Sunday, November 29, 2009

Soldiers Made from Steel‚ Leaders Made from Putty - MK Dr. Michael Ben Ari – Eretz Yisroel Shelanu



It had become routine. U.S. government treats the government of Israel and its branches as if they were clerks. When it comes to routine, there is no discomfort level.

In recent weeks, we have witnessed several such rude and coarse interventions. One was the incident in which Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin disqualified my speech in the Knesset after the American envoy Mitchell demanded an answer from Rivlin "until the afternoon" as if he was the last of Mitchell's subjects. This entire give and take was carried out amidst full media exposure. And that is only one of the events where they have demonstrated their intervention, even in matters that seem worthless.

Apparently Obama's envoy to the Middle East refers to the internal conduct of the Knesset's as if he was appointed to this as part of his job. That's why the referendum law to the Golan Heights, which was supposed to be put up for vote, was suddenly removed from the agenda without any logical explanation. The U.S. government occasionally sprinkles admonitions about building homes for Jews at Pisgat Zeev, and about the master plans of Giloh. Our pitiable response is reminiscent of a child caught doing mischief and tries to explain: "I did not understand", "I did not know", "I will not do it any more."

Crossing this line would not occur was it not that we ourselves broke all the boundaries. It began coordinating positions with the big American brother, and moved forward to total subjugation to American lordship and absolute flaccidity of our leadership.

We could have let desperation set in, if we were not exposed in recent weeks to the steadfastness of the brave soldiers. Brave young teenagers, for once, do not suffer from diseases of subordination or existential complexes.

Soldiers who had enlisted in the military service this week, were asked by a Channel 10 reporter if they would refuse an order to expel Jews. The question was asked a few minutes after the Chief of Staff talked with them about the refusal, including explanations and threats. The young soldiers who had just enlisted answered the reporter without hesitation, in this fashion:

A soldier from Migdal Haemek: "I will refuse an order, because I'm going with everyone, that's why. With friends, we're brothers, so I would refuse an order. If he refuses I will also refuse a command". A soldier from Kfar Vradim explained: "We are all Jews, there is nothing to do. You can not do this to Jews. I probably will not obey command because those are my values."
A soldier from Rechovot, enlisted today to the infantry brigade: "There are minimum values. We came to protect, not to expel. I protect my brothers, do not turn them out. I am now enlisting to protect and not to drive out."

Those who have seen the pictures of young soldiers see that they are not yeshiva students, none of them wore a skullcap, and none had a religious appearance. To the sorrow of those seeking to go against us, there isn't any Rosh Yeshiva you can point a finger at. The threats, intimidation and explanations that their refusal to expel Jews will allegedly dismantle the army - all these did not work for them. Their words were sharp and clear: We came to protect! We came to fight! Not to fight our brothers! They also renewed something our leadership lost long ago; they claimed that will not expel because "we have values."

Netanyahu and Barak's leadership may unfortunately be made of putty in the hands of haters of Israel. But the youth are made of natural steel, honesty and love of Israel. So who said there was no hope?

Who is Manhigut Yehudit - The Jewish Leadership Movement?

We are simply Jews, with no added definitions. We do not call ourselves Orthodox, Conservative or Reform - neither "right-wing" nor "left-wing." Like the overwhelming majority of Jews, we believe in G-d, Who has brought us back to our Jewish home; the Holy Land of Israel. In Israel, the natural predisposition of the Jewish People to illuminate the world with God's light is brought to perfection, enabling us to perform our task in the most consummate way.

Our aim is to create a genuinely Jewish consciousness in the Land of Israel, motivated by the awareness that our faith and our country are intrinsically woven together. An Israeli society predicated on Jewish faith - the Torah - is an ethical and loving society whose ultimate goal is to illuminate the entire world with God's benevolence.

The Modern State of Israel in Crisis
The Zionist movement, which founded the modern State of Israel, was a product of the millennia of longing for return to the Land of Israel. However, it was also a product of the times in which it was born. Basing itself on secular 19th century Western values, Zionism came to fill the need for a safe haven for the Jews of the world. Miraculously, the Zionist movement succeeded in building the complete infrastructure of a modern state - replete with a strong army, high tech, immigration absorption etc. out of the wilderness.
In its essence, though, the secular Zionism on which Israel was built negates holiness. In doing so, it has stripped itself of the tools necessary to reflect the Jewish nature of Israel and its ultimate holy purpose.

We are now witnessing a complete unraveling of the fabric of Israeli society. The very Zionist ideology that built the modern state of Israel has now turned against itself as it seeks to counter its Biblical roots and Divine purpose. This self-destructive bent is the ultimate conclusion of the secular ideology upon which Zionism is based.

The Essential Question: Is Israel a State of Jews - or a Jewish State?
Until now Israel has been a state of the Jews. It is vital to our future to transform Israel into a Jewish state. Israel's elected officials must lead the country with policies based exclusively on Jewish identity, values and ethics.

An Alternative
In 1994, Moshe Feiglin began the Zo Artzeinu ("This is Our Land") protest movement that opposed the self-destructive Oslo Accords with a massive civil disobedience campaign.
It became clear, though, that it was not enough to protest; we had to offer a fundamental alternative - a new strategic objective - in place of the process of collapse that gave rise to the Oslo Accords. Such an alternative would need to be based on both an alternative ideology that would inspire the nation and possess the means for implementation.

Faith-Based Leadership
There is only one way to truly imbue the State of Israel with the meaning it deserves and needs: to promote an alternative leadership for the State of Israel that is based on Jewish belief. Only leadership motivated by an authentically Jewish vision will be capable of meeting all the challenges currently facing the State of Israel and the Jewish People. Only leadership of this kind will be capable of reinvigorating the State of Israel and the Jewish People and leading it towards the realization of the vision of the prophets.

