defense based on past and future murderous acts is the height of immorality. It would be as if the soldiers who killed Auschwitz guards in the process of liberating the inmates were deemed morally equivalent to the Auschwitz murderers. It should not be surprising that Palestinian terrorists employ racist criteria in selecting their civilian targets, since the entire goal of Palestinian terrorism is racist to its core. It seeks to deny the Jewish people the right to self-determination. Under their version of Islamic law, it is impermissible for Jews to govern any land that was once under Muslim control, and it is equally impermissible for a Jewish majority to govern a Muslim minority, namely Israeli Arabs. The time has come for the international community to listen to what Palestinian terrorists say to their own people: that this is a racist struggle to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine, which includes Israel, of all Jews (except, they say, those Jews who lived there before 1917 and are willing to remain as a minority in a Muslim land). The civilian targets are selected on a racist basis all Jews are fair game, and if a non-Jew is killed, that is an unfortunate accident. The terrorist killing of the young Jerusalem Arab student, coupled with the apology when it was learned he was not Jewish, was not only a tragedy for his family (which lost another member to a terrorist attack years earlier), but it is also a revealing episode in the history of Palestinian terrorism. All who hate racism should condemn the selective morality under which a deliberate Jewish civilian death is applauded and a deliberate Arab civilian death is regretted. All deliberate targeting of non-combatants must be equally condemned. And the deliberate targeting of civilians based on their religion is to be especially condemned. 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

A LIKUD INSIDER'S ANALYSIS OF P.M. SHARON'S IMPENDING VISIT WITH PRES. BUSH Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, April 13, 2004.

As you know, PM Sharon decided to bring his plan of unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and 4 settlements in the northern part of Judea and Samaria to a referendum among all Likud party members in Israel. His decision was motivated because of his will to legitimize the plan by the party in large and thus he will be able to pass the plan smoothly in both the cabinet and inside the Likud faction in the Knesset. As of now, the schedule looks the following: Following the end of Passover PM Sharon is to leave Israel for a meeting with President Bush where he is expecting to hear the President supporting the withdrawal plan. By April 18 the PM is expected to put the final plan on the table of the Likud election committee (the body that governs the referendum) and the committee is expected to send it to all Likud party members (around 200,000 people) for their review. Referendum day is expected to take place on April 29 (elections will take place from 10 am till midnight). If the PM wins the referendum he is expected to immediately convene a cabinet meeting and pass the plan in the cabinet and on May 3 (the first day of the Knesset's summer session) to pass the plan in the Knesset. Of course, if the PM is not able to pass his plan then anything is possible - from back to usual business to the fall of Sharon's government. PM Sharon has a number of assets at his disposal to use in order to pass his plan: 1) He is not only the PM of Israel, he is also the Chairman of the Likud party and the organization of the party is basically committed to him and his people. The organization of the party has decided of the referendum date accordingly with the PM's request, they are the people sitting on the full list of the potential voters, they are deciding the voting procedure, managing the referendum day and the counting process. That gives the PM and his people a lot of power in making the game rules to their advantage. 2) The main political supporters of the PM's plan include Defense Minister Mofaz and Deputy PM Olmert. The three of them can (and actively do) influence the public discussion in Israel. A PM, Deputy PM and Defense Minister in Israel are 3 positions that carry a lot of weight in the public opinion and can basically spin whenever they want the media and the public opinion. Add to that the fact that this is the month that has the most appearances in the media of these 3 on formal occasions (special Passover interviews, Holocaust day appearances, and Independence day appearances) together with the PM's trip to Washington this week - and you get a total domination of the PM, Olmert and Mofaz on the media and the public opinion from now and till referendum day. 3) Traditionally the Likud party is very protective of its leaders. The political operators don't like to see acts of disrespect towards the Likud leader, especially that he is an acting PM. You can oppose him, but do it with dignity and respect. The ending result of that is the fact that the number groups opposing the plan did not find the exact way to both oppose the PM and do it with respect to him. And the clock is ticking... 4) The opposition to the plan is based on a number of ad-hoc groups that are cooperating together. These groups still lack the leadership of someone with the scale of Netanyahu or the Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom. Most of the Likud main Ministers are sitting on the fence, and even if they oppose the plan, they don't show their opposition in public or take upon themselves the leadership role of forming a strong and united opposition to the PM. 5) PM Sharon has shown again and again that he is the best player in the Israeli political arena these days. He is one of the oldest and experienced leaders living in Israel (and in the world). That is an added value that he has over his rivals. These are very strong factors that play on behalf of the PM. Nevertheless, there are also as strong factors that play against the PM: 1) The PM's credibility has eroded in the public eye due to the alleged fraud scandals of him and his sons. No one really knows if the withdrawal plan has been put on the table now due to his belief that this is the right thing for Israel or is it to counter the judicial attacks he and his sons sustain. 2) The opposition is a very strong grass rooted opposition. Yes, there are the famous 13 Likud Ministers and MK's that are opposing the PM's plan, but the base of opposition among political operators and party members is broad as well. The latest polls show that among potential referendum voters that declared that they will come to vote at any circumstances there is a lead of 2 opposing the plan for every 1 voter who supports the plan. That means that even with no strong organization and leadership, there is still a large base of grass root ideological voters that oppose the PM's plan at this point of time. From my own talks with potential voters and political operators I can tell you that you almost hear no one supporting the plan and those opposing the plan are very vocal and active. These are two strong factors that play against the PM's plan. If the Likud party members won't believe that there is a real urgency and/or national profit from the unilateral withdrawal then they will simply do what they thought is right in the past - to vote against any unilateral plan that includes settlements removal. After all, that is exactly what the PM himself advocated for a very long period of time, basically for the past 30 years. Best wishes, Shimon Israel Commentary (www.Israel-Commentary.org) is hosted by Jerome Kaufman. To Go To Top

PALESTINIANS URGE HOLY WAR AGAINST US Posted by Isralert, April 12, 2004.

Two articles on the Palestinian attitude toward U.S.A. PALESTINIANS URGE HOLY WAR AGAINST US by Khaled Abu Toameh, the Jerusalem Post, Apr. 9, 2004 (http://www.jpost.com). Thousands of Palestinians staged rallies over the weekend to mark the first anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, calling on Iraqis to rise up against the US in a holy war. Following Friday prayers, thousands of protesters in the West Bank and Gaza Strip burned Israeli and American flags and chanted slogans against US President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. In Ramallah, hundreds of Palestinians marched in the streets, chanting slogans against the US and Israel and expressing their support for the Iraqi resistance. The protesters burned American and Israeli flags and condemned the Arab states for failing to back the Iraqis who are fighting against the coalition forces in Iraq. Abu Ali Muqbel, a member of the Palestine National Council (The PLO's parliament in exile) denounced the "disgraceful" Arab silence regarding the "crimes being perpetrated against the Iraqis and Palestinians. In Nablus, thousands of Palestinians took to the streets, carrying pictures of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and Iraqi flags. The demonstration was organized by all the Palestinian factions in the city. Kamal Abu Zarifeh, a spokesman for the Coordinating Committee of the Palestinian Factions in Nablus, told the crowd that the Palestinians and the Iraqis were fighting the same war against the occupiers. "The are crimes perpetrated by the Americans against the Iraqi people are not different from the crimes which the Zionists are committing against the Palestinians," he said. "The people in Nablus and Jenin are facing the same challenges as the people in Fallujah and Karabala." A similar anti-American protest also took place in Kalkilyah, where hundreds of residents urged the Arab world to back the militias in Iraq that are fighting against the coalition forces. In Gaza City and Khan Yunis, thousands of Palestinians, chanting "Death to America" and "Death to Israel," burned effigies of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and US President George W. Bush. The protesters saluted the Iraqi "intifada" and expressed their desire to join the insurgents in Iraq. Addressing the demonstrators, Islamic Jihad leader Abdallah Shami strongly condemned the US "war crimes against children, women, mosques, and houses in Iraq." He said the American military offensive "exposed America's ugly face which had been covered with slogans about democracy and human rights." Another Islamic Jihad leader, Mohammad Hindi, said: "Our message to the world, to our brothers in Iraq: We are fighting against the same enemies, the same occupation. We are fighting in the same battle." Taisir Khaled, member of the PLO executive committee, praised the "courageous Iraqi resistance fighters." He expressed hope that Iraq would resume its role in defending Arab interests "in the face of the unholy and evil alliance between right-wing radical US Administration and the extremist, radical and expansionist government led by Sharon." Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, voiced support for Iraqi insurgency against the coalition forces, condemning Sharon and Bush as "murderers." "The Palestinian people are fully supporting the Iraqi people," Rantisi said at a demonstration in Gaza City Thursday night. Rantisi sent his greetings to Iraqi Shiite insurgent leader Moqtada al-Sadr, saying, "We support you and God be with you." He said that the demonstrators "came here to tell the Iraqi people that the Palestinian people are with you, you are fighting the American terrorism as we fight the Zionist terrorism." Rantisi added: "I'm certain that you would win your battle against the Americans and you would of course defeat American terrorism. You are there on the front line because you are fighting the enemies of God and Islam, the murderers Bush and Sharon." 2. PALESTINIANS RALLY TO SHOW THEIR SUPPORT FOR IRAQI UPRISING by Arnon Regular, Haaretz, April 11, 2004 (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/414272.html) Thousands of people took part in dozens of demonstrations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip over the weekend in support of the armed uprising of the Shi'ites and Sunnis in Iraq against the U.S. and coalition forces. The military wings of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah used the demonstrations as an opportunity to call for an escalation of the intifada. The largest demonstrations took place in the Gaza Strip. At one protest, senior Islamic Jihad member Mohammed al-Hindi called for participants to "learn the lesson of the Iraqi intifada and the determination of the groups in Iraq to expel the American conqueror. The Sunnis and the Shi'ites must continue their armed opposition, which brings respect to themselves and to all Arabs and Muslims. And we here in Palestine must also learn the lesson of the previous uprisings, work together, and not allow the American and Zionist conquerors to sow the seeds of disunity among the groups struggling for their freedom." Addressing Shi'ite forces in Iraq, Gaza Strip Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi declared, "We are with you in your struggle. Bush and Sharon are the enemies of Islam. Strike and burn them and teach them the lesson of the suicide actions." Rantisi's call, which was met by loud cheering, may be seen as an expression of his view that the uprising in Iraq is a pan-Arab act of revenge for the killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. The usual burning of the U.S. and Israeli flags and effigies of George Bush and Ariel Sharon were accompanied for the first time at the protests by the appearence of photos of Iraqi Shi'ite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Participants in Friday's Islamic Jihad demonstration called on Nasrallah and al-Sadr to cooperate in Iraq to expel the Americans. Masked men read part of an item that had appeared on a popular Islamic news Internet site that stated representatives of al-Sadr and Nasrallah had met over the past weeks and were cooperating. The item, which has not been verified, drew cheers from the crowd. Islamic Jihad also held a mass protest march in Ramallah, and in Nablus some 2,000 people demonstrated, including about 200 armed men. Protests were also staged in Qalqilya, Tul Karm, and Jenin. Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and "the monitoring committee of the national Islamic groups" (the umbrella organization of groups taking part in the intifada), headed by Fatah, published statements of support for the Iraqi people and drew comparisons between events in Iraq and those in the territories. The official Palestinian media is also covering events in Iraq extensively, calling Arabs killed in Iraq "martyrs" and praising opposition to the U.S. as "a continuation of the strong stand of the Palestinian people," in the words of the official Palestinian Authority daily, Al-Hayat al-Jadida. Palestinian Authority leaders, however, have avoided expressing themselves publicly with regard to Iraq, with Yasser Arafat making do with offering a special prayer on Friday for "those killed among the Palestinian and Iraqi people." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

PARTICIPATE IN THE REFERENDUM ON THE JEWISH HOMELAND Posted by Voice of Judea, April 12, 2004.

SHARON'S SHNOR TRIP TO WASHINGTON Ariel Sharon will be requesting five billion dollars from President Bush, to help ressettle Jewish refugees who he intends on expeling from Gaza and Judea and Samaria. Sharon is expected to synchronize the destruction of several Jewish "Hilltops" in Judea and Samria to coincide with his trip to Washingotn tomorrow. Sharon hopes to appease the Americans with Israeli headlines showing Jewish soldiers using force to tear down Jewish homes, according to a report appearing on Maariv online. In the meantime, efforts are being made to bring Sharon's surrender plan known as the "disengagement plan" to a referendum within the Likud party, in late April or May. Voice of Judea Commentary: The Americans control Sharon. He is prepared to wage war with his own brothers and sisters so as to appease his American handlers? The Americans pay cash and we pay in blood of innocent Jews. And Sharon is a great demagogue to put the "disengagement plan" to a vote. Sure, most Israelis want to disengage from the Arabs. However, which disengagement is the question that Sharon will never bring to a vote. Do the people of Israel prefer surrendering land and disengaging from some Arabs, under fire? They would certainly prefer the expulsion of the Arabs before supporting the expulsion of the Jews from Gaza and other parts of Israel. However, Sharon, will never allow the people of Israel or of his own party to take a true democratic choice and decide their own destiny. The present referendum show is a fraud. Those who wish to SUPPORT A REAL REFERENDUM TO SAVE ISRAEL. can send a contribution or help man a polling station as well as casting their vote online. A new group has been founded that calls for a national referendum on this very issue. "Operation Homeland" is launching a referendum proposal with the following 3 questions that each and every Jew is being asked to answer: 1- Should Israel disengage from the Arabs? 2- Should Israel implement a disengagement along the lines of Sharon and other politicians which would mean expulsion of Jews from their homes and surrender of Jewish towns, and leave many Arabs within the borders that remain Israel? 3- Should Israel implement a disengagement in accordance with the Bible, which would mean expulsion of most Arabs, no surrender of Jewish land and no hostile Arabs remaining within the present borders of Israel? Every Jew in the world has the right and obligation to cast their vote in this referendum. If you wish to participate, send back and email to jsid@dorsai.org with the subject: My Vote for Israel's Future. Send your name and email address as well as your vote. Every vote counts. EMAIL THIS EMAIL AND REFERENDUM EVERYWHERE AND ANYWHERE. REFERENDUM TO SAVE ISRAEL To help sponsor a massive ad campaign "Sharon stop playing games - Let's make a real referendum." And the contents of the above three questions. Millions of ballots and brochures offering a real alternative that could save Israel, need to be printed and distributed NOW, contributions can be sent to "Operation Homeland" at 1403 44th street Brooklyn NY 11219 PALESTINIANS RALLY FOR IRAQ Palestinians rallied in support of Iraqi insurgents fighting the United States. Following prayers on Friday, thousands of protesters in the West Bank and Gaza Strip burned Israeli and U.S. flags and chanted slogans against President Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, The Associated Press reported. In Gaza City, about 2,000 Islamic Jihad supporters chanted Death to America and burned effigies of Bush and Sharon. Our message to the world, to our brothers in Iraq, we are fighting against the same enemies, the same occupation, we are fighting in the same battle, Mohammed al-Hindi, an Islamic Jihad leader, told reporters. The Sunni and the Shiites have united in a jihad, as they should, against the Americans, one cleric in Nablus said. Fallujah, the people of Palestine are with you, one group chanted, referring to the Iraqi city at the center of the fighting. Voice of Judea Commentary: Let them go to Iraq and join their brothers. The website address of Voice of Judea is http://www.voiceofjudea.com Subscribe by writing listmaster@voiceofjudea.com To Go To Top

PLEASE SIGN THE GAZA, JUDEA AND SAMARIA PETITION Posted by Dafna Yee, April 12, 2004.

This petition is desgined to encourage the current Israel government to submit its decision to withdraw/dismantle Jewish communities in Gaza, Judea and Samaria to a vote by the citizens of Israel. PETITION While I signed the petition to show my support to the people of Israel, and my total disagreement with Sharon's plans to abandon Gaza, Judea and Sumaria to the "Palestinian" terrorists aka "moderates", I do not agree that any government official, under any circumstances, has the right to give away any part of Israel! This is true even if the people of Israel are foolish enough to vote for this to happen. Beyond being a democracy, the Land of Israel is held in trust for all Jews, not only for this generation but for all the Jewish people who don't have a vote now, including those who have died to keep Israel intact. Israel is the heritage of all Jews everywhere for all time and no election should be able to deprive the Jewish people of a gift that was given to them by God in perpetuity. God did not give a "expiration date" and neither should the Israelis who are temporarily in power. Dafna Yee is the director of the Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

ISRAEL'S 'BORDER' WITH THE WEST BANK Posted by Leo Rennert, April 12, 2004.

I sent this to the "Telegraph" in the U.K. Your report that President Bush is prepared to recognize that Israel will end up in any final peace agreement with some West Bank land erred in describing the "Green Line" as Israel's internationally recognized border. The "Green Line" never acquired full-fledged international legitimacy. It was a temporary armistice line at the end of Israel's 1948-49 War of Independence against Arab armies which tried to eliminate the Jewish state in its infancy. Later, during the 1967 Six-Day War, triggered by another Egyptian attempt to eliminate Israel, victorious Israeli forces breached the "Green Line" and took over the entire West Bank. Afterward, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 242, which envisaged "secure" borders for Israel along with Israeli withdrawal from some - but not all - captured Palestinian areas. In supporting Israeli absorption of some West Bank areas, President Bush merely affirms Israel's internationally recognized rights under Resolution 242, which remains the only legal foundation for a final settlement. To Go To Top

CIVIL RIGHTS, TERRORISTS, AND EUROPE'S ATTITUDE TO ISRAEL"S SELF-DEFENSE Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 12, 2004.

1. "RIGHTS" Western civilization strode ahead, when it recognized political and civil rights. Some of these rights, however, conflict with each other. Society must reconcile completing claims and by adjudicating which take priority over which, to what extent, and under what conditions. Although freedom of speech is the primary right, one is not free to incite to riot or to utter other speech presenting a clear and present danger. Some jurisdictions curb the right to utter hate-speech. That latter restriction starts a slide down a slippery slope of censorship. The object of censorship usually is difficult to define, and censors tend to expand their types of bans. In my youth, I joined four organizations dedicated to civil liberties. I quit two when they revealed some bigotry, and the third for supporting one ethnic group in repressing mine. Since then, experience has soured me somewhat about civil liberties. This happened after my wife took seriously ill. I wanted to bring her to the hospital for diagnosis and treatment. She refused to go. Her refusal was based on having been the butt of malpractice and upon her over-optimism about the extent of her illness. She always had recovered on her own. After a couple of days of her inability to eat and drink, I told her we should not wait in her usual expectation that the problem would go away. This was something other than the loss of appetite that she got from chemotherapy, which loss might pass, in a couple of days. Not having a loss of appetite, she tried to eat and drink. Whatever she swallowed gave her pain. That frightened me. My wife was getting weaker. I telephoned the oncologist, but he merely suggested she go to the hospital, when he should have insisted. I called the hospital, but they told me that since she didn't want to go, and she otherwise seemed in possession of her faculties, they would not take her. They would not take her against her will, because she had rights. After another couple of days of suffering for both of us, though in different ways, she relented. She looked deathly ill. After the hospital re-hydrated her and, at my insistence, gave her a nutrition infusion, the doctors told us that they had been worried that her bodily systems might shut down. She admitted that she had no idea she was that ill. Half a year later, her systems did shut down. I'll always wonder to what extent her death was facilitated by the blow to her health caused by the delay in getting her to the hospital. But I couldn't force her into the hospital to save her life, because she had "rights." It cost me some suffering in reliving that memory, in order to explain to you the need for a rational balance about rights. The US goes too far in letting people from enemy states study nuclear, chemical, and biological issues in our universities. The mischievous element in letting them do so is a misconceived notion of fairness and aliens' rights. 2. LIQUIDATE TERRORISTS AND LEAVE GAZA PM Sharon said that Israeli security forces are wiping out terrorists enough so that by next year, terrorism would be greatly reduced when those forces withdraw from Gaza. His logic is specious. It rests upon a false assumption. He assumes that the supply of terrorists is fixed, and so if Israel wiped out most of them, too few would be left to carry on. Fallacies: (1) Israel is wiping out many but not most. Offhand, Hamas and the PLO must have at least 10,000 gunmen in Gaza, and Israel probably would not liquidate more than 5,000. The rest could carry on; and (2) The thousands left easily would train more, enthused by Arab success in having gotten the IDF out of Gaza. 3. EUROPE ON ISRAELI SELF-DEFENSE 1. The European Parliament called Israel's self-defense assassination of Yassin, who inspired and ordered much terrorism, itself, terrorism, because civilians were hurt. NATO, however, bombed Yugoslavia for 73 days, although no member state was threatened with annihilation. 2. Europe (whether collectively or by individual governments and the major media was not defined) criticized Israel for using pinpoint snipers rather than machine guns. 3. When Israel used machine guns, Europe criticized that. 4. Then Europe criticized the use of helicopters (favored by the US in its own war tactics). 5. After that, Europe criticized the use of F-16s for more accurate bombing. (Accurate bombing means fewer bombs and fewer civilians hurt.) The US criticized Israel for that, too, but went on to use planes in Baghdad even after having come into control of Iraq. 6. Europe denounced Israeli bombing of the houses of Arabs involved in murder and paid by Iraq for it. Europe hardly objected to the P.A. deliberately bombing Israeli civilians with nail-filled bombs to increase bodily harm. 7. Another complaint was that Israel's bombs were too big. (When it used smaller ones, the targeted terrorists got away.) 8. Europe condemned Israel's rules of engagement, although those rules are milder than Europe's. 9. Rubber-coated bullets came in for their share of obloquy. 10. Europe demanded that Israel not impose blockades and checkpoints through which murderers and bomb-toting ambulances otherwise pass. 11. Israeli statements and rulings were mocked. 12. Israel's separation fence was opposed even before its route was selected. 13. Europe and some leftist Israelis threatened to put IDF officers on trial. When government representatives complained to editors about their having distorted what the IDF did, Europe criticized that, too, as if it and not the editorials were the persecution. 14. Israeli pursuit of terrorists was called criminal, rather than an act of war. Europe really does not think Israel has a right to self-defense. Israel should exercise the right to denounce such critics, suggests Ze'ev Schiff (IMRA, 4/7 from Haaretz, 4/4). Israel fails to point out the constant double standards that abet terrorism. It also has failed to formally declare war, in its deluded pretense of having a peace process and of pleasing the US. Minor concessions can never please an imperious power having major demands. 4. WHAT PM SHARON SAYS ISRAEL GETS OUT OF WITHDRAWAL He says withdrawal is the price "to ensure that the world insist that the P.A. keeps its end of the bargain." (Arutz-7, 4/7.) Israeli concessions never have brought enforcement against the Arabs by foreign powers, because those powers favor the Arabs and many hate Jews. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

CAMERA LAUNCHES LIBRARY PROJECT: DONATE NEW BOOKS ABOUT ISRAEL Posted by Lee Green, April 11, 2004.

The battle continues for the hearts and minds of Americans regarding the facts about the Arab-Israeli conflict and the current Palestinian terror war. While it is obviously essential that we persist in the essential work of educating the media about key context often misrepresented or missing from news reports, it is also helpful to go directly to the public. The more informed members of the public are, the more likely they will communicate with the media and their government officials regarding news and policies related to Israel and the Palestinians. With this in mind, CAMERA is launching its Library Project. The goal of CAMERA's Library Project is to: Make fair and accurate books about Israel available to the public in community, highschool and university libraries. We urge you to donate new books about Israel (from the suggested list below) to your local libraries. With the help of our thousands of members across the country, we hope to provide thousands of libraries with reliable books about Israel. CAIR (the Council on American Islamic Relations) and the rabidly anti-Israel AET have similar projects (http://tinyurl.com/2bhqp http://tinyurl.com/2ctv7 ) and they have provided books to over 7000 libraries nationwide. We can do no less! Please consider supplying several libraries with books. How to Donate Books to Libraries With a Quick Call: After April 26, please call Wordsworth Books, 617-498-0062, and ask to speak to Ellen. Tell her you're calling to order books for the CAMERA Library Project. 2. Tell her the amount of money you want to spend and if you have a preference for which library should receive the books. If you have a preference, please provide Ellen with the name, city and state of the library. The library's telephone number would also be very helpful, but is not necessary. If you don't select a library, Wordsworth will choose one in your state. $157 will buy all the books on the list, providing your library with an excellent collection of interesting and reliable reference books about Israel. However, there is no need to buy the entire list. You are welcome to donate any amount $20 and over. The gift of one book is helpful too! 3. Be sure to give Ellen your name and address, so that Wordsworth can send you a receipt and can provide the library with the name and address of the donor of the new books. Hopefully, the library will also send you a thank-you note. 4. Ellen from Wordsworth will call the library to determine which books will be accepted for their shelves. Wordsworth will send as many of the accepted books as possible with the money you provided. Since the total for the books will vary depending upon which books the library already has, you will probably be charged less than the amount you agreed to pay. You will never be charged more. You will be sent a receipt from Wordsworth with the names of the books sent, the cost, and the name of the library the books were sent to. For tax purposes, the Wordsworth receipt will be proof that you donated new books to a library. Please note that books will not be ordered until a librarian has agreed to accept them. The timing of the shipment depends on how quickly the librarian gets back to Wordsworth with a decision. Expect the shipment to take 1-3 weeks. 5. Check out the books and read them! Encourage your friends to check them out, so that the books will remain in circulation. How To Donate Books On Your Own: 1. Call or visit your community or school library to determine which books on CAMERA's recommended booklist (see below) they do not have. 2. Make a list of the books (with their descriptions) you would be willing to donate. 3. Present the acquisition librarian with your list and tell her/him you would like to buy these new books for the library's collection as long as they will definitely be put on the circulation shelves and not resold for fundraising. 4. Once you get approval, buy the books and either bring them to the library yourself or have them mailed directly to the acquisition librarian to whom you spoke. 5. Please send to CAMERA the names of the books you donated, along with the name and address of the library. Send e-mail to: leahgreen@aol.com with subject line "Library Project." Suggested Book List: Arafat's War: The Man and his Battle for Israeli Conquest by Efraim Karsh (2003). The author draws on Arabic, Hebrew and English-language sources to give what may be the most comprehensive account of Arafat's life. Well argued, fast-paced and engaging. The Case for Israel by Alan Dershowitz (2003). Dershowitz refutes 32 common misperceptions/misrepresentations regarding Israel. Excellent resource!! A wonderful gift for a college student. The Right to Exist; A Moral Defense of Israel's Wars by Yaacov Lozowick (2003) Lozowick, an Israeli historian, describes his evolution from a liberal peace activist into a reluctant supporter of Sharon. He delves into the roots of the Zionist enterprise and traces the long struggle to establish and defend the Jewish state in the face of implacable Arab resistance and widespread international hostility. Lozowick examines each of Israel's wars from the perspective of classical "just war" theory, from the fight for independence to the present day. Subjecting the country's founders and their descendants to unsparing scrutiny, he concludes that Israel is neither the pristine socialist utopia its founders envisioned, nor the racist colonial enterprise portrayed by its enemies. Refuting dozens of pernicious myths about the conflict - such as the charge that Israel stole the land from its rightful owners, or that Arabs and Jews are locked in a "cycle of violence" for which both bear equal blame - RIGHT TO EXIST is an impassioned moral history of extraordinary resonance and power. The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Middle East Conflict by Mitchell Bard (Alpha Books) is a surprisingly helpful reference book. It is highly readable, and topics include the roots of the Middle East turmoil, global terrorism and Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. This book is recommended for Bar Mitzvah age students. Confronting Jihad: Israel's Struggle and the World after 9/11 by Saul Singer. A collection of compelling and informative essays by Jerusalem Post columnist Saul Singer. The essays were written from 1998 to the summer of 2003, but all are introduced with updated comments and are often focused on the war on terrorism being fought and faced by both the United States and Israel. Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, formerly published by AIPAC, has recently been updated and published by the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. Contains new chapters on the "al-Aksa Intifada," settlements and the media. It also provides updated information on the peace process, U.S. Middle East policy, and more. "Myths and Facts" can be viewed on-line at AICE's website http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mftoc.html. Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East by Michael Oren. This is the most complete history to date of the Six Day War. Ivory Towers On Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America by Martin Kramer (The Washington Institute For Near East Policy), exposes academia's failure to anticipate major developments in the Middle East. For example, most academics underplayed the danger of Islamic fundamentalism and regarded the movement as a moderate force of democratization. Even so, the "experts" of the Middle East studies departments continue to garner federal funding, media interviews, and the credibility of a believing public. Dream Palace of the Arabs: A Generation's Odyssey by Fouad Ajami (Vintage Books, 1999), explores how those among the intellectual elite of the Arab world who have sought to introduce modernity and secularism into their societies have been stymied, exiled, and sometimes killed. The Palestine War 1948 by Efraim Karsh This book examines the origins of the war and its progression through two distinct stages: the guerrilla warfare between the Arab and Jewish communities of Mandatory Palestine, and the conventional inter-state warfare between Israel and the invading Arab armies. It assesses the participants, their war aims, strategies, and combat performance. The Claim of Dispossession: Jewish Land-Settlement and the Arabs 1878-1948 by Arieh L. Avneri (Yad Tabenkin, 1984). This study investigates the expanding Jewish settlement over the 70 year period prior to the founding of Israel and its effects on the existing Arab community's economy and cultural institutions. It also examines the size of the Arab population in Palestine in 1878, the cause of its growth during the 70 years of Jewish development, Arab land sales to Jews, and the number of both Jewish and Arab refugees following the 1948 war. The $36 Billion Bargain: Strategy and Politics in U.S. Assistance to Israel by A.F.K. Organski (Columbia University, 1990). An important look at America's motives for supporting Israel, it rules out the influence of supposedly powerful Israel lobby organizations. Instead, support has been based solely on U.S. interests - first to counter Soviet influence in the region and then in response to the growing influence of radical Arab states. Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries by Paul Fregosi (Prometheus Books, 1998). An account of Islamic military invasions of the last 1300 years, focusing on Jihad in Europe and beginning with the initially unsuccessful siege of Constantinople. While European history has often focused on the Christian Crusades from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries, Jihad in the West examines the smoldering Islamic war against the "infidels," which has now reached the Americas. If you have other book suggestions, let me know: leahgreen@aol.com With thanks, Lee Green Lee Green is director of the National Letter-Writing Group, CAMERA. CAMERA is an organization that monitors the media for fairness in reporting news about Israel. To Go To Top

DOCUMENTS ON US AID TO ARAFAT AND THE PLO Posted by Dafna Yee, April 11, 2004.

The U.S. Government puts out a FAQ (frequently asked questions) sheet about its aid to the Palestinian Authority. Its website address is http://www.usaid.gov/wbg/faq.htm#aa1 (U.S. Agency for International Development/West Bank and Gaza). This is from the faq page from the USAID/WBG (U.S. Agency for International Development/West Bank and Gaza) web site, http://www.usaid.gov/wbg/faq.htm#aa1: Question: Does USAID/WBG provide funds to the Palestinian Authority? Answer: Until recently, the U.S. provided no cash to the Palestinian Authority (PA), or to any officials, ministries, agencies or instrumentalities of the PA. U.S. law specifically prohibits cash assistance to the PA. However, on July 16, 2003, the United States, by invoking special Presidential waiver authority, for the first time ever and in recognition of important progress in the reform of Palestinian institutions, signed an agreement with the Palestinian Authority authorizing a $20 million cash transfer for the purpose of maintaining municipal water, sewage and electrical services and providing for PA directed municipal infrastructure development. All other assistance to the PA takes the form of in-kind assistance [emphasis added] (training, technical assistance, equipment, etc.) rather than cash. "In-kind Assistance?" If you don't understand GovSpeak, an anti-Semitic, pro-Palestinian web site - http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/usaid.html - uses plainer language: According to USAID, in 2003, the United States gave an additional $20 million dollars directly to the Palestinian Authority (PA). Although U.S. law prohibits providing aid directly to the PA, the law was waived this once, in recognition of recent reforms undertaken by the PA. Actually, according to the State Department web site - http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html ?p=washfile-english&y=2003&m=November&x= 20031111192326attocnich0.253338& t=xarchives/xarchitem.html - more than $249 million was given to the PA through the USAID/WBG. Technically, $229 million of that amount doesn't count as it was patterned after the oil-for-food program in Iraq. (Heads, indoor plumbing, tails, kill Jews.) I quote this site because of the importance of the dates. The remaining $20 million was provided directly to the Palestinian Authority - a first (announced July 9). This decision was made because of the credibility that Palestinian Finance Minister Fayyad brought to the Palestinian Authority budget process, (GovSpeak, GovSpeak, GovSpeak.) (They didn't mention the cash transfer was specifically prohibited by U.S. law.) The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs web site (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa) has a page listing terror attacks that have occurred since the Oslo days - specifically, from the Declararation of Principals in September, 1993: According to this list, there were five attacks from May 17, 2003 to May 22, one on June 11, one on June 19, and one on July 7th. Notice the dates: the American government awarded Arafat, I mean the PA, $20 million on July 16; however it was announced on July 9, just two days after the July 7th suicide bombing. The next bombing occurred on Aug. 12, followed by one on Aug. 19, killing 23 people. There was such a tiny window of opportunity between suicide bombings in which the U.S. could act. The President had said, "We will not distinguish between terrorists and the nations harboring terrorists." He had to figure out a way around the law without rousing Congress, have some lackey (probably Colin "We will never negotiate with terrorists" Powell) jet to Arafat's compound, and get back just in time to threaten Israel for building a fence to protect herself from terrorist attacks paid for with U.S. tax dollars. Who would have thought the State Department could act with such alacrity, such military precision and split second timing? The State Department site leads to the USAID site, which leads to a UN site, UNISPAL (UN In Support of Palestinians?) - http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/ 22f431edb91c6f548525678a0051be1d/ 3e513f3f88cfcc9185256e2a0065bb42!OpenDocument, which had this to say about that pesky wall that Israel insists it needs to protect itself: Annan, European officials agree on need to re-energize Middle East peace process 28 January 2004 - United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and European Union (EU) officials discussed in Brussels today the urgent need to support the Middle East peace process and assist the Palestinian Authority. Responding to press questions following a meeting with Brian Cowen, the Foreign Minister of Ireland, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency, Mr. Annan said the two had agreed on the importance of re-energizing the peace process. "We shared our concern about the economic, social and humanitarian situation of the Palestinians and I appealed for additional support for them because I am afraid if this situation continues, we will see real despair and perhaps even partial collapse of the Palestinian Authority," he said. Stressing the need to break the impasse and move forward, the Secretary-General said, "Everybody agrees that the solution is land-for-peace and we need to really find a way of bringing the parties to the table so that in the end we can have two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in security." He pledged to continue efforts aimed at encouraging the parties to move forward. Echoing this view, Foreign Minister Cowen said, "We have responsibilities; we need to discharge them and we will work proactively, diplomatically and politically in the coming weeks and months to try and devise a way forward, consistent with the Road Map because of course that is the only means by which a just and comprehensive peace can be obtained." Notice the date, 28 January 2004. On January 29, 2004, eleven people were killed and over 50 wounded in a suicide bombing of an Egged bus no. 19. Why the urgency?  Annan said "... I am afraid if this situation continues, we will see real despair and perhaps even partial collapse of the Palestinian Authority," he said. Kofi, you pious puke, we don't wish to see the partial collapse of the PA. We want to see the total annihilation of the PA. Throw in the total collapse of the UN, and I'd be one happy camper. Who is he talking about when he says "everybody" agrees that the solution is land-for-peace? Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

JEWS RIGHT TO RETURN Posted by Chuck Brucks, April 11, 2004.

This article is by Sarah Sennott and is a MSNBC News Web Exclusive for April 9, 2004. April 9 - Last week, a small celebration rang out within the Iraqi Jewish diaspora - a global community of 125,000 people who had been stripped of their citizenship and near $200 million in property during a half-century mass exodus from Iraq. Iraq's minister of Housing and Reconstruction had publicly declared that Iraqi Jews who were forced from the country have the right to demand compensation for their property left behind. E-mails with a hyperlink to Minister Bayan Baqer Sulagh's interview with a London-based Arabic newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat, were passed around. Recipients wondered: was the policy announcement some kind of gift in time for this week's celebration of Passover? Not quite. Sulagh's remarks only add to the increased ambiguity over the matter of repatriating Iraqi Jews. Conflicting reports and statements abound over whether who, if anyone, will be allowed to reclaim their citizenship and their former homes - or, at least, to receive compensation for the property they left behind. A few Iraqis exiled after 1968,? when the Baathist party came to power, already have temporary ID cards allowing them entry. And in January, the ruling Governing Council created the Iraqi Property Claims Commission (IPCC) to sort out claims of property confiscated by the former government. The commission expects more than 100,000 claims from Iraqi exiles (of all religions) to be filed this year. But the statute creating the IPCC only addresses claims made after 1968 and therefore only applies to a small minority of the community in exile: nearly all of the 125,000 Jews once living in Iraq left during the 1950s. And the Iraqi Governing Council does not seem sympathetic to their claims. Last September, when the council drafted a decree restoring the nationality of expelled Iraqis, it specifically excluded the Jews. But Coalitional Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer wouldn't sign it. So the new law for the transitional period - from July 1 when the Iraqi Interim Government takes office until a permanent constitution is put in place by a newly elected National Assembly - is somewhat more accommodating. It states that those carrying Iraqi nationality shall be granted recitizenship, regardless of when they left Iraq or what their political, religious or racial background. Still, after learning that they were left out of the initial decree that Bremer refused to sign, many Iraqi Jews are skeptical that the new law will guarantee that those expelled before 1968 will be able to reclaim their property or be awarded compensation. "The new Constitution says that after July 1968 you can get an ID and property back, but [the period] before [1968] is deliberately left ambiguous," says Edwin Shuker, a member of the World Sephardic Congress in London. "I have no doubt those who left after 1968 will be welcomed back. But for those before 1968, the situation is different." For more than two millennia, the Jews were a vibrant part of Iraqi society. After the destruction of the First Temple by the tyrant Nebuchadnezzar and their subsequent exile from Israel more than 2,500 years ago, Babylonia became the religious, scholarly, and cultural center of the Jewish world. The compilation of Jewish law and practice, the Babyloanian Talmud, was written here. Later, many were prominent doctors, lawyers, bankers and craftsmen.? One of Iraq's most renowned female singers in the first half of the 20th century was Selima Pahad (Murad), who was Jewish. In the early 20th century, Jewish estates lined the lively, caf??-filled Abu Nawas neighborhood along the Tigris River in Baghdad. But as Nazi propaganda spread across the Arab world, the Jews faced growing violence. Synagogues were bombed, and 180 Jews were murdered and 1,000 injured in the Mufti-inspired, pro-Nazi coup of Rashib Ali in 1941. After Israel was created, many Iraqi Jews were accused of acting as Israeli spies and prohibited from leaving the country. As the number of Jews fleeing Iraq illegally grew, the government passed a law allowing Jews to emigrate under the condition that they forfeit their citizenship. In 1951, nearly 120,000 Jews were evacuated in an airlift operation from Baghdad to Jerusalem. Bank accounts were frozen and an estimated $200 million in property were taken over by the state. Roughly 6,000 Jews remained, fairly safely, until the late 1960s, when Saddam's Baathist party took over. In 1969, 11 Jews, accused of being Israeli spies, were hung in Baghdad's Liberation Square. Baghdad radio encouraged Iraqi citizens 'to come and enjoy the feast.' That year, 2,500 of Iraq's estimated 3,500 remaining Jews fled, leaving behind locked-up empty family homes. By this month, Iraq's Jewish community had shrunk to 22 people. Baghdad's last synagogue has been locked up since March 2003, two weeks before the American invasion. Most of the remaining Jews are too elderly to leave, and the 'acting rabbi,' Emad Levy, 38, the youngest of the group, says he plans to leave after selling off assets too difficult to take with him. "I don't think many [Jewish] people will apply to come back," he told NEWSWEEK by e-mail. "They asked me how it was here and I told them it was very dangerous. The people are uneducated here and hate the Jews." But even if they don't return to Iraq, the Jewish diaspora wants to be compensated for the homes and property they left behind. Nearly half a century after the mass exodus, as a new constitution is being drafted in Iraq, the exiles are waging a worldwide battle for compensation. 'We feel it is now or never, as our memories fade and our children grow up,' says Shuker. 'There is a feeling we will be judged if we don't do something.' And it's not just Iraq they're targeting. From New York to Israel, reparations claims forms distributed from the Israeli Ministry of Justice and various Jewish organizations are being filled out by the estimated 900,000 Jewish exiles from Arab lands - including large numbers from Libya, Syria, Egypt and Algeria - who have had a similar experience to Jewish Iraqis. They all hope to mount a lawsuit or negotiate a deal with Arab governments. For the majority of Iraq's Jewish diaspora, there is an additional sense of urgency. With the transitional government set to take over July 1, there is only so long - 85 days - that Bremer can veto decrees against them. To Go To Top

MESSAGE TO MEL GIBSON'S FATHER Posted by Steven Plaut, April 11, 2004.

Bowing to intense pressure from Mel Gibson's father, Jews announced today that they would no longer control the world. In a press release, Jews stated, "Although we have thoroughly enjoyed the challenges of world domination for the last 3000 years, we feel it's time for gentiles to take control of their own affairs. We plan to spend more time with our families and pursue other interests." Hutton Gibson stated he was pleased with the announcement, but expressed concern he was losing a scapegoat for all of his problems. He said he would be launching a search for a new minority group to demonize. Many Jews expressed relief that they could give up burdensome responsibilities. Retired accountant Jerry Friedman, who controls all media in Montana, said, "I would just as well let the citizens of Montana manage their own TV and newspapers. Don't get me wrong, Montana is a fine state. But it gets awfully cold, and there's nowhere to get a good bagel." Attorney Allen Franks said he's glad he no longer has to manage Bulgarian monetary policy. "It was getting to be quite a hassle," he said. "I already have a full time job and can't even balance my own checkbook, let alone control the finances of an entire nation." Homemaker Judith Levine said she would "...miss the hustle and bustle of setting the international price for magnesium every day. But my son is about to become Bar Mitzvah, and oy! Such a party we're gonna have, you wouldn't believe!" Hollywood producer Sidney Greenbaum was pessimistic about the announcement. "Do you really think goyim know how to make movies?" he asked. "They'll all end up being high budget, technicolor snuff flicks if you leave things up to Mel and his kind." Comedy experts expressed concern that the business would suffer if Jews suddenly withdrew. According to one insider, "Take away all the Jewish comics and writers, and all you have left is Carrot Top. That's not a world I want to live in." 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

FORMER SPY: SYRIA HAS DETAILS OF DIMONA NUCLEAR REACTOR Posted by IsrAlert, April 11, 2004.

This article is by Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent. It appeared in Haaretz, 09 April 2004 and is archived at www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/414028.html ....Captain Yusef Abed al-Jalil, who served 10 years in an Israeli jail, made his claim in an exclusive interview with Haaretz. The interview will be published in full in Sunday's edition of the paper. Jalil said the Syrians received the information from Soviet intelligence sources and from agents among Israel's Arab population. The interview was made possible following the lifting by the Supreme Court of a 10-year publication ban on the affair, and at the request of advocate Mibi Mozar on behalf of Haaretz. Of Jalil's time in Israeli prison, four-and-a-half years were served after the Nazareth District Court found him guilty, in a plea-bargain arrangement, of spying against Israel. After that, the Israeli authorities kept him in various jails on different pretexts. He left Israel in December 2003 as part of the prisoner swap with Hezbollah. Jalil, who is of Kurdish origin, served in the Syrian general intelligence in a number of positions, including as an operator of agents in Iraq and Turkey. In 1994, he defected from the army after his commanders gave orders to detain him, and he fled to Israel. He reached the border on the Golan Heights near Kuneitra and made contact with an Israel Defense Forces patrol, which picked him up. Jalil requested that he be sent to a European country and given asylum after serving his term. Jalil was interrogated by Military Intelligence for several months and gave them information, but Israel then decided to indict him on espionage charges. The suspicion was that he had been deliberately sent by Syrian intelligence and that he had not told his interrogators the whole truth. He said he was given a lawyer from the public prosecution who arranged the plea-bargain against his wish since he did not understand Hebrew or the Israeli court system. After four-and-a-half years, the Israeli authorities wanted to return Jalil to Syria but this was prevented by the Committee Against Torture, which appealed to the High Court. It ruled against exiling him to Damascus, where he would face a death sentence, and Jalil remained in jail for five more years. As part of the prisoner swap, Jalil was due to fly to Beirut. Again the committee, and other human rights activists, intervened and Jalil was taken off the plane at Cologne. He has since remained in a refugee camp in Germany. "I came to you not as an enemy," he said in the interview, "but of my own free will and with good intentions, but you have destroyed my life." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

THE RHINO OF AN UNDETERMINED SEX Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, April 11, 2004.

When Arabs promise to destroy Israel or turn American and European cities into infernos with rivers of blood running along the streets, I don't question their sincerity: as soon as they think they can do it, they will try. In most other matters, I tend to distrust them. I certainly get suspicious whenever it comes to numbers. It's not just because the so-called "Arabic numerals" were in fact invented by Hindus. It's mainly because the Islamic concepts of good and evil can be exhaustively described in a single sentence: Whatever is good for jihad is good, period. It just so happens that truth is usually bad for jihad. Remember the arithmetic of Jenin, Jenin? Nevertheless, when I read an article posted on an English-language Al-Jazeera website about the Brits converting to Islam by the thousands, [1] I felt compelled to believe it, because I know from other sources, including private letters, that this is happening not only in (formerly) Great Britain, but all across Western Europe. As bizarre as it may seem, this is not unprecedented. The British Union of Fascists, organized by Sir Oswald Mosley in 1932, survived World War II and became, in 1949, one of the very first proponents of the European Union. [2] Interesting, isn't it? If some Brits could join a Nazi party during the Battle of Britain, [3] I don't see why they shouldn't convert to Islam during jihad. Still, the mentality of betrayal - and conversion to Islam even in the time of peace constitutes the ultimate betrayal of all our values - remains a fascinating topic, which is why the Al-Jazeera article is worth reading. One of the new converts honored by a personal reference in the article is Yahya (nee Jonathan) Birt, son of Sir John Birt, the former director general of the BBC. Even taking into account the proverbial eccentricity of the British elite, I still find it hard to fathom. It will forever remain a mystery to us whether the Master Yahya was influenced by the consistent pro-terrorist bias of the establishment headed until 2000 by Sir John, or both father and son fell victim to the same dreadful genetic disorder. The article quotes Yahya Birt's own explanation (the original punctuation preserved - YS): Initially, Birt said he had no coherent reasons for converting, but "in the longer term I think it was the overall profundity, balance and coherence and spirituality of the Muslim way of life which convinced me," he said. I find the absence of a coherent reason easier to believe than the rest of his statement. After all, a truly pristine oasis of Muslim life unmarred by the corrupting influence of the West is hard to come by. Afghanistan under the Taliban rule was probably the closest to the ideal. The profundity was there all right, if you can use the term to denote the bottomless desperation of its suffering people. But balance? Coherence? Spirituality? I'd like examples, please. In lieu of those, I am prepared to presume some deeply personal reasons for Yahya Birt's decision to join people who look and act like villains in a high school production of Sinbad the Sailor. Maybe his wife, assuming he is married, is so ugly that nothing can alleviate his eternal embarrassment but a good chador? Or maybe he is afflicted with that common manifestation of British eccentricity, homosexuality, and wrapping his life partner head to toe in a hijab is but a desperate attempt to gain social acceptance? Trying to be realistic though, I have to admit that the last hypothesis is sheer rubbish. In today's society, you can come to a party with a live rhino in tow, introduce it as your significant other, and no one, except for the most contemptible homophobic bigot, will ask you about the rhino's sex. Could this be the root of the problem? The article quotes another British convert to Islam, a former diplomat, Charles Le Gai Eaton, who wrote in one of his many books on the religion of his choice (the original punctuation preserved - YS): I have received letters from people who are put off by the wishy-washy standards of contemporary Christianity and they are looking for a religion which does not compromise too much with the modern world. Let me start with the rejection of the modernity. A vital religion evolves with time. Its progress is similar to the progress of science: our understanding of the subject either develops ever further or stagnates. as it has happened with Islam. Therefore, modernity does not present a problem for a true religion. Look, for example, at Orthodox Jews who, in the modern world, manage to live in the strictest compliance with the laws of Talmud that were written down centuries before the emergence of Islam and, unlike the "holy" texts of the Muslims, have never been edited since. And yet, Europeans convert to Islam rather than Judaism. Let me ask a funny question: Why? Probably, because Judaism presumes the freedom of will that implies the level of personal responsibility that most people are unwilling or unable to accept. Probably, because the level of both faith and understanding required by true Judaism is too much for most of those who did not absorb them with mother's milk. Probably, because being a Jew of any persuasion requires a commitment that most people who weren't born with that burden find excessive. It's easier for Christians: Jews, by killing Jesus, saved every single one of them, from 2,000 years ago till Judgment Day. For Jews it's a bit trickier. With 2,000 years of ruthless persecution behind them, with one Holocaust in recent history and the next one looming ahead, they know that every one of them is the sole savior of him or herself and, hopefully, their loved ones, and, with God's help, their people. Who in his sane mind would chose a religion whose road to salvation leads through the ovens and gas chambers? In comparison, conversion to Islam is easy. All it takes is a single statement acknowledging an Arabic deity as your god and one of the most abysmal characters in human history as its ultimate prophet. Say it, and you are in. Of course, it is a deceptive ease. Remember countless bad movies where the enemies make sure the turncoat is sincere by forcing him to kill his former comrades? In one form or another, there is no escaping that test for newly converted Muslims, but never fear: as the American war on terror has demonstrated, most of them pass it with flying colors. Please do not overlook this interesting fact: Islam, even in its most rigid form, lives in a state of permanent conflict with itself caused by inevitable compromise with modernity. Every piece of technology Muslims are using, from AK-47's to gold-plated Cadillacs, to cell phones, to running water, to suitcase nuclear bombs - all of it comes from the infidels, simply because all the past, present, and, I assure you, future technology on this planet comes from the infidels. The fact that use of this modern technology causes no intellectual discomfort among the followers of the vile non-prophet suggests that the ability to experience cognitive dissonance, as well as the urge to invent and discover, emerges only at later stages of societal evolution than those attained so far by Muslim countries. No, if I were looking for the cause of mass conversion to Islam among the Europeans, I would leave modernity alone and take a hard look at those "wishy-washy standards of contemporary Christianity", because they derive straight from the very glue that holds our civilization together: our tolerance. Our tolerance takes many forms, and for each of those forms there exists a wide variety of misinterpretations, both intentional and purely naive. Take, for example, the First Amendment, which is, essentially, a codification of our tolerance of expressions of dissenting views and opinions. Imagine, for instance that your interior decorator ignores your detailed instructions. When you come to inspect his work, you find out that the walls of your living room, instead of light peach, are now the color of fresh blood, interrupted only by portraits of Marx, Stalin, Mao and Fidel. Your bedroom is grass green and decorated with inscriptions of Allah akbar in both Arabic and Roman letters, lest you miss their meaning, while your pre-teen son's room is adorned with blown-up reproductions from the Hustler. Does the First Amendment mean that the creativity of your interior decorator shall remain unrewarded? No, the First Amendment means only that the Congress shall pass no laws that might impede freedom to express one's views. The government won't lock him up for being a Communist, a Muslim, or a pornographer. However, in a reasonable society, he will be forced to return everything you paid him, and recover the costs of undoing his exercises, and compensate you for whatever legal fees you may incur in the process. Believe it or not, in addition to granting your interior decorator the freedom to use and abuse all his freedoms, the First Amendment also implies that Congress shall pass no laws forcing you to view, listen to, or otherwise consume expressions of views you find offensive. Another vitally important manifestation of tolerance is our freedom of religion. No matter what I believe, no matter what you believe, none of us has a right to impose his or her beliefs on the other. This simple rule has managed to keep a terrible can of worms closed for so long, that we tend to forget that some of our beliefs are mutually exclusive and cannot be true at the same time, because there is only one truth. Just one. Any other version of events is false, regardless of how strong your belief in it is. The only reason we need freedom of religion is that there is no legal or scientific way to determine whose version is the closest to the truth. There is either one god, or several, or none. God either spoke to Moses from a burning bush or Moses made it up. The parting of the Red Sea is either a metaphor or an historic event. Jesus either lived or was invented. If he did, he either was a Messiah or wasn't. Jews either killed him or they didn't. Mohammad was either God's prophet or one of the worst criminals in human history. He either ascended to heaven on a winged horse or it is a stupid fairy tale of illiterate savages. Freedom of religion entitles each one of us to make his or her own choice among these almost endless possibilities. However, it does not guarantee that any theoretically possible choice is true. You have no right to tell me that your faith is truer than mine. But if you forget that, even for a second, then your faith is as good as dead. It gets more complicated. Our tolerance extends so unbelievably far that some creationists acknowledge the right of others to believe in evolution. They don't understand that the theory of evolution is not a religious dogma but a scientific theory, that it is a matter not of faith but of scientific proof, that, unlike any religion, it is inherently incomplete and limited, and always subject to revision whenever new relevant facts come up. I, for one, believe that God is the Creator of the universe. I don't believe however that He created everything the way it exists today. I can't imagine God drawing pictures and writing phone numbers on the walls of public toilets; I believe those art forms are a manifestation of evolution, one of many. I don't see why God would create a puppet theater rather than a living universe capable of evolving. According to my belief, there is no incompatibility between creation and evolution. God made Adam out of clay. An assumption that God has hands seems a bit of a stretch to me. Is there a reason that would prevent God from using evolution He Himself started as an instrument of His creation? Tolerance allows us to avoid a great many unnecessary conflicts. One day, we discovered that it was awfully convenient to tolerate more than just the other guy's religion. Whenever there is a possibility of a disagreement, polite people avoid the potentially dangerous topic. This way, we can all party together and have fun instead of clashing over each other's concepts of right and wrong. This way, there is no right and wrong outside our minds. Everything is relative. Everyone is entitled to one's own opinion. Any two opinions on any subject are equally valid. Insisting that 2x2=4 is not politically correct. Take, for instance, the abortion issue. When performed early, it does not hurt anyone, because the embryo is not really a human being yet, and the mother-not-to-be gets adequately anesthetized. Why then would we allow the government to dictate to us what to do in such intimately personal matters? This, by the way, has long been my own point of view. But abortion has an aspect that is rarely considered by either pro-choicers or even pro-lifers. Before the children of today's baby boomers are ready to retire, there will a shortage of workers in the United States. There will not be enough of them to support the retirees. The country will have to import workers from abroad by the million. Since Canada will be facing a similar problem, our workers will have to come from the south if we are lucky or from Greater Arabia if we are not. How long will it take for the United States of America to become a mere extension of Mexico or Iraq? This, by the way, includes Mexican or, respectively, Iraqi standards of living, public and personal hygiene, integrity of elected officials, and all other imaginable and unimaginable fringe benefits. Try to figure out who will be defending this country when that time comes. Try to imagine why they would want to risk their lives to defend it. Oops! We classify things as good or bad depending upon their consequences. Sometimes however those consequences are too distant and too difficult to predict, and when you are finally able to see them, it's way too late to change anything. So, the next time you feel like saying that something should be legal because it doesn't hurt anyone, consider the possibility that what you are drinking is a very slow acting poison. Complicated? You bet it is. It is so complicated, in fact, that most people become disoriented. They are neither capable nor willing to decide for themselves what's right and what's wrong. Eroded by tolerance, Christianity is no longer capable of guidance. This creates gaping vacuum. What's going to fill it? You know the answer. Notes: [1] "Thousands of British elite embrace Islam," (http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/ 2004%20News%20archives/March/12%20n/ Thousands%20of%20British%20elite%20embrace%20islam.html) [2] "Mosley, Parts the Channel 4 series did not reach," http://www.poptel.org.uk/against-eurofederalism/mosley.html [3]"Battle of Britain," www.bartleby.com/65/ba/BattleBr.html Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com To Go To Top

UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL - THE FAILURE OF "PRAGMATISM" Posted by Women in Green, April 11, 2004.

This article was written by Yoram Ettinger. President Bush (March 19, 2004): "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations... No accommodation will satisfy their endless demands..." A withdrawal from Gaza would be inconsistent with President Bush's sound statement. It would defy post-Oslo Palestinian hate-education. 1. Systematic blunders damage Washington. Since 1993, two US and five Israeli Administrations have embraced the politically-correct "pragmatist" Oslo, Wye, Mitchell, Tenet, Zuni, Camp David II and the Road Map accords. They failed to advance a solution and undermined US prestige; they fueled an unprecedented wave of terrorism (1,400 Israelis murdered, which is proportionally equal to 70,000 Americans - 23 Twin Towers!), distancing Israelis and Palestinians farther from peace. Reluctant to learn from past errors, they're now introducing Unilateral Withdrawal. 2. From "Territory for Peace" to "Territory for Terrorism". Unilateral withdrawal is the offspring of the "pragmatic" territory for peace, which was followed by the "pragmatic" recognition of the PLO/PA and by the "pragmatic" tolerance of PA/PLO's hate-education (since 1993) and PA/PLO's systematically ruthless violation of all accords. A retreat from Gaza would exacerbate terrorism in Israel, Jordan and Iraq, as was the case with the prior retreats from Lebanon (2000) and from Gaza and 40% of Judea & Samaria (Oslo 1993). 3. Peace was achieved following WWII when the rogue Nazi regime (not just Hitler) was demolished, and Germany was forced to concede territory to its intended victims, which reciprocated by peace. Peace has been undermined by the "Pragmatist" Oslo-Wye-Road Map, which legitimized the rogue Palestinian Authority, and forced the intended victim, Israel, to concede territory. It has thus rewarded regional terrorism, intensified regional violence and undermined regional moderation. 4. Deterrence-driven peace is the only possible peace in the violently unpredictable Mideast. It would be severely undermined if Palestinian terrorism would be rewarded. 5. Territory for peace assumes - illogically - that Israel (less than 0.2% of Arab territory) should concede its scarcest asset - territory, while the Arabs are expected to accord Israel that which they have never accorded to one another - compliance and peaceful coexistence. Would Israel be entitled to retrieve territory, when the Palestinians renege - once again - on peace?! 6. "Pragmatists" have sacrificed faith, tenacity, experience and realism on the alter of cynicism, vacillation, wishful-thinking and superficiality. 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

TREASON DU JOUR FROM ISRAELI ACADEMIA Posted by Steven Plaut, April 11, 2004.

Ben-Dror Yemini wrote an article called "Who can write that Israel is fulfilling Hitlers dream?" (www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=5795). This is it: The following article is not recommended reading for especially sensitive people. I admit that I vacillated before deciding to publicize it, not only because it is nauseating but also because the very act of publicizing these ideas could promote them. Several months ago, I hesitated before publishing an article about an exhibition in the Tel Aviv Museum in which Israel was presented mainly as a Nazi entity. The article actually did some good. As a result of protests and requests by a few intellectuals, some pictures were removed from the exhibition. Too little; too late. This time, the subject is not an art exhibit but rather an article. In this case, too, I believe that the publics right to know is the overriding consideration. Therefore, consider the article a public service. Under the title Who Won World War II? an Israeli university profession wrote on a popular internet site: Nazi Germany lost the War. But almost sixty years after its defeat in the battlefield, Hitler's concept of war part and parcel of his overall Weltanschauung icelebrates a rising tide in the global ideological arena. Israel's assassination of Hamas' leader Sheik Ahmad Yassin is a milestone in this process of barbarization of the human kind. After the scholarly author explains to us how Israel is following in Hitlers footsteps, he continues: Yassin's killing was meant to change the rules of the game: to signalize that the aim of this war is to annihilate the enemy, not just to defeat it, and that from now on, everything is possible. In the previous paragraph, the author quoted Adolf Hitler's words: The aim of war is not to reach definite lines but to annihilate the enemy physically. It is by this means that we shall obtain the vital living space that we need". The article concludes, Unless we renew the struggle for the legacy of the Allies who won World War II, and get rid of all those responsible for the barbarization of the human kind, Israel's assassination of Sheikh Yassin may enter history as the moment in which Hitler's concept of war for annihilation, of contempt for the basic convictions and conventions of humanity, celebrated its triumph, shared and imposed by the axis of Sharon, Bush and Bin Laden. This is hardly the first time I have read absurd articles attacking Israel in the international press. Many of the most strident are written by Israelis and Jews. However, I will admit that never before have I read anything so venomous. The article was written by an Israel named Ran HaCohen (no relationship to MK Ran Cohen). He purports to teach Comparative Literature at Tel-Aviv University. Yes, there is such a stain there. He also works as a translator and literary critic. I could continue by asking questions, many questions. Mainly I would ask, What happened to us that on the eve of Passover, one of our own could revive the blood libel and turn Israel into an heir to Hitlers legacy of annihilation? Considering the quotations, I do not think that there is anything to add. However, since I know how some readers will respond, I feel an obligation to clarify this point. Don't say, leftist. To the contrary. In another article, the same Ran HaCohen accused not only Meretz but also Hadash of being parties that serve the occupation, and made it very clear that he does not belong to the Peace Camp. In his view, Meretz is a center-right party. As I have written in the past, some of the people who lead the fight against anti-Israel propaganda, which is sometime anti-Semitic as well, are people whom we identify as leftists: Alain Finkelkraut, Bernard Henri-Levy, Alan Dershowitz, Amnon Rubinstein and many others. I assume that Yossi Sarid and Yossi Beilin would also consider the ideas espoused by this literature professor an abomination. Ran HaCohen, even by his own definition, is not a member of the camp we call left. He is part of the brown-red coalition of the extreme right and extreme left, which spreads libels around the world, in order to delegitimatize the State of Israel. Therefore, it is no wonder that HaCohens article gets top billing on the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic site of the Holocaust-denying historian David Irving. Exactly four years ago, Irving lost a libel suit against Prof. Deborah Lipstadt after she had claimed in a book that Irving was a Holocaust-denier and anti-Semite. The British High Court upheld Lipstadts claims in one of the most important legal rulings related to Holocaust denial. Many things can be said about Irving but he definitely is not a leftist. If Irving admires HaCohen, he must have a good reason. Somewhat ironically, the headline on the page is The International Campaign for True History. Yes, this article is well suited to two people who disseminate the truth: Irving and HaCohen. It is interesting to note that the article by HaCohen that Irving choose to place in his display window attacks the liberal image of Haaretz newspaper and claims that it actually serves the continuing occupation. Therefore, anyone who claims that HaChohens defamatory words represent the left will only do him a service. Don't fall into that trap. By the way, this is not the worst article crayoned by the same Ran Hacohen, from Tel Aviv University. He also has openly endorsed the Hizbollah, in "The Case for Hizbollah", at www.acj.org/Daily%20News/2003/August/August_13.htm#3 , an article widely reprinted lal over the world as a method for raising support for the Hizbollah. If you would like to tell Ran HaCohen what you think of his articles, his email is hacohen@post.tau.ac.il If you would like to write to the offices of Tel AViv University, where HaCohen is employed and whose computer he uses to send out his treasonous messages, here is their list: http://www.tau.ac.il/officers-eng.html The President of TAU is Prof. Itamar Rabinovich at itamarr@tauex.tau.ac.il Shimon Yankielowicz is the Rector and is at shimonya@post.tau.ac.il Israel Zang is the Vice Rector at zangis@post.tau.ac.il Let them know what you think. 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

OF PEANUTS AND PAINTED BUNTINGS Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, April 11, 2004.

