Annapolis...

From commentarymagazine.com:

Defining Annapolis Down
Noah Pollak

Is there anything left to be said about the Annapolis conference that hasn’t been said, at this point, dozens of times before? Well, not really. But there are a few smaller items worth discussing.

On Monday a force of 300 Palestinian Authority policemen were sent to the Balata refugee camp near Nablus, a stronghold of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, in order to demonstrate that the Palestinian Authority is attempting to fulfill its Phase I obligations under the Road Map. Remember the Road Map? That document has been living a strange existence in recent months, as it has been both invoked and ignored by all parties involved, at their convenience. The Balata operation was about as symbolic as it gets, with PA police taking up positions in the camp, trading a few shots with members of the Brigades, and then packing up and leaving twelve hours later.

For years The PA did nothing about the Road Map but offered various lame excuses as to why it couldn't, it wouldn't, it shouldn't comply with it and why Israel should... Could their sudden show of "interest" have an ulterior motive?

But the simple fact that a group of armed men, called the PA police, exchanged gunfire with a Palestinian terrorist group—the Martyr’s Brigades are also heavily involved in terrorizing Palestinians—will be used as leverage for demands for Israeli concessions, such as prisoner releases and a reduction in the IDF presence in the West Bank. If Phase I of the Road Map suddenly is being invoked again, the Israelis should re-read what it entails and insist on more than a half-day, merely symbolic PA police parade through Balata. Phase I is supposed to be permanent.

Frankly, as long as we have the likes of Olmert, the Invertebrate, et al bowing and kowtowing to Condi, that brilliant political scientist who is taking lessons from James "F... the Jews" Baker and the peanut bandit, Jimmy Carter... you can bet there will be a redefinition of Phase I and the actual duration of "permanent."

The rhetoric surrounding the conference has changed of late, and I think some people are making the mistake of taking Ehud Olmert’s lofty declarations seriously. The Israelis have done a good job of performing a sort of good cop/bad cop routine with their American interlocutors, and with the media as well. In front of the cameras, Olmert speaks in dulcet clichés about hopefulness and breakthroughs and the great promise of Annapolis, while in private meetings, people like Ehud Barak and Avigdor Lieberman have used hard facts to slap down Rice’s peace-process dreamscape. Such facts include these: Israel will retain freedom of action for the IDF in the Palestinian territories; Israel will not withdraw from the West Bank until a comprehensive missile defense system is in place; Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu, two members of Olmert’s coalition, will bring down the government if red lines are crossed; etc..

I wish I could share Mr. Pollak's optimism in the Israeli government. Unfortunately, based on past performance I hold no illusions as to how far Allmerde is really willing to reach before he hardens against the PA's inaction, intransigence and murderous lies. As for Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu bolting the government, my hopes are practically non-existent. As long as Allmerde is able to keep buying them off, they'll find plenty of excuses for staying in and explaining it as actually being there to curb the PM's enthusiasm in destroying the country even faster than he already is.

This disconnect has created an interesting dynamic, a sort of inverse relationship between rhetoric and reality, in which officials from all sides speak increasingly in platitudes, as the likelihood of anything concrete resulting from Annapolis continues to decrease. If the peace process has drifted off into Never Never Land, why not at least say the nice things that people enjoy hearing about peace processes? These declarations are starting to sound like the slogans affixed to those colorful motivation posters that can be purchased out of the SkyMall catalogue. Condi: “We can succeed. Failure is simply not an option.” Tony Blair: “Intentions will not suffice; only actions will.” Olmert: “This is an opportunity and it must be seized.”

Rice’s most recent trip, from which she returned Monday, was her eight to the region this year, and she will return for a ninth visit before the month is up. For all this activity and the trainwreck of clichés it has generated, remarkably little has been resolved. It is still uncertain which Arab states will show up in Annapolis, and under what conditions; the entire Hamas/Gaza crisis is being ignored thoroughly; and Annapolis itself continues to be defined downward, at this point being proposed as a sort of timeline marker to signify the start of negotiations that the participants hope to complete by the end of the Bush presidency. With goals like these, how can it not be a success?

For failure to truly be "not an option" Ms. Rice should abandon the unreal Realpolitik that historically has only served to compound today's problems around the world. Who are her mentors, the men she draws inspiration from?

James Carter is the former President whose legacy to the world includes, among other things, enabling the rise to power of the Ayatollahs in Iran and putting Mugabe at the helm in Zimbabwe. Did the Peanut Bandit's actions prove to be of any benefit or... do we all realize the disasters his foreign policy has wrought?!?!?

James "F... the Jews" Baker, proved to be an unmitigated calamity to American foreign policy! It is thanks to him that we are currently at war in Iraq. As the chief Consigliere of the Royal House of Saud, as a man who (when representing the US) was more interested in securing juicy deals for his firms clients than for his country, CAN BAKER BE TRUSTED TO GIVE GOOD, UNBIASED, ADVICE?!?!? The answer, gentle reader, is blowing in the wind and it's disgustingly unpleasant!

