What the U.N. Wants Hidden – Muslims’ apartheid

MUSLIM APARTHEID
Source: kahane.org
What the U.N. Wants Hidden

With unbridled audacity, the Muslim population of the world has adopted the technique of Hitler’s Big Lie to accuse the other of crimes they themselves have been guilty of for thousands of years and are still guilty of today: apartheid, racism, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. It is the Muslims, not the Christians, not the Nazis, and not the Serbs, who first taught the world such atrocities. It began with the Muslims, centuries before the Crusades, and continues openly and shamelessly into the 21st century, without an objection from the U.N.

FACTS THE U.N. AND ITS MUSLIM ALLIES WANT YOU TO IGNORE
– According to Islam, an agreement made between a Muslim and an infidel (non-Muslim) need not, and should not be honored. Does this speak volumes on why Oslo failed? This is Muslim apartheid.

– Muslims/Arabs control vast amounts of land – over 56 countries, 21 in the Middle East, none of which are democracies. All of which are oppressive repressors of the MOST BASIC human rights. The 21 Mid East countries are all Arab, all Muslim, all homo-geneous (with tiny sprinklings of Christians fearing for their lives). They find it unbearable a country such as Israel, a democracy which thrives on religious, ethnic, and cultural diversity, should exist amongst them. This is intolerance of the OTHER. This is Muslim racism, discrimination, and apartheid. They desire and live for Israel’s destruction, the West’s destruction. This is Muslim ethnic cleansing.

– In 622 A.D. Mohammed traveled to Medina and tried to force the Jews to convert. When they refused, two of the major Jewish tribes were expelled; in 627, Muhammad’s followers killed between 600 and 900 of the men, and divided the surviving Jewish women and children amongst themselves. This is Muslim racism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

-The Dhimmi, an inferior status accorded Christians and Jews, were forced to pay a tribute to the Muslim rulers in exchange for their lives. Dhimmis, on pain of death, were forbidden to mock or criticize the Koran, Islam or Muhammad, to proselytize among Muslims or to touch a Muslim woman (though a Muslim man could take a nonMuslim as a wife). This is Muslim racism, discrimination, and apartheid.

– Dhimmis were excluded from public office and armed service, and were forbidden to bear arms. They were not allowed to ride horses or camels, to build synagogues or churches taller than mosques, to construct houses higher than those of Muslims or to drink wine in public. They were not allowed to pray or mourn in loud voices-as that might offend the Muslims. The dhimmi had to show public deference toward Muslims-always yielding them the center of the road. The dhimmi was not allowed to give evidence in court against a 
Muslim, and his oath was unacceptable in an Islamic court. To defend himself, the dhimmi would have to purchase Muslim witnesses at great expense. This left the dhimmi with little legal recourse when harmed by a Muslim. This is Muslim racism, discrimination, and apartheid.

– Everyone other than Dhimmis faced a choice of either Death or Conversion. This is Muslim racism, genocide, and apartheid.

-Dhimmis were forced to wear distinctive clothing with huge collars which made them the subject of ridicule. In the ninth century, Baghdad’s Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews, setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later in Nazi Germany. Today, the Taliban continue this practice on the Hindu population of Afghanistan. This is Muslim racism, discrimination, and apartheid.

– On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was incited by Muslim preachers who had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish power. A precursor to the incitements of the Muslim clerics today to kill Americans and Jews everywhere. This is Muslim racism, apartheid, and genocide.

– in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in “an offensive manner.” The killings sparked a wave of massacres throughout Morocco. This is Muslim racism genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

– 8th century – mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco, whole communities were wiped out by Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830 and Marrakech, Morocco, where more than 300 hundred Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogue were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2),Iraq (854859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Koran’s prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen(1165 and 1678) , Morocco(1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344). Does this remind you of the 20th century where Jewish communities were slaughtered in Hebron in 1929, where Christians are 
arrested, falsely charged, and executed on a daily basis, where Hindus are murdered en masse, where Buddhist, Hindu, and Jewish Holy sites are plundered and destroyed by Muslims? Today is just a continuation of Muslim history of racism, apartheid, and genocide of the OTHER.

– 19th century- Jews in North Africa were forced to live in ghettos. In Morrocco,( the largest Jewish community in the Islamic Diaspora), Jews were made to walk barefoot or wear shoes of straw when outside the ghetto. Even Muslim children participated in the degradation of Jews, by throwing stones at them or harassing them in other ways. The frequency of anti-Jewish violence increased, and many Jews were executed on charges of apostasy. This was all before the State of Israel existed, yet their actions were no different then from today’s charter of the PLO and other Muslim countries – destroy Israel, kill the Jews, kill democracy, kill the OTHER. This is Muslim racism, apartheid, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

-Today, Sudan’s Islamic government continues to enslave women and children from Christian tribes. This is Muslim racism and apartheid. Muslim Sudaneese have murdered approximately one million Christian Sudaneese. This is Muslim genocide.

-Hindus and Muslims fight for the Kashmir. Thousands of Hindus are executed. This is Muslim genocide.

-After NATO gave them the province, Albanians in Kosovo cleansed 80 percent of the Serb population and destroyed over 100 Orthodox churches. This is Muslim apartheid, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

– In Indonesia, the Laskar Jihad (which includes veterans of Bosnia and Afghanistan) attacked Christian villages in September 2000 . In two provinces, over 5,000 have died and over 250,000 were driven from their homes since January 1999. This is Muslim genocide and ethnic cleansing.

-According to the Guardian, Muslims in England are trained in paramilitary camps and sent to Lebanon and Jordan to join the holy war against Israel. One young recruit explained: “We have a problem with oppression. That is, with the Hindus in Kashmir, the Russians in Chechnya, the Christians in the former Yugoslavia and the Israelis in Palestine.” Anything OTHER than Muslim dictatorships signifies oppression. This is Muslim racism, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

Today in Southern France, there are more mosques than churches. How long before the Muslims in France, the United States, and other Western countries begin to view the non-Muslims as their oppressors and start their jihad for “liberation” of those countries?

Today in Israel, Muslim clerics who control the Temple Mount (where the Dome of the Rock and the silver domed Al Aqsa mosques sit) claim that there is no evidence of a Jewish connection to Jerusalem. These brazen statements fly in the face of our common Western Heritage of the City of David, the Jewish monarch. The Palestinian Muslim clerics are guilty of gross historical revisionism so as to justify a future attempt at ethnic cleansing.

Who will the citizens of the “infidel” world depend on for protection when churches, synagogues, and Buddhist / Hindu temples start to be torched? Synagogue desecration has already begun.

When Muslim suicide bombers (who continue to be romanticized by Western media) come to your doorstep, will you ask Kofi Annan and Mary Robinson of the U.N. for your protection?

They will help you as they have helped Israel and the Jewish people be blown up and dismembered by Muslim “activists” in Israel. They will help you as they have helped the 2 million slaughtered Tibetans (by Communist China). They will help you just as they have helped the enslaved, slaughtered and beheaded Christians in Egypt, Lebanon, Sudan, Malaysia and other Muslim countries. They will help you as they have helped the slaughtered Hindus in the Kashmir and Afghanistan.

They will protect your places of worship as they have protected the Great Buddha and the Hindu Temples in Afghanistan in their destruction, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in its plunder and desecration by the Muslim expatriates, the Tomb of Joseph in its burning stone by stone and replacement by a mosque, the destruction of Tibetan monasteries in illegally occupied Tibet. The U.N. will help protect you and your places of worship the same way they have protected those above.

No doubt, the U.N., together with the Arafat’s and Saddam’s of the world will hold a World Conference Against Racism and accuse the U.S., France, England, and Italy of crimes against humanity. They will accuse them of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and brand them all apartheid states, just as the NGO has done to Israel (the forerunner) this week. The Motto: Accuse the OTHER of crimes you are guilty of.

It will no doubt be a democratic process of voting by those who practice tyranny, but no matter, democracy and equal votes for all dictatorships of the world. And on the last day of their conference, a resolution will be passed effectively branding all democracies and Western governments as racist, genocidal, apartheid states guilty of ethnic cleansing. Where will you be then? Back 


What do Muslims think of Osama bin Laden?, by Daniel Pipes 

Ask Westerners and you’ll hear how marginal he is. President Bush says bin Laden represents a “fringe form of Islamic extremism . . . rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics.” American specialists on Islam agree. “Osama bin Laden is to Islam like Timothy McVeigh is to Christianity,” says Mark Juergensmeyer of the University of California. Karen Armstrong, author of a bestselling book about Islam, reports that the “vast majority of Muslims . . . are horrified by the atrocity of Sept. 11.”

Well, that “vast majority” is well hidden and awfully quiet, if it even exists. With the exception of one government-staged anti-bin Laden demonstration in Pakistan and very few prominent Islamic scholars, hardly anyone publicly denounces him. The only Islamic scholar in Egypt who unreservedly condemns the Sept. 11 suicide operations admits he is completely isolated.

American officials are still waiting for Muslim politicians to speak up. “It’d be nice if some leaders came out and said that the idea the United States is targeting Islam is absurd,” notes one U.S. diplomat.They don’t because the Muslim world is bursting with adulation for the Saudi militant.

* “Long live bin Laden” shout 5,000 demonstrators in the southern Philippines.

* In Pakistan, bin Laden’s face sells merchandise and massive street rallies have left two persons dead. Ten thousand march in the capitals of Bangladesh and Indonesia.

* In northern Nigeria, bin Laden has (according to Reuters) “achieved iconic status” and his partisans set off religious riots leading to 200 deaths.

* Pro-bin Laden demonstrations took place even in Mecca, where overt political activism is unheard of.

Everywhere, The Washington Post reports, Muslims cheer bin Laden on “with almost a single voice.” The Internet buzzes with odes to him as a man “of solid faith and power of will.” A Saudi explains that “Osama is a very, very, very, very good Muslim.” A Kenyan adds: “Every Muslim is Osama bin Laden.” “Osama is not an individual, but a name of a holy war,” reads a banner in Kashmir. In perhaps the most extravagant statement, one Pakistani declared that “Bin Laden is Islam. He represents Islam.” In France, Muslim youths chant bin Laden’s name as they throw rocks at non-Muslims.

Palestinians are especially enamoured. According to Hussam Khadir, a member of Arafat’s Fatah party, “Bin Laden today is the most popular figure in the West Bank and Gaza, second only to Arafat.” A 10-year-old girl announces that she loves him like a father. Nor is she alone. “Everybody loves Osama bin Laden at this time. He is the most righteous man in the whole world,” declares a Palestinian woman. A Palestinian Authority policeman calls him “the greatest man in the world & our Messiah” even as he (reluctantly) disperses students who march in solidarity with the Saudi.

Survey research helps us understand these sentiments. In the Palestinian Authority, a Bir Zeit poll found that 26 percent of Palestinians consider the Sept. 11 attacks consistent with Islamic law. In Pakistan, a Gallup found a nearly identical 24 percent reaching this conclusion.

Even those who consider the attacks an act of terrorism (64 percent of both Palestinians and Pakistanis) show respect for these as acts of political defiance and technical prowess. “Of course we’re upset that so many died in New York. But at the same time, we’re in awe of what happened,” said a young Cairene woman.

An online survey of Indonesians found 50 percent seeing bin Laden as a “justice fighter” and 35 percent a terrorist. More broadly, I estimate that bin Laden enjoys the emotional support of half the Muslim world.

That America’s politicans and experts on Islam insist on seeing bin Laden as an isolated McVeigh-like figure is worrisome; they miss the danger that bin Laden’s militant Islam poses to existing governments – perhaps their greatest challenge of recent times. Their fear of him goes far to explain why the authorities so heavily discourage pro-bin Laden sentiments (forbidding posters of him, arresting militant Islamic leaders, blocking street gatherings, closing schools and universities, patrolling streets with loaded machine guns, and even shooting demonstrators).

The wide and deep Muslim enthusiasm for bin Laden is an extremely important development that needs to be understood, not ignored. Back 

Containing Islam, by Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Middle East expert Daniel Pipes proposes a policy of “containment” against what he calls “radical anti-Westernism among Muslims.” He states: “Containment was the successful U.S. policy toward the USSR in the Cold War.” He quotes George Kennan’s influential 1947 article, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct”: “The main element of any U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union must be that of long-term, patient but firm and vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies.” Pipes’s analogy is misleading, to say the least.
First of all, the U.S. is confronted not by a hostile IDEOLOGY, i.e., Soviet communism, but by a hostile 1,300 year-old CIVILIZATION: Islam. Pipes reduces this civilization to what he elsewhere calls “Islamism,” which he defines as “politicized Islam.” It can readily be demonstrated, however, Islam is and has always been a political religion.