It's been an exciting week. After not seeing some of my increasingly threatened (mostly due to loss of nesting habitat), beautiful feathered friends for some time, the pure green female and the red, yellow, green, and blue male painted buntings came to my birdbath and feeders. The sparrow-sized male is one of the most amazingly colored birds in the world - the most in the United States. What a gift! I live on endangered scrub habitat along the eastern central Florida coast and did my best to leave a lot of the habitat in its natural state. I tried to convince my neighbor to do likewise, showing him gopher tortoise mounds, wild scrub jays which come to your hands to feed, etc. To no avail. Having no real meaningful environmental protections, these officially threatened species are basically left at the mercies of the lot owners and developers. I contacted the powers that be to try to prevent this, but there are too many loopholes. So the moron cut down over 90% of the trees to make room on his two lots for his own private putting range. Something else to endear me to golfers. I drive a super low emission hybrid Toyota Prius, have a solar collector on my roof, and use no pesticides in the house or in my organic garden. I've taught these sort of things to several thousand students and dozens of teachers over the years and have led many of them on field trips for direct encounters. So I guess I have something in common, though I hate to admit it, with Jimmy Carter. To his credit, he did have a good environmental record. I voted for him in 1976. Ugh!!!!! I just read James Pinkerton's Houston Chronicle article discussing how Mr. Peanut, on an early April 2004 birding trip in the lower Rio Grande Valley, took Dubya to task on Iraq, environmental concerns, and the Arab-Israeli mess. Some of his criticisms on the first two issues were not without some merit. The war needed to be thought out better than it was before it was launched. We really didn't expect any lasting gratitude from the Shi'a for ridding them of their executioners, did we? And what's this deal about continuously treating the only real allies we have over there - the Kurds - worse than we do the Arabs who despise us, be they Sunni or Shi'a? America's "crime" against the latter? We said that someone else in addition to Arabs - i. e., Jews - should also have political rights in the region. Despite scores of millions of non-Arabs who have historically lived there - Berbers, Copts, Jews, Kurds, etc. - Arabs insist that the region is purely Arab patrimony. This mindset is largely responsible for the problems we're facing today. When the four century-old empire of the Ottoman Turks collapsed after World War I, Arabs saw the chance to reassert their own earlier Caliphal imperial hegemony over the entire area and were in no sharing mood. An independent Kurdistan (promised after the Paris Peace Conference) thus got nipped in the bud, Berber language and culture became largely "outlawed" in "Arab" North Africa, the only safe native Copt in Egypt was one who became immersed in the forced Arabization process, etc., etc., etc. Guess who'll be left holding the bag when we pull out of Iraq and who will quite possibly be slaughtered, as they were repeatedly before, for their friendship towards us? Yet the Foggy Folks insist that 30 million Kurds will remain forever stateless - no roadmap for them - while insisting on a 23rd state for Arabs dedicated to Israel's destruction. And, by the way, I don't hear a peep out of Mr. Peanut about them either. Quite a selective morality for a Habitat For Humanity spokesman - don't you think? Carter is correct, however, in asserting that Dubya's callous treatment of environmental issues is unfortunate. His record speaks for itself, and it's not saying anything too good. Big industry polluters and developers are reaping the benefits of their alliance with the Bush oil boys. And I say this as someone who might very well vote for Dubya the next time around. But this is going to be a close election, and many who truly care about the condition and quality of the air, water, biodiversity, and overall ecology of this nation and planet that supports our healthful existence have some legitimate concerns here. Ignoring millions of people who care about such things is not a particularly wise move - even for purely selfish reasons. The Republicans need to pay more attention to this critique and not just brush it off as lefty politics. But it's when Carter turns to Arab-Israeli issues that he totally loses it. He has never met an Arab disemboweler of Jewish babes and grandmas that he hasn't blamed the Jews themselves for. Pardon me if I'm not sounding too respectful, but the ex-President has been shown to be a blatant hypocrite and, despite delusions about his own self-worth (an argument could be made that Camp David Accords occurred despite him, not because of him), an outright menace to the survival of a viable Jewish State. In an earlier Indian summer blast of hot air in the September 23, 2003 Washington Post ("The Choice For Israelis"), he had proclaimed that the occupied territories and settlement issue were the main causes of Arab resentment and thus the violence as well. As can be seen in James Pinkerton's April 2004 report, this has become Mr. Peanut's standard line. Surely he's aware of poll after poll taken among Arabs that have shown that even if Israel withdrew completely from those disputed areas (not "occupied Arab lands"), the Arabs would still reject Israel's right to exist. It's not how big Israel is but that Israel is that's the problem - and Mr. Peanut knows this. And he knows about the offers made by Barak and Clinton at Camp David 2000 and Taba which would have handed over 97% of those disputed territories - including one half of Jerusalem and a $33 billion bonus as icing on the cake - to Arafat's boys. And he knows what the bloody Arab "counter offer" has been - .hundreds of deliberately murdered and thousands of deliberately maimed Israeli civilians. Yet he insists on prodding Jews to take suicidal chances and forsake security measures with a bloodthirsty enemy he wouldn't dream of asking others to do. Who's kidding whom here? Surely he knows that Israel had been repeatedly attacked and terrorized prior to '67 and that the PLO was formed in 1964 - long before Israel was in the "occupied" territories. And surely he knows that nothing has changed in the Arab mindset since then or before. Carter sees the Palestinian Authority websites, maps, schoolbooks, hears the imams calling for death to the Jews, etc. He knows full well that the proposed 23rd Arab state - second Arab one to be created within the original borders of Mandatory Palestine as Britain received it on April 25, 1920 - plans to replace Israel, not live side by side with it. The evidence for this is overwhelming. It's no accident that at the summits leading up to the roadmap, Ahmed Qurei' - latest Arafatian chief marionette - went on record opposing the use of the word "Jewish" along with "State of Israel." And these folks still insist that Israel, after being made to return to its 9-mile wide, pre-'67 armistice line existence, then agree to absorb millions of real or alleged descendants of Arab refugees. The half of Israel's Jews who were refugees themselves from so-called "Arab" lands doesn't seem to register with him. And the lie that the recent "Geneva Initiative" renounced the "right of return" was just that - a lie. At the close of hostilities after the invasion by Arab states of a nascent Israel in 1948, the fragile, U.N.-imposed Auschwitz/armistice lines made Israel a constant temptation to its enemies. Most of Israel's population and industry lies in that narrow waistband. Mr. Carter knows full well that you need a magnifying glass to find Israel in a map of the region - a microscope for a map of the world. He frequently brings up U.N. Resolution #242 to support his position for Israel's departure from the territories. While he's been a bit more careful in his wording of late, he still implies that a virtually total Israeli withdrawal is required. That's what his rants about settlements are all about. Nations have acquired territories thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own security, but Mr. Carter can't seem to figure out that Israel's 9-mile wide, artificially-imposed existence (the '49 armistice lines were never meant to be final borders) was a travesty of justice in desperate need of rectification. Whatever the size, shape, etc. the proposed 23rd Arab state might eventually be, it must not come at the expense of the security of the sole, miniscule state of the Jews. In the aftermath of the 1967 Six Day War Israel was forced to fight after it was blockaded at the Straits of Tiran (a casus belli) and other life-threatening hostile acts, U.N. Resolution #242 did not demand that Israel return to the status quo ante. The architects of that resolution such as Eugene Rostow, Arthur Goldberg, and others all stressed quite the contrary. It called, instead, for the creation of secure and recognized borders to replace those fragile armistice lines. Most of Israel's settlements have been built on strategic high ground areas for this reason. Even with these left in place, Israel's width goes from about nine miles up to perhaps around twenty in that waist bordering the West Bank/Judea and Samaria. Most people in America drive further than that just to go to work. Any roadmap discussions must continue to take this into account. Those currently involving the path of the security fence are particularly relevant. While compromises are in order, Carter's demands, advice, or whatever on this issue are not. Carter's brother, Billy, made lots of money endearing himself to the Arab oil folks. I haven't checked too deeply into his own record yet, but I'm told that Mr. Peanut has been going after that same money himself - full speed ahead. But on this issue, in all fairness, he certainly couldn't be any worse than the Bushes and their own closest friends and political allies. Best Bush buddy James Baker's law firm, for example, has quite lucratively represented the Saudis in this country. Now remember that he was appointed Secretary of State under Bush the First and Dubya has designated him as his special Middle East envoy. Carter speaks of the territories as if Palestinian Arabs (many of whom were recorded by the League Of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission as newcomers - settlers - themselves in Palestine) had exclusive rights there. Contrary to popular current protestations, these are not "occupied Palestinian Arab lands." Leading scholars such as William O'Brien, Rostow, and others have pointed out that these lands were non-apportioned areas of the Mandate, and all residents - Arabs, Jews, etc. - had the right to live there. Indeed, Jews had lived and owned land in Judea and Samaria until their earlier massacres by Arabs. And Mr. Carter knows this too - as he does the writings of the so-called "moderates" like the late, showcased Faisal Husseini whose goal was/is still a purely Arab Palestine from the River to the Sea. Indeed, the "moderates" of the good cop/ bad cop game the Arabs have played to gain concessions from the Jews speak in terms of temporary, meaningless concessions to the Jews as the "Trojan Horse" that will be used to deliver the final prize, Arafat's modern professed version of the "Peace of the Quraysh." The latter were the pagan tribe the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad, made a temporary truce with until he gained the position and strength to deliver the final blow. Talk of a new "truce" with Arafat falls into this same category. Arabs offer this hudna while expecting Israel to yield to all of their demands. So it's time to call it what it really is. Jews have repeatedly offered Arabs reasonable compromises and an honorable way out of this bloody mess. It is Arabs who have rejected all of these. The plain truth is that any solution which is not another Final Solution will not be acceptable to Arabs - at least those with both the real power and the power to influence their own captive masses. And Mr. Peanut knows this too. Carter's constant demand that Israel cave in to such above hogwash is nothing short of hostile intent on his part towards the Jewish State. He expects no others to bare their necks so freely to their sworn murderous enemies as he does Jews. When I see Mr. Carter show the same concern over the plight of millions of Blacks in Africa who have been slaughtered in the name of Arab nationalism, or that of some thirty million perpetually victimized, stateless Kurds, as he does for creating a 23rd state for Arabs (on the ashes of Israel - but fear not, he'll give a proper southern gentleman's eulogy), then I might listen to him again. For now, his blatant hypocrisy and double standards vis-a-vis Jews and Israel simply make him a spokesman for the Arab cause. Gerald A. Honigman is a contributing writer for Jewish Xpress magazine (http://www.jewishxpress.com), a monthly publication based in southern Florida. His background is in Middle Eastern Affairs. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

THE TAKE-A-PEN! ORGANIZATION Posted by Endre Mozes and Yair Malachi, April 10, 2004.

May we wish You - to all the friends, writers and readers of Take-A-Pen!, in Israel, in Europe, in the Americas, everywhere in the world, and to your families and loved ones: Pesach Same'ach! Happy and kosher Passover! Happy Easter! As our understanding goes, Pesach is, among others, the festival of the Exodus of the Jewish people out of Egypt, of 'Mitzrayim', of slavery and oppression, both physical and spiritual, to freedom, to physical independence and to faith in higher spiritual values. Jewish Sages say that every generation, even all individuals have to do anew this difficult but rewarding journey to real freedom. In this sense, we feel that Pesach is sort of a special festival for us, Jewish, Christian or non-religious volunteers of Take-A-Pen! We are doing our modest part in getting Israel out of a new 'Mitzrayim' of oppression by media distortions and political manipulations, by cunning propaganda lies and mislead masses, by hypocrites, good-intentioned ignorants and traditional racial haters. In recent months more and more little successes of the truth have rewarded our efforts, though of course not solely our efforts, like changes in the media and in the public's understanding of the conflict. It is happening in Holland and Spain, in Finland and Italy and elsewhere. So, let's continue, with renewed energies after Pesach and Easter, our learning and letter-writing for truth and freedom! Pesach Same'ach! Happy and kosher Passover! Happy Easter! CNN - LIAR OF THE MONTH On April 2, 2004, the CNN headline was "Israeli police enter holy site to quell protests." The right headline should have been: "Palestinians misuse holy site by throwing rocks at Jewish worshippers." CNN depicted the defenders as aggressors. Once again Palestinians abuse places of worship for violence. And once again the CNN and some other complacent media mix up the victim with the aggressor. The event started when part of the incited Palestinian crowd hurdled rocks, from the Temple Mount level where the mosque stands down to the Jewish holy site, the Wailing Wall, some twenty meters below the Palestinian mob, on the Jews praying there without any cover or shelter. Is there still any reason why Palestinians should be trusted to guard keep holy places? And is there any reason to believe CNN headlines? Endre Mozes is chairman of Take-A-Pen organization! (chairman@take-a-pen.org) and Yair Malachi is editor of their website (www.take-a-pen.org). To Go To Top

RALLYING AGAINST CAIR AND HAMAS IN FT. LAUDERDALE Posted by Joe Kaufman, April 10, 2004.

Thank you all for coming out to the rally against CAIR and Hamas on April 3rd at the Wyndham Ft. Lauderdale Airport Hotel. Since the founding of HAMAS by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, thousands of lives have been shattered. And we're not just talking about those innocents that have been brutally murdered. We're talking about all those that have been injured and maimed, those that have lost limbs, those that can no longer walk, those that can no longer hear or see, those friends and families that have to live out the rest of their lives with the pain of knowing that their loved ones' lives were extinguished in the most evil way known to man. HAMAS is suicide squads, troops of children, many of whom were born to commit suicide. It is an assembly line of death and destruction! These kids kids - teenagers - young adults - are promised an afterlife of paradise with the fulfillment of all of their sexual desires. Their families are promised money? The majority of the locals in their area agree that it's the right thing to do - that it's a legitimate form of resistance! They praise them as shaheeds - martyrs. They say they're fighting for a cause. But what cause takes an infant and breeds that infant into becoming a human time bomb? What cause promises a child heaven, while putting scores of innocent people through a living hell? HAMAS is the ultimate evil in the world, and HAMAS must be stopped before its suicide squads are unleashed right here on our shores. It was just a week ago that the new leader of HAMAS, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, stated, "We knew that Bush is the enemy of G-d, the enemy of Islam and Muslims. America declared war against G-d. [Ariel] Sharon declared war against G-d and G-d declared war against America, Bush and Sharon. The war of G-d continues against them and I can see the victory coming up from the land of Palestine by the hand of HAMAS." My friends, we are not here to warn people about HAMAS's threats. We are gathered here to tell the public that HAMAS is already here. In fact, HAMAS has been here since the mid 70's, when HAMAS was known by its predecessor's name, the Islamic Association, which, incidentally, was also formed by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. It is then not hard to understand that, in 1981, one of the highest ranking members of HAMAS, Mousa Abu Marzook - who is still a leader in HAMAS - created an organization in Chicago, Illinois named the Islamic Association for Palestine. The Islamic Association for Palestine is credited with publishing the actual HAMAS charter that calls for the annihilation of Israel. And sources have indicated that the Islamic Association for Palestine wrote parts of the charter. For the past 23 years - nearly a quarter century - the Islamic Association for Palestine has grown and thrived in America, and it is continuing to grow and seek power. Let it be known that this organization is none other than a HAMAS front. And one of its past leaders, Nihad Awad, is currently speaking right here in this hotel - at a banquet, in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida! The group that Nihad Awad is speaking in front of is CAIR or the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Awad is CAIR's national Executive Director. CAIR calls itself an Islamic civil rights organization, but this is no more of a fantasy than the one that says the suicide bombers are going to heaven. CAIR was formed in 1994 by three leaders of the Islamic Association for Palestine with $5000 from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a pseudo-charity that was later shut down for raising millions of dollars for HAMAS. Most probably, the founding of CAIR was to take heat off of the Islamic Association for Palestine, after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and to assist those that were involved in the bombing, as CAIR did. The support for HAMAS by Nihad Awad - who again is speaking in this hotel behind us - has been blatant. While he was with the Islamic Association for Palestine, he became an editor for the Muslim World Monitor, a publication that, according to counter-terrorism expert Steven Emerson, "celebrates successful Hamas terrorist attacks." In 1994, Awad defended HAMAS on CBS's 60 Minutes. When asked if he supports "the military undertakings of HAMAS," he said, "The United Nations Charter grants people who are under occupation [the right] to defend themselves against illegal occupation." And that same year, while at a symposium at Barry University in Florida, Awad stated his feelings in as clear language as possible. He stated, "... after I researched the situation inside and outside Palestine, I am in support of the Hamas movement..." My friends, Nihad Awad should not be eating a fancy meal at a formal banquet in Ft. Lauderdale. He should be eating out of a metal bowl in Gitmo!!! "But Joe, how can you say such a thing? We have Freedom of Speech in this country! You need proof of wrongdoing!" That is correct, and that is what I'm going to provide you with now? proof that the organization CAIR, in 2001, appeared to have materially supported terrorists. According to the Justice Department (Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 113B, Section 2339A, entitled 'Providing material support to terrorists'), such support can result in life imprisonment. In 2001, right after the September 11th attacks, CAIR placed on their website, under a picture of the World Trade Center in flames, a plea for donations. It read, "Donate to the NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund." Yet, when people clicked on the link, it did not take them to any NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund. No, it took them straight to the website of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a pseudo-charity that was created by the same HAMAS leader that created the Islamic Association for Palestine, and as stated earlier, a pseudo-charity that was closed down by the United States for raising millions for HAMAS. The fact that CAIR was toying with the emotions of persons wanting to give money to a fund that CAIR disguised as one related to the 9/11 attacks is despicable? The fact that CAIR was asking people to donate to an organization that was raising millions for a terrorist organization that regularly sends suicide squads to murder innocent people is criminal. On December 2, 2001, while CAIR had this link to the Holy Land Foundation on their site, a member of HAMAS detonated a bomb attached to himself inside a bus in Haifa, Israel, murdering 15 and wounding 40 others. And a day earlier, 11 young people were killed by a suicide bombing in an entertainment area in Jerusalem. Now, someone might say, "But Joe, CAIR took down the link to the Holy Land Foundation the same day the pseudo-charity was shut down. In the months that CAIR had the link to the Holy Land Foundation on their site, maybe CAIR didn't know about the terrorist connections of the charity." Yes, someone might say that. However, when one finds out that the head of the Holy Land Foundation, Ghassan Elashi, was none other than one of the founding board members of CAIR's Texas chapter - when one finds out that the head of the Holy Land Foundation was a leader in CAIR who now sits in a United States prison - that paints an entirely different picture altogether. And as stated previously, the Holy Land Foundation was founded by the same individual who founded CAIR's parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine. Furthermore, around the same time that CAIR asked for donations for the Holy Land Foundation, they asked people to donate money to another pseudo-charity that was shut down by the U.S. Government for raising funds for HAMAS, Al Qaeda and other terrorist entities - the Global Relief Foundation - and its leader, Rabih Haddad, was deported by the United States. CAIR described the closure of the Global Relief Foundation as the racial profiling of an organization that "had established a track record of effective relief work." And CAIR called the closure of the Holy Land Foundation "unjust" and "disturbing." My friends, the closure of this phony charity was neither "unjust" nor "disturbing." No, what is unjust and disturbing is the fact that CAIR - an organization that has been created by a front for the terrorist group HAMAS - is having a banquet in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. That is what's unjust and disturbing! They shouldn't be having a fancy banquet. They should be behind bars. And I hope, very soon, America wakes up out of its sleep and puts them there. Thank you very much. Joe Kaufman is head of Americans Against Hate (www.americansagainsthate.com), which protested a recent CAIR meeting. [Editor note: See Kaufman's writeup before the meeting, one of the featured articles in this issue of Think-Israel.] To Go To Top

FROM 1939 TO 2004 - GENOCIDE THEN AND NOW Posted by Louis Rene Beres, April 10, 2004.

Lest we overlook it, the ongoing objective of various Arab/Islamic states and movements is openly identical to Hitler's principal goal for the Third Reich. The objective in both cases is correctly described as genocide against Jewish populations. Indeed, even by the strict jurisprudential standard established at the 1948 Genocide Convention, the explicit policies and codified doctrines of certain Arab/Islamic states and terror groups remain unambiguously genocidal. It follows that Israel must now be prepared to act purposefully on this understanding, especially with regard to Arab/Islamic development of certain mass destruction weaponry. In the eyes of the world, Israel is today the individual Jew writ large. Since 1948, openly-acknowledged plans for extermination and annihilation of the Jewish State have been animated by age-old fanatical hatreds based on anti-Semitism. Among pertinent elements of the Arab/Islamic world, issues of land and politics are merely a pretext for orchestrated convulsions. In substance these issues are always peripheral. For these elements, war and terror against Israel are now little more than a newer and considerably more efficient means to commit old-style crimes against humanity. Should Iran or any Arab state or movement be permitted to acquire nuclear or even certain biological weapons, the fully intended result to Israel might well be another Jewish genocide. Starting in 1938, small groups of predominantly Jewish scientists from Central Europe living in the United States began to express informed fears that Nazi Germany could build nuclear weapons. About two years after Einstein transmitted these authoritative fears to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his famous letter of August 1939, the United States launched the Manhattan Project. In part, this effort was the result of a perceived danger by Jewish emigres of an incontestably existential threat to then widely dispersed European Jewish communities. Today it is the responsibility of Jews everywhere to recognize another existential danger, this time to the ingathered Jewish population of the State of Israel. Should it face the prospect of a nuclear Iran, or of any Arab state or movement with atomic or even certain biological weapons, Israel would have absolutely no choice but to act preemptively. This is exactly what Prime Minister Menachem Begin did on June 7, 1981, when Israel's "Operation Opera" successfully destroyed Iraq's Osiraq nuclear reactor. [Operation "Opera" - Israel destroys the Iraqi nuclear reactor (1981) http://www.alisrael.com/tamuz/] This operation, best described under international law as a permissible act of "anticipatory self-defense," was an expressed application of the "Begin Doctrine." This doctrine clearly affirmed Israel's policy to deny certain weapons of mass destruction to particular enemy states. It was drawn directly from Prime Minister Begin's awareness that the developing nuclear threat then facing Israel - a country already the Jew in macrocom - was merely a new form of a previous genocide against Jews. It is essential today, when Israel is under intense pressure to turn a blind eye to Iranian and possibly other regional efforts at nuclearization, that a continuing pattern of anti-Jewish genocide be recognized and, consequently, that the Begin Doctrine be reinvigorated and declared. Now, just as during the Second World War, Jews face the threat of mass murder because of atomic weapons. Now, however, the danger is not that these weapons will be used by a genocidal state against other states to acquire physical custody over Jewish bodies, but rather against that single state which was expressly created for the eternal protection of these bodies. In certain respects at least, the nuclear danger to Jews is even greater today; that is, it looms even more menacingly over those Jews who live in Israel. Logistically, with the concentration of more than five million Jews within a state that is half the size of Lake Michigan, genocide has now become much simpler. In a terrible irony, one almost too unthinkable to be uttered openly, the Zionist solution to what Herzl called the "Jewish Problem" could soon make much easier what Hitler called the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question." Currentlyly, Israel is coming under increasing pressure to dismantle and renounce its still unrevealed nuclear weapons capacity. In the name of "fairness," dozens of countries, including vertually all Arab/Islamic states and many others, in Europe and elsewhere, now demand that Washington push Israel to accept a regional "nuclear weapon free-zone." One needn't be an advanced strategic thinker to recognize that any serious Israeli move to comply with such sinister pressure would effectively assure Israel's violent disappearance. International law is not a suicide pact. From the standpoint of criminal intent, Israel cannot possibly be compared to various Arab and certain other Islamic states, whose only undeniable rationale for weapons of mass destruction vis-a-vis Israel is manifest aggression and offensive war. It is absolutely certain that Israel's nuclear weapons exist only for national survival and self-protection, and that these weapons - which have never been flaunted, brandished or even acknowledged - would never be used for any other reason. What, then, is Israel to do? With the danger of organized Jewish extinction again rearing its head, albeit in a different historical form, Israel's leaders must soon remind the world that, in current circumstances, the "Begin Doctrine" is still entirely consistent with the established right of anticipatory self-defense under international law. Following such an appropriate jurisprudential reminder, it must make prompt tactical preparations to prevent a looming Jewish genocide by implementing a number of established military means, including comprehensive plans for the preemptive destruction of various enemy WMD targets and infrastructures. Other coordinated and corollary Israeli efforts must be directed at particular regime targets, ranging from pertinent national leadership elites to those individual scientists in different parts of the globe who now fashion or prepare to fashion biological and nuclear weapons for exclusively genocidal purpose against Jews. This proposed killing of enemy scientists making mega-weapons for dangerous regimes is assuredly not unprecedented practice by Israeli or American operatives, nor is it by any means a prima facie violation of international law. Similar Israeli/American tactics of "targeted killings" must remain in place against certain terrorist leaders, and should quickly be extended and expanded to any such leaders with documented plans to create authentic weapons of mass destruction. During World War II, a number of Arab leaders went directly to Berlin to meet with Hitler, and to enthusiastically offer their armed services to carry forward the European annihilation of Jews to portions of the Islamic Middle East. At that time the Allies did everything possible to prevent the wartime nuclearization of Germany and, very successfuly, at least for the moment, to create an atomic monopoly for the United States. Today, aware that it cannot possibly permit a single Arab state or movement or Iran to ever acquire nuclear or certain biological weapons of mass destruction, and equally aware that it can never find security in the "civilized" international guarantees offered by the United Nations, Israel must prepare to do whatever is needed to prevent another Jewish genocide. This is now a genuinely sacred obligation, not only to Israel's currently imperiled population, but also to the blessed memory of those martyred Six Million who now sleep in the dust. Louis Rene Beres is Professor of International Law, Department of Political Science, Purdue University. He chairs "Project Daniel," a small private group advising the Prime Minister of Israel on nuclear security issues. The group's final report, "Israel's Strategic Future", was presented to Prime Minister Sharon one year ago. This article was published in the Jewish Press (New York) April 9, 2004. To Go To Top

GOOGLE SEARCH ENGINE FAVORS ANTI-SEMITIC "JEW WATCH" Posted by Leo Rennert, April 10, 2004.

When you type in "Jew" in Google's search engine, an anti-Semitic site - Jew Watch - comes up first. Upon contacting Google about this, they stated that if they get a petition of at least 50,000 names, they would seriously consider changing it. Please pass this link on to everyone you know to sign the petition. This campaign apparently began with the Jerusalem Post. I urge you to see for yourself - just go to JewWatch.com, (full of hateful and wrong information). Then Click here to sign the petition. The Post will track the number of responses. Remove JewWatch.com from Google! To Go To Top

MEL GIBSON: ARAB WORLD MESSIAH Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, April 9, 2004.

This article was written by Michelle Goldberg, a staff writer for "Salon" based in New York. It appeared in "Salon" April 6, 2004 and is archived as http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/04/06/the_passion AMMAN, Jordan - Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" has been playing on four screens at the Mecca Mall here for nearly three weeks, but the front desk employee at my hotel still suggested that I get to the theater an hour early to buy tickets for a Sunday evening show. She had seen it the night before in a sold-out theater and pronounced it "really amazing." "Muslims are going to see it much more than Christians," she said, "because they want to see the truth of how Jesus was tortured by the Jews." Throughout the Middle East, Muslims and Christians alike are flocking to "The Passion," making the movie a phenomenon to rival "Titanic." Many are driven by simple curiosity, their interests piqued by the controversy surrounding the film. As in America, some people are leaving theaters disgusted by Gibson's Grand Guignol sadism. Many more, though, are leaving theaters believing that Jewish villainy is confirmed by the gospels. And thanks to widespread piracy, this message has already quickly spread throughout a region already saturated with religious animosity. According to a March 24 Hollywood Reporter story, "When Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of the Christ' opens in Egypt next month, theater owners are anticipating record ticket sales even though many people in this Muslim country already have seen the biblical epic on bootlegged cassettes or downloads from the Internet." In a poor Cairo neighborhood, the article said, pirated copies were selling for less than $1. Similarly, even before it opened on March 16 in Jordan, a country that's only about 5 percent Christian, many in Amman watched it on pirated DVDs, easily available for a few Jordanian dinars. But that didn't stop people from filling theaters. According to Dima Amin, the black-clad, honey-haired girl working the Mecca Mall ticket counter Sunday night, all the hourly shows sold out for the first two weeks that "The Passion" played. "Now it's just on the weekend" that tickets are scarce, she says. This despite the fact that tickets cost 5 dinars, the equivalent of $7, and a significant amount of money in a country where the per capita income is around $1,650. In Lebanon, says As'ad AbuKhalil, a California State University professor of political science, the movie "is playing to great reviews. It was screened for the Lebanese president, who rendered a very strong verdict in favor. He attributed all the controversy to Zionist conspiracy. It was also screened for the Maronite Christian patriarch in Lebanon, who also gave it rave reviews. The verdict has been very positive uniformly. Newspapers are covering the controversy and using it to indicate Zionist intimidation." Gibson's American partisans have denied that his sanguinary passion play works, even inadvertently, as anti-Jewish propaganda. In the Middle East, though, just a few miles from the scene of the crime, audiences are interpreting the movie much like the Denver preacher whose church sign declared, "Jews Killed the Lord Jesus." With its claims of historical truth, "The Passion," which portrays a weary Pontius Pilate coerced into brutality against Jesus by a vicious, fawning cabal of hook-nosed Jewish priests, is being taken as further evidence of the Jews' elemental cruelty. "This is an injection of medieval anti-Semitism, and not only in the U.S.," AbuKhalil says of the film. "The judgment of this movie should not be confined to whether this is going to result in anti-Jewish manifestations around American movie theaters but, more importantly, whether this movie will inject classic medieval anti-Semitism into world public opinion." Despite the rabid Judeophobia of many Muslim fundamentalists, medieval anti-Semitism is an uneasy fit with Islamic doctrine. For Muslims, of course, Jesus isn't the Lord, and, according to the Quran, Jews didn't kill him. In Islamic doctrine, Jesus, a prophet, wasn't crucified at all - it only seemed that way. "They said, 'We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah' - but they killed him not, nor crucified him. But so it was made to appear to them," says the Quran. Yet now, thanks at least in part to Gibson, the ancient calumny that Jews are Christ killers is gaining currency even among people who don't believe that Christ was killed. Outside the theater on Sunday night, Yaquob Hamdan, a 23-year-old Muslim salesman, called the film "beautiful and interesting." But doesn't it contradict the Quran? "Yes", he allowed, but "it has some truth in it. The Jews are responsible for his killing. They're the ones who accuse him and spread chaos." Kuwait bans the cinematic depiction of Muslim prophets, but according to the AP, a top cleric has called for an exception for Gibson's opus because it "reveals crimes committed by Jews against Christ." This is hardly the first time that European Christian anti-Semitic iconography is resonating in the Muslim Middle East. Last year, many opinion makers in America were apoplectic about an Egyptian miniseries called "Knight Without a Horse," a dramatization of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Russian forgery that served as a mainstay of Nazi ideology. The so-called blood libel, the rumor that Jews bake their unleavened Passover bread with the blood of Christian children, has also migrated from Europe to many Muslim countries. "There is no indigenous literature of anti-Semitism in Islamic heritage," says AbuKhalil. "So if you are Hamas or Islamic Jihad, you fall back on these sources." Indeed, a column in Jordan's English-language Jordan Times interprets "The Passion" as a kind of parable of Israel's assassination of Sheik Yassin. "Maybe the obvious discrepancy between the delicacy of Christ's body and the sensitivity of his soul on one hand, and the violent punishment and its cruelty on the other hand, is what makes the audience leave the theatre carrying feelings of anger more than feelings of sadness or pity," writes Taher Riad, before switching rather abruptly to the killing of the spiritual leader of Hamas. "Did this weak and paralysed body need all these aeroplanes and bombs to explode it?" Riad asks. "Did this weak old man on his wheelchair really pose a threat to one of the mightiest military powers in the world? Finally, how many Christs are going to be tortured and crucified in the land of Christ by the hands of the Pharisees' descendants before another Mel Gibson comes along to depict their sufferings and pains?" At the theater, Amin was enthusing about Gibson-inspired transcendence. "A lot of Muslims come to see what Christians think about the Christ," she said. "When Christians watch this movie, a lot of them come out crying. This film is very important to a lot of people. This film is making history." Is it making people angrier with the Jews? "Yeah," she said. "Yes, of course." To Go To Top

THE ANTI-ISRAEL SAGA OF TOM FRIEDMAN ET AL Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, April 10, 2004.

Why have self-hating Jews become media stars? Non-Jews who despise Jews, a la Mel Gibson's daddy, are fascinating news stories. However, Jews who hate fellow Jews become front page material. If you are born with a Jewish surname like Chomsky, Beilin or Friedman, the Jewish people are stuck with you no matter what your practices or beliefs. Calling Tom Friedman and his "chevra" Jewish, is like calling Charles Manson an American. Technically, both facts are correct even though these misguided souls do not uphold the most important values of their traditions. Jews who are not rooted in Judaism, generally take up new causes, making them into radical, quasi-religions like animal rights, feminism, environmentalism and liberalism. The new "ultimate" compassionate cause is a Palestinian state "living side by side with Israel." According to the left's twisted psychology, being even-handed is always right, while taking a moral position in favor of a tiny Jewish democracy, located in a sea of totalitarianism, is somehow unbalanced and unfair. No group has a monopoly on Uncle Toms. In today's p.c. sensitive environment, winning the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary usually means that a writer is critical of Israel or America. Similarly, being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize is more often a red flag of a similarly bizarre world view. Among recent winners who have betrayed their peoples are (Uncle) Tom Friedman and (Chairman) Yasser Arafat, although the former is guilty of a double betrayal via America and Israel. For this honor, The New York Times has chosen to reward their chief foreign-affairs columnist with a cable tv show. Perhaps Mr. Arafat will be hosting "Meet The Press" or "Channel One" sometime soon. Thomas L. Friedman's elite university vocabulary has obsessed on two distinct terms to describe the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. "Cycle of violence" and "Occupation" have become the most politically charged and fraudulent terms for explaining the state of war in the Middle East, comparable to describing America's battle with the Nazis using similar terminology. Once upon a "Times," this newspaper was seriously regarded as the paper of record for an astute political viewpoint. Today, it has become a "leftist opinion rag," conveniently sandwiched into an otherwise exciting daily with truly in depth coverage of world events, along with terrific science, technology, finance, sports and arts coverage. So what gives with the op/ed pages? Throughout a rich history, the incredible liberalism of "The Times" was successful at fighting the extreme left and right, while maintaining the difficult balance of centrism. However, after Vietnam, liberals unfortunately aligned themselves with the left who had correctly protested the war. At the same time these media elites and professors stopped fighting the left's other misguided ideologies. The tragedy of Tom Friedman, The New York Times and essentially the rest of the liberal media is that they now focused all of their energies exclusively against the right. A similar version of this phenomenon occurred in Israel after the successes of the 1967 and 1973 wars, where Israeli liberals simply felt too good and too guilty about their overwhelming victories. Tom Friedman is living proof that the Democratic Party of 2004 has absolutely no resemblance to the party of 30-40 years ago. Henry Jackson and John Kennedy were great liberal thinkers who believed in lower taxes and more military spending, among other things. Today, these two leading Democrats would be considered Reagan right wingers. Friedman has steered his newspaper to define the world not by good and bad, or right and wrong. Rather, they divide the world by powerful and powerless, First World and Third World, rich and poor. A similar analogy can be used to explain the transformation of the Mapai/Labor party in Israel. This self-delusional complex has permitted intellectuals like Friedman, Peres and Sarid to deny that terrorists are pure evil, and are rather "misunderstood." If we only "understood" their pain and desperation. That is why Friedman can interview 3 "terrorists/shahids in waiting" on a recent show, treating each one with the utmost dignity and respect; or Peres could have continued negotiations for so many years with a proven terrorist named Arafat. The world according to Tom Friedman and his newspaper is supposed to show deep compassion for Third World nations who have not embraced modernity and continue to wallow in poverty, fundamentalism, desperation and a hatred of democracy. Assigning blame for their pathetic lives to Israel, Jews and Americans is the convenient road for the amoral left and their third world coconspirators. The Stockholm Syndrome, where people relate to the causes of their evil kidnappers, has infected media brains, making the liberal left complicit with anti-American and antisemitic values. How much attention was given by the media Friedmans to the stories where Hutus murdered hundreds of thousands of Tutsis in Rwanda? Virtually nothing was mentioned because black on black genocide does not quite matter to the liberal media nearly as much as when the stronger party is a white Christian American or a Jew; even if their acts were done in self-defense. To be very clear, the Palestinian people overwhelmingly (68%) would like another Holocaust to be brought upon the Jews of Israel. They pray for Israel, this miniscule Jewish state, to be destroyed. Yet the Tom Friedman's of the world do not wish to acknowledge this reality because it is simply too painful. Sometimes truth hurts just like a disease and is the reason why Friedman has called terrorism "sick" and not evil. Since his nice Jewish mother probably wanted little Tom to be Dr. Friedman, he still wishes to fix "sickness" and make it all better. Since real evil can only be "fixed" through physical destruction or war, acts for which leftists have visceral reactions, Friedman conveniently keeps the terminology in the realm of "medicine." A majority of Americans and Jews understand their unique role in the world. Unfortunately, Thomas Friedman does not know his own role. He rationalizes along the lines of Europeans who believe that if we do enough good things, we will all be loved. Friedman does not realize that the rest of the world is overwhelmingly wrong, while America and Israel have been absolutely right in virtually all of their unilateral actions. However, just like little boys, Tom, Yossi and Shimon do not care as much about morality, right or wrong. They care most about winning a popularity contest. It is the liberal media that has overwhelmingly been saying for the past few years, "America and Israel must win the hearts and minds of the Arab and Muslim world." How can you convince them of America's goodness or Israel's decency, when you cannot convince The New York Times? Irwin N. Graulich is a motivational speaker on politics, ethics, religion and Judaism. He is also president of a marketing, branding and communications firm in New York City. To Go To Top

THE MIRROR OF FALLUJAH: No more passes and excuses for the Middle East Posted by Dafna Yee, April 9, 2004.

This was written by Victor Davis Hanson, and appeared April 4, 2004 on the Hanson website: http://victorhanson.com/ What are we to make of scenes from the eighth-century in Fallujah? Random murder, mutilation of the dead, dismemberment, televised gore, and pride in stringing up the charred corpses of those who sought to bring food to the hungry? Perhaps we can shrug and say all this is the wage of Saddam Hussein and the thirty years of brutality of his Baathists that institutionalized such barbarity? Or was the carnage the dying scream of Baathist hold-outs intent on shocking the Western world at home watching it live? We could speculate for hours. Yet I fear that we have not seen anything new. Flip through the newspaper and the stories are as depressing as they are monotonous: bombs in Spain; fiery clerics promising death in England, even as explosive devices are uncovered in France. In-between accounts of bombings in Iraq, we get the normal murdering in Israel, and daily assassination in Pakistan, Turkey, Morocco, and Chechnya. Murder, dismemberment, torture - these all seem to be the acceptable tools of Islamic fundamentalism and condoned as part of justifiable Middle East rage. Sheik Yassin is called a poor crippled "holy man" who ordered the deaths of hundreds, as revered in the Arab World for his mass murder as Jerry Falwell is condemned in the West for his occasional slipshod slur about Muslims. Yet the hourly killing is perhaps not merely the wages of autocracy, but part of a larger grotesquery of Islamic fundamentalism on display. The Taliban strung up infidels from construction cranes and watched, like Romans of old, gory stoning and decapitations in soccer stadiums built with UN largess. In the last two years, Palestinian mobs have torn apart Israeli soldiers, lynched their own, wired children with suicide bombing vests, and machine-gunned down women and children - between sickening scenes of smearing themselves with the blood of "martyrs." Very few Arab intellectuals or holy men have condemned such viciousness. Daniel Pearl had his head cut off on tape; an American diplomat was riddled with bullets in Jordan. Or should we turn to Lebanon and gaze at the work of Hezbollah - its posters of decapitated Israeli soldiers proudly on display? Some will interject that the Saudis are not to be forgotten - whose religious police recently allowed trapped school girls to be incinerated rather than have them leave the flaming building unescorted, engage in public amputations, and behead adulteresses. But Mr. Assad erased from memory the entire town of Hama. And why pick on Saddam Hussein, when earlier Mr. Nasser, heartthrob to the Arab masses, gassed Yemenis? The Middle-East coffee houses cry about the creation of Israel and the refugees on the West Bank only to snicker that almost 1,000,000 Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Arab world. And then there is the rhetoric. Where else in the world do mainstream newspapers talk of Jews as the children of pigs and apes? And how many wacky Christian or Hindu fundamentalists advocate about the mass murder of Jews or promise death to the infidel? Does a Western leader begin his peroration with "O evil infidel" or does Mr. Sharon talk of "virgins" and "blood-stained martyrs"? Conspiracy theory in the West is the domain of Montana survivalists and Chomsky-like wackos; in the Arab world it is the staple of the state-run media. This tired strophe and antistrophe of threats and retractions, and braggadocio and obsequiousness grates on the world at large. So Hamas threatens to bring the war to the United States, and then back peddles and says not really. So the Palestinians warn American diplomats that they are not welcome on the soil of the West Bank - as if any wish to return when last there they were murdered trying to extend scholarships to Palestinian students. I am sorry, but these toxic fumes of the Dark-Ages permeate everywhere. It won't do any more simply to repeat quite logical exegeses. Without consensual government, the poor Arab Middle East is caught in the throes of rampant unemployment, illiteracy, statism, and corruption. Thus in frustration it vents through its state-run media invective against Jews and Americans to assuage the shame and pain. Whatever. But at some point the world is asking: "Is Mr. Assad or Hussein, the Saudi Royal Family, or a Khadafy really an aberration - all rogues who hijacked Arab countries - or are they the logical expression of a tribal patriarchal society whose frequent tolerance of barbarism is in fact reflected in its leadership? Are the citizens of Fallujah the victims of Saddam, or did folk like this find their natural identity expressed in Saddam?" Postcolonial theory and victimology argue that European colonialism, Zionism, and petrodollars wrecked the Middle East. But to believe that one must see India in shambles, Latin America under blanket autocracy, and an array of suicide bombers pouring out of Mexico or Nigeria. South Korea was a moonscape of war when oil began gushing out of Iraq and Saudi Arabia; why is it now exporting cars while the latter are exporting death? Apartheid was far worse than the Shah's modernization program; yet why did South Africa renounce nuclear weapons while the Mullahs cheated on every UN protocol they could? No, there is something peculiar to the Middle East that worries the world. The Arab world for years has promulgated a quite successful media image as perennial victims - proud folks, suffering under a series of foreign burdens, while nobly maintaining their grace and hospitality. Middle-Eastern Studies programs in the United States and Europe published an array of mostly dishonest accounts of Western culpability, sometimes Marxist, sometimes anti-Semitic that were found to be useful intellectual architecture for the edifice of panArabism, as if Palestinians or Iraqis shared the same oppressions, the same hopes, and the same ideals as downtrodden American people of color - part of a universal "other" deserving victim status and its attendant blanket moral exculpation. But the curtain has been lifted since 9-11 and the picture we see hourly now is not pretty. Imagine an Olympics in Cairo? Or an international beauty pageant in Riyadh? Perhaps an interfaith world religious congress would like to meet in Teheran? Surely we could have the World Cup in Beirut? Is there a chance to have a World Bank conference in Ramallah or Tripoli? Maybe Damascus could host a conference of the world's neurosurgeons? And then there is the asymmetry of it all. Walk in hushed tones by a mosque in Iraq, yet storm and desecrate the Church of the Nativity in the West Bank with impunity. Blow up and assassinate Westerners with unconcern; yet scream that Muslims are being questioned about immigration status in New York. Damn the West as you try to immigrate there; try to give the Middle East a fair shake while you prefer never to visit such a place. Threaten with death and fatwa any speaker or writer who "impugns" Islam, demand from Western intellectuals condemnation of any Christians who speak blasphemously of the Koran. I have purchased Israeli agricultural implements, computer parts, and read books translated from the Hebrew; so far, nothing in the contemporary Arab world has been of much value in offering help to the people of the world in science, agriculture, or medicine. When there is news of 200 murdered in Madrid or Islamic mass-murdering of Christians in the Sudan, or suicide bombing in Israel, we no longer look for moderate mullahs and clerics to come forward in London or New York to condemn it. They rarely do. And if we might hear a word of reproof, it is always qualified by the ubiquitous "but" - followed by a litany of qualifiers about Western colonialism, Zionism, racism, and hegemony that have the effects of making the condemnation either meaningless or in fact a sort of approval. Yet it is not just the violence, the boring threats, the constant televised hatred, the temper-tantrums of fake intellectuals on televisions, the hypocrisy of anti-Western Arabs haranguing America and Europe from London or Boston, or even the pathetic shouting and fist-shaking of the ubiquitous Arab street. Rather the global village is beginning to see that the violence of the Middle East is not aberrant, but logical. Its misery is not a result of exploitation or colonialism, but self-induced. Its fundamentalism is not akin to that of reactionary Hinduism, Buddhism, or Christianity, but of an altogether different and much fouler brand. The enemy of the Middle East is not the West so much as modernism itself and the humiliation that accrues when millions themselves are nursed by fantasies, hypocrisies, and conspiracies to explain their own failures. Quite simply, any society in which citizens owe their allegiance to the tribe rather than the nation, do not believe in democracy enough to institute it, shun female intellectual contributions, allow polygamy, insist on patriarchy, institutionalize religious persecution, ignore family planning, expect endemic corruption, tolerate honor killings, see no need to vote, and define knowledge as mastery of the Koran is deeply pathological. When one adds to this depressing calculus that for all the protestations of Arab nationalism, Islamic purity and superiority, and whining about a decadent West, the entire region is infected with a burning desire for things Western - from cell phones and computers to videos and dialysis, you have all the ingredients for utter disaster and chaos. How after all in polite conversation can you explain to an Arab intellectual that the GDP of Jordan or Morocco has something to do with an array of men in the early afternoon stuffed into coffee shops spinning conspiracy tales, drinking coffee, and playing board games while Japanese, Germans, Chinese, and American women and men are into their sixth hour on the job? Or how do you explain that while Taiwanese are studying logarithms, Pakistanis are chanting from the Koran in Dark-Age madrassas? And how do you politely point out that while the New York Times and Guardian chastise their own elected officials, the Arab news in Damascus or Cairo is free only to do the same to us? I support the bold efforts of the United States to make a start in cleaning up this mess, in hopes that a Fallujah might one day exorcize its demons. But in the meantime, we should have no illusions about the enormity of our task, where every positive effort will be met with violence, fury, hypocrisy, and ingratitude. If we are to try to bring some good to the Middle East, then we must first have the intellectual courage to confess that for the most part the pathologies embedded there are not merely the work of corrupt leaders but often the very people who put them in place and allowed them to continue their ruin. So the question remains did Saddam create Fallujah or Fallujah Saddam? Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

TERRORISTS ARE BLOOMING OUT ALL OVER Posted by Bryna Berch, April 9, 2004.

These are two items from todays' Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). JERUSALEM ARABS AMONG HOSTAGES IN IRAQ Two Christian Arabs from Jerusalem, though not citizens of Israel, are among 15 hostages from several nations taken captive in separate incidents Thursday by Iraqi terrorists. Iranian television broadcast images of the Arab captives - Nabil George Ya'akub Razuk, a jeweler aged 30, and Ahmed Yasin Tikati, 33 - along with pictures of their Israeli driver's licenses and HMO cards. The Foreign Ministry confirmed the report. The terrorists, calling themselves "Ansar A-Din", claimed that Razuk and Tikati are "agents" of Israel and they are demanding that US forces release Iraqi prisoners, mostly women, in exchange for the captives. Video footage released by the kidnappers showed the two men "confessing" to working for Israel. Government officials stated that Razuk and Tikati were not dispatched to Iraq in any government capacity. Furthermore, officials clarified, Razuk and Tikati do not hold Israeli citizenship. Samir, a Jerusalem resident and an uncle of Nabil Razuk, told Israel Television that his nephew is an employee of US AID, a humanitarian organization, who departed for Iraq approximately 2-3 months ago. US AID officials were as yet unable to confirm or deny the information. Family members of the Arab hostages have turned to PLO leader Yasser Arafat to intercede on behalf of their loved ones in the hope of obtaining their release. There is no information at this time regarding Arafat's reply. Of the other 13 captives held by the Iraqi terrorists, one South Korean managed to escape from his captors and seven other South Korean missionaries were released. In addition to the two Jerusalem Arabs, the hostages include three Japanese nationals, a Canadian and a Briton. The Arabic satellite news channel Al-Jazeera showed the Iraqi terrorists holding knives to the throats of the three Japanese hostages. According to the station, the video came from a group calling itself "Mujahedin Brigades", with a written demand to withdraw Japanese troops from Iraq within three days, or else the hostages would be burned alive. Japan demanded the release of its citizens and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi replied to the terrorists' demands with a terse, "No." SUICIDE BOMBERS, ARSON AND OTHER ATTACKS Fire department inspectors today said that two fires that erupted in the Jerusalem Forest, near the Pi G'lilot gas storage facility, were the result of arson by terrorists. The fires, which appeared to have several focal points, began on Thursday at about 10:00 and 14:00. Both blazes were contained without any injuries. However, the attack may have been aimed at endangering the gas facility and hence the nearby population. Meanwhile, near Bethlehem, IDF Golani Brigade forces apprehended a would-be suicide bomber, preventing yet another such attack inside pre-1967 Green Line Israel. The would-be bomber, apprehended in Dahaisha, is Heiman Al-Ahras, a woman belonging to Yasser Arafat's Fatah terrorist group. In addition, IDF troops last night arrested seven Palestinian Authority residents suspected of terrorist activities. Arrests were made in the Ramallah, Bethlehem and Jordan Valley areas. In other Oslo War news: Arab terrorists fired at IDF soldiers in the northern Shomron in two separate shooting attacks, near the community of Kadim; a bomb was detonated against an IDF armored vehicle in the Rafiach area of southern Gaza, along the Egypt-Israel border; Arabs threw a firebomb at a military jeep in the Shomron near the Arab village of Beta. A chase ensued, but the attackers managed to flee the area; terrorists fired a rocket at an IDF position in the area of the southern Gush Katif community of N'vei Dekalim; and, in attacks possibly terror-related, a number of firebombs were hurled at a police vehicle at Rimon Junction in northern Israel last night. It was the third such attack in a number of weeks. District police are investigating. There were no injuries in any of the foregoing incidents. In efforts to prevent incitement and violence in Jerusalem, Israel police are out in force today, following Friday afternoon Islamic prayer services on the Temple Mount. Last week, following prayers, riots erupted. Acting on intelligence information pointing to a repeat performance today, police imposed restrictions on worshipers, banning any male under the age of 45. Those permitted on the Mount must also show Israeli identity cards, thereby banning PA residents. In addition to the domestic terrorist elements, IDF Northern District Commander Major-General Benny Gantz told Army Radio that Hizbullah is operating in PA areas to perpetrate terror attacks, as well as along the northern border. However, the senior commander added that at present, the northern border is quiet and holiday travelers are encouraged to visit the area. BELGIAN JEWS THREATENED BY EURO-ARAB LEAGUE Belgium's Jews, in particular Antwerp's Jewish diamond merchants, have been put on notice by the Arab European League (AEL). "We want to warn Antwerp's Jewish community in its entirety to be on its guard. The community's support for Israel is no secret," Ahmed Azzuz, head of the AEL in Belgium told the Belgian newspaper La Libre Belgique. "The AEL calls on the Jewish community in Antwerp to cease its support of, and distance itself from, the state of Israel. If not, attacks in Antwerp are almost unpreventable," Azzuz had earlier told the Belgian Flemish magazine Knack, adding, "Every year, 200 Belgian-Israeli reservists leave for Israel to kill innocent civilians." According to an Israel Channel 1 television report, the Jewish community is taking the threats seriously, and have already contacted elected Jewish officials, the local police and the nation's justice minister. A member of the Belgian diamond merchant's community interviewed on the program confirmed reports that members of the Jewish community are afraid and at present, refrain from being outdoors during the nighttime hours. Peter Meeus reminded La Libre Belgique, "The quarter was already targeted in 1981, when terrorists attacked a Portuguese synagogue." The AEL's Azzuz insisted in the media that his statements were not threats. A spokeswoman for Antwerp police said rigorous security measures had already been introduced. To Go To Top

KEEP THE GLOVES OFF - DESTROY HAMAS Posted by IMRA, April 9, 2004.

This article is by Ehud Ya'ari, from today's Jerusalem Report, (www.jrep.com/Columnists/Article-1.html). What was the case on the eve of the Yassin assassination is much more true now: Hamas will murder as many Israelis as it can The Worst mistake that Israel could now make would be to stop pursuit of the terror leaders. It's a mistake Dr. Abd al-Aziz Rantisi and his colleagues apparently believe we will not make: Directly after the ceremonies of mourning for Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and the coronation of Rantisi as his successor in the Gaza stadium, they slipped deep underground and switched off their cellphones. Hamas's fiery rhetoric of revenge is reaching new peaks, and they will strike to the full extent of their capability; Israel therefore must not ease the pressure. What was the case on the eve of the Yassin assassination is much more true now: They will murder as many Israelis as they can, and they will try as hard as ever, particularly now that the chase is on. This is the simple truth: If Sharon orders a halt to the targeting of the terror contractors, the liquidation of Yassin will come to represent the turning point, at which Hamas realizes its dream of achieving a balance of terror against Israel. The Hamas leadership well understands that despite all the death and destruction it has sown in Israel, it has not yet succeeded in creating deterrence. It sees that the army doesn't hesitate to send its tanks into the refugee camps of the Gaza Strip, or its Apache attack helicopters to intercept its leaders, who would have liked to think of themselves as immune from attack. In the week that Yassin was killed, the Palestinians lost another 70 lives, most - though regrettably not all - from among the armed gangs. As they see it, Sharon has almost unlimited freedom of operation, and therefore it is urgently necessary to find a new method of scaring Israel into restraint. They talk about this incessantly, but by late March had not yet found the answer. Their fear is a repeat performance in Gaza of what happened to Hamas in the West Bank. There, about 90 percent of the Hamas terrorist infrastructure has been shattered through a combined effort of the army and the Shin Bet security service since the Defensive Shield operation of 2002. Today there is no effective Hamas military apparatus between Hebron and Jenin, but only a handful of isolated cells that have great difficulty launching "quality attacks," as they call them. The West Bank Hamas leadership has either been wiped out in targeted killings .The senior operational echelon is mostly dead, other than one member, Ahmed Badr, who is still in hiding. As a result, Fatah is launching most of the attacks from the West Bank, after a long period when Hamas carried out the most deadly ones. The fate of Hamas in the West Bank proves that a systematic, uncompromising campaign bears fruit. It is true that the Gaza Strip is different in many respects. But only one difference really counts: In contrast to the West Bank, in Gaza Hamas has an armed militia, not just terror cells, something along the lines of a "popular army" that is hastily being built. So far Israel has not acted against this militia, whose cadres are not for the most part involved in serious terror acts. But if the popular army is allowed to develop, it will turn into a parallel, highly-motivated armed force to rival the puny security apparatuses of the Palestinian Authority. From the moment that Hamas achieves its goal of a militia of thousands of fighters, there will be no hope of stopping it from turning the Gaza Strip into "Hamas-stan," like the "Hizballahstan" that rose up in the wake of the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon. Hamas makes no secret of its plans. For example the Lebanon-based Ossama Hamdan, the main Hamas liaison with Hizballah, spoke in an interview on Hizballah's Radio Nur of recruiting thousands of suicide bombers in order to carry out a large number of attacks simultaneously, perhaps in one location, Al-Qaeda-style. This is not vain talk. Hamas is working flat out towards this end, with the funding, guidance and encouragement of Hizballah's Sheikh Nasrallah. The Hamas leadership's belief is that a series of blows of this kind would "shock" Israel and bring this current round to its end game. The army's insistence on sticking to the credo of "limited conflict" has determined Israel's response since the beginning of the intifada, meaning restraint in its use of force, and selectivity and caution in its preemptive actions. There are now those in the army questioning this approach, which is the cause of the slow, limping pace of the war on terror. The debate now under way in the army's theoretical monthly journal, Ma'arachot, deals with the argument that it is precisely the credo of limited conflict that is dragging out the bloodshed over time, while this current intifada has in fact been an "all-out confrontation" from the start, with only the means used to fight it limited for the time being. As for Hamas, it has no limitations. Its terrorists have tried in the past to add cyanide and other poisons to their explosives. They planned to bring down the Shalom Tower in Tel Aviv. They send women and children as suicide bombers, and they are striving to pull off a mega-attack, which they already attempted in Ashdod. It is impossible to contend with such a danger in a hesitant, halting manner. It is time to keep the gloves off. Dr. Aaron Lerner is director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) (Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava). IMRA's Internet address is http://www.imra.org.il and email address is imra@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

IRAQI SAVAGERY AND THE P.A. PEACE MOVEMENT Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 9, 2004.

1. The casualties among my fellow Americans in Iraq distress me, but the savagery with which the Arabs committed some recent attacks are almost unspeakable. The media mostly made the carnage less clearly visible, not wanting to shock audiences. This barbarism is something that American and foreign audiences should be shocked with. They should be shocked into realization that we are dealing not with ordinary protest but with an assault on civilization. Remember, our opponents are doing everything to hinder our reconstruction of their country at our own expense, we supposedly imperialistic Americans. When critics of the US war on Iraq contend, prematurely in my opinion, that the reconstruction has been a failure, they blame the US for it. Shouldn't they also blame the saboteurs? US forces are finding themselves in the same predicament as do Israeli forces. The Arabs mutilate American victims, as they have mutilated Israeli victims. The US finds it has to assassinate terrorist leaders, or try to, as had Israel. There are other parallels, too, such as imposition of curfews, because the US and Israel have a common enemy: Arab society. You might think that excludes Egypt, but its diplomacy is anti-American and its people hate the US. The Israeli government recently announced that it would feel free to target for execution other terrorist leaders, such as the head of the PLO and of Hizbullah, since the US feels free to do so. It is about time that Israel did this. This should be a time of political relations gains for Israel, which is uniquely able to sympathize with Americans in their plight and the US government in its hard choices, while demanding that the US stop criticizing Israel for doing what the US does. Unfortunately, Israeli leaders are so naive, inept, and self-centered about public relations, for whch they have no long-range plans, that they fail to exploit this opportunity to help lead the world to realization of the nature of the "war on terrorism." 2. IMRA's co-directors, Dr. Aaron Lerner and his father, Dr. Joseph Lerner, are doing a yeoman job of getting extensive news out of Israel and analyzing some of it. IMRA has pointed out the misrepresentation by and of what is called a new peace movement in the P.A.. Some P.A. leaders, who enjoy a false reputation for moderation, such as Sari Nusseibeh who uses his campus for training in terrorism, and Hanan Ashrawi, who generally excuses terrorism, have formed what they are fortunate that the media calls a peace movement. It has nothing to do with peace, as IMRA points out. The new thrust is to revert to the first type of Intifada and call it peaceful. To the Arabs, "peaceful protest" includes firebombs, stone-throwing, and dishonest incitement to it. Genuine moderates do not indulge in that. The Arabs know that when they use the word, "peaceful," in English, they give a false impression. Mis-translation and false terminology are a typical Arab tactic. Why do they suggest an end to the use of firearms? They are not suggesting its end. They are suggesting its suspension. They contend that at present, such means are counter-productive. Such means provoke Israeli counter-terrorism instead of a negotiated Israeli surrender. These supposed moderates do not criticize the use of guns and on civilians as immoral. They have no qualms about murder, when they think it advances the Arab objective. Westerners should treat Arab claims of moderation skeptically. They almost invariably are phony or insignificant. The new movement is a tactical change, not a strategic one. Nothing suggests that Nusseibeh and Ashrawi, promoters of imperialism and enablers of genocide, have reformed themselves. They pile on the cunning, and the media piles on the praise. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

PALESTINIANS CALL FOR IRAQIS TO WAGE 'HOLY WAR' ON U.S. Posted by Leo Rennert, April 9, 2004.

This was a news item today by the Associated Press in Ha'aretz. GAZA CITY - Thousands of Palestinians staged pro-Iraq rallies Friday to mark the first anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, calling on Iraqis to rise up against the United States in a holy war. Following Friday prayers, thousands of protesters in the West Bank and Gaza Strip burned Israeli and U.S. flags and chanted slogans against U.S. President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. In Gaza City, about 2,000 Islamic Jihad supporters, including children holding the militant group's black flags, chanted "Death to America," and burned effigies of Bush and Sharon. "Our message to the world, to our brothers in Iraq, we are fighting against the same enemies, the same occupation, we are fighting in the same battle," Mohammed al-Hindi, an Islamic Jihad leader, told reporters. "Our people in Palestine and our brothers in Iraq are slaughtered by the knife, the knife of Bush and Sharon," he said. In the West Bank city of Nablus, about 400 Palestinians from various groups marched through the city chanting "Bush and Sharon are terrorists." Preachers in Nablus mosques spoke out against the current American military operation in Iraq and called on Iraqis to unite against America. "The Sunni and the Shiites have united in a Jihad, as they should, against the Americans," one cleric said. "The Palestinian and Iraqi people will lead the Arabs to victory," another said. In Ramallah, some 200 people joined an Islamic Jihad rally to mark what they called the first anniversary of the American occupation of Iraq. Masked gunmen in white and black robes burned Israeli and American flags as the crowd chanted "Bush is the enemy of God," and "Death to Bush." "Fallujah, the people of Palestine are with you," one group chanted, referring to the Iraqi city at the center of the fighting. To Go To Top

THE MAMBO PALESTINIANO Posted by Steven Plaut, April 9, 2004.

(to the tune of Mambo Italiano, lyrics and music by Rosemary Clooney. Read and sing it to a FAST beat) A girl strapped on her finery, 'twas filled with tubes of TNT, her happy dances and her songs, but wai a minute... something's wrong: Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Go, go, go, You mixed up Tanzin an'mal. All you Jihadist mammals do the mambo like there's no tomorrow With a-Hey Mambo! Sure wanna intifader, Hey Mambo! With no kosher mozzareller , Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Try a Kassem Rocker with da trigger in yo pocket, And then hey Abu! I love how you intifado. But take some advice from your old paisano, better learn-a how to bombo If you gonna bomb the square off to virgins uppa there The Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Go, go Joe, pull the trigger Abu Babbo, hello kess-yo toosh you get so happy when pogromo when you Mambo Palestiniano ! (...harpsichord...) Shake baby, shake, 'cause I bomb you Mister Jake (...harpsichord...) Mama say you bomb-a or I'm gonna tell your papa And then hey jihad! You donna have to go to school Just make-a wid da bomb-bambino, For Moslems mustn't touch no vino Kid you're good-a-lookin' but you don't know what's a-cookin, till you Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Hey Mambo! Mambo Palestiniano! Go, go, go, you mixed up tanzim an'mal it's -a so delisha, everybody gonna go splish Dat's how to Mambo Palestiniano ! 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

CHRISTIANS "PRAY FOR GAZA" DAY THROUGHOUT THE U.S. Posted by AFSI, April 9, 2004.

Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, has turned to the Christian Evangelical community who number in the tens of millions in the U.S., and considered to be one of President Bush's core constituencies, to institute a "PRAY FOR GAZA DAY." Zweibon notes, "Churches across the country will observe a day of prayer for Gaza before April 14, in anticipation of Prime Minister Sharon's visit to Pres. Bush at the White House. It is their hope to prevent the surrender of 21 Jewish communities in Gaza to the terrorists who are now in the area. In addition, all Bible believing Christians and Jews recognize that a give away of Holy Land is a violation of God's Covenant with the Jewish people. References to Joshua 13:1-3, and Judges 1:18, are cited as specifically naming Gaza as part of the biblical entitlement." AFSI's Chairman continues, "There are also historic, strategic and moral reasons for holding onto Gaza. The 1967 U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff report, which has never been revised, declared Gaza a strategic requirement for Israel's defense. Pres. Bush's March 19 assertion that '[a]ny sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations' would be negated if Israel would withdraw from Gaza. America's war on terror in Iraq would become more difficult and dangerous as we discover that terrorists by any name are all the same. This is borne out in the words of Moqtada al-Sadr who told his followers: 'I am the striking arm for Hizbulllah and Hamas in Iraq because the fate of Iraq and Palestine is the same.'" Quoting Pat Robertson in his address at the Herziliya Conference last December, Zweibon echoes Robertson's pleas to the Israelis, "Please don't commit national suicide... The slogan "land for peace" is a cruel chimera. The Sinai was given up. Did that bring lasting peace? No. Southern Lebanon was given up. Did that bring lasting peace? No. The world's Christians ask that you do not give away the treasured symbols of your spiritual patrimony... Those political leaders who... dismiss the spiritual dimension of Israel's existence will find that they receive the mess of pottage of Esau rather than the inheritance of Jacob." Americans For A Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. Afsi may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. To Go To Top

US CHRISTIANS LOBBY AGAINST GAZA RETREAT Posted by Michael Freund, April 9, 2004.

This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post yesterday. One of the largest grassroots pro-Israel groups in the United States has launched a nationwide effort to lobby the Bush Administration against offering support for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to evacuate Gaza. In an "Action Alert" being circulated to its 200 constituent member organizations, the National Unity Coalition for Israel, an umbrella group representing millions of Christians across the US, is urging members to contact the White House prior to Sharon's visit next week and express their opposition to the Gaza plan. In a letter sent to US President George W. Bush, the Coalition calls on him "to encourage Israel to stand strong and not retreat in the face of Palestinian terrorism." Citing remarks made by Bush on March 19, when he said that, "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations," the Coalition says that, "Israel must follow the lead of the United States by defending her innocent civilians from further butchery." In an apparent reference to the political fallout that Bush might face among Bible-believing Christians if he supports the Gaza pullout, the letter warns him not to "follow in the footsteps of previous failed plans," as it could "fail your own presidency." "Be wary of the potential downside of getting involved," the letter concludes. This is believed to be the first time that a major pro-Israel Christian organization in the US has raised the possibility of electoral consequences for Bush should he embrace Sharon's plan to withdraw from parts of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. Evangelical Christians, who number in the tens of millions in the US, are considered to be one of Bush's core constituencies, whose support is essential in the upcoming November presidential election. Many of them oppose an Israeli withdrawal from the territories, citing the Biblical promise of the land to the Jewish people. Michael Freund writes for the Jerusalem Post and directs Amishav, an organization committed to helping return the lost ten tribes to Israel. To Go To Top

ANTI-SEMITISM DENIAL Posted by Steven Plaut, April 9, 2004.