Tony Blair declared: “Intentions will not suffice; only actions will.” But... he has already made it clear that his idea of "actions" means more confidence bolstering for Abbas and his crew... Hasn't Israel tried that over and over and over? What fruit have these confidence bolstering "gestures" ever produced, beyond further bloodshed and more demands?

As Sarah Lehman wrote, The November Conference looms ahead and forebodes disaster. Relinquishing any part of Eretz Yisrael, especially Yerushalayim, Yehudah and Shomron, is relinquishing the Jewish heart in its heartland. It poses an immediate and irrevocable threat to Jewish lives. At this juncture we cannot afford to witness more tacit support in or out of the Knesset for such perfidy. Frankly, gentle reader, the upcoming Annapolis Conference as it stands now is merely a modern day "Munich" conference where Israel is about to be stripped of any semblance of a country.

This Munich type conference's eventual aim is not a Two State solution, but a One State (NOT a Jewish one, mind you, if Annapolis is to be considered a success by the likes of Rice, Baker and Carter!). Aside from it's effect on the Zionist Entity and dem Jooz, how will this Annapolis "Munich" Conference help America's own efforts on the War on Terror? HOW WILL SACRIFICING A FEW MILLION JEWS TO ALLAH'S FOLLOWERS MAKE THIS A SAFER, BETTER, WORLD?!?!? Frankly, it will only whet the appetite of the blood thirsty IslamoFascists in their pursuit of the big prize... the whole of the western world!!!! Could it be that John Edwards saying the War on Terror is merely a bumper sticker, will become true after all?!?!?

Chaim

Crossposted at: Freedom's Cost

Sara Lehman on: Need breeds Greed

Need Breeds Greed
by Sara Lehmann

I called a friend in Israel before Rosh Hashanah to wish her a Shanah Tovah and we exchanged news about our families. My friend’s nineteen-year-old daughter is currently involved in shidduchim and is looking exclusively for a husband who will be a full-time learner. My friend’s description of the process provided revealing insights into the Israeli counterpart of a world that I know well in Chutz LaAretz. Her daughter’s wish to marry someone who does not plan on working is quite the “ordre du jour” these days. But in light of current and past wrongs in Israel and their effects on the Jewish people as a whole, it seems to me that this wish involves ramifications that should transcend a personal choice.

My friend’s daughter never lacked for anything and seems quite unprepared to live a life of Torah under privation, despite her protests to the contrary. Of course her parents plan to pick up the tab, as many parents in such a scenario do. So many of these girls’ idealistic pursuits are buttressed by the pocketbooks of those who enable them. But there are limits, especially with younger siblings in the household. My friend’s daughter will not even consider someone who may have a long-term plan to support his family, and my friend’s dismay at this extreme attitude is not unlike that of many other families in Israel and in America. I have attended countless shidduch meetings in New York where mothers bemoan this stance that their children have adopted yet seem powerless to confront or negate it.

Torah is the bedrock of Judaism, and Torah learning is what sustains this foundation. Without it we Jews would simply not survive as Jews, as evidenced by those who have thrown off the yolk of Torah and vanished through assimilation. The concept of “Koveiah Itim”, setting aside time for Torah learning, is obligatory on all Jewish men. It is imperative that we have amongst us those who devote their lives to such a course so that we have talmidei chachamim to serve as rabbanim, dayanim and mechanchim in our communities. However, Torah scholars are not mass produced, and not everyone has the potential to become one. Today, it unfortunately seems as if the once valuable partnership of Yissachar and Zvulun has been hijacked by one side.

This single-minded manifesto to pursue a kollel life at almost all cost is a relatively new phenomenon. One does not need to go back to the days of the Tannaim to ascertain how the greatest of our sages worked for their livings. My mother grew up in a Rabbinic Chassidic home in Transylvania during World War II and clearly remembers the role of the father as a breadwinner in every household. She recalls how shameful it actually was for a husband to have to rely on his wife’s earnings. One would think that if Hashem did not intend for man to work, we would still be collecting mannah each morning outside our doorsteps.

My friend in Israel attributes much of her daughter’s leanings to her teachers. She told me that teachers in her daughter’s school in Petach Tikvah will now not even use the word “work” when referring to an eligible young man’s plans for the future. They have come up with a euphemism to replace the dirty word, and they admonish their students not to even consider dating someone who plans “la tzeit” - “to go out”. I wonder if these young men recognize the irony of their now having achieved a similar status to that of the ideal Bat Yisrael, who is extolled by King Solomon for not “going out” in his words, “Kevod Bat Melech Pnimah”.