Second, the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, some 43 years after Kennan’s containment policy was enunciated. It is highly questionable that this policy led to the disintegration of the “Evil Empire.” During the 1980s, the Soviet Union, to compete with the United States, spent some $400 billion in military hardware. Its economy, never, sound, collapsed. Besides, Russians are not Moslems. The Russians had been disillusioned about Communism at least since the purge trials of the mid-thirties. In contrast,
during the last few decades, or since the end of Western colonialism, Islam has been resurgent.

Third, Islam is anti-Western because the secular democratic lifestyle of the West, which increasingly influences mankind, threatens the religio-political power structure of the Islamic world. Where and how and to what extent Islam’s anti-Westernism will manifests itself will depend on the changing balance of power between Islam and the West; and now Islamic regimes possess or are acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

Fourth, unlike the Soviet Union, Pipes’ so-called Islamists are not reluctant to use such weapons. Communists were not suicide bombers. Communism, moreover, is a Western phenomenon. Whether one thinks of it terms of Marx or of Lenin, it is a product of the social engineering envisioned by the Enlightenment and modern rationalism. Although Soviet communism and Islam have much in common-both are totalitarian, both divide the world into a “peace camp” and a “war camp,” and both therefore reject national borders-the cultural mentality of their respective devotes is fundamentally opposed, and not only because Communism is atheistic. Suffice
to say that Islam has a love affair with death, and that blood is one of its fundamental motifs.

Fifth, there are 1.2 billion Moslems on planet earth, and approximately 60 Islamic regimes. In the Teheran Conference of October 1991, four hundred delegates from these regimes-including “moderate” Egypt and Jordan-unanimously signed resolutions calling for the elimination of the United States from the Middle East as well as the destruction of Israel. These delegates were not mere “Islamists.”

With all due respect to Pipes’ insightful articles about the Middle East, like others he obscures the “clash of civilizations” between the West and the Islamic East. The policy of “containment” is almost laughably inadequate to this conflict. At stake in this conflict is the materialistic and hedonistic lifestyle of the West, most conspicuously exemplified by the United States. In the final analysis, the issue is between atheism and religion-which is not to say that Islam is a true religion.

Atheism dominates the West. Western civilization-if it may be called a civilization-is morally complacent, steeped in nihilism, and long recognized as decadent by serious people. It is incapable of containing Islam-another decadent civilization. If proof is wanted, only note how Western “civilization” is allied with Islam against Israel! Back 


A Detrimental Unity?, by Ruth and Nadia Matar, October 16, 2001,

With the resignations of the Nationalist oriented factions, what remains is a Government led by Shimon Peres. In the name of a Unity Government, Sharon has capitulated to Peres and the failed Oslo process of the Labor Party. It moreover dictates a continuation of a Peres policy of appeasement to Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Labor resoundingly lost the last election, but surprisingly rules the roost today. The Shas Party remains in the Government and can be counted on never to leave. Its major concern is its own survival and Party advantages, rather than the vital interest of the Jewish People. Added to the pot-pourri is the Dan Meridor faction, which
lacks any real program nor any plans for solving national ills. A Government composed of such a motley group is doomed to failure. It can have no real leadership because of the serious conflicting viewpoints of its main members.The result is a Government of compromise and appeasement.

Where do we go from here? The Government is following the path of Peres to renew Oslo, and to live with Arafat and a Palestinian State. In fact Sharon incredulously initiated a statement talking about the creation of such a State several weeks ago. As such, he offended the majority of Jews who do not believe he was speaking in their behalf. One does not have to be clairvoyant to realize that the Palestinian Authority and Arafat are not capable of changing their ways. They have had a sustained course of action of teaching hatred and hostility in their schools and in their media against Israel and the Jewish People. Such action has borne fruit – suicide bombers
and ruthless shootings of civilians . It will be a very long time before there can occur any change in this Arab hostility, if ever.

There is virtually a lack of concern by Peres and the U.S. State Department for the loss of Jewish life. Remarkably, the catastrophe of September 11 hasn’t changed the U.S. State Department’s policies in the Middle East. They have divorced Arafat from terrorism and insist that Israel sit down with him to work out a peace process. Such a myopic approach is a clear message to Israel that there will be no moral leadership from the United States. A spark which Sharon recently generated by his pointing out American inconsistencies about the terror of Arafat, has been quickly extinguished. The Israeli Government is back to its subservient role to American interests, to its own detriment.

What should be the course of action of the Jewish People who a year ago entrusted the leadership of their nation to Sharon? He has grievously disappointed this electorate. At the time, the Jews resoundedly defeated the Labor orientation of Barak and Peres. Yet those policies dominate the present Government of Sharon.

The latest Sharon appeasement is his failure to retain Abu Sneineh. Once again we are turning over this area to Arafat’s control, thus exposing the Jewish Community of Hebron to murderous attacks. Sharon, who has called Arafat a murderer and a liar, is entrusting the safety and security of the Jews of Hebron into Arafat’s hands. It is an incomprehensible situation. It well deserved the departure of the nationalist camp from Sharon’s Government.

Unfortunately, Sharon will go down in Jewish history as a mediocrity. He has failed to meet the historical needs of his People. He has missed opportunities to retake part of his ancestral homeland. Sharon’s major failure, however, under the guise of unity, was elevating Peres to a position where Peres is able to defy the Will of the Jewish People.

Back 


What was behind Sharon’s warning to the West?, October 7, 2001, by By Reuven Koret

Publicly the furor has subsided over Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s warning to the Western democracies, and the United States in particular, not to repeat the lessons of 1938 and appease the Arabs at Israel’s expense. It was dismissed by the U.S. Secretary of State as a brief “cloudburst.” America and its allies understandably want to focus their attention on the expected Afghan campaign. The Israel-American media war of words is over, for now.

But behind the scenes, the anger and suspicions on both sides have not subsided. The Israeli press Sunday morning was filled with stories and speculation about why Sharon decided to go public with his unprecedented caution to the Western coalition and his comparison of the situation of Israel with that of Czechoslovakia before the Second World War.

What brought Sharon is launch such an outburst at such a sensitive moment? An “inside” report by senior correspondents Shimon Shiffer and Nahum Barnea in Israel’s leading daily, Yediot Ahronot [translated unofficially here from the Hebrew original] sheds considerable light on the circumstances that led to the speech.

They report that on Thursday, Sharon received an excited phone call from German Foreign Minister Yoshka Fischer, considered one of Israel’s diplomatic allies in Europe. “I spoke with Bashar Assad,” Fischer said. “He told me that Syria was always against terrorism. You have now idea how moved I was. To hear such things from the Syrian President.” Sharon, the report went on, exploded with anger, to hear that not only was Syria believed to have been “always” against terror, but that the senior German diplomat was so moved to hear Assad claim as much.

Not only that. Fischer went on to make demands of Israel. “You must go toward the Palestinians,” he said. “It is possible that these concessions will be painful for the current generation, but they will promise a better future for coming generations.”

It is possible that the conversation with the German about “generations to come” reminded Sharon about generations that came before. And with the prospect of a major war breaking out, the Israeli Prime Minister evidently felt it was necessary to go on record with his strongly felt perspective on what he clearly felt to be a concerted effort to force Israel into concessions for the sake of appeasing the Arab states that the Americans want to support its war coalition.

“THERE IS A CERTAIN MOMENT,” YEDIOT QUOTES SHARON AS SAYING, “THAT YOU DISCOVER THAT THEY ARE WORKING BEHIND YOUR BACK.” IT WAS AT THAT MOMENT, HE SAID, “I DECIDED, THAT’S IT. IN A LITTLE WHILE THE WAR WILL BEGIN.
ISRAEL WILL BE FORCED TO MAKE FAR-REACHING CONCESSIONS TO THE PALESTINIANS. IF IT WILL REFUSE, IT WILL BE BLAMED FOR UNDERMINING THE WAR EFFORT. THIS WAS THE LAST MOMENT.”

Sharon had observed the developments following the events of September 11 with growing trepidation. The United States had formulated a new Middle East initiative without consulting Israel, and press reports indicated that the U.S. had further modified that initiative in favor of Arab positions. This would not be the first time, and the Yediot reports makes the colorful observation that in times of crisis, Israel always goes from being the presentable wife to being shunned as the “other woman” who must be concealed from polite company. This time the “freeze-out” of Israel from U.S. consideration appeared almost total, as if Israel no longer existed in the eyes of
the Americans.

Nevertheless, Sharon said that he ordered Israel’s secret services to give “everything” to assist the American war preparations, passing on intelligence “worth more than gold” with regard to bin Laden and sharing operational secrets of Israel’s special anti-terrorist units.

But like the loyal wife that had been supplanted, Sharon felt that not only were the efforts unappreciated but that the Americans seemed to be going out of their way to scorn and snub Israel. The decision of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to leave Israel off his itinerary on his weekend trip to the region was particularly galling.

Then there was the apparent distinction that the Americans and the Europeans were trying to make between global terrorism (against them) and local terrorism (against Israel). There was the effort to make a reconciliation with Iran, with dangerous strategic implications for the ability of the Iranians to develop their nuclear capability, and the wooing of Syria, despite the Syrian support for Hizbullah in Lebanon, which only last week launched an unprovoked cross-border missile attack on Israeli bases.

And there was the most immediate bone of contention: the pressure to cover for Arafat and the Palestinians. American pressure forced Sharon to agree to let Foreign Minister Shimon Peres meet Arafat “under fire.” After the ceasefire agreement, as a senior Sharon adviser put it, Israel “ceased” and the Palestinians “fired.” The result were a first-of-its-kind terrorist incursion into an Israeli settlement in Gaza, a car bomb attack in Jerusalem, a shooting attack at the Afula bus station, and dozens of other attacks.

Arafat, from Sharon’s perspective, did not do even the minimum, not making even a single arrest. For simply making a condemnation of violence, Sharon noted, Arafat won worldwide praise. Not only that, he was rewarded with a removal of American pressure but also with President Bush’s expression of support for a Palestinian state as part of the traditional American “vision” for a peaceful Middle East.”

“There’s a limit,” Sharon told Yediot, and he feared the worst was yet to come. “The minute the war breaks out, an American envoy will come around with a plan, and Israel will be represented as undermining the war effort.” Sharon felt it was the last moment to make a statement, and that this was not the time for quiet diplomacy. Besides, there was an issue of self-respect, the right of an independent to state its case and stand on its rights. “Since when do we pass speeches to the Americans in advance?” the Prime Minister asked, rhetorically.Back 

Terror in The US and the Jonathan Pollard Case, September 26, 2001, by Larry Dub

A Must-Read! Terror in The US and the Jonathan Pollard Case If you saw the article that follows below on WorldNetDaily but it was
gone before you had a chance to read it, or it you received it from IMRA on the eve of Yom Kippur but never had a chance to read it, Justice4JP strongly recommends that you do so now.

This is the first time Terror in the US and the Jonathan Pollard Case is being circulated by Justice4JP. If you never again read anything else on the Pollard case, you must read this one!

It is an article that best lends itself to a being read in hard copy, so please take the time to print it out. It is worth it. Your understanding
of the Pollard case and of current events will be radically affected.

If you prefer a formatted copy with bolding and italics it is available on the web at www.jonathanpollard.org/2001/092601.htm
Here is the plain text version:

In a bitterly ironic way, the devastating terrorist assaults on New York and Washington which recently claimed thousands of innocent American lives bring to mind the desperate and futile attempts of Jonathan Pollard to save America and Israel from just such a catastrophe.

In the early 1980’s Jonathan Pollard was a civilian analyst in an anti-terrorist unit of the US Navy. He was responsible for identifying
state sponsors of terrorism in the Middle East, analyzing information on terrorist activities, and briefing American officials on the probability of terrorist strikes both at home and abroad.

Pollard’s unceasing message in these briefings and in the reports he submitted was if America did not combat terrorism abroad, the battle would eventually be brought home to be fought on American soil. Much to Pollard’s dismay, as long as his reports were “only” about murdered Jews and Israeli targets, his exhortations were met with indifference. His warnings and his recommendations – which if implemented threatened to disturb America’s relations with her so called “moderate” Arab allies – were largely ignored.

For example, Jonathan Pollard was deeply troubled that the US Government did not seem to appreciate the threat to American interests posed by Saddam Hussein. He repeatedly warned American officials of the dangerous game the US was playing both in arming Iraq and providing it with sensitive intelligence. He also tried desperately to hold the US to its commitment to warn Israel of “the Butcher of Baghdad’s” lethal plans for the Jewish State. In his efforts to get this information legally released to Israel, Pollard appealed all the way up the chain of command in the Pentagon. To no avail. In desperation, Pollard finally gave the information to Israel himself.