Leadership of the Likud
In 1998, Manhigut Yehudit (The Jewish Leadership Movement) was established as the successor to Zo Artzeinu. Our aim is to register thousands of believing members in the Likud - the ruling party of the National Camp - and to elect a party leader who will be motivated by Jewish ideals and values. As the Likud's candidate for Prime Minister, this candidate would be the natural leader of the national camp and would be elected as the Prime Minister of the State of Israel.

What began as a dream has become a reality. Already today, Manhigut Yehudit (The Jewish Leadership Movement) has the largest bloc inside the Likud's Central Committee. In a very short time we became known as the group that "does not come with a price tag." Our weapon is our ideology and tens of thousands of supporters have already joined our ranks. Many Israelis throughout the political spectrum believe that we are the future of Israel's political life and the path we have chosen is correct and viable.

Our Future
With firm faith in the God of Israel, Manhigut Yehudit (The Jewish Leadership Movement) is confident that our future is bright. Indeed the totality of our strategic goals could be summed up in a single phrase from the traditional Aleynu prayer recited daily:

To perfect the world in the kingdom of the Almighty

2009 Elections Prove Israel Ripe for Belief-Based Leadership

Playing on the theory that Israel is not yet ready for a belief-based leader, Moshe Feiglin's opponents claimed that his election in the 2009 Likud primaries would mean that the Likud would lose 6 mandates; ostensibly of those people who would not identify with belief-based leadership. But when Feiglin was elected to the 20th place on the Likud roster, just the opposite occurred. The Likud immediately began to gain in the polls, reaching 36 projected mandates. After Moshe Feiglin was forced down to 36th place on the Likud roster, the Likud's standing in the polls began to decline.

The following graph clearly shows the patterns that led to the Likud's slow but steady decline over the election campaign.



Conclusions:
A. There is complete symmetry between the decline of the Likud and the rise of Lieberman's party, and later of the National Union.

B. The Likud's decline begins when it loses its rightist/nationalist hue as a result of Netanyahu's battle against Feiglin.

C. From the beginning of December and until the elections, Lieberman and the National Union gained 11 mandates at the Likud's expense. The Likud with Moshe Feiglin could have won at least 38 mandates in these elections.

D. Israel voted Right because it is thirsting for leadership based on Jewish values and ethics.

Insubordination Can Save Israel

By Moshe Feiglin

5 Kislev, 5770 (Nov. 22, '09)


As a result of my attempts to halt the Oslo collapse, I was put on trial for "sedition." I asked the judges to allow me to read a short piece from a book that I had brought with me. The judges agreed, and to their surprise, I removed "The Little Prince" by Antoine de Saint Exupיry from my briefcase:

"Sire--over what do you rule?"

"Over everything," said the king, with magnificent simplicity.

"Over everything?"

The king made a gesture, which took in his planet, the other planets, and all the stars.

"Over all that?" asked the little prince.

"Over all that," the king answered.

For his rule was not only absolute: it was also universal.

"And the stars obey you?"

"Certainly they do," the king said. "They obey instantly. I do not permit insubordination."

"I should like to see a sunset . . . Do me that kindness . . . Order the sun to set . . ."

"If I ordered a general to fly from one flower to another like a butterfly, or to write a tragic drama, or to change himself into a sea bird, and if the general did not carry out the order that he had received, which one of us would be in the wrong?" the king demanded. "The general, or myself?"

"You," said the little prince firmly.

"Exactly. One must require from each one the duty which each one can perform," the king went on. "Accepted authority rests first of all on reason. If you ordered your people to go and throw themselves into the sea, they would rise up in revolution. I have the right to require obedience because my orders are reasonable." (The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint Exupיry, Chapter 10).

It is a mistake to think that the state works within the boundaries of laws. The public does not obey laws. It obeys rules within the boundaries of a triangle, the first side of which is the law. But the triangle has two other sides: common sense and ethicality.

What if the Knesset would pass a law requiring drivers to drive in reverse all winter? That would counter the logic side of the triangle. The public's subsequent refusal would be the fault of the government, not of the public. In other words, the fact that we obey the law is not because of the law itself, but because it is logical enough to warrant our adherence.

The third side of the triangle is ethicality. If the government would order us to drive our elderly and infirm out onto the frozen tundra, as per Eskimo custom, we may agree that it would logically enhance the economy. But nobody would obey, because it would be patently immoral. The party at fault for the insubordination would be the government that enacted the law and not the citizens who refused to obey.

How are the boundaries of this triangle determined?

The law is obviously determined by the government. A government has unlimited power to enact and enforce laws. The government, with its Knesset majority, can enact a law that would postpone elections for fifty years. Why doesn't it do so? For only one reason. Because it knows that the public would not accept it and the government would subsequently lose its credibility. In other words, just like Exupיry's king, the government enacts laws within the boundaries that it assumes the public will accept, both logically and ethically.

Power always strives for more power and the government will always attempt to test the boundaries of common sense and ethicality. But fortunately, it is not the government that determines these boundaries, but the public. How does the public accomplish this? By using its right and sometimes, its duty – to refuse to obey the law. That is how the logical and ethical platform for the healthy functioning of society is created.

In order to increase its power, the government tries to convince us that insubordination will cause the state to collapse. But that is completely false. The greatest crimes in human history were perpetrated when citizens ignored their duty to delineate logical and ethical boundaries for the rule of law. The societies in which this took place by and large collapsed.

"Good men must not obey the laws too well" (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

Emerson understood what the disengaging Israeli tyranny no longer wants to hear.

Those soldiers who obeyed the Expulsion law in Gush Katif despite the fact that they knew that it was illogical and unethical, brought the Hamas missiles to Be'er Sheva, the resulting Cast Lead Operation, Goldstone and the international anti-Israel demonization campaign that is gaining momentum by the day. In short, our eager-to-obey soldier has endangered Israel's very existence.