By opting for such a lifestyle, an enormous burden is put on the wife. She usually becomes the sole earner of the family and no longer serves as the Akeret Habayit to her children at home. Invaluable opportunities to teach children basic lessons in manners and inestimable rules of social interaction based on Torah values are frequently squandered without the proper mentors. Notwithstanding our obligation to support a certain amount of talmidei chachamim in kollel, an indiscriminate carte blanche invitation to all has engendered dependency as a matter of course.

In Israel especially, this situation seems to be compounded by the severity of prevalent difficulties. Unlike my friend, many parents are not in the position to support their children. The stipends of the typical kollel do not go a long way, and the benefits of programs in America, such as food stamps, section 8 and medicaid, do not have ready equivalents in Israel. Furthermore, the restrictions of not attending college, not only by the dictates of full-time learning but also by the shunning of the army draft, have limited the options of those who are forced to reconsider a kollel life and provide sustenance for their family. All these can cause a domino effect leading to rampant poverty.

It is not improbable to correlate claims of privation among this sector and ill-fated decisions in the Israeli government. Many of these citizens have grown accustomed to hand-outs in some form or another, and there is no shortage of willing politicians eager to fill the demand at any cost. It is no wonder that the Torah insists that the judges of Israel be independently wealthy (as were many of the leaders) and thus impervious to bribes. Needy leaders who represent needy followers are easy bait for corruption, and the ills of bribery cast long shadows after their acceptance.

To the irreparable detriment of the Jewish people, it seems as if Israel has sacrificed much on the supposed alter of Torah learning. The leaders of political parties in Israel who represent the vast majority of this segment of society have supported Knesset policies that have slowly destroyed the lives and security of their fellow Jews. Shas’s endorsement of the Oslo Accords enabled them to pass in the Knesset, a debacle that spiraled downwards into tragic consequences. How can a party steeped in Torah knowledge have agreed to give up parts of the holy land that Hashem promised His children? If one were to excuse their judgement as a mixture of naivete and a desire for peace for the sake of pikuach nefesh, how can one forgive subsequent decisions? After thousands of Jews were slaughtered and maimed as a result of Oslo, how can Shas now sit in the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a traitor to his G-d and his people, who plans to give the Palestinian Authority a state in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and much of Jerusalem?

How did UTJ (United Torah Judaism - Agudah) justify joining the government coalition that approved the Disengagement from Gaza? What amount of shekalim can absolve a religious party from receiving support for its constituents at the expense of ruining 10,000 lives and endangering their fellow countrymen? For that matter, why were so many of their American counterparts silent at the time? If ever a time of pikuach nefesh warranted action, that was it.

And what can one make of the endorsement by Rav Ovadiah Yosef, spiritual leader of Shas, of a man who is the antipathy of Judaism to serve as president of the State of Israel? Shimon Peres, a pariah of politics who has made a career of castigating the Jewish religion at every ample opportunity, won approbation from the likes of Rav Menachem Porush of the Agudah and won the presidency through the enabling of Shas. Such a Chillul Hashem is monumental. It has already had ripples of repercussions as this serpentine president usurps maximum power from a role that until now has been largely symbolic. His very first speech gave tacit support to the notion of relinquishing holy and strategic land, and he continues to take advantage of a pulpit to push his agenda of delusional capitulation.

Israel’s politics has been hijacked by the suicidal leanings of the Left, and its culture has been dying a slow death at the hands of the irreligious policies of its educators. The moral compass of a land that should have been directed by Judaic values has been increasingly off kilter. The religious right could have been at the forefront of combating this sickness and taking stands that would have made a Kiddush Hashem. Unfortunately, not only were opportunities of this sort wasted but too many were exploited. With their success at halting the Gay Pride Parade last summer in Jerusalem, the strength of their numbers and purpose should not be undervalued. They have the potential of being a force worth reckoning with. Their dedication to Torah study has the potential of linking with Torah action to achieve results.

It seems as if the personal dilemma which my friend in Israel is grappling with has national consequences. Her daughter’s decision to subscribe to a system of living that does not promote working can have ripple effects on more Jews than just those who adhere to it. Troubles of dependency in Israel cannot be viewed in a bubble. The rumblings against the Israeli government cutbacks affecting Chareidi families underscores how intertwined their lives are with the government. It highlights the necessity of division between the two based on financial independence in order to avoid corruption. The lives of all Jews are connected, and the manipulation by some, whether they be by those on the right or the left, have repercussions for all.

The November Conference looms ahead and forebodes disaster. Relinquishing any part of Eretz Yisrael, especially Yerushalayim, Yehudah and Shomron, is relinquishing the Jewish heart in its heartland. It poses an immediate and irrevocable threat to Jewish lives. At this juncture we cannot afford to witness more tacit support in or out of the Knesset for such perfidy. The Jewish people are waiting for the rabbanim and leaders in Israel and America to stand up and make a Kiddush Hashem worthy of the imprimatur of Torah scholarship.