This article was written by Edward Alexander who is professor of English at the University of Washington and the author of "Irving Howe - Socialist, Critic, Jew" (Indiana University Press). It appeared on Front Page Magazine today. On September 20, 2002 Lawrence H. Summers, the president of Harvard University, delivered to the Harvard community a speech deploring the upsurge of antisemitism in many parts of the globe: he specified synagogue bombings, physical assaults on Jews, desecration of Jewish holy places, and (this with special emphasis) denial of the right of "the Jewish state to exist." But his most immediate concern was that "at Harvard and ...universities across the country" faculty-initiated petitions were calling "for the University to single out Israel among all nations as the lone country where it is inappropriate for any part of the university's endowment to be invested."[1] One of the Harvard faculty, Ruth Wisse, had described the divestment petition as "corrupt and cowardly" in offering its reasons for calling on the U. S. government to stop military aid and arms sales to Israel and upon universities to divest both from Israel and from American companies selling arms to Israel. "The petition," wrote Wisse,"requires that Israel comply with certain resolutions of the UN - the terms of which it distorts to say what those resolutions do not mean"; she also pointed out that the petition says nothing of the fact that all the Arab states remain in perpetual non-compliance with the entire UN Charter, which is based on the principle of mutual respect for the sovereignty of member states, which are to settle disputes by peaceful means.[2] But of course the advocates of disinvestment in Israeli companies took a less benign view of Summers' position. Amidst the numerous wails of outrage Summers provoked, one, because of its great length and still greater indignation, stands out as a classic utterance of what has come to be called "antisemitism denial": Judith Butler's essay in the London Review Of Books (21 August 2003) entitled "No, it's not anti-semitic." Prior to the autumn of 2003, this University of California professor of rhetoric and comparative literature was, like many members of Berkeley's "progressive" Jewish community with which she habitually identifies herself, somebody who defined her "Jewishness" (not exactly Judaism) in opposition to the State of Israel. She was mainly a signer of petitions harshly critical of the Jewish state, full of mean spite towards its alleged "apartheid" and "bantustan" practices, oily sycophancy towards such Palestinian figures as Sari Nusseibeh, and a habit of covering over the brutality of Arab terror with the soft snow of Latinized euphemisms. She was one of the 3700 American Jews opposed to "occupation" (Israeli, not Syrian or Chinese or any other) who signed an "Open Letter" urging the American government to cut financial aid to Israel; later she expressed misgiving about signing that particular petition - it "was not nearly strong enough...it did not call for the end of Zionism."[3] In autumn of 2002 she requested, with ponderous irony, honorary membership in the Campus Watch organization's listing of Middle East specialists polemicizing in their classrooms on behalf of Radical Islam and against Israel and America. In June 2003 her name could be found on the ubiquitous "Stop the Wall Immediately" petition. The wall, Butler and her fellow adepts in the rhetoric of inverted commas alleged, was "supposed to block 'terrorist attacks' but certainly won't prevent missiles and helicopters from hitting their human target." Suicide bombings, lynchings, pogroms, and roadside shootings were not terrorist attacks but only "terrorist attacks," whereas Israeli response to those so- called "terrorist attacks" injured real human targets. But deeper currents were also stirring in Butler. She had undertaken some abstruse research into the history of Zionism and discovered that there had been "debates among Jews throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries as to whether Zionism ought to become the basis of a state." [4] From this discovery the Hannah Arendt professor of philosophy (as she is called at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland) promptly concluded that demanding an end to Zionism in 2003, that is, calling for politicide (and the genocide that would surely accompany it) was no different from taking a debater's position against Zionism 75 or 100 years ago. She was helped in following this arrow-straight course from Buber and Magnes to "post-Zionism" by her conviction that the crucial ethical activity for Jews "is relating to the other," [5] i.e., that Jews must dance at everybody's wedding except their own. Butler had herself signed the divestment petition at its place of origin, Berkeley, where it had circulated in February 2001. She therefore found Summers' remarks not only wrong but personally "hurtful" since they implicated Judith Butler herself in the newly resurgent campus antisemitism. Butler could hardly have failed to notice that the Berkeley divestment petition had supplied the impetus and inspiration for anti-Israel mob violence on her own campus on 24 April 2001, a few weeks after it had been circulated, and for more explicitly anti-Jewish mobs at San Francisco State University in May of the following year. Slander of Israel has provoked physical violence on many campuses, especially those (like Wayne State in Detroit or Concordia in Montreal) with a large Arab presence. Summers, aware of how ubiquitous in anti-Israel discourse is the straw man called "the defender of Israel who decries any criticism of Israeli policy as antisemitism," went out of his way in his address to separate himself from this (conjectural) figure: "I have always throughout my life been put off by those who ... conjured up images of Hitler's Kristallnacht at any disagreement with Israel." Nobody has ever discovered just who these conjurors (a term Butler picked up in her rebuttal) might be, but if Summers thought that he would distance himself from them by this disclaimer, he was greatly mistaken. In fact, the corruption of discourse about the ongoing Arab war against Israel - as Butler would soon demonstrate - consists precisely of the now deeply ingrained rhetorical habit of calling virtually all assaults on Israel, on Zionism, on Israelis, from verbal to physical, "criticism of Israeli policy." In a recent issue of JUDAISM, for example, one Andrew Bush (whose name pops up near Butler's in some anti-Israel petitions) writes that "The Intifada" - i.e., the murderous assaults by Arabs against Jews that were unleashed by the Oslo Accords - "is also a critique of Zionism...[and] it is precisely Postzionism that allows one to read the violent language [!] of the Intifada as critique." [6] It is indeed the compulsive repetition, with the regularity of a steam-engine, of the euphemism "criticism of Israel" that characterizes Butler's "No, it's not anti-semitic." Despite the large role played in promoting the divestment campaign by people like Noam Chomsky, Summers had chivalrously gone out of his way to say that "Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent." To annihilate Summers' distinction between intentional and effective antisemitism is the primary aim of Butler's counter-attack. Her strategy is what logicians call the tu quoque (i.e., you too, or you're another) argument: Summers' accusations, says Butler, are "a blow against academic freedom, in effect, if not intent." His words have had "a chilling effect on political discourse." No evidence, of course, is (or could be) adduced for the allegation. Of one thing we can be sure: the chill did not extend to Harvard itself, whose English department would soon (in November, to be precise) play host to the racist hoodlum from Oxford, Tom Paulin, who had urged (in yet another "criticism of Israeli policy") that Jews living in Judea/Samaria "should be shot dead," or to Columbia, where Paulin continued merrily through autumn semester as a visiting professor, or to the New York Review of Books, which in October 2003 would establish a new front in its 36-year old assault on Israel by publishing Professor Tony Judt's "Israel: The Alternative," a call for an end to the State of Israel that had already appeared in shorter form in the Los Angeles Times. Neither did Summers dampen the fires of Israel-hatred at the London Review of Books itself, which in January 2003 published another 133 lines of Paulin doggerel called "On Being Dealt the Anti-Semitic Card," a versified rehearsal for Butler's "No, it's not anti-semitic." If Summers' speech had a chilling effect on antisemitic clarion calls, including incitement to raw murder, one would not want to know what the fully heated versions would sound like. Butler perfunctorily assented to Summers' recommendation that - as she deviously restates it - "every progressive person ought to challenge anti-semitism vigorously wherever it occurs," but she seemed incapable either of recognizing it in such (to her) innocent "public criticisms" as economic warfare against the Jewish state or calls for its dismantling or assaults on Zionism itself or opposing any effort (however feeble) Israel might make to defend herself against suicide bombers; indeed, she made it clear that she saw no difference between Jews intentionally murdered by suicide bombers (also their sponsors and despatchers) and Arabs accidentally killed by Israeli efforts to repel would-be murderers. Although nobody can recall Judith Butler saying anything more critical of Arab butchery of Jews than that it is "unacceptable," she here presented herself, with characteristic brazenness, as offering Jews a salutary warning against crying wolf: "if the charge of anti-semitism is used to defend Israel at all costs, then its power when used against those who do discriminate against Jews - who do violence to synagogues in Europe [synagogues, bar mitzvahs, and Passover seders in Israel are not mentioned], wave Nazi flags or support anti-semitic organizations - is radically diluted." And so on and on - ad nauseam. In trying to confute Summers' distinction between intentional and effective antisemitism, Butler calls it wildly improbable that somebody examining the disinvestment petitions signed by herself and her co-conspirators might take them (as hundreds on her own campus already had done, and as gleeful readers of the London Review of Books were about to do) as condoning antisemitism. [7] She therefore poses this (as she assumes) unanswerable conundrum: "We are asked to conjure a listener who attributes an intention to the speaker: so-and-so has made a public statement against the Israeli occupation, and this must mean that so-and-so hates Jews or is willing to fuel those who do." But Summers was perfectly correct in stating that one need not "hate Jews" in order to perform actions or utter words that are "antisemitic in their effect if not their intent." Let us take a well-known case: when Dickens wrote "Oliver Twist" he harbored no hatred of Jews and had no programmatic or conscious intention to harm them. Indeed, he said of his Jewish monster Fagin that "he's such an out and outer I don't know what to make of him." The reason for Dickens' puzzlement was that, in an important sense, he did not indeed "make" Fagin, and therefore didn't know what to make of him. Fagin was ready-made for Dickens by the traditional folklore of Christendom, which had for centuries fixed the Jew in the role of Christ-killer, surrogate of Satan, inheritor of Judas, thief, fence, corrupter of the young; to which list of attributes Butler and her friends would now add "Zionist imperialist and occupier," or - I quote from the statement that was the germ of the whole divestment campaign - "criminal apartheid regime." Has Oliver Twist often been antisemitic in its effect? Of course - or does Butler think that it is because of their interest in the plight of the homeless in early Victorian England that Arab publishers have long kept cheap paperback translations of the book in print? Butler also uses the tu quoque "argument" in rebutting or rather evading (for she never really acknowledges it) the charge of discriminatory selectivity that Summers (like countless others) had made. Why, among all the nations on earth, has Israel alone been singled out for punishment and pariah status by the advocates of disinvestment? Where is their advocacy of disinvestment in China until China withdraws from Tibet, or from Morocco until that country ceases to occupy Western Sahara, or from Zimbabwe until it ceases persecuting its white citizens, or from Egypt until it stops building tunnels for the smuggling of arms to Palestinian killers? Could the singling out of Israel possibly have anything to do with the fact that it is a Jewish country? Despite the inordinate length of her essay, Butler cannot find space to answer this question. Instead, she accuses Summers himself of biased selectivity. "If we say that the case of Israel is different, that any criticism of it is considered as an attack on Israelis, or Jews in general, then we have singled out this political allegiance from all other allegiances that are open to public debate. We have engaged in the most outrageous form of 'effective' censorship...." Her ultimate use of the tu quoque strategy is to make Summers, the critic of antisemitism, himself guilty of what he attacks. Why? Because he assumes that Jews can only be victims, conflates "Jews" with Israel, and writes as if all Jews were a single, undifferentiated group. Apparently the 1135 Israelis murdered and the nearly 10,000 mutilated (in a Jewish population of under five million) by Arab pogromists, lynch mobs, and suicide bombers between 27 September 2000 and the time Butler published her essay were not sufficient to meet her stringent requirements for (Jewish) victim status. [8] But if Israelis are not the victims of Palestinian aggression in the latest round of the Arab nations' 56-year old war to eradicate the Jewish state, why is it that Jewish schools in Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem must be protected by armed guards while Arab schools in Nazareth or Jenin require no such safeguards? Why is it that getting on a bus in Jerusalem or going to a cafe or discotheque in Haifa is a form of Russian roulette, a far more dangerous activity than prancing about as a "human shield" for Arafat in Ramallah? One might forgive Butler for overlooking a seminal essay in the June 2000 issue of Scientific American [9] which demonstrated massively that ours is a time of a new kind of war, "characterized by routine massacre of civilians," in which relatively little of the destruction is inflicted by tanks and artillery. It is harder to forgive her for overlooking 9/11 of 2001, in which a small number of technically competent Islamicist barbarians, heavily armed with fanatical indifference to human life, including their own, succeeded in attacking two major cities of the greatest power on earth, killing 3000 people, shattering whole industries, and causing billions of dollars in economic damage. As for the argument that nothing is antisemitic which does not explicitly target every single Jew in the world, it is Butler at her most jejune. After all, she says (as if she had to remind us!) not all Jews are heavily "invested" in Israel: "Some Jews have a heartfelt investment in corned beef sandwiches." [10] But does she really think that when Josef (later Johannes) Pfefferkorn, whose distinction between "good" and "bad" Jews became the paradigm for Jewish self-haters, urged his countrymen (in the1520s) to "drive the old Jews out [of Germany]" he had himself in mind? When Karl Marx excoriated Jews as "the filthiest of all races," did he really mean to include himself? Do the operators of Nazi websites have trouble making "exceptions" for the writings of Chomsky or his disciple Norman Finkelstein? Indeed, Butler's requirement of total inclusiveness would have allowed Hitler himself to say (had he so wished) of his racial policy: "No, it's not antisemitic." And since Butler writes as if antisemitism were a genetic affliction from which Jews, most especially her "post-Zionist" Israeli friends, are protected by virtue of being born, this line of argument would leave poor Summers as virtually the only Jewish antisemite in the whole world. Although Butler's essay is such a loose, baggy monster that only a journal fanatically committed to erasing the Jewish state would have published it, what it leaves out is even more outrageous than what it includes. It omits history altogether, torturing a text and omitting context. Did it never occur to Butler that the divestment effort is merely the latest installment of the 50-year old Arab economic boycott of Israel, one prong in the endless Arab campaign to destroy the Jewish state, or that the Arab boycott is itself an imitation of the Nazi boycotts of the 1930s? Does she see no connection between the Nazi denial of the Jews' right to live and her own effort to make Israel's "right to exist" contingent upon its conformity to her political prejudices? And then, of course, there is the omission of context that is de rigueur among all those who have made the "Palestinian cause" and the erasure of Israel the touchstone of contemporary liberalism. The "occupation" which they constantly bemoan did not precede and cause Arab hatred and violence; it was Arab hatred and violence that led - in 1967 as in 2002 - to occupation. But the crucial omission from this essay by somebody who has relentlessly insisted on the political implications of language is - the political implications of the language of the advocates of divestment, of boycott, of "an end to Israeli occupation," of an end to Zionism, of stopping the "wall," etc. Josef Joffe, editor of the German weekly Der Zeit, has succinctly defined the linguistic difference between "criticism of Israeli policy" and antisemitism: Take this statement: 'Demolishing the houses of the families of terrorists is morally wrong because it imputes guilt by association, and politically wrong because it pushes more people into the arms of Hamas.' Such a statement is neither anti-Israel nor anti-Semitic; it might even be correct. By contrast, 'the Israelis are latter-day Nazis who want to drive the Palestinians from their land in order to realize an imperialist biblical dream' inhabits a very different order of discourse, ascribing evil to an entire collective and, in its equation of Israelis and Nazis, revealing an obsessive need for moral denigration. [11] The Harvard/MIT divestment petition that Butler champions against Summers was promoted at MIT by Noam Chomsky, a person who would be rendered almost speechless on the subject of Israel if deprived of the epithet "Nazi"; it was promoted at Harvard by Professor Paul Hanson, who referred to Israel as the "pariah" state. Butler was herself among the "first signatories" of a July 28, 2003 petition that uses the Israeli-Nazi equation beloved of nearly all denigrators of the Zionist enterprise (going back to British official circles in Cairo in 1941) by stating that "concrete, barbed wire and electronic fortifications whose precedents...belong to the totalitarian tradition" were transforming the Israel "'defense forces'" (again the rhetorical quotation marks) and indeed "Israeli citizens themselves into a people of camp wardens." [12] And so it would seem that, for Butler, "Language plays an important role in shaping and attuning our...understanding of social and political realities" [13] except when it happens to be the antisemitic language that demonizes Israel as the devil's own experiment station, black as Gehenna and the pit of hell. Notes: 1. The full text of Summers' speech may be found in Congress Monthly (September/October 2003) 2. Ruth Wisse, "How Harvard and MIT Professors are Planting a Seed of Malevolence," New York Sun, 20 May 2002. 3. London Review Of Books, 21 August 2003. 4. Ibid. 5. Ha'aretz interview of 6 January 2004. 6. Judaism, 52 (Winter/Spring2003), 111. 7. A delicious letter from a reader published in London Review on 11 September 2003 thanked Butler for saving him from thinking of himself as an antisemite: "As someone rather too ready to allow strong disapproval of Israel's policies to slide into anti-semitic prejudice, may I say how illuminating and helpful I found Judith Butler's article." Very helpful indeed. The only letter printed by the journal critical of Butler's essay was by Mona Baker, originator of the academic boycott of Israel: she found Butler too soft on Zionists and was angered at Butler's linking her to the arch-villain Summers himself. 8. Butler's feminist followers may wish to contemplate the following statistic: of the Palestinian fatalities at that stage of "Intifada II" 116 were women; of the Israel fatalities 271 were women. 9. Jeffrey Boutwell and Michael T. Klare, "Special Report: Waging a New Kind of War," Scientific American, 282 June 2000). 10. London Review Of Books, 21 August 2003. 11. "The Demons of Europe," Commentary, 117 (January 2004), 30. 12. "Israel and Palestine: Stop the Wall Immediately" petition. 13. "A 'Bad' Writer Bites Back," New York Times, 20 March 1999. To Go To Top

BLAMING ISRAEL FOR CHILD BOMBERS Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, April 9, 2004.

In a bold attempt at damage control fit for the PR hall of fame, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has come up with an innovative - albeit bizarre - response to the tide of world disapproval of recent foiled Palestinian attempts to use youths as suicide bombers. It's all Israel's fault, of course - but with a twist. We know the usual pattern of assigning blame to Israel for Palestinian terror attacks. If only Israel would stop targeted killings of terrorist leaders and stop building the wall to keep out terrorists, then the Palestinians wouldn't be driven to blow themselves up, killing and maiming Israeli civilians in the process. Indeed, a good chunk of the world still buys this argument. But even the most loyal Palestinian sympathizers have had trouble with the Palestinians' recent exploitation of minors, such as planting remote-controlled explosives on an unwitting 11-year-old in Gaza, or duping a naive 16-year-old in Nablus into becoming a suicide terrorist for 100 shekels (about $22 U.S.) and a date with 72 virgins in Paradise. Both attempts were foiled by the Israeli army before the youths could kill or be killed. News surfaced last week Israel had arrested three more Nablus teens who had been recruited as suicide bombers by Islamic Jihad. The plot was discovered when the older brother of 15-year-old Tamer Khawireh was suspicious of the new cellphone, clothes and cigarettes the Grade 9 student was flaunting. So the new twist on the "Blame Israel" strategy had to become more inventive. Despite the fact that terrorist organizations have already claimed responsibility for these would-be attacks, the creative PA spin is that Israel - not terrorist groups - recruited the kids, planted the explosives and made sure the world media stayed overtime to capture the events for posterity. All in the name of discrediting the Palestinians. So how did an 11-year-old walk into Israel with a bomb in his bag? According to official PA sources, "... the intelligence services of the occupying authorities [Israel] were the authors, directors and the organizers of the script... As [the boy] was coming home from school he was stopped by soldiers, who placed part of a rifle in his bag together with hand grenades and gas bombs, and then made the boy stand by his open bag so the weapons would be seen... " [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 27, 2004] The PA story says that Israeli intelligence collaborators "played with" the mind of 16-year-old Hussam Abdo of Nablus so he would blow himself up. He was caught with an explosive belt March 24 and safely disarmed by Israeli soldiers. Not only did Israel arrange the would-be suicide mission, according to this revisionist history, but it cleverly manipulated world media to make sure the event received maximum publicity. According to the PA twist, the Israeli army had asked journalists to stay late at the Nablus checkpoint that day, in anticipation of the arrest. The army then "put pressure on the foreign journalists to focus on the incident." And the PA allegations go a step further. According to an account in the official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Israel goes out of its way to publicize the use of children as suicide bombers - not just to discredit the PA, but to encourage more Palestinian children to blow themselves up. "The occupation [Israel] in this situation and with this lie, is playing with its own blood, and it is like they are encouraging children to go from stone-throwing to use of explosives... Israel's focusing accusations about children [in suicide terror] is in fact an open invitation to other children to imitate the accusations, because it is characteristic of children to blindly imitate." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 18, 2004]. In fact, it is the Palestinian Authority, not Israeli intelligence, that has preyed on the tendency of children to "blindly imitate" the actions of their peers and elders, with its systematic and relentless indoctrination of children to seek Shahada, martyrdom for Allah. Music videos directed at children call child martyrdom "sweet" and offer enticing images of child paradise. One, broadcast hundreds of times since Dec. 26, 2000, features child martyr Muhammad Al Dura in paradise flying a kite, frolicking on a beach and riding a Ferris wheel. "I am waving to you not in parting, but to say, 'Follow me,'" he tells other child martyrs-in-waiting. Palestinian textbooks contain poems glorifying child martyrs. Yasser Arafat has called dead Palestinian children "the greatest message to the world" [PA TV, Jan. 15, 2002]. Soccer tournaments and summer camps are named after teenage suicide bombers, thus encouraging children and youth to follow these role models. Asked on a June 2002 PA TV broadcast whether she prefers Shahada or peace and full rights for the Palestinian people, an articulate 11-year-old girl replies without hesitation, "Shahada." And according to Palestinian surveys, between 70 per cent and 80 per cent of Palestinian children share her aspiration. Taught to overcome their natural fear of death, they are the young suicide bombers of the future - and they won't all be lucky enough to be intercepted. Itamar Marcus is founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer in Ottawa Canada, is PMW's North American representative. To Go To Top

ROUND THREE OF HUMANITY'S GREAT CHALLENGE Posted by Barry Rubin, April 9, 2004.

Three times in the last seventy years humanity has faced a major challenge, a battle lasting for decades. Each time, the world's response, the high costs, and the ultimate outcome have been the same. Each of these three rounds in the greatest struggle of modern history has had its differences but the parallels are remarkable. What is this war about? Democracy, decent civilization, progress, modernity, you can choose your own label. The first two rounds were centered in Europe but the debates and conflicts spread across the entire face of the globe. They were the struggles against fascism and communism. The third, in which we are now engaged, is the battle with radical Islamism and terrorism involving also extremist Arab nationalism to a lesser, perhaps declining, extent. In each case, a new ideology arose claiming that it represented people oppressed by evil foreign imperialism, beset by conspiracies, and opposed by a rotten system of decadent democracies. But it had the answer to all humanity's ills and would inevitably triumph, given its endorsement by the deity or history. And when it did triumph, all humanity's problems would be solved. Equally, in each case, the movement found sympathizers, apologists, and appeasers in Western democratic states, inspired by this new vision and fueled by guilt over real or fictional past transgressions and current inadequacies of their own societies. The German people - far more people believed at the time than is remembered today - had been so mistreated in the aftermath of World War One, their lands seized or despoiled that naturally they reacted in a great movement of their own in self-defense. The French (Ruhr valley) and Czechs (Sudetenland) were said to occupy German lands and ruled over that ethnic group brutally. The Germans were only asking for what was theirs by right. Domestic successes were exaggerated - Italian dictator Benito Mussolini had made the trains run on time - and repression underplayed or unnoticed. Others intoned that if Western democracies left them alone these movements and regimes would pose no danger. Or perhaps they were so strong they should be bought off by feeding them smaller states, as with the Anglo-French sacrifice of Czechoslovakia. And fascism was not really the enemy of the West, went an idea accepted by many but was merely reacting against the depredation of the Jews. Weren't the Jews behind the demand to fight fascism, simply acting in their own self-interest? This notion, of course, was encouraged by Nazi propaganda. Another target was the United States. The unrestrained "monster" derived from a distortion of European civilization, in the words of Arthur de Gobineau, the nineteenth-century Frenchman who was the intellectual father of fascism. One doesn't have to enter a debate over whether fascism and communism were the same to argue that the challenge represented was a parallel one. True, communism portrayed itself as the realization of progress but it became a reactionary, anti-democratic system of the greatest brutality. It was even more successful at winning far-flung adherents, often driven by humane sentiments and good intentions. The Russian people, too, had suffered from past internal dictatorship and external intervention, now menaced by capitalist states whose hands were bloody from their sins at home and abroad. Again, it was argued that inaction would avoid conflict or at least appeasement or merely a more "sympathetic" and "unbiased" understanding of a much-slandered "other" would do so. Intellectuals obsessed with the virtue of "lying for peace" downplayed the repression, crimes, incompetence, and mendacity of the communist states while overplaying their achievements and authenticity. Those people living under the rule of communism, we were told, loved their dictators and saw these people as the true embodiment of their national aspirations, as the legitimate carriers of their culture, history, and traditions. As George Orwell unforgettably put it, they supposedly loved Big Brother. The United States was portrayed by many as the true villain. Wasn't it imperialistic and deeply flawed? The communists might be seen as purveyors of a better future, potential allies against the American danger, or at least no less palatable than the Yanks. The Jewish question also appeared here. On one hand, Jews were persecuted as communism's true masters - even as they were its victims. In later years those who identified themselves as Jews were equally derided as the advocates of anti-communism. Communism even became explicitly antisemitic by the 1950s. Now, here we are again. There is nothing new under the sun, to use the Jewish phrase, or the more things change the more they remain the same, to employ the French version. Today's extremists and terrorists should be understood, appeased with the blood of others (Jews and perhaps Americans). If treated properly they would leave one alone. They just respond to other's mistreatment. There is never a shortage of those ready to "lie for peace," to misrepresent the true situation, to slander Jews and Americans, to apologize for tyrants and terrorists. Each time in the past, the right side triumphed. This will happen again. The aggressors kept pushing until the threat could no longer be ignored. Yet it would be better for people to learn sooner from this past's pattern and the mistakes that are now so obvious. Wait fifty years and read the history books, which will sound - I'll wager - very much like the above paragraphs. Professor Barry Rubin is Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA). To Go To Top

NEW WHITE HOUSE INTERACTIVE FORUM Posted by IsrAlert, April 9, 2004.

Isralert's source for this item: http://www.whitehouse.gov Too good an opportunity to pass up. Let's make use of this forum White House Interactive is yet another way for you to get involved. Questions sent in by the public are answered by Cabinet Members, senior White House officials, and behind-the-scenes professionals at the White House. New questions and their answers are posted daily. In it's first two weeks e-mails have been answered by Chief of Staff Card, Faith-Based Director Towey, Press Secretary McClellan, and NASA Administrator O'Keefe. White House Interactive: http://www.whitehouse.gov/interactive/ To Go To Top

WE'RE BACK! Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 9, 2004.

This was written by Stuart Pilichowski, Mevaseret Zion. I usually leave for work between 5:00 - 6:00 AM. I absolutely hate sitting in traffic. Israeli traffic is horrific; drivers read the papers, they're on their cell phones, they're shaving and putting on their make-up (right, all at the same time). Fender benders galore. But, today, Chol HaMoed Pesach, I absolutely reveled in what I normally abhor: I loved sitting in bumper to bumper traffic with hundreds of thousands of other Israelis en route to all points across the land. Sheikh Yassin was given his fitting end a short time ago. Everyone was admittedly worried about the ramifications of ridding ourselves of this evil fiend. The first night of Pesach, the seder and the following day were quite nerve racking. Where would they strike? Who would fall victim this time? Yet we showed the world the stuff we're made. In short: (excuse my Brooklyn upbringing) Up yours! We Israelis acted as if nothing had happened. It was our Passover vacation and we were going to spend it without a care in the world stopping us. Of course, security was beefed up all over the place. But if you wanted to go to the Golan Heights or Jerusalem or even Turkey - Israelis were there in the thousands. Fortitude. Guts. Resilience. Our middle names. Come what may we will not be beaten down. All we want is to live. Hopefully peacefully. But if not, we'll do all in our power to allow life to continue normally. I think Thomas Friedman is a brilliant, clever columnist. But he's also a pompous ass. There are a series of CNN special reports from the Middle East starring Mr. Friedman. Every time he talks to a Palestinian there are so many questions he leaves hanging without even asking. It's only the corrupt Palestinian Administration that's responsible for the poverty of the common Palestinian. Any Palestinian that wanted work was able to get a good job - at least in textiles - prior to the Intifada. He was able to put food on the table for his family. They had the pride that comes with earning a living. I know. I was there almost daily before the Intifada began. I witnessed it with my own eyes. I was invited into the mansions of successful businessmen who were able to make money based on Israeli investment into the PA. That all ended when the Palestinian violence began. Friedman interviewed a liberal, peace-nik, American professor who lives in Kfar Saba. Kfar Saba's real, real close to Qalkilya, a stronghold of Palestinian terrorists. "What do you think about the "separation wall," Mr. Professor?" "Well, I'd rather we didn't have it. But I feel a lot more comfortable when my kids get on a school bus knowing that perhaps the security fence keeps the terrorists from invading my town and blowing up my kids." Pretty strong stuff - but really simple stuff - from a peace-nik, right? How'd Friedman allow that segment to remain? So, as we recalled during the Passover seder: We, the Jewish people, have been around a long time and we're not going anywhere anytime soon. After a two thousand year absence from our Homeland, we're back and we're here to stay. Get used to it, Dr. Rantissi. Happy Pesach. Judy Lash Balint is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen), which is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

PETITION FOR THE UNITED NATIONS TO TREAT SUICIDE BOMBINGS AS WAR CRIMES Posted by Seymour Ginsburg, April 8, 2004.

Please sign this very important petition and pass it on. This petition asks the United Nations to treat suicide bombings as war crimes and that those who inspire them be prosecuted by the International War Crimes Tribunal. The Call for UN &World Leaders to Prosecute Organizers of Suicide/Homicide Bombings, performing acts of terror against Civilians, as War Criminals, was initiated by Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and written by Dr. Edward S. Beck. 1 [one] million signatures are being sought for this petition. Click here and please take 10 seconds to sign. Please sign and forward on to everyone you can who might also agree to sign the petition. To Go To Top

UNITED TALMUD TORAH SCHOOL BOMBED BECAUSE OF ITS INTIMATE IDENTIFICATION WITH BEING JEWISH Posted by IsrAlert, April 8, 2004.

Isralert's source for this item: Isralert contributing subscriber Naomi Frankenburg, Vancouver, Canada, Apr. 7, 2004. This article was written by Rex Murphy of the "National". Commenting on the bombing of a Jewish school library in Montreal yesterday,the prime minister said, "the assault was not directed against the Jewish community of Montreal, but against all Canadians." I know what the prime minister meant by saying that. It's a noble thought, that we're all diminished by violence and hate, that an attack on any group of Canadians for whatever reason is an attack on the civil and moral code that makes us Canadians. In the abstract, the prime minister was right, but what was the name of the school that was actually bombed? Well, it's the United Talmud Torah School in Montreal. The Talmud Torah. I cannot see how it is possible to get more Jewish, more quintessentially expressive of Jewishness than in the combination of those two words that refer to the absolute foundational text and commentaries of the Jewish faith. So let's be very clear. The bombing, not a word we're used to hearing in Canada I note in passing, was directed very particularly at the Jewish community in Montreal, at its Jewishness, and to walk away from its immense particularity is to diminish it's very concrete outrageousness. It wasn't a school. It was a Jewish school, and it wasn't any Jewish school but the United Talmud Torah School. It was bombed because of its intimate identification with being Jewish. The second part of the crime was the note that accompanied it which read that the bombing was prompted by the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and that more attacks were being planned. Now, I know that there are very strong opinions on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and with opinions as opinions, neither I nor any other Canadian can have any real problem, but there really does seem to be a tilt, that some of those who most see themselves as critics of the Israeli side of this conflict, and please note I said some of those, seem to think they have some extra warrant or righteousness in how far they can go to express their detestation of Israel's policies, its government, and then by extension of Jews. And as is the case in the bombing of the Talmud Torah library in Montreal, Canada, they also feel that tormenting and intimidating Jews anywhere is an earned license because of where they stand on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. So we have swastikas on Jewish homes in placid Toronto, we have the upsurge in assaults on Jews in Europe, and we have all too frequently in demonstrations almost everywhere in the world the placards and chants equating Israel and its government with its own demonic anti-type, the nazi-ism of Adolf Hitler. We have in effect the Holocaust, the mightiest engine of ethnic cleansing the world has ever seen, thrown in the face of the people who were its targets. I salute the prime minister for the civic nobility of what he had to say, but by attempting to generalize what happened in Montreal yesterday, he has in effect diffused its horror. It was a piece of hatred for the Jews of Montreal. It was an expression on Canadian soil of that simmering anti-Semitism that takes some camouflage, some protective colouring from asserting a solidarity with the Palestinian cause. Anti-Semitism springing from whatever source is the most toxic political virus in the world. That's something we've already learned in that other school, the school where six million went to their death. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT - FORGOTTEN FACTS! Posted by Dafna Yee, April 8, 2004.

The term "Palestinian" is itself a masterful twisting of history. To portray themselves as indigenous, Arab settlers adopted the name of an ancient Mediterranean tribe, the Philistines ("Invaders" in Hebrew), who had died out over 2,500 years ago. There is no connection between this tribe and modern day Arabs. [Note: Just as there is no connection between today's Egyptians - descendents of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century C.E. - and ancient Egyptians - the ones with the pyramids. DY] The Romans, in order to conceal their shame and anger with rebellious regions, changed the references to Judea and Samaria by naming them 'Palestine'. Most Arabs had settled in Palestine after Jews started developing agriculture and industries approximately 100 years ago. [Note: Even today, there are many more recently settled (after 1967) Arab villages - and most of these Arabs moved there from countries other than Israel - than Jewish neighborhoods in Judea/Samaria (aka "West Bank"). DY] This article was written by Steven Shamrak. It was provided by the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org) 1. Israel became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., almost two thousand years before the rise of Islam. 2. Since 1272 B.C.E. the Jews have had a dominion over the land for at least 1,000 years as well as a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years. 3. The only Arab dominion since the conquest in 635 C.E. lasted no more than 22 years. 4. King David made the city of Jerusalem his capital, Mohammed had never been to Jerusalem. 5. For 3,000 years, Jerusalem has been known to be the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. When the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital and Arab leaders did not specifically come to visit there. 6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in the Tanach (Jewish Holy Scriptures). Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran. 7. Jews pray facing Jerusalem wherever in the world they may be. Muslims pray facing Mecca (often with their backs toward Jerusalem). 8. In 1854, according to a report in the New York Tribune, Jews constituted two-thirds of the population of the holy city. (The source: A journalist on assignment to the Middle East that year for the Tribune. His name was Karl Marx. Yes, that Karl Marx.) 9. In 1867, Mark Twain took a tour of Palestine and described that land: "A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. It is a silent and mournful expanse. We never saw a human." 10. In 1882 census figures of the Ottoman Empire, it was recorded that in the entire land of Israel, there were only 141,000 Muslims, both Arab and non-Arab. 11. A travel guide to Palestine and Syria, published in 1906 by Karl Baedeker, estimated that the total population of Jerusalem was 60,000, of whom 7,000 were Muslims, 13,000 were Christians, and 40,000 were Jews. 12. After Zionist Jews came, drained the swamps, and made the deserts blossom Arabs followed them. They came for jobs, for prosperity, and for freedom. Arabs arrived in large numbers. 13. In 1922, during the illegal separation of Transjordan, Jews were forbidden to settle on 77% of the disputed territory, while Arab settlements went unrestricted by British. 14. Prior to the Second World War, Mojli Amin, a member of the Arab Defense Committee for Palestine, proposed the following idea "All the Arabs of Palestine will leave and be settled amongst the neighboring Arab countries. In exchange for this, all the Jews living in Arab countries will leave and come and live in Palestine." 15. Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not established until 1913? Lebanon was not established until 1920. Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932 and Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and those of Kuwait in 1961. Any of the aforementioned nations that say that Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own right of existence. They did not exist as fully-fledged countries, but were all under the control of the Turks. Over 80% of the original British Mandate land was given to the Arabs without any form of population transfer. 16. In 1947, the Jewish state settled on 18% of the original British Mandate land. This was accepted gratefully. The Arabs rejected it with a vengeance and seven Arab states immediately declared war against Israel. 17. In 1948, the Arabs were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders promising to purge the land of Jews. Most of them left in fear of being killed by their own Arab brothers as traitors. 18. Jewish citizens of Arab countries had been forced to flee from Arab brutality, persecution, and pogroms. 19. The number of Arabs who left Israel in 1948 was 470,000 (this figure was later inflated after UN offered them free help). The number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands is estimated to be the same. 20. From 1948 to 1967 Arabs made no attempt to create a Palestinian state. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated. Jews and Christians were denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths. 21. Arabs began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people only in 1967, after Israel captured Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. 22. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, Arab-Palestinians are the only refugee group in the world that have never been absorbed or integrated into their own peoples' lands. Jewish refugees from all over were completely absorbed into the land of Israel. 23. Arab refugees intentionally were not absorbed or integrated by the rich Arab oil states that control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land mass. They are kept as virtual prisoners by the Arab power brokers with misplaced hatred for Jews and Western democracy. 24. There is only one Jewish state. There are 57 Muslim countries, including 22 Arab ones. 25. The PLO's Charter still calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. [Note: Their most recent "Constitution" for the proposed "State of Palestine" has glaring omissions - Israel is not named at all on its borders and there is no mention of a Jewish population anywhere in the document. DY] 26. Pan-Arabism or the idea of an Arab Caliphate declares that all land that supposedly to belonged to Arabs, must be returned to Arabs. Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

SYRIA ORDERING COMPONENTS WITH NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS Posted by IsrAlert, April 8, 2004.

This is from Geostrategy-Direct, Week of April 13, 2004, MILITARY TECHNOLOGY The Bush administration has expressed concern that Syria might exploit dual-use components and technology approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency for a nuclear weapons program. Officials said the U.S. has been tracking Syrian orders for dual-use components and technologies for its civilian nuclear research program. Russia has been offering Damascus expertise and cooperation in developing Syria's nuclear reactor. "We are concerned about Syria's nuclear research and development program and continue to watch for any signs of nuclear weapons activity or foreign assistance that could facilitate a Syrian nuclear weapons capability," said John Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security. "We are aware of Syrian efforts to acquire dual-use technologies - some, through the IAEA Technical Cooperation program - that could be applied to a nuclear weapons program." Bolton testified before the House International Relations Committee on March 30. Syria has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has a standard safeguards agreement with the IAEA. But Syria has refused a U.S. demand to sign the Additional Protocol of the NPT, which would allow for rapid and intrusive inspections. Officials said they could not rule out the possibility that Syria has secret nuclear weapons research facilities. They said Iraqi nuclear scientists escaped Baghdad for Syria during the U.S.-led war in Iraq and might now be employed by the regime of President Bashar Assad. For his part, Bolton said only a Syrian agreement to the Additional Protocol could enhance the IAEA's ability to "verify whether Syria has been conducting clandestine nuclear weapons research barred by the NPT." He did not elaborate. Russia and Syria have approved a draft program on cooperation for civil nuclear power, Bolton said. Syrian access to Russian expertise could provide Damascus with opportunities to expand further its indigenous capabilities, "should it decide to pursue nuclear weapons." Officials said the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, signed by President Bush in December 2003, would not reduce Syrian access to dual-use nuclear technology. But Washington has recruited the European Union and U.S. allies in the Mideast to press Syria to dismantle its WMD programs. "We are turning up the pressure on Syria to end its WMD efforts, and by all these efforts are seeking to deter other would-be proliferators," Bolton said. The EU, led by Britain, Germany and the Netherlands, has linked the dismantling of Syria's WMD facilities to the signing of an EU draft association agreement with Damascus, initialed in December 2003. On April 1, Dutch Foreign Minister Bernard Bot discussed the EU demand during a meeting with President Bashar Assad in Damascus. Bot urged Assad to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the production and export of CW. "I have urged your country, your president and [foreign] minister to be very open on this issue," Bot said after meeting Assad and Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk A-Shaara. "We have stressed the importance of the association agreement because it can help to strengthen relations between Europe and Syria. We are convinced that we will be able to find a compromise solution that will satisfy both parties." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

ASK FOR DEATH: THE INDOCTRINATION OF PALESTINIAN CHILDREN TO SEEK DEATH FOR ALLAH - SHAHADA Posted by Itamar Marcus, April 8, 2004.

The original article is at http://www.pmw.org.il/new/ASK%20FOR%20DEATH.htm#top It contains links to the video documentaries discussed in the article. Executive Summary "Ask for death" is the message that the Palestinian Authority [PA] has been conveying to its children since the start of violence in October 2000. In June 2002, two articulate 11-year-old girls were interviewed in the studio of official Palestinian Authority TV. Among other topics, they spoke of their personal yearning to achieve death through Shahada - Death for Allah - and of a similar desire they said exists in "every Palestinian child." It is striking that their desire for death was expressed as a personal goal, not related to the conflict with Israel. Having been convinced that dying for Allah is preferable to life, their goal in living is not to experience a good life, but to achieve the proper death - Shahada. The following is a selection from their remarks: Host: "You described Shahada as something beautiful. Do you think it is beautiful?" Walla: "Shahada is very, very beautiful. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be better than going to paradise?" Host: "What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people, or Shahada?" Walla: "Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a Shahida." Yussra: "Of course Shahada is a good thing. We don't want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life, but from the Afterlife... The children of Palestine have accepted the concept that this is Shahada, and that death by Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child aged, say 12, says "Oh Lord, I would like to become a Shahid." [PATV, June 9, 2002] What has caused this compelling desire for death among these children, a desire that conflicts with the basic survival instinct of every human being? During the more than two and a half years of armed conflict, the Palestinian Authority [PA] has been making a paramount effort to convince their own children that there is no greater achievement than to die for Allah in battle, known as Shahada. This has been done via the many mediums at its disposal, including children's TV broadcasting, the educational system, cultural programs, directives from political and religious leaders and even encouragement from within the family. In November 2000, a mere six weeks after the start of violence, Palestinian Media Watch published a report documenting the first indications that this was a PA goal. The official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, glorified children who were killed in confrontations and described their deaths as personal achievements. It wrote of a 14-year-old: "He responded to the call of Allah and achieved the Shahada he yearned... He reached the highest levels with Allah..." The paper reported with admiration that the dead boy's "classmates swore they would continue on the path of Shahada..." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, November 9, 2000] Other children were said to have been disappointed at having merely been injured and not killed. An injured 13-year-old: "My goal is not to be injured, rather something loftier: Shahada." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, November 8, 2000] Since then, Palestinian Media Watch has published numerous reports on the progress of this PA indoctrination of its children and on the varying methods the PA employs to portray death for Allah to its children, not only as an ideal, but, as something that is expected of them. The Results of the Indoctrination In recent months the success of the PA indoctrination efforts are apparent. The 11-year olds quoted above defining death for Allah as their goal in life and public opinion polls confirm the widespread acceptance of this sentiment. These polls show 80% of Palestinian children seek death as Shahids. Still more grave are the cases in which 14 year-olds have fulfilled this PA directive, writing farewell letters to their parents proudly describing their desire to be Shahids, and embarking on suicide terrorist missions hoping to die. It must be emphasized: the children's farewell letters have included phrases identical to phrases from the propaganda films produced by the PA, such as "Mother, don't cry for me," showing a direct link between the PA propaganda and the children's drive for heroic death. The Research This paper documents the PA's indoctrination of Palestinian children to seek death, and its effects on the children. With the exception of statements made by parents, all the indoctrination cited in this report is directed by the Palestinian Authority. Part I: The Indoctrination of Palestinian Children to Seek Death for Allah - Shahada A. Propaganda Films for Children Short propaganda film-clips for children, teaching them to see violence and Shahada - Death for Allah - as ideal values that are expected of them, are broadcast daily on PATV, often for several hours a day. The following are three examples from among hundreds. 1. The "Farewell Letter" A propaganda film-clip designed to offset a child's natural fear of death, portrays Shahada as both heroic and tranquil. The film's hero, a nice looking schoolboy, leaves a farewell letter explaining his choice to achieve Shahada, describing the death he is seeking as pleasurable: "How sweet is Shahada." It was broadcast repeatedly in 2001-02, even three times a day. The following are selections from the boy's letter, which are sung accompanying scenes of the boy calmly heading toward his death: "Do not be sad, my dear, "And do not cry over my parting, "Oh my dear father, "For my country, Shahada? "How sweet is Shahada "When I embrace you, Oh my land!?" "My beloved, my mother, "My most dear, "Be joyous over my blood "And do not cry for me?" The words "How sweet is Shahada when I embrace you, oh my land!" are sung as the child actor is seen in the above picture falling dead and "embracing" the land. [PATV, hundreds of times since May 7, 2001. Recently September 27, 2002] 2. The Film-Clip: "I am the Shahid, My Mother" "I am the Shahid, oh my mother! I have inscribed my name with my blood? "I have prayed for the land "And I have responded to the promise "And if I do not return, don't cry for me my mother! (3x) "Sound a cry of joy, sound a cry of joy, my mother!? "I am the Shahid, oh my mother! I have inscribed my name with my blood!" [PATV, many times in 2001-2002, beginning May 16, 2001] 3. The Muhammad Al-Dura Clip: "Follow me" to a Child's Paradise In a striking film-clip, the most famous child Shahid, Muhammad Al-Dura, whose death in a crossfire was captured by a cameraman and broadcast on television, calls to Palestinian children: "follow me" to paradise. Al-Dura, played in the clip by a child actor, is portrayed in paradise, going to an amusement park, flying a kite and frolicking on the beach. The aim of the soothing words and scenes is to eliminate a child's natural fear of death: "How sweet is the fragrance of the Shahids... I go with no fear, no tears..." The film-clip opens with the following invitation from Al-Dura displayed on the full screen: "'I am waving to you not to part, but to say follow me' [signed] "Muhammad Al-Dura" The following calming words are from the film-clip: Narrator: "How sweeis the fragrance of the Shahids, "How sweet is the scent of the earth, "Its thirst by the gush of blood "Flowing from the youthful body." Vocalist: "Oh father 'til we meet, Oh father, 'til we meet! "I shall go with no fear, no tears, "How sweet is the fragrance of the Shahids! "I shall go to my place in heaven, "How sweet is the fragrance of the Shahids!" Choir: "How sweet is the fragrance of the Shahids!" Vocalist: "Oh father 'til we meet, Oh father, 'til we meet!" [PATV December 25, 2000, and many times since] B. Schools and Textbooks The PA Ministry of Education's textbooks portray Shahada as an ideal. For example, "The Poem of the Shahid" extols yearning for death, and includes the words: "I see my death, but I hasten my steps towards it..." It appears in schoolbooks for grades 5, 6, 7, and 12. The illustration below of a dead child appearing in a textbook published in September 2001, teaches the children to identify a child as the one who is yearning death. 1. "The Shahid" in Four Different Grades' Curricula "I shall carry my soul in my palm And toss it into the abyss of destruction... And then, either life, gladdening friends, Or death, enraging the enemies. By your life! I see my death, But I hasten my steps towards it... By your life! This is the death of men And who asks for a noble death - here it is..." [Our Arabic Language for 5th grade, p. 60, Our Beautiful Language for 6th grade, section 1, p. 47, Our Beautiful Language for 7th grade, section 1, p. 97, Arabic Language Improvement Guide for 12th grade, p. 84] 2. Textbooks Educate for Shahada "The Moslem sacrifices himself for his belief, and wages Jihad [Holy War] for Allah. He is not swayed, for he knows that the date of his death has been predetermined and that his death as a Shahid on the field of battle is preferable to death in his bed..." [Islamic Education, for 8th grade, page 176, by the PA Ministry of Education, based on a Jordanian book, CMIP Report] 3. In School The following, one example among many from the PA official newspaper, shows a teacher's supportive attitude toward his student's seeking Shahada: "The Shahid Wajdi Al-Hattab [9th grade] responded to the call of Allah and achieved the Shahada he yearned for... He would always say to his friends: 'When I become a Shahid, give out cake... he attained what he yearned. He reached the highest levels with Allah... [Wajdi's gym teacher said:] ?Wajdi asked me to give out cake if he becomes a Shahid...' His classmates swore that they would continue in the path of Shahada..." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 9, 2000] 4. Higher Education: "We do not Love Life!" Professor Issam Sissalem, Chairman of the History Department in the Islamic University of Gaza and host of an educational program on PA TV: "...Allah rewards those who offer Shahids for the sake of heroism and honor with great compensation. We are not afraid to die, and do not love life..." [PATV, Sep. 8, 2002] C. Culture Many cultural programs idolize Shahada and the Shahids - those who died for Allah. The regular PA TV programming includes song and dance accompanying scenes of violence and words glorifying willingness to die for Allah. The following are some examples of cultural PA TV broadcasts glorifying Shahda: 1. A Song of Praise to Wafa Idris, the First Woman Suicide Terrorist A song honoring Wafa Idris, the first woman suicide terrorist, who blew herself up in the center of Jerusalem, was broadcast on PA TV three times in two weeks. The song extols and praises both Idris and her act of suicide terrorism. It calls her a "blossom" and a "heartbeat of pride" and applauds her choice of death: "You chose Shahada, in death you have brought life to our will." Vocalist: "My sister, Wafa, "My sister, Wafa, "Oh, the heartbeat of pride, "Oh, blossom who was on the Earth and is now in heaven, (2x) "My sister, Wafa, My sister, Wafa, "Oh, the heartbeat of pride, "Oh, blossom who was on the Earth and is now in heaven, (2x) "My sister, Wafa..." Choir: "Allah Akbar! Oh Palestine of the Arabs "Allah Akbar, Oh Wafa!" Vocalist: "But you chose Shahada, "In death you have brought life to our will. "But you chose Shahada, "In death you have brought life to our will." [PATV, May 12, 2002 and others] 2. Dancing and Singing: "I will Even Fall as a Shahid" This song calls upon children to attack Israel with stones: "You will not be saved, Oh Zionist, from the volcano of my county's stones." It reiterates the preparedness to die: "I will even willingly fall as a Shahid!," is sung to scenes of children throwing stones and participating in a frenzied "war dance." "Allah Akbar! [Allah is Great] "Oh, the young ones... "Shake the earth, raise the stones "You will not be saved, Oh Zionist, "From the volcano of my county's stones. (2x) "You are the target of my eyes "I will even willingly fall as a Shahid! "Allah Akbar! Oh, the young ones." [PATV, many times in 2002, beginning July 24, 2002 as recent as Oct. 9, 2002] D. Political Leadership The Shahada mandate to children comes from the Palestinian political leadership. Arafat presents the actions of children who intentionally died as Shahids as model behavior. 14-year-old Faris Ouda died a week after having been broadcast on TV hurling stones at an Israeli tank. The story of his successfully achieving death was glorified in the PA official press: "On the day of his death Faris Ouda left his home with a slingshot, after having made himself a wreath decorated with photos of himself and having written on it 'The Brave Shahid Faris Ouda'..." He said to his mother: "Don't worry, mother, Shahada is sweet..." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 30, 2000, Feb. 3, 2001] Yasser Arafat has singled out Ouda as a role model for children. Addressing an assembly of summer camp children, he praised Ouda's action, and called the children there "peers of Faris Ouda." Asked in a TV interview what was his message to Palestinian children, he cited Ouda's suicide act, saying dead Palestinian children Shahids are "the greatest message to the world." 1. Arafat: Displaying Dead Palestinian Children to the World is "The Greatest Message." Question: "Mr. President, what message would you like to send to the Palestinian people, in general, and, in particular, to the Palestinian children?" Arafat: "...This child, who is grasping the stone, facing the tank, is it not the greatest message to the world when that hero becomes a Shahid? We are proud of them..." [PATV Jan. 15, 2002] 2. Yasser Arafat: Palestinian Children are "Peers" of Faris Ouda. The Children: "Millions of Shahid's Marching to Jerusalem!" Newscaster: "The president said in his address to these boys and girls [in summer camp] that the [14-year-old] Shahid Faris Ouda and all the Shahids of our people constitute the fundamental and victorious power, Allah willing!" Arafat to the children: "Oh, children of Palestine! The peers, friends, brothers and sisters of Faris Ouda. The peers of this hero represent this immense and fundamental power that is within, and it shall be victorious, Allah willing!... Onward together to Jerusalem! Onward together to Jerusalem!" The children respond, cheering and chanting: "Millions of Shahids marching to Jerusalem!" [PATV Aug. 18, 2002] 3. Arafat's Fatah Organizes Young Girls to Celebrate a Woman Suicide Terrorist. In a Fatah demonstration, young girls were given posters of the first woman suicide terrorist, Wafa Idris, portraying the terrorist as a hero. The poster's text: "The Fatah Movement... eulogizes with great pride its heroine Shahida... the Shahida Wafa Idris." [Al-Ayyam, Feb. 1, 2002] E. Parents and the Palestinian public In order to present Shahada-seeking as a popular and broad based phenomenon, the Palestinian Authority gives significant media exposure to parents who praise their children's choice to die, and express gratification and joy with their Shahada. The PA media also highlights praise offered anonymously by the "man on the street" for acts of Shahada. The following are a number of examples. 1. Mother of a Shahid and the Palestinian Public Express Satisfaction with Shahada The mother of Ashraf Zwayed: "Praise to Allah... I hold my head high. The honor is mine; the pride is mine. I have a son who is a Shahid. And not only is my son a Shahid, but all the Shahids amy children, Praise Allah.... The honor is mine; the pride is mine." Man on the street #1: "Their death as Shahids is a source of great joy for us. They responded to the call of the country. May Allah's mercy be upon all of them. They are Shahids, close to Allah, in a position of the highest status." Man on the street #2: "Praise Allah for giving us the Shahada. We are a people who love the Shahada and love defending our country..." [PATV, September 24, 2002] 2. Mothers Pray for Sons Death "Before I made my pilgrimage [to Mecca], he put his hands on my head and said: 'Be calm, mother, be calm, this is my wish. Pray for me, that I will be a Shahid.' When I did the circuit [ceremony], in Mecca and Medina, I swear to Allah, I prayed for him... and said: Praise Allah, my children asked for Shahada, and it is better then the way we will die." [PATV, Dec.5, 2002] Mother of Abdallah: "He would always dream of Shahada, it was his first and last goal in life... I told him: By Allah, we all want to be Shahids... He said: "In this entire world we live in, there is no one I want to marry here... I want to marry the Dark Eyed (Virgins of Paradise).' [In Islamic tradition the Dark Eyed Virgins of Paradise are promised to the male Shahids.] I said: "If he has these thoughts I will wish for him Shahada." [PATV, Jan.21, 2003] 3. A Child's Death - a Mother's Day Present The Mother of Abbas Al Awiwi: "The best Mother's Day present I got this year was the death as a Shahid of Abbas.' The mother of the Shahid Munib says to the mothers of Shahids on Mother's Day: 'A blessed day and a blessed Shahada'." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 21, 2001] 4. A Mother Encourages Her Son to Shahada "She is interested in nothing, other than to encourage her sons to sacrifice and to die as Shahids for the sake of the land of Palestine." [Al-Ayyam, November 1, 2000] 5. "Praise Allah, I Gave Birth to Heroes" - Mother of Dead Boys "After Fatma read this passage [her son's desire for Shahada] aloud, her expression took on a look of pride and honor at her sons' sacrifice, and her own sacrifice. Then she said: 'Praise to Allah, I gave birth to heroes'..." ['Voice of the Women', Al-Ayyam, February 28, 2002] 6. For the TV camera, a Mother Sends her Son to be Killed Some of the suicide terror attacks were preceded by a parting ceremony of the terrorist from his mother. One such ceremony was filmed of a 17-year-old terrorist, who later killed 5 Israeli teenagers before he was shot dead. The following are the TV narrator's description of her hugs and kisses, and an interview after the attack, in which she explains her sending him to his death: Narrator: "In a silence filled with tears, with a mother's warm longing, his mother embraced him good-bye, planting kisses on his cheeks before the moment of parting. She ordered him not to come back to her except as a Shahid." The mother [after he was killed]: "I give my son to Jihad for Allah. This is a religious obligation for us. If I were to have compassion for him, or allow him to change his mind it would not be right. I do not want to follow my heart, a mother's feelings. I mean: I sacrificed him for something greater. Even something like this is connected to motherhood. How? Because I love my son and I want to choose the best for him..." [Arab News Network TV] F. Religious leadership In Islam, religious teaching is not limited to the realm of worship, as social and military activities are considered within Islam's jurisdiction. Palestinian religious leaders have been a driving force, through their religion classes and their televised sermons, in calling for Palestinians to kill Jews, especially through suicide bombings. They teach that seeking death for Allah as a Shahid is every Moslem's duty, and direct these messages to children as well. Religious rulings [Fatwas] have also established that children are obligated to participate in these activities. The following are a number of examples: 1. Children are Obligated to Shahada: Ruling of a Senior Religious Leader Interview with Sheikh Hamed Al-Bitawi, Head of the Council of Sages of Religion of Palestine and Preacher in the Al-Aqsa mosque: Question: "Is children's participation in Shahada-Seeking missions permitted?" Al Bitawi: "The sages say: 'They should go [on Jihad], the men and the women, and even the children'. In the time of the Prophet [Muhammad] it was shown that children, who had not reached maturity, participated in Jihad... We in Palestine have a great love of Jihad and Shahada, and that makes many children compete among themselves in carrying out Jihad and Shahada-seeking missions." Question: "What is the obligation to be obedient to parents in cases where they insist their child not participate in the confrontations with the enemy?" Al Bitawi: "...if the enemy conquers a portion of Moslem land, Jihad becomes a personal obligation on every Moslem man and woman... and as the Prophet said: 'One must not obey a creation [the objecting parent] and disobey the Creator [Who demands Jihad].' The principle is that this son and others like him will take part in Jihad against the enemy." [www.islamonline.net, September 28, 2002] 2. "The Moslem was Created to Die for Allah" "The believer was created to know his Lord and to uphold Islam... to be a Shahid, or intend to be a Shahid. If the Moslem does not yearn Shahada, he will die as in the Jahiliya [pre-Islam faith]. We must yearn Shahada and request it from Allah. If we truthfully request it of Allah, He will grant us its rewards even if we die in bed... [Allah] has planted within our youth the love of Jihad, the love of Shahada. Our youth have turned into bombs, they blow themselves up among them [Israelis] day and night." [Sheikh Ahmed Abdul Razek, PATV March 22, 2002] 3. Religious Leader: Fathers Should Send Sons on Suicide Terror Attacks: "Shame upon he who does not educate his children the education of Jihad... blessings upon he who dons a vest of explosives on himself or on his children and goes in to the midst of the Jews and says: Allah Akbar [Allah is Great]..." [Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Madi, Friday sermon, PA television, June 8, 2001] 4. Preaching Suicide Terror Attacks to 14-Year-Olds "I was uplifted when a youth said: 'Oh, Sheikh, I am 14 years old. I have 4 more years and then I will blow myself up among Allah's enemies, I will blow myself up among the Jews.' I said to him, 'Oh young child, may Allah let you merit Shahada and let me merit Shahada...' All the weapons must be aimed at the Jews, Allah's enemies, the cursed nation in the Koran, whom Allah describes as monkeys and pigs, worshippers of the calf and idol worshippers... Nothing will deter them except the color of blood in their filthy nation... unless we blow ourselves up, willingly and as our duty, in their midst...' May Allah make the Moslem rule over the Jew. We will blow them up in Hadera, we will blow them up in Tel-Aviv and in Netanya so that Allah will make us masters over this riff-raff. We will fight against them and rule over them until the Jew will hide behind the trees and stones and the tree and stone will say: 'Moslem! Servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him.' We shall enter Jerusalem as conquerors, and Jaffa as conquerors, and Haifa as conquerors and Ashkelon as conquerors.... Blessings upon he who educates his sons in the path of Jihad and Shahada!" [Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Madi, Friday sermon, PATV, August 3, 2001] Part II: Results of the Shahada Indoctrination Palestinian polls show that 72% - 80% of Palestinian children desire death as Shahids. In games and in conversation, the yearning to die for Allah is an integral component of the Palestinian child's worldview. Children are already acting on the indoctrination - a 17-year old girl has blown herself up in a terrorist attack in a Jerusalem supermarket. 14-year-old children have written "farewell letters" to their parents, incorporating expressions from PA propaganda film-clips. In the letters they took pride in their eagerness to die as Shahids and then set out on attacks in which they did, in fact, die. Following are some examples, listed by age groups. Ages 6-9: Playing Death Games Palestinian children have embraced honoring Shahada from an early age, as expressed in the "Shahid Game," in which children act out a Shahid's funeral. An interesting note on this game: the children argue who will have the honor of playing the dead child. "I am younger than you. I should be the one to die!" is the 6-year-old's assertion. Even at this young age, they have already internalized the message that thonorable role is the Shahid. The "Shahid Game" as described in the PA media: "Nada, a seven year old girl, says to her friends: 'Let's play the Shahid Game!' The children fetch an old sheet that they spread on the ground, and then they argue who will play the Shahid. Fa'iz, 6 years old, says: 'You were the Shahid yesterday, today it's my turn! I'm younger than you. I will be the one to die!' "Then he lies down on the sheet. Nada, playing the role of 'mother of the Shahid' cries and yells as the rest of the children lift Fa'iz up, wrapped in his 'shrouds'. The children walk, chanting 'Allah Akbar! Make way for the Shahid!' As they brandish plastic toy Kalatchnikov [AK-47] rifles..." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 26, 2001] Ages 10-13: Expressing the Wish to Die 1. 11 Year-Olds: Shahada is Preferable to Peace In July 2002, two articulate 11-year-old girls were interviewed in the studio of official Palestinian Authority TV. Among other topics, they spoke of their personal yearning to achieve death through Shahada - Death for Allah - and of a similar desire they said exists in "every Palestinian child." It is striking that their desire for death was expressed as a personal goal, not related to the conflict with Israel, having been convinced that dying for Allah is preferable to life. Their goal in living is not to experience a good life, but to achieve the proper death - Shahada. The following are portions from the TV discussion: Host: "You described Shahada as something beautiful. Do you think it is beautiful?" Walla: "Shahada is very, very beautiful. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be better than going to Paradise?" Host: "What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people, or Shahada?" Walla: "Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a Shahida. We won't stay children forever." Host: "OK. Yussra, would you agree with that?" Yussra: "Of course Shahada is a good thing. We don't want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life, but from the Afterlife. And so all young Palestinians are not like other youth, they are hot tempered. Of course they prefer Shahada; since they are Palestinian." Host: "I want to ask you, do you actually love death?" Yussra: "There's a difference between death and Shahada." Host: "No, I mean the absence that is in death, the physical absence. Do you love death?" Yussra: "No child loves death. The children of Palestine have accepted the concept that this is Shahada, and that death by Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child aged, say 12, says 'Oh Lord, I would like to become a Shahid." ['Letter of the People', PA TV, June 9, 2002] 2. Public Opinion Polls "72% of the children sampled from all the districts of Gaza expressed the hope of becoming Shahids in the confrontations..." [?Sout Al-Nissa?-Voice of the Women, Al-Ayyam, January. 24, 2002] "...79-80% of the children expressed willingness to be Shahids." [PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 18, 2002] 3. Children's Poetry "I swear to you by all that I hold dear that I will purify your land... For your land we will die, we shall advance to Shahada in groups!" [10th grade boy reads a poem, PATV, August 23, 2002] 4. Three Girls go to Seek Shahada "The residents of the village Yassid... found the 3 girls who had disappeared two days ago, following a full day of extensive, strenuous searching. Yassid residents said that the three girls, aged 10,11 and 12, packed clothes, food and some money, and left eastward, looking for the way to Jerusalem, in order to achieve Shahada there. The girls got as far as a PA checkpoint, and there the officer on duty convinced them to go back. The children said they had wanted to get weapons and to go to Jerusalem in order to achieve Shahada there, and that the Israeli Army checkpoint would not have prevented them from their aspiration to achieve Shahada." Ages 14-17: Embarking on Suicide Attacks The PA indoctrination has already led to the death of Palestinian children. Young chlidren have written "farewell letters" to their parents in which they express pride in their desire to die, and have set out on suicide terrorist attacks. These children's farewell letters included phrases identical to "farewell" phrases from the propaganda films produced by the PA: "Mother, don't cry for me," indicating a direct link between the PA propaganda and the children's desire for heroic death. In addition, a 17-year-old girl blew herself up in a suicide terrorist attack in Jerusalem. Following are the stories from the press: 1. Leaving Farewell Letters: "Do Not Cry for Me" Three 14-year old boys set out to attack an Israeli village, hoping to be killed. They left farewell letters which included phrases from the TV clip "Farewell Letter" which was broadcast hundreds of times on PA TV: "The child Yussouf Zaakut wrote: '... Don't cry for me. Bury me with my brothers and with the Shahids...'" [The New York Times, April 25, 2002] 2. Brothers Leave Farewell Letters: "Don't Cry for Me, My Mother" Two brothers who took part in the confrontations left farewell letters to their parents expressing their hope of being killed: "He wrote phrases of love of the counrty and love of Al-Aqsa and becoming a Shahid, for liberty and independence. He referred to himself as a Shahid. On one of his notebooks he wrote: 'The hero Shahid, Yasser Sami Al-Koussba died as a Shahid on the land of Palestine...'" "Sammer wrote the following phrase on one of his notebooks, a few days before he became a Shahid: 'Mother! Don't cry over me if I am killed. Death does not scare me, my aspiration is to be a Shahid'" ['Sout Al-Nissa-Voice of the Women', Al-Ayyam, Feb. 28, 2002] 3. 17-year-old Girl commits Suicide Terrorist Bombing in Jerusalem Ayyat Al Achris, wearing a belt of explosives, walked into a supermarket in Jerusalem's Kiryat Yovel neighborhood, on March 29, 2002. She was 17 years old. The security guard at the door, suspecting she was a terrorist, pushed her outside, and she detonated her explosives, killing the security guard and a 17-year-old Israeli girl. Part III: Findings and Conclusions The Palestinian Authority has created a violent, death seeking reality for their young children, having taught them to see death for Allah - Shahada - as an ideal, which they are expected to achieve. As Arafat said in his message to children: "Is it not the greatest message to the world when that hero becomes a Shahid?" The examples presented in this report are a representative selection, demonstrating the comprehensive campaign waged by the Palestinian Authority. If just 1% of the children attempt to fulfill their "duty" and seek Shahada through suicide terrorism, the ramifications will be cataclysmic. The targets of the future Palestinian terror wave will be Israel, and in all likelihood, other Western democracies, as well. Today an entire generation of Palestinian children, victims of the PA's indoctrination and propaganda, believe that their death for Allah in war is the highest achievement attainable in life. This education is an indelible stain on Palestinian society, and places the Palestinian Authority among the greatest child abusers in history. Itamar Marcus is Director of Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il) To Go To Top

STATE DEPT. SEEKS TO DEFEAT BUSH BY COERCING SHARON Posted by Gail Winston, April 8, 2004.

We were asked to forward this from an anonymous source: It didn't make sense. Sharon was a war hero and a master strategist. He had championed the right of the Jewish people to their land as a member and then a leader of the right wing Likud party. Suddenly he is acting like a left winger with flowers in his hair. He wants to give the Hamas terrorist a secure land base to plot their terror against Israel and America - for little discernable military benefit. Why? He still seems to acting in a more or less normal fashion. It is well known that the denizens of "Foggy Bottom" a.k.a. The State Department, are flaming Arabists - both by virtue of ideological sympathies, as well as the high paying jobs they receive when they leave pubic service. They were pushing the now defunct "Road Map", but reality got in the way when the PLO, Hamas etc refused to even pretend that they would stop violence. So they came up with another plan. Make the Israelis accept the end stage of the Road Map without anything substantive in return. Despite being a rather plucky little country, Israel still needs economic and military help so they are vulnerable to the kinds of pressure that skilled diplomats can bring to bear. The only problem is that Congress, Evangelical Christians and the Conservative Right opposed the Road Map - so the U.S. couldn't be seen pressuring Israel - at least not publicly. What were they to do? Simple. Convince President Bush that he needed a quick diplomatic victory in the Middle East to look good. Remind him that we needed to appease the Arabs who have still not declared Jihad against us - officially. Then threaten Sharon to jump to the end of the Road Map if he wanted to see the Israeli economy recover, together with a host of military threats which are too scary to mention. Then make Sharon announce the plan as if it was his and that he was trying to convince the Americans to accept it! Send the State Dept triplets Burns, Hadley and Abrams to Israel manage the program. Of course, after Sharon goes to the U.S. to present the plan to President Bush, it will be a done deal and the planned referendum in Sharon's Likud party will be irrelevant. Another benefit to this diabolically clever plan is that it will defeat George W. Bush in the upcoming elections. Even if the U.S. is not attacked right away by terrorists based in areas from which Israel has withdrawn, the Conservative Right will be disaffected, the Evangelical Christians will be disappointed and they will fail to work hard to get out the vote in November. If you were an Arabist in the State Dept., what party would you prefer? A President who is smashing one Arab nation after another, or a nice liberal Democrat like Clinton who let the Arab terror states do whatever they wanted? Gail Winston is the founder of M.E.I.R., Mid East Information Resource. To Go To Top

AL QAEDA ABDUL AZIZ CALLS UPON ISLAMIC MUJAHIDEEN TO KILL AMERICANS EVERYWHERE Posted by the Tovia Singer Show, April 8, 2004.

Saudi Arabia's Most Wanted Al Qaeda Abdul Aziz al-Muqrin Calls Upon Islamic Mujahideen to Kill Americans Everywhere New York, NY - (April 8, 2004) Terrorism expert and "Prophet of Doom" author Craig Wynn speaks out on the raging conflict in the Middle East, and the threat we now face from radical Islam, as America and Israel continues to battle Arab forces, on the Tovia Singer Show, Thursday, April 8 from 10 PM to Midnight New York time (Friday, 5 - 7 AM Israeli time) on Israel National Radio and around the world on the Internet at www.toviasingershow.com The show is broadcast live throughout Israel on a live stream at Israel National Radio. To contact the show, e-mail ephraim@toviasingershow.com or call (888) 620-2384 x83. You can call into our on-air studio line toll-free from Israel, USA, & Canada at 1-800-270-4288; England at 00 800 3-700-7000; and, South Africa at 09 800 3-700-7000. To call in live through the Internet using your PC mic, the Tovia Singer Show is multi-cast on Paltalk Radio at www.paltalkradio.com To Go To Top

AMERICAN APPEASEMENT IN IRAQ Posted by Peter Schwartz, April 8, 2004.

As U.S. soldiers respond to attacks in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq, many commentators warn that a forceful, self-assertive campaign to wipe out the militant resistance would be disastrous. Disaster may indeed be looming - but only because of a *lack* of self-assertiveness by the United States. We are inviting failure in Iraq, and in our overall war on terrorism, by conducting a campaign that is hopelessly apologetic and appeasing. The Iraqis have long produced despotism. But instead of being morally confident in our right to establish a government that is no longer a threat to anyone - Iraqi or American - we are deferentially asking the Iraqis for permission to proceed. Afraid to offend them, we are reluctant to defend our interests and to uphold our values. For example, we did not appoint the members of Iraq's Governing Council based on their commitment to freedom; instead, we sought ethnic and religious "diversity" in order to placate the tribal and political factions that dominate Iraq. The 25 members include: the secretary of the Iraqi Communist Party; the founder of the Kurdish Socialist Party; a member of Iraq's Hezbollah; and a leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution - a group, funded by and partly founded by Iran, advocating an Islamic theocracy. Is this an assemblage that is going to create a free Iraq? To assuage the United Nations, we are asking for its aid in postwar Iraq. Is it conceivable that this organization - which helped keep Saddam Hussein in power and whose membership includes the world's bloodiest tyrants - could lead Iraq to freedom? On the military front, our soldiers face continuing attacks, but political considerations prevent us from disarming the populace. Attendees at funerals and weddings regularly fire automatic weapons, as their means of "emotional expression." We are at war, but our military planners apparently believe that a methodical, house-to-house search for guns - let alone a disarming of private "militias" in Fallujah and elsewhere - would be too "intrusive." Iraqis - again, brandishing automatic weapons - stage public demonstrations designed to incite violence against us. Yet none are arrested, presumably because we don't want to be regarded as overly assertive. This same, self-effacing policy is being practiced in Afghanistan, where the problem of "offended local sensibilities" - as a recent N.Y. Times article describes it - has led our policymakers to transform our soldiers into goodwill ambassadors, "whose focus is less on capturing terrorists than on winning public support." Is it surprising that the Taliban appears to be successfully regrouping? In logic and in justice, there is only one means of "winning public support," in Afghanistan or Iraq: eradicating every trace of the former enslavers. If that is not sufficient, then the support is not worth gaining. Our only concern should be toward those who value freedom enough to recognize the inestimable benefit our troops have given them. As to all the others - they need not like us, only fear us. In Iraq we started by apologizing for our presence, when our invading soldiers were ordered to jeopardize their lives rather than risk harming civilians or damaging mosques. We have deposed Hussein - but we are still apologizing. We are unwilling to ask Iraqis to bear the costs of their liberation. We are endorsing the very statism we are supposed to be overthrowing as we permit the Iraqi government to own the oil supplies and to remain in the coercive OPEC cartel. We are appeasing the Shiite clerics who regard us as the infidel enemy. This conciliatory attitude only emboldens the enemy, thereby encouraging resistance and inviting disaster. Upon ousting the governments of Germany and Japan in World War II, we did not proceed on tiptoe. We did not express regret at having to stop traffic, search homes and shoot fleeing suspects. We were morally certain - certain that their system was wrong and ours right, certain that their system threatened us and needed to be eliminated. As a result, the enemy was eventually demoralized, allowing freedom to take root. The identical approach should be adopted now. In postwar Japan, it was Gen. Douglas MacArthur who unilaterally drafted a new constitution - over the objections of many Japanese - and paved the way for a radical shift from tyranny to liberty. Emulating MacArthur, by imposing upon Iraq a U.S.-written constitution that champions the principle of individual rights, including the separation of mosque and state, would be an ideal means of asserting our interests - along with the interests of those Iraqis who genuinely value freedom. Peter Schwartz is editor and contributing author of "Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution" by Ayn Rand and is chairman of the board of directors of the Ayn Rand Institute (www.aynrand.org) in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead". To Go To Top

IRAQ DEMONSTRATES A PREVIEW OF GAZA ATTACKS Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 8, 2004.