The writing on the wall of Netanyahu's office is clear: Destruction of the Golan Heights, of the settlements in Judea and Samaria and the division of Jerusalem. Public delineation of clear, logical and ethical boundaries for the law can prevent Netanyahu from carrying out his plan.

In the past few weeks, soldiers from two separate units in the IDF expressed their civic responsibility by refusing to obey orders to expel Jews from their homes. These brave young men are positioned to save Israel from collapse.

Feiglin on Netanyahu: Writing is on the Wall

8 Kislev,5770 (Nov. 25, '09)

Following the cabinet decision to freeze construction in Judea and Samaria, Jewish Leadership Head, Moshe Feiglin, said that "the writing on the wall is clear, Netanyahu is working to surrender the Golan, destroy the towns of Judea and Samaria and divide Jerusalem."

"Anyone who supports this move proves he has not learned anything from the crime of the expulsion from Gush Katif. I urge everyone to whom Israel and the future of the state are important to them, to join the Likud in order to replace Netanyahu with a leader that has a God".

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Lion's Den: Islamism 2.0 - an even greater threat


Nov. 24, 2009
Daniel Pipes , THE JERUSALEM POST
To borrow a computer term, if Ayatollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden, and Nidal Hasan represent Islamism 1.0, Recep Tayyip Erdogan (the prime minister of Turkey), Tariq Ramadan (a Swiss intellectual), and Keith Ellison (a US congressman) represent Islamism 2.0. The former kill more people but the latter pose a greater threat to Western civilization.
The 1.0 version attacks those perceived as obstructing its goal of a society ruled by a global caliphate and totally regulated by Shari'a (Islamic law). Islamism's original tactics, from totalitarian rule to mega-terrorism, encompass unlimited brutality. Three thousand dead in one attack? Bin Laden's search for atomic weaponry suggests the murderous toll could be a hundred or even a thousand times larger.
However, a review of the past three decades, since Islamism became a significant political force, finds that violence alone rarely works. Survivors of terrorism rarely capitulate to radical Islam - not after the assassination of Anwar Sadat in Egypt in 1981, nor the 9/11 attacks, the Bali bombings of 2002, the Madrid bombing of 2004, the Amman bombing of 2005, or the terrorist campaigns in Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Terrorism does physical damage and kills and intimidates but it rarely overturns the existing order. Imagine Islamists had caused the devastation of Hurricane Katrina or the 2004 tsunami - what could these have lastingly achieved?
NON-TERRORIST violence aimed at applying Shari'a does hardly better. Revolution (meaning, a wide-scale social revolt) took Islamists to power in just one place at one time - Iran in 1978-79. Likewise, a coup d'état (a military overthrow) carried them to power just once - Sudan in 1989. Same for civil war - Afghanistan in 1996.
If the violence of Islamism 1.0 rarely succeeds in forwarding the Shari'a, the Islamism 2.0 strategy of working through the system does better. Islamists, adept at winning public opinion, represent the main opposition force in Muslim-majority countries such as Morocco, Egypt, Lebanon, and Kuwait. Islamists have enjoyed electoral success in Algeria in 1992, Bangladesh in 2001, Turkey in 2002, and Iraq in 2005.
Once in power, they can move the country toward Shari'a. As Mahmoud Ahmadinejad faces the wrath of Iranian street demonstrators and bin Laden cowers in a cave, Erdogan basks in public approval, remakes the Republic of Turkey, and offers an enticing model for Islamists worldwide.
Recognizing this pattern, al-Qaida's once-leading theorist has publicly repudiated terrorism and adopted political means. Sayyid Imam al-Sharif (b. 1950, also known by the nom de guerre Dr. Fadl) was accused of helping assassinate Sadat. In 1988, he published a book that argued for perpetual, violent jihad against the West. With time, however, Sharif observed the inutility of violent attacks and instead advocated a strategy of infiltrating the state and influencing society.
In a recent book, he condemned the use of force against Muslims ("Every drop of blood that was shed or is being shed in Afghanistan and Iraq is the responsibility of bin Laden and Zawahiri and their followers") and even against non-Muslims (9/11 was counterproductive, for "what good is it if you destroy one of your enemy's buildings, and he destroys one of your countries? What good is it if you kill one of his people, and he kills a thousand of yours?").
Sharif's evolution from theorist of terrorism to advocate of lawful transformation echoes a much broader shift; accordingly, as author Lawrence Wright notes, his defection poses a "terrible threat" to al-Qaida. Other once-violent Islamist organizations in Algeria, Egypt, and Syria have recognized the potential of lawful Islamism and largely renounced violence. One also sees a parallel shift in Western countries; Ramadan and Ellison represent a burgeoning trend.
(What one might call Islamism 1.5 - a combination of hard and soft means, of external and internal approaches - also works. It involves lawful Islamists softening up the enemy, then violent elements seizing power. The Hamas takeover of Gaza proved that such a combination can work: win elections in 2006, then stage a violent insurrection in 2007. Similar processes are possibly underway in Pakistan. The United Kingdom might be undergoing the opposite process, whereby violence creates a political opening.)
In conclusion, only Islamists, not fascists or communists, have gone well beyond crude force to win public support and develop a 2.0 version. Because this aspect of Islamism undermines traditional values and destroys freedoms, it may threaten civilized life even more than does 1.0's brutality.
The writer (DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

Monday, November 16, 2009

Voting Rights for Israeli Expatriates and Diaspora Jews: By Moshe Feiglin


The State of Israel is a Jewish State. It is the state of all the Jews. Every Jew in the world should see Israel as his country - even if he does not yet physically live in Israel.

In most democracies, the right to vote is not contingent on actually living in the country in question, but rather on citizenship alone. Many Israelis who are also US citizens - even if they were not born in the US - vote in US elections. Israel's law that makes a citizen's right to vote contingent on his living in Israel deviates from the norm.