CALL TO ACTION - CONTACT CONGRESS

URGENT INFORMATION REGARDING A NEW HOUSE RESOLUTION: H.Res.758

This resolution can impact the outcome of the upcoming Annapolis Summit by calling for Palestinian accountability.

Last week, House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) introduced H.Res.758 jointly with Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV). This resolution calls on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, also chairman of his Fatah Party, to officially renounce ten articles in the Fatah Constitution that call for Israel’s destruction and acts of terrorism against its people.

The Fatah Constitution opposes any political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and it labels Zionism as racism. Other examples of the offensive language among the ten separate articles that explicitly seek to incite violence against the state of Israel include the following:

Article 17
(“armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine”)

Article 19
(“the struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished”)

Article 22
(“opposing any political solution offered as an alternative to demolishing the Zionist occupation of Palestine”)

Rep. Blunt released the following statement:

“There can be no reasonable expectation of a broad-based, long-term reconciliation between the Israelis and Palestinians while one side’s constituting document calls for the complete destruction of the other. I believe it’s absolutely critical that the insidious nature of the Palestinian constitution be brought to light – and that those with a genuine interest in working toward peace insist its most unconstructive provisions be abrogated from the text.

“It goes without saying that a basic condition of negotiating with someone is recognizing their right to exist – and once that’s granted, the right to live without fear of terrorism. But, at least according to the ruling party's constitution, even these fundamental concessions continue to be rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

“The resolution I’ve offered with Rep. Shelley Berkley builds on the Arafat Accountability Act of 2002, which sought to bring action against former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat as long as he continued to sanction acts of terrorism against Israel. This resolution takes a different approach, but the message remains the same: As long as Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah Party continue to promote the wholesale destruction of Israel, there can be no possibility for peace – whether in our time, or any other.”

It will be easy for you to contact your representative and ask him/her to support H.Res.758. To send the message, simply click the link below. You will be asked to enter your state and zip code. You will then be directed to your own Representative’s Website where you simply fill out a short form using your own message or you can copy and paste the sample message below.
Go to your Representative’s Website and send a message.

SAMPLE MESSAGE:

Dear Congressman,

I hope you will co-sponsor H. Res. 758 calling for accountability from the Palestinians. The PLO Charter (Constitution) calls for incitement to violence and the destruction of Israel and its people. By co-sponsoring this resolution, you will make a statement that will express the opinion of millions of Americans against submitting to wanton calls in the Palestinian Constitution for the eradication of the state of Israel. This demand particularly applies to the upcoming Annapolis Summit that will ask for millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to go to the Palestinians and promises them statehood, while at the same time they continue to profess their underlying “death wish” for the state of Israel.

Rep. Blunt said, “As long as Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah Party continue to promote the wholesale destruction of Israel, there can be no possibility for peace – whether in our time, or any other.”

As long as the Palestinian Constitution remains in effect in its current form, it is preposterous to assume that the Palestinians have any intention for peaceful coexistence.

Respectfully,

CAJLCC110607 What we can do to save Judea and Samaria, by Nadia Matar.

CAJL Conference of Authentic Jewish Leadership
CC Calling Campaign
November 6, 2007

The following was sent out by Nadia Mater, forefront activist, leader of Women in Green in Israel.

Dear Friends,

1) Yesterday, Monday evening, a group of us went to a very last-minute demonstration to give support to the 30 youth still in jail after they had been arrested the day before (Sunday) by the police for the "crime" of settling the Land of Israel. As you may recall, this past holiday of Sukkot, the Land of Israel Faithful, Youth for Eretz Israel, Women in Green and others have put up five new communities in Judea and Samaria. Three of the five communities lasted a day or two before the authorities brought them down. Weekly activities continue to take place on those three hills until we will be able to return and settle them with families, please G-d, in the near future.

But two out of the five communities have held strong since Sukkot, with families and youth living there. One community is "Harchivi" next to Elon Moreh and the other is "Shvut Ami" next to Kedumim. More than once, the authorities have sent troops to Shvut Ami to bring down the residents, but they have always immediately returned. On Sunday, the troops came once again and this time were very brutal, arresting over 40 youth and confiscating their cameras. The youth spent the night in jail and some thirty of them are still incarcerated in the Ariel police lockup. Last night close to a 100 people came to the Ariel police station to show our support to those wonderful idealistic youth who understand that now, more than ever, we must fight for every inch of this land. Their friends who have not been arrested have already returned to Shvut Ami to rebuild the place.

More details can be found by clicking on the Arutz 7 newsreport about it in English:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/124139

We strongly suggest you also click on the Hebrew website, where you will find a videoclip of Shvut Ami and of what happened in court yesterday: http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/168213

There is no doubt that at this time, when the Olmert government wants to give away large parts of the land to the Arab enemy, the authorities are very bothered by activities that express our eternal link to the Land of Israel. We expect there to be many more actions by the police in the coming weeks against the Jews living in Judea and Samaria.