Essentially, Jonathan Pollard warned Israel that Saddam Hussein was planning to scorch the Jewish State with weapons of mass destruction. What is perhaps most shocking of all, though, is the fact that this vital information was being purposely withheld from Israel by the US, Israel’s closest ally.

While the exact reason for this betrayal will probably never be known, at least two high-ranking members of the American national security establishment at the time – Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Deputy CIA Director Admiral Bobby Ray Inman – were well aware of Iraq’s genocidal intentions towards Israel, and chose to blindside the Jewish state. Their motive, it seems, was to curry favor with the Egyptians and the Saudis who viewed Saddam’s covert strategic arsenal as a means to finally destroy Israel.

Nevertheless, thanks to Jonathan Pollard, Israel was ready with gas masks and sealed rooms when Iraq attacked her during the Gulf War.

In warning Israel, Jonathan broke the law. He deserved to be punished. But the punishment has to fit the crime. The usual sentence for spying for an ally is 2-4 years. Jonathan is about to complete his 16th year of a life sentence, with virtually no possibility of parole.

Jonathan Pollard did not spy against the United States. He was never indicted for intent to harm the United States nor for treason, though he has been falsely accused of both. He received his life sentence without benefit of trial, as the result of a plea bargain which Jonathan honored and the US violated.

Jonathan received a sentence far harsher than most of those who spied for an enemy nation. Twentieth Century spies Michael Walker, Clayton Lonetree, and Richard Miller, who spied for the Soviet Union and did inestimable damage to American national security, are all free men today. Only Jonathan Pollard, a Jew who spied for the Jewish State, remains in prison with no end in sight.

The case of Michael Schwartz highlights the disparity in sentencing between Jew and non-Jew and between Israel and other US allies.
Schwartz, a non-Jew who spied for Saudi Arabia, was arrested, confessed and indicted. But before he ever stood trial a quick deal was worked out in order to appease America’s Saudi ally. His punishment? Loss of his Navy job, rank and pension. Whereas Jonathan Pollard got life for his activities on behalf of a US ally, Schwartz did not get single day in prison.

An article (Crime and Punishment, LA Jewish Journal – 04/03/98) by J.J. Goldberg, Editor of The Forward (NY), cites high level Washington sources indicating that the Joint Chiefs of Staff acted through Caspar Weinberger to secure a life sentence for Jonathan Pollard that has nothing to do with Jonathan’s guilt or innocence and everything to do with sending an intimidating message to Israel and to the American Jewish community: “High-ranking sources say that it was the Joint Chiefs of Staff who urged the judge, through then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, to ignore the plea agreement and throw the book at Pollard…. They wanted to send a message …Pollard is still in jail, these sources say, not because his crime merits his lengthy sentence — it doesn’t — but because too many American Jews still haven’t gotten the message.”

Perhaps this explains why both the American Justice system and the clemency process have been repeatedly subverted in the Pollard case and why in spite of the patently false accusations against him, Jonathan Pollard remains in prison nearly 16 years later.

Granted, there is resistance to releasing Jonathan Pollard from numerous officials and institutions in Washington which have gone to great lengths over the years to exaggerate and fabricate the damage Pollard allegedly did to US national security. The record, however, has never supported these unsubstantiated claims.

Congressman Anthony Weiner (D. NY) recently wrote a letter to President Bush in which he stated: “The facts of the case show that none of the information provided by Mr. Pollard resulted in the loss of lives or the utility of any agents, the need to replace or relocate intelligence equipment, the loss of sources of information, or the compromising of technology. And while sentences in espionage cases are traditionally proportional to the damage caused, Mr. Pollard’s sentence is in gross violation of this principle. Having reviewed many of the documents in the case myself and received numerous briefings on the subject, I believe that if anyone were to conduct an original review of Mr. Pollard’s case, they would come to the same conclusion that I have: Mr. Pollard’s sentence does not fit his crime.” [see
www.jonathanpollard.org/2001/080701a.htm]

Indeed, the Government’s own Victim Impact Statement (VIS), which was submitted to the court prior to sentencing indicated that Pollard’s greatest “sin” was that by giving Israel vital security information which permitted the Jewish State to act in its own defense, he had made Israel “too strong” and thus angered America’s “moderate” Arab allies.

The assertion that Pollard had disturbed the balance of power in the Middle East by making Israel “too strong” is absurd. As pointed out by David Zwiebel Esq. in his 1997 critique of the VIS:

“For decades, Washington has sought to assure Israel of a qualitative military and strategic advantage vis–vis its Arab neighbors; Pollard’s actions were, if anything, consistent with this goal.

Moreover events of subsequent years (and especially the Gulf War) have shown America’s enormous credibility with its allies in the Arab world; Pollard’s actions had no discernible impact here.

Finally, intelligence-sharing between the United States and Israel has actually been strengthened in the past decade, culminating in a historic strategic cooperation agreement between the two states in 1996; Israel now receives real-time data throughout the day from US intelligence satellites.

If Pollard’s actions indeed “adversely affected US relations with both its Middle East Arab allies and the Government of Israel,” as claimed in the VIS, it seems fair over a decade later to say that such adverse impact was of short duration”.
[See www.jonathanpollard.org/1997/061397.htm]

Nevertheless, in response to the “moderate” Arab allies’ complaints that Pollard had made Israel “too strong”, the entire American judicial process was subverted. This judicial subversion resulted in an unprecedented life sentence for Jonathan Pollard, which was intended not only to send a severe warning to Israel, but more importantly, to placate America’s oil-rich Arab allies.

In spite of the passage of time which has exposed Government allegations against Jonathan Pollard as either gross exaggerations or outright lies, and in spite of the all evidence to the contrary, America continues to punish Jonathan Pollard as if he had committed a far more serious crime and as if Israel were an enemy state. Meanwhile America continues to indulge her “moderate” Arab allies as if she were unaware of their connection to and tolerance of terrorism.

As of September 11, 2001 the above situation is no longer tolerable. America’s sufferance of Arab “allies” who tolerate terrorism and give it safe haven must cease immediately; and the grossly disproportionate sentence meted out to Pollard to placate these so called allies must be immediately resolved.

What can be done to bring resolution to the Pollard case which has for 16 years remained impervious to due process and truth? In 1998 a political solution was sought and found – but never implemented. That solution remains viable to this day.

Most Americans and Israelis know that on the heels of the Pollard crisis at the Wye River Summit in 1998, former President Clinton promised former Prime Minister Netanyahu that he would review the Pollard issue. What very few people know is that both prior to the Wye summit and then again as an integral part of the Wye accords, President Clinton had in fact committed the United States to freeing Jonathan Pollard. The US commitment still stands to this day, waiting to be honored. Israel has fulfilled its part of the deal. The US must live up to its end of the agreement.

In order to understand why America still owes Jonathan Pollard to Israel it is necessary to understand the sequence of events before, during and after the Wye River Summit. According to a variety of eyewitness participants, including Mr. Netanyahu himself, this is what happened:

In September, 1998, just before the mid-term Congressional elections, President Clinton (who at the time was facing impeachment hearings and in need of a foreign policy PR victory) asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to attend a three-way summit with the Palestinians at Wye River, Maryland. Clinton knew that a successful summit at Wye just before the Congressional elections would be good not only for his image, but would also reap political benefits for the Democrats in their bid to regain control of Congress. As an inducement to Netanyahu, Clinton promised to release Jonathan Pollard within the context of the summit.

Understanding the value of Jonathan Pollard for his own re-election bid, and needing him as a sweetener to sell any kind of “peace” deal to the Israeli people, Netanyahu ignored the entreaties of Republican friends like Newt Gingrich, who implored him not to hand a PR victory to the Democrats, and agreed to attend the summit.

Once the Summit was underway Clinton “forgot” his promise to free Pollard. Netanyahu knew he had been had but there was little he could do about it at that point.

Talks at Wye soon broke down over the release of Palestinian murderers with Jewish blood on their hands and over Israel’s request for the extradition of Ghazi Jabali, the Chief of Police in Gaza who was wanted for his role in planning and executing terrorist attacks in Israel. To break the stalemate the Palestinians suggested Jonathan Pollard as the solution. They proposed that Pollard be “sold” to Netanyahu once again: the US would give Jonathan to Israel in return for Israel’s freeing hundreds of Palestinian terrorists, and immunity for Ghazi Jabali.

The US and Israel agreed to the Palestinian plan to swap Pollard for terrorists and murderers. President Clinton personally worked out the details in a late-night private session with a Palestinian and an Israeli representative. According to the deal, Prime Minister Netanyahu was to receive a side letter from President Clinton the next morning (one of approximately 30 side letters the Americans had promised) guaranteeing Pollard’s release for November 11, 1998, one week after the US House elections. Jonathan Pollard did not agree to this deal. He was not even consulted.

Had Pollard been consulted, he would have warned the US and Israel that making deals with terrorists only encourages them; and that his freedom should be arranged in a way that redresses the injustices in his case and brings honor to both the United States and Israel.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that Pollard’s release was negotiated at Wye in a currency agreed upon by both Israel and the United States.

What is more, the Pollard negotiation was the deal-maker at Wye which allowed the summit to be successfully wrapped up and a signing ceremony to be planned for the next morning in Washington on Friday, October 23, 1998.

Only hours before the signing ceremony P.M. Netanyahu received all of the American side letters that had been promised to him except one – the one guaranteeing the release of Jonathan Pollard. Netanyahu threatened not to attend the signing ceremony unless he got the Pollard side letter. Clinton said, “Trust me.” Netanyahu, knowing he was about to be double-crossed by Clinton over Pollard for the second time, refused.

Netanyahu demanded that in the absence of a side letter of guarantee, Pollard should be freed into his custody immediately, or no signing ceremony. Ariel Sharon, who was then a Cabinet Minister and is now Prime Minister of Israel, supported Netanyahu and they threatened to leave Wye without signing the Accords.

In order to take the pressure off President Clinton, CIA chief George Tenet leaked the news of Pollard’s imminent release to the media in a deliberate – and ultimately successful – attempt to torpedo the deal. He sent emissaries to Capitol Hill to hold emergency meetings with leading Senators and Congressmen to enlist their support in publicly denouncing Pollard’s release. Many lies were told by the CIA emissaries to convince the American legislators to act swiftly and in unison. Believing the lies, the legislators complied and began an unprecedented series of public actions to prevent the release of Jonathan Pollard.

Meanwhile at Wye, under heavy pressure and still fearful that Netanyahu would not back down, Clinton quickly negotiated a private fall-back position with Netanyahu: Clinton would publicly promise to do a “speedy review” of the Pollard Case and he would use that review to free Pollard a few months later, parallel to the release of the 750 Palestinian terrorists who were part of the price Israel had agreed to pay for Pollard.

Under heavy public pressure and betrayed by his own Minister of Defense, Yitzhak Mordecai, who closed ranks with Clinton, Netanyahu reluctantly and with misgivings accepted this private deal. The signing ceremony was held in Washington as scheduled.

Netanyahu’s capitulation at Wye and the lopsided deal he brought home from the summit, now that Pollard was no longer publicly perceived to be a part of it, would shortly cost him his premiership. This in turn would jeopardize the private deal that Netanyahu had made with Clinton because it required the next Prime Minister to ensure that Pollard’s release was delivered as promised by the US.

After the signing of the Wye Accords, when Clinton had all that he wanted from the Israeli leader, the White House falsely accused
Netanyahu of having injected Pollard into the summit at the last moment. However, eye-witnesses to the Pollard deal at Wye, including the Israeli and the Palestinian who had negotiated the deal with Clinton, and the former Israeli Cabinet Secretary, Dani Naveh (currently Minister without Portfolio), all later contradicted the White House version of events and affirmed that President Clinton had committed the United States to the release of Jonathan Pollard as an integral part of the Wye Accords.

When Netanyahu returned to Israel after Wye, he created a firestorm of publicity by releasing 200 Palestinian common criminals from Israeli prisons. The Palestinians were outraged because they insisted that these common criminals were not the prisoners that they had bargained for at Wye. The Americans also angrily protested. Netanyahu reminded Washington that the Wye Accords do not specify exactly which prisoners Israel must release.

Critics wondered why the Prime Minister would so deliberately antagonize the Americans this way. Only those close to Prime Minister Netanyahu understood that this was Netanyahu’s private, pointed reminder to Bill Clinton that if he were thinking of double-crossing him over Pollard yet a third time, he should think again. No Pollard, no release for the Palestinian murderers and terrorists. Unfortunately for Jonathan Pollard, Netanyahu’s government fell before he was able to act on this.