On the surface, this would seem like a positive way to strengthen the connection between Israeli citizens and their country. But just the opposite is true. The original Zionist platform called for the establishment of a new nation in Israel - the Israeli nation - to replace the Jewish nation. Azmi Bashara is an Israeli, while a Jew in London who would like to be an Israeli citizen while remaining in the Diaspora in the meantime - is not.

To grant Israeli citizenship to every Jew who requests it turns Judaism into the Israeli nationality. The founding fathers of Zionism wanted to cut the connection between the two. They preferred to leave the Jewish nation to die, either physically or spiritually, in the exile - to relegate Judaism to the status of religion and nothing more - and to establish a new nation here in the Land of Israel.

In the words of pioneer author and Zionist thinker, Chaim Hazaz:

Zionism and Judaism are not one thing, but two things, different from each other, two things that contradict each other. When a person cannot be a Jew, he becomes a Zionist.
Zionism begins at the place where Judaism is destroyed, from the place that the strength of the nation is sapped. Zionism is not a continuation, not a panacea for the blow. That is ridiculous! It is uprooting and destruction, the opposite of what was, the end. I believe that the Land of Israel is no longer Judaism.
(The pioneer in Hazaz's book, "Hadrasha")

The generation of Hazaz attempted to turn the gates of the Land of Israel into the gates of the new Israeli nation. That is why today, a Jew cannot be Israeli unless he lives in Israel.

And what about the Israeli expatriates who have "descended" and live in the Diaspora?
While giving voting rights to Jews in the Diaspora is complex and would require intricate legislation and minimal criteria of connection with the Jewish nation and the State of Israel, there is no excuse for not allowing expatriates to vote. The reason why they are excommunicated from Israel is because Israeli citizens who leave Israel are proof that the New Nation Project of Zionism's "founding fathers" was a dismal failure.

Why should a Jew who doesn't live in Israel have voting rights here?
Because Israel is the Jewish State. As such, it is the state of the Jews outside of Israel just as much as it is the state of the commander of the most elite IDF unit.

True, the Jews in the Diaspora have forgotten that Israel is their real home. But when we established a state for Israelis instead of for Jews, we showed the world that we have also forgotten. It is our duty to change this situation. With G-d's help, we will propose legislation that will allow expatriates - and eventually Diaspora Jews - to vote in Israeli embassies throughout the world.

As a Jewish state that is secure in its eternal existence on the basis of G-d's promise to Abraham, we must give the Diaspora Jews the opportunity to connect to Israel, to care about what is transpiring here, to feel that they belong and to vote. It will be an excellent reminder that their homeland is Israel and encourage aliyah. Not only that, but it will be much more effective than all the excommunication methods that we have used until now to try to stop expatriates from leaving our Land.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Zionist Student Group: 'No Academic Freedom in Israel'

(IsraelNN.com) Earlier this week, it was revealed that many students at Tel Aviv University are afraid to speak out in class for fear that they will be punished for holding Zionist or right-wing views. Erez Tadmor, director of the Zionist student group Im Tirzu, believes that all Israeli universities are suffering from a similar problem, leading to a situation in which Israel lacks true academic freedom.

Tadmor spoke to Arutz Sheva's Hebrew news service, and began by praising Professor Nira Hativa, who revealed the issue at TAU. “She is a very courageous woman,” he said.

Hativa based her findings on feedback forms provided by students upon completing courses, Tadmor said. The forms revealed that students who found that their own political views were to the right of those of their instructors were intimidated into keeping their opinions to themselves.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Is US Envoy Mitchell Interfering in Knesset Policy?

(Israelnationalnews.com) MK Michael Ben-Ari (National Union) has been engaged in a battle to honor former MK Rabbi Meir Kahane, who was murdered in New York City in 1990, by giving a memorial speech from the Knesset podium. On Wednesday, it was revealed that Ben-Ari's struggle has drawn opposition from well beyond the Knesset, and that U.S. envoy George Mitchell has taken an interest in the matter.

Arutz Sheva quotes unnamed sources that said that Mitchell reportedly sent a message via the American embassy asking Knesset speaker Reuven Rivlin if he planned to approve Ben-Ari's request to speak about Kahane in the Knesset. Rivlin, who recently canceled the planned speech after it received initial approval, replied in the negative.

Upon hearing the report, Ben-Ari accused Mitchell of “crossing a red line” by interfering in internal Israeli politics. “I was elected by citizens of the independent state of Israel... It's amazing how members of the American government are attempting to intervene in the daily affairs of the Knesset, which is supposed to be a sovereign body.”

Rivlin is “sending a message of weakness,” Ben-Ari accused.

MK Aryeh Eldad (Ichud Leumi) backed his colleague, saying, “If the American embassy did this... this is beyond audacious, it is a humiliation and a degradation of Israeli democracy.” The veteran MK encouraged his fellow lawmakers to fight for Ben-Ari's right to speak in Kahane's memory. "Even those who opposed Kahane must enlist in the struggle for Israeli sovereignty and freedom of expression,” he explained.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

NYistan!

Speaks for itself!!!

Z (Zionist) Street -- Lori Lowenthal Marcus

Z STREET is based on these ironclad positions:

The right of the Jewish people to a state, and the right of Jews to live freely anywhere, including inhaling oxygen in areas the world insists are reserved for Arab Palestinians;

Relishing the terms "Jewish State" and "Zionism" - ones currently derided as shameful instead of sources of pride;

Circulation of facts -- not deceptive "Palestinian" narratives -- about the Middle East, Israel and terrorism;

Condemnation of those who revile Israel for actions they ignore when taken by Israel's enemies and virtually all states throughout history;

Categorical rejection of agreements with, or concessions to, terrorists (or their supporters) who are dedicated to Israel's destruction.