We are privileged to observe the response to America's pacification of the Muslims in Iraq. The vicious attacks by both Shi'ite Muslims and Sunni Muslims against American troops is instructive as it grows in intensity. Note the increased sophistication of ambushes and weapons with the increased mix of International Muslim fighters pouring in. This is pre-view of what will surely happen in Gaza, Judea and Samaria as the Israeli Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon retreats and withdraws Israeli civilian and military forces from these crucial areas. Is Sharon is behaving like a court jester for the Bush dynasty? Has he forgotten so soon that, to protect civilians all over Israel, the Israel Defense Forces had to re-enter those areas which the prior fools, Rabin and Peres, gave over to Yassir Arafat under Olso. All those areas in Israel's historic ancient heartland that Rabin and Peres used as their appeasement (Munich-style) didn't appease but only provided a base to consolidate Muslim Arab terrorist operations against Israeli men, women and children in almost every Israeli city and town. Israeli intelligence already knows that International Muslim Terrorists have migrated into the areas given to Arafat by the Oslo Accords. They are training Hamas, Hebz'Allah, PLO, Islamic Jihad, Tanzim, Al Aksa Brigades and other terror organizations, awaiting Sharon's self-proclaimed retreat to increase the intensity and sophistication of their attacks. Now, Sharon wishes to once again retreat and withdraw from Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Then the numerous terrorist organizations will bond more closely and advance their operational skills with better and longer range weapons smuggled in openly over the Egyptian borders, by sea and probably by air. Worse yet, he wishes to scrap the provision in the Camp David Accords that keeps Egypt out of the Sinai militarily. Instead, Sharon invites Egypt to 'patrol' the southern border of Gaza. "Once the nose of the camel is in the tent", (as the saying goes), "the rest of the beast is sure to follow." Does Sharon forget that the IDF is fighting a fruitless battle to destroy the tunnels coming under that border from Egypt? Does he think they grow there by themselves and the weapons to Arafat's terrorists transit Egypt without Egypt's knowledge? Sharon will not only have provided the swarm of terrorists who will fill the vacuum of Gaza, resulting in a South-West front but, with the Egyptian lines pulled up to Gaza, there will be a double front. Does Sharon forget that Gaza has always been the route of invasion by the Egyptians toward Tel Aviv? Sharon is going to Washington to seal his betrayal of the Jewish pioneers sent to settle the land by both Labor and Likud Parties. He plans to acquire the Bush Dynasty's blessing for his retreat and withdrawal. Hopefully, the American Jews and Christians who are against the antics of retreat and withdrawal to abandon Gaza, Judea and Samaria will bombard President Bush with a decisive "NO!" Tell him: "President Bush, if you agree to Israel abandoning Jewish land, you will be a one-term President like your father. We Jews and Christians believe that G-d gave the land to the Jews and we will sit out your November election!" Sharon is headed to Washington on April 12 to secure a license to betray the Jewish people and he wants Bush to bless this treason and even to 'promise' to pay for it. (Of course, Bush might promise but he'll never be able to deliver the Billions of American tax-payers' dollars necessary to re-locate 8,000 Jewish pioneers from their homes, farms, factories, businesses, schools, synagogues, infrastructure, etc. Congress and the American people wouldn't stand for it.) Sharon must contemplate the possibility that George Bush won't be in office next year and will, therefore, be unable to fulfill any promises he makes now. As for the Israelis and their weak government, watch the nightly news to get a pre-view of what will happen to Israelis as Muslim swarm against Americans in Iraq. We are, indeed, already in World Wars 3, 4 and 5 - all overlapping - as Islam goes to war against the West and all non-Muslims. America is just learning that you cannot win the hearts and minds of Islamists. When the Americans and Coalition Forces could have crushed the insurgent Islamists, they didn't - and now it may be too late. Have you ever noticed that all the Arab countries are ruled by dictators who contain the radicalism of their own people by quick and brutal force? It was always this way through the centuries because that's the way things are! Winning hearts and minds, seeding democracy, writing up agreements they will sign but never keep - is the reason why the West and Israel always give way to radical Islam. Why do we have no staying power, act too late and when there is no choice, start to fight from weak positions - resulting in excessive casualties? *BREAKING NEWS April 8: This just in: American supply column hit in Iraq. *Also, three Japanese civilians captured by Islamists called the "Mujahadin Squadrons". Reuters says they are threatening to burn the 3 hostages alive if Japan doesn't withdraw their troops in three days. I wonder how many Jewish civilians and soldiers will be kidnaped and held hostage for one of Sharon's unbalanced exchanges of prisoners? Israel was and remains a test case, a litmus test as successive governments keep backing up, giving up ground and, thereby, encouraging greater assaults. When attacked, whether by armies or terrorists, Israel must always fight to win and to keep what she wins. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

VOICE OF JUDEA HEADLINES Posted by Voice of Judea, April 8, 2004.

1. Escalation in Iraq Since Sunday, 35 Americans, two other coalition soldiers and more than 230 Iraqis have been killed in fighting. The Iraqi figure did not include those killed at the mosque. Since the war began, at least 630 U.S. service members have died. Dozens were killed yesterday when coalition forces fired a missile into a mosque in Faluja. Voice of Judea Commentary: Iran is backing the insurgents. The Americans will need to understand that Saddam was only one small little dictator in the Muslim and Arab world. Terror is supported and endorsed by main stream Arab and Muslim societies and by most Islamic and Arab regimes. Those are the sad facts of life. It is a religious war against Western civilization and all that it represents. It is unlikely that the Americans will have what it takes to sustain a long drawn out war of terrorism against coalition forces. Not to mention that the Islamic terrorists will not hesitate to attack U.S. civilian targets. Just as the Spaniards caved into the terrorists after the recent terrorist carnage, shifting their support for a candidate who opposed the war against terror, this is likely to be the backlash experienced in the United States in the upcoming elections. In such a case the terrorist barbarians will emerge the big winners if the civilized world is indeed forced to surrender to the forces of evil. The ultimate loser in any U.S. capitulation to Arab/Islamic terror remains the Jew. However, either way, the Jew who remains in the Exile loses: If the Americans continue to fight, the Jews will ultimately be blamed for Arab terrorism, with every casualty of soldier or civilian lost in the battle. And If America capitulates and limits the war on terror, Arab and Islamic terrorists will only step up their attacks, and Israel and the Jew will be recalled upon every terror attack. The obvious conclusion every Jew must draw from world events must be that the time to come home to Israel is now. However bad things may yet get in Israel, ultimately we must remember that Israel does have the military might to distance the hostile Arab population from their borders and to maintain domestic peace and security within the borders of Israel. Israel restrains herself purely for political diplomatic reasons. Israel does have the power to secure the streets of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. If and when Arab terrorism escalates beyond control, Israel will be forced to take action that would isolate Israel and intensify attacks on Jewish targets around the globe. All the more reason for Jews to come home to Israel now!! It is time to read the obvious writing on the wall. The Jews are the soft scapegoat for the Arabs as well as for ugly anti Semites who will blame the Jew and Israel regardless. 2. Firebombing at Jewish school in Montreal Attackers set a Jewish school in Montreal ablaze and left a note saying the attack was revenge for Israeli killing of Hamas founder. The fire destroyed the library of the St. Laurent branch of the United Talmud Torah elementary school. Police said the library was firebombed early Monday afternoon, according to media reports. The attack follows a spate of anti-Semitic incidents in Toronto. The chairman of Bnai Brith Canada League for Human Rights, Stephen Scheinberg, said the incident shows that Montreal Jewish institutions are woefully unprepared and that security should be stepped up at Jewish institutions around the city, according to the Canadian Jewish News. "This is a wake-up call," he said. Voice of Judea Commentary: Next year in Jerusalem? Why do we say it if we don't mean it? One Canadian family answered the call to come home to Israel, making aliyah the day before Passover and joining the Gedud HaIvri, in Kfar Tapuach. The Gedud HaIvri provided housing and food for the Katz family, who will be volunteering their first year to assist the Gedud in a voluntary canine security program, protecting Jewish towns in Yesha, with specially trained canines. Sarah will be studying ulpan as Aryeh studies to be a dog handler and guards... The Katz's are the first couple to join the Gedud. Over 100 young Jews from North America have joined over the past 2 years. For more info visit www.defendisrael.net To send a needed contribution to aid the Gedud in sponsoring Jewish volunteers and olim as well as in sponsoring canines and other defense projects, call 718 874 2057 or send a contribution to Israel's Best Friend, Rechov Moriah 3, Jerusalem, Israel, 94386. 3. Israel enlists pigs against terrorists. Use of unclean animals as sniffers blessed by rabbis [Editor's note: Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is an online, subscription intelligence news service from the creator of WorldNetDaily.com a journalist who has been developing sources around the world for the last 25 years.] (www.Worldnetdaily.com, April 6, 2004 - A special Israeli security group, known as "Gdud Ivri," or Jewish Legion, is enlisting pigs in its life-and-death fight with Islamic terror, reports Joseph Farahs G2 Bulletin. The Jewish Legion, named after the World War I, all-Jewish regiments of the British army, supports the Israeli military, police and isolated communities by providing special K-9 patrols and mounted riders. Not surprisingly, the outfit is sometimes referred to as the K-9 cavalry, reports the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by WND. Recently the Jewish Legion decided to add pigs to its security program. Yakutiel Ben-Yaacov, the leader of the Jewish Legion, learned about the British army's use of pigs during the 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine. The British deployed pigs, known to have a highly developed sense of smell, enabling discovery of explosives and deterring Muslim zealots from infiltrations. Though the pig is considered a defiled animal strictly forbidden in Jewish dietary laws, the Muslims forbid any contact with the animal. Any contact with the pig is punishable by denial of entry to paradise. Ben-Yaacov's plan received the warm support of many of the most important rabbis in Israel and abroad. According to a Jewish law, saving a life supercedes the prohibition to eat or have any contact with pigs. This is not the first time Israel has made the decision to use pigs in its struggle with terrorism. According to recent reports, the Israeli government may soon place bags of lard on buses a favorite target of suicide bombers. Many Muslims thus believe that a corpse smeared in pig remains disqualifies its owner from ascension to paradise, a goal of many Palestinian "martyrs." More than a century ago, Americans discouraged Muslim terrorists in the Philippines by executing them with bullets rubbed in lard. And in the 1939 film, "The Real Glory," which portrays combat against terrorists in the Philippines during the same period, Gary Cooper proclaims that slain Muslims will be buried in pig skins. More recently, the Russians have reportedly applied the Cooper method to the bodies of Chechen terrorists. SPONSOR A PIG OR A CANINE FOR ISRAELI SECURITY BY SENDING A CONTRIBUTION TO IBF - ISRAELS BEST FRIEND RECHOV MORIAH 3, JERUSALEM, ISRAEL, 94386 4. Pricey Sharon plan Prime Minister Ariel Sharons plan to "disengage" Israel from the Arabs will cost around $1 billion. Sources at the Treasury in Jerusalem on Thursday cited relocating some 7,500 Gaza Jews in other parts of Israel and redeploying troops around the territories as the main factors behind the anticipated 4-5 billion shekel tab. Sharon hopes to win U.S. President George W. Bushs endorsement for the unilateral plan when he visits Washington on April 14. There is no indication the prime minister will come with a request for extra American funding, but according to Israeli media reports the Bush administration has already voiced interest in investing in developing communities in the Negev desert, which could defray the cost of moving Gaza Jews there. JTA Voice of Judea Commentary: Hmm. When we speak of the expulsion of 8000 Jews from their homes it is called relocating and acceptable. However, when some speak of expulsion of anti-Israel, hostile Arabs from Israel to one of their many Arab/Islamic countries this is called racism and considered to be a violation of international law. A new group has been founded that calls for a national referendum on this very issue. Operation Homeland is launching a referendum proposal with the following 3 questions that each and every Jew is being asked to answer: 1- Should Israel disengage from the Arabs? 2- Should Israel implement a disengagement along the lines of Sharon and other politicians which would mean expulsion of Jews from their homes and surrender of Jewish towns, and leave many Arabs within the borders that remain Israel? 3- Should Israel implement a disengagement in accordance with the Bible, which would mean expulsion of most Arabs, no surrender of Jewish land and no hostile Arabs remaining within the present borders of Israel? Every Jew in the world has the right and obligation to cast their vote in this referendum. If you wish to participate, send back and email to jsid@dorsai.org with the subject: My Vote for Israel's Future. Send your name and email address as well as your vote. Every vote counts. EMAIL THIS EMAIL AND REFERENDUM EVERYWHERE AND ANYWHERE REFERENDUM TO SAVE ISRAEL 5. Purim rampage probed Ten Israeli Hassidim are suspected in an anti-Arab rampage over Purim. Police said on Thursday the 10 male members of the Breslov sect are believed to have attacked Arabs in Jerusalem while under the influence of holiday wine during the March 7-8 festival. Five of the suspects, including two minors, are still in police custody. There were no serious casualties in the rampage. According to legal sources, the suspects are known to have links to extreme right-wing groups and may have acted in anger after a recent pilgrimage to Rabbi Nahman of Breslovs tomb in Uman, where they themselves were attacked by Ukrainians. Voice of Judea Commentary: How strange that a Jew in Jerusalem would consider the Arabs to be an enemy that they would attack lightly under the influence of alcohol. In Shushan, King Ahashverosh offered license for Jews to attack those who wished to annihilate the Jews. In fact, the Jews annihilated over 70,000 evil wishers. How strange that Jews would lightly wound Arabs in Jerusalem, without having been licensed to do so by Ariel Sharon. Strange indeed. How long will Sharon's cops hold the minors and the other Hassidim? How many psychiatrists will be called in to investigate the possible psychological connection to their attacks with attacks perpetrated by Ukranians on Hassidim in Uman? How odd that the JTA on this story refers to several Arabs being lightly injured as a rampage. How odd indeed! 6. A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO ALL OF OUR READERS: You are reading this message together with more than 37,000 other readers and subscribers. However strange this might sound to you, the anti-Israel U.S. state Department and some self-hating forces in Israel continue to try and silence the Voice of Judea. The Voice of Judea remains committed to offering news and commentary on Israel and Jewish affairs, you probably will not see elsewhere. While we have never in any way incited violence and have never supported any form of terrorism, the anti-Semitic State Department has had the audacity to call the Voice of Judea a Foreign Terrorist Organization. This moral outrage is nothing more than an insane attempt to silence those who engage in legal speech from speaking our truth. What type of news and commentary anger the State Department or the Sharon government? It bothers them when we articulate a Torah/political alternative to their failed disengagement and Road-map agendas. It upsets the anti-Israel State Department when we bring concrete evidence to the danger in following U.S. dictates that put Israel at risk. The news and facts speak for themselves. However, most news agencies twist the news and distort the facts. This is why we continue to be a lone voice in the wilderness, in spite of the many obstacles that have been placed in our way. The truth will prevail. The faithful and loyal Jews will be triumphant. Those who think that they will aid themselves and their families by hurting those who fight for Jewish survival, will fall prey to their very fears, and lose their place in both worlds. We will not be silenced. We will continue to engage in free speech to report honestly on events and to offer our opinions, based on Jewish law. Our goal is to inform the world about news and opinions that they otherwise would not be exposed to. This tiny voice of sanity and truth will continue to be heard by those who wish to listen. This voice must be heard among other opinions. The competition of our ideas must take place in the market place of ideas, on and off of the internet. It is not just the fate of Israel that is at risk. It is the fate of all who seek to speak freely and practice their religious and political beliefs. We urge you to send these email broadcasts of the Voice of Judea to as many of your friends and relatives and lists that you can. Spread the voice that they wish to squash. Do not be a partner to this outrage. Let the world know the truth about Israel. Play a role in spreading truth during these critical times. Remember, those who stand tall and proud without fear with Israel during rough times will be blessed to celebrate with Israel and rejoice at Israels victory, in the future. Those who lack the moral strength to do the right thing will be forgotten. The Jewish nation will win with or without their help. The editors of the Voice of Judea wish all of our readers and friends a Chag Sameach. May we celebrate next Pesach in Jerusalem, with the Temple Rebuilt, Amen. The website address of Voice of Judea is http://www.voiceofjudea.com Subscribe by writing listmaster@voiceofjudea.com To Go To Top

GADHAFI'S SON SAYS LIBYAN JEWS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION Posted by IsrAlert, April 8, 2004.

Isralert's source for this item: This was written by Zvi Bar'el, Haaretz Correspondent. It is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/413084.html Libyan Jews will be able to receive compensation for property confiscated when they left the country, the son of Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi told the Egyptian weekly Al-Ahram Al-Arabi. Saif al-Islam Gadhafi also invited Libyan Jews to return, saying Libya is "their country and their original homeland." Gadhafi said this would help solve the Palestinian problem, as the returning Libyan Jews could leave their homes to the Palestinians. Gadhafi explained that Libya does not intend to negotiate with Israel, as it is not in conflict with Libya and has not conquered Libyan territory. Libya is therefore indifferent to the Middle East peace process. "From the start we did not want to get into the stew of the Middle East," Gadhafi said. "Until recently we were in conflict with Israel, but things have changed. The Palestinians to whom we gave support, weapons and military equipment refused this assistance and began to ask for money to build industrial projects and civil infrastructure," he said. "Besides, conflict countries like Egypt, Jordan, and to a certain extent Syria, negotiated with Israel and even signed peace agreements while Libya, which is not a conflict country, continued to pay the bill. That is, they benefited and we continued to pay a price. "We have, therefore, decided to completely distance ourselves from the Middle East and to turn to Africa. If interested parties have decided to cease the war against Israel, why should we go on with it? Should we be more righteous than the Pope?" In an interview last month, Saif Gadhafi praised Israel for its democracy, saying that unlike Arab countries, sons do not tend to succeed their fathers in power in Israel. "We don't put the appropriate person in the right place, but Israel is a democratic country,'' he told Al-Jazeera television station. Gadhafi also called on Arab states to support U.S. President George W. Bush's campaign to promote democracy in the Middle East. "Instead of shouting and criticizing the American initiative, you have to bring democracy to your countries, and then there will be no need to fear America or your people," said Gadhafi. "The Arabs should either change or change will be imposed on them from outside." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

FLEEING BAGHDAD Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, April 8, 2004.

The writer, Jen Banbury, is the author of "Like a Hole in the Head." Her Web journal [http://www.iraqandahardplace.org/] chronicles her life in Baghdad. This appeared in Salon and is archived at http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/07/leaving AMMAN, Jordan - Last week, before followers of Muqtada al-Sadr began actively fighting coalition forces, before four Americans working for a private security company were killed and mutilated in Fallujah, I left - or perhaps I should say fled - Iraq. In the week or so preceding my departure, I felt the country undergo an essential, albeit subtle, shift. The anger previously focused on soldiers and members of the Coalition Provisional Authority seemed to morph, almost daily, into an indiscriminate ire toward Westerners in general. Almost overnight, I stopped feeling safe. Many of my biggest concerns were wrapped up in the fact that I had been in the country so long. I (and the house I shared with other freelance journalists) had become well known. Some seasoned war correspondents - friends who had actually lived in the house last fall - warned us that they felt the house might be marked as an easy "soft target." Journalists and contractors were moving en masse out of small, lightly protected hotels (such as the Mount Lebanon, which was bombed a few weeks ago) into hotels that lay within heavily guarded and restricted compounds. With fewer easily available Western targets, my friends believed that the house might be ripe for an attack. Up until a month ago, my housemates and I joked about Western journalists and civilians who were obsessed with security. We made fun of our friends who worked for TV networks and had to get permission from New York just to come to our house for dinner. When they did come, they traveled in armored cars with armed British former special ops soldiers. For six months we had gone all over Baghdad and Iraq, driving in a regular old Iraqi car with an unarmed translator and driver. Going shopping, walking on busy streets, wandering into crowds. There was always some risk, but it was small. The soldiers were the real targets. Iraqis might hate the occupation, but they didn't hate Americans per se. Then, seemingly overnight, everything felt different. It began with the Mount Lebanon bombing. Though many journalists I talked to also sensed the city's mood shift, it was hard to figure out exactly why that particular attack made us feel so different. We had been to blown-up hotels before; it happens every few months. But it wasn't the bombing, it was how Iraqis were talking to us. Iraqis are fed up with the occupation. They're fed up with what they consider to be a year's worth of false promises. They're fed up and the situation is getting very ugly. A driver we worked with told us that our house had been targeted and we needed to "take a break" from Iraq. One of my housemates (who had been in Iraq as long as I had) heard that there was a rumor circulating that he was actually CIA. It was time to leave. In the few days that passed between when I made the choice to leave and actually got the hell out, I became even more aware of the threat in the city. I wore a hijab pulled close around my face when I drove through town. Now all female journalists I know wear a hijab and even a full-on abaya when they leave their hotel. And not just female journalists - a few guys I know who are unfortunate enough to have blond hair have taken to covering it with a head scarf when driving through the city. On the one hand, we joke about it - "Shit, you make a good- looking old Iraqi woman" - but it's deadly serious. Now in Baghdad, in addition to the fortified "Green Zone" occupied by the Coalition Provisional Authority, other heavily guarded compounds have sprung up to encircle the hotels most populated by Westerners. During the war, almost every Western journalist who chose to stay and tough out the conflict took refuge in the large Sheraton and Palestine hotels that sit, almost lobby to lobby, a block away from the Tigris River, opposite the river from the Green Zone. Following the fall of Baghdad, American soldiers parked tanks in front of the hotels and (somewhat informally) secured the grounds. Still, it was possible to drive a car filled with luggage into the parking lot (as I did the day I first arrived in Baghdad last May) and move freely around the streets flanking the hotels. Over the course of the last year, however, the security perimeter for those two hotels has slowly but surely expanded to encompass an entire neighborhood. Roadblocks, cement barriers, concertina wire, and legions of private guards keep a tight rein on anyone entering the area. A big chunk of Abu Nawas Street, the wide boulevard that parallels that side of the Tigris, is completely blocked to traffic. News organizations and foreign companies have rented many of the larger homes inside that secured zone and each employs its own security guards. Men with Kalashnikovs roam the empty street or park themselves at the front gates of the sandbag- wrapped houses. If you look up, you're likely to see more men with guns pacing the flat roofs and keeping watch on passersby. The New York Times was one of the first organizations to take up residence there. Last spring, before Westerners of all kinds were being targeted, they rehabilitated a large home and painted the outside bright pink and purple. I used to joke that it looked like an MTV "Real World" Baghdad house. Not long ago, I noticed that the house had been repainted to a dull white-gray. The isolation of Westerners only feeds the danger, in a kind of vicious circle. With journalists and civilians in Baghdad now living the same way soldiers and CPA staffers do, it's no wonder the Iraqis differentiate among those groups less than they used to. After our friends expressed their concerns about our house being vulnerable - but before we received the more specific threats - my housemates and I decided to consult with some of the security companies working in Baghdad to get an assessment of our danger level. The house we lived in was not in a cordoned-off area but rather a quiet residential neighborhood. Our idea was to be as low-key as possible. We had a guard at all times but he usually stayed inside the wall that fronted our house. Early last fall, when we rented the house, low-key was the best way to go. In fact, part of the impetus for getting the house in the first place was that hotels (even those with security) seemed the greatest risk to Westerners. Private security companies can be found all over Iraq right now. Most of them consist of a cadre of well-trained Westerners - usually some version of former special forces guys from the U.S., Australia or South America - supplemented by Iraqi guards. The biggest companies, like Custer Battles (whose unfortunate moniker actually derives from its two founders' last names) and Blackwater (the employer of the four men killed in Fallujah), are hired almost exclusively to act as armed security support for the military and Coalition Provisional Authority. They provide escorts for contractors and create secure areas (like the Green Zone) in which different arms of the coalition live and work. Some of the contracts are massive. Custer Battles essentially runs the airport. A number of security companies have carved out multiblock areas in the wealthy Mansour neighborhood of Baghdad. I drove to Mansour with one of my housemates to talk to some people at Erinys Security, a large firm (with ties to Pentagon favorite Ahmed Chalabi) working throughout Iraq. When my housemate and I made an appointment over the phone, the Erinys guy had given us rough instructions to their compound. He told us to drive to a street behind the wrecked communications building and then look for a lot of men in blue shirts. We followed his instructions and, sure enough, came across a gaggle of beefy Iraqis wearing blue Oxford-type shirts and holding Kalashnikovs and mini-machine guns. My translator, Amjad, who was with us, explained we had an appointment. The men directed us to pull up to a barrier that marked the beginning of a blocked-off fragment of the neighborhood. We milled around outside our car while one of the guards crossed the barrier and ducked into a house just beyond to announce us. The dozen or so guards around us seemed bored. Some stood with their rifles hanging in front of them, supported by the kind of neck straps I associate with guitars. They chain- smoked cigarettes and laughed in surprise at my housemate's decent Iraqi Arabic. After a few minutes, a very scrawny American guy came out of the nearby house and walked over to greet us. He was casually, even sloppily, dressed with longish lank hair and teeth that reminded me of late-season corn on the cob. There was something decidedly creepy about him. Certainly, he didn't inspire any strong feelings of security. After a slightly confused exchange, it became clear that we weren't even at the Erinys headquarters. This was a different security company with different blue shirts and a separate compound. The man offered to help us, but we told him we had another appointment and had to move on. We asked if he knew where the Erinys compound was - we knew it was close. He shrugged and said that there were lots of security compounds in the area and he wasn't sure which was which. Though Mansour lies in the heart of Baghdad, it feels more like a suburb, or like parts of Los Angeles. Imagine driving through a suburban town in which, at any given moment, you're likely to come across a roadblock manned by up to a dozen heavily armed men, marking the entrance to a small compound. If you live inside, you will have to show an I.D. and have your car checked for explosives whenever you enter the compound. Though right now Mansour seems to have the highest concentration of these compounds, they are quickly springing up all over Baghdad. For Westerners, it's increasingly unrealistic to live outside the bounds of these mini-Green Zones. Iraqis whose houses get inadvertently annexed by these zones choose to rent their homes to whichever company has taken over. Others choose to stay and accept the trade-off: hassle for high security. We did eventually find Erinys that day. As it turns out, they are a very large and high-tech operation with a contract to guard oil pipelines throughout the country. For that, they employ more than 10,000 Iraqi guards. Advising a handful of journalists on the safety of their living situation wasn't exactly the company's regular gig, but they were incredibly amenable to helping us and, the following morning, a consultant came by our house to advise us. He recommended that we increase the number of guards and line the inside of the wall in front of the house with sandbags. In general, he felt that we could make the house safe enough to warrant staying. Then came the change in the atmosphere, and the threats. The viciousness of the attacks on the four Blackwater employees in Fallujah illustrated, in an incredibly depressing way, the shift I felt on the streets of Baghdad. An explosive anger just below the surface of daily life. Of course not all Iraqis want to kill Americans. But the violent minority could easily tip the country toward yet another out-and-out war with the coalition. As I write this, coalition forces are fighting Saddam loyalists in Fallujah and nearby Ramadi and followers of Muqtada al-Sadr in a number of cities throughout the middle and south of Iraq. At least 18 U.S. Marines have been killed over the last three days, with 12 more reported slain today in Ramadi; at least 130 Iraqis have been killed. The next few days on those fronts will be very telling. On the surface, the clashes in Fallujah and Ramadi aren't related to the Shiite actions: The Saddam loyalists of Fallujah don't historically have much in common with Shiite hard-liners, who were persecuted under Saddam's rule. In that sense, the timing couldn't be worse. The coalition is now fighting battles on several different fronts simultaneously. Their hard clamp-down may quell some of the violence. But I think it's more likely that it will severely aggravate it. Al-Sadr's followers, including his well-armed Mahdi militia, will fight fiercely to block his arrest. If enough of them get gunned down, non-Sadrists might join the fray. Though al-Sadr doesn't command nearly the same respect as the more moderate Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, his outspoken vilification of the United States may position him as a "mouse that roared" figure and enable him to sidestep into Iraq's severe leadership vacuum. But even before the current crisis, something may have happened to ordinary Iraqis that cannot be reversed. When I sensed the country's mood change before I left Iraq, I wasn't hanging out with Saddam loyalists or members of al-Sadr's militia. I was in Baghdad talking to average people. To be fair, I think part of what changed in the last few weeks was me. After seven months in Baghdad, with low- level stress all the time and high-level stress a few times a day, the heightened danger and the disappointment of seeing the country fall apart was too much. Last May I felt some sense of optimism about the future of Iraq. But since then I've witnessed the nation's slow decline toward the present chaos. The occupation, perhaps doomed from the start, is proving to be a failure. I've heard from plenty of CPA employees (off the record, of course) that the governmental situation is a mess. Reinventing an Arab-nationalist socialist dictatorship as an American democracy is too great a task. The Bush administration's fantasy about how it was going to transform postwar Iraq reminds me of a "Star Trek" episode in which a confident multicultural, quasi-military group beams down to a planet where people are following the wrong leader. The Enterprise crew quickly implants American-style democracy and, by episode's end, are light- speeding toward another galaxy, safe in the knowledge that the changes they've wrought are good and right and will endure. It doesn't work that way in real life. Though I was against the war, when I first got to Iraq I couldn't help feeling (especially after a trip to the mass graves) that getting rid of Saddam would improve the lives of Iraqis. Now I'm no longer sure. In my final weeks in Baghdad, I started feeling constantly on edge. The gunfire that I had become so accustomed to hearing as part of Baghdad's background noise was suddenly sending my stomach into my throat. Getting stuck in traffic no longer felt like a petty annoyance; it felt like a trap. When I visited a university to interview some students, I encountered a much more hostile reception than I had at the same university last fall. Pretty much all the American journalists I knew began saying they were Canadian (much to the chagrin of the actual Canadian journalists). Certain news reporters started "covering" stories about events in Iraq by recycling what they read on the Web and watching CNN instead of actually going to the scene. Then, too, I became very worried about the safety of my driver, Thamer, and my translator, Amjad. In the last month, Iraqis working for American news outlets such as Time magazine, Voice of America, and the Washington Post have been threatened and killed. (Both Time and the Washington Post moved out of their relatively low-key houses and into hotels within security compounds.) While neither Amjad nor Thamer expressed any fear to me, the idea that they might be targeted truly terrified me. Neither had exactly advertised the fact that he worked with an American but, after seven months, word gets round. The same experienced war correspondents who warned of the danger to our house told me that they believe the situation in Iraq right now is much more hazardous than it was during the actual invasion of the country (and they were both in Baghdad for it). It's a question of the unknown. The increasingly large X factor of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. On the day before I left, I was driving back to my house with Amjad, Thamer and another journalist. I was famished and asked Thamer to stop at my favorite roadside kebab stand to get some sandwiches. Amjad, the other journalist and I stayed in the car while Thamer jogged across the street (with its raised dirt median) to the kebab stand. I slouched in the back seat and watched a man sweeping the sidewalk nearby. Across the street, two men in jackets and ties sat at a small plastic table, eating a mound of food from the kebab place and laughing at some shared joke. Down the block, a woman in an abaya looked over the pile of lettuce at the vegetable stand. Cars passed us - junky orange-and-white paneled cabs, new-looking Mercedes, minivans filled like buses, a black car with no license plate. Across the street, Thamer stood waiting for the kebabs with some other Iraqis. Amjad and the other journalist played games on their phones. The black car without a license plate passed us going in the other direction. Then, a minute later, it passed us again. I told Amjad to move into the driver's seat and take off. We sped away, making a bunch of fast turns to be certain we weren't followed. Minutes later we were at the house and Amjad went back to pick up a confused but understanding Thamer. It's possible that the driver of the black car (which contained at least one passenger) was lost or looking for an address or cruising for prostitutes. That he had no idea some Westerners were hanging out in a parked car, waiting for some sandwiches. It's possible I was experiencing a case of short-timer's paranoia. I've seen too many bad cop movies where the old sarge who's retirin' in a week to finally do that fishin' he's been talking about for so long gets blown up in the third scene. There's no way to know. But right now in Iraq, the assumption of danger is the safest bet. It is not safe. To Go To Top

WE ARM "FRIENDLY" EGYPT AND SAUDI ARABIA. Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 8, 2004.

Egypt's government-controlled press compares unfavorably the US to Nazi Germany's brutality, imperialism, and the concomitant concept of its people as of superior status to the rest of the world. The US brutality supposedly is committed at Guantanamo Bay. The media in Egypt holds the US responsible for car bombing in Iraq and guilty of poisoning Afghans and introducing AIDS to Africa, if the Mossad didn't (IMRA, 4/1 from MEMRI). Egyptians hate the hand that arms them. What imperialism, in the last half-century? Egypt doesn't know what goes on with the hundreds at Guantanamo besides feeding prisoners well, whereas the Nazis starved and murdered millions. The Arab attitude is that victims who counter-attack are responsible for future terrorism against them. The Arabs casually blame whomever they don't like; Americans blame perpetrators. Which seems more rational to you? The Saudi army held maneuvers with tanks, jets, and 5,000 combat vehicles, involving 100,000 soldiers in all (IMRA, 4/11). That military force, IMRA points out, is in an alliance with Egypt implicitly aimed at Israel. It stations fighter planes on a base near Israel. S. Arabia had pledged not to station the planes there, as a condition for acquiring them. Think tanks cavalierly omit S. Arabia from estimates of the balance of forces between the Arabs and Israel. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

A PASSOVER STORY Posted by Steven Plaut, April 7, 2004.

Once upon a time, somewhere in the steppes of Eastern Europe, in the Pale that contained many a Jewish village and stedtel, there roamed two beggars. One of these hoboes was Jewish and the other a gentile. The two transients were friends and far too lazy to hold a real job or to do any work, so they wondered carefree, aimlessly and uselessly from village to village, begging for food, sometimes collecting discarded things to sell, here and there stealing some eggs or fruits off farm trees. It was a hard life and they often found themselves on the brink of starvation. One day the two were looking for someone from whom they could "shnorr" some food when they came upon a Jewish village, a stedtel, whose residents were all buzzing about, hurrying, scouring pots and pans, cleaning their homes and cooking. The Jewish beggar suddenly realized that it was but a few hours before Passover was to begin. "We have extraordinary good luck today," he said to his gentile comrade. "Tonight begins Passover, a Jewish holiday. Indeed, it is in many ways the happiest holiday of the year, with mountains of food and drink. So here is my plan. Let us come into the village just before evening. We will stand in the back of the synagogue. We will tell them you and I are both Jewish wanderers, far from home, traveling to do some trading and seek our fortunes. And the local Jews will invite us to the most wonderful banquet of our lives!" His gentile comrade agreed to the plan. They entered the village towards sunset and stood in the back of the "shul". And just as the Jewish beggar had predicted, the plan went off like clockwork. The locals competed with one another to see who would have the honor of hosting one of the beggars at his own Passover seder. In the end, two families were selected. After the evening prayers, the Jewish beggar went off to feast with one family, while his gentile friend, pretending to be Jewish, went off to dine and celebrate with another family. The gentile beggar's mouth was already watering with the thought of the wonderful delicacies he was about to devour. His belly was grumbling with anticipation. But things were not going the way he had expected. His hosts ushered him into a chair at a large table, set with candles and many empty dishes. In the center, however, he saw nothing but some pathetic hard boiled eggs, a few leaves, and a single small shank bone of meat. "This for the entire assembly?" he thought. Then, instead of pouncing on the food, his host poured everyone a single cup of wine, but a small one. The beggar guest would have preferred a bottle of vodka or a barrel of gin or even some German beer. But things just got worse. His hosts finished drinking their small glasses of wine and then offered everyone at the table a few small leaves. Not even enough to satisfy a rabbit! And they even insisted that he dip these into an awful salty solution, which only made him more thirsty and desperate to drink some real grog. Then to celebrate this "meal", they broke into song and laughter, which went on for a whole hour. When he was expecting them to serve him his dessert, they handed him instead a piece of bread, but not one like anything he had ever seen before. It was dry, evidently having been left out in the sun for a week, and barely resembled real bread. It was hard and it cackled and cracked when he chewed on it, and it was served plain, with no oil or molasses or fat. "This is the feast my friend promised me?" thought the beggar to himself. "This is the mountain of food these Jews eat to celebrate their happiest holiday?" And then just imagine his horror at what came next. Each of the people at the table was given the most bitter and disgusting glob of horseradish, something he would never ordinarily eat even if he were famished beyond limit. They even blessed God when they swallowed the horrid-smelling and evil-tasting slop! Convinced the "meal" was over, the beggar excused himself, said he was needed elsewhere with great urgency, and left his hosts with an apology. He then wandered the streets of the village, looking for his Jewish beggar mate, preparing to thrash him in rage and scream at him for his empty promise of a full stomach and a glorious meal. It was only four hours later that he found his Jewish friend. The Jewish beggar was wandering through the alleys, his shirt buttons popping, his belly overfull, picking at his teeth, belching his pleasure. He was so full of food that he could only walk along at a relaxed pace, humming to himself with pleasure. His gentile friend was so weak with hunger that he was unable even to pummel his friend. The Jewish beggar examined his starving comrade with surprise. "What happened?" he asked. Some feast you promised me!, said the other. And then he told the Jewish beggar what had happened, how his hosts had offered him a thimble of wine, less than a handful of pathetic leaves in brine, a stale piece of bread of some sort with nothing on it, and - In the names of all Saints - some horrid bitter glob. "At that point I decided enough is enough," he explained, "and I got up and left." The Jewish beggar could not control his laughter. You do not understand, he explained. Those were simply the earliest preliminaries of the feast. You just snatched hunger from out of the horn of cornucopia! Had you stuck things out for just a few more minutes, you would have been served the most sumptuous feast of your life, a meal for kings, food that would have sufficed you for a whole week of wanderings. There would have been more food than you could eat, fish, eggs, meat, delights you can only imagine, along with wine and drink. But you see, you abandoned hope only a few moments too soon. Had you just a little more patience and determination, you would have a belly filled to bursting. It would have been one of the happiest nights of your life. But because you were impatient, you spoiled everything." The story of the two beggars is not a fairy tale nor a goodnight fantasy for children. The gentile beggar in the story, the one who spoiled everything because of his own ignorance and impatience, is the state of Israel. Like the gentile beggar who did not understand where he was nor what was going on, like the fool who misunderstood the preliminaries as the entire meal, the state of Israel was on the verge of entering the most wonderful, prosperous and satisfying period of its existence in the early 1990s. Had it listened to the Jewish beggar, all would have been well. Had it found patience and stamina to stick things out, for just a little more, it would have achieved its deepest desires and fulfilled its strongest yearnings. By 1990, the "first Palestinian intifada" had been defeated, suppressed by force of Israeli arms. The dimensions of Palestinian violence were dropping each month. It would likely have been ended altogether had Israel used more vigorous force against it. Those Israelis saying they thought Israel should use MORE force to end the violence outnumbered those saying less force should be used by perhaps four to one. It was a near-consensus. Israel's were in no mood to appease or capitulate. The intifada violence that had begun in the late 1980`s had petered out, with fewer and fewer incidents of violence by the month and with the terrorists so desperate for weapons that they were concocting zip guns out of household materials and Molotov cocktails far more likely to scorch the throwers than any targets. The best that the terrorists could do in most cases was to toss rocks at Israeli troops in the Gaza Strip or in parts of the West Bank, a phenomenon that was unpleasant, but not life-threatening, and certainly was no existential threat to the entire country. Other parts of the West Bank were fairly tranquil, including Bethlehem and Jericho. Jews could walk or ride in security in many parts of the "occupied territories" and in all of Israel. The leaders of the Palestinian terrorists were off in distant Tunis, with a few others in Damascus, places from which they could do little more than pout and bluster. The world - or at least the United States - had made its peace with the Israeli position that the PLO was not an acceptable partner in any Arab-Israeli peace talks and that the most that Palestinian Arabs could hope for would be a limited autonomy, with no role whatsoever for the PLO. There was enormous support in the United States, and in parts of Europe, for Israel's position that limited autonomy without the PLO was more than generous and the best for which the Palestinians could hope, a fair and just solution. Even the Egyptians were formally on board behind that program. The Jordanian border was tranquil and the impoverished Syrians afraid to risk any confrontations. Sure, the world belly-ached when Israel used force to suppress the rioters and rock-throwers, but - within Israel - there was near-consensus that the cause for the rock throwing and Palestinian hooliganism was the use of insufficient force by the Israeli army, not Israeli "war crimes" and meanness. Few took seriously the notion that Palestinians were a "people" deserving of their own state. Israelis were willing to treat them as the Palestinian branch of the Arab people, entitled perhaps to control their own lives and conduct their own local affairs - in exchange for foreswearing violence, and this was a formula backed by the United States. While a few demagogues in the US spoke about a Palestinian "state" and "people", this was not the American official position. Even under Jimmy Carter, the UN Ambassador Andrew Young had been forced to resign over issuing such a call. Calls for "self-determination" for Palestinians were something usually restricted to the Third World kleptocracies or the campus whackos and anti-American leftist extremists in the West. Israelis themselves were in near-consensus that Palestinian "statehood" was a nonstarter, and that limited autonomy for Palestinians alongside Jewish settlement of the West Bank and Gaza were the only plausible long-term peace strategy. Things became even more encouraging when the United States trounced Iraq, after Iraq had invaded Kuwait. Israel had earned American gratitude and support for its own interests by sitting tight and turning the national cheek when Saddam hurled his SCUD missiles at Tel Aviv. Americans were angry at Arab aggressors and looking to kick Arab fascist butt. The PLO had lost any residual sympathy it might have had in the United States and parts of Europe when it chose to play the role of cheerleader for Saddam's aggression. The Israeli public still had fresh memories of the Palestinians dancing on their roofs when the SCUDs fell, and there were very few in Israel who wanted to hear anything about "Palestinian rights". Even a head of the semi-Marxist Meretz party stated that, after their behavior in the Gulf War, the Palestinians could go get stuffed. There was virtually no sympathy for the idea of making any further "goodwill gestures" to the Palestinian barbarians who had danced in glee and screamed, "Saddam, Saddam, Incinerate Tel Aviv." In the early 1990s, the Israeli economy was booming, riding the crest of the high-tech revolution. The country was being flooded with immigrants from the countries that had compromised the Soviet empire. They were arriving with their economic drive, their advanced degrees and skills, together with others from Argentina to Ethiopia. The standard of living in Israel had reached the levels of the middle tier of Western European countries. Israelis enjoyed their Scandinavian-style welfare benefits, their almost-free medicine, their world-class universities. While many Israeli Arabs voted for the anti-Zionist Stalinist Party to show their contempt for their country and their solidarity with its enemies, many others did not and voted for the Zionist parties, maintaining cordial relations with Jews. Tourism was recovering, as the intifada violence was suppressed. Even the weather cooperated, with some wet winters, and the Sea of Galilee even burst its banks, full of water. And into this near-pastoral tranquility burst the Oslo "peace process", led by the ignorant beggar who did not understand that the greatest of feasts was nigh. Oslo was based on the proposition that economic interests and consumerism had replaced military power as the determinants of international relations in the post-modern world. It sought to reduce tensions with the Palestinian Arabs, who had just been defeated in their intifada, by importing the PLO`s leadership from Tunis and Damascus into the ``occupied territories`` and then allowing it to arm itself and build up an army in the suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, bankrolled and armed by Israel itself. Like the beggar who snatched starvation from the jaws of plentitude, the Israeli government of Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres succeeded in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They turned the near-tranquil Israel of the early 1990s into the Shadow of the Valley of Death. Peres and - through his nagging - also Rabin became convinced that the most promising path towards peace was Israeli capitulation to Arab demands and appeasement of the planet's worst Islamofascist terrorists. Peres and Rabin lectured the country that there was not peace because the Israelis were not strongly desirous enough of it. The best strategy for achieving Middle East peace was to flood Israel with billboards and bumper stickers about how nice peace is and how nasty war is. The Israel Left used its control of the government and mass media to attack the Israeli soul and morale, hectoring Israelis about their "insensitivity" to the Palestinian "Other", like professors of post-modernism at Western literature departments unable to keep their students from bolting. The PLO was invited into the outskirts of Israel's main cities. It set up an army of tens of thousands of soldiers, possessing anti-aircraft missiles that now threaten Israeli civilian and military air traffic, and a system of police-state control over the Palestinian population. The PLO's stormtroopers possessed anti-tank weapons, Katyusha rockets, and al-Kassem rocket factories. The PLO shelled civilian areas inside pre-1967 Israel for years and has fired hundreds of rockets at Israeli civilian homes. The Gaza Strip is today a large mortar and rocket factory. The goodwill measures of Israel produced a campaign of Nazi-like hatred led by the Palestinian Authority, down to and including virulent Holocaust denial accompanied by Holocaust justification (never mind the contradiction). Oslo was based on the proposition that armies are obsolete and so is patriotism, that appeasement of fascist terrorists is the surest path to true peace, that Israeli self-abasement is the highest form of patriotism, that cowardice is the highest form of valor, that the best way to end war is to pretend it does not exist. Like that old Peter and Gordon song, "I don't care what they say, I won't stay in a world without love," Peres and Beilin decided that if reality is ugly and tough, the solution is to live in fantasy. They refused to live in a reality in which war is present and where people do not solve their conflicts through building tourist hotels and internet web services. Seven years into the "peace process," Prime Minister Ehud Barak was ready to hand over to the PLO the Old City of Jerusalem, including control over the Western Wall, in addition to slabs of pre-1967 Israeli territory in the Negev - all this while the Palestinians were routinely murdering Jewish civilians, many of them children. The PLO`s response to Barak's obsequiousness was to launch a new war against Israel in the form of the "Al-Aqsa intifada". The Oslo era was accompanied by a massive assault on Israel`s pride, morale and confidence by its own leaders and intellectual elites. Israeli intellectuals lectured the country about its original sinfulness. Israel was flooded with "New Historians" and "Post-Zionists" who zealously set about the task of rewriting history texts and school curricula to promote the Arab "narrative" - i.e. the Arab version of history. Large swaths of Israeli universities became the occupied territories of tenured traitors, working for the enemy, seeking the destruction of their own country. Israeli politicians, ever attentive to the zeitgeist of trendy secularism, announced themselves ready to strip the country of all of its Jewish national emblems, from the star on the flag to the words of the national anthem. And, after 1,300 years of discrimination against Jews by Arabs, Israeli politicians were implementing ``reverse discrimination`` programs, under which Arabs received preferences and Jews suffered from quotas. One after the other, Israeli politicians mouthed the post-modernist gibberish of the anti-Israel choruses from overseas - how Israelis need to stop ruling over another "people", how they have to learn to understand the "Other," how they must bring themselves to commemorate the "tragedies" the Jews had imposed upon the Arabs and make restitution. The Israeli public school system was conscripted to proliferate Arab ideology. Israeli politicians and leftist professors seriously proposed that Israel create a National ``Naqba`` Day, in which it atone for the very fact of its creation and the ``catastrophe`` that this creation caused to Israeli Arabs. The Israeli media, operating under the nearly complete hegemony of the Left, bludgeoned the country on a daily basis, promoting Palestinian propaganda in editorials, Op-Ed columns and even ostensibly objective news stories. This Israeli self-flagellation produced a situation whereby each and every atrocity committed by Arabs was greeted with calls from the Israeli chattering classes for further concessions and appeasements by Israel. Some, including tenured extremists at the universities, went so far as to justify and celebrate Arab acts of terror as necessary to force Israelis to come to their senses and make peace on terms favored by these extremists. The Left promoted insubordination and mutiny by soldiers in the military, and some endorsed boycotts of Israel by overseas anti-Semites. The Israeli press adopted the practice of overseas Israel-Bashers in referring to Palestinian nazi terrorists and suicide bombers as "activists and militants". For seven years the Israeli elites lived in a make-pretend world, in which Jews were to blame for everything and Arabs were merely expressing "frustration" at being ``mistreated`` for so many years by Jews. The psychological war by Israel`s elites against national pride, dignity and self-respect - indeed against national existence - was accompanied by a set of diplomatic policies expressing little more than self-loathing. Israel was pursuing a policy that in effect let no act of Arab violence go unrewarded. Ehud Barak surrendered to terror and withdrew Israeli troops from Lebanon, and in so doing placed all of northern Israel, the Haifa Bay and its refineries within rocket range of Hizbullah. Syria, despite decades of aggression, sponsorship of terrorism and government-sanctioned Holocaust denial, was begged by the same Barak to take back not just the Golan Heights but also parts of pre-1967 Israel with access to the waters of the Sea of Galilee. Miraculously, Syria turned down the suicidal offer. The Israeli national policy of self-abasement was accepted with equanimity by much of the Israeli public, which hoped against hope that its leaders` promises of a light at the end of the Oslo tunnel would come to pass. There was no light, other than from the flashes of exploding buses full of children and civilians. The 1990's were the era in which it became evident that a great many Israelis and most of the Israeli elite had lost their will to survive as a nation. After centuries in which Jews maintained the most militant sorts of pride and self-assurance even while being mistreated, despised and humiliated, here were the Israelis, possessing one of the great armies of the world, abandoning all pride and explicitly promoting self-humiliation and self-destruction. The same Israeli military that had rescued the Jewish hostages in Entebbe was suddenly incapable of rescuing a wounded IDF soldier bleeding to death in Joseph`s Tomb in Nablus or protecting children under fire in Jerusalem neighborhoods. Here was an Israel unwilling to use force to prevent Palestinians from firing rifles and mortars into civilian homes, instead begging the PLO to hold talks with those doing the shooting in order to ``work out differences and reach understandings.`` An Israel no more than two generations removed from the Holocaust was willing to hold "peace talks" with people who denied there ever was a Holocaust and who insist that Jews use the blood of gentile children to make Passover matzos. The same Jews who fought against enormous odds and won in 1948 were acquiescing in a "peace process" that involved unilateral peace gestures from Israel in exchange for the Arabs continuing to make war against the Jews. Israel's leaders were given a very clear choice in the early 1990s. They could have followed the lead of the Jewish beggar, hold back their appetites for just a bit longer and defer their gratification just a bit, suppressing the residual of Palestinian violence and denazifying the West Bank and Gaza, and then they would have enjoyed a sumptuous Passover feast like none before it. But they chose to behave like the foolish gentile beggar in the story, who had no idea of what was going on, who let his hunger get the best of him, and who stormed out in irritation just before the delights of the feast were to begin in earnest. Because of Israeli frustration at Palestinian guttersnipes tossing rocks at Israeli troops, Israel swapped them for suicide bombers exterminating scores of Jewish children in Jerusalem and Haifa. Is the foolish beggar still with us? The impatient one who does not understand the rules of the seder? The one who is unwilling to control his hunger pangs for just a little longer? Can we bring back the Jewish beggar who correctly understands the rituals of the seder and understands Jewish heritage, who knows how to wait patiently and achieve the delightful bloated belly of satisfaction and prosperity? I search but do not find him anywhere. I do not know where he has gone. 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

YASIN'S DEATH AND PALESTINIAN POLITICS Posted by Barry Rubin, April 7, 2004.

What are the implications of Ahmad Yasin's death for Palestinian politics? In the short run, it brought sympathy for Hamas from the general population. But this event is unlikely to have much lasting impact. The real issue is the power struggle between Fatah and Hamas. Let's consider some of the elements involved: The key factor is the purposeful paralysis of Yasir Arafat who is, surprising to think about, six years older than Yasin. Despite the terrible Palestinian situation, Arafat is happy with it. He continues his war against Israel despite his side's economic collapse and military defeat. Nothing makes him want to change course and it seems conceivable he will not shift strategy again in his lifetime. He revels in the chaos. Asked by a visitor why he doesn't deal with the collapse of the PA, Arafat replied that he was ready for it to fall apart because Israel and the United States would be blamed. Arafat, as many Fatah leaders know, is responsible for the declining fortunes of his group as well as his people. By refusing to take strong action against Hamas, stop terrorism, or rein in the thuggish activity of militias waging battle against Israel, he is discrediting the Palestinian Authority (PA), Fatah, and the nationalist cause in general. Thus, at the very moment when Fatah and the PA need to bolster their unity and decisiveness they are sabotaged by their own leader. Arafat's departure from the scene cannot be too far off. How will they manage in his absence, stick together, or find a successor, if they are more divided than ever? Fatah has never been so factionalized and the PA has virtually ceased to exist. Each security agency does as it pleases. The Tanzim and al-Aqsa brigades operate as independent fiefdoms. Each town and small area of the West Bank is becoming a mini-kingdom with its own contending factions. Arafat can change this situation but he won't and perhaps the time is running out for reversing it. With Yasin dead, the only possible Islamist successor to Arafat is out of the picture and so the prospects for a Hamas seizure of power have plummeted. Since 2000, Arafat has put Fatah into alliance with Hamas. The two groups even carry out joint terrorist attacks. He never had any intention of restraining Hamas. In this respect, Yasin's death has changed nothing. Hamas can only win if Fatah lets it take over by default. If Hamas can itself kill Fatah officials and ignore the PA's authority, this makes it a contender for power. In this context, it is doubtful that in their innermost feelings most Palestinian nationalist leaders are sorry to see Yasin dead. The pending Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip raises the stakes. Who is going to be in control, not necessarily of the whole areaitself small enoughbut every tiny piece of real estate within it? This includes the right to collect protection money. But Hamas has its own problems in the pursuit of power .However many terrorist attacks it can mount, Hamas is going to be weaker without Yasin. It is a very fragmented organization. There is no alternative leader in sight. After all, what is a "spiritual guide," the title held by Yasin? He was the leader of Hamas though he did not give out detailed orders or sit in an office doing its paperwork. He set the general policy, which for Yasin meant always pushing for a hard line. But most importantly, a "spiritual guide" is someone who is so exalted, so respected by everyone that he is beyond challenge. Hamas has no replacement for Yasin in this regard. In this context, the appointment of Abdel-Aziz Rantisi as Hamas' new leader is good news. Rantisi is not a strong figure and does not enjoy broad authority in the group. In political terms, this means Hamas will be fragmented and less able to operate in a coordinate fashion to try to take over the Gaza Strip or seize power among the Palestinians more generally. Publicly, after Rantisi escaped an Israeli attack last year he spoke of eternal struggle against Israel. Privately, intelligence sources reported, he started suggesting that a ceasefire might not be a bad idea. While no one should have illusions that Hamas will stop trying to strike against Israel with terrorism, Rantisi's elevation is not going to make it a tougher organization. Speaking of Rantisi, let it not pass without notice that when Israel tried to kill him one of the complaints brought by foreign politicians and journalists was that he was "only" Hamas' spokesman and not involved in terrorism. As has repeatedly happened before, the organization's own decision shows how nave are such distinctions. Professor Barry Rubin is Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA). To Go To Top

MR. PRESIDENT: ENCOURAGE ISRAEL TO STAND STRONG AND NOT RETREAT Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, April 7, 2004.

Your letter to President Bush will be sent with copies to his Cabinet, leaders of Congress, Prime Minister Sharon and his Cabinet, and leaders of the Knesset. This is a crucial time preceding Prime Minister Sharon's visit to the U.S. next Wednesday, April 14th. President Bush must understand that American voters do not automatically follow Israeli policy, poorly conceived without backing from the Israeli electorate and legislative branch of government. This is especially true when it runs contrary to US policy against terrorism. Please encourage President Bush to heed his own words about combating terrorism and avoid going along with Sharon's plan of unilateral retreat from Gaza. CLICK HERE to send the following message. You may change the wording as you see fit. Dear President Bush, For many years Israel has been in the forefront of the global war against radical Islam. Palestinian terrorism has spearheaded this war. On March 19, 2004, you pronounced the U.S. policy on countering Islamic terrorism: "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations... It is in the interest of every country, and the duty of every government, to fight and destroy this threat to our people..." Please do not encourage Israel to retreat from Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, which would invite - in your own words - "more violence for all nations." Israel has to remain, at least as determined as is the U.S., in its war on terrorism. Mr. President, please do not follow in the footsteps of previous failed plans - the Oslo Accord, Mitchell, Tenet, Zinni and Camp David. It could fail your own presidency! Be wary of the potential downside of getting involved - inadvertently - in Israel's unpredictable political system. We implore you to encourage Israel to stand strong and not retreat in the face of Palestinian terrorism. Israel must follow the lead of the United States by defending her innocent civilians from further butchery. Founded in 1991, we are the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel. Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard! To Go To Top

OMITTING THE ISLAMIST ELEMENT Posted by Honest Reporting, April 7, 2004.

With an 'Iraqi intifada' gathering steam and Iraqi insurgent leader Moktada al-Sadr openly declaring an alliance with Hamas and Hizbullah, the global war on terror is becoming indistinguishable from Israel's anti-terror war. Yet while media reports on terror attacks in Madrid, Istanbul, Bali and elsewhere recognize Islamist perpetrators, reports on attacks on worldwide Jewish targets regularly omit the Islamist element. On April 5, a few hours before the beginning of Passover, a Montreal Jewish school was firebombed. The perpetrators left a note on the school door and contacted a local TV station, stating their attack was in response to Israel's killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin. They added: "this is just a beginning. If your crimes continue in the Middle East, our attacks will continue." Curiously, the content of these messages - which ties this heinous act to Islamic terror in Israel - was not reported in some major Canadian media outlets, such as the Toronto Star and CBC. Though local police have yet to confirm the perpetrators' message, this was certainly a central aspect of the story that required mention. Moreover, HonestReporting is disturbed by the fact that the Montreal attack received very little coverage outside of the Canadian media. This, despite the fact that this bombing was only the latest episode in a troubling surge of anti-Semitic acts in Canada: A Jewish cemetery was vandalized and a synagogue was defaced with swastikas last month in Toronto, and B'nai Brith recently reported a record 584 anti-Semitic incidents in Canada in 2003 - 27 percent more than in 2002. This omission of a global Islamic threat against Jews recalls the controversy over the recently-released EU report on European antisemitism. The EU report found a sharp rise in anti-Semitic acts over the past two years, but its authors surprised everyone when summarizing the source of most attacks, stating: "The largest group of the perpetrators of anti-Semitic activities appears to be young, disaffected white Europeans." This summary contradicts the very body of the report, which finds that most of the 193 violent attacks on synagogues, Jewish schools, kosher shops, cemeteries and rabbis in France in 2002 were actually carried out by Muslims of Northern African descent. European Jewish leaders were shocked by the EU's 'white Europeans' summary, as the UK Telegraph reported: The European Jewish Congress accused the EU watchdog of twisting data from the 15 member states to suit its own ideological bias, describing the report as a catalogue of "enormous contradictions, errors and omissions." "We cannot let it be said that the majority of anti-Semitic incidents come from young, disaffected white men. This is in complete contradiction with the facts recorded by the police," it said. The reason for this 'data twisting' is apparently the same reason for the shelving of another anti-Semitism study by this same organization four months ago - concern that Europe's large Muslim population would be 'inflamed' by its findings. Needless to say, local Muslim sensitivities should not interfere with political accountability or accurate reporting. The Montreal school bombing is the latest effort of Islamists to strike Jewish targets worldwide: from Jerusalem to Paris, Tuninia to Kenya, North America and beyond. As this highly troubling terror wave grows, HonestReporting encourages subscribers to contact your local editors, encouraging them to publicize its growth and the Islamist source of nearly all recent anti-Jewish acts worldwide. Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167 To Go To Top

HABLA ESPANOL, ISRAEL? Posted by Michael Freund, April 7, 2004.

This is an article of mine from the Jerusalem Post on the need for Israel and the US Jewish community to reach out to Hispanic-Americans, who are now the fastest-growing minority group in the United States - MF They are the fastest growing minority group in the United States, with rapidly increasing economic and political clout. With large concentrations residing in key states such as Florida, Texas and California, they have the ability to determine the outcome of presidential elections, and their voice in local and national policy issues grows stronger with each passing year. They are the Hispanic population of America, and it is time for Israel and the Jewish community to start reaching out to them and cultivating their support. According to a report released last month by the US Census Bureau, the number of Hispanic-Americans is expected to soar from about 36 million today to nearly 103 million by 2050, meaning their share of the overall US population would nearly double, from 12.6 percent today to 24.4 percent. Thanks to higher birthrates and increased immigration, this means that in practical terms Hispanic-Americans have outpaced other minority groups, such as blacks and Asians, and will overtake them numerically in the decades ahead. Politically, socially and economically, they will be a force to be reckoned with. The demographic explosion will be felt in virtually all fields of American society. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, the largest source of new workers in the American economy will be young Hispanic-Americans (Reuters, March 19). A study released by the University of Georgia in July 2002 found that the buying power of Hispanics is increasing faster nationwide than that of any other minority group in the US. In terms of spending power, Hispanics' economic clout rose from $223 billion in 1990 to $490.7 billion in 2000 to $580.5 billion in 2002. By 2007, it will approach $1 trillion. According to the author of the study, Jeff Humphreys, "the U.S. Hispanic market is already larger than the entire economies of all but eleven countries in the world, and by 2007 it may exceed the GDP of Canada, the eighth largest economy in the world." A recent Associated Press report (March 28) noted the far-reaching impact of Hispanics on the media industry. "As many American newspapers struggle to hold on to readers," the report said, "the industry's Spanish-language segment is expanding circulation and seeing competition increase." The number of Spanish-language dailies and weeklies published in the US has more than doubled, rising from 166 in 1990 to 344 in 2003, with new papers popping up everywhere from Georgia to Washington state. What all this means for Israel and the American Jewish community is that we must start to do intensive political and community outreach to Hispanic-Americans, looking for areas of common interest and concern and issues that we can work on together for the benefit of both groups. More importantly, though, greater resources and energies must be invested in garnering support among Hispanics for Israel and its cause. We must reach out to Hispanics, in Spanish, and make Israel's case to them. Thus far, this has not been done. A check of several prominent official government websites, such as those of the Israeli Embassy in Washington and the Israeli consulate in Los Angeles, reveals that there is no separate section for information on Israel in Spanish. Similarly, pro-Israel groups such as AIPAC and ZOA, which produce reams of excellent material in English, do not as of yet offer Spanish-language information on the Jewish state and its struggle for survival. There is also a dearth of books, videos and other material in Spanish on Judaism, Jewish history and Zionism, essentially meaning that many Spanish-speakers are unfamiliar with Jews and Israel. This situation can easily be rectified, if only Israel's leaders and American Jewish organizations have the foresight to do so. Trips to Israel for prominent Hispanic community leaders and politicians should be organized, Israel's embassies and consulates should start addressing Hispanic audiences and material should be translated into Spanish. Of course, it would be wrong to lump all Hispanic-Americans together and view them as a monolithic bloc. Cubans in Miami are different from Puerto Ricans in New York or Mexicans in California. But if we do not start to better understand this community and take its growing influence more seriously, Israel and American Jewry will lose out. For, as we should know by now, when a vacuum exists in the world of hasbara, it does not long remain empty. Our foes will almost certainly fill it, unless we move expeditiously to do so. And so, if the Census figures are correct, the key to ensuring ongoing and long-term US support for the Jewish state may just lie in the answer to a very simple question: Habla Espanol, Israel? For the sake of Israel's future, the answer had better be: si To Go To Top

RETREAT PUTS STATE A PHOTO OP AWAY UNDER ROADMAP? Posted by Aaron Lerner, April 7, 2004.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asserted in his Passover Eve interviews that a sovereign Palestinian state will not form in the upcoming years after Israel retreats from the Gaza Strip and the Roadmap assures Israel that this will not happen before the Palestinians destroy the terror infrastructure. A reading of the Roadmap, however, finds that a sovereign Palestinian state within the evacuated Gaza Strip may be a matter of photo opportunities away. While the Roadmap (excerpts below) does call for Palestinian security activity in both the first and second phases - with a sovereign state possible in the second phase - in truth the roadmap can be fulfilled by photo-ops since it requires that efforts "begin" and "move forward" but not that anything is actually accomplished. It is noteworthy that the Roadmap not only declines to provide for measurable standards of Palestinian security performance in either phase one or phase two, it gives the Quartet the exclusive right to determine if Palestinian activity is sufficient to warrant the formation of a sovereign state. Even if it is grossly obvious that the Palestinians have failed to perform by any standard, the Road Map allows the Quartet to give the green light to a sovereign state since the Quartet is to judge the situation "taking into account performance of both parties". Thus the Quartet can even concede that the Palestinians haven't done much but then argue that "both parties have failed equally in their performance" and thus it is possible to progress to a sovereign state. That's the Quartet - not the U.S.. The roadmap gives no special standing to the U.S. within the Quartet, so even if the U.S. is not satisfied with Palestinian performance this is no guarantee that the Road Map won't march on to a Palestinian state. In sharp contrast to "final and comprehensive permanent status agreement that ends the Israel-Palestinian conflict" that "the Parties reach" - meaning the result of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the sovereign Palestinian state formed in phase two is "through a process of Israeli-Palestinian engagement". The term "engagement" does not require negotiations. In fact, Sharon's retreat and the Palestinian take-over of control of evacuated areas could readily be construed as "a process of Israeli-Palestinian engagement." To summarize: a retreat from the Gaza Strip that relies on the terms of reference of the Road Map creates conditions that allow the Quartet to decide to sanction the formation of a sovereign Palestinian state within evacuated areas - regardless of the actual performance of the Palestinians. Once this happens the key requirement of the Israeli security establishment - control of entry and exit via land air and sea from the Gaza Strip - will be beyond Israel's reach as Israel's blockade of a sovereign Gaza is challenged by various nations. A Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+ the+Peace+Process/A+Performance-Based+Roadmap +to+a+Permanent+Two-Sta.htm The U.S. State Department April 30 released the text of the "roadmap" to a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The roadmap specifies the steps for the two parties to take to reach a settlement, and a timeline for doing so, under the auspices of the Quartet - the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and Russia. The following is the text of the roadmap: Office of the Spokesman Washington, DC April 30, 2003 Phase I: Ending Terror And Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions - Present to May 2003 Palestinians declare an unequivocal end to violence and terrorism and undertake visible efforts on the ground to arrest, disrupt, and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning violent attacks on Israelis anywhere. Rebuilt and refocused Palestinian Authority security apparatus begins sustained, targeted, and effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. This includes commencing confiscation of illegal weapons and consolidation of security authority, free of association with terror and corruption. Implementation, as previously agreed, of U.S. rebuilding, training and resumed security cooperation plan in collaboration with outside oversight board (U.S.-Egypt-Jordan). Quartet support for efforts to achieve a lasting, comprehensive cease-fire. All Palestinian security organizations are consolidated into three services reporting to an empowered Interior Minister. Restructured/retrained Palestinian security forces and IDF counterparts progressively resume security cooperation and other undertakings in implementation of the Tenet work plan, including regular senior-level meetings, with the participation of U.S. security officials. As comprehensive security performance moves forward, IDF withdraws progressively from areas occupied since September 28, 2000 and the two sides restore the status quo that existed prior to September 28, 2000. Palestinian security forces redeploy to areas vacated by IDF. Phase II: Transition - June 2003-December 2003 In the second phase, efforts are focused on the option of creating an independent Palestinian state with provisional borders and attributes of sovereignty, based on the new constitution, as a way station to a permanent status settlement. As has been noted, this goal can be achieved when the Palestinian people have a leadership acting decisively against terror, willing and able to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty. With such a leadership, reformed civil institutions and security structures, the Palestinians will have the active support of the Quartet and the broader international community in establishing an independent, viable, state. Progress into Phase II will be based upon the consensus judgment of the Quartet of whether conditions are appropriate to proceed, taking into account performance of both parties. Continued comprehensive security performance, including effective security cooperation on the bases laid out in Phase I. Creation of an independent Palestinian state with provisional borders through a process of Israeli-Palestinian engagement, launched by the international conference. As part of this process, implementation of prior agreements, to enhance maximum territorial contiguity, including further action on settlements in conjunction with establishment of a Palestinian state with provisional borders. Dr. Aaron Lerner is director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis), (Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava). IMRA's Internet address is: http://www.imra.org.il To Go To Top

PA REJECTS U.S. CAUTION AGAINST INCLUDING HAMAS IN LEADERSHIP Posted by Leo Rennert, April 7, 2004.

This was written by Arnon Regular, Haaretz Correspondent. It is archived at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/412901.htm The Palestinian Authority on Wednesday rejected a warning by the United States administration against inviting Hamas to join a unified leadership group. Palestinian cabinet minister Saeb Erekat told Israel's Itim news agency that the U.S. has no authority to intervene in internal Palestinian matters. He added that the Americans should be giving the Palestinians guarantees that if Israel does indeed withdraw from the Gaza Strip, under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan, the pullout will be part of the U.S.-backed road map. The U.S. said Tuesday it opposes any cooperation with the militant Palestinian organization. In an interview to the German magazine Focus, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat expressed support for the inclusion of the militant organization in the Palestinian leadership. Asked if he supported Hamas' integration into the PA, Arafat replied: "Yes. They [Hamas] were there from the beginning, even if they did later break away." But a State Department spokesman Tuesday voiced American opposition to such a move, calling for Hamas to be ostracized and stripped of any power and influence as an organization. Hamas said in response to Arafat's suggestion that it is ready to heed the chairman's call to join the Palestinian Authority, but will not be restricted to a symbolic role. "We do not want to become political partners by joining already-existing institutions on a quota basis but without securing any influence on the political decision-making, as is the case for several parties," Sheikh Said Siam, a senior figure within Hamas' Gaza stronghold said Tuesday. "We want a political partnership along new guidelines which take into account the weight of the various movements." The Palestinian newspaper Al Ayyam, which is close to Arafat's Fatah faction, also said that the Palestinian leader was willing to include Hamas and Islamic Jihad in a unified leadership group, though it did not specify what the group's function would be. In the past PA officials have indicated they would be willing to cooperate with Hamas if it recognized the authority's leadership. Al Ayyam quoted Fatah Central Committee member Hani al-Hassan as saying the new leadership group could easily coexist alongside the existing leadership structure. "Forming a unified Palestinian leadership does not contradict the Palestinian Authority as it is an internal Palestinian factional issue," it quoted him as saying. Arafat's critics have accused him of being an autocratic leader, unwilling to share power with his prime minister and refusing to groom a successor. Over the past several days, the Palestinian Authority has been holding meetings with Palestinian militant groups on how to run the Gaza Strip after a possible Israeli withdrawal. To Go To Top

GENERALLY SPEAKING Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, April 7, 2004.