THERE IS SOMETHING YOU CAN DO TO HELP:

Women in Green call upon all of you to have a campaign of protest phone calls to your nearby Israeli Embassy and to your Congressmen. When we in Israel protest the government's crushing of Jewish civil rights, it does not bother Olmert one bit. But when lovers of Israel abroad, Jews and non-Jews alike, bombard the embassies with masses of protest calls and faxes, then they do take notice.

Below are the numbers of the Israeli Embassy in Washington. Keep their numbers for you will need them in the coming weeks and do not stop calling them whether it is to protest the arrest of tens of minors who have done nothing wrong except settling the Land of Israel ,or whether you simply want to tell them: I oppose the creation of a Palestinian State in Israel's Biblical Heartland.

Embassy of Israel in Washington D.C.
Tel 202-364-5500
Fax 202-364-5527
For finding the consulate closest to you please click on:
http://israelemb.org/israeli-consulate-in-usa.htm

For finding your congressmen please go to the following website: http://www.house.gov/writerep/


2) Wednesday mornings - Women in Green mornings

Starting this coming Wednesday, November 7th, Women in Green will hold weekly activities to support the Land of Israel.

This Wednesday we will go to Hebron and show support to our heroic brothers there. We will meet at 10:15am at the Gush Etzion intersection and drive with our cars to Hevron. Approximate return to Jerusalem: 2:00pm.


3) SUNDAY, November 11th: The State of Israel vs Nadia Matar in the Jonathan Bassi case.

As you may recall, Women in Green co-chair Nadia Matar was accused of "insulting a public official" after having written an open letter to Jonathan Bassi, head of the Sela committee before the expulsion from Gush Katif. Judge David Mintz, in the Shalom Court, dismissed the case saying that Nadia was unfairly being accused, when so many leftists had said things that were much worse, and were not put to trial. The State of Israel appealed Mintz's decision and won.

The trial is starting all over again in the Shalom Court, once again in front of Judge David Mintz.
The public is invited to come and protest this outrage.

When? Sunday, November 11th at 8:30pm
Where? Jerusalem, the Shalom Court, in front of Judge David Mintz.

Because there are often last minute changes we suggest you check your email to make sure we did not post any cancellation or change of date.


4) A call for Action by www.israelunitycoalition.org - Call your Congressmen


URGENT INFORMATION REGARDING A NEW HOUSE RESOLUTION: H.Res.758

This resolution can impact the outcome of the upcoming Annapolis Summit by calling for Palestinian accountability.

Last week, House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) introduced H.Res.758 jointly with Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV). This resolution calls on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, also chairman of his Fatah Party, to officially renounce ten articles in the Fatah Constitution that call for Israel’s destruction and acts of terrorism against its people.

The Fatah Constitution opposes any political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and it labels Zionism as racism. Other examples of the offensive language among the ten separate articles that explicitly seek to incite violence against the state of Israel include the following:

Article 17
(“armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine”)

Article 19
(“the struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished”)

Article 22
(“opposing any political solution offered as an alternative to demolishing the Zionist occupation of Palestine”)

Rep. Blunt released the following statement:

“There can be no reasonable expectation of a broad-based, long-term reconciliation between the Israelis and Palestinians while one side’s constituting document calls for the complete destruction of the other. I believe it’s absolutely critical that the insidious nature of the Palestinian constitution be brought to light ­ and that those with a genuine interest in working toward peace insist its most unconstructive provisions be abrogated from the text.

“It goes without saying that a basic condition of negotiating with someone is recognizing their right to exist ­ and once that’s granted, the right to live without fear of terrorism. But, at least according to the ruling party's constitution, even these fundamental concessions continue to be rejected by the Palestinian leadership.

“The resolution I’ve offered with Rep. Shelley Berkley builds on the Arafat Accountability Act of 2002, which sought to bring action against former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat as long as he continued to sanction acts of terrorism against Israel. This resolution takes a different approach, but the message remains the same: As long as Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah Party continue to promote the wholesale destruction of Israel, there can be no possibility for peace ­ whether in our time, or any other.”

It will be easy for you to contact your representative and ask him/her to support H.Res.758. To send the message, simply click the link below. You will be asked to enter your state and zip code. You will then be directed to your own Representative’s Website where you simply fill out a short form using your own message or you can copy and paste the sample message below.
< http://www.house.gov/writerep/>Go to your Representative’s Website and send a message.