Unlike other organizations that claim to be pro-Israel, Z STREET will not pander to politicians who invite us to their offices and pay attention to our pocketbooks but ignore our positions. For those who do not embrace our principles, there are plenty of other organizations to join. This catalyzing organization seeks to change the way discussions about Israel are crafted and viewed.

A fuel source previously untapped has been released: within days of the launch thousands clamored to our site, asking how to join and how they can help. Z STREET already includes members from five continents and more than twenty states. News articles are being written about Z STREET from the far right and the center, and we have been viciously denigrated and cartooned from the far left - all of which is gratifying.

The rising groundswell is in part a response to organizations whispering into the ear of this US administration that pervert the meaning of "pro-Israel." Their ultimate loyalty is to left-wing principles including a secular Israel and tolerance of terrorism only when directed at Jews. They are ashamed of an avowedly Jewish State, yet completely comfortable with 22 Muslim ones, and are actively seeking the creation of a 23rd, based in Jerusalem, whose governing documents call for the destruction of Israel.

The idea that weakening Israel, either because of ideological conviction, animosity towards a strong Jewish State, cowardice, or the grossly misguided belief that compromise or dialoging with committed terrorists will lead to Middle East or global peace, is obscene.

A very few World War II Jews acted as catalysts for those who refused to be cowed. They adamantly, sometimes theatrically, demanded action to prevent the incineration of millions of Europeans Jews, along with millions of members of other minority and political groups.

This band of warriors, led by Peter Bergson and Ben Hecht, staged marches, rallies and theater events. They refused to mimic the Jewish leaders who shrank from their moral duty to demand the US government face the irrefutable facts of the plans, and then the execution of those plans, to murder millions. It would be an honor for Z STREET to be compared to the Bergson Group. Others should join so that the present horrors, and worse, are prevented. The policy implications are profound and the time is now.

I sleep better knowing that when my grandchildren ask me what I did to help prevent the destruction of Israel, I can tell them about Z STREET with a clear conscience and a sense of pride. What will you say?

Lori Lowenthal Marcus is a Z Street co-founder.

Monday, November 9, 2009

Saudis launches offensive against Yemen rebels

SAN'A, Yemen – Saudi Arabia sent fighter jets and artillery bombardments across the border into northern Yemen Thursday in a military incursion apparently aimed at helping its troubled southern neighbor control an escalating Shiite rebellion, Arab diplomats and the rebels said.

The Saudis — owners of a sophisticated air force they rarely use — have been increasingly worried that extremism and instability in Yemen could spill over to their country, the world's largest oil exporter. The offensive came two days after the killing of a Saudi soldier, blamed on the rebels.

Yemen denied any military action by Saudi Arabia inside its borders. But Yemen's president is a key ally of the Saudis, making it highly unlikely the kingdom would have launched the offensive without tacit Yemeni agreement.

A U.S. government official said the Yemenis were not involved militarily in the fighting. The official spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
The offensive immediately raised concerns of another proxy war in the Middle East between Iran and Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally. Shiite Iran is believed to favor the rebels in Yemen while Saudi Arabia, which is Sunni, is Iran's fiercest regional rival.

The same dynamic has played out in various forms in Lebanon, where Iran supports the Shiite militant Hezbollah and Saudi Arabia favors a U.S.-backed faction, and in Iraq, where Saudi Arabia and Iran have thrown support to conflicting sides in the Sunni-Shiite struggle.
A top Saudi government adviser confirmed "a large scale" military operation underway on the Saudi-Yemeni border with further reinforcements sent to the rugged, mountainous area.
"It is a sustained operation which aims to finish this problem on our border," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. He said Saudi troops were coordinating with Yemen's army, but Yemen's defense ministry denied the Saudis were inside the country.

The northern rebels, known as Hawthis, have been battling Yemeni government forces the past few months in the latest flare-up of a sporadic five-year conflict. They claim their needs are ignored by a Yemeni government that is increasingly allied with hard-line Sunni fundamentalists, who consider Shiites heretics.

The rebels said the Saudi airstrikes hit five areas in their northern stronghold Thursday but it was not possible to independently verify the reports. They said there were dead and wounded, and that homes were destroyed. The rebels' spokesman said people were afraid to get near the areas being bombed, making it difficult to count the casualties.

"Saudi jets dropped bombs on a crowded areas including a local market in the northern province of Saada," Hawthi spokesman Mohammed Abdel-Salam told The Associated Press. "They claim they are targeting al-Hawthis, but regrettably they are killing civilians like the government does." He said the attacks were followed by hundreds of artillery shells from the border.

"So far, three killed have been pulled out of the rubble, including a woman and a child who perished when their houses were bombed and burned down," said Abdel-Salam.
The fighting is more than 600 miles from Saudi Arabia's oil fields on the kingdom's eastern Persian Gulf coast. But northern Yemen overlooks the Red Sea, the world's busiest route for oil tankers.

Two Arab diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Saudi Tornado and F-15 warplanes had been bombarding targets inside Yemen since Wednesday afternoon, inflicting significant casualties on rebels. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not allowed to talk to the media.

They said army units and special forces also had been sent to northern Yemen, and that several Saudi towns on the border had been evacuated as a precaution. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters he had no information about whether the conflict had spread across the border but expressed Washington's concern over the situation.

"It's our view that there can be no long-term military solution to the conflict between the Yemeni government and the Hawthi rebels," Kelly said. "We call on all parties to the conflict to make every effort to protect civilian populations and limit damage to civilian infrastructure."
The weak central government of Yemen, which has little control outside the capital San'a, is fighting on multiple fronts including the northern rebels and a separatist movement in the south. But the most worrisome is a lingering threat from al-Qaida militants.
The U.S. also fears any Yemeni fighting could spill over into Saudi Arabia and is concerned that Yemen could become a haven for al-Qaida militants hiding out in the nation, at the tip of the Arabian peninsula.
The Yemeni government openly accuses Iran of arming the Hawthis rebels, but there has been no public evidence to back those claims, said Joost Hiltermann, deputy program director of the Middle East program for the International Crisis Group think tank in London.
"I think Iran is probably pleased with what is happening, but that is not the same as saying they are supporting the Hawthis," Hiltermann said.
Simon Henderson, director of Gulf and energy policy at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy in Washington, agreed that there is no clear evidence that Iran funds the rebels. But he said there is a wide assumption that Iran favors the Hawthis and the Saudis are backing Yemen's Sunni president.