As a general rule, generals make lousy prime ministers. Why the general public in Israel refuses to accept this axiom is worth exploring. We do adore our men in uniform, but once they remove that army-issued footwear and enter public office, the whiff of clay feet permeates the Knesset floor. Now we expect Yossi Beilin to be a calculating weasel and Shimon Peres a shrewd diplomate, but our generals are supposed to be made of honest, earthy stuff. An up-close and personal confrontation with war and death has been known to shed translucent light on a lot of life's issues. And because, purportedly, "there are no atheists in fox holes", we imagine that career officers are perhaps a bit G-d fearing in addition to being straight-forward and no-nonsense. So when our intellectually arrogant career diplomats and politicians start with the evasive doublespeak, we Israelis instinctively know that trouble is lurking around the corner and we subsequently turn to our decorated heroes for protection and leadership. Is it any wonder that when our generals-turned-politicians do an about-face on issues they once held sacred, that the public feels an immense sense of betrayal? We are all too familiar with this distressing pattern, and yet a rather pathological electorate is driven to repeat the same mistakes. Could it be because there really is no choice and we're entangled in some type of time warp? I mean when faced with the option of a Peres or Sharon, many of us would still cast our lot with the old, confused lion rather than the scheming vulture. Up until recently, Sharon's three-year record with regards to ensuring the security of the citizens of Israel had been dismal. Yet, he didn't budge on the issue of territorial compromise. Now we see an astounding about-face. Suddenly the security of Israel's citizens are a top priority, but portions of the Land of Israel are (G-d forbid) negotiable. Although Sharon is to be commended for the termination of Sheikh Yassin's reign of terror, his either/or policy with regards to the Life of Israelis and the Land of Israel spells further tragedy. There is a common mistake that all of our contemporary Jewish leaders seem to make regardless of their background or political persuasion. The integrity of the Land and the People of Israel are bound together. Neither component can be negotiated or compromised. Any attempt to separate either one of these elements results in disaster. The "land for peace" equation is simply not available as an option for the Jewish people. But it should be noted even an erudite and G-d fearing leader like Menachem Begin stumbled on this issue. In fact, he set a catastrophic precedent by both negotiating with Egypt and surrendering Sinai. Some will say that Sharon, the once brilliant soldier and strategist, has fallen out of line in order to dodge a deadly volley of corruption charges. That may be true, but I believe the overall problem runs much deeper. Could it be that military protocol and Democratic process are about as congruous as war and peace? What about the personality of a warrior when compared to that of a politician? Rabin looked like a perplexed, pathetic soul after Oslo. Observe the forlorn expression he exhibited when he shook hands with Arafat in 1993. The photo-ops at the awarding of the Nobel peace prize in December 1994 show a beaming Peres and Arafat flanking a rather dejected general. Yitzchak Rabin couldn't even hold his prize up straight (and no, I don't believe he was drunk as some say). It was the expression of capitulation. For an exercise in nausea check out the image of Ehud Barak as he and Arafat playfully nudge each other in front of a chuckling President Clinton in the doorway at Camp David in the summer of 2000. Our warrior turned buffoon. If your soul can take it, notice the rather heavy-handed hand of restraint that President Bush lays on Ariel Sharon's upper arm at the Jordanian summit in June 2003. A few weeks ago, Arutz 7 reported that back in 1970, the Lubavitcher Rebbe advised Arik Sharon not to enter politics. "My opinion is that there is no logic at all for his honor to leave and turn to other pursuits - and certainly not in the political sphere....Even a ministerial position [is not recommended], as this is not your task, and will not utilize your talents and knowledge. I have no doubt nor shadow of a doubt that your task and success are specifically in the army..." (http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=59951) There is no shame having to be a warrior. King Solomon, who enjoyed a reign of unprecedented peace knew this. "There is a time for war and a time for peace." His father, King David, longed for peace but spent his days defending his people, pursuing and being pursued by his enemies. Yet, he lay the groundwork for an era of peace. This is indicative of a classic Jewish problem. Every one of us wants the peace and order, but few of us are willing to do the dirty work (I came to that revelation while up to my neck in pre-Pesach clutter). Sharon the peacemaker isn't going to happen. He's made two dreadful mistakes. He tried to play politician and compromised the lives and safety of Israel's citizens. And by proposing a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, he has compromised the integrity of the Land of Israel He's broken an eternal covenant. His term as Prime Minister of the State of Israel appears to be coming to a close. What kind of footnote Sharon receives in history's chronicles remains to be seen. If he chooses to do the right thing by using the rest of his time in office to relentlessly pursue the enemy and protect his land and people, then history will be a bit more kind. As for the Israeli public, well we have a lot to think about. Our consistent longing for a general to keep us in line may be indicative of something profound. Perhaps as a people we are not yet mature enough to accept the responsibilities that come with freedom? Or maybe the type of free choices and liberties made available in an open Democratic society are not compatible with the true aspirations of the Jewish people? Just something to grapple with on this Festival of Freedom. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com To Go To Top

AL QAIDA PLANNING MEMO EXCERPTS - PRIORITY LIST OF HUMAN TARGETS Posted by IsrAlert, April 7, 2004.

The NBC News Investigative unit has obtained a planning memo, written by an al Qaida militant, that specifies which Americans and others to target in Iraq and worldwide. (April 02, 2004) Below are excerpts from that memo. Targets Inside Cities Targets inside the cities are considered a sort of military diplomacy. Normally, this kind of diplomacy is written with blood and decorated with body parts and the smell of guns. It carries a political meaning that relates to the nature of the faith's struggle. The intent is to send messages to different directions. Therefore, it is very important to choose accurate targets (similar to Al-Qaeda explosions). One of the good examples is what four heroic brothers did with their successful choice of target. (Khaled Al-Saeed, Riyadh Al-Hajeri, Abdul Aziz Al-Muthem, Moslih Al-Shamrani). God bless their souls. Faith Targets At the beginning of any Jihad military operation, it is not advisable to target religious places unless it is used for: Missionaries in Islamic countries, where they try to convert Moslems to Christians such as what happened in Yemen and as what is going on in Iraq as well as well as what was going on in the land of the two Holy Mosques (Saudi Arabia) where they were distributing bibles to homes. In this case hunting those people is good and we know who they are. Covert intelligence operations Any Moslem religious scholar who cooperates with the enemy. Targeting those is glorified and makes them as symbols for God's anger. Reverends, priests, rabbis and any religious personality that attack Islam or Moslems such as an American reverend that cursed the prophet, we hope to God that we will get his neck. Also as what Mr. Sayed Nosair did when he killed Rabbi Kahana who cursed the prophet. Any (Jewish or Christian) personality that provides financial, military, or moral support against Moslems as with what happened with the crusades in the past. Economic Targets The purpose of these targets is to destabilize the situation and not allow the economic recovery such as hitting oil wells and pipelines that will scare foreign companies from working there and stealing Moslem treasures. Another purpose is to have foreign investment withdrawn from local markets. Some of the benefits of those operations are the effect it has on the economic powers like the one that had happened recently in Madrid where the whole European economy was affected. Such attacks have dual economic effects on the crusaders, Jewish and renegade Islamic countries. These are practical examples: 1. Targeting of Jewish and crusader's investments in the Moslem lands. 2. Targeting international companies. 3. Targeting international economic consultants and experts. 4. Targeting investments coming from enemy countries using either military methods such as the blowing up of American restaurants (franchises) or using political means such as boycotts. 5. Targeting stolen natural resources from the Moslem lands such as the attack on the French oil tanker and Iraqi pipelines. The leadership should decide the selection of such economic targets because it can choose the right time. 6. Assassinating Jewish businessmen and teach lessons to those who cooperate with them, but after you warn them. You only assassinate those who have been proven to deal with them. Human Targets We have to target Jews and Christians. We have to let anybody that fights God, his prophet or the believers know that we will be killing them. There should be no limits and no geographical borders. Wee have to turn the land of the infidels into hell as they have done to the land of the Moslems. Therefore, all the cells all over the world should not look to geographic borders but should try to make the infidel countries theaters of operations and get them busy with that and themselves. They have made the Moslem lands, experiment fields for their weapons and inventions, we must turn their places into hell and destruction and the sons of the Islamic nation are capable of that. The primary targets should be Jews and Christians who have important status in the Islamic countries. The purpose is not to allow them to settle in the lands of the Moslems. Our advice is to start with unprotected soft targets and the individuals from countries that support the local renegades. For example, In the Holy Land (Saudi Arabia), the primary target should be Americans, then the British. In Iraq, the Americans first, in Afghanistan, the Americans first, and in Algiers, the French and in Indonesia the Australians and so on. The importance of the targets should be as follows: 1. Jews: They are at different levels. American and Israeli Jews first, the British Jews and then French Jews and so on. 2. Christians: Their importance is as follows: Americans British Spanish Australians Canadians Italians The Purpose for Human Targets To stress the struggle of the faiths. Targeting Jews and Christians is a proof that it is a religious struggle. To show who the main enemy is. To get rid of the renegades and to purify the land and to use them as examples for others. To spread fear in enemy lines. This is a requirement from God as a Holy Koran says, "Verse from the Koran". To lift the morale of the Islamic nation. To destroy the image and stature of the targeted government. America's nose was smeared in the soil after the attacks on New York and Washington. To obstruct political projects for the infidels and the renegades. Italy decided not to send soldiers to Iraq after exploding Italians in Baghdad as well as the promise made by opponents of the Spanish Prime Minister to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq because of the Madrid explosions. Punishment for killing Moslems. God says, "Punish them in the same way they punished you." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

I DENOUNCE THE FOLLOWING IN THE NAME OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE Posted by Isaac ben-Ami, April , 2004.

From Prof. Stephen Berger, Tel Aviv Medical Center Following the latest atrocity in Jerusalem, Secretary of State Powell urged the Palestinians to issue some form of denunciation. Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas complained that only the Palestinian side is ever required to denounce terror. Predictably, the Palestinian denunciation later mumbles that they "deplore the murder of civilians on both sides." Perhaps the Palestinians have a point, and so to set the record straight, I do hereby denounce the following in the name of the Jewish People: 1. All Jewish suicide bombers who have ever acted against Arabs. 2. All Arab buses blown up by Jews. 3. All Arab pizza parlors, malls, discotheques and restaurants destroyed by Jewish terrorists. 4. All airplanes hijacked by Jews since 1903. 5. All Ramadan feasts targeted by Jewish bombs. 6. All Arabs lynched in Israeli cities; all Arab Olympic athletes murdered by Jews; 7. All mosques, cemeteries and religious schools fire bombed or desecrated by Jews in North Africa, France, Belgium, Germany, England or any other country. 8. The destruction of American military, governmental and civilian institutions in Kenya, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen - along with the murder of U. S. Marines and diplomatic personnel. 9. All Jewish school books which claim that Arabs poison wells, use Christian blood to bake pita, control world finance, and murdered Jesus; or that Arab elders meet secretly to plot a world takeover. 10. And I am particularly ashamed at the way my fellow Jews attacked the World Trade Center, Pentagon and civilian aircraft on September 11th, and then danced in the streets to celebrate the act. To Go To Top

NO FAIR! A LETTER OF PROTEST TO AN AMERICAN SOLDIER FROM A FALLUJAH ACTIVIST Posted by Steven Plaut, April 7, 2004.

Hey, yank. NO FAIR! You did not behave the way you were supposed to. Sure, all we did was kill some American soldiers in cold blood and drag their bodies through the streets for people to spit on. But that is certainly not a reason for you guys to react the way you did. Well, to tell you the truth, we expected you to react like Israelis. We figured that if we kill a few of your people, your government will start whining about how there is no military solution to the problems of terror, that the problem is that the world has failed to understand the suffering of the Iraqi "Other", and that occupation is the worst crime on the planet. We expected your government to react like Shimon Peres, and to offer to arm the people who murdered the soldiers and bankroll them, to help put them in power lest the really radical terrorists take power. We were sure the yanks would invite the Shi'ite and Sunni militia chief who are killing American and Allied soldiers to set up their own state and to annex sections of Washington DC. I mean, why should not the Americans respond to our terror the same way the Israelis do? Why do they not label our killers activists and militants? Why do they not try to win us over with goodwill gestures and concessions? Why do they not offer to change the American national anthem and the flag to make us feel more accepted? Why do they not let our agents serve as Congressmen and Senators? Why do they not pay subsidies to the widows and orphans of Iraqi suicide bombers, like the Israelis do? Why doesn't the American President lecture his public about how the whole war is their own fault, that they have been insensitive and trying to rule over another people? Why doesn't the US respond to the terror by disarming unilaterally, like the Israelis do? Why don't the Americans send delegations to Geneva to sign agreements in which they capitulate to all our demands? Why don't they offer us control over the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial? Why don't they let us move to Virginia and Maryland in the thousands? Not only are you not behaving like Israelis, but you are not even behaving like Clinton. We recall how Clinton ordered the Americans to run away with their tails between their legs when the Somalis killed a few. SO how dare you! How dare you round up and mow down 130 Iraqi terrorists in just one day? How dare you respond to our Tet Offensive, our Intifada, through force of arms? How dare you respond other than with cowardice and defeatism? How dare you fight back? How dare you exhibit courage? Have you not learned anything at all from the Israelis? Don't you know there are no military ways to fight terror? 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

NETANYAHU'S POLL SHOWS SHARON WILL LOSE RETREAT VOTE Posted by Aaron Lerner, April 7, 2004.

Israel Radio political observer Channan Crystal reported this morning that Treasury Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has a poll of Likud members that, after taking into account the propensity of Likud members to actually go and vote on the retreat plan, predicts a 2:1 defeat for Sharon. Crystal noted that the poll suffers from a technical problem: it used the data base of 300,000 Likud members - that includes the 100,000 brought in by the voting contractors for the primaries who did not pay dues after the elections and thus are no longer members. Crystal says Netanyahu also knows that his support base is opposed to retreat. Crystal reported that Netanyahu reiterated to Sharon yesterday that he would only support the retreat if all three of his conditions were explicitly included in the exchange of letter between Sharon and Bush. The following are Netanyahu's three conditions as presented in his speech at the Federation of Israeli Chambers of Commerce - Tel Aviv 21 March 2004: "1. The first condition is security arrangements and freedom of security action, and foremost the retention of land, sea and air passages under absolute Israeli control. We must not permit broken borders through which terrorists from around the world will reach the Strip and turn Gaza into a terror base against Israel and the world. For these purposes Israel must be assured, on the international front, freedom of action to destroy terror. This is a condition that the American Government can, and should, agree to. 2. The second condition is the completion of the security fence in Judea and Samaria. The fence will give security to Israel. This fence should include within it the Jerusalem- Tel Aviv Road 443, the Greater Ariel Bloc, Maaleh Adumim and the Etzion Bloc - the concentrations of most of the Israelis in Judea and Samaria. These cities and communities are the very heart of Israel, and the first line of defense of Netanya and Tel Aviv, Kfar Sava and Jerusalem. There is no budget problem here. The Treasurer makes available everything that is need for the completion of the fence to the last Shekel. And before the fence is competed from the Gilboa to the slopes of the Hebron Hills with the settlement blocs within them - there should be no withdrawal and not even one centimeter in the Gaza Strip. This is a necessary condition for the daily security of the residents of Israel - a condition that the American Government, that is well aware of the dangers of terrors, can and should agree to. 3. The third condition is official and public American opposition to the right of return, that means the destruction of Israel. The erasing of the right of return from the international agenda will deny from the Palestinians any reason to dance on the roofs. When the strong power in the world stands with Israel on this matter it is a message to the Palestinians that is clear and incontrovertible: they will understand that Israel may have withdrawn from the Gaza Strip, but they will have to withdraw from their fantasy. America opposition to the right of return - is also a condition that the American Government can, and should agree to. These three basic conditions: Full Israeli control of the passages, Completion of the fence around settlement blocs before the start of any withdrawal. Official American opposition to the right of return - they are one package. It is impossible to bring only one or two and it is impossible to water down or soften only one of them. If these three conditions are not met in full - I cannot support, and not just me. Most of the public understands that we cannot "come out as patsies" from the move - to receive terror in return for withdrawal. There is no withdrawal without proper compensation." Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) (Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava). IMRA's website address is Website: http://www.imra.org.il To Go To Top

TANGLED TIES Posted by Israela Goldstein, April 7, 2004.

This was written by Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball and appeared on MSNBS Newsweek National News today. It is archived at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4687305/ April 7 - Within weeks of the September 11 terror attacks, security officers at the Fleet National Bank in Boston had identified "suspicious" wire transfers from the Saudi Embassy in Washington that eventually led to the discovery of an active Al Qaeda "sleeper cell" that may have been planning follow-up attacks inside the United States, according to documents obtained by NewsWeek. U.S. law-enforcement officials familiar with the matter say there is no evidence that officials atthe Saudi Embassy were knowingly financing Al Qaeda activity inside the country. But documents show that while trying to trace a tangled money trail beginning with the Saudi Embassy, investigators soon drew startling connections between a group of Saudi nationals receiving financial support from the embassy and a 34-year-old microbiologist and MIT graduate who officials have since concluded was a U.S. operative for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. The microbiologist, Aafia Siddiqui, a mother of three young children, has since fled the country - most likely to her native Pakistan - and is now wanted for questioning by the FBI. But "suspicious-activity reports" (SARS) filed by Fleet Bank with the U.S. Treasury Department, suggest that Siddiqui and her estranged husband, Dr. Mohammed Amjad Khan, an anesthesiologist, may have been active terror plotters inside the country until as late as the summer of 2002. The reports show that Fleet Bank investigators discovered that one account used by the Boston-area couple showed repeated debit-card purchases from stores that "specialize in high-tech military equipment and apparel," including Black Hawk Industries in Chesapeake, Va., and Brigade Quartermasters in Georgia. (Black Hawk's Web site (http://www.gunaccessories.com/) advertises grips, mounts and parts for AK-47s and other military-assault rifles as well as highly specialized combat clothing, including vests designed for bomb disposal.) Fleet accounts associated with the couple also showed "major purchases" from U.S. airlines and hotels in Pittsburgh and North Carolina as well as an $8,000 international wire transfer on Dec. 21, 2001, to Habib Bank Ltd., a big Pakistani financial institution that has long been scrutinized by U.S. intelligence officials monitoring terrorist money flows. NewsWeek first reported, in a June 23, 2003, cover story, that the FBI had identified Siddiqui and Khan as suspected Al Qaeda agents. Internal FBI documents showed that, after his capture in March 2003, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed told U.S. interrogators that Siddiqui was supposed to support "other AQ operatives as they entered the United States." Agents also found evidence that she had rented a post-office box to help another Baltimore-based Al Qaeda contact who had been assigned by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to blow up underground gasoline-storage tanks. Bureau documents also stated that Khan, Siddiqui's husband, had purchased body armor, night-vision goggles and a variety of military manuals that were supposed to be sent to Pakistan. The newly obtained SARS documents filed by Fleet shed additional light on the federal government's effort to track Siddiqui and Khan's activities - and raise questions about possible links to other Saudis in the United States. As early as October 2001, long before Khalid Shaik Mohammed's capture, FBI and Treasury Department investigators were alerted to the couple's possible terror links in a series of SARS filed by Fleet. At the time, Fleet's Financial Intelligence Unit was trying to trace $70,000 in wire transfers on the same day, July 10, 2001, to two Saudis in the United States. One, for $50,000 from the Saudi Armed Forces Account at the Riggs Bank in Washington, D.C., went to a Saudi student at Clark University in Worcester, Mass. Two others, totaling $20,000 from the same Saudi military account, went to a Saudi national named Abdullah Al Reshood in Boston. NewsWeek has been unable to locate either Saudi. But a spokesman for the Saudi Embassy in Washington said both wire transfers were consistent with the Saudi government's longstanding practice of providing educational and medical assistance to fellow countrymen living in the United States. The spokesman said the embassy has no reason to believe either Saudi has any connection to terrorist activity. But Fleet security officers were concerned about the transactions from the start. Immediately after receiving the $20,000 wire from the Saudi Embassy in Washington, Al Reshood wrote a $20,000 check to another Saudi, Hatem Al Dhahri, who five days later wired $17,193 back to an account controlled by Al Reshood at the Al Rahji Bank in Saudi Arabia. "There appears to be no commercial reason nor reasonable explanation for the series of transactions," wrote one Fleet security officer in an Oct. 24, 2001, SARS report. Both Saudis lived at the same address, a high-rise apartment building in Boston's Mission Hill neighborhood that was frequented by Arab nationals. If the purpose of the expenditures was to provide medical expenses for either Al Reshood or Al Dhahri and their families in the United States, as the Saudis claimed, the security officials wanted to know why the money was being wired back to Saudi Arabia. Al Dhahri also listed as his address the same apartment number, 2008, as another Fleet Bank customer - Aafia Siddiqui. It is still not clear what connection, if any, Al Dhahri had with Siddiqui or whether they shared the apartment at the same time. (The Fleet Bank records suggest that Al Dhahri and Siddiqui's accounts were both active and current in the fall of 2001 and do not indicate a change of address had been filed.) A Saudi Embassy spokesman said that the payments to Al Dhahri were to pay for liver treatments for one of his children in the United States. A Saudi Embassy spokesman said that Al Dhahri has been interrogated by the FBI and has denied any knowledge of the microbiologist. But the common address prompted Fleet auditors to zero in on Siddiqui, resulting in more "links" that "shocked" the security officers, according to a source familiar with the matter. In addition to the expenditures for high-tech military equipment - items that seemed unusual for a microbiologist - the security officers found that Siddiqui was making regular debit-card payments to one Islamic charity, Benevolence International, that was under active investigation by federal agents for raising funds for terrorist causes. (The charity has since been shut down and its founder jailed.) In addition, Siddiqui was found to be active with the Al-Kifah Refugee Center, another Islamic charity that was ostensibly raising funds for Bosnian orphans but which also was under scrutiny by federal investigators. A spokeswoman for Fleet, which last week was purchased by Bank of America, declined to comment on the bank's role, noting that it is a violation of federal law to even refer to the existence of a SARS. But investigators noted that Fleet Bank SARS stand in stark contrast to the lack of similar reports from Riggs Bank, where the Saudi Embassy kept its accounts and the wire transfers began. Riggs Bank's failure to alert investigators to a large number of unusual cash transactions by the Saudi Embassy and other foreign bank customers has led to a wide-ranging investigation by Treasury Department regulators that is likely to result in substantial civil fines imposed on the bank in the next few weeks, according to sources familiar with the matter. "Anytime, you have suspicious money movements, and it's not reported as needed, it hurts our overall efforts," a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said about Riggs' failure to file the SARS. Riggs recently terminated the Saudi Embassy as a client and, according to a story in today's Wall Street Journal, may be planning to drop its diplomatic business entirely.) Riggs officials say they've initiated a program to more vigorously monitor financial accounts. And the bank late last year filed more than two-dozen reports involving Saudi Embassy transactions, including large overseas wire transfers and cash deposits made by Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan; his executive assistant, Ahmed A. Kattan; his chief military aide, Gen. Abdual Rahman Al-Noah, and other embassy officials. Most of these transactions have no apparent links to terrorism and may simply reflect the Saudis? longstanding habit of mixing government and personal accounts. In one case, Kattan, who carries the rank of ambassador, deposited $6 million in embassy funds into his personal account at Riggs, wired $5.5 million to the agents of a school in Egypt and the remaining $500,000 to his own account in Saudi Arabia. Al-Noah, the military officer, made a total of $1.6 million in cash deposits - most in cash, one of them for $210,000 - and then wired the money to pay for the purchase of furniture for a new palace in Saudi Arabia. Bandar himself wired $17 million last year to his construction manager for a new palace in Saudi Arabia. Just last December, one of Bandar's personal aides deposited $3 million in international drafts, converted them to dollars, and then wired substantial sums back overseas - including about $200,000 to a luxury-car dealer in Great Britain. (A Saudi spokesman said that Bandar has substantial business interests overseas, so it is not surprising that he would conduct such transactions.) But other transactions raised eyebrows at the FBI. The Riggs accounts showed a number of checks to flight schools and flight-school students in the United States as well as 50 separate $1,000 American Express travelers checks issued by Bandar to Saudi employees between July 9, 2001 and Aug. 28, 2001 - including seven that were deposited that summer at the MGM Grand Hotel in Las Vegas. Riggs also reported $19,200 in payments from the Saudi Embassy to Gulshair al-Shukrijumah, a Florida-based imam who once served as an interpreter for the "blind Sheik" Omar Abdul Rahman, who was convicted in 1996 of a plot to blow up New York City landmarks. Gulshair al-Shukrijumah's son, Adnan al-Shukrijumah, also known as "Jaffar the Pilot," is a suspected Al Qaeda operative who is the subject of a worldwide FBI manhunt. (In response to U.S. demands to impose tighter controls, the Saudis have since terminated the payments to Gulshair al-Shukrijumah, along with a number of other clerics who were being supported by the embassy.) A Saudi Embassy spokesman stressed that the Saudis have been actively cooperating with U.S. officials on all aspects of the war on terrorism and that the embassy has recently been assured by top FBI officials that the bureau "has no concerns" about any of the embassy accounts. But senior law-enforcement officials told NewsWeek that Saudi Embassy accounts - including the wire transfers related to Siddiqui - remain under active investigation. Told that the Saudis have been assured the FBI "has no concerns," a law-enforcement official made additional checks and reported back to NewsWeek: "That is not the case." To Go To Top

"TAKE ME OUT OF MITZRAYIM" ve sufficed you for a whole week of wanderle week of wander Posted by Ken Heller, April 6, 2004.

This was written by Allan Sloan. (to the obvious tune) Take me out of Mitzrayim. Take me out through the sea. Feed me with matzah baked crisp and dry, Pile it with moror until my eyes cry. Say, it's really tough about Pharaoh, (Too bad about him and his scheme.) So it's eight Nine Ten plagues, you're out Of old Mitzrayim. To Go To Top

FRANCIS A. BOYLE, ANTI-ISRAEL, ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDIST Posted by Dafna Yee, April 6, 2004.

This is the information I sent to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). One of the most dangerous anti-Israel/anti-American propagandists in America today is Francis A. Boyle. He is an international law professor at the University of Illinois (which doesn't say much for either the American Bar Association or the University of Illinois), a former legal advisor to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East Peace Negotiations from 1991 to 1993, and formerly served on the board of directors of Amnesty International from 1988-1992 (where he was instrumental in forming their anti-Israel policy.) Yet I find absolutely nothing refuting his voluminous distortions in the JCPA archives. Just a quick Google search will give ample evidence of his hateful (and hate full) fabrications. You could check out a little article of his at Ramallah Online (www.ramallahonline.com/modules.php?name=News &file=article&sid=1604) There you will find quotes such as "For their own different reasons, both gangs also worked hand-in-hand to support Israel's genocidal Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, an internationally acknowledged war criminal." and "President Bush Jr. hired about 20 Straussians to occupy key positions in his administration, intentionally taking offices where they could push American foreign policy in favor of Israel and against its chosen enemies such as Iraq, Iran, Syria, and the Palestinians. Most of the Straussian Neo-Cons in the Bush Jr. administration and elsewhere are Israel-firsters: What is "good" for Israel is by definition "good" for the United States. Dual loyalties indeed." That is minor compared to the anti-Israel vitriol that is in his paper "A New Direction for the Palestinian People" (http://www.mediamonitors.net/francis3.html) He not only repeats and exaggerates the standard propaganda, he calls for "the de facto suspension of Israel throughout the entirety of the United Nations System, including the General Assembly and all U.N. subsidiary organs and bodies" and gives details of how to legally effect this end. He also states that he has "... great respect for Palestinian negotiators. They have done the best they can negotiating in good faith with the Israeli government that has been invariably backed up by the United States. But there has never been any good faith on the part of the Israeli government either before, during or after Oslo. Ditto for the United States." This page has links to several of his other articles that I strongly urge you to examine as well. His most recent publication, though, is why I am writing. It is called Palestine, Palestinians, and International Law (http://www.counterpunch.org/boylebiglie.html). In it he reiterates every lie that the Arabs have dreamed up in their campaign to destroy Israel and replace it with 'Palestine". I won't bother to put in quotes here; the entire article, indeed every sentence, is entirely made up of flagrant anti-Israeli and anti-American perversions of the truth! A year and a half ago, Boyle published an attack on Justus Reid Weiner. Mr. Weiner's son, Amidan, wrote a letter defending his father to Boyle. Boyle's reply is copied below: From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 6:29 PM To: 'Amidan Weiner'; Boyle, Francis The truth of the matter is, your father is a War Criminal for what he did to the Palestinians - protected persons within the meaning of the Fourth Geneva Convention - while he worked for the Israeli Ministry of Injustice. And you can tell him I said that. Francis A. Boyle Professor of International Law Board of Directors, Amnesty International USA (1988-92) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu I was so outraged that I wrote this open letter to Boyle. How did this man get to be a law professor when he cannot even read the actual words of the Fourth Geneva Convention for himself?  So that everyone else can do so, the entire text is available at: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/geneva1.html Just for the record, I find it very interesting that the full text is only offered on ISRAELI sites; everyone else "quotes" out of context (just like Mr. Boyle does)! Here are a few relevant excerpts: "Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:" [Note: The 'palestinians' are NOT a Contracting Party and the armed conflict is NOT of an 'international character' so technically, the Geneva Convention does not even apply to this situation. DY] "1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria." [Note: The Israelis have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid harming civilians even when it costs the lives of their own people.  However, the Arabs in question have made it very clear that they consider everyone to be taking an 'active part in the hostilities' (that is part of their reasoning for targeting Israeli civilians far from the actual battles.)   Israel has no choice but to classify the Arabs' urging children to do everything from throw rocks to blow themselves up as "taking an active part in the hostilities"!  I suggest that Mr. Boyle go to PMW - Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il/) and see for himself how the Arabs are conducting themselves as well as what they are actually saying. DY] "Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are." [Note: This section makes it very clear that the 'palestinians', since they are not Nationals of ANY State let alone one which has contracted with the contracted State (i.e., Israel), are NOT considered to be 'protected persons' under the terms of the Convention!  This clause definitely holds true for Nationals of the Arab countries (many of them enter Israel to kill Jews and any other 'infidels' they can) as they belong to 'co-belligerent States'! DY] But, article five is the most relevant (this is the paragraph that should be emblazoned!) "Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State." Frankly, I do not see what is so difficult to understand in Article 5; it is perfectly straightforward.  Of course, I only have degrees in history and psychology, not law.  Maybe it is the obtaining of a law degree that makes Mr. Boyle unable to comprehend the words as written.  No, that cannot be true because there are lawyers at the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org) who have shown themselves to be perfectly capable of accurate deductions and assessments of the political situation in Israel.  Therefore, the lack must be in Mr. Boyle himself.  Of course there is always the possibility that, if he is not simply professing his ignorance, then he must be demonstrating blatant bigotry and, yes, outright anti-Semitism.  There is simply no other explanation for Mr. Boyle's unsubstantiated accusations and statements.  Therefore, I would advise Amidan Weiner to look at the source of the comments about his father and dismiss them for the demonstration of ignorance that they are.  I also want to add that I decided to write this letter because of my outrage at Mr. Boyle carrying his attack to someone who is not capable of retaliating.  While Mr. Boyle's comments about Mr. Weiner, Sr. definitely show that he is biased against Israelis, his comments to the man's son, who was defending his father in the only way that he knew how, are contemptible.  Mr. Boyle's letter was nothing but taunting a defenseless boy from his ivory tower and as such it was a despicable act. It is also a fact that there has been NO independent corroboration of any acts of torture on the part of the Israelis (although the same cannot be said for the Arabs.)  I am perfectly willing to concede that some people might feel 'humiliated' at how they are treated (if you hate the governing body, you are not likely to sing its praises) but 'humiliation' is a feeling that is both ambiguous and subjective.  (I do not enjoy being frisked every time I visit my daughter's school - a policy that was instituted after the rash of school shootings - but I put up with it without making plans to bomb someone despite the 'humiliation'.  I am not even bothering to mention the inconvenience.)  Personally, I do not believe that 'humiliation' alone is grounds to call for an investigation for 'war crimes' and it is certainly not reason enough to name someone a 'War Criminal'.  The Jews were continually subjected to extreme humiliation during their long history (which includes having to listen politely to the rantings of bigots in organizations such as Amnesty International as well as much more flagrant acts) but they never used humiliation as an excuse for committing mass murders! I also want to go on record as stating that Mr. Boyle's reference to Israel's Ministry of 'Injustice' was not only bigoted, it was highly unprofessional and 'humiliating'.  Just for the record, I do not condone Amidan Weiner's use of profanity towards Mr. Boyle (even though he was obviously humiliated by Mr. Boyle's comments.) However, I think that Mr. Boyle, who defends Arabs' murder of Jewish men, women and children because of their 'humiliation', should be fair-minded enough to accept bad language as a reasonable reaction to humiliation on the part of an Israeli. I suggest that Mr. Boyle ask someone to interpret the Fourth Geneva Convention for him, as he has proven incapable of accurately reading its words for himself.  Oh, yes, he might go to the JWD website and read what is quoted there from Amnesty International (http://mish-mash.ca/jwd-a-media.html) before he applies the word 'injustice' to Israel. The glass house that he lives in is too full of cracks to stand up to any more stones. To the Jerusalem Center for Policy Affairs: Unfortunately, although I am certain of my facts, I do not have the prestige that a center like yours offers, and Boyle has ignored my letters. Please do the world a great service and expose Boyle for the dangerous liar that he is, not only to Israel but to the entire Western world. Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

THE OSLO DAYENU: A Song For This Year's Passover Seder Posted by Steven Plaut, April 6, 2004.

When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz crowd assured us that Arafat would pursue peace. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz camp assured us that Hamas would be more of a threat to the PLO than to Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz supporters assured us that Arafat would fight the Hamas and Islamic Jihad "with no Supreme Court or Betselem"* (in Rabin's words). But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz supporters assured us that terrorism would decrease. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz people assured us that hostility to Jews in the Arab and the Western media would decrease. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz cheerleaders assured us that trade between Israel and Arab countries would flourish. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz leaders, later joined by the Likud, assured us that the Palestinian Authority would be disarmed. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz supporters assured us that the PLO would cooperate strategically with the Israel Defense Forces. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that there would be an economic peace dividend. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Israeli Arabs would demonstrate increasing moderation due to the "peace process". But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the Hamas and Jihad would be persecuted and suppressed by the PLO. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that PLO arms would never again be used against Jews. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO leadership would speak in terms of peace with the Jews. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would cease its efforts to delegitimize Zionism and Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would denounce and renounce anti-Semitism. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would encourage normalization and daily peaceful commerce between Arabs and Jews. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would introduce democracy in the Palestinian zones. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would be forced to spend all its energies on resolving domestic social and economic problems. But they were ever so wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would have so many internal troubles that it would not have the time or ability to pursue confrontation with Israel. But of course they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the US would back Israel if the PLO reneged on its obligations or displayed duplicity. What a joke, they were so wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the US would cease to pressure Israel to endanger its security and fundamental interests. But they were mega-wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the Europeans would rush forward to support Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the Japanese and Saudis would pour money into regional investments, including into Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the Egyptians would end all animosity towards Israel, Zionism and Jews. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the non-Arab Moslem countries would gush friendship for Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Arab military expenditure would drop significantly. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Arab verbal threats against Israel would end. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Nazi-like propaganda in Arab countries would end. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the Israeli Left would lead the retreat from the Oslo experiment it if proved to be not working. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the PLO would never show itself as a tin cup Third-World kleptocracy if granted power. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Jews remaining in Moslem countries would see their treatment dramatically improved. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Russia would act as a stabilizing force for peace. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that liberals and leftists around the world would congratulate Israel for taking risks for peace and rush forward with goodwill and support. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that the majority of Palestinians would denounce all violence and terror. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Israel Arabs would cease to support political parties dedicated to eliminating Israel. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that Palestinian and Israeli Arab chants of "Death to the Jews" and "Massacre the Jews" would end. But they were wrong. It should have been enough. When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Labor/Meretz lemmings assured us that no longer would the Israeli Arab chant be "In blood and fire we shall redeem thee Palestine." But they were wrong. It should have been enough. * Can you remember when the Laborites assured us that Arafat would war against the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in the Palestinian version of the "Atalena", that the PLO would destroy the Islamists out of self-defense and to protect its own interests? Well, to help the Jews celebrate the prescience and depth of intelligence of Israel's political leaders, the PLO yesterday announced that Hamas and Islamic Jihad reps were now being integrated in all the institutions and organs of the Palestinian Authority, as part of the de facto merging of the PLO with those other Islamofascist organizations. It is far more than enough. 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

WHY NO CHRISTIAN SUICIDE BOMBERS? AND OTHER THOUGHTS ON ISLAMIC TERROR Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, April 6, 2004.

This article was written by Dennis Prager, one of America's most respected and popular nationally syndicated radio talk-show hosts, is the author of several books and a frequent guest on television shows such as Larry King Live, Politically Incorrect, The Late Late Show on CBS, Rivera Live, The Early Show on CBS, Fox Family Network, The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes. Golly gee, Muslim terrorists tried to attack Madrid again. How can that be? Wasn't Muslim terror in Spain supposed to end once Spain appeased the terrorists by voting in the socialists? Only those who do not understand Muslim terror could fool themselves into believing that. So, to better understand the subject, I offer three conclusions I drew about terror during my week of broadcasting from Israel last month. First, Islamic terror is caused by Muslims, not, as Islamic and leftist apologists would have it, by the non-Muslims against whom it is directed. In our morally confused world, Spain, Israel and America are blamed for having their men, women and children blown up: What did these countries do to arouse such enmity among otherwise tolerant Arabs and Muslims? Palestinian terror provides the answer. About 25 percent of Palestinians are Christian, yet if there are any Palestinian Christian suicide bombers, I am unaware of them. Now why is that? Don't Muslim and leftist apologists incessantly tell us that the reason for Palestinian terror is "Israeli occupation and oppression"? Why, then, are there no Palestinian Christian terrorists? Are Christian Palestinians less occupied? The answer is obvious. There is Palestinian terror for the same reasons there is Muslim terror elsewhere. A significant part of the Muslim world wishes to destroy those non-Muslims - Americans, Israelis, Filipinos, Nigerians, Sudanese blacks - who prevent Islam from violently attaining power. Palestinian Muslim terror emanates from a desire to destroy Israel, not to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank. Other Muslim terror is aimed at weakening the West, America in particular, so that militant theocratic Islam can dominate Muslim-majority societies and then take over other societies, as it is slowly doing in Western Europe. Second, despite the Spanish cave-in to terror, in the long run, terror doesn't work. By any rational calculation, to take the Palestinian example, it has become the most self-destructive policy Palestinians could pursue. Palestinian terror has convinced almost all Israelis outside of academia that the moral gulf between them and the Palestinians is so wide that there is presently no hope for peace. Nor has Palestinian terror terrorized Israelis. In what will surely be recorded as among the most impressive behaviors of a national group, Israelis have decided to live as normally as possible among people who aim to murder and maim as many of them as possible. In fact, I learned, many Israelis are now concerned that they have done this too well, that there is not enough mourning and rage after each atrocity. Palestinian terror is self-destructive because it has morally, economically, religiously and politically destroyed Palestinian society and led to its present state of chaos. The mayor of Nablus resigned two months ago, declaring that gangs of thugs now govern Palestinian society. Any society that encourages terror ends up consumed by it. Ask the Saudis. Third, there is a terrible long-term price that Muslims - Arabs and Palestinians in particular - are paying for the minority that engages in terror and for the majority that says nothing about it or supports it. They may wish to reflect on the fact that with every act of terror they engage in, their people and religion are increasingly identified with cruelty. Can anyone anywhere name any Palestinian contribution to humanity other than innovative forms of terror and cruelty? On my radio show, the spokesman of Zaka, the Israeli rescue squad that attends to terror victims, told me that at various times Palestinian terrorists have laced the screws attached to their bombs with rat poison, and that at least one of the Palestinian terrorists was injected with the AIDS virus in the hope that his blood would transmit AIDS to wounded Israelis. Just as the German nation, fairly or not, has had to grapple with the moral legacy of Nazism, and the name of Christianity still suffers (unfairly) because of medieval persecutions of non-Christians, so, too, Islam, Arabs and Palestinians will have to struggle for generations to shed their identification with murdering innocents. While it is Americans, Israelis and other targets of terror who most suffer individually from Palestinian and other Muslim terror, those with the most to lose are Palestinians, Arabs and Islam. To Go To Top

JEWISH TELEGRAPH AGENCY MALIGNS ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE Posted by Rennert, Leo, April 6, 2004.

To the Editor of the Jewish Telegraph Agency: Reading your "news" article about the upcoming meeting of American Jewish leaders with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak made me wonder whether it was coauthored by the Egyptian Embassy. I'm referring specifically to your mention of the Anti-Defamation League's decision to boycott the meeting, which you round out with a gratuitous slap at the ADL, accusing it of timing its reports on anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic pronouncements in the Egyptian media with Mubarak visits to the United States. Vicious anti-Semitic diatribes in state-controlled Egyptian media are so extensive and pop up with almost daily regularity that the ADL doesn't have to select a few examples to challenge Mubarak with when he's on U.S. soil. Instead of questioning the motives of Abraham Foxman's decision to skip the upcoming meeting with Mubarak and impugning an ulterior motive to the ADL's decision, it would have been more helpful if you had cited a few excerpts from Egyptian newspapers and magazines that are as abhorrent as the worst of the Nazi propaganda machine in the 1930s. Providing such illustration also would have been more journalistically pertinent, since it would have given your readers a better and fairer insight into the ADL's mindset about Mubarak's visit. Personally, I wish Foxman had decided to travel to Houston to confront Mubarak directly. But this was Foxman's call and he should not have been treated worse than Mubarak in your article. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you still supposed to be the JEWISH telegraph agency? To Go To Top

THROWING ISRAEL TO THE WOLVES Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 6, 2004.

Why does the West seek to appease the Arabs at Israel's expense? One reason is to sacrifice Israel in the hope of sparing oneself. Can this stratagem work? No. Why not? Feeding is temporary; hunger recurs. The radical Muslims are in jihad against the whole world. They would digest the scapegoat, Israel, quickly. Soon their hunger for conquest would motivate new attacks on the rest of the world, spurred on by the conquest of Israel and the world's weakness in not defending Israel. About unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, the US probably will issue vague commitments to Israel about refugee repatriation and Israeli control of settlement blocs in Judea-Samaria. PM Sharon would then present the non-committal commitment to the Likud plebiscite as a US commitment to what they want to hear, that Israel would be able to retain those blocs. After the Gaza withdrawal, the US would deny that it actually agreed that Israel may annex those blocs; it is up to negotiations (NY Sun, 4/2, p.7). It is both a pity and a shame that the US dictates to Israel and that Israel lets it. Israel has failed to explain its moral and legal rights properly, as well as failed to exercise them fully. If the world were as intelligent as it is cynical, it would preserve Israel as the breakwater that protects it from the wave of Islamism. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

DAYENU, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED Posted by IsrAlert, April 5, 2004.

This was written by contributing subscriber/commentator Yoram 'Tex' Ettinger in Israel One of Passover's longest hymns is: "How many good qualities has God bestowed upon us? If God had only delivered us from Egypt, and had not plagued the Egyptians, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED..."). Paraphrasing the Passover hymn, I'd like to share with you the following version: How many afflictions has the Oslo/Wye/RoadMap Process (represented by the PA) piled upon us? If Israel would've only snatched PLO terrorists from the jaws of oblivion in terror camps in Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon and Tunisia, and had not imported them to the cradle of Jewish history, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've imported PLO terrorists to the cradle of Jewish history, and had not equipped them with weaponry, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've provided PLO/PA terrorists with weaponry, but had not tolerated the manufacturing and smuggling of missiles, mortars and explosives, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've tolerated the manufacturing and smuggling of missiles, mortars and explosives, and had not tolerated the Hate-Education in PA schools, mosques and media, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've tolerated the PA-controlled Hate-Education, and had not tolerated the weekly incitement - by PA clergies - at the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've tolerated the weekly incitement - by PA clergies - at the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount, and had not tolerated the resulting terrorism in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've ignored Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, and had not tolerated Palestinian terrorism in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Hadera, Afula and throughout the Green Line, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED' If Israel would've tolerated Palestinian terrorism within the Green Line, and would have treated differently Palestinian terrorism in Jerusalem, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've tolerated terrorism in Jerusalem, and had not tolerated the systematic and violent abrogation of all PA/PLO commitments, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've tolerated the systematic and murderous violation of all commitments by the PLO/PA, and had not withdrawn militarily from ANY area until compliance with commitments would had been established, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've only withdrawn militarily from Gaza (which it did already in 1993!) and from 40% of Judea&Samaria (1993-1999), and had been spared of the 1,400 persons murdered since then (70,000 in American terms = 23 Twin Towers), IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've suffered the loss of the equivalent of 70,000 Americans, murdered by PA-harbored/inspired Palestinian terrorists, but would have then declared a total war on PA/PLO/Hamas terrorism - with the stated goal of destroying its political, financial and ideological infrastructure - IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel would've suffered the consequences of the lethal Oslo/Wye/RoadMap fantasy, but would have then learnt from its errors, IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICED; If Israel were to retreat - AGAIN - in face of Palestinian terrorism ("unilateral withdrawal"), it would thus transform the delusion of Land-For-Peace to Land-For-Nothing, and probably to Land-For-Worse Terrorism, AND THAT'S TOO MUCH! However, to be realistic - with much faith and determination - no one has the moral right to be pessimistic. How can we be but optimist, when comparing the current resources at the disposal of the Jewish State (almost 6MN Jews, one of the world's finest military and technological powers, a $100BN economy, the friendliest ever US public and Congress) to the resources available to Theodore Herzel and to David Ben Gurion, when they conceived (1900) and established (1948) the Jewish State?! IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

WHY IS THIS PESACH DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER PESACH? Posted by Beth Goodtree, April 5, 2004.

When the ancient Romans were crucifying the Jews, our people had already observed several millennia's worth of Passovers. And we asked the same question, year in and year out for these thousands of years: "Why is this night different than any other night?" But this year we should be asking ourselves another question. "Why is this Passover different than any other Passover?" The answer is because the Jewish people as well as the world, is on a precipice. The chasm we are staring into is one of annihilation. And that may be the better alternative. There are several outcroppings on the way down this chasm. Their names are tyranny, repression, forced conversion, murder, mutilation, and torture. If we fall into this chasm and are unluckier still, we will land on one of these outcroppings. In the past, Jews in specific areas were targeted for extermination. In Roman times, it was the Jews living in their aboriginal homeland of Palestine. In Spain and a few other Catholic European countries it was during the Inquisition, later it was the Jews of Russia, and later still, the Jews of Germany, Austria, Poland, and Czechoslovakia were targets of the Holocaust. Shortly afterwards, the Arab world decided to commit genocide on the Jews living in their newly restored aboriginal homeland of Palestine (newly renamed Israel). But now we are facing a threat to our very existence like never before. And this time we have company. During the past week, radical Islamists have issued edicts calling for the extermination of all Jews the world over, as well as advocating the murder of Christians. Nor is this the worst of it. Some of Israel's putative friends are actively working to ensure her destruction. Egypt, with whom Israel supposedly has a peace treaty, continues to foment lies and anti-Semitism with such state-sponsored filth as "The Four Horsemen," a television series based upon "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." Egypt also does nothing to destroy the weapons tunnels and stop the terrorists emanating from her country. And even more outrageous, the editors of the Egyptian government daily Al-Masaa in a late January 2004 edition advocated the murder of Jewish children (a clear call for genocide) in one of their articles: "Ultimately, we should bless every Palestinian man or woman who goes calmly to carry out a martyrdom operation, in order to receive a reward in the Hereafter, sacrificing her life for her religion and her homeland and knowing that she will never return from this operation...We have no argument regarding the question of the legitimacy of these operations because they are considered a powerful weapon used by the Palestinians against an enemy with no morality or religion.... [e]ven if during [a martyrdom operation] civilians or children are killed..." * Meanwhile America, ostensibly Israel's best friend, is pushing a 'Roadmap' that would leave Israel with indefensible borders while at the same time rewarding terrorism. America also funds Egypt**, one of the cradles of anti-Semitism, to the tune of $1.3 billion annually (my tax dollars at work here...). Meanwhile, the EU, who at least professes no hostilities towards Jews and Israel, covered up an alarming increase in anti-Semitic acts and continues to fund Palestinian terror while denying the fact that their money is being used to commit genocide. Okay, things are bad, but this is not news if one is a Jew. What has put us on the edge of global catastrophe are recent events that seem to be a harbinger of things to come. Spain just capitulated to terror in their recent elections. Because of a horrific bombing, the Spaniards ousted their political frontrunner in recent elections. The man they ousted was a staunch supporter of the war on terror. Instead, they capitulated to blackmail and put in a man who seeks to assuage terror with concessions, in the futile hope that the Islamic terrorists would leave them alone. Instead, within days, these same Islamic terrorists attempted to blow up another rail line. So much for the strategies of retreat and cowardice. But what is even worse is the message the people of Spain sent when they elected a weakling. They told the terrorists that terrorism works and can be used to alter elections. In effect, the Spaniards have painted a bull's eye on the rest of the civilized world. In November, the United States is having presidential elections. The Islamic world (and terrorism these days is done almost entirely by Muslims) views America as 'the big Satan' and Israel as 'the little Satan.' It is probable that some Islamic group or groups will try to influence US elections through more mega-terror attacks. And to these Muslims, attacking Israel as a secondary target is almost as good as attacking the US. The Muslim terrorists hate President Bush. He has gone on the offensive against them. On the other hand, Islamists, their supporters and apologists seem to like Kerry very much. For example, one of the supposed best and brightest stars of the Islamic world, Dr. Mahathir, former head of the Organization of Islamic States supports Kerry.*** This is the man who said "Jews rule the world by proxy," and "We need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships..."**** At the same time, Kerry's wife, Theresa Heinz (of Heinz food fortune) has actively supported Islamic terrorism to the tune of many millions of dollars.***** Kerry is the ideal choice for a Muslim terrorist. And while Kerry seemed to have a good shot at winning, that has been spoiled by the entry of Ralph Nader into the elections. Based upon their success at overturning the Spanish elections as well as their lack of understanding of the American psyche, it is highly likely that the Muslim terrorists will try to affect the American elections in a mega-terror attack. It is also likely that they will attack Israel at the same time as a form of coup de grace. And I predict, based upon new stories over the past year, that this time they will use WMDs. Nor do they care if they, their compatriots, or their fellow Muslims die. This is an evil unlike the world has ever seen. They aspire to die. And therefore we are on the precipice of total annihilation. Will total annihilation happen? I doubt it. As a Jew, I know that G-d will not let it happen. But I do know this. Come next Passover, it will be a very different world. *http://israelnn.com/news.php3?id=57548 **http://cfrterrorism.org/coalition/egypt.html ***http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAVRL33ZRD.html ****http://thestar.com.my/oic/story.asp?file=/2003/10/16/oic/20031016123438 *****http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37244 Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer, with a background in advertising. She writes political commentary and the occasional humor and science articles. To Go To Top

OPPOSITION MOUNTS AGAINST SHARON'S DISENGAGEMENT PLAN Posted by National Unity Coalition, April 5, 2004.

With Prime Minister Sharon's visit planned for next week, April 14th he will meet with President Bush to sell his disengagement plan. Time is very short for us to tell President Bush and his cabinet that we oppose unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, Judea and Sumaria. Prime Minister Sharon feels that if he can convince the Americans, then he can win over the Israelis. In Israel, as people learn more about "the plan", they are becoming increasingly skeptical about what it will achieve, by demanding nothing of the Palestinians and their multiple terrorist organizations. What follows is one influential group in Israel, Professors for a Strong Israel, expressing their 100% opposition. Also, we ask that you sign the Coalition Position Paper, if you have not already done so. Professors for a Strong Israel rejects absolutely Prime Minister Sharon's disengagement plan and the referendum that is meant to overcome opposition to it. We hold that: *  The ethnic cleansing of Jews from their homes in their homeland is both unethical and unfeasible. *  The disengagement plan encourages terror when terror should be fought, and thus increases the peril of Jews everywhere. *  The referendum is nothing but a maneuver designed to bypass the government, the Knesset, the Likud delegation in the Knesset, and the Likud Central Committee - the very bodies and institutions that are empowered to take decisions such as this. This is an attempt to impose a policy that the Prime Minister is unable to explain and to gain approval that is unavailable through ordinary democratic means. Professors for a Strong Israel will enlist its members in a publicity campaign against the Prime Minister's anti-Zionist plan, a plan that raises the black flag of illegality alongside the white flag of surrender. Dr. Ron Breiman, Chairman of PSI eran_ron@netvision.net.il Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top

A WORLD OBSESSED WITH ARAB ANGER Posted by IsrAlert, April 5, 2004.

This article was written by Craig Weiss and is archived at http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0404weiss0404.html Craig Weiss is an American-Israeli who lives in Scottsdale during the year and spends the summers in Jerusalem. He is a U.S. registered patent attorney and the co-author of "I Am My Brother's Keeper: American Volunteers in Israel's War for Independence." Israel landed a devastating blow at Palestinian terror by assassinating Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas, two weeks ago. Yassin was responsible for directing terror attacks that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israelis and tens of Americans. In a too-familiar scene, the United Nations Security Council swiftly voted to condemn Israel's focused response to Palestinian terror. Although the United States vetoed this preposterous resolution, the Bush administration admonished Israel for escalating tensions in the region. The purported justification for these criticisms is that Israel's action threatens to increase Palestinian rage, and thus to promote further acts of terror. Both the Security Council vote and the U.S. criticism reveal a dangerous mind-set that threatens American and Israeli lives. The accepted worldview is that when fighting terror, one must avoid actions that are liable to enrage the Arab world, however effective and justified those actions might otherwise be. Under this principle, however, Muslim extremists have veto power over any effective counterterrorism policy. After every successful Israeli strike against a Palestinian terrorist, we are accustomed to seeing television images of angry Palestinians firing AK-47s in the air and chanting "Death to Israel" and "Death to America." Hamas' new leader recently labeled George W. Bush an "enemy of God." The United States was not deterred by the threat of Arab rage after 9/11. The result was the dismantling of two despotic regimes. Far from increasing Arab rage, America's victories have inspired fear among those who wish to cause us harm. Lybia, which once sent terrorists to bomb Pan Am Flight 103, is now voluntarily dismantling its nuclear arms program. Similarly, a serious look at the numbers shows that Israel's policy of targeted assassinations has had the effect of decreasing, not increasing, terrorism. Israel began a serious campaign of targeting terrorist leaders in early 2003, resulting in a 50 percent decrease in the number of Israeli victims of terror as compared with the previous year. Israel's policy has also saved Palestinian lives, as the number of Palestinian dead decreased by 30 percent over the same period. Without terrorist ringleaders around to send unwitting Palestinian children and adolescents to murder Israeli civilians, the region will continue to become less tense and more peaceful. Yet, the world maintains its obsession with Arab anger. The most common tactic used by those who wish to legitimize Arab rage is to stress the need to explore the "root causes" of terrorism. According to this view, terrorists who murder children have some reason for doing so, which, after investigation, will lead the rest of us to better understand them. Of course, no perceived or actual wrong can justify the targeted, mass slaughter of innocent civilians. In the case of Israel, the accepted view is that Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are the root cause of Palestinian terrorism. This position not only legitimizes terrorism, but it condones racism and genocide. We should not respect or cater to the emotions of people who are moved to kill because they do not like the religious persuasion of their neighbors. Tellingly, while world leaders are preoccupied over rage in the Arab world, there seems to be no concern whatsoever about the emotional stability of Westerners. Is anyone worried that if there is one more suicide bombing in Israel, Jews will start blowing themselves up in Palestinian pizza parlors? Was the world concerned that after 9/11, enraged Americans would fly planes into Saudi Arabian buildings? A more sensible evaluation of Arab anger should consider those things that do not rile Arab emotions. We should ask why Palestinians do not seem to mind that while their economic situation is desperate, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat has embezzled more than a billion dollars. (Just last month, French authorities discovered that Arafat had wired $10 million to his wife so she could rent an entire hotel floor for herself at $16,000 a night). We must ask why Palestinians are angry enough to blow up Israeli children, yet unperturbed that local terror leaders seduce their young sons into committing murder with the absurd promise that such acts will grant them 72 virgins. The lack of Palestinian anger over self-inflicted crimes highlights the dysfunction of Palestinian anger directed at Israel's efforts to defend itself. By catering to the murderous rage of Arab terrorists, we only promote more rage. Arab anger is an internal Arab problem that we cannot tame, and that only they can solve. They must free themselves from a murderous fury that, in the case of the Palestinians, prevents them from building positive communities based on laudable values. We cannot do this for them. If the West is going to win the war on terror, we need to stop becoming distracted with what may or may not enrage Arab radicals, and start focusing on the most effective way to defeat Arab terrorists. Israel's targeted killings of terrorist masterminds is a good start. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

BE CAREFUL OF YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS IN YOUR EMAILS AND SPEECHES Posted by Dafna Yee, April 5, 2004.

I am a long-time supporter of Women in Green as well as an activist against our common enemies. Many of your posts help me to keep my courage up when it seems like our enemies - Israeli promoters of "peace" who declare that "negotiation"/"goodwill gestures" are even allowed, let alone preferred as well as "Palestinians" who claim to be "moderates" while they plan the mass murders of Israelis - are getting the upper hand. Therefore, I am extremely concerned about your use of certain terms which have undesired meanings attached to them. Your most recent e-mail, "The Likud Poll Will Determine Nothing", is an excellent example of what I mean. You continually talk about "settlements" and "outposts". Every time you do so, you hurt these neighborhoods and the Israelis who make their homes there because you are giving validity to the Arab propaganda that they are indeed "settlements" and therefore expendable! This use of their terminology also implies that these communities are not already on Israel's land - which they are - but rather on some "disputed territory". Use of these terms is especially dangerous in the present political situation because it acknowledges a differentiation between newer communities - "outposts" - and older ones - "settlements" - which leaves the newer ones even more vulnerable to attacks from both Sharon's minions and "Palestinian" terrorists. This differentiation also enables Sharon to pick and choose which "settlements" to "evacuate" now and which ones he can hold off on until later. Of course you know that there will be a "later", if not from Sharon then from someone who follows in Sharon's footsteps and finds it's politically expedient to play "peace" games with Israelis' homes and lives (or G-d forbid from the "Palestinians" themselves)! Playing semantics with these words has also allowed Sharon to "negotiate" his intentions - originally state that he will "evacuate" eight "settlements" but then reassure Israelis that he would ONLY clear out four! (Asking for more than you expect to get and then "compromising" is a classic bargaining ploy, as I'm sure you know.) The Israeli citizens who face "evacuation" (which is merely a euphemism for the very ethnic cleansing that the Arabs and Europeans are always accusing Israel of doing) from their homes often live in the suburbs of larger and older communities, but they do not live in "outposts" - legal or otherwise. They live in the land of Israel and within its borders - it doesn't matter if Israel's enemies don't recognize those borders. Your use of the word "legal", as in "legal outposts", is also very troubling. Israelis have the legal right to live anywhere in Israel just like Americans have the legal right to live anywhere in the US, not only because Israel was promised to them by G-d (which I don't question) but because they built their country with their sweat and paid for their Homeland with their blood. Questions about legality, especially when it has to do with Israel, are usually arbitrary and politically inspired anyway - look at the decisions handed down by the United Nations and the International Court of Justice, for perfect examples of that. What you are unwittingly doing is casting doubts on the rights of Israelis to live in parts of Israel just because the "Palestinians" claim this land and the world governments put political expediency - and oil - above moral decisions. The "Palestinians" are the ones who may have "legal" rights to Israel's land (because misguided politicians stupidly granted it to them) but they have no historical rights to it at all. Use of their terminology is giving validity to the claims of the "Palestinians" whether you intend it to or not. Are you aware that their terminology was deliberately created by professionals for the express purpose of furthering the "Palestinian" goal? Take a look for yourself at the description for the word "settlement" in their lexicon: http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/media/lexicon.html#settlements (If you browse through this lexicon, you will find that many "peace" groups are the sources for their definitions, such as B'tselem for "Rubber-Coated Steel Bullets", and Gush Shalom for "Occupied Territories"!) Use of terminology is why the "Palestinians" are so successful in fighting the media war; most Israelis don't realize the power of words to achieve political aims. They hope that by being factual and politically correct, they can convince people that they are right while not offending anyone but it doesn't work that way. If just giving people facts convinced them of anything, then billions of dollars a year wouldn't be spent to advertise people's products in the US alone. Please don't continue to give validity to the terminology of Israel's enemies. Along with a group of historians, writers and business people, I am presently working on a pro-Israel lexicon. We would be pleased to send you a copy of our work-in-progress and I'm certain that your feedback would be very appreciated. May you and your families have a joyous Pesach. Dafna Yee id director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). JWD's internet address is http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

AN EVENING OF UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FOR THE JEWS OF GAZA Posted by Helen Freedman, April 5, 2004.

It was a cold, rainy, March 31 pre-Passover evening when over 200 ardent supporters of Israel gathered at the Westside Institutional Synagogue in Manhattan to hear an extraordinary roster of speakers express their opposition to Prime Minister Sharon's Gaza evacuation plan. As organizers of the evening, Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI had decided to call it a HATIKVAH Emergency Meeting, taking the words from Israel's national anthem as our beacon of hope: "L'hiyot am chofshee b'artzeinu, b'eretz Zion, Yerushalayim - To be a free nation in our own land, the land of Zion and Jerusalem." As the beautiful voice of AFSI member Shereen Levine led us in the singing of the Star Spangled Banner and Hatikvah, I was struck by how similar were the words of the two anthems. The American anthem also sings of the "land of the free and the home of the brave." Today we see America embarked on a brave path to eradicate the evil and terrorism that is threatening the entire world. America threatens fierce retaliation for the bestiality against its citizens in Iraq. But inexplicably, Israel, in its battle against the terrorist enemies of Yasser Arafat and his line-up of cohorts, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Aqsa Brigade, Fatah, etc. - is asked to exercise "restraint." Israel's attack on arch terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin is labeled, "unacceptable," "unjustifiable," and "troubling." Amazingly, America supports the European Union and the United Nations in their craven and evil effort to create another Arab terrorist state - calling it "Palestine," within the holy land of Israel, promised by G-d in his Covenant to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And with a logic that defies understanding, Prime Minister Sharon is facilitating the creation of this terrorist entity with his plan to evacuate the 8,000 Jews of Gaza/Gush Katif, and then to go on to the expulsion of Jews from Judea and Samaria. Our distinguished speakers had assembled to address these issues. Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of AFSI, was the first speaker, and began with a bit of history. He referred to a visit by Jabotinsky to Hadera in 1918, where he noticed some boarded up cabins. A long-time resident explained that this was due to an epidemic of yellow fever that swept through Hadera in 1890 causing the deaths of many, including two of his own children. He recalled how he had turned to his wife, asking her whether or not they should run or stay. She insisted that they stay, despite the hardships. Zweibon asserted that this was the pioneer spirit that drove Israel to its miraculous success as an independent state. Zweibon compared this spirit to that of the Jews living in Gaza/Gush Katif today. He called on those in the audience to be active in trying to persuade President Bush and our representatives in Washington not to support Sharon's Expulsion Declaration. (AFSI distributed contact names of leaders in Washington and Israel, along with suggested sample letters, in order to express our objections to any plan that would expel Jews from their lands.) Zweibon concluded by saying that today Sharon makes Israel look like an emasculated giant. Morton Klein, National President of the Zionist Organization of America/ZOA spoke forcefully about the importance of Jews showing open and conspicuous support of the threatened Jews of Gaza who are living on ancient Jewish land. He decried the activities of leaders of major Jewish organizations and AIPAC, whose members are actively lobbying FOR the expulsion of the Gaza Jews. Klein quoted Minister of Foreign Affairs Silvan Shalom who is opposed to the withdrawal personally, but tried to explain PM Sharon's logic in "punishing" the Arab terrorists who have proven that they cannot be "partners for peace" by giving them "land for nothing". Sharon plans to transfer Jews, while everyone cringes from thoughts of transferring Arabs. Klein cited Ehud Olmert who is for total expulsion of Jews, even though he admits this will not end the terror. Klein continued to give example after example of the absurdities of the unilateral surrender to terror withdrawal plans. He joined the call for action on the part of Americans to contact their representatives and Pres. Bush, demanding that Israel be given a free hand to defend itself and to fight terror without restraint. At this point, with the technological help of Oren and Gil Margolis, we were successful in making a telephone call to Rachel Saperstein, resident of Neve Dekalim in Gush Katif, Israel. Although it was 3:30 in the morning in Israel, Rachel had agreed to speak to us on behalf of all Israelis. She stressed that "as Gush Katif goes, so goes Yehuda and Shomron and Hevron and Tel Aviv and Yerushalayim." Rachel described the constant rain of mortars, over 4,000, that have landed on Gush Katif during the past three and one half years, but the people have been strong and brave, treasuring their homes and businesses, and refusing to be frightened into running away. She worries that if the PM of Israel can expel Jews, other governments will also consider expelling Jews. Rachel asked that Americans join with them in the fight by writing to Pres. Bush and our representatives that there must be NO EXPULSION OF JEWS! NO VICTORY FOR TERROR! Rabbi Allen Schwartz, Rabbi of Ohab Zedek Synagogue, was our next speaker. He began by telling us that Abraham was willing to give up land to the Jebusites, land that is today's Judea and Samaria, and Gaza's land to the Philistines, who were in Gaza. G-d then punished Abraham for his readiness to give up the land, and demanded the sacrifice of his son, Isaac, comparing the willingness to give up land to giving up one's son. Rabbi Schwartz quoted Rashi in asserting that the nations of the world will always consider the Jews robbers and those who have stolen the land. The nations will continue to say this, especially if the Jews participate in the chorus of accusers. He concluded with a concrete suggestion that communities in America should "twin" with communities in Gush Katif/Gaza. Shmuel Sackett, International Director of Manhigut Yehudit, called for the Jews of Gaza not only to stay on their lands, but to expand on them. He believes in the transfer of Arabs, and the killing of Yasser Arafat. He maintained that Ariel Sharon, Bibi Netanyahu, Limor Livnat, Ehud Olmert and Silvan Shalom, the leaders of the Likud party, are the real problem in Israel today. In identifying what Israel is fighting for, he asserted that this is a religious war and not a war over land. "We are fighting for Jewish identify, for the Bet HaMikdash and the restoration of the Davidic dynasty." Sackett explained that now that PM Sharon has announced that the fate of the 8,000 Jews of Gaza will be voted upon by the Likud members in a referendum, it turns Likud into the boxing ring where the battle will be fought. He believes that Moshe Feiglin, leader of Manhigut Yehudit, represents authentic Jewish leadership, the alternative to Netanyahu and his ilk. Sackett asserted that the 11,000 Likud members signed up by Manhigut Yehudit will be the leaders in the fight to win over the 200,000 members who will be casting the determining vote. They will need our help. An Evangelical Christian Minister, Miriam Hellman, had traveled from Washington, DC, to talk to our gathering about "truth". She declared that there is a war of good versus evil. Mrs. Hellman described a vision she had of Israel as a great giant on life support, with Ariel Sharon in a position to unplug it. She described the Arab vision for world conquest, formulated in 1900. Mrs. Hellman decried the fact that Israel lacks a vision that will sustain it in holding onto all the land of Israel. She believes that Israel is weary because they do not believe - first in themselves and then their right to self-defense and dignity. Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis, founder of Hineni, spoke then about the rise of anti-Semitism throughout Europe. As a Holocaust survivor of Bergen Belsen, the Rebbetzin described her recent reluctance to visit Berlin. She was invited to speak there, and did go, insisting that it was sufficient for her to say, "Hineni. Here I am." She traced the rise and fall of civilizations throughout history, with the Jews surviving. The Rebbetzin concluded with the certainty that the return to our land after 2,000 years is an affirmation of the Covenant that the Jewish people and the Land of Israel will last to eternity. Quoting from the words of the Passover seder, she affirmed Israel's strength to overcome all its enemies. The curtain came down on this extraordinary evening with a presentation by the world renowned Cantor Joseph Malovany, Cantor of the Fifth Avenue Synagogue in NYC. He spoke movingly of his support for Jews to live in all the land of Israel without fear of expulsion, and then sang for us the beautiful prayer for Israel. It was the perfect conclusion to a profound evening of "achdut" - togetherness - for Gush Katif/Gaza, and for all of Israel. Inspired by the clear need that had been articulated by the speakers, many of the attendees handed AFSI representatives their tax-deductible contributions to FRIENDS OF GUSH KATIF. Readers are encouraged to continue sending contributions for FRIENDS OF GUSH KATIF to Americans for a Safe Israel, 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128. In addition, those wishing audio tapes of the event may contact AFSI, and be sent a tape for a minimum contribution of $18 to FRIENDS OF GUSH KATIF. Finally, the assemblage was reminded that another important way to show support for Israel was to join AFSI in its Chizuk (Strength) Mission, May 16-24, which includes two days in Gaza/Gush Katif as well as visits to the embattled communities in Hebron, Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem. Call AFSI at 212-828-2424 or email: afsi@rcn.com, or write to the above address for information. Helen Freedman is Executive Director of Americans For A Safe Israel/AFSI; Afsi may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org; April 5, 2004 To Go To Top

THE SAUDI FIFTH COLUMN ON OUR NATION'S CAMPUSES Posted by Lee Kaplan, April 5, 2004.