In a meeting with Netanyahu right after his electoral defeat in the Spring of 1999, Jonathan Pollard’s wife, Esther, received assurances
from Netanyahu that the new prime minister, Ehud Barak, had been fully briefed about what had been agreed to at Wye and about the fall-back position; that is to say, Israel had yet to free the 750 terrorists with blood on their hands and was still supposed to receive Pollard home in what would be publicly presented as a parallel “gesture” from President Clinton.

Not long after Barak took office, the 750 Palestinian murderers and terrorists walked out of prison as free men. Jonathan Pollard remained in his American jail cell.

In an attempt to justify Clinton’s reneging at Wye, a story was leaked to the press that George Tenet had threatened to resign as head of the CIA if Pollard were released. It became popular to cite the opposition of the American Intelligence community as the reason Clinton did not honor the US commitment at Wye to free Pollard. This would soon be exposed as nothing more than a lame excuse.

In September of 1999, Clinton ignored a solid wall of opposition from the Justice, Intelligence and Defense Departments and Congress, and invoked his powers of executive clemency to free a group of unrepentant FALN terrorists in an apparent attempt to gain Hispanic support for his wife in her NY Senate bid. In doing so, Clinton effectively put the lie to the notion that any government agency might tie his hands or influence his decision in matters of clemency. CIA chief Tenet’s alleged threat to resign was clearly an excuse, not the reason, for keeping Pollard in prison.

More than two years after Wye, President Clinton’s “speedy review” of the Pollard case still had not occurred. Jonathan Pollard remained in prison while the US continued to extract Israeli concessions for his release. Those who still believed the myth that the American Intelligence Community was tying the hands of President Clinton also clung to the belief he would finally honor America’s promise to release Jonathan Pollard at the end of his term, when he could do so without fear of political reprisal.

But when Clinton left office in January 2001, Jonathan Pollard was not included among those to whom he granted clemency, in spite of the American commitment to free Pollard as an integral part of the Wye Accords; in spite of the appeals of the Jewish community; and in spite of the demonstrable injustices of the Pollard case which include:
+ a grossly disproportionate sentence
+ a plea agreement violated by the US (honored by Pollard)
+ the use of secret evidence
+ a false charge of treason
+ ineffective assistance of counsel
+ a lack of due process
+ a sentencing procedure infected by false allegations and lies

On his last day in office, Clinton granted clemency to 140 people. Many of these pardons were judicially insupportable and it was suspected that many of the recipients had “bought” them with very large financial contributions. The most flagrant of these tainted pardons was granted to a notorious billionaire, a criminal fugitive from justice who never stood trial, much less spent time in prison.
[See www.jonathanpollard.org/clemency.htm]

Again, although the legal system and the clemency process have repeatedly failed to do justice in the case of Jonathan Pollard, there
remains one last avenue for relief:

The commitment that the United States made at Wye to free Jonathan Pollard is still in effect, still viable, and has yet to be honored. On February 28, 2001, Minister Dani Naveh, an eyewitness to the Wye deal, made the following remarks in the Knesset Record:

“…The former President of the United States, Bill Clinton, made an explicit commitment to the then-Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin
Netanyahu, to release Jonathan Pollard…. This promise was made prior to the Wye Summit and [again] during the course of the negotiations at Wye… This was not a personal promise made to a particular prime minister… This was a promise made to the
State of Israel and to the People of Israel…” (Dani Naveh, Minister without Portfolio)
[See The Wye Doublecross Page : www.jonathanpollard.org/wye.htm]

As Naveh clearly indicated, at Wye Mr. Clinton acted in his capacity as President of the United States and the commitments he made as an integral part of the Wye Accords are binding upon successive Administrations until fulfilled. The current Prime Minister of Israel,
Ariel Sharon, was also an eyewitness to America’s promise to free Jonathan Pollard. Both morally and legally Sharon has no right to
“forgive” that commitment to free Jonathan Pollard which was paid for so heavily in Israeli blood, territory, and self-respect.

Since the Wye Summit, terrorist Chief of Police Ghazi Jabali has remained immune from all charges and to this day continues to plan and promote terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets. Thanks to the US, the ranks of his bloodthirsty “army” are now larger by 750 terrorists – the price Israel paid at Wye for Jonathan Pollard. It is high time for America to fulfill her end of the deal by releasing
Jonathan Pollard. His life sentence is a travesty of justice – the product of malicious lies – driven by America’s determination to appease
her Arab allies.

Jonathan Pollard put it best when he recently said, “My release must be a matter of principle – of justice and of due process – and it should reflect the honor and integrity of the US-Israel special relationship. Israel has already paid for my release at Wye. It is time to collect it.”

Now more than ever, Israel must honor its commitment to Jonathan Pollard by collecting on America’s promise to free him; and America must fulfill its commitment to Israel.

By releasing Jonathan Pollard, America will demonstrate her renewed commitment to equal justice for all, untainted by political motive; and reaffirm her relationship to Israel as a valued ally and faithful partner in the war against terrorism. Back 

Terrorism is terrorism 

Editorial 
——————————————————– 
Here we go again. By the time the security cabinet met Saturday night to assess the latest cease-fire, the Palestinians had racked up 50 acts of violence – including the mortar attack on Tekoa – since the Peres-Arafat meeting on Wednesday morning. It was decided to give Yasser Arafat another 48 hours to do what he had pledged to do “immediately”: issue clear instructions to prevent terror, arrest terrorists, end violent activities and attacks, and end incitement to violence and terrorism. 

Security officials reportedly noticed that the relative calm that preceded the Shimon Peres-Yasser Arafat meeting quickly deteriorated after the meeting took place, indicating that once Arafat had what he needed, he loosened the reins on violence and terrorism a few notches. Arafat’s Gaza security chief, Muhammad Dahlan, has already stated that no Palestinian on the list of 108 terrorist suspects handed over to the Palestinian Authority will be arrested, despite Arafat’s agreement to do just that.

A pattern, to put it mildly, seems to be emerging here. Whenever Arafat is under pressure, such as following the particularly horrific suicide bombings at the Dolphinarium and Sbarro and now post-September 11, he has agreed to “cease-fires” and urged his Hamas and Islamic Jihad allies to temporarily hold back. Whenever the pressure eases, the “cease-fire” melts away, until the next time Arafat fears international wrath and isolation. 

The conclusion should be that what determines Arafat’s behavior is not whom he meets with and what he agrees to but his perception of what he can get away with. Arafat’s clear objective, if he can get away with it, is to get Israel to accept a “low level” of attacks, which will continue as Israel offers him further diplomatic concessions. 


Just as Arafat is attempting to get Israel used to the idea of negotiations and funerals at the same time, he is exploring how much he can attack Israel and still remain off America’s post-September 11 “bad guys” list. We can assume that Arafat is offering America intelligence goodies that may or may not be useful in fighting Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network in tacit exchange for not pressing him to the wall. 


Some might be offended by the thought that America would even consider a Faustian bargain with Arafat along these lines: You let me kill just a “few” Israelis and I’ll help you get bin Laden. Yet the alternative explanation for the seeming American eagerness to see Israel negotiate with Arafat even if there is no real cease-fire is even worse: that the US wants to define violence and terrorism against Israel as quiet, even if it is not getting any direct benefit from Arafat. 


We would sincerely like to believe that neither the Faustian bargain nor the Faustian giveaway is the case. We want to assume that Secretary of State Colin Powell meant it when he said that the US would “go after terrorism wherever we find it in the world” and that America would not limit its war against terrorism to bin Laden, but would fight groups “that have conducted attacks previously 
against US personnel, US interests, and our allies.” But barring evidence to the contrary, it is hard to believe that the US has decided to hold Arafat to the standard of “zero tolerance” of terrorism, as if his terrorism were not against Israel, but the United States. 


The US should say to Arafat in no uncertain terms: zero terrorism, or you go on our terrorism list. If the US holds him to such a standard, Arafat will explain to his people and allies, as he has in the past, that the “supreme Palestinian interest” is to return to the negotiating table. If, on the other hand, the US lets Arafat be the exception to the war on terrorism, that war will be lost from the beginning. To concede the acceptability of terror anywhere is to concede it everywhere. Back 



Why America Has Already Lost the War, By Moshe Feiglin

Last Thursday I realized that America had already lost the war….

I came to the US for four days for a meeting that was to have been held in Manhattan on Tuesday evening, September 11. The meeting didn’t take place — no-one could get in or out of the great city. I’m not sure if all those invited to the meeting are still alive. There were no flights back home, and all that remained to do was to listen to the reports and hope for a place on the first flight returning to Israel.

I never stay abroad on Shabbat. The trip is more costly and less efficient, but that’s the way it is; my own rule. I had now missed out on Shabbat in Eretz Israel, and I could only pray that I would be home in time for Rosh Hashana.

It was impossible to get away from the reports of the massacre in downtown Manhattan. The news was everywhere: on the air, at home, in the car, in the shops. I entered the neighborhood grocery store. The storekeeper’s radio was on: Bush was speaking to the American people:

“I declare tomorrow to be a day of prayer”, said the President.

Now that’s interesting, I think to myself, I can’t recall an Israeli Prime Minister who declared a day of prayer. Even when the Yom Kippur War broke out, Golda Meir was shocked, but I dont remember her asking anyone to pray. But after all, I think, America’s national anthem is directed to G-d and Americans sing “G-d bless America”. Even the British maintain close contact with the Almighty: “G-d save the Queen”. But the Israelis have lost their connection to G-d in their anthem, and all that remains is a dismal hope for a meaningless sort of freedom. To whom precisely should they pray?

“I ask every American”, the President continues, breaking into my train of thoughts, “during lunch time tomorrow” (not on the employer’s time, like a good Histadrut worker) “to pray for all the injured, their families, and the American nation”.

“Go to church, to the synagogue, to the mosque, and pray”, ended the President.

“Did I hear right?” I ask the storekeeper. “Did he say mosque?” She nodded.

“At this very moment you’ve lost the war”, I say to the astonished storekeeper, and start looking for what I need on the shelves.

America has lost the war. The Americans have made the same mistake as the Israelis, and just as Israel is retreating from one defeat to the next, so the Americans are now lined up on the track to disintegration.

When the black boxes of the hijacked airplanes are recovered, we will hear the pilots screaming “Allah Achbar” in the last moments before the crash. They slaughtered you in the name of Allah, and now the President calls on you to pray to him.

The American giant received a far more serious knock-out blow than that which brought America into the Second World War. Those who gave the Americans the knock-out blow at Pearl Harbor received in two atomic bombs in return. The latest knock-out blow has no return address. During the first hours, it seemed that the American revenge would be horrifying and terrible. US Jews thought that now Sharon could “finish off” the Arabs, blow up the El Aksa mosque, expel them all, and do as he wished. In light of the pictures of horror from the World Trade Center, and the television coverage of the spontaneous celebrations from Ramallah, Sharon would only receive words of thanks from the Americans. The Americans’ revenge would be dwarfed by Israel’s reprisal. The hours passed, and the days, and the American tiger turned out to be a helpless kitten. 

The American President was busy running after the countries of the world, trying to set up a strange coalition against a few cave dwellers in Afghanistan, while senators explained on live television to the American people that “we must remember that the enemy is the terrorists, not Islam”.

America has been trapped by the same weakness that has visited Israel in the recent years. It is entrapped in a notion of power and is therefore incapable of identifying the enemy and fighting it. Consequently, America will lose the battle, in the same way Israel is losing it.

The State of Israel was founded on the notion that the Jewish people is a “normal” people like all other nations. One that has to establish a normal state, based on Western cultural values, and be accepted into the family of nations. If these premises are valid, Israel’s disputes with its neighbors are also “normal”, rational, territorial issues, that may be resolved in a logical manner.

But the Jewish people is not a “normal” nation, and its conflicts are not “normal” ones. The war being waged against us is not about territories but rather about our very existence as a Jewish nation. This is a war against our message and our mission. That is what our enemies are fighting against, while we reply to them through our own subjective interpretation of reality: we speak of security and of territories. We fail to understand why they refuse to accept even all the territory.

“The Emperor has no clothes!” Arafat shouts at us, and murders three people in Netanya.

“Do you want us to wear something else in your honor?”, Peres asks.

“He’s naked!”, shouts Arafat, and murders a young mother from Alfei Menashe.

“Perhaps we’ll wear red for you?”, asks Beilin.

Arafat continues to attack us, and we continue to propose solutions that fail to admit the naked reality.

It is no wonder we are losing the war.