SAMPLE MESSAGE:

Dear Congressman,

I hope you will co-sponsor H. Res. 758 calling for accountability from the Palestinians. The PLO Charter (Constitution) calls for incitement to violence and the destruction of Israel and its people. By co-sponsoring this resolution, you will make a statement that will express the opinion of millions of Americans against submitting to wanton calls in the Palestinian Constitution for the eradication of the state of Israel. This demand particularly applies to the upcoming Annapolis Summit that will ask for millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to go to the Palestinians and promises them statehood, while at the same time they continue to profess their underlying “death wish” for the state of Israel.

Rep. Blunt said, “As long as Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah Party continue to promote the wholesale destruction of Israel, there can be no possibility for peace ­ whether in our time, or any other.”

As long as the Palestinian Constitution remains in effect in its current form, it is preposterous to assume that the Palestinians have any intention for peaceful coexistence.

Respectfully,

(Insert your name) _______________________
<http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/pdf/hres758.pdf> View the full Resolution


With Love of Israel,

Ruth and Nadia Matar

Purely Right!

One on One: Purely Right
Ruthie Blum
THE JERUSALEM POST - November 1, 2007

'The fact is that everyone has a responsibility to prevent someone else from committing suicide," says Herb Zweibon, chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI), a conservative, New York City-based organization promoting "peace through strength," rather than "land for peace."

This, according to Zweibon, is what the Bush administration should be doing - not allowing Israel to put itself at existential risk by withdrawing from territory that is not only crucial militarily, but central to its "covenant." Pretty heavy stuff, coming from someone who hails from the United States, and who is neither Orthodox nor claims to be a "Jew first."

For, while Zweibon, who resides two months of every year in Herzliya, made his living in the real estate business, his life has been devoted to a different sort of passion for property - that of the right of the Jewish people to the Holy Land. And, if his uncompromising posture vis-a-vis political deal-making is anything to go by, he's probably not someone you'd want to come up against when buying a house. So hard a bargainer is he, in fact, that he has kept the running of his non-profit group - established in the early 1970s - as close to his chest as his heart. Or, more to the point, his mouth.

"Expanding would require a lot of money," explains Zweibon, whose demeanor is as affable as his doomsaying is direct. "Then we'd have to be beholden to the people who gave it to us, and I don't want to be told what to say."

Indeed, anyone familiar with AFSI's monthly publication, appropriately named Outpost, can attest to its pull-no-punches polemics. Edited by founder Rael Jean Isaac, the 12-page newsletter - in which Zweibon and associate Ruth King, among other hawkish contributors, such as former Knesset member Elyakim Ha'etzni, have regular columns - Outpost is distributed free to Congress, pundits and other opinion-makers. (It is now in its 37th year, with a circulation of around 6,000, and currently being reproduced in Canada.)

Like Zweibon and the like-minded evangelical Christians with whom AFSI has cultivated close relations, his organization's rhetorical vehicle is anything but apologetic when it comes to its relentless support of "the state and the land of Israel."

This undying loyalty, as Zweibon hastens to point out, is "not a question of supporting the government; it's a question of supporting the integrity of the land, because it is essential. And it makes little difference to us whether the government of the United States or the government of Israel believe that they can somehow compromise with the Muslim community. This just will not happen."

Are you a Jew first, or an American first?
I'm an American Jew; I find it very difficult to separate the two. I have loyalty to the United States - I served in the army in World War II - and I have been heavily involved in Jewish affairs almost all my life, at least for the last 40 years of it.

Is that why AFSI doesn't have the word "Jewish" in its title?
That's correct. Though most of our membership is Jewish, we do have non-Jews. As a matter of fact, AFSI reached out to Christian groups as early as 1984. We even invited the Reverend Jerry Falwell to speak at our conference. Whereupon, many of our members asked me, "Are you off the rail?" [he smiles] "Have you lost your marbles?"

Why did they respond that way?
They thought that the Christians either weren't friendly, or that their motivations were not appropriate to a group that was mainly Jewish and concerned about Israel. But we knew that was not so.

You mean motivations like conversion?
Yes, conversion, and the bringing on of the messiah. When Falwell finished his presentation, and we opened the floor to questions, somebody asked him: "Isn't it true that you want all of us to make aliya so that the messiah can come?"

His answer was: "My dear friend, if you think the good lord is going to wait for you [Jews] to go to Israel in order to decide when [the messiah is coming], you have another thing coming."

Anyway, this relationship between us has gone on for a long time, and I believe that it's borne fruit. We have made many, many friends in that community, and they have been very helpful politically in regard to Israel's needs.

On the one hand, both AFSI and the evangelical Christians maintain that Israel's well-being is in the political interest of the United States. On the other, you both talk about the Jews' biblical right to the Holy Land. Which is it?
I always say to people who are interested in AFSI that it makes little difference how one comes to support us or the State of Israel. Is it scripture? Fine. Is it connected to Israel's strategic requirements? Good. Is it a matter of international law and the rights of the Jewish people to this land? Welcome. Any and all of these are appropriate for involvement in supporting the state and integrity of the land of Israel, which is primary to AFSI.