From Riyadh to Ramallah to the Ivy League, the Saudi Wahhabi lobby and money machine is funding the goals of radical Islam and undermining America's efforts to prosecute the War On Terror. The press recently reported new closures by the Department of Justice of Saudi "charitable" fronts like the Muslim World League, the Al-Haramain Foundation, the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), and others which raised money for Al Qaeda, Hamas and Islamic Jihad.[1] But the government has so far ignored an even larger network of Saudi front groups working toward parallel ends. This network is embedded deep within our system of higher education, including many of our most prestigious universities. The Saudis have steadily infiltrated American educational institutions, using vast infusions of money to turn the American educational system against US support for Israel and in favor of the Saudi vision of a global Muslim state in which not only Jews but Christians and all infidels will have subordinate status to the followers of the "true faith." At the same time they look to affect American policy in the Middle East and public opinion in the US in a way to aid their Wahhabist goals.[3] Saudi Wahhabism fuels a particular hatred for the West and its liberalism regarding religious tolerance and human rights. It views attempts by the West to promote democratic reforms in the medieval Arab monarchy of the Saudi royal family as an affront to Islam. In other words, it shares the religious and political views of its wayward-but not forgotten- son, Osama Bin Laden. Accordingly, the Saudi royal family has been waging its own quiet jihad of ideas and disinformation to advance its goals. It has also financed terrorist activities of Al Qaeda and Palestinian radicals. The US Senate Judiciary Committee recently heard testimony from fellow senators and terrorism experts that the Bush administration has failed to recognize the dangers of Saudi influence, having left the Kingdom in control of most of the Muslim organizations in the United States. For instance, 80% of the mortgages on mosques in the US are paid for by the Wahhabist Saudis. Over the last 30 years the Saudi Royal Family has contributed upwards of 70 billion US dollars to infiltrate worldwide institutions with propaganda against the West and Israel. This sum, it has been observed, makes the one billion dollars per annum spent by the Soviet Union during the Cold War for Communist propaganda pale by comparison. [4] The Saudis see donations to our universities as a way of promoting their political and religious propaganda. To quote their English language daily, Ain Al Yaqueen: "The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, under the custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Fahd Ibn Abdul Aziz has positively shouldered responsibility and played a promising role in order to raise the banner of Islam all over the globe and raise the Islamic call either inside or outside the kingdom."[5] The new head of Middle East Studies at UC Santa Barbara, Stephen Humphreys, holds a chair named after Aziz himself. The head of the Muslim American Society , W. Deen Muhammed, has stated that Saudi gifts require the receiver to prefer the Saudi "school of thought." While Humphreys denies there are strings attached, one wonders how likely a thesis on Saudi misogyny or their educational system teaching hatred of Americans, Jews and Christians would go over in Saudi funded departments if someone hoped to advance or be tenured.[6] One wonders why a theocratic totalitarian regime where 30% of the population is illiterate and where PhDs teach that Jews use the blood of gentile children to make matzoh[8] would take such interest in the American educational system instead of their own.[9]Yet the money the Saudis are pouring into our universities and colleges as gifts and endowments is alarming: King Fahd donated $20 million dollars to set up a Middle East Studies Center at the University of Arkansas; $5 million was donated to UC Berkeley's Center For Mideast Studies from two Saudi sheiks linked to funding Al Qaeda; [10] $2.5 million dollars to Harvard; $8.1 million dollars to Georgetown including a $500,000 scholarship in the name of President Bush; $11 million dollars to Cornell; $1.5 million dollars to Texas A&M; $5 million dollars to MIT; $1 million dollars to Princeton; Rutgers received $5 million dollars to endow a chair as did Columbia which tried to hide where the money came from.[11] Saudi largesse included UC Santa Barbara; Johns Hopkins; Rice University; American University in Washington, D.C.; University of Chicago; Syracuse University; USC; UCLA; Duke University; and Howard University among many others.[12] Saudi infiltration works on several levels. By creating new Middle East Studies Centers and such endowed chairs on campuses across the US, the Saudis are able to influence the curriculum taught to the next generation of American students about the Middle East situation as taught at Saudi-funded madrassas both here and abroad. That curriculum is decidedly anti-Western and full of incitement against Christians and Jews.[13] Based not on truth as much as the agenda of the totalitarian regime in power, it "molds" the next generation to hate Israel and to hate America as an "imperialist" or "racist" nation.[14] For example, according to Middle East historian Martin Kramer, Columbia University has become the "Bir Zeit (University) on-the-Hudson"[15]. Bir Zeit is a university built for the Palestinians by Israel in the West Bank. Instead of its being a source for educational prosperity and peace, it is a breeding ground for totalitarian terrorist ideologues and their ilk. Faculty write scholarly works about Middle East history against the US and Israel as a matter of course. At Columbia, Palestinians dominate the teaching of the modern Middle East and do not encourage a diversity of approaches in doing so. [16] When a chair is endowed by Saudi money it is filled by academics known for their Palestinian or Saudi activism less than for their scholarship. Thus Columbia's new chair was given to Rashid Khalidi, a University of Chicago historian and Palestinian activist. Khalidi took over the "Edward Said Chair Of Arab Studies." Said, who died recently, and who was raised in Egypt, was a member of the Palestine National Council and anti-Israel activitist thought the Oslo peace process was a "sellout." [17] He was an English literature professor, whose expertise was Jane Austen, yet his anti-American and anti-Israel writings dominate the perspectives of Middle East Studies departments across the nation. Khalidi is on record defending the killing of Israeli soldiers: "Killing civilians is a war crime, whoever does it, but resistance to occupation is legitimate in international law". [18] Khalidi is an obsessive Israel basher and has stated Americans are "brainwashed" by the Middle East's only democracy. He also considered US popular support for overthrowing Saddam Hussein an "idiots' consensus". [19] Another Palestinian professor in Columbia's Middle East Studies program is Joseph Massad, who also rails against the US and Israel. Massad likes to denigrate American democracy by alluding to early 19th century history when slavery was a worldwide institution, and accuses America of nuclear genocide for using the atomic bomb to end World WarII. He has also characterized Israel as an "imperialist" and "colonial" concoction of the Europeans. [20] With Khalidi's appointment as chair and Massad as the main teacher of politics and history of the Middle East at Columbia, what students will be exposed to with no alternative views isn't hard to imagine. Even Lisa Anderson, head of International Studies at Columbia has conceded publicly that Middle East Studies at Columbia are not balanced, nor are they at other Middle East Studies centers nationwide.[21] What is more telling is that Columbia tried to conceal where the money came from to fund Khalidi's chair until pressure from outside academics and even the state of New York required it.[22] Daniel Pipes has remarked that choosing Khalidi for the Columbia chair is "particularly egregious because he is one of a team of Palestinian falsifiers who are all giving us this propagandist, non-scholarly interpretation of the Middle East" and that Columbia's cover-up of the donors "doesn't smell right". Steve Emerson, who reports to Congress frequently on terrorism issues, has stated publicly that "Khalidi's statements raise serious questions about his attitudes on violence" [23] But Columbia is not alone. Such departments and professors are now found in Middle East Studies programs nationwide. UC Berkeley's Center For Middle East Studies website boasts of receiving a $5 million dollar grant courtesy of Sultan bin Abdul aziz Al-Saud and Sheikh Salahudin Yusef Hamza Abdel jawad, another major donor. Both are linked to Islamic charities which the US government says are front groups for funding Al Qaeda and both are now part of a $1 trillion dollar lawsuit by the families of the victims of 9/11. Their contributions link through a labyrinth of front banks and charitable institutions which ultimately finance terrorism against the West. Al-Saud gives generously to the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, the Muslim League and World Assembly of Muslim Youth - all established fronts for terrorist funding named by the US State Department. And Abdeljawad is linked to the Saudi Dar-Al_Maal-Islami Bank founded by Osama Bin Laden and managed by Osama Bin Laden's brother that is known by the State Department to also fund terrorism as well. Did the Sultan Al-Saud give money knowingly to charity that made its way to Bin Laden? [24] A visit to the Sultan's foundation website in Saudi Arabia tells much more. It lists a "Higher Council" or board of directors which includes one Abdul rahman bin Ali Jeraisy who has been openly funding Al Qaeda according to a report to Congress.[25] UC Berkeley's Saudi funded academics have more than satisfied Saudi goals of using US campuses to teach hate for America and Israel. The Israel divestment petition was begun at UC Berkeley and has been promoted by faculty there. [26] A Jewish student who complained to her Arabic instructor about the anti-semitic Protocols Of the Elders Zion was told that the ficitious "protocols" were indeed written by Jews. She was then attacked by the instructor's supervisor, who openly called her a liar and threatened her with a libel suit. He even lied to the press claiming an investigation had been conducted of the student's claims when the student was never interviewed. The instructor held so firm to his comment about Jews being authors of the forgeries that the campus newspaper believed afterward that the "protocols: were actually written by Jews. [27] Saudi endowed chairs and departments have produced faculty at the college level in America who spout the propaganda provided to 8th graders in Saudi Arabian schools, where textbooks claim that Jews "are people of treachery and betrayal." At Connecticut State University, Norton Mezvinsky, has declared Judaism a religion of "racism" whose followers believe that "the blood of non-Jews has no intrinsic value" and that the killing of non-Jews does "not constitute murder according to the Jewish religion" and that Judaism teaches "the killing of innocent Arabs for revenge is a Jewish virtue." While textbooks in Saudi Arabia claim "the Zionist Jews are the enemies of Islam and supporters of the modern Crusaders" Joel Beinin, Middle East Studies professor at Stanford and former head of the Middle East Studies Association (MESA), rails against America's "Zionist lobby" that controls the US government by blocking democracy and economic development in the Arab world" and uses power "to make and unmake regimes". [29] The University of Arkansas Middle East Studies department, set up under King Fahd, offers an Arabic language program. A sample newsletter published by the department contains a full-page poem translated by some of the studnet body's Arabic language students entitled "A Letter To A Faraway Friend (from inside the occupied territory)". The poem subtly demeans Israel and praises martyrdom and death. [30] The sole guest lecturer to the department mentioned on its site is Joel Beinin.[31] Examples abound on campuses all over the country. Harvard received a $2 million dollar grant from Sheik Khalid Al Turki. For its graduation ceremony it chose a student, Zayed Yasin, for commencement speaker. His speech? "My American Jihad." Yasin has voiced his support for Hamas and says suicide bombers should be paid. He also has raised money for the Holy Land Foundation, one of the Islamic charities shut down by the Bush administration as a front for Al-Qaeda.[32] Prince Alaweed Bin Talal recently donated $500,000 to Georgetown University for a scholarship program in President Bush's name. Alaweed also recently donated $27 million dollars to Hamas. Martin Kramer's book "Ivory Towers On Sand: The Failure Of Middle East Studies" illustrates many other similar situations on US campuses to show how pervasive this has become. [33] Saudi money sets up these academic departments with anti-American and anti-Israel agendas, but U.S. taxpayers underwrite the programs themselves. This is done through Title VI funding mandated by Congress. Originated in the late 1950's during the Cold War, Title VI received an additional $86 million dollars after 9/11 as part of the Education Act. This allowed the creation of 118 Middle East Resource Centers at US colleges and universities where Arabic would be taught and security analysis developed in the War On Terror. Yet the program has been seriously abused. The idea was that the universities would provide an understanding of the Middle East and Arab language experts for the military and intelligence services. But most Middle East Studies departments let their students slide by with minimal Arabic instruction. The focus is on research articles which serve the worldwide cause of jihad when they have any contemporary relevance.[34] It goes also for "outreach" programs to secondary schools which are little more than propaganda efforts against Israel and the United States. At Georgetown University such an outreach program is provided for teachers from kindergarten level through the 12th grade. Seminars are packed with Arab anti-war activists opposed to the removal of Saddam Hussein by the US military. One of these "academics" was in fact once a public relations consultant for Saddam Hussein and blamed the oppression of Iraq's people by Saddam Hussein on the United States. No opposing views were presented.[35] Once the Saudi endowments are complete, matching funds are then provided by the US taxpayer, who refreshes the Saudi investment with matching funds through Title VI. One "scholar" who lobbied for the continuation of such funding to the State Department recently was Hussein Ibish, a non-academic and leader of the radical American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. [36] Besides paying the salaries of academics who advance the Saudi "point of view", Title VI money goes to what could be considered the Saudis' "foot soldiers" on campus, activists who will spread the word beyond the scholarly community. Co-mingled funding for Middle East centers goes into stipends, scholarships and fellowships for Arab students to support them in their work as activists spearheading Muslim and Palestinian groups on campus. While handpicked Arab professors and sympathizers "reeducate" the student body to the proper "point of view," these student activist groups carry it forward, creating an atmosphere that permeates campuses with anti-American and anti-Israeli propaganda. A tour of any major campus will reveal the prevalance of professionally produced flyers posted against Israel and "Zionists" (the new euphemism for Jews) or against American policy in Iraq, and "film festivals" and lectures devoted to crude attacks on alleged Israeli "massacres" and other alleged atrocities. All this is made possible by the Title VI funding of stipends to Middle East Studies students. Arab students may train overseas during the summer in "activism" then return to campus to ply their skills. As a result, anti-Semitic attacks are on the increase on our college campuses. Not long ago Jewish students at San Francisco State needed to be escorted to safety by off-campus city police during a pro-Israel rally, causing one professor to remark it was like Germany in the 1930's. At Concordia University, 1,500 "students" showed up to create a riot and prevent former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu from speaking about terrorism on that campus and ticket holders needed a police escort off campus as well. This tide of abuse needs to be addressed. Academic departments with political agendas is a new phenomenon on American campuses and directly violates the principles of Academic Freedom established by the American Association of University Professors and long recognized by accrediting institutions. Congress has recently taken a needed step to oversee the way it provides Title VI needs to take a hard look at the way it provides money to underwrite these programs. University trustees and administrators need to do likewise. ENDNOTES [1] www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/mowbray/ mowbray122002.asp [2] www.ropma.net/saudi-education.htm#edn1 [3] http://216.26.163.62./2003/ss_terror_06_27.html [4]http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=static& page=alexievtestimony [5] http://216.26.163.62/2003/ss_terror_06_27.html [6] http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=static&page= alexievtestimony [8] http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP35402 [9] http://biz.bahrainedb.com/NewsIn.asp?Article=1605&Sn=6 10] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/675 [11] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/794 [12] Source: US Dept. of Education (figures may be higher due to more current donations). [13] http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-stalinsky020703.asp [14] http://www.meforum.org/article/538 [15] http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/2003_09_08.htm [16] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/663 [17] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1157 [18] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/756 [19] http://www.campus-watch.org/about.php [20] http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1825.shtml [21] http://www.dafka.org/NewsGen.asp?S=4&PageID=57 [22] http://www.senatorlavalle.com/press_archive_story.asp?id=199 [23] www.campus-watch.org/article/id/756 [24] www.campus-watch.org/article/id/627 also: http://www.sultanfoundation.org/english/advisory.htm [25] http://financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/031103me.pdf [26] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3804 [27] http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=7785 [28] http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=2783 [29] http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/comment/ comment-harris061903.asp [30] http://www.uark.edu/depts/mesp/newsletter/fall03.pdf [31] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/398 [32] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/22 also: http://www.academia.org/news/struggle.html [33] http://www.ivorytowers.org/pages/832317/index.htm [34] http://www.meforum.org/article/208/ [35] http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/740 [36] www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5101 also: www.wrmea.com/backissues/1188/8811050.htm (note discussion of American-Arab Anti-discrimination Committee touring Saudi information minister) also: http://kyl.senate.gov/legis_center/subdocs/091003_epstein.pdf also: www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/lobby.html [37] http://www.sultanfoundation.org/english/studies.htm [38] http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz061603.asp [39] http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz061603.asp [40] http://www.ropma.net/saudi-education.htm#-edn1 Lee Kaplan is a contributing Editor to Front Page Magazine (http://www.Frontpagemag.com), where this article appeared today. It is archived as http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=12833 To Go To Top

IS THE NRP GIVING AWAY YESHA? Posted by Gail Winston, April 5, 2004.

The NRP says they will quit the government as soon as an "official government decision" been made to give away Gaza and significant parts of Judea and Samaria. But, needless to say, by then it will be too late. Sharon is already acting as if an "official government decision" has been made. Once Sharon comes back from the U.S. with their reluctant "approval" - it will be a done deal. The vote in the Likud party will be effectively irrelevant and you can kiss YESHA goodbye. The NRP could stop this by resigning now. By throwing the government into a turmoil, they would slow Sharon down. What about Labor joining the government? Sharon's plans already reflect the dreams of the Labor party, so it doesn't really make a heck of a lot of difference. There is one major advantage to having Labor in the coalition - they will be looking for the first opportunity to bring down the government. This will also slow Sharon's Pied Piper's march of the lemmings over the cliff of national suicide. Unfortunately, the NRP Knesset members are simply too comfortable in their ministerial seats and probably do not have the courage to risk their Volvos for the sake of the country. Gail Winston is the founder of M.E.I.R., Mid East Information Resource. To Go To Top

ADL TALKS ABOUT ISRAEL Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 5, 2004.

The guest speaker surpassed the lunch. Without notes, Ken Jacobson from ADL took us sailing through the development of Israeli thought, culminating in the Sharon Plan. His observations broke new ground, but his assessments had shaky premises. He referred to a divergence of national interest between the US and Israel. That is a misconception. US policy harms the national interest, largely due to State Dept. bias and ineptitude. The US needs stability for trade and conservation of energy for reduced dependency, pollution, and cost. Instead, the US promotes an unstable, terrorist PLO state and energy waste. Israel, according to Mr. Jacobson, is democratic, so the government must do what the people think, and the polls reliably indicate what that is. Actually, the government, media, and academia have a self-perpetuating leftist ideology regardless of elections. What the people think one year, they may not, the next. Polls that the Left quotes are skewed to allow people's opinion to be misrepresented in sound bytes. Democratic leadership would apprise the people of situations, instead of leaving them in the dark, as is the case in Israel. A truly vibrant and democratic media would discuss the pros and cons of proposals, instead of just the pros. It would ask questions. Since Israel is in the "real world," he said, its choices are limited. Sharon and Netanyahu can be nationalist out of office. In office, they must take a broader view, leaving fewer options. I think that referring to the "real world" is an excuse for abandoning parts of Israel because the world is hostile. It is up to Israel to induce the world to accept its entitlements, just as it gained a state against the odds. Israel has not made its case. Its anti-Zionists don't want to or know how to. But who are the Left and the Right? Jacobson ranked Sharon and Netanyahu among the Right. That is the popular notion, but too facile. Sharon is an old leftist. Netanyahu may be an heir to Jewish nationalism, but does not have a nationalistic ideology. Both are amenable to pressure. The pair may call themselves nationalists, but politics is too dirty to take them at their word. Then what caused Israelis, if these polls may be believed, to be willing to jettison most of Yesha? The Arab demographic threat. They don't want to annex Yesha if it means being overwhelmed by Arab voters. They want security from within and without and peace. Jacobson agreed with me that Israel can't just get out of part of the Jewish homeland and expect there to be peace, because the Arabs want the whole of the Jewish homeland. He admits that the withdrawal would encourage the Arabs to keep attacking Israel. When I pointed out that the demographic problem exists within the present State of Israel, even without the territories, Jacobson was not worried, because that is "a long way off," and much can happen in the meantime. Meantime, I see the Arab percentage is growing, and along with it, Arab influence and boldness at sedition. Jacobson's non-chalence overlooks the ability of united insurrectionists to tip a divided society before having attained numerical parity. Israel offered the Arabs excessive territory and rights, but got neither international credit for it nor an Arab peace agreement, observed Jacobson. The Arabs will not make peace. By offering the Arabs so much, Israel now can say that war is not its fault but the Arabs'. Since the Arabs won't negotiate peace, Israel will decide its own boundaries, rather than let boundaries be imposed on it. Israel doesn't want to withdraw for nothing, so seeks a US to offer of something. The US offer would not help Israeli security, if precedent, much of which was cited by Jacobson, himself, be a guide. Let Israel not suppose that the US would accept the boundaries that Sharon proposes. It would accept his withdrawal, trying to make it as extensive as it could, preparatory to pressuring Israel to withdraw more. After acknowledging the world's failure to credit Israel for offering the Arabs so much, while the Arabs offer the Jews death, it is not logical to then suppose that the offers would enable Israel to make its own boundaries unimpeded from the outside. Point is, the world wants Israel to go under. That truth is what Israel must confront! Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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 LIKUD POLL WILL DETERMINE NOTHING Posted by Nadia Matar, April 5, 2004.

The following is the translation in English of Nadia Matar's show in Hebrew on the Internet. 1)Why We Must We Struggle for Each and Every Outpost Last week marked the anniversary of an extremely important historical event that, unfortunately, is neglected by the national consciousness. As Michael Freund reminds us in an article in the Jerusalem Post, last week, more than 500 years ago, on March 31, 1492, King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella signed the cursed edict that called upon the Jews of Castile and Aragon to choose between two options: either to convert, or to leave Spain. Most of the Jews of Spain elected to leave. It is estimated that close to two hundred thousand Jews were uprooted from their homes and expelled. How ironic and how tragic it is that on the very day on which we commemorate the signing of the expulsion order from Spain, the Prime Minister of Israel gave the order to destroy the Hazon David synagogue in Kiryat Arba. Anyone who sees the site is astounded, and asks himself why the Prime Minister sent hundreds of police officers and soldiers to destroy a single building at the entrance to Kiryat Arba, that functions as a synagogue and that was built in memory of two precious Jews who were murdered by the Arab enemy? Why does the Prime Minister insist on totally razing this small structure? On the other hand, we could also ask why the residents of Kiryat Arba-Hebron are so persistent about this place, and despite its destruction return to rebuild it. The answer is clear. The struggle over Hazon David and the other outposts that Sharon intends to destroy in the coming days and weeks is not a struggle just for these places: it is a struggle for all of the Land of Israel. The destruction of Outposts is just a full dress rehearsal for the real show that Ariel Sharon plans - the uprooting of totally legal settlements, razing them to the ground, and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Jews, men, women, and children. It is important that we understand the gravity of the situation: the moment that Sharon gave the order to destroy the synagogues in Tapuah and in Kiryat Arba, he officially became the operational arm of the Hamas movement. These are undoubtedly harsh words - but let's think about this for a moment. The program of the Hamas speaks of the total razing of Jewish settlements and the expulsion of Jews from Eretz Israel, with their supreme goal being the destruction of the State of Israel. The Hamas is incapable of realizing this program. Although they murder us in the hope that we will uproot ourselves and abandon all of Eretz Israel, they are not physically capable of leveling Jewish settlements and expelling Jews from their homes. And now, here comes Ariel Sharon and proposes doing their work. How ironic! On the one hand, Sharon eliminated Yassin, while, on the other, he announces that he himself is about to implement what Yassin so desired to do! Accordingly, the reason why we must be so persistent regarding each and every outpost is so that the Israeli public, the government, and the army will say: "if it takes so much manpower, money, and time to destroy a single structure, and the stubborn settlers do not give up, but keep returning to rebuild the place - we will never be able to destroy even a single settlement!" 2) Don't Get Overly Excited by the Likud Poll We Will Never Budge from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza!. Naturally, we hope, and expect, that the majority of the Likud membership will express loyalty to Eretz Israel and vote against Ariel Sharon's plan, a plan of capitulation and surrender that, even from the security aspect is dangerous for Israel. Accordingly, even a Likud member who does not care for Eretz Israel as a value, but is concerned for his personal welfare, must vote against the plan. Each of us must join the major efforts by Moshe Feiglin's group within the Likud, and the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza to convince those Likud members to vote in accordance with the principles of the Likud platform, and not according to the principles of Ariel Sharon's capitulation platform. But we must not be naive. We all know that on the eve of the elections, Omri Sharon brought tens of thousands of people into the Likud from various sectors, whose connection to the Likud is like our connection to a political movement in Zimbabwe - and for the sole purpose that, when the time comes, they would vote for Sharon. Accordingly, we must be cognizant of the possibility that Sharon will be victorious in this poll. It therefore is extremely important that, already today, we proclaim: "We really don't care what the results of the poll will be." Of course, it would be nice if there would be a majority against the Sharon unilateral evacuation plan for Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. However, even if there were to be a decisive majority for the program of uprooting from Eretz Israel and the expulsion of Jews, this does not obligate us, and we have no intention of honoring such a decision. This should be reiterated, more than once, and made crystal-clear: even if 120 Members of Knesset, and all the government ministers, and even 100 percent of any poll, were to vote in favor of the uprooting of settlements, such a decision would still constitute a crime against the people of Israel in its land, a crime against Zionism, and a crime against the Will of the Creator, and therefore we do not intend to honor it. We are remaining in our homes! There are matters on which not even a decisive majority is entitled to decide. Just as a majority in a referendum or in the Knesset cannot force all of us to violate the Holy Sabbath, one of the things on which a majority cannot decide is the uprooting of Jews from Eretz Israel and the handing over of Eretz Israel to foreigners. Eretz Israel is not the private real estate of the Sharon family, the Likud movement, or even of this entire generation. Eretz Israel was given to us by the G-d, for all eternity, and no leader, in any generation, has the right to hand it over. Period! Accordingly, we must make every effort and work extremely hard to ensure that the results of the Likud poll will be in our favor, but we should not get overly excited if we lose in the poll. In either event, we are staying, as the slogan in the demonstrations declares: We shall never budge from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza! The leaders of the national camp, Rabbis, leaders of the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and public figures must have the courage to adopt this fundamental position. We must not be carried away and follow the cliches of the secular left about "the sanctity of democracy and the will of the majority." For us, the people of Israel, the Land of Israel, and the Torah are sacred. Passover specifically, is a fine time to slaughter the holy cows of the secular left. Our forefathers, too, overcame their fear, as Rabbi Hayim Druckman explains in his book in Hebrew whose English translation is "A Little of the Light," The question arises, why is the Shabbat preceding Passover called the "Great Sabbath?" The answer is that this is so called because of the miracle that was performed on this day. The next question is: What miracle? The conventional explanation is as follows: on that Shabbat that preceded Passover in Egypt, the Israelites were commanded to take a lamb for the Paschal sacrifice. The Egyptians saw and heard from the Israelites that they were about to slaughter the Egyptians' god, but the Egyptians were afraid and did not harm the Israelites. In commemoration of this miracle, this Sabbath is the "Great Sabbath." Rabbi Druckman gives another, and very intriguing, explanation: We want to say - the fear of the Egyptians is merely a consequence. The truly great miracle is that the Israelites dared! The fact that the Israelites dared to take the god of Egypt, to tie it to the legs of the bed, and to proclaim that they are about to slaughter it in accordance with the Lord's command to them - and that they did not fear the Egyptians this is the great miracle! This, then, is the source of the Egyptians' fear. So that we may go forth to freedom. Freedom must burn within us. [...] All the wondrous occurrences of recent generations are a result of the blazing forth of the spark of freedom within us, of our standing straight and tall, of our abhorrence of the Exile, of our ascent to the Land, and our self-sacrifice for it. [...] Matters begin with us, by the mercies of the Lord, may He be blessed, who gives us the strength to triumph. If we stand upright, if we speak out, with full belief in our words, then we "break the teeth" of the others. This has been so from the time of the Redemption from Egypt to our days. In conclusion: during the time of the Expulsion from Spain, whoever wished to remain Jewish had to leave Spain. Today, when enemies, both internal and external, seek to destroy the Jewish state by the expulsion of Jews, the struggle for the existence of the Jewish state consists, specifically, of embracing the land and remaining in every individual place. In Egypt, the Jews gathered their courage and shouted forth in a loud voice, before the entire world: "Let my people go to the Land of Israel"; now, on the eve of Passover 5764 (2004), we must dare to cry throughout the entire world: "Let my people stay in Eretz Israel - all of Eretz Israel belongs to the People of Israel, in accordance with the Torah of Israel, and there is no power in the world that will move us from here!" Only by conducting ourselves in this manner will there be a joyous and meaningful Passover for those who reside in this blessed Land of Israel. 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

URI AVNERY, UBER-LEFTIST AND ANTI-ZIONIST, ATTACKS ANTI-SEMITISM IN THE PLO Posted by Steven Plaut, April 5, 2004.

Evidently the arrival of the Messiah is nigh. And how do I know that? There can be no other possibility, when Israel's worst Lord Haw-Haw is attacking Arafat and the PLO for their vulgar anti-Semitism. The grandpa of all Israel's anti-Zionists is Uri Avnery, who has opposed his own country's existence and worked for its demise for decades. Originally the Israeli version of Larry Flynt, running a semi-pornographic scandal sheet named Haolam Hazeh, Avnery also wrote "Irsael Without Zionists", a book essentially supporting the dismantling of Israel and its replacement by a bi-national anti-Zionist state, back in the late 60s. Later he briefly sat in the Knesset when his splinter party got elected in a protest vote by people desiring to tweek the noses of the main parties, kind of like Chichulina did later in Italy. Then he launched his ultra-extremist Gush Shalom movement, basically a splinter group of communists and sundry anti-Jewish extremists, to support the Palestinian terrorists and endorse and slavishly legitimize anti-Israel movements all over the world. It is linked with the ISM (International Solidarity Movement, or more correctly the "I Support Murderers" movement). Avnery is the darling of the anti-Semitic Eurotrash. When his own mother died she disinherited him, declaring him a traitor. He had lately been courting the Sheikh Yassin, now of course ensconced with virgins, and was promoting Israel's capitulating to Hamas demands as a new peace plan. Ah, but even Comrade Avnery seems to have limits. There are some at least forms of treason that are rejected by and beyond his Gush Shalom organization. And Avnery reached his own limits when Yassir Arafat praised Mel Gibson's movie "Passion". Arafat of course liked the flick because he believes it will enflame anti-Semitism. Seems the PLO paper "Jerusalem Times" cites His Ugliness as saying he saw the film, liked it, and that it was "exciting and historical". Arafat's sidekick Nebil Abu-Rodeina, then added that the Palestinians today are experiencing the same sorts of torment and sufferings at the hands of the Jews as Jesus did while he was up on the cross. Avnery, who was born in Nazi Europe, was nonplussed. "Had these statements not appeared in a Palestinian newspaper," said Avnery, "I would have been sure that they were a fabrication of Ariel Sharon's propaganda machine." (Avnery of course has spent the past few decades running his own propaganda machine in the service of Palestinian terrorism.) "I cannot imagine something more damaging to the Palestinian cause than these statements," adds Comrade Haw-Haw. You see, he opposes anti-Semitism when it damages the Palestinian cause. Avnery then adds (in Hebrew article is at http://nfc.msn.co.il/archive/001-D-43691-00.html?tag=10-51-49 ): "As a Moslem you need not be aware of the terrible results the libel about the Jews crucifying Jesus had on the Jews throughout history in Europe, nearly 2000 years of persecution, pogroms, and torture, the Spanish Inquisition, mass expulsions, mass murder, and finally the Holocaust." Incredible words coming from someone who spent the past decades assisting Arab fascists who carry out mass murders and seek to perpetrate a new Holocaust. He then adds that Christian anti-Semitism is what gave birth to the Zionist movement (and hence to the Palestinian "suffering" and "plight"), which makes anti-Semitism the worst enemy of the Palestinian people, in Avnery's view. I happen to believe that anti-Semitism and Palestinian nationalism are synonyms. But Avnery insists there is great truth to the description of Palestinians as "victims of victims". Avnery then goes on and rejects the comparison between the "Israeli-Palestinian conflict" (never mind that this is not what the Mideast war really is) and apartheid and the conflict in South Africa, although he continues to justify Palestinian violence and compares it to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. Is Avnery about to become the new Benny Morris? Bashing the PLO and Arafat on 3 or 4 days out of the week while bashing Israel on the other days? All to upset both Right and Left at the same time and to enjoy the attention of the media? Stay tuned. (The New ISM Motto: "I went to Gaza, and all I got was this flat shirt!") 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

NO TIME FOR AMBIGUITY OR FOGGY DOUBLESPEAK Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, April 4, 2004.

The recent report in Haaretz was headlined, "Bush to assure PM: Israel won't have to withdraw to Green Line." Reading a bit further, however, it soon became apparent that America is still determined to remain non-committal on this crucial issue and won't get down to specifics. The usual explanation is that we don't want to prejudice negotiations. This is precisely the wrong approach this late in the game. And it is late. While the Foggy Folks have been trying to virtually rewrite the final draft of a hotly debated and meticulously worded U.N. Resolution #242 at least since the days of Secretary of State William Rogers back in 1969, the authors of that resolution themselves - Eugene Rostow, Arthur Goldberg, and others - have pointed out that Israel was not required to withdraw to its indefensible, artificially-imposed armistice lines of 1949. Nations have acquired vast tracts of territories as a result of wars, yet the world expects the sole State of the Jews to return to that 9-mile wide existence... a constant temptation to those who would destroy it. As has been pointed out many times, #242 clearly states that any Israeli withdrawal was to be made to "secure and recognized " borders to replace those suicidal armistice lines. While it was not envisioned that Israel would retain a large percentage of the lands conquered from those who repeatedly tried to end its life, having already given back most of this territory upon concluding an iffy peace with Egypt, territorial compromise was in order for the remaining lands in question. There is nothing comparable to the desert of the Sinai Peninsula separating Israel from its other surrounding would-be executioners. It's down hill all the way for Syria from the Golan, and right in Israel's backyard for the others in Judea and Samaria. The latter were unapportioned areas of the original Palestinian Mandate legally open to settlement by all residents of the Mandate, not just Arabs (many, if not most, of whom were also newcomers), that came to be known as the "West Bank" as a result of British imperialism and British officer-led Transjordan's illegal seizure of these territories in that country's assault on a reborn Israel in 1948. These were not exclusively Palestinian Arab lands. Until they were largely massacred by Arabs in the 1920s, Jews had lived and owned land in these areas long before the Arab conquest in the 7th century C.E. That the European and Russian hypocrites expect Israel to cave in to all that Arabs demand is no great shock... they who have fire and carpet bombed enemies and incorporated other entire nations when their own security and interests were at stake. The stench from the crematoria has long since subsided, so the temporary respite from age-old, ingrained antipathy towards Jews has simply reemerged. No surprise. Make no mistake about this. While legitimate criticism of Israeli policy is in order, for far too many, Israel has indeed simply become - as many have written - the Jew of the nations. It sounds better, after Auschwitz, to call yourself "just" an anti-Zionist. Denying Jews that which, with few exceptions, such as the Kurds, you won't deny to almost all other peoples is somehow legitimate for these folks. Israel is always under a high power lens. Kurds are slaughtered in "Arab" Iraq and Syria, Berber language and culture is outlawed in "Arab" North Africa, Copts are suppressed in "Arab" Egypt, and millions of Blacks are killed, maimed, enslaved, etc. in "Arab" Sudan, but the U.N. has a trial in Geneva for Israel's security fence designed to keep Arabs from disemboweling its kids. What is needed now from Washington is a clear statement to its tiny beleaguered ally and to the rest of the world - especially the Arabs, too many of whom still maintain their "destruction in stages" goals vis-a-vis Israel. Having been blockaded (a casus belli) by Arabs and attacked as well in 1967 (Egypt and Syria calling for a war of extermination up to the days prior to Israel's forced defensive preemptive strikes in June '67), it was obvious to all fair observers in the aftermath of that war that Israel deserved something better. If there is to ever be any real hope for true peace in this region, an American President must once again have the courage to stand up to his own State Department. Harry Truman did this when he recognized the Jewish State in 1948. If it was up to the Arabists-tied-to-Big Oil Foggy Folks, there would be no Israel today. Much of this hostility remains. For one thing, there's a wealthy revolving door between multinational businesses and State. Complicating matters further, the current Presidential family itself, along with its closest friends and allies, have huge ties to Big Oil. Nevertheless, leadership must indeed come from the Oval Office on these matters. A strong President must tell the Arabs point blank that there will be a territorial compromise that will take into consideration Israel's legitimate security needs. No doublespeak or blurred phraseology... Any 23rd Arab state that will be created in an area that really doesn't have room for one must not come at the expense of the security of the sole state of the Jews. Paying merely lip service - as surfaced in the Haaretz report - to this crucial issue won't cut it. Only when Arabs are convinced that Israel is not going to be offered up on a silver platter a la Chamberlain's disgraceful sacrifice of his Czech "friends" for "peace" (and there were lots of ethnic Germans in the Czech Sudetenland) on an earlier allegedly small territorial issue, will there actually be a better chance at arriving at a peace settlement. All parties will at long last know where they really stand and what is and what is not possible via negotiations. And if the Arabs can't handle this, then so be it. Israel must then take the gloves off. In short, Arabs must learn that compromise is truly a two-way street. Up until now, it's simply been a game of what unilateral concessions they can get the world - including America - to pressure the Jews into giving in the good cop/bad cop game the Arafat and Hamas teams have been playing. Gerald A. Honigman is a contributing writer for Jewish Xpress magazine (http://www.jewishxpress.com), a monthly publication based in southern Florida. His background is in Middle Eastern Affairs. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

PETITION TO SUPPRESS A HATE-JEW SITE WHEN SEARCHING GOOGLE FOR 'JEW' Posted by Marilyn Ginsburg, April 4, 2004.

When performing a search for the word "Jew" on Google, the first result is a site that has been notorious for being anti-Semitic. The site is called Jew Watch (http://www.jewwatch.com). Jew Watch is an archive of all the information any hate-Jews person needs: lists of Jewish 'Terrorists', Jewish-controlled press, Jewish spies, power mongers, etc., etc. You won't find Jewish Nobel Prize winners here. And much of the material is either dead wrong or distorted. The New York Times and the Washington Post have worked so hard to blame Israel whenever possible for the ills of the Middle East. They will be sad to learn from this site they are still considered Jewish newspapers. JewWatch implies they are a reference library, and if you scan hastily, you might be fooled into thinking they are associated with Cornell University. In point of fact, the "US Code Collection" of the Legal Information Institute (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/115.html) is a discussion of all you'd ever want to know about using copyrighted works for non-profit research. It has nothing to do with the contents of the website. Google is the #1 search engine and the fact that the first search result would yield an anti-Semitic site is disturbing, especially in a era of increased Anti Semitism. In order for Google to remove this, they would need a petition of over 50,000 requests. This is the link to the petition: http://www.removejewwatch.com If you have the e-mail addresses for any Jewish organizations, I would appreciate it if you sent them to me and I will contact them with whatever information I have found. Send comments to Google to comments@google.com Additional Information Someone wrote back with this information: I have become intrigued with your search engine issue and the Jew Watch problem. It seems that Google just suppressed the site for a day or so and now it's back at number 1. It also comes up at number 2 on the Excite.com search engine. It appears as number 18 on yahoo.com. It doesn't appear until page 10 on AskJeeves.com. But the interesting thing is that on the Yahoo search, the description underneath says "Archive of essays, articles and online books about a perceived international Jewish conspiracy," which at least gives an indication of what you are going to find. AskJeeves.com says "Keeping a close watch on Jewish communities and organizations worldwide," which is the tagline for the site. Google and Excite.com both say "Jew Watch. Keeping ... Archived for Educational Purposes only Under USC Title 17 Section 107 by Jew Watch Library at jewwatch.com. *COPYRIGHT ... ," which is technical garbage and clearly doesn't indicate what type of site it is. So ... it seems to me that if you can't long-term get them to change the order in which the site appears (and even if you can), that Google, Excite, and AskJeeves should at least, in their descriptive lines, follow Yahoo's model and give information specific to the site. To Go To Top

THE SELF-HATING JEW Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, April 4, 2004.

This article was written by Dr. Kenneth Levin and appeared in the International Jerusalem Post, March 19, 2004. Dr. Levin, a psychiatrist and historian, is author of the forthcoming "Surviving Deadly Delusions: The Challenge of Jewish Self-Blame." Individuals betray their own nations and communities for well-known reasons - material gain, ideology retaliation for perceived grievances, and blackmail. But betrayal takes on special dimensions for those groups subject to chronic assault by the surrounding world. Exposure to persistent verbal and even physical attack, whether on the grounds of religion or ethnicity or some other communal characteristic, is a psychologically corrosive condition. Often those abused accept at face value the indictments of their accusers in the hope of thereby escaping their predicament. They may seek to reform their community in a manner consistent with the haters' indictments or they may simply abandon what they have come to see as a tainted identity or they may join the attackers as a means of more thoroughly separating themselves from their status as victim. The long history of Jewish Diaspora communities, chronically besieged, is replete with examples of such behavior, including actions that contributed to large-scale shedding of Jewish blood: The burning of Jewish books and more severe restrictions on Jews were often promoted by former Jews, like 13th-centufy French convert Nicholas Ponin and 16th.centuty Nuremberg apostate Josef Pfefferkorn. In the wave of forced conversions that swept Spain in 1391 with much loss of life, one of those who converted was the Solomon Halevi, chief rabbi of Burgos. Wealthy and well connected, Halevi could likely have resisted with some sacrifice of his status and wealth but preserving his life. He instead became Paul of Burgos and used his connections to rise ultimately to bishop of that city. He also turned his status in the Church and his political clout to relentless attacks on Spain's remaining Jews. This culminated in his authorship of Castilian proclamations in 1412 which deprived the Jews of virtually any means of supporting themselves, confronting them again with the choice of conversion or death and triggering a second wave of mass conversion. More modern examples of such apostates eager to separate themselves from a besieged Jewry include Karl Marx and his screeds against the Jews. Philosopher Isaiah Berlin wrote of Marx's anti-Jewish rhetoric: "He was determined that the sarcasms and insults to which some of the notable Jews of this generation, Heine, Lassalle, Disraeli, were all their lives a target, should, so far as he could effect it, never be used to plague him." The precise motives that drive any individual to join his community's besiegers is, of course, often difficult to fathom, and some have noted that various Jews notorious for such behavior appear to have had intense conflicts with their families or serious psychological problems.Yet it is characteristic of the spiritual corrosiveness of besiegement that its victims are predisposed to associate any grievance, such as unhappiness with family, or any sensed inadequacy in themselves, such as maybe related to psychopathology as due to the communal taint. They are more receptive to seeing the fault in their family or themselves as a product of their Jewishness and the solution as lying in escape from that tainted identity. Mordechai Vanunu's motivation in betraying Israel's nuclear facility is similar difficult to infer with any precision. But the role of Israel's besiegement and a wish to distance himself from it is suggested by his conversion to Christianity. It is noteworthy in this regard that a docudrama of Vanunu's story, made in Australia, is virtually an updated Merchant of Venice. Vanunu's family, while in actuality of Moroccan origin, is portrayed as black-garbed Eastern European Jews full of hate and vengeance, to better convey the message that Israel's nuclear arsenal is a reflection of unholy Jewish determination to exact pounds of flesh from its enemies. The Australian Christians who convert him are, in contrast, paragons of mercy, the quality of which is supposedly not strained even while the rhetoric is. Although examples of outright-treason such as Vanunu's are relatively rare in Israel, a broader identification with Israel's enemies is widespread and again a result of Israel's besiegement. Natan Sharansky, addressing the current global upsurge of anti-Semitism, recently suggested a definition of anti-Israeli criticism that is actually anti-Semitism: Demonizing the Jewish state or delegitimizing it or applying to it standards different from those by which others are measured. By these criteria there are more than a handful of Israelis who are fellow travelers with some of Israel's most hate-driven critics. For example, analogies of Israeli policies to those of the Nazis have appeared on Israeli campuses and in Israeli art galleries. That biased criticism of Israel is a path to visiting professorships abroad and an entry ticket to foreign art shows and film festivals has apparently not made Israelis avoid joining foreign bigots' attacks on the Jewish state. Israel cannot end the hatemongering of its enemies. It can, however, do more to inoculate its own population, as well as Diaspora Jews, against the spiritual corrosiveness that leads to psychological capitulation and rhetorical betrayal if not outright treason. Part of that effort must be in making anti- Jewish and anti-Israeli rhetoric among Jews as illegitimate as Sharansky and others are seeking to make it among non-Jews. Jerome S. Kaufman hosts Israel Commentary (http://www.israel-commentary.org), a website of news and analyses. To Go To Top

TERROR VICTIM RECALLS ATTACK Posted by IsrAlert, April 4, 2004.

This was written by Yifat Zohar, Uri Glikman and Marwan Atamana of the Maariv staff. They can be contacted at contact@maariv.co.il Chani Zaga, 14, who was injured and lost her father in the terrorist attack in Avnei Chefets Friday night, revisits those terrible moments. "We understood immediately that it was a terrorist and I screamed to my father", Chani Zaga told Maariv Online, as she was recovering from surgery in Meir hospital in Kfar Sava this morning. Zaga was shot during a terrorist attack where her father Yaakov, 40, was killed. She can barely speak, whispering her words as she explaining almost apologetically that she has difficulty speaking with all the tubes and wires she is attached to from the operation. Her mother Estella sits beside her, having had to leave the other five children with a neighbor in the settlement to come and see her oldest daughter as soon as the Sabbath was over. After a few minutes, Chani starts to recount in whispered tones what she remembers from the night before. "Suddenly someone was pounding on the shutter, and we understood immediately that it was a terrorist. I screamed to my father he was trying to break open the display cabinet. I ran to the shelter room and my little sister was beside me", Chani says emotionally, "I went to grab her and suddenly he began to shoot." "Then", she adds, "I turned around and was hit by bullets and by shards of flying glass." "I tried to continue running for the shelter room, but I couldn't walk anymore because I was injured, so I fell down and crawled to the shelter, with my little sister Tehiya, who is three and a half years old, in my arms. The rest of my siblings were there already. If my father hadn't gone outside, maybe none of the rest of us would be alive." After Chani was injured, Yaakov Zaga ran outside and tried to shoot the terrorist, but he was shot and killed. The mother Estella, who was sitting quietly by her daughter's bedside adds that she "was with two of the children in another room, and I understood that if the terrorists are still shooting, then it meant my husband couldn't stop them." Estella spoke painfully about her murdered husband. "He was a man with good values, who loved the land of Israel, and loved to help people. He was totally devoted to helping others, always the first one to offer to help. Unfortunately this time, it was with us." Yaakov Zaga, 40, was murdered Friday night and his 14 year-old daughter, Chana, suffered light injuries in a shooting attack carried out by a terrorist who infiltrated the Avnei Chefets settlement in Samaria. The Islamic Jihad's Jerusalem Brigades claimed responsibility for the terror attack. Security authorities say that the terrorist, Fakhri al-Arda, 20, was released from a military prison only four days ago. Yaakov (Kobi) Zaga moved to Avnei Chefets from Bnei Brak 12 years ago and was employed as an economist. He left a wife, Estella, and six children, who were all at home at the time of the attack. The Avnei Chefets spokeswoman said that Zaga was "an optimistic and happy person, a wonderful human being". She added: "It is very difficult to talk about him in past tense. He saved his family and the entire community and paid for it with his life". Late Friday night, two terrorists from the Tulkarm refugee camp arrived at a Palestinian village near Avnei Chefets. The two left their vehicle there and continued on foot, infiltrating the settlement through an unfenced section. One of the terrorists led the other one into the community and then fled the scene. The remaining terrorist, who was armed with a Kalashnikov rifle, continued to advance towards the community's residential houses. The terrorist passed by two darkened houses, which he assumed were empty, and reached a third house. He shot into the home and wounded the 14 year-old girl, Chana. The girl's father, who heard the shooting, came out of the next room armed with a handgun but the terrorist shot him first, critically injuring him. The terrorist continued to fire at houses in the community and also threw some hand grenades. A few minutes later, an IDF force dispatched to the scene identified the terrorist and killed him. Paramedics were called to the scene, but failed to save Yaakov Zaga's life. Later that night, forces entered Tulkarm in search of terror suspects. Meanwhile, Yesha Council (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) Chairman, Bentzi Lieberman is charging that PM Sharon and Defense Minister Mofaz are responsible for "the failure that allowed the lethal terror attack at the Avnei Chefets settlement". According to Lieberman, despite repeated infiltrations into Judea, Samaria and Gaza communities, Sharon and Mofaz did not provide adequate funds for securing the settlements, despite a government decision on the matter. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

PRESIDENT BUSH IS ABOUT TO MEET WITH P.M. SHARON IN APRIL Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, April 4, 2004.

This Media Release was originally sent out in December 2001. It is being updated because President Bush is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Sharon on April 14, 2004, with regard to Sharon's plan to unilaterally evacuate large segments of Jewish Communities in Biblical Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Eugene W. Rostow, U. S. Undersecretary of State for political affairs between 1966 and 1969, played a leading role in producing the famous Resolution 242. He has emphatically stated that 242 calls on the parties to make peace, and allows Israel to administer the territories it took over in 1967 until "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" is achieved. 242 called for secure and recognized boundaries agreed to by the parties. When such a lasting peace has been "achieved", Israel is required to withdraw from SOME, but not ALL of the territories it acquired during the Six Day War, in accordance with the agreement reached by the parties to the present dispute. The 338 Resolution passed after the Yom Kippur War in 1973, made Resolution 242 binding. Professor Rostow pointed out that President Reagan always maintained that Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria and in the Gaza Strip were perfectly legal. Moreover, the British Mandate fully recognized the right of the Jewish People to settlement in the entire mandated territory. In 1922, Britain withheld Jewish settlement in what is now Jordan, but Rostow asserts that the Jewish right of settlement in Judea and Samaria and Gaza, that is west of the Jordan River, is incontestable. Rostow says that right cannot be terminated and is buttressed by Article 80 of the UN Charter which provides that nothing shall be construed to alter in any manner the rights of "peoples or the terms of existing international instruments..." The Mandate given to Britain by the League of Nations was such an international instrument. The Mandate recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with their Biblical homeland, and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country. Undersecretary of State Rostow pointed out that therefore the Jews have the same right to settle in any part of Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip as they have to settle in Haifa, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. The State Department, until Powell's Louisville speech, has never denied that under the British Mandate the Jewish People have the right to settle in all parts of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. U.S. Secretary of State Powell, with President Bush's blessings, has brought an inordinate amount of pressure on little Israel to comply with the Saudi Arabia sponsored Road Map. Although seemingly drafted by the United States, the UN, the European Union and Russia, (with the support of France and Germany), the proposed Road Map is none other than a disguised Saudi Arabian approved proposal. The Saudis know that if the Road Map is ever effectuated, it will mean the destruction of Israel. If that was to occur, the Muslim dictatorships would have an unhampered rule over the entire Middle East. President Bush and US Secretary of State Powell talk about Israel's "occupation" with regard to Jewish settlements. Their Two State solution has not the remotest chance of working because of Arab violence and terrorism. Indeed, true American interests in the area, particularly in Iraq, require that terrorism not be rewarded by creating another Arab State within the Biblical Homeland of Israel. The Bush family's close ties with the Saudis should not prevail over what is in the true interest of America. Nor should Powell be impressed by Saudi wealth and royalty. America is being extremely disloyal to its only true friend and ally, Israel. When will President Bush finally realize that the G-d of Israel is the ruler of this universe? As the Bible states (Genesis 12:3), He will surely "curse" those involved in causing the attempted elimination of Israel from His Holy Promised Land. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

PRAYER: AN OVERLOOKED WEAPON IN WAR ON TERROR Posted by Michael Freund, April 4, 2004.

This was written by Chris Mitchell Middle East Bureau Chief of CBN - The Christian Broadcasting Network - April 2, 2004. It is archived at http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/news/040319e.asp JERUSALEM- For more than three years, frustration has been building in Israel over the onslaught of deadly terror attacks. Recently, one Israeli commentator suggested a seldom-used weapon in the war on terror: the power of prayer. Since the beginning of the Palestinian Intifada, more than 1,000 Israelis have died in terror attacks. The recent suicide attack at Ashdod was one of the most frightening. It had the potential to kill thousands of Israelis. Michael Freund writes for the Jerusalem Post and directs Amishav, an organization committed to helping return the lost ten tribes to Israel. Freund says "Many of us feel powerless or helpless to do something about the situation." He believes Christians and Jews need to employ a seldom-used weapon in the war against terror. "I think that many of us have overlooked what is perhaps our most powerful weapon in this struggle, and that is the power of prayer," says Freund. In a recent column, Freund appealed to both Christians and Jews to beseech God's mercy in light of this onslaught of terror. He said, "The fact of the matter is that our foes have already issued a call to arms, and I think it's time for us, for the Jewish people and Christian friends of Israel, to issue a call to Psalms. And to deploy this weapon in our struggle." King David wrote the Psalms here in the city of Jerusalem, thousands of years ago. The power of those words continues to inspire hope and faith, and to bring comfort to Christians and Jews around the world. Historically, the Psalms have strengthened Jews throughout centuries of persecution. In the shadow of the massive terror attack in Spain and the near mega-terror attack in Israel earlier this week, Freund says the West and Israel need to recognize they are confronting a deep-rooted religious fundamentalism, unlike anything in modern history. "And if our foes are resorting to their form of holy war, as it were," says Freund, "I think it's incumbent upon us not to abandon the sacred weapons that we have in our arsenal, chief and foremost among them, the power of prayer." Freund continued, "Supporters around the world need to pray that God will intervene on Israel's behalf, that He will defeat our enemies, and that He will instill our leaders with the wisdom and understanding, and the guidance that they so desperately need, to take this country forward and to take it out of the morass that we currently find ourselves." Freund hopes one day for an international day of prayer for Israel. He said, "I think that such an event - that the echoes of such an event - would resound from Washington to Moscow to Tokyo, but more importantly, they would resound in the Heavens above, too." To Go To Top

YESHA LEADERS BLAME GOVERNMENT FOR TERROR ATTACK Posted by the Gedud Haivri organization, April 4, 2004.

Benzi Lieberman, Chairman of the Yesha Council blasted PM Sharon and DM Moufaz, blaming them for the Friday night attack in Avnei Chefetz that left one Jewish man dead, and one girl injured. Yesha leaders say that the government did not offer the necessary preventive security measures, in spite of IDF recommendations. Yekutiel Ben-Yakov, spokesman for the Gedud HaIvri, a volunteer guard unit said that the Yesha Council should not be blaming the government when Yesha has done absolutely nothing to help the Gedud HaIvri in their endeavor to defend "settlements". "We have been struggling for two years to bring guards and specially trained canines to Yesha. What has Yesha done? Have they offered us one caravan to house our volunteers? Have they brought us one cup of coffee for our guards? Has the Yesha council sponsored one vaccination for one of our guard dogs? Have they supplied us with one vehicle or ten agurot for gasoline? We have been urging the Yesha council for years to help sponsor additional independent guards in Yesha. And they have repeatedly answered that they will rely solely on the IDF. And now after another murder, they wake up. Two of our medics and one of our canine handlers were on the scene Friday night. Instead of Yesha crying about what Sharon does and does not do, let the Yesha council begin to take steps to support the Gedud HaIvri in their efforts to defend Yesha towns." Gedud Haivri is an independent volunteer guard group that provides both canine and cavalry patrol teams. People who wish to contribute to the life-saving efforts of the Gedud HaIvri can send contributions to 'Gedud Haivri', Rehov Moriah 3, Jerusalem Israel 94386. Or through their website at www.defendisrael.net To Go To Top

HRW'S WAR ON NGO-MONITOR Posted by Gerald Steinberg, April 4, 2004.

I am editor of the NGO-Monitor, which monitors the Non-Governmental Organizations in the same way that Camera and Honest Reporting monitor the news media. Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), an NGO, attacked us in the Jerusalem Post, claiming HRW provided "an honest evaluation of [Israel's] human rights practices." It found Israel's response to terrorist attacks excessive. It claimed Israel's actions were illegal. Below is my response. While Human Rights Watch claims to "defend human rights worldwide", this NGO superpower has betrayed its mandate and these norms by playing a leading role in the demonization of Israel. As a result, HRW has lost the halo effect and immunity from analysis that it once enjoyed, and for HRW's Executive Director Kenneth Roth, this external scrutiny is very disturbing. In an article in the Jerusalem Post on April 2 ("The Truth Hurts"), which reflects the precept that "the best defense is a good offensive", Roth launches an attack on the analyses published on www.ngo-monitor.org that clearly demonstrate HRW's exploitation of the rhetoric of human rights in delegitimizing Israel. According to HRW's distorted moral framework, the totalitarian terrorism on the Arab side of the dispute trumps Israeli democracy, and antisemitism does not even register on the human rights agenda. Roth's desperate counterattack designed to salvage HRW's tarnished reputation is based on anything but the truth. While using the terms "objective" and "unbiased", the political anti-Israeli agenda is obvious in any examination of this organization's activities. For example, in the period between April 2002 and January 2003, in which hundreds of Israelis were murdered in Palestinian terror attacks, HRW issued 15 press releases and reports on Israeli-Palestinian issues. Almost all repeated the political allegations (disguised in the rhetoric of international law) of "Israeli war crimes", "extra-judicial killings", and "disproportionate use of force". This anti-human rights campaign reached its zenith following the murder of dozens of Israelis during Passover in 2002, when HRW focused its attacks on the IDF's operation to destroy the terror network in Jenin. The report alleged that "IDF military attacks were indiscriminate... failing to make a distinction between combatants and civilians" and claimed that "...the destruction extended well beyond any conceivable purpose of gaining access to fighters, and was vastly disproportionate to the military objectives pursued." This highly subjective language reflects the propaganda campaign of the Palestinian leadership, and is based on unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence and unverifiable Palestinian claims. Going further, in a December 10 2002 CNN interview, Roth called for "conditioning" or cutting US government assistance to Israel, condemned Israeli policies, and again "forgot" to mention the context of terrorism. HRW, whose Middle East director is Joe Stork, former editor of the anti-Israel Middle East Report, also contributed to the campaign against the "apartheid" wall, and the overall effort to deny Israelis the right to defense against terror attacks. When Israel sought to halt the illegal infiltration of Palestinians based on often fictitious marriages to Israeli Arabs, HRW led the NGO chorus in attacking this policy as "racist". As usual, HRW's reports erased any of the background information that justified the Israeli move, thereby earning Al-Jazeerah's endorsement as the leader in the battle against the "Zionist NGO's Monitor" (January 9 2004) Roth attempts to escape association with the notorious UN Conference on Racism in Durban, which set the pattern for demonization of Israel, by pointing to HRW's minimalist statement disassociating itself from the NGO manifesto. HRW might have had an impact had it walked out of the forum, and if it had used its multi-million dollar public relations apparatus to amplify the late protest, but instead, HRW issued a meek statement with no visibility which was immediately buried. Similarly, with the exception of a very belated November 2002 report that was quickly forgotten, HRW's condemnations of Palestinian terror attacks are couched in terms that gain little attention. In contrast, the steady stream of attacks against Israel are accompanied by highly orchestrated press conferences, televised appearances by Roth, and detailed reports that give credence to Palestinian propaganda claims. It is precisely this comparison that Roth is trying to bury by attacking NGO Monitor. Roth's political agenda is also reflected in his pseudo-legalistic condemnations of "extra judicial killings" and "assassinations". Israeli attacks against Hamas leaders such as Ahmed Yassin, he claims, demonstrate " Israeli indifference to the same body of international human rights and humanitarian law that prohibits deliberate attacks on civilians." Beyond the base immorality of referring to terrorists as "civilians", Roth's armchair alternative - the arrest and trial of terrorist leaders - is pure fantasy. Had Israeli forces entered the dense streets of Gaza to arrest Yassin, the result would have been a blood-bath in which large numbers of people would have been killed. But since the goal is to demonize Israel, regardless of the facts, none of this is relevant to the HRW leadership. NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and the UN frameworks in which they operate were founded in the black shadow of the Nazi Holocaust with the goal of insuring that such brutality is never repeated, but since then, they have lost their way. Under the leadership of Roth and Stork, and the adoption of a heavily anti-Israel political agenda, HRW has betrayed the principles of its founders, and become a potent force in the exploitation and destruction of human rights. The record speaks for itself. NGO-Monitor's website address is http://www.ngo-monitor.org To Go To Top

THE EFFECT OF GOODWILL MEASURES Posted by Steven Plaut, April 3, 2004.

The latest goodwill measure by the Beilinized Sharon government was to release an imprisoned terrorist. The man then ran out and murdered a father of four last evening, while trying also to murder his children and badly wounding the dead man's daughter of 14: Sources in the Shin Bet confirmed that Arda, the perp, was released last week from a military prison, where he had been incarcerated for "less than a few months" for throwing firebombs and stones at soldiers and civilians. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1080979159440 The Sharon government will no doubt respond to this by seeking to carry out more goodwill measures. 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

COMMENTARY ON THE THIRD DRAFT OF THE "PALESTINIAN" CONSTITUTION Posted by Dafna Yee, April 4, 2004.

While checking out some suspicious "peace" organizations for my website's "anti-Israel 'peace' groups" page, I came across the third draft for the "Constitution of the State of Palestine" (http://www.jmcc.org/documents/palestineconstitution-eng.pdf). While I don't pretend that it is enjoyable reading, I still suggest that everyone who is interested in the consequences of such a document take the time to read it also as soon as possible. If you've already read it, you might look it over again as the Israeli situation has changed considerably in the year since it was published, especially in the light of Sharon's betrayal. You will note that nowhere in all of the pages is there a single acknowledgment of the State of Israel that all the "peace plans" assure us will be there "side by side" after Israel gives up its land that it paid in blood for. The "Palestinians" also make it clear that, while they will accept Christians (though their citizenship status is not really clear); the issue of the status of Jews is noticeably absent - I imagine they are hoping there will be no Jews left to be considered. And, yes, there is an inclusion about their denouncement of terrorism, but one must remember that the Arabs don't consider the killing of non-Muslims murder, let alone an act of terror. More importantly than their token statements to democratic concepts and ideals, it should be noted that the constitution specified that fundamentalist Islam - which frequently calls for jihad - is to be, not only the state religion, but the ultimate civil authority, as well. It is also states very clearly that future ties are to be with the Arab world and NOT with the West. Two other points of note is that ALL of Jerusalem is named as the capital of "Palestine" and there is a "law of return" for any "Palestinian" who claims it! Please also take special note of the provisions for the presidential powers. (And don't forget who the "President" will be!) The chief backers and formulators of this document include President Mubarak of Egypt, Minister El Hariri of Lebanon, Prince Sa'ud Al Faysal of Saudi Arabia, and Mr. Amr Moussa, the General Secretary of the League of Arab States. It would make this commentary too long to examine the background of every contributor to this document, so I took one at random - Kamal M. Astal, a protege of Al Sourani, the Constitution Chairman. You can read all about Astal on his PEACE website (http://www.peacearab.org/administrativ.htm), which not surprisingly, is no different from the vast majority of "peace" groups. Among the more interesting points about Astal is that he spent 10 years in an Israeli jail (for an unnamed offense). But, his educational background and publications are far more significant (he's a VERY prolific writer). He has publicly criticised Arafat, not for using non-peaceful means against Israeli civilians but for "risking the waste of the 'blood of the martyrs'" by not being tough enough in recognizing the radical nature of the "Palestinians". (http://middleeastinfo.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file =print&fid=1&tid=1252) I have no doubt that a detailed examination of the other committee members will reveal similar philosophies. One very interesting fact is that the sole American consultant in the writing of this document is a man named Nathan J. Brown. He is a professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University and has published many papers and taught many courses on the "situation" (although he usually just refers to "Palestine"). One particularly interesting paper demonstrating his historical beliefs is one that he prepared for the Adam Institute for Democracy and Peace (http://www.tolerance-net.org/network/inst/adaminst.html) located in Jerusalem, Israel. It is called "Democracy, History, and the Contest over the Palestinian Curriculum" (http://clubs.asua.arizona.edu/~apjme/palschools.pdf). Although, he specifically states that the opinions are his own, he also acknowledges that this paper was funded by a Fulbright grant as well as a grant from the United States Institute of Peace. Here is a lovely quote from that paper to whet your appetite (which I'm sure you'll lose after reading this blatant Arab propaganda): "the Palestinian curriculum is not a war curriculum; while highly nationalistic, it does not incite hatred, violence, and anti-Semitism." I guess all the evidence compiled by people like Itamar Marcus of the PMW - Palestinian Media Watch (http://www.pmw.org.il/new/) is all wrong, right? (BTW, if you haven't checked out their new website recently, take a look. It's very impressive.) As a matter of fact, Brown spends quite a lot of time attempting to discredit Itmar Marcus, both professionally and personally. He even cites a paper submitted by the PLO to the Mitchell Commission (www.nad-plo.org/eye/Response%20to%20Israeli%20Submission.5.pdf) as "proof"! Now, there's an unbiased source for you! When you get down to page 11, you will find Brown giving legitimacy to the entire mythology of a "Palestinian history" complete with the lie of a connection to the Canaanites. The reference to a second grade text specifically mentions "Arab Canaanites" who built Jerusalem (only of course the text doesn't call the city by that name). This treatise is all the more dangerous because Brown only acknowledges that, yes, some things are left out of the 'Palestinian" texts but he excuses these glaring omissions as ways of avoiding controversy instead of what it is - a gross violation of history! Actually, he uses this excuse again and again throughout his paper. If the Arabs, including their children, weren't being taught from a young age to hate and kill Israelis (and Americans - a fact that Brown conveniently leaves out!), then recruiting them as "martyrs" would be impossible. The fact that the "Palestinians" teach hatred to their children is borne out by the evidence of their murderous actions as well as their incomprehensible joy (to me, at least) at the death of non-Muslims. The other two non-Muslim consultants were both lawyers from the UK - Professor Anthony Bradley of the University of Edinburgh, who founded the Scottish Human Rights Trust(http://www.scotrights.org) and Professor Emeritus Keith Patchett, of the University of Wales Institute of Science and Technology. You might be as interested as I am to learn that the Trust that Bradley founded is linked to the UN, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and several others who are known to have a distinctly anti-Israel bias. (For those of you who know of my "peace" list, just writing this paper has added some more groups.) What I find to be the most interesting fact to emerge after going through the list of everyone involved in the making of this "Constitution", is that not one of the self-proclaimed Jewish friends of the "peace" movements to create "Palestine", such as Neve Gordon or Ilan Pappas (just to name two at random), were invited to work or even consulted on it. I guess their "Palestinian" friends aren't counting on continuing their relationship after Israel is gone and "Palestine" is established in its place (G-d forbid!) Perhaps the Western World won't see such a peaceful future with "Palestine", after all, irregardless of what the Israelis do or don't do. Dafna Yee is director of Jewish Watch Dog (JWD). Its website address ishttp://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

MIKE'S TRAVEL ADVISORY Posted by IsrAlert, April 3, 2004.

This was written by Mike Levine News Bulletin: "US State Department warns Americans not to travel to Israel following the Sheik Yassin killing". To my knowledge there was no such travel advisory following the bombings in Madrid in which 190 were killed. Just today another huge bomb was found on a railroad track in Spain. Nor was there a warning to stay away from Uzbekistan after scores were murdered by terrorists. Today the British police conducted a raid which resulted in the arrest of a gang of suspected terrorists, yet no one has put London off limits for Americans. It was my intention to write an article listing all the countries in the world that have suffered attacks by terrorists, but when I began researching it turned out the list quickly grew to 22 and I was nowhere near finished. The sad fact is that almost every nation on earth has suffered one sort of terrorist attack or another in recent years, with many thousands of deaths. Maybe it would have been easier to list the countries that have not suffered from terrorism. You know, like Greenland and Iceland. (Maybe terrorists don't like ice and cold.) So why is it that the State Department is always so quick to put Israel off-limits? After 9/11 shouldn't they have put New York off limits, and Washington, D.C.? Instead they made it an act of defiance and patriotism for Americans to visit New York City and gape at the big hole! Egypt has been plagued by fundamentalist Islamic terrorists for years who have murdered busloads of tourists, yet they have never been put on the US Travel Advisory warning list. Turkey has suffered bombings and shootings of three Synagogues, yet Americans are free to travel there. Insurgent terrorist groups in the Philippines have kidnapped, murdered, and brutalized hundreds of people without honorary mention in the infamous list. In a few days at Passover Seders all over the world Jews will ask, "Why is this night different from all other nights?" In Israel we ought to change that to, "Why is this nation treated differently from all other nations?" So here's Mike's Travel Advisory for Americans. Don't go anywhere. Stay home! No place on earth is totally safe. If you have a storm cellar or deep basement, hide! IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

HOWELL RAINES' SERIOUS LAPSE FROM "FULL DISCLOSURE" Posted by Leo Rennert, April 3, 2004.