The same is now happening to America. The Americans are in fact the children of Christianity. While America is not a Christian country, it is the standard-bearer of Western culture which draws from Christian culture. Why do the terrorists hate the US so much? Why are they prepared to commit suicide in order to kill Americans? After all, America has not conquered their country. On the contrary, many of them receive generous aid from the US. How strange that even Arabs in New Jersey, who are actually living in the flesh-pots of America, and were liable to have suffered physically from the terrorist attack, rejoiced at the sight of the horrible massacre.

Why this hatred?

Two deviant daughters came forth from Judaism but left the fold to conquer the world: Christianity and Islam. Both hate their mother, and both fight each other.

Judaism integrates the qualities of strict justice and mercy, in harmony and in proper measure. Christianity took only the quality of mercy while Islam took the quality of strict justice.

The Moslems see with jealousy how the culture based on Christian mercy succeeds in gaining control over the world. Let everyone come and benefit from the cornucopia open to all — to everyone we proffer the other cheek, and the whole body, in fact. Come and take your part in the wealth, come and enter the gates of the World Trade Center. We aren’t conquering you with the sword, but with gold.

“Why are they bringing their wars here?”, a soot-covered broker shouted into a CNN reporter’s microphone. He didn’t understand that he was conquering, not territories, but the opposing culture, straight from here — from the twin towers.

But every Moslem child understands it clearly. What the political commentators and senators in the US fail to realize is crystal clear to the other half of the world. America is not at war with a single individual –Bin Laden, but with every child that will be born tomorrow in Cairo, Amman, Beirut, Gaza and, if he is a Moslem, even in New Jersey.

America will never admit that it is involved in a war of cultures, in fact in a religious war. Such an admission implies that, as in the case of Israel, American values are fundamentally at question. They are not as universal as Americans would like to believe. The happiness they pursue in the name of all humanity may be happiness for a specific group based on Christianity, but it means hell for another group that is just as large. 

It is entirely possible that the balance has changed and the other half of the world is now beginning to realize its aspirations for happiness (and woe to such a culture immersed in rivers of blood). America will never admit it, and consequently will be unable to fight back. Just like the Israelis. They fail to identify the enemy. They seek the terrorists just as Sharon is pursuing individual terrorists. They are pursuing the wasps instead of destroying the nest, because they are afraid of the nest. They are afraid of a real confrontation between their values and those of Islam.

They want a coalition with moderate Arab countries. They have to prove that neither Islam nor the Arabs, but terrorism, is their enemy. The situation is so ludicrous that even Arafat is being wooed — Arafat, who invented hijacking, Arafat, the father of 20th century terrorism. They want to make a coalition with him, if only to avoid facing reality.

They will in fact catch the wasps. Bin Laden doesn’t stand a chance. He won’t be able to escape the power of the US. And then what? Today every Arab child wants to be a Shahid, a martyr for Islam. Bin Laden will enter the pantheon of the Shahids, but another million are waiting their turn, and they are impatient. America is waging a physical war against a metaphysical enemy. They are incapable of understanding what we in Israel witness every day — overjoyed parents of suicide bombers.

In the coming months, we will see a lot of military planes take off and land. We will see destroyers and missiles, and millions of tons of TNT exploding in the Iraqi desert and in Afghanistani caves. They will kill thousands of innocent people, and in the end America will lose — because it failed to identify the true enemy.

The previous campaign was code-named Desert Storm, and the current one will be called Infinite Justice, but this justice has no aim, and will therefore actually lack justice. If only America had the clairvoyance and the moral fortitude to face up to reality, America could win easily, without a coalition, without deploying armies, and without senseless killings.

But America is too busy deceiving itself. Not only the politicians, but everyone in the population. An interesting phenomena I noticed, was the self-imposed censorship of the American media. I sat and watched as the drama unfolded live on television. In the first hour, there were live broadcasts from Ramallah and Shechem, in which the “Palestinian” masses could be seen rejoicing over the massacre in Manhattan. I was pleased to see the pictures broadcast for all to see. Suddenly the reports ceased as if they had never happened. After the first hour, I didn’t see them again. I dont believe that the American administration contacted the media networks and told them what to screen. This happened naturally: dont show the American people a reality that conflicts with its fundamental values. “We shall preserve the American way of life and win” was the message.

There was no longer any footage from Ramallah or from anywhere else. Instead, there began to appear an endless stream of interviews with American professors having Arab names and speaking with Arabic accents. The message was this: here is an American called Ahmed, who is a Moslem, but who is also an American.

“I vehemently condemn this attack”, said a professor. “You have to realize that the majority of Arabs are not like these despicable terrorists. Most of them think like I do, but” added the professor in a knowledgeable manner, “when you aid the Israeli occupation of Palestine, you cause more Arabs to be on the side of the terrorists rather than on my side”.

Hence Israel is out of the coalition. Even the crack rescue unit from Israel that was ready to come and help was courteously sent back to its base. Israel is the mistress that must be hidden, and Arafat, the king of terrorism, is the legitimate wife, who is sought after.

Better this way, since at the end of the day, America is not truly Israel’s ally — but we’ll leave that issue for another time.

The day after the attack, a wealthy American acquaintance approached me and asked for my comments on the situation. I told him what I thought, and he then surprised me by making an offer that couldn’t be refused: “I am ready to pay for a full-page ad in the New York Times”. “I want you to compose the ad” he said. I didn’t want to do it, because America’s war isn’t my war, and because I had hoped that this dear Jew would direct his financial resources to far more important endeavors in which we are engaged in Eretz Israel. But the man persisted, so I composed the following quick draft:


IT IS A CULTURAL/ RELIGIOUS WAR.

We can kill a million Bin Ladens, but they will continue to celebrate. 
[Photo of Arabs celebrating in the streets.]

They have destroyed our symbols. 
[Photo of the twin towers going up in flames]

We must destroy their symbols. 
[Photos of the El-Aksa mosque on the Temple Mount, and the Kaba building in Mecca.]

Shocked?

Americans don’t do such things?

Right.

Therefore, America will continue to be destroyed until you understand.


My friend was astonished. “But they will start a religious war!”, he exclaimed. “Can you imagine what acts of vengeance will result from this?”

“And what have you suffered just now?”, I asked him. “Do you think that they only killed nearly ten thousand people because at the moment they don’t hate you so much?” 

“This is a religious war”, I explained to him. “They aren’t afraid to die. They have sanctified death, they die with the name of Allah on their lips, and seventy virgins are waiting for them in Paradise. You don’t frighten them with your bombs. At best, you’ll turn them into Shahids. They have directed their attack against your god. You have no alternative, but to direct your attack against theirs. When you destroy their god, they will become powerless and come back down to this world. They will suddenly be frightened by the sound of footsteps, and by the prick of a pin. They will know that not only they understand your language, but you understand theirs, and you are fighting them according to their own rules”.

“Think about it”, I added. “How many people are you going to kill in vain, and how easy it would be to win this war without killing anyone”.

My friend was convinced, but in the end decided not to run the ad. 

I am worried by what is to come. Since America is going to lose, tremendous frustration is going to build up in the American population. The twin towers will only be the beginning. The success of the terrorist attack will create an unconquerable desire among every Arab child to claim his share of martyrdom. Terrorist attacks will increase, and America won’t have an answer.

The Arab professor’s words of incitement will then start ringing true to Americans ears: Israel is the problem and by extension so are the Jews.

There won’t be large-scale pogroms in America, perhaps small ones, but not the kind we became accustomed to in Europe. After all, there is something too good about the American people that won’t allow it. But how will a Jew show his face in the street when every American is convinced that he has lost his job, his property, and that his relatives are being killed in terrorist attacks and in an endless war, all because of the Jews?

My return trip to Israel was no picnic. I sat at the airport in uncertainty for nearly 24 hours with thousands of others, until I managed to get onboard one of the flights of El Al’s air shuttle returning the stranded Israelis home.

“If this is the line of Israeli visitors wanting to go home”, I thought to myself, “how long will the line be when American Jews rush to come home to Israel?”

I always kneel and kiss the ground when I return home. 

Our holy land had never received as warm a kiss from me as it did this time.Back 


Are Most Moslems anti-Terror?, by Steven Plaut

Since the jihad against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, US officials and civic leaders have been wringing their hands over the “racist stereotyping” of Moslems, over assaults on Moslems in US cities, and insisting over and over that the “vast majority of Moslems” oppose terrorism and violence, that Islam is the religion of peace. Even the asslibs (assimilationists liberals) amongst US Jews have been spending more time on denouncing the “stereotyping of Moslems” and protecting Arab civil rights than on anything else. Now let us be clear. Yes the word “Islam” comes from Salaam or peace. Yes there are some Moslems who have consistently opposed violence and terror, although they are a small minority. The vast majority of Moslems have condoned and endorsed terrorist violence, especially when directed against Jewish children and civilians. 

And yes, for centuries Islamic civilization was the most advanced and most tolerant and most enlightened on the planet. Islamic civilization preserved the ancient Classical Greek and Roman learning, invented algebra and chemistry, led the world of scholarship. The great tragedy of Islam is that this brilliant civilization of the seventh through fifteenth centuries has long ago degenerated into savage barbarism, where violence is commonly worshipped. Where – aside from Turkey – no Moslem country has embraced democracy or freedom or tolerance or diversity.

One of the unchallenged axioms of American civic religion is that each and every group of people on earth must consist of an “overwhelmingly vast majority of decent hard-working honest people who want peace and are tolerant and freedom-loving and anti-violence.”

It is an unchallengeable presumption of this theology that “vast majorities” of not only each and every racial/religious/ethnic group may
be so described, but even vast majorities of each and any subgroup within society. Hence we even sometimes hear assertions that the vast majority of prisoners, prostitutes, drug users, gang members, etc. are also decent, honest, peace-loving, honorable people.

The one imponderable in American civic theology is the idea that somewhere out there someplace there just might be is a group of people, the majority of whom are NOT peace-loving or honest or tolerant. This belief in universal peacefulness in the minds of Americans is the main obstacle to Americans ever understanding the Middle East. The simple fact of the matter is that the overwhelmingly vast majority of Arabs, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of Moslems, are not peace-loving and are not
opposed to violence.

Noting this could not be more timely. Commentator after commentator among the Western media discuss the reactions in the Moslem world to the US atrocities with self-righteous fawning observation that Islam is a religion of peace, that the terrorists are about as representative of true Islam as the IRA bombers are of Christianity, or as white supremicists are of Christianity. Each commentator goes out of his way to emphasize how we all understand that the vast majority of Moslems oppose terrorism and violence.

The only problem with this is that it is simply false and empirically disprovable. It is wishful thinking. The vast majority of Germans
supported Hitler, supported wars of aggression, and supported genocide. The vast majorities of Hutus and Tutsis support massacres of the other. Similarly, the vast majority of Arabs support terror and violence and war. They do not see anything wrong with the blowing up of hundreds of civilians in an Embassy of the United States or in an office building of Argentinian Jews. They see any act of force taken against the perpetrators of such things to be itself a crime. (This is not to say that the vast majority of each and every subgroup of Moslems support such barbarism; the Turks and Indonesian-Malays come to mind as possible exceptions.)

True, Islam is a religion of peace and its very name derives from salaam – peace. But it is a religion of peace with other Moslems and for non-Moslems living under the clear domination of Moslems. True also, the vast majority of Moslems do not personally engage in violence and terror in their daily lives. The vast majority of Germans did not take personal part in the Holocaust. Indeed, as a blanket statement regarding Arabs in Israel, I would say that most Arabs behave in a far more polite daily manner than Jews, exhibiting on average far better manners and more consideration than do Jewish Israelis. But of course that is hardly the point.

The vast majority of Moslems support the random and indicriminate use of terror and violence against Jews and against Americans. The reactions of Moslems everywhere are there on the TV screens for all to see and will be more unambiguously pro-terror the moment the US begins to attack Afghanistan and/or Iraq. Arab political thought is fundamentally Orwellian: murder is peace, prevention of murder or
retaliation for murder is terror. Moslems are outraged by events in the Balkans because Moslems are being massacred; if Bosnians and Albanians were instead massacring Serbs they would have trouble hiding their approval and delight. 

We have known for decades that the vast majority of Moslems also approve of Palestinian atrocities and bombings directly against Jews. There is no act of savagery directed against Israelis or Jews of which they will not approve by enormous majorities, and no act of defense by Israel that they will legitimize.

Public opinion polls are not conducted in most Moslem countries, but if they were they would no doubt reflect this popular approval. Polls ARE conducted among Palestinians and they show without exception that Palestinians approve of bombings and suicide bombs and atrocities committed against Jews, by enormous majorities. Their approval rates have generally increased with each Israeli concession to them under Oslo. The vast majority of Palestinians support Saddam Hussein. The vast majority probably support Bin Laden and the bombings of the Americans. The vast majority would approve if Iran or Iraq dumped chemical weapons or nerve gas on Tel Aviv. These are the people with whom Oslo is supposed to produce peace.