Doesn't your ideological purism - which seems like the opposite of realpolitik - cause you political problems? After all, by believing in the integrity of the land of Israel because of the Jews' right to all of it, you necessarily oppose any deal that involves relinquishing any of the land.
I'm not so sure [it's the opposite of realpolitik]. There are many people in Israel who, as a result of the political situation, agree that the integrity of the land is essential. When leaders of the country talk about Judea and Samaria as being dispensable, you have a serious problem - which goes back to two matters. One is security. We know that the area of Judea and Samaria - what some call the West Bank - is hill country, overlooking the Coastal Plain. There are points along the Coastal Plain that are as narrow as 9-12 miles - a very dangerous situation, when you have a potential enemy up high, and you're down low. Following Israel's recovering of the land in 1967, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff did a report in which they laid out certain parameters, among them retention of the mountain ridge running north to south in Judea and Samaria. There were other things that they suggested be retained, as well. Sharm e-Sheikh, for example. The Golan, certainly. So, military experts saw the situation in this part of the world, and after reflecting on it, this was their recommendation. Such things don't change, particularly in the Middle East, where the enemy is very persistent and determined.

That is one aspect. The other is the recognition by the Western world that the Jews had a claim to the land of Israel, based on scripture. And what are the places on which they base that recognition? The hills of Judea and Samaria. Those are the places that are part of the covenant, if you will.

We are aware of Christian elements who espouse replacement theology. But those who support us and understand the rights and needs of the Jewish people in the land of Israel hold fast. I'm thinking right now of a group called CUFI - Christians United for Israel - established by Pastor John Hagee. I must admit, I was somewhat nervous about Hagee's statements early on, because he said [his group] would support the government of Israel no matter what it did. I sent him a letter asking him how he can reconcile this with scripture, and told him that making nice with the government of Israel - or playing kissy with AIPAC - doesn't help us. I must say, the statements that emerged in the last CUFI convention in Houston were first class, though I don't take any credit for influencing Hagee.

If the head of a left-wing organization had written such a letter about not supporting the government of Israel at all costs, would you not view it as disloyal? I remember right-wingers calling people who engaged in such practices traitors.
As I said before, it's not a question of supporting the government; it's a question of supporting the integrity of the land, because it is essential. And it makes little difference to us whether the government of the United States or the government of Israel believe that they can somehow compromise with the Muslim community. This just will not happen.

Some would argue that the reason former prime minister Ariel Sharon was able to carry out disengagement was that a majority of the population was persuaded that demography was not in Israel's favor. Even a number of conservatives said - albeit sadly - that the settlement movement and mass aliya had both failed. In other words, if Jews like yourself had come here in droves and settled the land whose integrity is of such concern to you, Israel wouldn't be in the situation it is today.
Well, I'm not sure this analysis is right, but it has no bearing on the problem of security and Jewish rights. The fact that the electorate in Israel is confused doesn't surprise me at all. The results of elections in this country are beyond understanding, as is the fact that Kadima came away with 29 seats when it's not really a party, but rather a collection of opportunists. Now the people are apparently prepared for another kind of change - one that in my book is not so dramatic.

You mean Bibi Netanyahu?
I mean Bibi Netanyahu.

Why is that not such a dramatic change?
Well [he sighs], Bibi, whom I know and admire, has a problem that most Israeli politicians have, particularly those who spent a lot of time in the United States. I call it Washingtonitis. They are so impressed with the power of the United States - with the strength and breadth of the nation - that they believe Israel is totally dependent.

Isn't it?
No, I don't think it is.

Not even economically?
I wonder.

Not militarily?
Militarily, the resupply in a conflict, perhaps. But then, who did the resupplying? When I'm asked who the best president whoever dealt with the needs of the State of Israel was, I say Richard Nixon. At a very crucial moment, it was Nixon who overrode the advice of people like Henry Kissinger. All the others - going all the way back to the Rogers plan and since then - say, "Give up the land, give up the land."

So you have to ask yourself: Do they really understand the nature of global conflict that Norman Podhoretz has named World War IV?

You fought in World War II. Did the American government understand what dire danger the Jews were in then?
I don't think they cared. The proof is that they did relatively nothing to save the Jews. So, the reality is that we must learn to depend on ourselves, and be strong and stay strong for a long period. Otherwise, all of Israel's great accomplishments could disappear in a flash. Even the US, had it not maintained its strength, would have lost to the Soviet Union. Today, the influence of radical Islam - in Europe especially, but in the US as well - threatens to undermine that strength. Democracy is at risk when you provide the ability for a group to take control of a political situation. Can it happen in the US? I don't think so. But, I don't know whether the president truly understands the nature of the problem.

President George Bush doesn't understand the nature of the problem?
Yes, well, the Bush Doctrine is a bit foolish. Democracy in the Middle East? Where has it ever existed?