This was written for the Atlantic magazine. In Howell Raines' apologia about his rise and fall at the New York Times, he describes himself as an uncompromising apostle of "full disclosure" of the paper's shortcomings. So it comes as a bit of a shock to read his explanation of why one of his distinguished predecessors, Abe Rosenthal, was denied a coveted assignment to Paris despite his abundant qualifications. Raines writes it was because Cy Sulzberger, then the chief European correspondent, "thought Abe too rough-hewn to be turned loose in the salons of Western Europe." Too rough-hewn? Try instead too Jewish. As Arthur Gelb recounts the same episode in "City Room," his far more balanced and less self-serving memoir of his days at the Times, Sulzberger vetoed Rosenthal by cautioning Times executives that "one Jew in the Paris bureau was enough." Sulzberger, a member of the Jewish family that still owns the Times, actually was not referring to himself but to another correspondent in the bureau, Henry Giniger. As Gelb observes, "Cyrus didn't think of himself as Jewish." (pages 229, 230). How odd that Raines, who prides himself on unflagging sensitivity to anything that smacks of discrimination against minorities, would ignore amply documented attempts by the Times' Jewish owners over several generations to bend over backwards not to be regarded as a "Jewish paper," even if it meant engaging in personnel practices that smacked of anti-Semitism. After all, this was also the paper that ignored or downplayed Hitler's Final Solution during the Holocaust and even after the liberation of the death camps. Raines' advocacy of letting-it-all-hang-out-there - the reason he gives for his downfall - would be more credible if he were less selective about "full disclosure" - whether of his own failings or the darker side of the paper's history. To Go To Top

ALLAH OR JESUS Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, April 3, 2004.

This is a true story and the author, Rick Mathes, is a well known leader in prison ministry. Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the 'Diversification' training seminar were not happy with Rick's way of dealing with the Islamic Imam and exposing the truth about the Muslim's beliefs. I think everyone in the US should be required to read this, but with the liberal justice system, liberal media, and the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized. Last month I attended my annual training session that's required for maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of their belief systems. I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say. The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video. After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers. When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked: "Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against the infidels of the world. And, that by killing an infidel, which is a command to all Muslims, they are assured of a place in heaven. If that's the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?" There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation, he replied, "Non-believers!" I responded, "So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can go to Heaven. Is that correct?" The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just gotten caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He sheepishly replied, "Yes." I then stated, "Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Dr. Stanley ordering Protestants to do the same in order to go to Heaven!" The Imam was speechless. I continued, "I also have problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me. Let me ask you a question. Would you rather have your Allah who tells you to kill me in order to go to Heaven or my Jesus who tells me to love you because I am going to Heaven and He wants you to be with me?" You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame. To Go To Top

EVERY YEAR ON YOM HASHOAH JEWS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD REMEMBER HITLER'S HOLOCAUST. Posted by Choni and Miriam Davidowitz, April 3, 2004.

We wrote this after visiting Hebron in March, 2004. HOWEVER HOW MANY JEWS KNOW ABOUT ANOTHER HOLOCAUST - NOT IN EUROPE - BUT IN OUR OWN LAND OF ERETZ ISRAEL. NO ONE CAN GIVE A RATIONAL EXPLANATION FOR THE MURDER OF SIX MILLION JEWS IN EUROPE, BUT THE HOLOCAUST IN ISRAELTHAT TOOK PLACE IN HEBRON AND OTHER PARTS OF ISRAEL IS FRIGHTENING IN ITS CLARITY AND ITS EXPLANATION IS CLEAR. THE YEAR IS 1929. THERE WERE NO JEWISH "OCCUPATION" TROOPS PATROLLING "THE WEST BANK." THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS "OCCUPIED ARAB LANDS OF 1967." ALL THE REASONS FOR VIOLENCE, BLOODSHED AND HATRED THAT TODAYS ARABS AND CONFUSED JEWS POINT TO AS BEING AT "THE HEART" OF THE ARAB JEWISH PROBLEM DID NOT EXIST THEN. THERE WERE NO JEWISH SETTLEMENTS WHICH WERE "OBSTACLES TO PEACE." NO WALL, NO FENCES. IN FACT THE ARABS OF ISRAEL WERE ALWAYS QUIET LOYAL CITIZENS ENJOYING PROGRESS AND EQUAL RIGHTS. IN 1929 WHAT CAUSED THEM TO CHANGE? WHAT HAPPENED? THE ANSWER IS NOTHING. NOTHING FUNDAMENTAL HAS CHANGED AT ALL. THE HATRED WAS NEVER ABSENT. ONLY OBJECTIVE AND HISTORICAL REASONS PREVENTED THIS REALITY FROM EMERGING DURING THE FIRST 20 YEARS OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL. THE REAL REASON JEWS ARE SO SHOCKED TO-DAY IS THAT ISRAEL NEVER WANTED TO SEE THE REALITY. WE BELIEVED WHAT WE WANTED TO BELIEVE BUT THE FOLLOWING FACTS WILL SHATTER THESE ILLUSIONS AND NOW WE MUST FACE THE BITTER REALITY. ALLOW ME TO TO LIST SOME OF THE MOST HORRIFIC MURDERS PERPETUATED BY THE ARABS ON THE JEWISH POPULATION IN HEBRON, THE BURIAL PLACE OF OUR PATRIARCHS AND MATRIARCHS WHO ARE BURIED IN THE CAVE OF THE MACHPELA, WHERE JEWS AND JUDAISM GO BACK THREE AND A HALF THOUSAND YEARS.   THERE WERE FIVE HUNDRED JEWS LIVING IN HEBRON IN 1929. IT WAS A HOT FRIDAY MORNING, AUGUST 23RD 1929, AND THE ARABS WERE BEGINNING THEIR MURDEROUS PLANS - THEY WANTED TO KILL JEWS. THESE BLOODTHIRSTY ARABS MADE THEIR WAY TO THE SLOBODKA YESHIVA. BECAUSE IT WAS EREV SHABBAT MOST OF THE STUDENTS WERE NOT THERE. ONLY THE YEMENI SHAMMAS AND THE DILIGENT ETERNAL LEARNER OF TORAH, SHMUEL ROSENHOLTZ. THE MOB CAME CHARGING INTO THE COURTYARD. THE SHAMMAS LEAPT INTO THE WELL AND COVERED HIMSELF THUS SAVING HIS LIFE. NOT SO ROSENHOLTZ. COMPLETELY IMMERSED IN HIS TALMUD HE DID NOT EVEN HEAR THE MOB COME IN. IT WAS ONLY WHEN STONES CAME FLYING INTO THE HALL, ONE SMASHING HIS HEAD SO THAT BLOOD SPURTED OVER HIS TALMUD, THAT HE ATTEMPTED TO FLEE BUT IN VAIN. THE MOB FELL UPON HIM AND PUNCTURED HIS BODY WITH KNIFE WOUNDS LIKE A SIEVE. THE MASSACRE HAD BEGUN AND THE ARABS HAD THEIR FIRST VICTIM. THE TRAGEDY UNFOLDS EARLY SABBATH MORNING THE JEWS ARE TOLD TO STAY IN THEIR HOMES FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY. MEANWHILE ARAB NEIGHBOURS GLEEFULLY TELL THEIR JEWISH "FRIENDS" THAT TO-DAY WILL BE A SLAUGHTER. THE STREETS ARE NOW PACKED WITH ARABS ARMED WITH GUNS, SWORDS AND KNIVES. SHOUTING SLOGANS, CALLING FOR DEATH TO THE JEWS, FEAR OF A TRULY SERIOUS THREAT TO JEWISH LIVES IS NOW EVIDENT. IN ONE OF THE HOUSES LIVES THE ABUSHADID FAMILY. THE FATHER , ELIYAHU, 55 YEARS OLD IS A STORE KEEPER BORN IN HEBRON. ROCKS FLY INTO HIS HOUSE SMASHING WINDOWS AND SCREAMS ARE HEARD. WOMEN AND CHILDREN FROM THE ABUSHADID FAMILY APPEAR ON THE BALCONY. AN ARAB, HIS EYES FILLED WITH HATE RUSHES AT THEM SWINGING A SWORD HE CUTS AND STABS THEM AGAIN AND AGAIN AND THEIR BLOOD SPURTS OVER THE BALCONY AND DRIPS DOWN TO THE STREET. INSIDE ARE THE BODIES OF ELIYAHU AND HIS 25 YEAR OLD SON. DEAD TOO ARE YAACOV GOSLAN 45, AND HIS 18YEAR OLD SON MOSHE. THE MOB NOW TURNS TO THE HOME OF THE REVERED RABBI MEIR KASTEL. THE 69 YEAR OLD "HAHAM" IS BRUTALLY MURDERED. THE MOB LOOTS HIS HOUSE AND THEN BURNS IT DOWN OVER HIS BODY. CLOSE BY RABBEINU HASON, 65 YEARS OLD, THE HEAD OF THE SEPHARDI RABBINATE AND HIS WIFE CLARA WATCH IN TERROR AS THE MOB BURNS DOWN THEIR DOOR AND STORMS IN. BOTH DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH AT THE HANDS OF THESE MONSTERS. NOW THE MOB TURNS TO BEIT HADASSAH, WHICH WAS THEN A MEDICAL CLINIC AND SYNAGOGUE FOR THE JEWS OF HEBRON. SO MUCH GOOD HUMANITARIAN WORK WAS CARRIED OUT IN BEIT HADASSAH FOR BOTH THE JEWS AND THE ARABS. THAT MATTERED LITTLE TO THE INFLAMED ARAB MOB, MANY WHO HAD RECEIVED FREE MEDICAL TREATMENT IN THIS HOSPITAL. ONCE INSIDE THEY SAVAGELY DESTROYED EVERYTHING IN SIGHT, MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, MEDICINES ALL SHATTERED IN A HATE FILLED FRENZY OF VIOLENCE. THE SYNAGOGUE IS THE SCENE OF UTTER DESTRUCTION, THE TORAH SCROLLS TORN AND DESECRATED AND THEN BURNED. NEXT DOOR TO THE HADASSAH BUILDING LIVES BEN ZION GERSHON, A CRIPPLED PHARMACIST, WHOSE KINDNESS TO THE ARABS IS LEGENDARY. HOW MANY TIMES DID THE ARABS THANK HIM BY BLESSING HIS NAME AFTER HE HAD HELPED THEM . TODAY THE MOB SHOWS THE WAY IT REPAYS KINDNESS. THEIR FINGER NAILS GOUGE OUT THE CRIPPLED PHARMACISTS EYES AND HE DIES AS KNIVES PIERCE HIS BODY. HIS WIFE IS ASSAULTED AND BOTH HER ARMS ARE CUT OFF. SHE DIES LATER IN A JERUSALEM HOSPITAL. THE ARABS ATTEMPT TO RAPE THEIR DAUGHTER, BUT SHE STRUGGLES SO FIERCELY THAT THEY KILL HER IN AN OBSCENE WAY. THE STREETS OF HEBRON ARE NOW A NIGHTMARE OF SHOUTING, FRENZIED ARABS. SCREAMS OF DYING MEN, VIOLATED WOMEN AND WEEPING CHILDREN ARE HEARD FROM DOZENS OF HOUSES. THE POGROM CONTINUES. YESHIVA STUDENT AVRAHAM DOV SHAPIRA STABBED TO DEATH. THE YOUNG TORAH GENIUS ZVI HELLER IS STABBED AGAIN AND AGAIN AND CRIES OUT, "I AM ONLY A BOY." BUT NEVERTHELESS HE DIES OF HIS WOUNDS ON THE WAY TO A JERUSALEM HOSPITAL. ANOTHER STUDENT MOSHE ARON RIPPS BEGS HIS MURDERERS A MOMENT TO PRAY THE VIDUI, THE FINAL CONFESSION. AS HE BEGINS THEY SLAUGHTER HIM. TWO OTHER STUDENTS SHMUEL IZIK BERNSTEIN AND YESHACHAR ELIYAHU SANDROW ARE KILLED AND THE LATTER ALMOST CUT IN TWO BY THE CRUEL MOB. THE HOME OF THE SHOCHET IS BROKEN INTO BY THE MOB AND YAAKOV ZVI REIZMAN IS CAUGHT AND HE IS RIDDLED WITH KNIFE WOUNDS AND DIES OUTSIDE HIS HOUSE IN THE GUTTER. ON THE FLOOR OF HIS HOUSE LIE HIS DEAD BROTHER MOSHE AND HIS MOTHER IN LAW FRIEDA HAIMSON. THE NEXT "CALL" IS TO THE HOME OF ONE ELIEZER DON SLONIM. SLONIM HIMSELF IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT JEWS IN HEBRON AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE ANGLO PALESTINE BANK. HE IS THE ONLY JEW TO SIT ON THE HEVRON TOWN COUNCIL AND HAS MANY "FRIENDS" AMONG THE ARABS. HE KNOWS ALL THE NOTABLES AND THEY HAVE PROMISED HIM PROTECTION AND ASSURED HIS SAFETY. BECAUSE OF THIS SLONIM TELLS AS MANY JEWS AS POSSIBLE TO COME TO HIS HOUSE TO SEEK REFUGE. SOME SEVENTY JEWS ARE GATHERED THERE WRAPPED IN PRAYER SHAWLS. THE MEN STAND AND PRAY THE SABBATH SERVICE IN FEAR AND TREPIDATION SUDDENLY THE WINDOWS AND DOORS OF THE HOUSE ARE SHATTERED AND THE MOB ATTACKS. THEY CHARGE UP THE NARROW STONE STEPS. INSIDE THE YESHIVA STUDENTS ATTEMPT TO HOLD BACK THE MURDERERS - SHOTS RING OUT. AVRAHAM YANAI 56 YEARS OLD FALLS, STRUCK IN THE ARM. A SECOND SHOT CATCHES 27 YEAR OLD ZALMAN VILENSKY IN THE FACE. HE COLLAPSES IN A POOL OF BLOOD. ANOTHER BULLET RIPS OUT THE STOMACHE OF YISRAEL MORDECHAI KAPLAN 22 YEARS OLD. EVEN AS HE FALLS HE ATTEMPTS TO HOLD CLOSED THE REMAINING DOOR TO KEEP MORE ARABS OUT BUT THEN HE DIES. DOV BER LIPIN 26 YEARS OLD AND ALTER HAIM SHOR 24 YEARS OLD ARE SHOT AND THEIR BODIES TUMBLE OUT ONTO THE STEPS AND THE MOB TRAMPLES THEM. ELIEZER DON SLONIM FIRES HIS PISTOL AT THE MOB BUT IS TRUCK DOWN BY AN ARAB WIELDING A HEAVY METAL PIPE. YISRAEL LAZOROWSKY 17 YEARS OLD IS STABBED TO DEATH. YISRAEL HILLEL KAPLINSKY TWENTY ONE YEARS OLD LIES ON THE GROUND FELLED BY A BULLET AND IS THEN ATTACKED BY THE ARABS WHO STAB HIM REPEATEDLY UNTIL THEY ARE CERTAIN HE IS DEAD. A SURVIVOR RECALLS HIM SHOUTING - "I AM ALREADY NEARLY DEAD AND STILL THEY STAB ME!" AND IN A CORNER IN A POOL OF BLOOD, WRAPPED IN HIS TALIT LIES THE RABBI OF ZICHRON YAACOV, RABBI AVRAHAM YAACOV ORLINSKI, NEXT TO HIS DEAD WIFE. THEY HAD COME TO HEBRON TO SPEND A QUIET SHABBAT WITH THEIR DAUGHTER AND SON-IN-LAW ELIEZER DON SLONIM. RABBI TZVI DROBKIN SIXTY SEVEN YEARS OLD - KNOWN AS THE "GENIUS OF SHKLOV" - THE ARABS LITERALLY RIP HIS BELLY IN TWO AND HIS INSIDES POUR OUT. AND ALL THE OTHER MARTYRS WHO DIED TO SANCTIFY G-DS NAME: SHLOMO YIGAL TWENTY FOUR YEARS OLD ZEV BERMAN TWENTY THREE YEARS OLD YAACOV WECSLER SEVENTEEN YEARS OLD AHARON DAVID EPSTEIN SEVENTEEN YEARS OLD REB AHARON LEIB GOTTLOVSKY SEVENTY TWO YEARS OLD BETZALEL LAZAROWSKY AND HIS FIVE YEAR OLD DAUGHTER - BOTH LIE DEAD. YAACOV AND LEAH GRODZINSKI - DIE TOGETHER ELIEZER AND LEAH DOVNIKOV. ELIEZER WAS THE PRINCIPAL OF THE TEL NORDAU SCHOOL IN TEL AVIV. THEY HAD ALSO COME TO HEBRON TO SPEND THE SHABBAT IN THE CITY OF THE PATRIARCHS - BOTH LIE DEAD. THE YOUNG GIRL WHO IS STRIPPED NAKED AND IS SAVED FROM BEING RAPED ONLY WHEN SHE PLEADS TO BE KILLED. THE "MERCIFUL" ARABS COMPLY WITH HER REQUEST AND RIP OPEN HER BELLY BEFORE THE EYES OF HER LITTLE SISTER WHO IS HIDING UNDER A BED. THERE ARE MANY MORE HORRIFIC DEATHS TOO NUMEROUS TO MENTION.   HEBRON - NOTHING HAS CHANGED. HEBRON - WHERE THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF JEWISH/ARAB CO-EXISTENCE IS WRITTEN IN BLOOD. NOT ONLY IN HEBRON, BUT IN SAFED, JAFFA AND JERUSALEM. THE POGROMS OF 1936 TO 1938 WHEN MANY JEWS WERE MURDERED BY ARABS IN KFAR SABA YAKNAAM, HAIFA ETC. A TOTAL OF FIVE HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN SLAUGHTERED IN THESE POGROMS. REMEMBER AT THIS TIME THERE WERE NO SETTLEMENTS, NO FENCES, NO WALLS, NO OCCUPATION.   NOTHING HAS CHANGED - IT HAS BECOME WORSE. OUR CEMETRIES ARE FILLED WITH JEWISH MEN,WOMEN AND CHILDREN, WITH MANY MORE THOUSANDS MAIMED FOR LIFE DUE TO ONGOING ARAB BARBARISM. IF THE JEW DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE REAL CAUSE OF THE ARAB/JEWISH CONFLICT, HE WILL INDEED G-D FORBID GIVE THE ARABS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR WHICH HE SO LONGS - TO LIQUIDATE THE JEWISH STATE. WHAT IS WRONG WITH US? WHO BLOCKED FROM OUR MEMORIES THE EXISTENCE AND POWER OF THE G-D OF ISRAEL? DID A JEWISH PEOPLE EXIST FOR 2,OOO YEARS WITHOUT A STATE OR ARMY, WANDERING FROM LAND TO LAND, SUFFERING POGROMS AND HOLOCAUSTS AND SURVIVING POWERFUL EMPIRES JUST BY CHANCE? DID A JEWISH PEOPLE RETURN TO ITS LAND EXACTLY AS PROMISED IN THE BIBLE THROUGH MERE "NATURAL MEANS?" WHAT OTHER NATION EVER DID SUCH A THING? NO - ONLY AN ISRAEL BECAUSE THERE IS G-D IN IT!!! THE LAND OF ISRAEL IS HIS DIVINE LAND. THE JEW HAS COME HOME FOR THE THIRD AND LAST TIME. THE ARABS OF ISRAEL REPRESENT "HILLUL HASHEM" IN ITS STARKEST FORM. THEIR REJECTION OF JEWISH SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE LAND OF ISRAEL CONSTITUTES A REJECTION OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE LORD G-D OF ISRAEL. THEIR TRANSFER FROM THE LAND OF ISRAEL THUS BECOMES MORE THAN A POLITICAL ISSUE. IT IS A RELIGIOUS ISSUE, A RELIGIOUS OBLIGATION, A COMMANDMENT TO ERASE HILLUL HASHEM. FAR FROM FEARING WHAT THE "GENTILE" WILL DO IF WE CARRY OUT SUCH A THING, LET THE JEW TREMBLE AS HE CONSIDERS THE ANGER OF THE ALMIGHTY IF WE DO NOT CARRY OUT THIS OBLIGATION!!! LET US REMOVE THE ARABS FROM ERETZ ISRAEL AND BRING THE REDEMPTION. To Go To Top

INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENT OF ZAKAT, ONE OF THE FIVE PILLARS OF ISLAM Posted by IsrAlert, April 2, 2004.

1. PURPOSE: To provide background on the concept of Zaket and its funding of asymmetrical warfare. 2. ASSESSMENT: ZAKAT is one of the five pillars of Islam and is erroneously thought to be simply alms giving for the poor. It is also an asymmetrical warfare funding capability. a. The obligatory disbursements for those whose hearts are to be reconciled constitute funding mechanisms facilitating the establishment of Islamic footholds in non-Muslim areas and the consolidating of those footholds to increase Islamic influence. b. The obligatory disbursements for those fighting for Allah constitute a funding mechanism for combat, combat support and combat service support operations. The precise characteristics of the funding process and the amount of money involved is presently unknown, but the enabling doctrine is in place and ideally suited for supporting autonomous, decentralized, asymmetrical military operations. c. The obligatory disbursements for travelers needing money defrays personal expenses and transportation costs associated with individual movement to and from conflict zones. d. These three categories of disbursements constitute an unrecognized dimension in Islamic charitable fundraising for purposes inimical to U.S. interests. 3. DISCUSSION: Islamic law, comprised of the Koran[1], the Hadiths, Consensus[2] and reasoning by analogy, prescribes compulsory alms giving (zakat). A primary legal reference within the Sunni tradition, Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri's Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, details how zakat is to be administered. Although religious in its context, zaket constitutes a political and military budgeting capability that can facilitate autonomous, decentralized, asymmetrical operations against U.S. interests. a. Revenue Production: Zakat generates funds through obligatory contributions. The percentage of the expected donation for contributing Muslims varies between 1/40th (2.5 percent) to 1/5th (20 percent) of their annual income and property holdings. b. Eight Categories of Recipients: It is obligatory to distribute zakat to the following eight categories of recipients (Analyst Comment: The verbiage used in the following paragraphs is taken almost verbatim from Reliance of the Traveller to illustrate funding intent.) (1) The Poor. (2) Those Short of Money. (3) Zakat Workers. (4) Those Whose Hearts are to Reconciled. (5) Those Purchasing Their Freedom. (6) Those in Debt. (7) Those Fighting for Allah. (8) Travelers Needing Money. c. The Poor (1) One who does not have less than one half of what he needs for food, clothing, housing and whatever he cannot do without, to a degree suitable to someone of his standing without extravagance, then he is poor, and is either: (a) unable to earn his living by work suitable to him; or (b) is able to earn a living but to do so would keep him too busy to engage in attaining knowledge of Sacred Law. (2) May not receive zakat if one's religious devotions are what keeps one too busy to earn a living. d. Those Short of Money (1) Someone who has something to spend for his needs but it is not enough and; (2) is subject to additional considerations including: (a) if he cannot earn a living by work befitting him; or, (b) if he can earn a living but attainment of knowledge of Sacred Law prevents him from doing so. (3) May not receive zakat if he is capable of working but extra devotions prevent him from doing so. e. Zakat Workers: Zakat collectors are paid from the collections taken. f. Those Whose Hearts Are To Be Reconciled: (1) Must be Muslim. (2) Given to ensure propagation of the faith in initial stages. (3) If recent converts and are alienated from their kin. (4) Those to be reconciled include: (a) Chief personages of a people (with weak or fledgling institutions needing economic support to improve or whose peers may be expected to enter Islam). (b) Heads of a people who collect zakat for Islam from Muslims living near them who refuse to pay it. (c) Heads of a people who fight an enemy for Islam at considerable expense and trouble to themselves. g. Those Purchasing the Freedom. Slaves who are purchasing their freedom from their owners. h. Those in Debt. (1) To a person who incurs debts in order to settle trouble involving bloodshed or to settle trouble concerning property. (2) To a person who incurs debts to support himself or his dependents if he is poor but not affluent. (3) To a person who incurs a lawful debt, but spend his money on something unlawful and then sincerely repents for misspending the money. i. Those Fighting for Allah: (1) Those engaged on Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster. (2) Given enough to suffice them for the operation even if affluent of: (a) weapons; (b) mounts; (c) clothing; (d) expenses: and, (e) for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there. (f) Current interpretation and practice has been to provide expenses in supporting such person's Family during this period. j. Travelers Needing Money. One who is passing through a town in Muslim lands where zakat is collected or whose journey was not taken for the purpose of disobeying Allah, if such a person is in need, he is given enough to cover his personal expenses and transportation, even if he possesses money back home. k. Financial Administration. Given the protected religious nature of "charity" fundraising activities and the paucity of intelligence reporting on this subject, initial assessments suggest that revenue production, financial transfers, and distribution of zakat funds is through the mosque networks and, perhaps, through Islamic based Non Government organizations. 4. ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT. a. The obligatory disbursements for those whose hearts are to be reconciled constitute funding mechanisms facilitating the establishment of Islamic footholds in non-Muslim areas and the consolidation of those footholds to advance the spread of Islamic influence. b. The obligatory disbursements for those fighting for Allah constitutes a funding mechanism for combat, combat support and combat service support operations. While the nature and the extent of the funding process is presently unknown, the doctrine and capability is in place to support autonomous, decentralized, asymmetrical operations. c. The obligatory disbursements for travelers needing money permits funding for personal expenses and transportation costs associated with individual travel to and from conflict zones. d. These three categories of disbursements are ideally suited for supporting a wide range of tactical operations against U.S. interests and constitute little known, seldom recognized, enemy capability warranting further analysis. 5. POC: Mr. William Gawthrop, SAIC Forward Analytical Element, U.S. National Intelligence Cell, Sarajevo, APO AE 09780; Commercial: 387.33.626-827; email: gawthrop@aol.com. DRV FM: Multiple Sources DECL: X1 DOI: 17 December 2003 NOTES: [1] All references to the Koran (Qur'an) are taken from "The Noble Qur'an", Seventeenth Revised Edition, Darussalam Publishers, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. [2] Laleh Bakhtiar, "Encyclopedia of Islamic Law: A Compendium of the Major Schools", Kazi Publications, Chicago: 1996), page XXXVI. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

AN UNIMPORTANT SHEIKH Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, April 2, 2004.

Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was a perfect symbol of Islam: blind, deaf, unable to experience life the way normal people do, and full of murderous hatred towards them. Now, the analogy is broken, because the sheikh is dead while Islam is very much alive, and so is Hamas. A few short hours after the demise of Sheikh Yassin, Dr. Rantisi firmly stepped in to fill the sudden vacancy. The same would have happened if, instead of an IAF missile, the bloody sheikh's death had come from a really bad case of flu, an accidental fall from a window, an alien abduction, or any other theoretically possible cause. Hamas continues functioning. In his inaugural interview, Dr. Rantisi assured the New York Times reporter that Hamas could not be dismantled. This evokes an obvious question: how exactly does the killing of Sheikh Yassin constitute a victory for Israel? Oh, it could have very well become the beginning of a victory, had it been the first step in the complete, systematic eradication - not dismantling - of Arab terrorist forces in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. But immediately after the elimination of the evil sheikh, Israel resumed sitting on its hands. Apparently, Prime Minister Sharon had not planned any real action. What did he plan then? When Israel withdrew from Lebanon, Arabs quite correctly perceived the step as their victory. The killing of Sheikh Yassin was an attempt to prevent them from coming to the same conclusion when Israel leaves Gaza. Obviously, this attempt failed. Notwithstanding propaganda lies about "Palestinian" territories, Gaza, Judea, and Samaria are integral parts of Israel. Jews know it, Arabs know it, and everyone who ever read an honest history book about the region knows it, as well. Quitting Gaza will be an act of surrender of Israeli territory to the enemy. No matter how the government of Israel tries to sell it to the public at home and abroad, no mater how loudly it slams the door on exit, it will be a victory for the Arabs and a defeat for Israel. Of course, had Israel decided to kill every terrorist in Gaza before the withdrawal, then, after the withdrawal, Gaza would have remained empty, because, just like Judea and Samaria, its population today consists of exactly two categories of people: Jews and terrorists. Sharon is removing the Jews, leaving terrorists to live on Israeli land. Compared to Oslo, this is an important step forward: Oslo, at least in theory, was supposed to be land for peace; Sharon is giving away land for nothing. Every advocate of peace with "Palestinians" assumes that at least some of them oppose terrorism and would want to live in peace with Israel under, at least, some circumstances. Facts do not support that theory. For terrorists to operate with impunity from small towns or overcrowded refugee camps where everyone knows what's cooking in everyone else's kitchen, they must enjoy the unanimous support of the population. And they do. Whenever they doubt the sincerity of someone's support, they murder him on the spot as a "collaborator". For some inexplicable reason, these actions remain largely ignored by human rights defenders all over the world; just as the ongoing mass murder of Israeli citizens fails to ignite their righteous anger. Apparently, the world believes that Arabs have a right to kill, while Jews have a duty to be killed. In recent weeks, the Israeli security forces caught several Arab children carrying explosives. Amnesty International condemned the use of children commissioned for terrorist acts, but failed to condemn the murder of children in the very same acts. That's understandable: the victims are Jews, while the murderers are Arabs. Since Arabs, themselves, did not rise up in anger, the incident has proven once again, this time more conclusively than ever, that they hate Jews more than they love their own children. The elimination of the evil sheikh has once again demonstrated that the enemy our civilization is facing, like the Hydra of myth, cannot be decapitated. George W. Bush has had a very similar experience in Iraq, where the capture of Saddam Hussein has failed to make a dent in the resistance to the American-led occupation. In light of these experiences, common sense demands that we question the wisdom of spending billions of dollars and risking the lives of our soldiers trying to capture Osama bin Laden; after all, WWII was won even though Hitler was never captured. But common sense seems to be a rare commodity nowadays among both the powers that be and the public, and the definition of victory in the American War on Terror remains as elusive as the definition of terrorism itself. The Madrid bombing convincingly showed that the two years of war have not made our world any less vulnerable to terrorism, but rather more psychologically susceptible to it. Are we doing something wrong? Is there a flaw in our approach to the problem? Judging from the results or, rather, lack thereof, these questions must be deemed purely rhetorical. They are rhetorical not just because the answers to them must be obvious to everyone. Unfortunately, those obvious answers contradict commonly shared misconceptions, and most people are simply not willing to adjust their beliefs in order to accommodate reality. Instead, most people prefer to adjust reality to accommodate their beliefs, which is one of the main reasons why our reality is in such disarray. What misconceptions am I talking about? Here is one: Islam is just another religion, and deep down Muslims are not that different from us. Obviously, this is a politically correct point of view, but how does it relate to facts? Before you answer, please take a look at recent pictures from Falluja, Iraq, where an Iraqi mob murdered four American civilians and turned the mutilation of their bodies into a mass celebration. This was nothing unusual in the Muslims world. The event bears a striking resemblance to the behavior of Muslims crowds in Mogadishu ("Black Hawk Down") and Ramallah, where in October, 2000, two Israeli reservists were literally torn apart by an Arab mob. If you sincerely believe that deep down you are not so different from those people, maybe you belong with them, rather than in a civilized society; maybe you should convert to Islam and begin preparing your children for the glories of martyrdom. Contrary to what multiculturalists want us to believe, there are objective criteria allowing us to assess a foreign, as well as our own, culture without succumbing to ethnocentrism. Here are a few simple tests: - How far is a given society willing to bend the truth in promoting its concepts of right and wrong? - What does it do with the bodies of fallen enemies? - How socially acceptable in that society is the hatred of Jews? Try applying these criteria to the Muslim culture, and you will come to an inescapable conclusion: whether deep down or on the surface, they are fundamentally different from us. Different to the point of full incompatibility, and unless we honestly admit it and begin acting accordingly, we are bound to lose this jihad. Unfortunately, one dead sheikh doesn't really make a difference, especially one who never was really alive in the first place. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com To Go To Top

CALL FOR CONSTITUTION TO BE SIGNED IN SPAIN Posted by Stan L. Bowman, April 2, 2004.

There is a call for a Constitution to be signed in Madrid. This will be a great boost for Spain. This would have big complications because Spain could become very powerful in the EU as predicted by Daniel the prophet. Daniel 7:19-21 "Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast (EU), which was diverse from all the other World Powers, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces (10 World Tradeing Blocks), and stamped the residue with his feet. 20-And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up (#11 SPAIN), and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. 21-I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them." I think this is the Spanish future king dictator that Daniel is talking about here. Spain will be very strong in these last days. Peace to Jerusalem - Stan L Bowman Israel and Jerusalem Forever Together. This item was written by Honor Mahony. EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The European Parliament on Thursday (1 April) voted in favour of having a formal signature of the European Constitution in Madrid as a way of showing solidarity for the victims of last month's terror attack. The resolution was passed with 197 votes in favour and 173 against, but a final decision on the matter lies with the EU governments. Where a European Union Treaty is signed carries a lot of symbolic value. It is one of the reasons why Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi pushed so hard for the Constitution negotiations to be finished within his EU Presidency in the second half of last year. It would have resulted in a new Treaty of Rome to replace the original Treaty of Rome from 1957. However, with the collapse of negotiations in December, the question once again became an open one. All treaties go to Rome Now EU leaders have committed themselves to signing the Treaty by 18 June meaning that it could result in a Treaty of Dublin. Last week Irish prime minister and current head of the EU was quite nonchalant about what moniker it could go under. "I don't care what it is called. As far as I am concerned it can be the Romano Prodi [European Commission president] Treaty". On Wednesday (31 March), however, he was more circumspect about the question of where the Treaty will be signed insisting that it "has to be completed first". Mr Ahern did mention another Irish idea which is to have a rotating signing ceremony where each of the 25 EU governments would stage it in their own country. But some say Ireland would not be averse to having a Treaty of Dublin having helped prepared the groundwork on two treaties in previous years only to see them be called Treaty of Maastricht and then Treaty of Amsterdam. In any case, where ever it is signed, and how ever it is named, it will be housed in Rome where all original and signed copies of EU treaties are kept. World Events Watcher Stan L. Bowman, Jr can be contacted at stan120032000@yahoo.ca To Go To Top

ETCHED IN STONE? PRESIDENT FORD'S LETTER TO PRIME MINISTER RABIN Posted by David Haimson, April 2, 2004.

IMRA (Independent Media Review Analysis) provides news and analyses of events in Israel. IMRA's website address is http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=20235 Their email address is imra@netvision.net.il The text of this letter was in Michael Widlanski, ed., Can Israel Survive a Palestinian State? (Jerusalem: Institute for Advanced Strategic Political Studies, 1990), pp. 120-21. www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/press/appendix/appen_c.htm Friday, April 2, 2004 September 1, 1975 SECRET His Excellency Yitzhak Rabin Prime Minister of Israel Dear Mr. Prime Minister: I wish to inform you that the U.S. recognizes that the Israeli-Egyptian Interim Agreement entailing withdrawal from vital areas in the Sinai constitutes an act of great significance on Israel's part in the pursuit of final peace and imposes additional heavy military and economic burdens on Israel. I want to assure you that the U.S. will make every effort to be fully responsive within the limits of its resources and Congressional authorization and appropriation on an ongoing and long-term basis to Israel's military equipment and other defense requirements as well as to Israel's economic aid needs, all of this based on the requests submitted by Israel, joint studies and previous U.S. Presidential undertakings. Further to those undertakings, it is my resolve to continue to maintain Israel's defensive strength through the supply of advanced types of equipment, such as the F-16 aircraft. The United States Government agrees to an early meeting to undertake a joint study of high technology and sophisticated items, including the Pershing ground-to-ground missiles with conventional warheads, with the view to giving a positive response. The U.S. Administration will submit annually for approval by the U.S. Congress a request for military and economic assistance in order to help meet Israel's economic and military needs. Realizing as I do the importance of the Interim Agreement to the Middle Eastern situation as a whole, the U.S. will make every possible effort to assist in the establishment of conditions in which the Agreement will be observed without being subjected to pressures or deadlines. In the spirit of the special relationship existing between the United States and Israel and in light of the determination of both sides to avoid a situation in which the U.S. and Israel would pursue divergent courses in peace negotiations, the U.S. will take the position that these are negotiations between the parties. As I indicated to you in our conversation on 12 June 1975, the situation in the aftermath of the Israeli-Egyptian Interim Agreement will be one in which the overall settlement can be pursued in a systematic and deliberate way and does not require the U.S. to put forward an overall proposal of its own in such circumstances. Should the U.S. desire in the future to put forward proposals of its own, it will make every effort to coordinate with Israel its proposals with a view to refraining from putting forth proposals that Israel would consider unsatisfactory. The U.S. will support the position that an overall settlement with Syria in the framework of a peace agreement must assure Israel's security from attack from the Golan Heights. The U.S. further supports the position that a just and lasting peace, which remains our objective, must be acceptable to both sides. The U.S. has not developed a final position on the borders. Should it do so it will give great weight to Israel's position that any peace agreement with Syria must be predicated on Israel remaining on the Golan Heights. My view in this regard was stated in our conversation of September 13, 1974. Sincerely, Gerald R. Ford David Haimson sends out a set of links to excellent articles. Subscribe by sending an email to dhaimson@w3-4u.net To Go To Top

SPAIN'S CRYPTO-JEWS SEEKING TO RETURN Posted by Michael Freund, April 2, 2004.

This was a news item March 31, 2004, in Arutz-7 Israel National News and is archived at (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=60397) More than fifty descendants of Spanish and Portuguese crypto-Jews attended an intensive three-day seminar held in Madrid this past weekend by the Jerusalem-based Amishav organization, which reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people. The participants, who hailed from over a dozen communities across the Iberian peninsula, were Bnei Anousim, whose ancestors were compelled to convert to Catholicism during the Spanish Inquisition (historians have often referred to them by the disparaging term "Marranos"). "The turnout was great - it exceeded our expectations," said Amishav Director Michael Freund. "We studied Jewish texts together, learned about the travails of their ancestors, and examined issues of identity and return currently faced by the Bnai Anousim." Among those addressing the group were Rabbi Moshe Ben-Dahan, the Chief Rabbi of Madrid, Mr. Jacobo Garcon, President of the Federation of Jewish Communities in Spain, and Mr. Jackie Haddad, Spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Madrid. The seminar was entitled "The Meaning of Liberty: Individual and Collective Freedom in the Life of the Bnai Anousim". Sessions were held at Madrid's main synagogue, and included traditional Sabbath services as well as festive meals. "There is a real awakening taking place among the Bnei Anousim, who long to reconnect with the Jewish people and their heritage," Freund said. "It was quite moving to look around the room and see these people, who have clung to their Jewish roots despite centuries of persecution, singing Sabbath hymns and discussing their desire to return to Judaism. We simply have to do more to help them." "I waited 500 years for this seminar," said one participant from northern Portugal. "And now at last I feel that I have taken a first step on my way back home, to rejoin my people - the Jewish people." To Go To Top

WHEN TERRORISTS USE MENTAL PATIENTS AS HUMAN SHIELDS Posted by Leo Rennert, April 2, 2004.

I sent this letter to the Washington Post (letters@washpost.com) After terrorists hid in a Bethlehem psychiatric hospital, the Post suggested that Israel, in going after them, was as much to blame for the ensuing clash as the Palestinian gunmen's despicable use of mental patients as human shields. The article ("Mental Patients In Mideast Crossfire" April 2) began by dwelling at length on the traumatic experience of helpless patients during a one-hour firefight. But readers were not told until the ninth paragraph that the terrorists were arrested without anyone being injured. Nor did the Post mention that Israeli intelligence received information that the holed-up Hamas and Al Aqsa Martyrs terrorists were plotting suicide attacks during the Passover holiday in Israel and that Israeli forces, after surrounding the hospital, first called on them to surrender. Instead, they opened fire, further endangering the lives of mental patients. The article goes into great detail about gunfire and rockets raking the hospital and leaving gaping holes in walls and shattering windows. Yet, the fact that the attack ended with no injuries is a tribute to Israel's determination to hunt down terrorists while taking special pains not to harm bystanders. Quite a contrast with the repeated use of hospitals and ambulances by Palestinian terrorists intent on murdering innocent civilians. Had Israel not taken action, how many Israeli men, women and children would not just have been traumatized by gunfire but killed or permanently maimed by homicidal bombers? To Go To Top

NO EXCUSE THIS TIME AROUND Posted by Arlene Peck, April 2, 2004.

I thought to myself, L-rd, what has it come to when I found myself attending an all day conference entitled, "How to defend Israel (on campus, in the media, to the White House, at your office") which was being given Stand with Us, APAIC, and CAMERA. That was, until later that evening when I had dinner with a JEWISH man from California who told me, "They ought to give back Israel to the Palestinians to whom it belongs". Questioning him further, he replied that 'they' were the Jews who didn't belong there in the first place. Controlling my anger, I smiled and asked this idiot to where he thought they should move? He responded, "Anywhere. They have money. Countries will take them in." It was then that the need for such conferences hit me. It took all of my control, despite my red hair, not to hit him. That folks, is the reason why we, and in this case, the we stands for Jews AND Christians who are alarmed about what is over the horizon, should be aware and attend such conferences. When the Second World War was being fought, my southern relatives had excuses for inaction that we don't now. My daddy, a man from Atlanta, Georgia, was in the Navy and stationed in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. From what I gathered, the people at home knew there was a war and all out efforts were made to support our boys in the service. However, they really weren't aware of what was happening to our brethren in Europe who were systemically being slaughtered to the tune of millions who were being herded into the ovens of the death camps. The Atlanta Jewish community had lulled themselves into believing that President Roosevelt was a great man. I don t believe they knew that his immigration policy towards Jews resulted in them being trapped in Europe where Hitler would find them. It was only later that they realized that the allies did not bomb even one concentration camp, or even one railroad leading to a concentration camp. Today, we just don t have any excuse. Thanks to television and the internet, the news is broadcast around the world. Unless you have been living in caves, as those in the countries that oppose us have, you know what s going on. Even there they use computers to keep in touch Even that haven of Arab propaganda, the Los Angeles Times, which had spent all week beating up profusely on Israel over the Sheikh Yassin killing, surprised me. They ran a token story on anti-Semitism entitled New Anti-Semitism Stirs Old Anxieties. I found it a little ironic as it was a contributing story and their resident Nazi, Tracy Wilkinson, who never met an Anti-Semite she couldn't write a story defending, has been moved to Italy where she can do her damage from there. I didn't need the folks at Stand With Us, AIPAC, CAMERA or any of the others who were at that conference that day to tell me that when it comes to the European Union, Anti-Semitism is at pre-1930 War levels. It's obvious when Europe makes a major issue of putting Israel on trial for war crimes when they take steps to protect its citizens. For the past year or so Europeans aren't just after Israel they're after the USA too. They know you don't negotiate with people whose only reason for living is killing. Yet, terrorism is terrorism, everywhere in the world. Except of course, when it happens in Israel. Then, it s reported as incidents. We try and sound-bite terrorism. But, somehow Israel's Public relations or lack thereof don't quite convey what we need to hear. That being, that the Jewish State is fighting a real honest to goodness war. Also, the side that speaks most effectively for peace will win American support. Arafat has been saying the big lie of Palestinian statehood for so long that there is an entire generation who grew up never knowing that there are no Palestinians. They are Arabs! I think however, that we, in the United States are finally beginning to realize that Israel's problem is now a global one. Too much of our taxes are going to people who wish us ill. Although we haven t quite begun to realize that our aid to the downtrodden Palestinians is in reality a culture of hatred that is going to fund streets, squares, soccer teams and payoffs to the families of terrorists. And, bombings to our soldiers and Embassies are getting all too common. All those charities, such as CAIR (council American Islamanic Relations) that even Sen. Kerry's wife make donations to are funding terror. I recently received an e-mail from a Professor Francisco Gil-White who teaches in the psychology department at the University of Pennsylvania and who was fired because of his pro-Israel and pro-Serbian views. Initially, I found it hard to believe that Professor Gil-White was actually being fired until I made a call to the dean, and also, tried to speak with Prof. Robert DeRubeis, the psychology department chairman. None of my calls into the university were returned. It's ironic that good gentiles such as Professor Gil-White are now on the receiving end of persecution because of their defense of Israel. The situation has gotten so bad that it s almost impossible for any speaker who is Jewish or is from Israel to speak on any campus. The Arab coalition and their clueless, Jew-hating supporters are so strong and the universities have been so weakened by the politically correct dribble that is being taught to the students there. Even journalists are not immune. One of my colleagues, writer Steven Plaut is fighting thousands of dollars in legal fees because of a lawsuit initiated by Neve Gordon because he is saying that Plaut damaged his good name. Yet, as Mr. Plaunt states, How can someone who says Israel is a fascist, apartheid, terrorist state, and someone whose anti-Israel comments are regularly featured on the web sites of neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers even have a good name that can be damaged? "The case was filed in Nazareth court because Mr. Neve Gordon wanted the case to be heard by an Arab judge because he thought he would be more sympatric to Gordon's going into Ramallah illegally in the middle of Operation Defensive Wall, to serve as human Shield and show his solidarity for Arafat and the PLO." Now, Mr. Plaut is facing thousands of dollars in legal expenses to fight off this frivolous suit. What is happening in Israel when anti-Semitism is at an all time high and the freedom of speech is being slowly removed from Israel by Jews, no less? I am still astounded that the Arutz Sheva radio show isn't allowed to broadcast because they to have been deemed politically incorrect. Yet, the official PLO media continue to broadcast incitement against Israel when Israel, I believe, controls the airways. Time is on Israel's side because terrorism is not a Jewish problem. Its cancer has a tendency to spread. Its victims are non-discretionary. The Monsters who target buses, schools, discos and restaurants etc. don't give a diddly-squat whether they kill babies, old people, or even the neighborhood dog. Our papers over the past couple of years have been filled with Arab terrorism. Our economy has been going down the tubes in large part because of the Arab/Muslims terrorism and the cost of protecting ourselves against it. Anti-Semitism is an immediate threat but the Christians are in their sights now and reality is beginning to set in that our enemy is a common one. Now, we, in the United States are finally witnessing the grisly scenes of barbaric Arabs dancing and waving and chanting anti-American slogans while mutilating and burning the remains of U.S. civilians before dragging them down the street into the cheering mobs. The American mentality will eventually understand just how vicious, evil and formidable the enemy is. Our army has already had a press conference stating, "We will have a deliberate, precise, overwhelming response." Funny, when Israel response to their terror with that attitude, the United Nations usually have emergency sessions protesting the harsh response. How this plays out is going to be interesting. Israel has long known that this is not a culture which is possible to reason. They understand force. I hope the time is coming soon in Israel where they also understand transfer. That is the only option. 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

FIFTH CUP FOR GUSH KATIF Posted by Menachem Kovacs, April 2, 2004.

This was a news item in the Arutz Sheva News Service (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) Apr. 2, 2004 / Nissan 11, 5764 Some drank it on behalf of Soviet Jewry, others imbibe it in memory of the six million Jews eradicated in the Holocaust, still others drink it in thankfulness for the State of Israel - and this year some will consume it as a form of prayer against a withdrawal from Jewish Gaza. The reference is to the Fifth Cup at the Passover Seder meal this coming Monday night, in accordance with a recommendation by Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, the dean of Yeshivat Ateret Cohanim in Jerusalem. The Passover holiday is marked by a festive and liturgical Seder meal, a self-contained educational lesson in Jewish faith and history. Among the elements of the symbolic meal - which remembers specifically our Exodus from Egypt 3,316 years ago - is the drinking of four cups of wine. These correspond to the Four Biblical Promises of Redemption, as written in Exodus 6,6-7. We also place a Cup of Elijah on the table, though it is not drunk, as it corresponds to a promise in the next verse that is not yet fully realized: "I will bring you into the Land... and I will give it to you for a heritage." Throughout the years, a custom arose of drinking a fifth cup (immediately after the fourth one, in keeping with a ruling by the saintly Maharal of Prague) on behalf of a noble cause, such as those mentioned above. In a lecture in his Jerusalem yeshiva this week, Rabbi Aviner stated that a prayer that "not one Jewish community be uprooted, and not one Jew be expelled from his home" should be added. He explained that the promise to "bring [Jews] to the Land" can be interpreted on this night - when we discuss at length on matters of Redemption - to refer to "the Land, and not to desolation: to build communities and cities and settlements." The rabbi further said that G-d's "giving" it means that we should preserve and maintain it, and certainly not to give it to foreigners. The closing words of the verse, "I am G-d," can be explained, "I am He Who conquered this Land for you and fought your wars, and I will stand before you and preserve Gush Katif, Judea, Samaria, and the Golan." 4,000 ROCKETS ON GUSH KATIF The 4,000th mortar shell/Kassam rocket was fired on the Jewish communities of Gush Katif in Jewish Gaza last night - no one was hurt - and the Jews say that these unceasing Arab attacks are the direct result of Prime Minister Sharon's policy of offering to retreat. "The Government of Israel must understand," reads an announcement on the Katif Bloc website today, "that our Arab neighbors read the map clearly, and they understand that while the Prime Minister talks about expelling Jewish residents, they try to rush up the process by 'shooing' us out with continued rocket attacks. These bombardments must be stopped!" Gush Katif - literally, the Katif bloc - is a cluster of approximately a dozen Jewish communities in southern Gaza. The other Jewish communities in Gaza are, from south to north, Kfar Darom, Netzarim, and the northern Gaza towns of Dugit, Nisanit, and Elei Sinai. The Gush Katif announcement notes that when Hizbullah fired hundreds of mortar shells at Israel's northern communities, Israel went to war - "while here there have been 4,000 rocket and shell attacks, and yet the Nation of Israel is silent." The number 4,000 has already been surpassed, as three additional mortar shells landed last night in N'vei Dekalim, Gush Katif's largest community. No one was hurt and no damage was caused. Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. To Go To Top

PROFESSOR ZE'EV STERNHELL, ONE OF ISRAEL'S CLUELESS "INTELLECTUALS" Posted by Steven Plaut, April 2, 2004.

This year the Award for the Dumbest Article written by an Israeli Professor this Passover goes to Prof. Ze'ev Sternhell, a professor of history at Hebrew University. Like so many others in his department and university, he is a Far Leftist "Post-Zionist" and a "New Historian", who not only opposes everything Israel does to defend its citizens but also specializes in filling Haaretz (and sometimes also TIKKUN - such as http://www.tikkun.org/index.cfm/action/current/article/185.html) with sophomoric pieces bewailing how awful it is that Israelis do not live under Marxist Gulag rule. He thinks markets are just awful and hates the capitalism that has made his life so comfortable. He dreams of a return to 19th century illiterate notions of utopian socialism. Here is what he writes in Haaretz April 2, 2004: "Bourgeois capitalism and democracy are historical phenomena that will pass just as other political and social regimes have passed. The question is only what will replace them." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/411613.html Here is a nice piece debunking Comrade Sternhell (he really spells his name that way by the way). Relatively early on in the current Palestinian offensive, Hebrew University Prof. Ze'ev Sternhell wrote in Ha'aretz that "many in Israel, perhaps even the majority of the voters, do not doubt the legitimacy of the armed resistance in the territories themselves. The Palestinians would be wise to concentrate their struggle against the settlements, avoid harming women and children, and strictly refrain from firing on Gilo, Nahal Oz, or Sderot." Guess the terrorists did not heed all of Sternhell's warnings when he endorsed their right to murder Jews. In 2001, on 16 May, Arieh Rokach, an Israeli citizen who numbers among the group that Ze'ev Sternhell suggested the Palestinian murder, filed a complaint against Sternhell with the police. The police and Attorney General refused to prosecute the pro-terror professor. Here is some background on the investigation though: http://goldwater.mideastreality.com/settlers.html Noam Chomsky also loves Sternhell (http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4411560-103677,00.html) Here is a longer background piece on such critters as Sternhell. Sternhell is one of the stars of this classic piece. It was written by Edward Alexander and is called "Israeli Intellectuals and Israeli Politics" (http://www.freeman.org/m_online/jan97/alxandr.htm:). It was prepared for delivery at the 1996 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, The San Francisco Hilton and Towers, August 29-September 1, 1996. In his essay of 1838 on Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill wrote that "speculative philosophy, which to the superficial appears a thing so remote from the business of life and the outward interests of men, is in reality the thing on earth which most influences them, and in the long run overbears every other influence save those which it must itself obey." Of course Mill was not always willing to wait for the long run and was often tempted by shortcuts whereby speculative philosophers and other intellectuals could make their influence felt upon government. Frightened by Tocqueville's observations of American democracy, Mill sought to prevent the "tyranny of the majority" by an elaborate scheme of plural voting which would give everybody one vote but intellectuals a larger number; when he awoke to the folly and danger of such a scheme he switched his allegiance to proportional representation as a means of allowing what he calls in On Liberty the wise and noble few to exercise their due influence over the mindless majority. By now we have had enough experience of the influence of intellectuals in politics to be skeptical of Mill's schemes. To look back over the major intellectual journals of this country in the years prior to and during the second World War - not only Trotskyist publications like New International or Dwight Macdonald's Politics, but the highbrow modernist and Marxist Partisan Review - is to be appalled by the spectacle of the finest minds of America vociferous in opposition to prosecuting the war against Hitler, which in their view was just a parochial struggle between two dying capitalist forces. The pacifism of English intellectuals in the thirties led Orwell to declare that there are some ideas so stupid that only intellectuals could believe them. If we look at the influence of Israeli intellectuals upon Israeli policy during recent years, and up until the demise of the Rabin-Peres government, we may conclude that Mill and Orwell were both right, Mill in stressing the remarkable power of ideas, Orwell in insisting that such power often works evil, not good. Among the numerous misfortunes that have beset the Zionist enterprise from its inception - the unyielding hardness of the land allegedly flowing with milk and honey, the failure of the Jews of the Diaspora to move to Zion except under duress, the constant burden of peril arising from Arab racism and imperialism - was the premature birth of an intellectual class, especially a literary intelligentsia. The quality of Israel's intelligentsia may be a matter of dispute. Gershom Scholem once remarked, mischievously, that talent goes where it is needed, and in Israel it was needed far more urgently in the military than in the universities, the literary community, the arts, and journalism. But the influence of this intelligentsia is less open to dispute than its quality. When Shimon Peres (who fancies himself an intellectual) launched his ill-fated election campaign of spring 1996 he surrounded himself with artists and intellectuals on the stage of Tel Aviv's Mann Auditorium. [1] Three months earlier, he had listed as one of the three future stars of the Labor Party the internationally famous novelist Amos Oz, the same Amos Oz who had recently referred to traditional Jews as "filth." Intellectuals in many countries have adopted the motto: "the other country, right or wrong," and worked mightily to undermine national confidence in their country's heritage, founding principles, raison d'etre. But such intellectuals do not usually arise within fifty years of their country's founding, and in no case except Israel have intellectuals cultivated their "alienation" in a country whose "right to exist" is considered an acceptable subject of discussion among otherwise respectable people and nations. As Midge Decter shrewdly put it in May of this year, "A country only half a century old is not supposed to have a full fledged accomplished literary intelligentsia../..../..This is an extravagance only an old and stable country should be allowed to indulge in." [2] The seeds of trouble amongst intellectuals in Zion antedated the state itself. On May Day 1936 the Labor Zionist leader Berl Katznelson asked, angrily, "Is there another people on earth whose sons are so emotionally and mentally twisted that they consider everything their nation does despicable and hateful, while every murder, rape and robbery committed by their enemies fills their hearts with admiration and awe? As long as a Jewish child../...can come to the Land of Israel, and here catch the virus of self-hate../...let not our conscience be still." [3] But what for Katznelson was a sick aberration would later become the normal condition among a very large segment of Israeli intellectuals. A major turning point came in 1967, when the doctors of Israel's soul, a numerous fraternity, concluded that in winning a defensive war which, if lost, would have brought its destruction, Israel had bartered its soul for a piece of land. The Arab nations, shrewdly sensing that Jews were far less capable of waging the war of ideas than the war of planes and tanks, quickly transformed the rhetoric of their opposition to Israel's existence from the Right to the Left, from the aspiration to "turn the Mediterranean red with Jewish blood" (the battle cry of the months preceding the Six-Day War) to the pretended search for a haven for the homeless. This calculated appeal to liberals, not least to Jewish and Israeli liberals, created legions of critics of the Jewish state, especially among believers in the progressive improvement and increasing enlightenment of the human race. Israeli intellectuals who were willing to express, especially in dramatic hyperbole, criticism of their own country's alleged racism, imperialism, and religious fanaticism quickly became celebrities in the American press. They were exalted by people like Anthony Lewis as "courageous voices of dissent," even though what they had joined was, of course, a community of con sent. But it was not until 1977 that the Israeli intelligentsia turned massively against the state, against Zionism, against Judaism itself. For in 1977 the Labor Party lost its 29 year old ownership of government to people it considered its cultural inferiors, people Meron Benvenisti described as follows: "I remember traveling on a Haifa bus and looking around at my fellow passengers with contempt and indifference - almost as lower forms of human life." Such hysteria (which burst forth again three months ago when Mr. Netanyahu won the election) now became the standard pose of the alienated Israeli intellectual, and it was aggressively disseminated by American publications such as the New York Times, ever eager for Israeli-accented confirmation of its own hatreds. Amos Oz, for example, took to the pages of the New York Times Magazine during the Lebanon war to deplore the imminent demise of Israel's "soul": "Israel could have become an exemplary state../...a small-scale laboratory for democratic socialism." But that great hope, Oz lamented, was dashed by the arrival of Holocaust refugees, various "anti-socialist" Zionists, "chauvinistic, militaristic, and xenophobic" North African Jews, and so forth. [4] (These are essentially the reasons why it was not until Menachem Begin became prime minister that the Ethiopian Jews could come to Israel.) In 1989 Oz described members of the religious settlement movement Gush Emunim in the following language: "A small sect, a messianic sect, obtuse and cruel, emerged a few years ago from a dark corner of Judaism, and it is threatening to destroy all that is dear and sacred to us, to impose on us a wild and insane blood ritual../...They are guilty of crimes against humanity." In April 1995 Oz was telling New York Times readers that supporters of the Likud party were accomplices of Hamas. [5] People like Benvenisti - sociologist, deputy mayor of Jerusalem until fired by Teddy Kollek, and favorite authority on Israel for many years of the New York Times and New York Review of Books - foreshadowed the boasting of the intellectual spokesmen of the recently deposed Labor government that they were not only post-Zionist but also post-Jewish in their thinking. Benvenisti, writing in 1987, recalled proudly how "We would observe Yom Kippur by loading quantities of food onto a raft and swimming out with it to an offshore islet in the Mediterranean, and there we would while away the whole day feasting. It was a flagrant demonstration of our rejection of religious and Diaspora values." [6] Anecdotal evidence of the increasingly shrill anti-Israelism (or worse) of Israeli intellectuals is only too easy to amass. Some years ago the sculptor Yigal Tumarkin stated that "When I see the black-coated haredim with the children they spawn, I can understand the Holocaust." [7] Ze'ev Sternhell, Hebrew University expert on fascism, proposed destroying the Jewish settlements with IDF tanks as a means of boosting national morale. (Ibid) In 1969 the guru of Labor Party intellectuals, the late Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz, began to talk of the inevitable "Nazification" of the Israeli nation and society. By the time of the Lebanon War he had become an international celebrity because of his use of the epithet "Judeo-Nazi" to describe the Israeli army. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, he outdid even himself by declaring (in words redolent of what Katznelson had deplored in 1936): "Everything Israel has done, and I emphasize everything, in the past 23 years is either evil stupidity or stupidly evil." [8] And in 1993 Leibowitz would be honored by the government of Yitzhak Rabin with the Israel Prize. In third place after Oz and Benvenisti among the resources of intellectual insight into Israel's soul frequently mined by Anthony Lewis, Thomas Friedman, and the rest is David Grossman, the novelist. Grossman established his credentials as an alienated intellectual commentator on the state of his country's mind in a book of 1988 called The Yellow Wind, an account of his seven-week journey through the "West Bank," a journey undertaken in order to understand "how an entire nation like mine, an enlightened nation by all accounts, is able to train itself to live as a conqueror without making its own life wretched." [9] This is a complicated book, not without occasional patches of honesty. But its true flavor can be suggested by two successive chapters dealing with culture and books, especially religious ones. Grossman first visits the Jewish settlement of Ofra, at which he arrives fully armed with suspicion, hostility, and partisanship, a "wary stranger" among people who remind him, he says, of nothing human, especially when they are "in the season of their messianic heat." (p 52) In Ofra, Grossman does not want "to let down his guard" and be "seduced" by the Sabbath "warmth" and "festivity" of these wily Jews. (p 34) Although most of his remarks to Arabs in conversation recounted in The Yellow Wind are the perfunctory gestures of a straight man to whom his interlocutors pay no serious attention, he angrily complains that the Jewish settlers don't listen to or "display a real interest" in him. He asks them to "imagine themselves in their Arab neighbors' places" (p 37) and is very much the angry schoolmaster when they don't dance to his tune or accept his pretense that this act of sympathetic imagination is devoid of political meaning. Neither are the settlers nimble enough to make the appropriate reply to Grossman: "My dear fellow, we will imagine ourselves as Arabs if you will imagine yourself as a Jew." But Grossman has no intention of suspending his own rhythms of existence long enough to penetrate the inner life of these alien people: "What have I to do with them?" (p 48) His resentment is as much cultural as political. He complains that the settlers have "little use for culture," speak bad Hebrew, indulge in "Old Diaspora type" humor, and own no books, "with the exception of religious texts" (p 46). And these, far from mitigating the barbarity of their owners, aggravate it. The final image of the Jews in this long chapter is of "potential [!] terrorists now rocking over their books." (p 51) For people like Grossman, the conjectural terrorism of Jews is always a far more grievous matter than the actual terrorism of Arabs. The following chapter also treats of culture and books, including religious ones. Grossman has come to Bethlehem University, one of several universities in the territories that have been punningly described as branches of PLO State. Here Grossman, though he admits the school to be "a stronghold of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine," sees no terrorists rocking over books, but rather idyllic scenes that remind him of "the pictures of Plato's school in Athens" (p 57). Bubbling with affection, eager to ascribe only the highest motives, Grossman is now willing to forgive even readers of religious books. He has not so much as a snort or a sneer for the Bethlehem English professor who ascribes Arabs' supreme sensitivity to lyric rhythm in English poetry to the "rhythm of the Koran flow[ing] through their blood" (p 59). The author's ability to spot racism at a distance of twenty miles when he is among Jews slackens when timeless racial categories are invoked in Bethlehem. When the Labor Party returned to power in 1992, so too did the Israeli intellectuals and their disciples. People we once (rather naively) casually referred to as extremists moved to the centers of power in Israeli government and policy formation. Dedi Zucker, who used to accuse Jewish "settlers" of drinking blood on Passover, and Yossi Sarid, who once shocked Israelis by declaring that Holocaust Memorial Day meant nothing to him, and Shulamit Aloni, whose statements about religious Jews would probably have landed her in jail in European countries that have laws against antisemitic provocation, all became cabinet ministers or prominent spokesmen in the government of Rabin. Two previously obscure professors laid the foundations for the embrace of Yasser Arafat, one of the major war criminals of the twentieth century, responsible for the murder of more Jews than anyone since Hitler and Stalin. The Oslo process put the PLO well on the way to an independent Palestinian state (a state, it should be added, that commands the allegiance of far more Israeli intellectuals than does the idea of a Jewish one). Amos Oz and A. B. Yehoshua and David Grossman were delighted, with the last of this trio assuring Anthony Lewis (17 May 1996, New York Times) that Israel had finally given up its "instinctive suspicion," and that although "we have the worst terrorism," "we are making peace." Benvenisti proved harder to satisfy: in 1995, he published a book called Intimate Enemies, the ads for which carried glowing endorsements from Thomas Friedman and Professor Ian Lustick, in which he proposed dissolution of the state of Israel. Only a few figures within Israel's cultural establishment expressed dismay at what was happening. The philosopher Eliezer Schweid warned that a nation which starts by abandoning its cultural memories ends by abandoning its physical existence. [10]  Amos Perlmutter analyzed the "post-Zionism" of Israeli academics as an all-out attack on the validity of the state. [11] A still more notable exception to the general euphoria of this class was Aharon Megged. In June of 1994 this well-known writer and longtime supporter of the Labor Party wrote an explosive article in Ha'aretz on "The Israeli Suicide Drive" in which he connected the Rabin government's record of endless unreciprocated concessions to a PLO that had not even cancelled its Charter calling for Israel's destruction, to the self-destructiveness that had long before infected Israel's intellectual classes. "Since the Six Day War," Megged wrote, "and at an increasing pace, we have witnessed a phenomenon which probably has no parallel in history: an emotional and moral identification by the majority of Israel's intelligentsia with people openly committed to our annihilation." Megged argued that since 1967 the Israeli intelligentsia had more and more come "to regard religious, cultural, and emotional affinity to the land../...with sheer contempt"; and he observed that the equation of Israelis with Nazis had become an article of faith and the central idea of " thousands [emphasis added] of articles and reports in the press, hundreds of poems, ../...dozens of documentary and feature films, exhibitions and paintings and photos." He also shrewdly remarked on the methods by which anti-Zionist Israeli intellectuals disseminated their message and reputations. Writers like Benny Morris, Ilan Pepe, and Baruch Kimmerling "mostly publish first in English to gain the praise of the West's 'justice seekers.' Their works are then quickly translated into Arabic and displayed in Damascus, Cairo and Tunis. Their conclusion is almost uniform: that in practice Zionism amounts to an evil, colonialist conspiracy../..../.." [12] The minds of the majority of those who carried on the Oslo Process of the Israel government from 1993 to 1996 were formed by the writers, artists, and publicists whom Megged excoriated. Although Shimon Peres' utterances about the forty-eight year war for independence which his country has been forced to wage often seemed to come from a man who had taken leave of both his senses and the actual world, they were rooted in the "post-Zionist," post-Jewish, and universalist assumptions of the Israeli intelligentsia. Just as they were contemptuous of any tie with the land of Israel, so he repeatedly alleged that land plays no part in Judaism or even in the Jewish political philosophy that names itself after a specific mountain called Zion. Like the Israeli intelligentsia, he accused Israel's religious Jews of an atavistic attachment to territory over "spirit," claiming that Judaism is "ethical/moral and spiritual, and not an idolatry of soil-worship." [13] Just as Israeli intellectuals nimbly pursued and imitated the latest cultural fads of America and Europe, hoping to be assimilated by the great world outside Israel, so did Peres hope that Israel would be admitted into the Arab League! [14] Despite the enlistment of President Clinton as his campaign manager, and the nearly unanimous support he received from the Israeli and world news media, to say nothing of the herd of independent thinkers from the universities, and the rented academics of the think tanks, Shimon Peres and his Oslo process were decisively rejected by the Jewish voters of Israel. Predictably, the Israeli intellectuals reacted with melodramatic hysteria. David Grossman, in the New York Times of 31 May, wailed sanctimoniously that "Israel has moved toward the extreme right../...more militant, more religious, more fundamentalist, more tribal and more racist." [15] Among the American liberal supporters of Israel's intellectual elite, only the New Republic appeared somewhat chastened by the election result. Having for years, perhaps decades, celebrated the ineffable genius of Shimon Peres and his coterie, the magazine turned angrily upon the Israeli intellectuals for failing to grasp that "their association with Peres was one of the causes of his defeat." "Disdainful of [Jews] from traditional communities, they thought of and called such people 'stupid Sephardim.' This contempt for Arab Jews expresses itself in a cruel paradox, for it coexists with a credulity about, and esteem for, the Middle East's Christians and Muslims - Arab Arabs. Such esteem, coupled with a derisive attitude toward Jewish symbols and texts, rituals, remembrances and anxieties, sent tens of thousands to Netanyahu." [16] Having begun this talk with statements by J. S. Mill and George Orwell about the role of intellectuals and their ideas in politics, I shall conclude in the same way. The first statement, by Mill, is recommended as an aid to reflection by the intellectuals of Israel: "The collective mind," wrote Mill in 1838, "does not penetrate below the surface, but it sees all the surface; which profound thinkers, even by reason of their profundity, often fail to do../..../.." The second statement, by Orwell, obliquely comments on the defeat of Mr. Peres and his avid intellectual supporters: "if the radical intellectuals in England had had their way in the 20's and 30's," said Orwell,"the Gestapo would have been walking the streets of London in 1940." NOTES 1. Jerusalem Post, 6 April 1996. 2. Midge Decter, "The Treason of the Intellectuals," Outpost, May 1996, 7. 3. Kitvei B. Katznelson (Tel Aviv: Workers' Party of Israel, 1961), VIII, 18. 4. Quoted in Edward Rothstein, "Israel's Alienated Intellectuals,"Commentary, 83 (February 1987), 54. 5. Jerusalem Post, 29 April 1995. 6. Conflicts and Contradictions (New York: Villard, 1987). 7. Jerusalem Post, 1 December 1990. 8. Jerusalem Post, 16 January 1993. 9. The Yellow Wind, trans. Haim Watzman (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1988), 212. Subsequent references to this work will be cited in the text, with the page number enclosed in (). 10. Jerusalem Post International Edition, 15 April 1995. 11. "Egalitarians Gone Mad," Jerusalem Post International Edition, 28 October 1995. 12. Aharon Megged, "The Israeli Suicide Drive," Jerusalem Post International Edition, 2 July 1994. 13. Quoted in Moshe Kohn,"Check Your Quotes," Jerusalem Post International Edition, 16 October 1993. 14. The Arab League contemptuously replied that Israel could become a member only "after the complete collapse of the Zionist national myth, and the complete conversion of historical Palestine into one democratic state to which all the Palestinians will return." 15. "The Fortress Within," New York Times, 31 May 1996. 16. "Revolt of the Masses," New Republic, 24 June 1996. 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

A LETTER FROM JEREMY, WHO IS SERVING IN THE IDF Posted by Judy Lash Balint, April 2, 2004.