Oh, you might object, but Arafat has DENOUNCED Bin laden and even endorsed the US bombings in Sudan and Afghanistan. Well, yes he did, no doubt hoping thus to get the US to force Israel to make a few more concessions as quid pro quo, and he was no doubt as sincere as were the IRA folks who denounced the bombing of Omagh. But the Palestinian fascist hordes, taking their signals from the PLO, know he is posturing and winking and these folks support Bin Laden by overwhelming majorities. 

All this week there have been massive anti-American marches by the Palestinian brownshirts. US flags have been burned throughout the Palestinian zones. 

Now the entire Oslo “peace process” is based on the naive American civic dogma, adopted by Israeli politicians, holding that the vast majority of Palestinians want peace with Israel. They do not. Unless of course one means the sort of peace that prevailed and prevails in traditional Islamic societies, where the non-Moslems live as low-profile minorities with no political sovereignty. (The vast majority of Germans, one supposes, would have favored peace in 1940 if they could get it at Hitler’s terms.) 

The vast majority of Palestinians want to see Israel destroyed, and support all violence against Jews. Once Israel is destroyed and large portions of its population are killed or dispersed, no doubt the remainder will be permitted to live under conditions resembling those of the Copts in Egypt or the Armenians and Bahais in Iran. That is the only peace Arabs want by majorities.

Sweeney was the name of an Irish king who believed he was a bird and spent his life in treetops. (Really.) The Oslo “peace process” is the direct function of the Sweeneyization of the political establishment of Israel. Peres Sweeney and Beilin Sweeney adopted the wishful thinking of American civic religion, presumed that the vast majority of Palestinians prefer peace and prosperity to continuing war and violence. They took it as axiomatic that Palestinians would compromise over land and sovereignty because after all THEY were willing to do so. Their evidence that Palestinians would place peace above land is that Jews do so. Their belief that economic prosperity would interest Palestinians more so than irredentist aggression and terror is that decent honorable people anywhere should feel this way. In short, Oslo is the godchild of King Sweeney taking over the Israeli Labor Party, Meretz, and even swaths of the Likud.

These Sweeney weenies are the same people who refuse to even ponder the possibility that the vast majorities of Palestinians, other Arabs, and Moslems are not at all peace-seeking (at least not when it comes to Israel and the US), are not anti-violence, are not anti-terror. In other words, Oslo is based upon a fundamental denial of empirical reality. Like the old Peter and Gordon song from the 60’s, it is based upon the Sweeneyish assertion that “I don’t care what they say I won’t stay in a world without love.” And what happens to Sweeneys who live in unlit corners of the earth without love? They pretend to be birds and rise above such mundane things
as reality to live in treetops of utopian dreams. Leaving the rest of us to face terror, murder, violence, Arab fascism, and threats of genocidal extermination. Back 


ATTACK ON AMERICA – A JEWISH VIEW

(the following analysis is based on concepts and principles set down by Rabbi Meir Kahane, z”tl, during the Gulf Crisis over ten years ago, at a time when Jews believed that the American-Iraqi confrontation was beneficial for Jews and Israel. Much of what is written here is extracted from articles he wrote on the subject only several weeks before his murder)


That the startling events in America are yet one more giant leap in this, the era of “atchalta d’geula” and “ikvot d’mshicha”, the beginning of the redemption and the footsteps of the Messiah, is too painfully clear for all but the most blinded to see. The nightmare of world terror, the rage of the nations, the pandemonium of economies and the politics of the nations, all testify to the escalation of the Almighty of the final era. 

And so few understand what it means! So many are overjoyed to see the United States facing an Arab enemy, hoping that “at least the whole world sees that the PLO and the Arab world do not want peace”. And how happy and certain we are that it is all good for Israel and how Jews who are un-Jewish in their thinking can understand and see nothing! 

For all the pragmatic and practical Jews who look at world events through the spectacles of geopolitical and socio-economic theory, let it be understood that Israel will come out the loser in all of this. You think not? Consider.

Let’s Be Logical

America’s effort to crush the Islamic fundamentalist threat will be done under the umbrella of a multi-national force that will see Egypt, Saudia Arabia and other Arabs fighting at the side of US forces. These Arab states will tell Washington: “we are fighting against our own brothers for you; now you owe it to us to save our Arab credentials by stopping Israeli aggression, too.”

You think that Bush and Powell, who are hostile to Israel in any event, will not agree? Is there anyone who believes that the United States will not try to save its reputation in the Arab world by showing “evenhandedness” against Israel? Remember, the American interest to remain on good relations with “moderate” Arab is a fact that directly clashes with Israeli interests!

There is more. Listening to radio talk-shows across America has become frightening. Many callers are openly blaming Jews for the bombings, literally quoting the terrorists – “It is all because of U.S. policy in the middle East and the support for Israel.”

Rather than say that this is a war between Islamic terrorists who see America as the big Satan, Israel and Jews are being scapegoated by many. And this may only be the beginning. What if gasoline prices continue to rise, or if more such attacks against innocent Americans are launched because of “U.S. aid to Israel”?

What if Israel is forced to take stronger action against Arabs, or if the U.S. more blatantly and openly blames Israel for Mideast unrest? Just as America was beginning to hear the shocking news of the attacks, Powell was already urging Israel to do more for peace and meet with Arafat. The distance between open hostility between average Americans and Jews may be a lot closer than most Jews would like to understand. And let us not even speak of the obvious Islamic threat to Jews in America. If they could hit the Pentagon, then certainly they could hit any Jewish institution they want, G-d forbid.

The fact that planes were grounded should also be an issue for American Jews to consider. What if things get really bad, and more unexpected terrorism shocks America? What if Jews feel that they need to leave this country for Israel? Who says they will have the opportunity to get out?

The fact remains that the United States rejected Israel’s plea to help. And Israel has the ability to help in rescue and in anti-terror
areas. Yes, quietly, behind the scenes Israel is helping with critical advise. However America refused to allow Israelis to openly enter
U.S. soil where they could truly have helped much more. This American rejection of Israeli help comes for the same reason that America rejected Israel’s help in the Gulf War, in spite of the fact that Israeli pilots could have gotten the job done and would have taken much more risky flight patterns and missions.

In the end, the Americans do not want to risk their coalition and reliance on Saudi Arabia and other so called moderate Arab states. It is these very relationships that will ultimately force America to place more pressure on Israel. 

“A Nation That Dwells Alone”

Of course Israel cannot win in any secular “practical” event, for that is what the Almighty decrees. He will never bring the redemption to a Jewish people that has not returned to Him and His Law except through the creation of conditions that create the foundation for the redemption: Isolation. Israel alone and without allies; Israel with no one to turn to except God. “The son of David will not come until Israel loses hope of redemption, as it is said, ‘when He sees that their power is gone…’ as if to say, there is no one to support or aid them” (Sanhedrin 96a)

As long as Jews have even one supposed ally, they will always believe that it was that ally that enabled them to overcome and survive. Thus was it with France in the ’50s and for the last 30 years with the United States. Never was God seen as the One who saved Israel. A people of little faith never looked to Heaven and never credited it with salvation. This includes religious Jews as well (or shall we say, practitioners of Jewish ritual). As long as their faith is not genuine, and they are always looking to the
nations, the redemption cannot come. 

The Jew must be alone. He must be isolated. That was from time immemorial, the demand and command of God. Am lvadad yishkon, a people that dwells alone (BaMidbar, 23). 

Only a Jewish people that is alone with no allies, will perforce turn to Heaven. It will then have to turn to Heaven. If it does so willingly, the redemption will come swifty and with joy. If the Jew eagerly and with total faith turns from the gentiles and looks to God, the Messiah comes “today, if you will but hearken to My voice.” If the Jew refuses and in his tiny lack of faith clings to the gentiles, the nations, then his allies will turn on him, and the isolation will come anyway. But because we did not seek it ourselves, only with terrible punishment.

This is how the Jew, the authentic Jew, looks at world events. The others will continue to wallow in their gentilized delusions, changing the names of Israeli streets to “Pentagon Street” and “New York” Street in the pathetic hope that U.S.- Israeli ties will be strenghtened, and all the while bringing down tragedy on all of us. 

Time to Go Home

And for the Jews of the exile, who up to now had been worrying about us here in Israel: That there is a crisis in the Middle East is undeniable. And that an Israel that does not go back to God faces terrible times is of course true. But the Jews of Israel can never be exiled again. There can be no destruction of the Jewish state; at worst, great suffering than can be stopped by a return to God and having the kind of faith in Him that leads Jews to do all the things that will anger the world: Strike at the PA, annex the territories, drive out the Arabs – without asking America for permission, without groveling. But this last disaster is a reminder that
for the Jews of the United States and the rest of the exile, there is no way out. For them, who worry about Israel, let the message be: Heal thyselves! Worry about your fate, for yours is by far the more dangerous situation. 

It will be difficult for so many Jews to come to terms with the fact that Jews will be scapegoated for the terror in America. But the fact is that Jew-hatred in American runs rampant. The average American red-neck hates Jews. Unlike their attitude to blacks, they are bitterly and violently jealous of Jews. The same Jew-hater is a black fearer. He fears blacks physically but holds them in contempt emotionally and intellectually. He is not jealous of them and there is nothing more fierce and frightening and
more terrible than jealousy. In the words of King Solomon (Mishlei 27): “Wrath is cruel and anger is overwhelming but who is able to stand before jealousy?”

Jealousy is an irrational demon that drives people to the depths of hate. It is a monster that possesses its owner and that becomes an obsession that will not leave him. The object of that jealousy becomes an enemy that must be destroyed and irrationality becomes king of his manor. And that is what the Jew faces today in an America that is addicted to materialism in a way
that no crack addict can match.

Material has controlled the very soul of America and what once was sheer luxuries today have become necessities that one cannot do without. And should the day come when those necessities and much, much more basic needs cannot be satisfied – the beast that is within material man will explode in a horror of jealousy and viciousness against the object of his jealousy – the Jew.

And how sad that even as these words are being read, reader after reader feels a momentary terror (it is called a recognition of truth) and then, immediately, a defensive reaction of denial and rejection of the conception. Because it is false? No. Because it is true. Too painfully true. 

The Islamic fundamentalists know that in order to bring America down, military invasion is not necessary. It is enough to hurt the economy, which is so pitifully weak today, a huge baloon that is on the verge of explosion. When the Material Man in America is deprived of some of his basic needs, it is the Jew who will be the vicitm, the target, the target of the bitter bile of jealousy, before which who can stand?

The end of days are upon us, and they come with a decree: “flee out of the midst of Babylon and save every man his life.” The exile is a curse for the Jew and a punishment, and the Almighty, when the era of Messia and redemption comes, will not allow the Jew to remain in the impurity and desecration of the nations. Just as he brought tragedy upon the Jews who left Egypt, so too will He never allow the Jew of the Exile to remain peacefully and in tranquility. “Depart ye, depart ye, go out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out from the midst of her (Isaiah 52). And the Ibn Ezra (ibid) states: “Go out every one from the place of his exile…so that they shall seperate themselves from the nations of the world, go out each one from his country of exile..”

The ferment in the world today are all part of the end of days and the beginning of the redemption. The events in America has caused the Jew to stop just worrying about Israel, and that’s a good thing. For in Israel there will never be total destruction. But for the exile… Ah, dear Jews, get out while you can.

“For on Mount Zion there shall be an escape and it shall be holy.”
(Ovadiah) On Mount Zion, the Land of Israel. And only there. Back


Some Important Observations – Please Read, by Yekutiel Ben Yakov 

We just thought we would share some important observations with our readers.

1- No Working With So Called Moderate Arabs To Put Down Terror
2- Jews Become Scapegoats

1- It is important to remember that the CIA trained and financed Bin Laden’s friends in Afghanistan and blind Islamic cleric Omar Abdul Rahman presently sitting out prison terms for his role in the previous World Trade Center terror attack of 1993. The United States helped these bands of terrorists into the United States, some with false papers, so that they could establish a recruiting center, known as the Al Kifah Refugee Center, in order to help in the struggle against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

El Sayed Nosair, one of the ringleaders who later assassinated Rabbi Meir Kahane was one of these operatives that helped run the Islamic Recruiting Center in Brooklyn that trained and sent many terrorists to Afghanistan. Some of these terrorists remained in the U.S. Some returned. Some participated in the Kahane assassination in 1990 and the World Trade Center bombing in 1993.