Natan Sharansky argues that democracies emerged where it had been thought impossible.
In Germany and Japan?

Yes, and the Soviet Union.
There was a prelude to the forming of democracy in Germany and Japan, and I'm not sure that in the Soviet Union - or what's left of the Soviet Union - is exactly going forward with democracy. Germany and Japan were defeated. We occupied and stayed there for decades.

Wasn't that what Bush had in mind for Iraq?
I don't think so, but even if it was, I don't think that democracy - which is antithetical to [radical] Islam - can survive in Iraq. When the president calls Islam a "religion of peace," come on, I mean, doesn't he understand? And then when he further says that there can be two states in this little piece of land called Israel?

In fairness to Bush, Sharon and his adviser, Dov Weisglass - and subsequently Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni - all assured him that a two-state solution was a viable option. Is Bush supposed to be more Catholic than the pope?
Yes, definitely. When he was governor of Texas, Bush was taken by the very same Sharon on a [helicopter] tour over Judea and Samaria, landing in the Golan Heights. He got a full explanation of Israel's military requirements, and understood them full well. For anybody today to say that you can put a potentially dangerous entity on the hills of Judea and Samaria - don't tell me that it is because of Sharon, Weisglass or anybody else. The fact is that everyone has a responsibility to prevent someone else from committing suicide. If you're standing on the precipice, it is my duty to pull you back.

Aren't your expectations too high? After all, the president, however well-informed or well-intentioned, is a politician who has to maneuver his own political system.
I don't believe for a minute that there is any political advantage to a lame duck president creating [the illusion of] peace in the Middle East. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Maybe it's a smoke screen to divert attention from his intention to bomb Iran.
What does one have to do with the other? If he believes that Israel has to pay the price for bringing other Arab nations to the American side when and if they decide to act in Iran, well, which of these countries is prepared to help? Saudi Arabia, armed to the teeth, never fired a shot at anybody. The Syrians? I don't think so. Who? Who will it be? There is nobody there. You can provide all the goodies you like to the Arab countries; they will not join us in an attack on Iran, even if it is in their interest.

Why does it matter whether they join such an attack?
It matters because we seem to be offering up Israel's well-being and safety in the interest of bringing together Muslim nations in the conflict with Iran.

Are you saying that the United States doesn't really view Israel as crucial to its interests in the Middle East?
I find it difficult to believe that putting a potential enemy in the high ground of the State of Israel is in any way indicative of a country concerned about Israel's well-being.

But the Palestinians are located in the "high ground" of Judea and Samaria anyway; and the weapons and terrorist cells are already in Gaza. Perhaps the attempt at coming to an arrangement is a way of minimizing the danger that already exists.
You have to make a distinction between Gaza and Judea and Samaria, because at this moment, the IDF is still in Judea and Samaria. And since the disengagement from Gaza, missiles have been flying regularly. Every terror group in the world now exists there, which wasn't the case before disengagement. So, all the ideas of Sharon and everybody else in favor of "separation" from the Arabs - well, we haven't separated from anybody. On the contrary, we've given them a solid base pointed at the heart of Israel, and they are having a grand old time. Meanwhile, there is the two-headed snake behind it all - Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism on the one hand, and Iran's nuclear ambitions on the other - that has to be defeated.

If this "two-headed snake" is at the root of the global conflict, what difference do the Palestinians really make? If radical Islam is defeated, doesn't the rest follow? Why are we so focused on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? Aren't the Palestinians merely pawns in the greater clash?
Yes, absolutely. They are part of the worldwide conflict. And as part of it, they mean us no good.

Not just Hamas.
No, not just Hamas. All the Arab residents of the land of Israel.

What about Jerusalem? Do you believe it's about to be divided?
[He laughs uncomfortably, and shifts in his seat.] Well, I don't believe it's going to happen, but when you put something on the table, it's in play. The danger is that Jerusalem is now in play. When Tzipi [Livni] says we've got to have a Palestinian state, where is she coming from?

Condi-land, one supposes.
Now, [US Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice is another story, because so far she has not been successful at anything. Condi was supposed to be an expert in Soviet relations. She can supposedly speak Russian. Nu? So, what's happened? We're in worse shape today vis-a-vis [Russian President Vladimir] Putin than before. She hasn't been effective in almost any of the things she's tried to do, and it reflects on what she's trying to do here. And when you're dealing with the weakest element that ever existed in the State of Israel, you can put the pressure on.

Look at it for a moment. I believe that a two-state solution is an existential threat. And who are the people presenting this plan? A prime minister with the lowest rating of any prime minister in the history of the state; Abu Mazen [Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas], who left Gaza, barely able to get his trousers on; and a president of the United States who is a lame duck under pressure.

These three people - who really have no clout - are trying to decide the fate of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. This is a grave situation.