Tom Friedman to Obama: Leave peace alone



Well-known columnist takes jabs at Israel, Palestinians, calls Obama to stay out of Mideast politics for a while. Friedman paraphrases James Baker: 'When you’re serious, give us a call: 202-456-1414. Ask for Barack. Otherwise, stay out of our lives. We have our own country to fix'
Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON – New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote a piece on the eve that US President Barack Obama set a much-contended meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The article recommends that Obama abandon the Middle East peace process, claiming that US involvement only helps both sides cover up their deficiencies and lack of willingness for real concessions.

Friedman describes talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians as a tiring routine that are more a function of diplomatic habit than real intentions to reach an agreement. The talks have left the realm of diplomacy and have become more an issue of maintenance – something the diplomats do in order to stay in shape, so to speak. "The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has become a bad play. It is obvious that all the parties are just acting out the same old scenes, with the same old tired clichés — and that no one believes any of it anymore. There is no romance, no sex, no excitement, no urgency — not even a sense of importance anymore. The only thing driving the peace process today is inertia and diplomatic habit," Friedman wrote.
Friedman called upon Obama to adopt a new, radical approach that has yet to be seen in the White House: "Take down our 'Peace-Processing-Is-Us' sign and just go home."
As of today, he wrote, the US is interested in peace more than the two parties and has become the Israelis' and the Palestinians' Novocaine."We relieve all the political pain from the Arab and Israeli decision-makers by creating the impression in the minds of their publics that something serious is happening. 'Look, the US secretary of state is here. Look, she’s standing by my side. Look, I’m doing something important! Take our picture. Put it on the news. We’re on the verge of something really big and I am indispensable to it.' This enables the respective leaders to continue with their real priorities — which are all about holding power or pursuing ideological obsessions — while pretending to advance peace, without paying any political price," Friedman claimed.
"Let’s just get out of the picture. Let all these leaders stand in front of their own people and tell them the truth: 'My fellow citizens: Nothing is happening; nothing is going to happen. It’s just you and me and the problem we own.' Indeed, it’s time for us to dust off James Baker’s line: 'When you’re serious, give us a call: 202-456-1414. Ask for Barack. Otherwise, stay out of our lives. We have our own country to fix.'"



Friedman, who played golf with President Obama just three weeks ago, mocked the American administration for "begging" Israel to stop building the settlements. He claimed that the US is in the wrong position when it continuously asks the Palestinians to come to the negotiating table, and importunes the Saudis to "wink" at Israel. According to him, these are pathetic moves that only damage Obama's credibility in the peace process.
"If the status quo is this tolerable for the parties, then I say, let them enjoy it. I just don’t want to subsidize it or anesthetize it anymore. We need to fix America. If and when they get serious, they’ll find us. And when they do, we should put a detailed US plan for a two-state solution, with borders, on the table. Let’s fight about something big."


Friday, November 6, 2009

Ten Obstacles to Middle East Peace - By David Bedein

1. November 2, 2009 marked the 92nd anniversary of Balfour day, which led to the 1922 San Remo Treaty and to the 1924 League of Nations ratification of the San Remo Treaty, which recognized the right of Jews to purchase land in the Jewish national homeland, defined as anywhere west of the Jordan River. Ratified by the UN in 1945, that is the basis of international law by which Israel can, indeed, settle the land of Israel with Jews who come from the four corners of the earth. The internationally ratified legal basis for Israel has been forgotten.

2. The Arab league rejected the idea of a Jewish national home, declaring a war of extermination in 1945 and actualizing that declaration in 1948. That declaration which is still extant, and the Arab League’s war to exterminate Israel continues. Egypt was then the dominant factor of the Arab League. The Saudis, however, remain the dominant factor of the Arab League today, as the only nation contiguous to Israel to have never signed any armistice or peace treaty with the Jewish state.

3. Perhaps the most effective tactic of the Arab League was to spawn the PLO under its aegis, whose task it would be to coordinate indigenous Palestinian Arabs to join the Arab States in their war to conquer and displace the Jewish state. To this day, the PLO, led by the Fatah reports to the Arab League, which has never changed its charter to destroy Israel. For that matter, neither has the PLO changed its charter to destroy Israel. At the same time, the Fatah conveys the false impression to the world that it is the product of a grass roots Palestinian national movement. Yet the PLO, course, changed the map and the perception of the Arab war to exterminate Israel, to make the war look like some kind of war of national liberation.

4. The Arab League continued its war of extermination by confining Palestinian Arab refugees from 1948 to the squalor of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the right of return. Their presence in UNRWA refugee camps continues to this day, under the aegis of the UN, through UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.

5. The purpose of UNRWA is to fulfill successive UN resolutions that promote the supposed “inalienable right” of Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendent's to return to villages from before 1948. Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants in the UNRWA camps learn that the 531 Israeli villages, kibbutzim, moshavim and neighborhoods that replaced the Arab villages are the illegal Israeli settlements, which are located in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ashkelon, BeerSheva, Ashdod, Sderot and hundreds of other Israeli communities that were established on the ruins of Arab villages after 1948. While the popular imagination posits that the Palestinian Arab national ambition is only to replace the Israeli communities in Judea, Samaria and Katif, the Palestinian Arab ambition as dictated by the PLO and its patron in the Arab League, is to take back the lands lost in 1948. UNRWA, financed by the US and other western nations, reinforces that ambition. UNRWA has recently been taken over by Hamas, to ensure that the ambition to actualize the right of return has gained a new, Islamic emphasis. Just look at how many Palestinian Arab refugees have left the teeming UNRWA Arab refugee camps in Gaza to live on the lands of the expelled Jewish communities from Katif. Not one. Why? Because the dictate of the PA, the PLO and Hamas is that Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants must return to the homes and villages that they left after 1948 - to Jaffa, Beer Sheva, Ashdod, Ashkelon, etc.