For all we know, some participated in last week’s horror.

While everyone is talking about Bin Laden we are missing the point. Every American or Israeli attempt that has ever been made to court moderate Islamic sectors or to appease them has only backfired in the most horrific way. Israel helped finance and create the Hizbullah and the Hamas to weaken the PLO, only to learn that they would be even more deadly. The U.S. created these monsters in Afghanistan. The results we all now see.

The U.S. and Israel are making the same foolish error again. Now, Israel places their faith in Arafat to dismantle the “radicals”, and the U.S. continues to rely on the moderate state of Pakistan, when Pakistan is the only state to recognize the Taliban regime that harbors Bin Laden.

Similarly, the U.S. continues to place their faith in various so-called Arab moderate states. Will Syria, a state sponsor of terrorism, once again be a part of the U.S. coalition? Relying on Moslem or Arab states or terrorist factions to put down other states and factions will only backfire, once again.

Terror is terror and Islamic fundamentalism continues to fuel the fires of hatred and suicide bombers in Tel Aviv and in New York. There is no difference between Arafat and his Palestinian Authority TV encouraging suicide bombers and brainwashing young to follow the example of the murderous martyrs, or Bin Laden preaching his hate in Afghanistan. There can be no partnership with these barbarians. Anything we do with them or teach them will be used against forces of good and innocent people in the
future.

2- Jews Become Scapegoats

Listening to traditionally pro-Jewish radio talk-shows across America has become frightening over recent days. Many callers are openly blaming Jews for the bombing and literally quoting the terrorists when they say, “It is all because of U.S. policy in the Middle East and the support for Israel.”

Rather than say that this is a war between Islamic terrorists who see America as the big Satan, Israel and Jews are being scapegoated by many. And this may only be the beginning. What if gasoline prices continue to rise or if more such attacks against innocent Americans are launched, “because of U.S. aid to Israel”? What if Israel is forced to take stronger action against Arabs or if U.S. begins to more openly blame Israel for Mideast unrest? Powell already urged Israel to do more for peace and meet with Arafat, just as the American nation was beginning to hear the shocking news of the recent attacks. The distance between open hostility
between average Americans and Jews may be a lot closer than most Jews would like to understand. Not to speak of the obvious Islamic threat to Jews in America. If they could hit the Pentagon they could hit any Jewish institution they want, G-d forbid.

The fact that planes were grounded should also be an issue for American Jews to consider. What if things get really bad and more unexpected terrorism shocks America? What if Jews feel that they need to leave this country for Israel? Who says they will have the opportunity to get out?

The fact remains that the United States rejected Israel’s plea to help. And Israel has the ability to help in rescue and in anti-terror
areas. Yes, quietly, behind the scenes Israel is helping with critical advise. However America refused to allow Israelis to openly enter
U.S. soil where they could truly have helped much more. This American rejection of Israeli help comes for the same reason that America rejected Israel’s help in the Gulf War, in spite of the fact that Israeli pilots could have gotten the job done and would have taken much more risky flight patterns and missions.

In the end, the Americans do not want to risk their coalition and reliance on Saudi Arabia and other so called moderate Arab states. It is these very relationships that will ultimately force America to place more pressure on Israel. It is these Arab states that will bring America down, just as their alliance with Bin Laden’s and Omar Rahman’s friends helped develop these terrorist cells in America, that would be turned against America in the most bloody fashion.

Even the Islamic cleric who spoke at the special national prayer service in Washington refrained from openly attacking and condemning the suicide animals who killed thousands of Americans. President Bush sat there as the “moderate” Muslim spoke about uprooting evil in the name of Allah. No reference was made to which evil he was referring to. Was it the evil Satan represented by the West and Western landmarks like the World Trade Center, or the evil Muslim terrorists who carried out their carnage? Back


Why Is Damascus Still Standing?, by Richard H. Shulman

It was a beautiful morning for walking to work. Passing directly over me at 8:45 a.m., an airliner passed headed south towards New York Bay, not along an air lane and too low for safety. Another second and it was beyond the Empire State Building, but I feared that it was too low to clear the World Trade Center, especially when it veered west, towards it. Further view was blocked by its angle with the tall buildings around me. At my next glance, I saw a lone cloud in the otherwise clear sky. But it was rising and no cloud, rather, the result of a conflagration. THE fire.

For the next five hours, one constantly heard the sirens of emergency vehicles. Thousands slain! Walking home, I looked back at the tip of Manhattan, saw dense smoke, and wept for what terrorists did to my country and in my city. Passing a hospital uptown, I saw a crowd of people either giving blood voluntarily or seeking word on relatives from whom blood had been taken involuntarily, and I wept again. Then I gained some understanding of why the US atom-bombed Japan, for this was the “Pearl Harbor” of World War III.

I had warned that jihad was coming. Then experts warned that the terrorists were plotting. Today a plot hatched. Arab Internetters used to deny there is such a thing as jihad, but I pointed out that the Arabs were fighting here, infiltrating there, scheming everywhere. The clash of civilizations has become audible to the politically hard of hearing. Will they also be 
soft of will?

The US has been infirm, its spirit corrupted by petrodollars and confused by misconceptions. In the name of justice, the US contends, even after the atrocity, we cannot just attack terrorist states and terrorist gangs. We have to prove exactly which gangs and which members of them were involved. Then we have to search the world for them. By that time, other gangs, hosted by terrorist states, will have struck. They are at war, whereas we imagine we are fighting one crime at-a-time. Nor are the gangs discrete entities, but merge for joint missions and subcontract for specific tasks. Meanwhile, our government does business with some of their governments, as if the relationship is normal instead of, on their part, deadly.

Will the US stop pretending it is making war on terrorism and replace half-measures with full-scale war? Will the US stop demanding that Israel “restrain” its retaliation against the daily, yes DAILY, terrorist attacks it faces? Will journalists “understand” that the poor Arabs are “frustrated?” It’s jihad, not frustration.

Although most Arab and other Muslim Arab states sympathize with jihad against the West, from which some of them beg for aid, not all of them participate. The states that strongly aid terrorism or threaten neighbors are: Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, S. Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Yemen. The PA does, too. Expel their students and deport their nationals! 
Let the US destroy their armed forces, terrorist bases, military industry, and mad scientists! But let Israel have the honor of annihilating the PA, which is celebrating our travail! Back 

Rosh Hashana, The Time for “Tsheuva” & Kahane Was Right, by Lenny Goldberg

The essence of “tsheuva” is the admitting of one’s mistakes. In the Bible story of Yehuda and Tamar, we see Yehuda pave the way for “baale tsheuva” by way of his admission, “Tsadka mimeni” – “She is more right than I”.
Indeed, the hebrew root of the name “Yehuda” is “LeHodot” – to admit. 

To admit. And how amusing it is to see right-wing rabbis and intellectuals wriggle uncomfortably as they belatedly approach the conclusion that killing “innocent” Arabs may be halachaically permissible after all. In their weekly columns and in their parsha sheets, we begin to see half-hearted admissions that expulsion may be the only answer..

And concerning this it is written: What’s the difference between Rav Kahane and Gush Emmunim? About 10 years.

Kahane & “Kiruv”

With just about every religious camp finding itself “ideologically stuck” (except for Aturei Karter), it becomes an urgent duty to learn authentic Torah as espoused by Rav Meir Kahane, H”yd and his son Rav Binyamin, H”yd.

As the knitted yarmulkes unravel from the heads of the religious nationalist youth, it becomes obligatory to teach a relevant Torah which provides real answers to the burning problems of Am Yisrael. What could be more convincing testimony to the divine truth of our Torah than the verses, “But if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those whom you allow to remain of them shall be as thorns in your eyes, and stings in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein you dwell”. (BaMidbar, 33:55) That’s a pretty accurate diagnosis, especially when considering it was written over 4,000
years ago. One doesn’t even need “gematrias” to see the truth in THESE verses.

And if “kiruv” seminars want to makes Jews Jewish again, they can bring down the “Ohr HaChaiim”, who commented on the above verse (300 years ago!): “Not only will they seize the lands you didn’t succeed in conquering, but even on the lands you succeeded in conquering, they will say: ‘Get out of here’ “. 

The very fact that there was someone, guided by the simple understanding of the text, commentaries, and Jewish halacha predicted precisely what is happening today – perhaps this can be a boost for the religious nationalist
camp to extricate itself from the ideological trap it finds itself in. Back 

Israel as the Battered Woman, by Dr, Miriam Adahan

In years to come, historians will be shocked at how Israeli leaders happily encouraged a bunch of Arab murderers to create a country that never existed before within our tiny borders, gave them arms knowing that those arms would be used to kill and maim its citizens and then continued to try to appease the murderers. Why are we fulfilling Hitlers dream? Why do our leaders ignore Yasser Arafats rhetoric calling for our destruction, ignore the fact that his people are flooding their cities with arms and ignore the warnings that they are preparing for all-out war? 

Having worked with battered women for most of my life, I see a similarity between the behavior of the Israeli Left and the mentality 
of those women who are so hungry for love that they search desperately for any signs of it, because the truth is unbearable. 
Want to know how the Left thinks? Look at the battered woman: 

1. “It takes two to make a fight, so I must deserve this abuse. After all, Im not perfect either. I left dishes in the sink, was talking 
on the phone when he came home and didnt have dinner ready on time. Sometimes, I was a little confused after he beat me up and didnt function so well. When he spits at me and bullies me, its sometimes hard to make the elaborate meals he demands.” 

(Israeli Left: As penance for not being perfect, we must allow them to continue murdering us.”) 

2. “If hes so angry, it must mean that Im to blame. People dont angry about nothing. It must be that I havent done enough to please 
him. If I just try harder, Im sure Ill eventually win his love.” 

(Israeli Left: “We must keep making more concessions. Were the more enlightened country, so we have to keep trying harder to get them to become more democratic, more humane, more civilized.”) 

3. “No matter how bad he acts at times, I truly believe that he doesnt really mean to hurt me and that he really does want a 
peaceful home and does really love me underneath it all. He just has to act like this to prove his masculinity. It doesnt really mean 
anything, because underneath it all, theres a man of true kindness.” 

(Israeli Left: “It doesnt matter how many Israelis are killed, hes our partner. The fact that he keeps wanting to talk is proof.) 

4. “Im proud of myself for being LOYAL and DETERMINED! I stand by my man through thick and thin. You dont leave during the bad times. When youre willing to forgive after getting beaten up, thats when you prove how strong your love is.” 

(Israeli Left: “We take pride in the fact that we keep negotiating even when were being murdered.”) 

5. “I dont have delusions of grandeur. I simply believe in love. Love is the only power in the world. With the strength of my love, I 
CAN turn this frog into a Prince! A woman has the power to do the impossible! If I love HIM so much, it must be that HE loves me too. 
It cant be that Im creating something out of nothing. That would be foolish. Im not a fool – I just believe in love!” 

(Israeli Left: “Well make the Arabs love us…. Well get their approval in the end.”) 

6. “True, some days I just feel like committing suicide, because, after all, If I didnt exist, I wouldnt be abused! Ill give up my 
dreams, my identity, my desires, and shrink myself to nothing. Then the abuse will stop, because I will no longer be here to take it.” 

(Israeli Left: “Lets shrink ourselves down to nothing and then there wont be anything left to attack.”) 

7. “If I cant please him, its MY failure. I have to examine where Im failing.” 

(Israeli Left: “If its my fault, then I can maintain the illusion that I have the ability to fix the problem.”) 

8. “Im proud of my ability to take abuse. Im a SURVIVOR! Im a fighter! Im superior because Im always ready to forgive and forget. 
That puts me at a higher level. If I continue to make concessions for a peaceful home, even though Im hurting, it proves that Im TRYING. Effort is always rewarded eventually. The more he hurts me, the more opportunities I have to prove my superiority by forgiving and forgetting and showing restraint.” 

(Israeli Left: “Hey world! Look at how much were willing to suffer and not fight back! Now will you love the Jews?”) 

9. “All my relatives, especially my rich uncle Sam – keeps telling me that I have to stop the violence. I dont really know what he means, because I was cooking him a meal in the kitchen the last time he took a shot at me. But Uncle Sam tells me its my fault and Uncle Sam helps me pay the bills, so I have to listen and try harder to please. If I cant win his love, its my fault.” 

(Israeli Left: “Every country puts all this pressure on us to give in. We have to listen or we wont be able to pay the bills.”) 

10. “Im a nice person, a peace-maker. Ill destroy my self-image if I turn into one of those aggressive types who fights back, argues, 
calls the police or makes waves. It makes me feel superior to be the one whos so enlightened and civilized.” 