Jeremy is one of the group of Israelis - the Jerusalem Diarists - who record their experiences and impressions living in Israel today. Dear Family and Friends, Two years ago I asked a friend of mine, Josh Frankel, who was then serving in the army as a part of the Hesder program, whether or not he hadkilled a terrorist. Before answering he explained to me as follows. It's an honest question, but a very sensitive issue. At first, I was tremendously reluctant to write this letter. But, I've decided to send it because I think it will make you think. In addition, it is my hope that it will bring you one step closer to the events that are occuring in Israel, and thereby strengthen your ties with the Land and the struggles of our Nation. Last Tuesday night I killed a terrorist. At 9pm, two terrorists - both armed with Kalishnikov rifles, one wearing an IDF uniform and vest, six grenades, and four magazines, the other with a bomb inside of a suitcase - entered the closed security zone which buffers the Jewish settlement of Morag in Gush Katif with the Palestinian own of Rafiah, and crawled toward the road which connects Morag with the other settlements in Gush Katif. The two were spotted by infantry who were guarding the area, and the first terrorist (with the uniform) was killed on the spot. The second terrorist attempted to flee, but was shot in the leg, so he ducked for cover and began crawling towards Rafiah. Surrounded by bushes and sand dunes, the infantry were unsuccessful in mortally wounding him. Therefore, my tank was ordered to cross the electronic fence, enter the security zone, and finish the second terrorist off. We closed in on him, and, from a distance of 50 meters, literally blew his head off with 11 rounds from our heaviest machine-gun, which shoots shells which are a half an inch in diameter. Among a myriad of other emotions, I felt relieved and consoled. A primary impetus for my enlistment in the army was the murder on a Tel Aviv bus, a year and a half ago by a Palestinian suicide bomber, of my friend, Yoni Jesner, HY"D. I enlisted to be a part of the system which prevents people from experiencing the same pain through which I suffered by the loss of Yoni. Relieved because last Tuesday night, I took an active role in fulfilling that ideal. Consoled because Yoni's murder was not for naught. As we approached the terrorist, I recited chapters of Tehillim, and davened that I should be successful in killing the terrorist and that Yoni's soul should receive merit for the destruction of evil in his memory. Hu ha-noten lekha ko'ach la-`asot chayil: my success is not my own, but solely due to the power that Hashem has instilled within the IDF to protect our Nation's right to live freely in our land and fight against terror. HaRav Amital (head of Yeshivat Har Etzion) has been known to explain that, of the two thousand year course of our exile, the Holocaust was the greatest Chillul Hashem, desecration of God's name, and the creation of the State of Israel was the greatest Kiddush Hashem, sanctification of God's name. A state of our own; after having nowhere to turn to. A state with an army, after having no one to protect us. A modern state based upon a classic Jewish sensitivity to morality, after the most technologically advanced country peformed the most immoral act of mankind. A state that cherishes and flourishes upon our history and rich tradition, after the Nazis tried to destroy the Jewish People forever. A state that attempts to preserve and promote Jewish values, after those same values were mocked, spurned, and almost eradicated. Kiddush Hashem is not just about dying in the name of God or killing terrorists, though those are two excellent examples. Kiddush Hashem, especially as expressed through the establishment and continuous vitality of the State of Israel, is about everyday life, about living each day with an intense passion to serve God in any and every capacity. It is incumbent upon us to realize that tremendous potential for Kiddush Hashem in all of our actions, and not only in those few intense moments when the good that we do is clear and tangible. May we always merit to realize that potential. Chag Kasher Ve-sameach, Jeremy Judy Lash Balint is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen), which is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

WORLD BANK INDIRECT FUNDING OF SUICIDE TERROR Posted by Itamar Marcus, April 2, 2004.

Meetings were held this week between representatives of the World Bank and the Palestinian Ministry of Education regarding significant World Bank investment in PA universities, including "developing the infrastructure for the Palestinian institutions of higher education..." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 25, 2004.] In doing so the World Bank is ignoring, or is possibly unaware of, the fact that the very PA universities they will be strengthening all have official student branches of Hamas (called Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyah) and Islamic Jihad (called Al-Jama'ah Al-Islamiyah), both terrorist organizations outlawed on the US and EU terrorist list. The World Bank will be building the university infrastructures that will be used by student terrorist organizations to form the backbone of suicide terrorism in coming years. The Hamas and Islamic Jihad student branches at the PA universities have historically been a breeding ground for terrorists, as campus structures are used to promote murder and terror, and to recruit and plan terrorist activities. For example, it was Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyyah (Hamas) at the Al-Najah University that created the horrific celebration of the 2001 Sbarro Pizza bombing by building a mock pizza parlor and decorating the walls and tables with images of pizza and body parts. Terrorists who have come directly from PA university activity include: Mahmud Shuraytakh: Chairman of Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyyah (Hamas) and of the Student Council at Bir Zeit University. Planned a suicide attack on a bus in Tel Aviv Sept. 19, 2002, in which six Israelis were murdered and 71 injured. Ihab Abdul-Qadir Mahmud Abu Salim: Arab Language student and a member of Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyyah (Hamas) at Bir Zeit University. Carried out a suicide attack at Zerifin Sept. 9, 2003, in which eight Israelis were murdered and about 20 injured. Daya Muhammad Hussein Al-Tawil: Engineering student at Bir Zeit University and a member of Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyyah (Hamas). Carried out a suicide attack at the French Hill junction in Jerusalem March 27, 2001, in which 29 Israelis were injured. Ramiz Ubaid: Student and a member of Al-Jama'ah Al-Islamiyyah (Islamic Jihad) at Bir Zeit University. Carried out a suicide attack at Dizengoff Center in Tel Aviv March 3, 1996, in which 13 Israelis were murdered and 118 injured. Hamid Abu Hajlah: Engineering student and a member of Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyyah (Hamas) at Al-Najah University. Carried out a suicide attack in Netanya on Jan. 1, 2001, in which three Israelis were injured. Ramiz Abu Salim: Hamas activist and a student at Al-Quds Open University branch in Al-Birah. Carried out a suicide attack at Kafe Hillel in Jerusalem Sept. 9, 2003, in which seven Israelis were murdered and about 20 injured. Muhammad Al-Rul: Hamas activist and a student at Al-Najah University. Carried out a suicide attack in Jerusalem June 18, 2002, in which 19 Israelis were murdered and 42 injured. While governmental and international aid agencies have repeatedly imposed regulations and safeguards to try to prevent inadvertent funding or promotion of Palestinian terrorists, many aid organizations do in fact fund terror promotion. The World Bank has not been discerning in the use of its funding in the past. For example, it funded the "development of the Dalal Mughrabi Street" in Gaza. This street is named after terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, who murdered 36 Israelis and the American photographer Gail Rubin in a 1978 bus hijacking. [Al Quds, Feb. 17, 2003]. They also funded the building of a school in Jenin named after the terrorist head of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Abu Ali Mustafa, who was responsible for planning and executing numerous terror bombings in Israel. [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Oct. 2, 2003] Other aid organizations have been similarly lax. For example, the Haj Amin al-Husseini Street project in Gaza, named after the former Mufti of Jerusalem (infamous for his close ties to Adolf Hitler), was funded by the German Development Agency together with UNDP (United Nations Development Project). [Al Quds, Feb. 17, 2003]. USAID funded school renovations for the Dalal Mughrabi school. [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida July 30, 2002] In 2003, USAID funded projects in Palestinian universities, including the Arab American University in Jenin, which sponsored numerous anti-American and terrorist-supporting rallies last year. One event included "blessings" to those fighting American soldiers in Iraq. The rally opened with "a speech given by the Arab-American University lecturer Dr. Hamad Hussein" He blessed the Iraqi resistance for its firm stand against the American- British occupation..." [Al-Ayyam, Nov. 4, 2003] This and other anti-American activities continued while USAID was funding programs at this university. USAID has a budget allocation of $3 million for the 2004 fiscal year for PA higher education programs. But in a January 2004 letter to PMW, a USAID representative said that USAID has ceased funding PA universities directly, and is now giving scholarships to students. If the World Bank funds PA universities without demanding the closure of their terror branches, this may be the most direct financing of terrorism to date by the World Bank. The following are the texts of the articles cited above, followed by a listing of PA terror branches and promotional activities in PA universities: "Dr. Naim Abu Al-Humos, [PA] Minister of Education and Higher Education, met yesterday with a delegation from the World Bank ... The meeting dealt with discussing the aid project in implementing a funding strategy for higher education ... in addition to projects whose goal is developing the infrastructure for the Palestinian institutions of higher education..." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 25, 2004] "The elementary school [named after] the Shahid [Martyr for Allah] Abu Ali Mostafa in the town of Araba in the Jenin district was handed transferred to the Education [ministry]... the construction of the school took place... in cooperation with the World Bank.... And based upon the instructions of the president Yasser Arafat the school was named after the Shahid Abu Ali Mostafa, the general secretary of the] Popular Front [PLFP- terror organization] ..." [Al Hayat Al-Jadida 2/10/03] "The Gaza municipality is currently implementing a large group of developmental projects in various city locations" in a value exceeding 10 million dollars... [The projects include] the development of the Dalal Al-Mughrabi Street, funded by the Al-Aqsa fund by the World Bank ...and the Abed Al Kader Al Husseini [Hitler's allie] Street project, funded by the German Development Agency by UNDP, the United Nations Development Project..." [Al Quds, 17/2/04] The following is a partial listing of newspaper articles and activities indicating the presence of terrorist branches in PA universities. "The Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyah (Hamas) in the Bir-Zeit University yesterday held a memorial assembly..." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 30, 2004] "Yesterday the Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyah (Hamas) in the national Al-Najah University held a memorial rally in memory of the two Shahids, Sheik Yassin and the student Abu-Halima..." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 25, 2004] "The Islamic Union, the student arm of the Islamic Jihad in the Al-Quds Open University in Jenin, organized a mass march yesterday..." [Al-Ayyam, Feb. 2, 2004] "The memorial rally for [Head of Hamas] Sheik Yassin in the Islamic University in Gaza... was organized yesterday by the Islamic University's student council, [taking place] in the presence of a few of the [Hamas] movement leaders, the president and the board members of the Islamic University Trustees council, the head of the university, and the Academic and administrative staff members..." "The Al Kutlah Al Islamiyah (Hamas) in the Al-Quds Open University held in the Tobas center its annual "Live Memory" exhibition..." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 5, 2004] A student rally was organized in the Al-Azhar [University] park by the Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyah (Hamas), commemorating the anniversary of the death as a Shahid of Yihya Ayyash..." [Al-Ayyam, Jan. 6, 2004] "In elections for student council of Bir Zeit University nearly 50 per cent of the seats went to a coalition of the Islamic Jihad and Hamas student groups." [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Dec. 11, 2003] "The new leader of Hamas, Dr Abed Al-Aziz Al-Rantisi... emphasized in his words during the ceremony, held in the Islamic University in Gaza, that the war is raging against the United States and Israel..." [Al Ayyam, March 29 2004] "The [Hamas university student group] Al-Kutlah Al-Islamiyah- won the student elections in the Islamic University in Gaza. [Al Ayyam Oct. 23, 2003] "Al-Jama'aa Al-Islamiyah (Islamic Jihad) in the Al-Quds Open [University] in Jenin held a honorary [ceremony] for the families of the Shahids... The president of the University, Doctor Walid Jarar, expressed his appretiation to the Al-Jama'ah Al-Islamiyah initiative..." [Al-Quds 14/1/04] Al-Jama'ah Al-Islamiyah (Islamic Jihad) arranged a mass assembly yesterday in the Arab-American University on the occasion of the eighth annual Shahid [Martyrdom] day of the former Secretary General, Dr. Fathi Shqaqi, of the Islamic Jihad organization "A large crowd of students and university workers, and dozens of guests were present. . . . [The university lecturer] Dr. Hussein Abu-Hammad gave a speech in the name of the Arab-American University, in which he enumerated the virtues of the Martyr Shqaqi, [founder of the terror organization] as a remarkable national and Islamic commander in his philosophy, his struggles and his affiliations. Abu-Hammad stated that the Shahid was a exclamation mark in the history of the Palestinian struggle. The student factions in the university considered the Shahid Shqaqi a mentor for [the next] generations and as a unique commander... One of the students gave a speech in the name of Dr. Ramadan Abedallah Shalah, the Secretary General of the Islamic Jihad." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 4, 2003] "One of the students of Al-Jama'ah Al-Islamiyah (Islamic Jihad) [at the Arab American University in Jenin] delivered the speech for Islamic Jihad Secretary General, Dr. Ramadan Abdullah Shalakh, on his behalf." [Al-Ayyam, Nov. 4, 2003] Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). To subscribe to PMW's reports and bulletins, send an empty e-mail to reports-subscribe@pmw.org.il To Go To Top

ON YOM HASHOAH, LIGHT A YELLOW CANDLE TO REMEMBER THOSE WHO PERISHED Posted by Israela Goldstein, April 1, 2004.

It's been more than fifty years since Nazi concentration camps were liberated, and the Holocaust that claimed six million Jewish lives came to an end. To ensure that the six million did not die in vain and that the Holocaust never happens again, Jews throughout North America are participating in the Yom HaShoah Yellow Candle Program, a program sponsored by the Federation of Jewish Men's Clubs in cooperation with the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the North American Federation of Temple Brotherhoods. As the years pass, the memories of those who fell victim to the ultimate hate crime must not diminish. That's why we are being encouraged to light just one Yellow Candle on the night of Sunday, April 18, the 27th day of Nisan. When each family lights a Yellow Candle, it will increase the awareness of the Holocaust and perpetuate our commitment to our people. The memory is important because the number of Holocaust survivors is diminishing with each passing day. As we lose this precious link, those who deny the Holocaust ever happened gain strength. Sadly 20% of all high school students have no knowledge of the Holocaust. Yom HaShoah candles are a highly visible symbol for keeping the flame alive. Their color recalls the badges Jews were forced to wear in Nazi-occupied Europe, but their flame inspires hope that we can yet make our world a tolerant place to live. The following meditation is posted on this website:www.fjmc.org/pdfs/YH04.pdf where additional information can be accessed. Place the Yom HaShoah Yellow Candle in your window on the evening of Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 27th of Nisan 5764 and recite the following as you light it): As I light this Yellow Candle, I vow never to forget the lives of the Jewish men, women, and children who are symbolized by this flame. They were tortured and brutalized by human beings who acted like beasts; their lives were taken in cruelty. May we be inspired to learn more about our six million brothers and sisters as individuals and as communities, to recall their memory throughout the year, so that they will not suffer a double death. May we recall not only the terror of their deaths, but also the splendor of their lives. May the memory of their lives inspire us to hallow our own lives and to live meaningful Jewish lives so that we may help to insure that part of who they were shall endure always. Candles should be available for purchase through local synagogues or Jewish Community Centers. Let's do all we can to keep the memory of those who perished alive. To Go To Top

USA TODAY SKIPS THE HARD QUESTIONS Posted by Honest Reporting, April 1, 2004.

The highly-publicized scene of Palestinian teenager Husam Abdu - caught at an IDF checkpoint with an explosive belt wrapped around his body (March 25) - generated broad media follow-up on the highly troubling question: How can Palestinians send young children to perform suicide terror? But, as a March 31 USA Today article by Ellen Hale on this topic illustrates, media outlets have by and large decided not to tell the whole story on this key issue. The USA Today article, entitled 'For Palestinian Moms, Some Painful Choices,' attempts to debunk the claim that some Arab parents (to paraphrase Golda Meir) 'hate Jews more than they love their own children.' To that end, the reporter omits all mention of Palestinian cultural encouragement of child suicide terror in, for example, religious sermons, official textbooks, public speeches, television, and even through kids' collector 'terrorist cards.' Regarding parental attitudes on suicide terror, the reporter interviews three pro-Palestinian figures to reach the following conclusion: Experts discount claims that any Palestinian mother would wish her child to die as a martyr, even though the mothers of suicide bombers commonly are quoted as glorying in their child's death. Such comments are meant to provide a show of strength and assuage political and community pressure, mental health experts say. USA Today submits that the oft-expressed Palestinian parental pride in a child's 'martyrdom,' after the deed is done, is merely a psychological defense mechanism that 'assuages community pressure' and makes the best of the tragedy. But what about the harder and more vital question - the many documented cases of parents actively encouraging their children to commit suicide terror? For example, Naima al-Obeid, videoed in June 2002 alongside her son Mahmoud before he went off on a suicide attack, saying: "May every bullet hit its target, and may God give you martyrdom. This is the best day of my life." And what about Umm Nidal, who appeared in a March 2002 video sending her son to commit a suicide attack? She recalls: "I prayed for him when he left the house and asked Allah to make his operation a success and give him martyrdom." And just last week at a pro-Palestinian rally in South Africa, the Argus of Capetown reported that a six-year-old boy, dressed as a Palestinian suicide bomber, complete with a belt of fake explosives strapped to his body, says he wants to go to heaven - and his father says his child wants to be a martyr. These parents, and the religious and political leaders who incite them, are wholly ignored by USA Today in an article that addresses this very issue. And when USA Today addresses suicide bombing against civilians, it's only in the context of a parental dilemma: Religious mothers have a particular conflict in child rearing; in Islam, life on Earth is considered a test for getting into heaven. Dying as a martyr ensures immediate ascent there. [A psychiatrist] recounts an incident last week involving a devout mother suffering immense guilt because her son kept telling her he wanted to die as a martyr. "'I don't want him to die,' [he] says the mother told him. 'But at the same time, I'm a good Muslim.'" Let's get this straight - the Palestinian woman is torn between restraining her son, which would render her a 'bad Muslim,' and blessing him to blow up on an Israel commuter bus, which would make her a 'good Muslim.' USA Today lets this statement pass without batting an eye, thereby passing off the horror of Islamist suicide bombing against innocent civilians as just another form of legitimate religious expression. Again, USA Today fails to ask the hard and vital questions that lie at the heart of this issue. Last week's scene of the teenager wearing the bomb vest outraged the world, and might have been an important impetus to real reform of Palestinian education to child terror. But news agencies such as USA Today - through omission of essential cultural context and extreme moral relativism - have told only part of the story, and allowed that opportunity to pass. Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167, To Go To Top

GUERRILLA THEATER OF THE ABSURD IN HEBRON Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, April 1, 2004.

For the last few days, I've been attending the theater. Not the high and mighty halls of culture, but the street theater of life. I've been attending the "guerilla theater" - i.e. political theater - taking place in Hebron-Kiryat Arba. The Israeli government wants to "evacuate" an "outpost" and the "settlers" don't want to let them. Like a carefully crafted work of art, choreographed in finest detail, each side knows it's part, it's role, when to enter, when to exit stage right. Soldiers mosey around watching, while the police direct the action. Juxtaposed to them, the Jews living in the area, rabbis and community activists, and lots and lots of children. There are little girls six and eight and ten years old and little boys equally young. Teenagers are talking, police are standing in place, while the mayor of Kiryat Arba, Tzvi Katzover, sits and shares a sun umbrella with long-time political activist - former under-ground fighter in the pre-state days - and former member of Knesset, Geula Cohen. Then there's Elyakim HaEtzni, long-time political activist and another former member of Knesset, sitting and later after the police order his spot "evacuated," walking around commenting on the events unfolding before his eyes. It was strange to think, a few nights before, I had "davened" - said my evening prayers - in a synagogue called Hazon David - the vision of David - named after a victim of Arab Terror who was shot dead - about 2 and a half years before - 50 yards from that spot. The people of Hebron set up the synagogue to memorialize him. Now, Hazon David, an "illegal outpost" as it's called in international political parlance, was being dismantled, for the express purpose to carry out Israel's commitments in the Roadmap, and to further the "peace process". The synagogue stood just across the street from the entrance to the town - in an empty lot - bordered on both ends by Arab houses, and the Jewish neighborhood of Givat Avot - the hill of the fathers - just up the short - 50 yard high - hill. Interestingly, I was informed by one of the official spokespersons of the Kiryat Arba Municipality, that the Arab owner of the particular piece of land where the synagogue was built, had during the long drawn-out legal battle to save the "outpost" from evacuation, submitted to the courts an affidavit that he didn't mind the synagogue on his land. But politics and theater are more important. Well choreographed, the play unfolds. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, committed to forward political movement in the "peace process," and under pressure from the American administration to dismantle the "outposts," sends in the police and army. Some political commentators - from the left and right in Israel - claim that Sharon really isn't committed to the "peace process," but wants to distract people - including the Americans and "Palestinians" - from his unfolding problems, in the bribery scandal he and his sons are embroiled. The scandal threatens to cause him to resign. But back to the theater. After two nights and a day - of dire warnings - the army carries out the destruction order, tearing down the simple structure. In what can only be described as a "political twilight zone," the destruction of a defenseless synagogue in an empty field, owned by an Arab who doesn't mind it there; and then it's torn down, in the name of some high political idea, "peace". An idea that the Israeli government itself has repeatedly said its "adversary-partner," the Palestinian Authority, doesn't want. In any other country, such a destruction of a house of worship would raise the ire of people; Jews and many others would accuse the authorities of anti-Semitism. But in Israel, the Jewish homeland - ostensibly created to fight anti-Semitism after the Holocaust - the destruction of a synagogue - a memorial to a victim of Arab terror - has been cheered by much of the Israeli political mainstream - left and center - for its contribution to the "peace process" that isn't. As the play unfolds, the actors take their positions. The synagogue - a modest structure with three-foot stonewalls and a tent-like covering for a roof - already has been broken down. But the "settlers" won't let it end there. Not all Jews take lightly to synagogues being destroyed, even in the Jewish State. So, even after the Israeli Army meticulously carried off the prayer books and torah scroll, packed up the benches, tables, and chairs onto a truck, and bulldozed the stone-wall structure, Jews have returned, and returned, and returned, and vow to continue returning to re-build their synagogue. To this end, dozens of "settler" children carry rocks - small stones for a Jewish five-year-old, buckets or large boulders for a teen - re-building the broken walls. In the best tradition of "the absurd," minutes and hours go by, children and adults building stone by stone in the baking sun, while the police and army personnel sit around watching. Then they get up, organize, talk to their commanding officers and stand attendant for any order. More time passes, more stones are put in place, then a police commander shouts into his bullhorn that "This is declared a 'closed military zone' and you must leave, if you don't, we will expel you by force." Everyone knows his part; everyone knows his place on stage. As the bullhorn blares the evacuation order, all the children shout and jeer as loud as they can, to drown out the policeman's command. In their young minds, if they didn't "hear" the order, they needn't obey. All of this is being captured for posterity on video and film, by more than a dozen cameramen and women, from the Israeli and international media, the "settlers," and the police. Each camera looking for the best angle, the best shot, with which to tell the story. Everyone senses the high drama playing out in this empty field, in between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, on the cutting edge of the Israeli-Palestinian War. But not all is what it seems to be, in the "theater". On day two of the "evacuation," after the usual declaration that this is a "closed military zone" by the police, they swoop down onto the kids re-building, and start pushing and shoving people, to force them out. " ...We will expel you by force." Sometimes, four or five policewomen might surround a girl, pick her up and cart her off. At other times, the YASAM - the special police unit whose purpose in to bust up "settlers," i.e. crowd dispersal - goes in kicking, punching, and clubbing. That happened on day two, when a 14-year-old boy was injured during one of the many "evacuations". Later that day and the next, Israel radio and television, the Israeli and international press, variously described it as, "he got kicked in the head," "pushed down," "hit by a rock," and in one article, "police officials claim the boy was hit by a rock thrown by settlers. " I spoke with the boy, eyewitnesses, and saw photos of the incident. Some photos can be seen at: http://www.hebron.com/news/hdviolence.htm "Settlers" claimed police injured the boy using, what they called, excessive force. According to the boy, who was "moderately injured" and evacuated by ambulance for treatment at Hadassah Hospital, one YASAM policeman shoved him, and then a second grabbed him, threw him against the stonewall and onto the ground, then walked away. He was hurt on his back and the Magen David Adom - emergency ambulance service - paramedic was concerned he might have a broken rib or back injury. The boy asked, "If the police wanted to push me out of the synagogue area, why throw me against the wall and the ground, then walk away?" Several other people also testified to the undue force being used by the YASAM that day. It seems that someone started to ad lib, or did the police decide to change the script? How did brutalizing a 14-year-old Jewish kid, help the "peace process"? As long as everyone remembers that it's just a play, a big game, no one should get hurt. But when everyone starts taking it too seriously, especially the police... And so, the play goes on. The YASAM leave, the police move to the parameter, and the "settlers" move in again. Kids bringing stones, adults helping and supervising, offering prayers, occasionally singing and dancing, and the police carefully biding their time till its their turn to enter the stage and act out their part. This "theater of the absurd" is likely to run for quite some time, given the determination shown by the actors, "settlers" and police alike. My guess is that in the end, the synagogue will still be there when Sharon leaves office. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in international relations & policy analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

WHEN SHOULD WE STOP SUPPORTING ISRAEL? Posted by National Unity Coalition, April 1, 2004.

Today's message contains two noteworthy items dealing with why Evangelicals support Israel. This is a topic that merits serious discussion. We submit the following articles to counter critical accusations of possible hidden agendas on the part of Christians who support Israel. These articles written by American Christians offer straightforward and irrefutable evidence for the overwhelming and growing Christian support for Israel's preservation. The first article is by Victor Davis Hanson and appeared on Mr. Hanson's website, http://www.victorhanson.com/, March 28, 2004. The second article is by John Altevout. 1.  "When Should We Stop Supporting Israel?" by Victor Davis Hanson The recent assassination of Sheik Saruman raises among some Americans the question - at what point should we reconsider our rather blanket support for the Israelis and show a more even-handed attitude toward the Palestinians? The answer, it seems to me, should be assessed in cultural, economic, political, and social terms. Well, we should no longer support Israel, when? * Mr. Sharon suspends all elections and plans a decade of unquestioned rule. * Mr. Sharon suspends all investigation about fiscal impropriety as his family members spend millions of Israeli aid money in Paris. * All Israeli television and newspapers are censored by the Likud party. Israeli hit teams enter the West Bank with the precise intention of targeting and blowing up Arab women and children. * Preteen Israeli children are apprehended with bombs under their shirts on their way to the West Bank to murder Palestinian families. * Israeli crowds rush into the street to dip their hands into the blood of their dead and march en masse chanting mass murder to the Palestinians. * Rabbis give public sermons in which they characterize Palestinians as the children of pigs and monkeys. * Israeli school textbooks state that Arabs engage in blood sacrifice and ritual murders. * Mainstream Israeli politicians, without public rebuke, call for the destruction of Palestinians on the West Bank and the end to Arab society there. * Likud party members routinely lynch and execute their opponents without trial. * Jewish fundamentalists execute with impunity women found guilty of adultery on grounds that they are impugning the "honor" of the family. * Israeli mobs with impunity tear apart Palestinian policemen held in detention. * Israeli television broadcasts - to the tune of patriotic music - the last taped messages of Jewish suicide bombers who have slaughtered dozens of Arabs. * Jewish marchers parade in the streets with their children dressed up as suicide bombers, replete with plastic suicide-bombing vests. * New Yorkers post $25,000 bounties for every Palestinian blown up by Israeli murderers. * Israeli militants murder a Jew by accident and then apologize on grounds that they thought he was an Arab - to the silence of Israeli society. * Jews enter Arab villages in Israel to machine gun women and children. * Israeli public figures routinely threaten the United States with terror attacks. * Bin Laden is a folk hero in Tel Aviv. * Jewish assassins murder American diplomats and are given de facto sanctuary by Israeli society. * Israeli citizens celebrate on news that 3,000 Americans have been murdered. * Israeli citizens express support for Saddam Hussein's supporters in Iraq in their efforts to kill Americans. So until then, I think most Americans can see the moral differences in the present struggle. If the Palestinians wish to hold periodic and open elections, establish an independent judiciary, create a free press, arrest murderers, subject their treasury to public scrutiny, eschew suicide murdering, censure religious leaders who call for mass murder, embrace non-violent dissidents, extend equal rights to women, end honor killings, raise funds in the Arab world earmarked only to build water, sewer, transportation, and education infrastructure, and pledge that any Jews who choose to live in the West Bank will enjoy the same rights as Arabs in Israel, then they might find Americans equally divided over questions of land and peace. But all that is a lot of ifs. And so for the present, Palestinian leaders shouldn't be too surprised that Americans increasingly find very little in their society that has much appeal to either our values or sympathy. If they continually assure us publicly that they are furious at Americans, then they should at least pause, reflect, and ask themselves why an overwhelming number of Americans - not Jewish, not residents of New York, not influenced by the media - are growing far more furious with them. 2. "Why I Support Israel" by John Altevout Some people will tell you that evangelicals like myself support Israel because of some obscure passage in Genesis. Sorry, that's simply wrong. I support Israel because of scenes like the one described below. I personally believe that Israel should have never given back the lands they took in 1967. If they had kept it, today it would be a prosperous and productive area. Instead, what is it today? Look at this. Look at this. Ten year old children who behave worse than animals, and you don't want Israel to defend herself from these monsters? These were unarmed civilians. Around the world that's about the only people these cowards have the courage to attack, or more accurately have the courage to send their children to attack. Despicable, barbarous cowards. Israel is the cradle of our shared faith. Those who would secularize our society jeopardize the connection we as a people have to values that are derived from the same God and sacred texts. We embrace the same pursuit of educational attainment and enlightenment, the same pursuit of democratic institutions that reach out to the less fortunate and the same definitions of art and beauty and civilized conduct. We have nothing in common with these stone age barbarians. But this is who the left wants us to kowtow to. This is what the government of Spain is submitting itself to. Idiocy. Sheer brazen stupidity. Barbarism understands only one answer and that answer is not capitulation. This is barbarism: Men with scarves over their faces hurled bricks into the blazing vehicles. A group of boys yanked a smoldering body into the street and ripped it apart. Someone then tied a chunk of flesh to a rock and tossed it over a telephone wire. "Viva mujahedeen!" shouted Said Khalaf, a taxi driver. "Long live the resistance!" Nearby, a boy no older than 10 ground his heel into a burned head. "Where is Bush?" the boy yelled. "Let him come here and see this!" Masked men gathered around him, punching their fists into the air. The streets filled with hundreds of people. "Falluja is the graveyard of Americans!" they chanted. Founded in 1991, the National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" To Go To Top

MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT OUTDO THEMSELVES Posted by David Frankfurter, April 1, 2004.

Dear Friends, The same day as news reports (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/411056.html) surface of the head of the Palestinian Security Forces stealing millions every month through cash payments to 7,000 fictious policemen - from the EU funded PA salary budget, the EU Working Group on Budgetary Assistance to the Palestinian Authority has issued its reports. The committee could not agree on how much of a whitewash they could get away with, and so they issued two reports - the commmittee being split almost down the middle. Would they say 'There was no terror, and it wasn't funded by the EU, but lets make lots of recommendations to improve control,' or would they say 'There was terror, it might have been funded by the EU - but go prove it!'? The Funding for Peace Coalition (www.eufunding.org) has published a comprehensive analysis of the reports, and made the reports themselves available. I urge you to read the analysis at http://www.eufunding.org/EUWorkingGroupReport.html. Just to show how fair they are, though, today the EU parliament is debating a joint resolution on terrorism. Proposed clauses relating to the Middle East recognises "Israel's right and duty to defend its people from terrorist attacks" - and then go on to condemn all Israel's defensive actions as 'extra-judicial', implying that Israel's actions amount to terrorism themselves. But you got to hand it to the EU. The proposal is even handed. After all, it 'reiterates its condemnation of all terrorist acts against the civilian population by both sides." Send a fax to MEPs. Write to the media, church and opinion leaders. Let them know that in this so-called European democracy, the elected leaders far from represent the opinions of their electorates. David Frankfurter is a writer on the Middle East conflict. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Contact him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com To Go To Top

UNILATERAL JIHAD OR UNITY WITH G-D Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 1, 2004.

April 1, 2003 April Fool's Day: Let the fools be unfoolish enough to unite for themselves They kill the Jews and the anti-G-d Jews dismantle their memorials! DISMANTLE their houses of prayer and imprison the bereaved. They kill Jewish citizens, religious and nonreligious and the government attacks the mourners.  They hate themselves because they are hated. They suffer evil and are unilateral with evil, victimizing their own, victimizing the victimized, disregarding  legal rights to exist, own property, religious freedom  as well as Biblical deeds, history, Balfour mandate and right to survive. As Jews are denied, they cease to believe in themselves, deny  validity of their country,  laws of cilization, morality, kindness and justice. Attacked, they attack their own faithful, G-dfearing, those daring to fight for their rights. They are bombed in buses, cafes, hotels, everywhere and would destroy Gush Katif where Jews returned invasion after invasion, Shilo, the hometown of the Jewish Mishkon, Hebron the burial place  their forefathers bought as a deed to the Jewish generations for 1,000,000 shekels, (so much  more costly than Manhattan Island),  Jerusalem that they had a mandate to unite. (No, it was not the Congress and Senate which did vote to move the Embassy to Jerusalem; it was Netanyahu and is Sharon with the voices of Labor they defeated who considered the Arabs' sensitivities and not their own, not the sensitivities of their forefathers and their future generations. Unilaterally,  they would divide their country again and again to expand a non-country into a "Jihad Only Palestine" to replace Israel again, They would do worse than the Romans who changed the name of Judea to Palestine to confuse the Jew; THEY WOULD REMOVE THE JEWS, DISCREDIT THE JEWS AND CREDIT THE SYRIANS AND EGYPTIANS WHO CALL THEMSELVES PALESTINIANS AND ARE NOT EVEN ROMANS. As the enemy is unilaterally united in Jihad by will or by whip, as all 22 Arab nations shout "WE ARE ALL HIZBALLAH," the Israeli government acts likes His - b'allah; on the side of Jihad, too confused to see it for their own way, they whiplash their countrymen. Too cowardly to fight their murderers, they abuse their citizens. The heroes of the 6 day war and the Yom Kippur War against all the people  in all Israel,  would surrender to an unholy Jihad gang of those who hate them so much they kill themselves. Thus, unilaterally the "Jihad Jews" for the unholy put holes in their hasbara,  repeat the big lies and welcome more Jihad autonomy becoming the whipping dog of those who caricature them as dogs. Untruthful to themselves, they are for fraud. NOT MAN ENOUGH, WOULD THAT THERE WAS A WOMAN WHO COULD SAY, "WHEN THEY STOP HATING ENOUGH TO KILL THEMSELVES, MAYBE THERE WILL BE SOMEONE ALIVE TO TALK TO..." Not man enough to lead, to be an individual, the disturbed intellectual follows the semantics of their enemies who keep pummeling them. and rationalizes,  "IF THEY WANT WAR WE WILL FIGHT ON THE SIDE OF JIHAD; WE, TOO,  WILL BE  UNILATERAL' AND JIHAD FOR THEM, TAKE ARAFAT-AL HUSSEINI'S SIDE AND DESTROY OUR OWN SYNAGOGUES, GIVE AWAY OUR GREENHOUSES, IMPRISON OUR PATRIOTS, DISMANTLE OUR HOLY SITES . THE LEFT WHO HAS LEFT REASON AND DECENCY AND MORALITY AND KINDNESS AND G-D, HAS JOINED THE JIHAD, THOSE MORE INDECENT THAN THE UNCIVILIZED THAT ABRAHAM DISGARDED TO FORM CIVILIZATION, KINDNESS, RELIGION, LIBERTY HONESTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THE LEFT HAS CHOSEN ONE WORLD ORDER WITH THE DISORDERLY TO UNILATERALLY ELIMINATE THE POSITIVE BY CHOOSING THE NEGATIVE. THEY MIGHT CALL ZERO CONFLICT PEACE; IN FACT, IT IS CONFLICT MULTIPLIED TO SELF-INFLICT; NOTHINGNESS! NIHILISM! UNILATERAL SUICIDE KILLS ALL THOSE CHOOSING DEATH OF THEMSELVES, SIGNIFICANT AND INSIGNIFICANT OTHERS. The victor who feels guilty he is a Holocaust survivor would help the predators survive, supporting those who hate.  Loving his enemy he unloves himself, loved ones lost,  truth,  his family and future. LET THERE BE NO MORE VICTIMS OF ARAFAT AL-HUSSEINI AND NO MORE VICTIMS OF THE "UNILATERAL"  GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL WHERE UNILATERAL LIKUDNIKS HAVE REVERSED INTO  LEFTISTS AND LABOR TO LOSE. BLESS THE STEADFAST REAL JEWS WHO ARE LOYAL TO G-D, ISRAEL AND THEMSELVES. THIS PESACH, LET THE EXODUS from " unilaterality" bring unity of Israel, each Jew for each other. Let our people unite with their past in the present and for the future. Ask not what you can do for a non-country. Ask what you can do for your country, for a nation of survivors who are so few, where one against one suicide will still leave over a billion jihadniks for those other cowardly nations who abandon the Jews. Ask whether to battle the Jihad or become unilaterally alike it, going the wrong way into a head on collision into omission.  This Pesach let there be UNITY OF ISRAEL, EACH FOR EACH OTHER. LET THEJ EWISH PEOPLE UNITE WITH THEIR PAST IN THE PRESENT AND FOR THE FUTURE AND BE ONE NATION UNDER G-D. LET THE PEOPLE OF ONE G-D UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE OF ONE ANCIENT AND G-DLY NATION, INDIVISIBLE AND JUST, THAT MUST NEVER BE DIVIDED AGAIN. G-d created the world and it is good. Let our people carry the mantle their Forefathers chose and America's Founding Fathers emulated. Israel's reaffirmation will be a light unto nations. LET ISRAEL ACT FOR ITSELF, BE ON ITS OWN SIDE. Am Yisrael Chai! Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

374 FREED SLAVES ARRIVE IN SOUTHERN SUDAN Posted by Stephen A. Crawford, April 1, 2004.

WARAWAR, Sudan - Today, 374 slaves safely reached the market town of Warawar in SPLA-controlled Southern Sudan after a long and sometimes harrowing exodus from bondage in Northern Sudan. After crossing the Bahr-Al-Arab river they had been received by the local Dinka community and Christian Solidarity International (CSI) representatives. Over the past three weeks 503 slaves - mainly women and children - were gathered from government-run camps in Northern Sudan. Most of the slaves had been held in these camps for between one and three years. The 374 slaves were tightly packed in open trucks, approx. 55 on each truck. The remaining 129 of the 503 slaves have not yet arrived. The 374 slaves had been detained for more than one week in Meiram, near the border with Southern Sudan on account of threats from government-sponsored militias. Following an intervention by the World Union of Progressive Judaism at the UN Commission on Human Rights on March 28, the Government of Sudan provided a guarantee of security to enable the slave convoy to cross the border into Southern Sudan. However, at least one boy was reportedly re-abducted by his knife-wielding master as the convoy crossed the Bahr-Al-Arab River. The arrival of the liberated slaves in Warawar was greeted with great rejoicing. The slave exodus was organized and led by James Aguer and other members of the Committe for the Eradication of the Abduction of Women and Children (CEAWAC) and members of the Warawar Arab-Dinka Peace Committee. CSI is providing humanitarian assistance to the now liberated slaves. The Goverment of Sudan appears to be divided about the future repatriation of freed slaves. On the one hand the First Vice President Ali Osman Taha has reportedly made a commitment to fund CEAWAC for another 12 months. However according to witnesses the presidential advisor Mubarak al-Fadil al-Madhi declared at a mass rally in Meiram on 31 March that funding for CEAWAC would be terminated by the end of May. Moreover, he was reported to have declared his opposition to the repatriation of child slaves who were fathered by their masters. Stephen A. Crawford is with Christian Solidarity International, a Christian human rights organization. Its internet address is www.sci-int.org. To Go To Top

ISRAELI ARABS NOW WORKING WITH ARAB LEAGUE Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 1, 2004.

Long under a cloud of suspicion by Arab states, Israeli Arabs have won acceptance by the Arab League. These Israeli residents have persuaded the League that they did not assimilate, they are not loyal to the Jewish state, they have local grievances against that state for which they seek outside support, and their outlook is pan-Arab (IMRA, 3/29) and therefore anti-Zionist). This is a significant milestone, among many, of Israeli Arab disaffection. Such disaffection should not be surprising. A couple of hundred thousand are illegal aliens, refreshing their hostile attitude. Israeli Arabs never accommodated themselves to minority status, they just smoldered, except when they rioted. Their riots, however, either were ignored by the head-in-the-sand Israelis or were thought to be the fault of something Israel did to the Arabs rather than the Arabs' regret of not having done in the Jews in 1948. Radical imams imported to Islamicize Israeli Arabs were given a free hand, as were seditious Israeli Arab politicians. An Israeli inferiority complex and extreme multi-culturalism weakened Israeli nationalism and defensive measures against Arab excesses. These Arabs feel contempt towards Israel. It is time for Israel to grow out of its inferiority complex, awake to, and react against, internal sedition. This sedition includes some Jewish leftists. Unfortunately, the Left controls Israeli society. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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

JANE'S DEFENSE NEWS BRIEFS Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, April 1, 2004.

More details of Libyan WMD revealed US and international officials have outlined further information about Libya's weapons of mass destruction programmes, new details of which came to light after Tripoli decided to end proliferation efforts and allow international inspections (JDW 28 January). [Jane's Defence Weekly - first posted to http://jdw.janes.com - 26 March 2004] Big Patriot order for Lockheed Martin Production contracts totalling US$505 million for Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missiles and related support equipment have been won by Lockheed Martin, the company announced on 19 February 2004. The battle-proven PAC-3 missile is the world's only fielded hit-to-kill, pure kinetic energy air-defence missile. [Jane's Defence Industry - first posted to http://jdin.janes.com - 17 March 2004] [MBM Note] During the first Gulf War, we sustained more damage from the Patriots than from Scuds. During the second war, not a single missile was fired. Calling this system "battle-proven" is ludicrous. Mini-UAVs proliferate in Israel The Israel Defense Force (IDF) has selected Elbit to supply its Skylark miniature unmanned aerial vehicle (mini-UAV) system for close-range reconnaissance. The company says that its contender was the only one to meet all the IDF's requirements, including the ability for the UAV to land routinely within 5m of the operator. [Jane's International Defense Review - first posted to http://idr.janes.com - 11 March 2004] To Go To Top

ATTEMPT TO REBUILD HAZON DAVID SYNAGOGUE AND POLICE VIOLENCE Posted by Hebron Community, April 1, 2004.

Last night was relatively quiet. About 50 people stayed at the synagogue, all night long. In the morning there were several prayer services, including a Torah reading. The synagogue's Torah scroll, which was confiscated yesterday by the army during the eviction, was returned, and used today. At about 10:00 a large contingent of police and riot squad forces arrived at the site and declared 'an illegal gathering of people.' The police, in an attempt to destroy the low rock wall surrounding the area of the synagogue, began pushing woman and children who were sitting on the wall. The scene became very ugly and very violent in a short time. A number of people were arrested including Hebron leader Mrs. Orit Struk and several other women, as well a about five teenage boys. One of the woman was shoved into a police car and driven wildly to the nearby police station. During the ride, she was bounced from side to side in the car, and injured. She requested medical care all day, and was refused. Only late this afternoon was she examined by a doctor and sent by ambulance to a hospital in Jerusalem for treatment. The event repeated itself later, in the early afternoon. Again, a number of people were arrested, despite the fact that they did nothing wrong. Men and women were brutally dragged and carried to awaiting police vehicles, and taken to the police station. In order to be released, the arrestees must sign a form promising not to return to the Hazon David synagogue for two weeks. There is at least one case of a 14 year old girl who was forced to sign an agreement forbidding her to return to the synagogue, and also to walk along 'worshipers way, between Hebron and Kiryat Arba. Kiryat Arba-Hebron residents have vowed to remain at the site until the synagogue is rebuilt. Pictures of the destruction of the synagogue by the police can be viewed on these web pages: The Day Before: www.hebron.com/news/hazondavid.htm The Destruction: www.hebron.com/news/hdavid.htm Day One: Attempts to rebuild and police violence: www.hebron.com/news/hdviolence.htm Day Two: Continuation of above: www.hebron.com/news/hd-day2-1.htm 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

COLUMNIST ROBERT NOVAK'S USE OF JESUS TO BASH ISRAEL Posted by Leo Rennert, April 1, 2004.

I wrote this to Letters to the Editor of the Washington Post about Novak's defense of sacred sites. Robert Novak's criticism of the alleged encroachment of Israel's security barrier on paths trod by Jesus would have more credibility if he were to show the same passion in deploring far graver threats to sacred sites in the Holy Land ("Walling Off Christianity in Israel" April 1, op-ed page). As an avid reader of Novak's column, I don't remember any protests when Palestinians desecrated a historic synagogue in Jericho or built a mosque atop Joseph's Tomb in Nablus or used Rachel's Tomb outside Bethlehem as a firing range or pelted Jewish worshipers praying at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Nor do I remember Novak congratulating Israel when, in the face of strident opposition from local Arabs, it sided with the Vatican and prevented the planned construction of a huge mosque next to the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth. Novak should make his own pilgrimage to Israel to see for himself how Israel has safeguarded the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in the Old City of Jerusalem and the Al Aqsa Mosque atop Temple Mount. On his return, he might stop off in Spain and contemplate how Christian rulers, when they took power, destroyed synagogues and mosques or converted them into churches. Israel may not be perfect but it has a peerless record, under the most trying circumstances, in its solicitude and respect for all faiths. To Go To Top

NO SHARON RIVAL WITH A RIVAL PLAN Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 1, 2004.

Imagining there was no alternative to the Oslo plan, Israel felt it had to adopt it. A thousand Israeli corpses later, Oslo is in disarray, and its debris continues to wreak havoc. The status quo was a better alternative. Israelis who devise foolish plans stick to their ideology (or bribes) regardless of sad experience. They continue to concoct foolish schemes. All these plans propose Israeli retreat. This is defeatism. Israeli freelancers on the European dole have come up with new plans, but lack the political standing to gain acceptance, despite the millions of Euros poured into that subversive effort. Enter PM Sharon. PM Sharon says he has a plan of retreat, for which "there is no alternative." Haven't we heard that, before! Of course there are alternatives. He finds it easier to dismiss them as "unrealistic" than to discuss them. Neither does he discuss his plan's nuts and bolts, and open it up to ridicule. He just touts it. For the promulgator of a withdrawal plan to discuss its problems would revolutionize Israeli politics. Why should these authors oblige critics and take their people into their confidence, when with parliamentary Party discipline and control over the media, they can shut off most dissent from reaching most Israelis? So thoughtless is promotion for Sharon's plan, that few realize it really is not a plan. It merely is a list of Jewish communities to abandon, and secret preparation to pounce on those communities with overwhelming force and block national protest, much less resistance. The government of Israel has the wrong concept of who are the enemy. It thinks the people are. I think the Arabs are. My evidence? The thousand Jewish corpses and the calls for jihad. Basically, his plan is to hide behind a fence but if attacked, return to catch the offenders. Meanwhile, the Arabs are developing artillery to fire over the fence. Israel would not be allowed by the Security Council to return if the P.A. declared sovereignty over the abandoned area. Foreign troops might bar them. If the IDF did invade, how would it know whom to apprehend, when without a constant presence, its intelligence network would have collapsed? Sharon's "plan" is half baked. The first requirement of a good plan is that it potentially accomplish something. Sharon's plan fails that criterion. To be sure, Sharon asserts advantages to it. Assertion doesn't suffice. Explanation showing how the advantage can be achieved, would suffice. That explanation was omitted. Earlier essays showed the advantages to be imaginary. One claimed advantage with a certain ring to it is gaining some acceptance, because of repetition and people's reluctance to analyze such things. It is difficult to think about what should be controversial when the media makes sure most dissenters are kept silent. That claim is the one that by withdrawing from isolated areas, the troops stationed to protect those areas would be able to fall back and augment protection of other areas. They certainly would be needed to augment such protection. As Deputy PM Olmert has admitted, terrorism would not be decreased. It would be redirected to the fall-back areas, which afford more targets and therefore would be more difficult to defend. Some advantage! This is a plan for avoiding terrorism, that according to its own advocates would allow continued terrorism, and that according to its opponents would engender increased terrorism. Nor would as many troops be needed if the alternatives discussed below were adopted and if the ruling class stopped scheming to expel the Jews of Yesha and instead provided them with heavier arms and training for more self-defense. Worse, the absence of outlying patrols would give the terrorists more freedom to smuggle and develop weaponry. Buoyed by more weaponry and an enthusiasm already heating up at the prospect of finding Israelis retreating from past terrorism, the Arabs would fall upon other Jewish communities on both sides of the Green Line. It should dawn on the plan's authors that withdrawal is counter-productive. Anticipate, instead, further agitation to retreat farther. Israel likes to throw good money after bad. Deputy PM Olmert was asked how the plan would stop the Arabs, left to their own devices in Gaza, from forming a state there. How would such a state be kept from its legal right to import heavy arms? He did not know. He neither answered nor found out. Why then is he advocating such a scheme? Why is he retained as a national leader? Politics. What he urges is not good for the Jewish people, Zionism, or national security. In fact it is deadly for the Jewish people, stifling for Zionism, and perilous for national security. A plan for empowering the enemy, as this scheme would do, should get Ariel Sharon punished both in this world and in the next. One thing the Israeli system does, with its lack of accountability to the people, is to foster dull thinking and unreliable politicians. These politicians deal with immediate problems of public relations - basically, how to get a smile out of the President of the US, this week. They do not plan ahead. Israelis are notorious for improvising rather than planning. By planning, I mean broad planning, not scheming. For schemes they have cunning, of which Sharon may have as much as Peres. The problem with improvising is that one cannot always count on the enemy behaving as predicted or on other conditions staying favorable. Lack of planning means mostly not taking the wisest position at the outset, thereby precluding some superior options later. Israel survived by improvising when matters were simpler and so were the Arabs. No longer! Of course, there are alternatives. All the withdrawal plans are variations on surrender, partial or whole. The first alternative is to stand pat. The status quo does not empower the enemy. It gives Israelis time to come up with a worthwhile and workable plan, unlike Sharon's. Other alternatives are Zionist ones, partial or full-scale. The Israeli Army could be sent in to really disarm the Arabs. Jewish communities in Yesha and undeveloped areas could be annexed. P.A. Arabs could be forbidden to work in Israel, until their economy collapses and masses move away. In Israel, itself, laws could be enforced against Arabs for illegal entry, illegal seizure of land, illegal building, non-payment of taxes, and rioting. Discriminatory subsidies could be withdrawn from their college tuition and quotas withdrawn from jobs, but they could be accorded veterans' job benefits after they perform national non-military service equivalent to the time Jews and other non-Arabs perform military service. To be fair, more Jews should have to serve, too, under conditions consistent with their religious scruples. Unfortunately, the high command resents the notion of greater morality being introduced into the Army. In other words, Jewish dignity could be upheld and Jewish claims fulfilled. This kind of a plan is not on the horizon. The reason is that it would require national integrity and Jewish knowledge. Those are in short supply in the ruling class of Israel. Heaven help our people there! Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. 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 LEFT'S REAL AGENDA Posted by Naomi Ragen, April 1, 2004.

In the beginning, I didn't understand. I thought that there were people with different political viewpoints in this country of ours, a vital democracy. Of course, I thought that the policies of the Labor Party and Meretz, exemplified by Yossi Sarid and Shimon Peres, were totally wrong. I thought that they and their supporters were mistaken in their honest, but misguided, search for a peaceful solution to the problems with our Arab neighbors. But now, three plus years into the Intifada, when, as a direct result of their policies, over 20,000 terrorist attacks have killed our children in the streets, and caused thousands of injuries, destroyed our once-thriving economy and put people in line for soup kitchens, not to mention an unprecedented outpouring of hatred all over the world not only for Israelis, but all Jews, I must admit the truth to myself. These people really will not be satisfied until they destroy the Jewish State. That is their real agenda. I give you the fabricated "pilots' revolt," carried out in conjunction with Israel's Channel Two and the Yediot Acharonot newspaper, both of whom apparently coordinated the release of this trumped up traitors' list, which includes reserve pilots who haven't been in a cockpit in years, as well as those who aren't at all involved in targeted terrorist killings anyway. They will "refuse orders" they tell us; the orders they don't get anyway. Hundreds of pilots signed counter petitions, but you will not hear about that. Just as you will not hear about the thousand people who stood across the street from Shimon Peres' birthday extravaganza paid for by the impoverished Israeli people (and don't tell me it was privately funded. I know who did the catering at the President's House, and that alone cost 80,000 shekels, and the people of Israel are paying for it). And now we have the "writers and intellectuals" who have taken the army to the Supreme Court, charging them with a criminal act in targeting Hamas Chief Salah Shehadeh, killed by Israel in July 2002. Shehadeh was responsible for hundreds of terrorists attacks and hundreds of Israeli deaths. In killing Shehadeh, civilian bystanders, including children, were also killed, the regrettable outcome of fighting an enemy who hides behind children and old ladies. This is the "crime" the army is accused of by two Arab writers and their Jewish colleague. I myself once personally witnessed Shulamit Aloni fawning all over Muhammad Bakri, who put together that web of filthy lies he called a "documentary" about Jenin, a film that Goebbels would have given the Third Reich's highest award. Self-hating doesn't begin to explain these Israelis. They don't hate. They actively support and encourage the enemy to destroy their fellow citizens. So let us see how their campaign is going so far. Bring in Arafat from Tunis and let him rearm and then give him a private enclave where his terrorists can set up camp, joined by Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Make it a safe haven for bomb-building and a launching pad for attacks against Israelis by taking to the streets any time the IDF tries to stop their activities. Then, let them bomb away. Let them kill your fellow Jews at their Passover seders, at their bus stops, in cafe's, in playgrounds. In short, make Israel an unlivable place. Certainly, a place no tourist in his right mind would want to visit. And then, when you are voted out of office by the hoodwinked masses, rally your leftist leagues once again. You've already got all of your people into key positions in Israel's newspapers, and most of its radio and television news programs, so that they report what you want and ignore what you don't want. Use them to fight the elected government (not hard; they are mostly corrupt, spineless jellyfish anyway). And, having accomplished that, go all out after the last bastion of resistance to your plans, the Israeli Defense Forces, those ordinary patriotic citizens willing to die for their country, those people who man the thin red line between Israelis and the murderous hordes of barbarians chafing at the gate. And because we are not allowed to call anyone a traitor in this country; and because no one wants to be labeled a right-wing fanatic (although no one worries about being called a left-wing suicidal lunatic), you will get away with it. And the last stage in the destruction and the demoralization and impoverishment of this country can take place. There is only one thing wrong with this plan. Israelis love life. And they understand when they've been taken for a ride. And they have no faith in the press, and have stopped buying Yediot Acharonot (before the holiday, my supermarket was giving it away for free...) and watching the news. But the time has finally come when we have no choice. All those of us who want to stop this plan have got to begin to fight our fifth column, our own Israeli media and our own media darlings, the way we once fought CNN and the New York Times. The enemy within our gates has had enough tolerance. We need to use our democratic rights to defeat them, by exposing them and boycotting their propaganda organs. We need to rout them before they complete their agenda. May God help us. Naomi Ragen is a best-selling novelist and columnist who has lived in Israel since 1971. Her website address is http://www.naomiragen.com/ This appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews) October 7, 2003. To Go To Top

TRASHING ISRAEL WITH A GRIN(BERG) Posted by Steven Plaut, April 1, 2004.

Lev Grinberg is one of the many Far-Leftist anti-Israel extremists that fill Ben-Gurion University. There are so many such extremists there that I have already heard more than one person refer to Ben Gurion University as the "University of Treason". BGU is filled with faculty who endorse and promote treason in the form of mutiny and insubordination by Israeli soldiers, urged on by these faculty members to refuse to obey the law or to serve in the army, at least until Israel adopts the national suicide policies advocated by the leftist, most extremist 2% of the electorate. In fairness, there are also some serious scholars and non-wacko people there, while at the same time the other Israeli universities have their fair shares of such extremists as well. BGU is the home of Benny Morris, godfather of the "New History" (meaning pseudo-history) of Israel's academic "Post-Zionists", although recently Morris has been a radical anti-Zionist only on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Shabbas, while a pro-transfer quasi-Kahanist on the other days of the week, evidently part of his campaign to anger both the Left and the Right at the same time, or at least to occupy the center of attention in the media. Then there is Neve Gordon, the lecturer in political science who praises Holocaust Denier Norman Finkelstein and compares him morally to the Prophets of the Bible, who entered Ramallah illegally (after having been arrested for similar activities earlier) as part of the "Solidarity with Terrorists" delegations that tried to protect Arafat and his people from the Israeli army during Operation Defensive Wall, and who subsequently filed a harassment SLAPP suit against me because I dared to criticize his political opinions and political activities. Lev Grinberg is an Argentina-born senior lecturer in behavioral science at BGU, who was rescued from Argentinian violence and economic crises when granted citizenship in a welcoming Israel. Do not bother writing his department chair about him though, because the latter is almost as extremist as Grinberg. Recently, Grinberg apparently decided there is not enough Israel-bashing and anti-Semitism in Europe, so he wrote an article for a Belgian newspaper denouncing Israel as perpetrating "symbolic genocide" when it whacked the nazi Sheikh Yassin. Now let us make sure you are following this. When Sheikh Yassin orders the murders of hundreds of Israeli civilians, many of them children, that is not any atrocity according to Grinberg. Nor is it genocide, symbolic or otherwise, when the same sheikh issues blood-curdling demands for genocide of Jews and insists all Jews anywhere should be murdered. But when Israel dispatches the sheikh to his virgins, that constitutes genocide according to Dr. Grinberg. Grinberg's article and responses to it are reported in Maariv April 1, 2004. The Israeli Foreign Ministry was not amused by Grinberg's Belgian waffle and issued a denunciation (Maariv April 1, 2004) in which a spokesman for the Ministry openly labels Grinberg a "traitor" (his word), entirely uncharacteristic language for such diplomats. Limor Livnat, the Minister of Education, was already investigating Grinberg for his abusing his position in his classroom to impose his extremist anti-Israel opinions on his students, even BEFORE the current Belgian Israel-as-Genocidal-State scandal. The Ben-Gurion University spokesman issued yet another of his wonderful "We believe in free speech and pluralism" platitudes, just like those he regularly issues regarding Neve Gordon's promotion of Norman Finkelstein and serving as human shield for Arafat. The only itsy bitsy problem is that Ben Gurion University is noted for having large academic departments in which there is no pluralism whatsoever and no room for anyone who is not ferociously anti-Israel or Far Left. Besides Grinberg's own "Behavioral Science" department (a mix of psychologists and sociologists; Grinberg himself claims to be a "political sociologist", whatever that is), the political science department at BGU is notorious and renowned for having not a single non-leftist among its faculty members. Some pluralism! BGU is said by some to go out of its way to stock its faculty slots with leftist extremists, often even when this involves lowering academic standards for hiring and promotion. Here is the English text of Grinberg's anti-Israel screed that appeared in the Belgian newspaper. Note who is distributing it. http://amin.org/eng/lev_grinberg/2004/mar23.html. (If you'd rather read it in Frog, it is at http://homepage.mac.com/vuillermoz/iblog/B1691587594/). And here are his other pieces distributed by the same crowd: http://amin.org/eng/lev_grinberg/. Grinberg by the way was one of those people who denounced Benny Morris for breaking ranks with the Hate-Israel Left when Morris justified some of Israel's policies and denouncedthe PLO, at least on certain days of the week. Grinberg was outraged that Morris is not anti-Israel enough any more. He is one of the PLO's favorite Jews: http://www.solidarite-palestine.org/doc144.html . Mikey Lerner and the Tikkun Cult love him - http://www.tikkun.org/index.cfm/action/current/article/79.html The PLO's official web pages run his material: (http://www.ramallahonline.com/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=58 ). Grinberg maintains a personal web site at http://www.bgu.ac.il/beh/lev.html and here is his resume: http://www.ffipp.org/events/speakers/bio2002-Lev%20Grinberg.doc (note how he lists himself as a Beilin advisor). Here is a typical Grinberg screed: http://www.democracymeansyou.com/mideast/state-terrorism.htm. Grinberg is one of the most extreme promoters of treason and mutiny by Israeli soldiers refusing to serve: http://www.merip.org/mero/mero022202.html. Here is Grinberg bashing Israel in the Egyptian Holocaust Denying daily al-Ahram: weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/580/op5.htm. Here is Grinberg again denouncing Israeli "state terrorism": http://www.fpc-wilmette.org/sanders/032902/11grinberg.html. He makes it clear he thinks Israeli state terrorism is far worse than anything mere Palestinians or al-Qaeda folks perpetrate. (Note: BGU's Neve Gordon has also built his career on making similar charges about Israeli "state terrorism", in one case in a "research paper" financed by the same Kroc Institute recently found to be financing a French anti-Semite with ties to al-Qaeda.) According to the article in today's Maariv, - Grinberg himself has done jail time for insubordination while in the army. - In Grinberg's Belgian article he explicitly accuses Israel of perpetrating "genocide" against the Palestinians, not just "symbolic genocide". - Was a founder of the "Yesh Gvul" organization devoted to organizing mutiny among Israeli soldiers. - Grinberg claims the Palestinians keep offering ceasefires but it is Israel under Sharon that refuses and Israel that perpetuates the carnage. - Grinberg claims Israel is leading the Middle East to Jihad. - Grinberg calls on the Europeans to violate Israeli sovereignty to "save Israel from itself and its own government." In other words, to coerce Israel into accepting what Grinberg himself advocates even if 99% of Israelis reject his "ideas". Should you wish to write to the officials at BGU about any of this, you can write to Officials at Ben Gurion University: Professor Avishay Braverman President, Ben-Gurion University Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel Fax: 972-8-647-2937 avishay@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Professor Jimmy Weinblatt Rector, Ben-Gurion University Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel Tel. 972-7-6461105 Fax: 972-7-6472945 weinb@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Professor Avishai Henik Dean of Social Sciences henik@bgumail.bgu.ac.il 972-8-6472945 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, P.O.B. 653 Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Be'er-Sheva 84105, Israel. and also American Associates of Ben Gurion University: 1430 Broadway 8th Floor New York, NY 10018 phone 212-687-7721 fax 212-302-6443 email info@aabgu.org Lis Gaines President Vivien K. Marion Executive Vice President 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

FIGHTING WORD WITH WORD Posted by Linda Olmert, April 1, 2004.

My friend Yuval and I have been discussing the importance of "words for some time. Yuval had the amazing idea of putting together a "Say, Don't Say" Israel supporters dictionary. Please add the word "genocide" to the list under "say", across occupation. This article was written by Dmitry Radyshevsky who heads the Michael Cherney Foundation and is executive director of The Jerusalem Summit. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post, March 30, 2004. An Israeli journalist, a friend of mine, was recently invited on an American radio program to debate the Middle East situation with a colleague, an Arab-American. Like many such debates, this one was a lost cause for the Jewish side. All the facts on terrorism, on the monstrous hate-the-Jew propaganda in Palestinian schools, media, and mosques, all the numbers and stats and quotes were reduced to rubble with one word from his opponent: "occupation." And the audience agreed: Terror is horrible, but it is caused by this nasty occupation. Thousands of anti-Israel propaganda makers have learned well a recipe developed by the KGB and picked up by European and American PR firms operating on behalf of pro-Palestinian clients: For the West, the word "occupation" is an absolute negative and can be used (with accompanying phrases like "right to self-determination" and "struggle for independence") to trump any facts. Can defenders of Israel find a magical word that would trump "occupation"? It would have to be one word - a word of truth to defeat legions of lies. There is such a word - "genocide." In 1948, five Arab armies tried to choke Israel in embryo. Days before their invasion, Azzam Pasha, the general secretary of the Arab League, announced, "This will be a war of extermination, a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." In 1967, Gamal Nasser declared a few days before the war, "Our main task is to destroy Israel." Syria's Hafez Assad echoed, "It is time to embark on a war of annihilation." The same sentiments were voiced in 1973. ONLY THE fear of yet another resounding defeat, or being snuffed out by Israel's presumed nuclear capability have since held back many Arab states from new attempts. Yet the obsession with destroying Israel among Muslim fundamentalists keeps growing. Arab maps still do not show Israel, and after the 55 years of dehumanization and demonization of Jews in Arab propaganda and education systems, the psychological grounds are laid for a new genocide. The clear and present danger of a new holocaust should be the subject of presentation by Israeli delegations at all appropriate international conferences. We need to argue that only thanks to Israel's military deterrent capability has this new genocidal threat not come to pass. The key to maintaining our deterrence is military control over Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. Such minimal territorial depth is necessary to mobilize the IDF reserves in case of attack by enemy states. And it is also necessary to prevent Palestinians from easily striking straight at Israel's population centers. Indeed, in 1967 the US military's joint chiefs of staff concluded that Israel must maintain defensible borders - specifically the strategic high ground of the West Bank. Thus Israel must have permanent military control over this tiny land (0.12% of the total Middle East land mass) in order to prevent a new holocaust. Any person with vestiges of Judeo-Christian morality would admit that a Jewish military presence in Judea and Samaria is an acceptable cost of preventing a holocaust. So, if you choose to call it occupation, feel free to do so. Occupation is an acceptable cost for preventing a holocaust. Occupation saves the lives of 5 million Jews. Only the occupation of Germany stopped Hitler's genocide. The whole world accepted it as the only way to salvation. Few would be so shameless as to claim that a genocide should always precede an occupation. So let us remember: Genocide is the word. Checkpoints prevent genocide. Israeli soldiers in Arab villages prevent genocide. "Racist separation wall" prevents genocide. If Europeans are so concerned with the Palestinians' welfare, here's another truth: Occupation is the Arabs' only hope for a normal life. Until Yasser Arafat's return from Tunis, the morbidity and mortality statistics of the Palestinians "languishing" under Israeli occupation - lifespan, infant deaths, education, income, free press - were incomparably better than they are now after 10 years under the PA. Moreover, the occupation is the Islamic world's only chance to rid itself of the true occupation - by unholy fundamentalist forces who have usurped the theology of Islam. If Israel's presence results in a Palestinian enlightenment, Palestinians can become agents of positive change in the Islamic world; otherwise they will remain the strike force of jihad, jeopardizing civilization and themselves. To Go To Top

THE TRANSFER OF JEWS - WITH THE CONSENT OF THE LIKUD Posted by Mikimia and Herb Sunshine, April 1, 2004.

To: Manhigut Dear Mr. Feiglin, We are English speaking members of the Likud, enrolled by Manhigut. We are devastated at the prospect (chas v.sholom) of Jews forcibly transferring Jews from the Biblical lands of Israel. It is unthinkable in a "democratic" society that this earth -shaking action will be undertaken without a vote of the people, the Knesset or the Ministers. G-d forbid, should the Likud membership approve, it will signal the U.S. that the Sharon surrender plan is realistic, despite its surreal nature. How, specifically, can we assist in defeating this plan? We are willing to contribute money for expenses. Can we help to contact the membership, e-mailing, writing letters; anything to prevent this disaster from happening. It does not take prophecy to know that the surrender of Gaza, parts of Yesha and the withdrawal of the IDF will soon result in rockets falling in Jerusalem, Haifa, Tel Aviv and in all of Israel. Without exaggeration, we consider the surrender of Gaza to be a crucial moment in the struggle for the existence of Israel. Ariel Sharon is a leader who has lost all direction. No society can long exist by divesting itself of land, pride and patriotism. Please allow us to be part of the coming Likud campaign With love of Israel, and with fear for its future. To Go To Top