6. The Palestinian Authority, established in 1994, instead of spurring the newly recognized Palestinian national entity to establish a nation state alongside Israel, has instead launched a base from where they can liberate the rest of of Palestine.

7. Meanwhile, the PA has established an educational system to educate the next generation that Israel must not exist. The new PA school books and the new PA maps speak for themselves, as the first school curriculum since the Third Reich that inculcates the idea that you must make war on the Jews and that Jews are less than human. The PA school books go one step beyond the Nazis, however, as they introduce lesson plans which praise those who murder Jews. While the Nazis murdered Jews, the Nazis always tried to obfuscate their acts. The Palestinian Authority instead teaches their children to take pride in the act of murdering a Jew.

8. To further reinforce the Palestinian entity around a renewed religious determination of the continued war to liberate all of Palestine, the Palestinian Authority adopted the draft of an Islamic constitution, based on the Sharia law. This was revealed to the public by a senior official in the Vatican who addressed visiting US congressmen in March 2003. This radical constitution was sponsored by the US government, through US AID.

9. Meanwhile, the Hamas Islamic movement took control of the PA legislature in democratic elections that were held under the sponsorship of the American government, in January 2006, which led to a Fatah-Hamas power sharing agreement known as the Mecca Accord, signed between the Fatah and the Hamas in March 2007. When the Fatah began to hesitate in carrying out the Mecca Accord, Hamas took over Gaza in its entirety in June, 2007.

10. The PA has made it clear that it will make no deal with Israel that does not assure the right of return of Palestinian Arab refugees, the PA control over Jerusalem, and the establishment of full and total sovereignty, which includes an army.

The laughter of the son of the maidservant is the laughter of murder

And she said to Abraham: Drive out this maidservant and her son, because the son of the maidservant will not inherit with my son, with Yitzchak. (Genesis 21:10)

A woman who had immigrated from Libya once told me the following story:

"When I was a young girl, my mother sent me to care for my grandmother, who was ill in a Jerusalem hospital. The patient in the bed next to her was an elderly Arab woman. The two women became friendly and spent a number of weeks chattering in Arabic, while I listened on.

One day, the Arab asked my grandmother:
"Why did you come here? Why did you leave Libya?"
"Because this is my Land," my grandmother answered.
"Why do you think it is yours?" the Arab woman asked.
"Because I received it as an inheritance from my father," my grandmother replied.
"Who is your father?" asked the Arab woman incredulously.
"Abraham!" my grandmother answered without missing a beat.
The old Arab woman thought for a moment and then said, "But Abraham is also my father!"
"That is true," my grandmother answered pointedly. "Abraham is also your father. But I am the daughter of the lady of the house, and you are the daughter of the maidservant."

How funny and how true.

Shabbat Shalom,

Moshe Feiglin

In Memoriam: Rabbi Meir Kahane by Shifra Hoffman

In this generation of fleeting allegiance and loyalty, particularly in the realm of Jewish leadership, it seems inexplicable that today, years after the brutal murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane,  he is mourned by so many Jews throughout the world. The phrase coined so as to perpetuate his ideas as well as his memory is" Kahane tzadak"(Kahane was right [i.e.his predictions were correct]).
Having worked closely for more than two decades with this self-sacrificing Jewish leader, both in the United States and in Israel, I feel impelled, on the l9th anniversary of his
In his view, the Torah was the only timely and relevant 'road map' for the Jewish people.
murder, to relate a few little known insights about the man behind the headlines.

Although demonized by both left- and right-wing Israeli governments for his prophetic warnings concerning the rise of Arab nationalism and the dire consequences of making concessions to these implacable enemies, Rabbi Kahane remained undaunted. In his view, the Torah was the only timely and relevant 'road map' for the Jewish people.

During his election campaign for the Knesset, despite an Israeli Court decision that obliged television and newspapers to cover him  as they did  all other candidates, these  'democratic media outlets’ refused to do so. This compelled the Rabbi to travel to speak each day in communities throughout Israel, often returning late at night in a state of complete exhaustion. Against all odds, he was elected to the Knesset. and following his unexpected success,  began to use the Knesset podium to sponsor the exact legislation upon which he based his pre-election platform.  This, as we know, is an unusual phenomenon in Israel, where once elected, politicians feel they have the right to diametrically change their policy. Rabbi Kahane believed that the only solution that could prevent a repeat of the Holocaust “final solution” in the Jewish state is the separation of Arabs and Jews.

(click title for rest of A7 article)

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Gov’t Radio Bans Ads for Memorial Services for Rabbi Kahane


(IsraelNN.com) Voice of Israel government radio, which is part of the state-regulated Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA), banned on Tuesday commercials urging attendance at memorial services for murdered former Knesset Member Rabbi Meir Kahane. His family said it will sue the government.
Itamar Ben-Gvir, a Knesset aide to MK Dr. Ben-Ari, warned that if the IBA does not cancel the ban, he will demand that it also prohibit commercials calling on the public to attend memorial services this week for former Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin.

"Voice of Israel government radio officially is mandated to maintain a balance of views, but media watchdogs have continually documented and complained about bias against Orthodox Jews, strong action against terrorism, and those who favor a State of Israel that includes all of eastern Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights. "


This is but yet another example of a pathetic Israeli Government, that fears a ghosts shadow!
Even in Death Kahane is more open powerful than this Bibi Peres travesty. The secular leaders of Israel continue to act like fascists.