(Israeli Left: “Were so good! No Arab country is willing to take in Arab refugees. Think of what an impression it will make on the world 
if only the Jews are willing to act as the saviors of the Arabs. Im sure that THEN, well really win the love of all the nations of the 
world.”) 

11. “Everyone says that its a sign of true spirituality to be optimistic. So, Im having hope. Im sure I can win his love. I just 
have to try harder. My European relatives are constantly urging me to `Hang in there! Respect him more! I really want these relatives to 
like me. I cant bear rejection. 

(Israeli Left: “If we just keep giving in, the anti-Semitism will stop.”) 

12. “Look, weve been to all these romantic places – Madrid, Sharm el Sheik, Taba, Camp David, Wye Plantation – and we talked and made love and you dont know how truly charming he can be. If theres a chance to work things out, Im willing to do ANYTHING. I have to give in. He gets SO angry if I refuse. The fact that he wants to talk must mean that he cares about me on some level, doesnt it? It must mean that he really loves me.” 

(Israeli Left: “Look how much they want to talk! Doesnt that mean they really love us?”) 

13. “I have no choice. Hes my only hope for love. I cant stand to be rejected. What hes giving me is better than no relationship at 
all. I cant bear the thought of being alone. 

(Israeli Left: “We have to keep making concessions or theyll kill us. We have no choice. There is no other partner for peace. Better an 
illusion of love than facing the reality of his hatred.”) 

14. “Im so weak and helpless. I need him to protect me.” 

(Israeli Left: “Im sure we can trust the Palestinian authority to fight terrorism and take care of our holy places in the future. Past 
history doesnt count.”) 

15. “People keep telling me that the whole problem is that I didnt show enough respect in the past. They tell me that if I just respect 
him more, THEN hell love me. Even if he beats me up, I have to show restraint and be more respectful. They tell me that that, truly, is 
the ultimate key – respect. Then Ill be LOVED. I cant wait!” 

(Israeli Left: “If Arafat gets enough peace awards, itll become a self-fulfilling prophecy and hell change and become the nice guy 
weve always envisioned he can be.”) 

16. “Im tired of fighting. I have no strength left. I just want him to love me. Im sure hell learn to appreciate all Ive done for 
him. 

(Israeli Left: “No more war. We need to be loved. There isnt any other partner for peace.”) 

17. “I got used to it. Most of the time, it doesnt really even hurt all that much.” 

(Israeli Left: “We can take it. Were tough. We clean up the blood and go on. These are the sacrifices I have to make for peace.”) 

18. “At least hes showing me attention. Thats better than being ignored.” 

(Israeli Left: “The Americans didnt try to protect the Kurds or the Tibetans or all the others. They didnt try to make peace between the 
Greeks and the Turks or the Pakistanis and the Indians. Look how much attention their giving little Israel. This MUST be love! The whole UN dwells only on Israel!) 

19. “I feel such pity for him. He keeps saying that HE is the abused one. He looks so pitiful. When hes shooting at me with his new gun, he tells me about how much hes suffered from me and I feel so bad for him. So, if it makes him feel like more of a man to beat me up, whats the big deal? He needs this release. You know how frustrated men get!” 

(Israeli Left: “The Arabs are SO frustrated! This occupation is depriving them of their manhood. So we have to let them let off steam 
and give MORE money, more ARMS – after all, Arabs love their guns….”) 

20. “Hes really not evil, just misguided. He had such a difficult childhood. He doesnt realize what hes doing. Its really not his 
fault. He doesnt know any better. He needs to be convinced, educated. Thats my job. And if I dont succeed. Its MY fault.” 

(Israeli Left: “Arabs arent bad, just frustrated. By example, well teach them how to be more humane.”) 

21. “Everyone tells me to forget the past. Start again. They promise me that hes turned over a new leaf. I HAVE to give him another 
chance. Maybe hes changed. People keep pointing out the fact that he did bring me flowers when I was in the hospital after he broke my nose. And hes often so helpful to the neighbors. He cant be ALL bad. With the right therapist, Im sure hell change. 

(Israeli Left: “No one was killed today. So maybe he really did turn over a new leaf! Maybe we CAN trust them! Hurray! Things ARE getting better. I always knew he could do it! See, my faith and love have been rewarded! We just have to be brave and stick it out and while longer. We just have to get to the right negotiating team and talk for long enough and it will work out….) Back 


Time to Say Good Riddance to Yasser, by Jackie Mason

Why are we still negotiating peace with Arafat if he already admitted that he cant be responsible for the killing of Israelis on a daily basis? We have decided long ago that Arafat was the man in charge of our enemies in the Middle East, but almost every time an Israeli life is destroyed, the Hamas takes the credit and Arafat claims that he can t help it because the Israelis caused it by their “intransigence”. Or he claims that he can t be responsible for everything the Hamas does, especially when they kill people.
When he s told that he should do what the Israeli government does – arrest and prosecute any murderer immediately, Arafat announces that he s ready to negotiate in good faith, if only the Israelis would make an honest effort to control the violence and make peace. How long will the Israelis continue to victimize themselves with this phony charade? Why are we negotiating for
peace with a man who admits that peace is not his line of business? For the purpose of conferences and negotiations he s the man in charge, but killing Israelis is “out of his control.”

How hard is it to understand that after 20 years of these flip flops, we should not go to another negotiating table, we should announce a timetable. The timetable should be very simple: Arafat’s time is up! The Israeli government has no moral right to allow more Israeli lives to be lost because of another fraudulent peace conference. How many more years will we be blinded by the holiness of the words “peace process”? If the man admits that he can t control the violence, are we supposed to accept the idea that “peace” is important, except when human life is involved? The fact is that Arafat has long ago abdicated his right to be a peace negotiator. It is only Israel”s desperation for peace that made it adopt the Arafat fantasy.

Instead of negotiating with Arafat, we should search for our own sanity. If we could find it, we would not accept for one more day any “acceptable level of violence”. We have no moral right to sacrifice one Israeli life by use of the shameful word “acceptable” and we have no moral right to care what the rest of the world will “accept” as an “acceptable” level of Israeli retaliation. World “opinion” will gladly continue to “”accept”” the sacrifice of Israeli lives for the “peace process”. Would the American government accept the idea of a terrorist organization killing its citizens every day in the streets of this country for 20 years and still wait for world opinion to “”accept”” their right to do something about it?

When President Clinton decided that bin Laden was planning a terrorist attack, nobody knew if it was true or just a diversion from Monica Lewinsky. Nevertheless, he didn t ask for permission from world opinion. He didn t care or ask if it was an “acceptable level of violence” and hundreds of innocent Sudanese lives were sacrificed for reasons nobody knows or questions or even cares about. When an American president decides to even fantasize a threat to human life, he wantonly bombs countries with impunity, but when Israelis die every day we still wait for acceptance while we negotiate with America about the definition of an “acceptable
level of violence.”

Israel has the responsibility of any legally constituted government to protect the lives of its citizens and it would be derelict, sinful, and even criminal to sacrifice one Israeli life for the hypocrisy of Arafat or for American “acceptance”.Back 


A New Guide for the Perplexed?, by Ruth and Nadia Matar

The complex Middle East picture which Prime Minister Sharon is required to solve, cannot but baffle him. On the one hand, there is wily Arafat who skillfully blurs his terrorist and barbaric activities under the guise of a National Liberation Movement. Then there is the United States which acts to protect its need for Arab oil. Accordingly, it engages in a macabre dance whereby it seeks to assuage the Arabs by unreasonably bashing Israel. Moreover, to keep the region quiet, U.S. policy demands Israel show restraint in the face of Israel’s citizenry being slaughtered on a daily basis. Added to this stew, are the hostile positions of the nations of Europe. They too need Arab oil; they too want the massive oil monies deposited in their banks; and they too seek favorable trade from the many
Arab countries in the region. Then there is the United Nations overhanging threat to intervene. Its policies are dominated by countries currying favor with the Arabs and their oil wealth.

The situation becomes more complex because Sharon has chosen the path of a unity government. The leftist-oriented Labor Party holds pivotal posts in such a government, led by the Socialist-International adherent Shimon Peres, as Israel’s Foreign Minister. A ludicrous phenomenon is occurring. The Israeli electorate overwhelmingly voted in the last elections for a nationalistic-oriented government. Yet today Shimon Peres virtually rules this nation, despite the fact that his views are those of a slim minority, not shared by the major bulk of the electorate.

Add to this complex picture, the fact that Sharon is no longer a young man. He was previously maliciously smeared by Labor, who invented a bizarre accusation against him in the Sabra and Shatila matter. More recently, Labor’s major platform in the last election was the prediction that Sharon will lead us to war. Faced with the many years of attempting to exonerate his name and reputation, Sharon no longer seems to possess his former daring and courage. The psychological factors involved may have taken their toll, and affected his confidence and ability to act decisively.

Israel desperately needs a leader who believes passionately in the value of its noble Ancient Heritage, and its historical rights to its
Homeland. Above all, it requires a leader to inspire and unite the Jewish People in the present war being waged against them by the Arabs. Sharon, up to now, has not shown such leadership.

Given the above considerations, it is a gigantic task for anyone to lead. Yet, despite such problems, Israel desperately needs an inspired leader. Recent polls indicate that the Jewish People in Israel are losing faith in Sharon. Under the present trying circumstances of the Arab intifada, they need to be fortified in their faith, belief in themselves, and in their rights to this Promised Land. Sharon, or some other leader, must have the courage and wisdom to provide new guidelines and objectives. Oslo is dead. It is now quite clear that a Palestinian state is a dire threat to Israel’s survival. Israel must meet the challenge of Arab enmity
that refuses to abate, or ever to go away.Back 


No way to win a war, by Moshe Arens, Aug 21 2001

Slowly, too slowly, Israelis are beginning to realize that the Palestinians are waging war, a war that is now entering its 11th month. Some preferred to believe that it was only the Muslim fanatics among the Palestinians that were intent on killing Jews, or that the participation in the violence by Palestinians under the direct orders of Yasser Arafat was at most marginal. Or, that possibly Arafat was really our partner in fighting Hamas and the Islamic Jihad and eventually our partner in making peace between Jews and Palestinians.

But with every funeral of victims of Palestinian violence, there seem to be fewer Israelis who put any faith in Arafat and more who conclude that it is Arafat with the troops under his command aided by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad who is waging a war against Israel.

This war is daily claiming innocent Israeli victims, many of them women and children. There can be no disagreement that it is the Israeli government’s foremost task to put an end to the killing.

And yet, Shimon Peres remains unconvinced. He still claims that negotiations with Arafat hold the key to ending the violence and threatens to leave the government if he is not permitted to meet with Arafat. He refuses to be confused by the facts – his mind is made up.

But for most Israelis, after a string of disappointments, Arafat has revealed himself for what he really is. His word is worthless and his credo is violence. He is not a partner for peace with Israel, and force must be used to counter his violent acts.

Seeking the support of the international community, the government has been restrained in using force against the Palestinian militias while the killing continued month after month. Even after the Dolphinarium massacre, the government decided that the best response was no response. As should have been expected, the sympathy that Israel enjoyed in the aftermath was short-lived.

It is in this context that the government’s response to the next major act of Palestinian terror – the bombing of the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem that claimed 15 lives – should be judged. Advertised by government spokesmen as a brilliant move to impose a “political penalty” on Arafat, the takeover of Orient House seems to make little sense as a deterrent measure against further acts of terror. What is the connection between the outrage committed and the takeover of a building by the police in Jerusalem? Does anybody really believe that the takeover of Orient House will lead Arafat to call off his campaign of violence?

In any case, it was the activity pursued in Orient House that was illegal and not the building itself, and it is the people engaged in illegal
activities there and in Abu Dis who should have been arrested and put on trial long ago. Using the massacre at the Sbarro restaurant as the trigger to attempt to put an end to Arafat’s illegal activities in Jerusalem seems at the very least inappropriate and is in no way commensurate with the crime committed by the Hamas suicide bomber in Jerusalem.

There is no alternative to using the IDF to suppress Palestinian violence and terrorism. If, after the latest terrorist acts, there are still those in the international community who fail to see that the Israeli government at this juncture has no choice but to use force against the Palestinian militias and terrorist groups in defense of its citizens, no demonstrations of restraint by Israel are going to convince them. In any case, it is wrong to base Israel’s strategy on reprisals for Palestinian acts of terror. It is not a matter of returning blow for blow. No reprisal for an individual act of terror is going to prevent the next atrocity. It is their ability to commit acts of violence and terror that has to be neutralized. Much more than symbolic acts like taking over Orient House will be needed to win this war.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s