Monday, November 2, 2009

The Land of Israel in Exchange for Goldstone: By Moshe Feiglin

If it were not so dangerous, it would even be amusing. There is certainly an element of poetic justice in the fact that the same people who gleefully destroyed the homes of over 8,000 Jews in Gush Katif are now being labeled as international war criminals.

In the summer of 2005, Israel's Left waged a war against the settlers. All the forces in Israel allowed to use violence were drafted for the battle. The goal of the war, as so accurately defined by Yair Lapid was "to teach them a lesson." Not peace, not security, not anything else. The State was simply drafted to wage war against the Left's internal ideological adversary.

As far as I am concerned, anybody who took part in the crime of Expulsion is a war criminal. True, there are varying degrees of crime; beginning with Sharon and Olmert, on through the Supreme Court justices and the writers, journalists and anchormen who enthusiastically encouraged the crime, the Likud ministers who voted in favor of the Expulsion, the rabbis who gave the halachic go-ahead to carry it out and down to the soldiers who obeyed their orders. Ultimately, all of them were polluted by this war crime in some measure.

My son will be enlisting in the army next month. I said to him: "If two top officers order you to guard the entrance of a room so that nobody will prevent them from raping a woman soldier inside, you must refuse to obey your orders. And by the same token, if they order you to simply be in the second military line-up or the tenth around the expulsion of a Jew from his home in the Land of Israel - it is exactly the same thing. Exactly."

That is why there is poetic justice in the fact that the Expulsion leaders are now being accused of international war crimes. He who sacrificed his brothers and his land on the altar of international acceptance now finds himself on the international defendant's bench.

It is even amusing. Imagine that tomorrow the current government falls, and businessman Ehud Barak, no longer armed with diplomatic immunity, cannot land in London. Can you imagine a greater tragedy? Bibi and Sarah will not be able to go to the opera, as they did when half the country was in bomb shelters and 130 soldiers and citizens were killed - all in the name of Olmert's attempt to boost his Convergence scheme to continue to destroy the settlements.

Did anyone really listen to Netanyahu's speech in the UN? What was the nucleus of his speech - after he dispensed with all the melodrama? Netanyahu's speech was directed at neutralizing the danger of the Goldstone report. In other words, he wanted to ward off the danger that an entire slice of political and military leaders will not be able to go shopping at Marks and Spencer. In his speech, Bibi said that - with his support - the State of Israel took unilateral action and expelled the Jews from Gush Katif. And if you don't get this Goldstone off our backs, we will not be able to continue to expel more settlers and to establish a state of terrorists in Israel's heartland.

Like it or not, that was the crux of Netanyahu's speech: The Land of Israel in exchange for Goldstone.

I once knew a very special Jew by the name of Shlomo Baum. He was Ariel Sharon's deputy in Unit 101. Before he died, he said to me, "Shimon Peres could not care less if this entire country turns into a pile of ashes - as long as he will be left standing on top of the pile." I was naive then and I thought that the likeable old man was exaggerating. Today I know that his analysis of Peres holds true for an entire echelon of leaders who will sell this country out so that the capitals of Europe will remain open for their pleasure. Our situation today is more dangerous than ever before because until now, the citizens of this country were able to compensate - with their sweat and blood - for the foolishness of their leaders. Now, the enemy has found the way to direct the arrows straight into our weak spot - the leaders of the State of Israel.

The danger at our threshold is much broader than the question of how our threatened leaders will behave. Historically, physical destruction has always come on the heels of demonization. Gush Katif could not have been destroyed before the demonization of the settlers that preceded the actual expulsion. Even though I was just a young boy in 1967, I still remember Nasser's propaganda against Israel that preceded the Six Day War. All the pogroms and the holocausts that we suffered in the exile were preceded by poisonous propaganda that negated the Jews' very right to exist.

Our flight from our Jewish identity and our decades-long attempt to establish a state of all its citizens in Israel precludes our ability to give a Jewish answer to the claims of the Moslem and Christian world. When we adopted their moral standards, we seated ourselves on their defendant's bench.

It makes no difference how many Israeli soldiers were killed and will be killed, G-d forbid, in our attempt to wage war according to the values of the Western world. We will always be the bad guys- the robbers - in the story. When in 1967 we did not do what we did in 1948 - and left the Arabs in our land - we proved that we accept the principle that this land actually belongs to them. When we drove out the Jews who nevertheless believed in this land and made it flourish, we irreversibly proved the claim that this land is not ours.

I was there, in Gush Katif, when it happened. There was more foreign press there than there were grains of sand. The entire world watched in anticipation to see if it would really happen. The Jews drove themselves out of their land and from that point and on, we are robbers/colonialists - also in Tel Aviv and in Haifa. Furthermore, whoever fires missiles at us from Gaza is a freedom fighter. You can send them one thousand text messages before you invade - but you will still be a war criminal. The Goldstone Report would never have seen the light of day without the Expulsion.

So there is no reason to be amused. The international demonization that we are experiencing threatens more than Ehud Barak's next weekend in London. It threatens us all with physical annihilation.

Nevertheless, there is something positive that is coming out of the Goldstone debacle. The State of Israel has its back to the wall and is being forced to re-think its basic assumptions. The 'normalcy' idea is officially bankrupt. The commentators and pundits are still attempting to blame the IDF or Israel's diplomatic efforts. "We should have cooperated with Goldstone," they say. But here and there, we already see individual journalists, like Ari Shavit in Ha'aretz, who at least understand that the problem is not tactical, but rather the essential negation of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

Understandably, the solutions that they suggest are the very same "political processes" that have brought us to this crisis. Their horizons are as broad as an ant's. But as the crisis continues, wider and wider circles in Israeli society will begin to listen to the voices outside the media bubble. Policies that base their justice on Judaism will become Israel's lifeline.