September 30, 2009

We did not take a foreign land

We did not take a foreign land, nor the property of strangers to us, but rather the Land of our forefathers which had been conquered in the past by enemies with no justice. And we, when we had the opportunity, repossessed the Land of our forefathers."

(Simeon Hasmonian's letter to Antiochus in Damascus)

September 25, 2009

Joseph’s Era Coins Found in Egypt

An Egyptian paper claims that archaeologists have discovered ancient Egyptian coins bearing the name and image of the Biblical Joseph.
The report in Al-Ahram boasts that the find backs up the Koran’s claim that coins were used in Egypt during Joseph’s period. Joseph, son of the Patriarch Jacob, died around 1450 B.C.E., according to Jewish sources.
Excerpts from the Al-Ahram report, as translated by Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI):
"In an unprecedented find, a group of Egyptian researchers and archeologists has discovered a cache of coins from the time of the Pharaohs. Its importance lies in the fact that it provides decisive scientific evidence disproving the claim by some historians that the ancient Egyptians were unfamiliar with coins and conducted their trade through barter.
"The researchers discovered the coins when they sifted through thousands of small archeological artifacts stored in [the vaults of] the Museum of Egypt. [Initially] they took them for charms, but a thorough examination revealed that the coins bore the year in which they were minted and their value, or effigies of the pharaohs [who ruled] at the time of their minting. Some of the coins are from the time when Joseph lived in Egypt, and bear his name and portrait.

"There used to be a misconception that trade [in Ancient Egypt] was conducted through barter, and that Egyptian wheat, for example, was traded for other goods. But surprisingly, Koranic verses indicate clearly that coins were used in Egypt in the time of Joseph...
"Research team head Dr. Sa'id Muhammad Thabet said that during his archeological research on the Prophet Joseph, he had discovered in the vaults of the [Egyptian] Antiquities Authority and of the National Museum many charms from various eras before and after the period of Joseph, including one that bore his effigy as the minister of the treasury in the Egyptian pharaoh's court…
"Studies by Dr. Thabet's team have revealed that what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin. Several [facts led them to this conclusion]: first, [the fact that] many such coins have been found at various [archeological sites], and also [the fact that] they are round or oval in shape, and have two faces: one with an inscription, called the inscribed face, and one with an image, called the engraved face - just like the coins we use today.
"The archeological finding is also based on the fact that the inscribed face bore the name of Egypt, a date, and a value, while the engraved face bore the name and image of one of the ancient Egyptian pharaohs or gods, or else a symbol connected with these. Another telling fact is that the coins come in different sizes and are made of different materials, including ivory, precious stones, copper, silver, gold, etc."

PM Netanyahu's remarks at the U.N. General Assembly




BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: The United Nations recognized the rights of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the prime minister of Israel, the Jewish state. And I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II, after the horrors of the holocaust. It was charged with preventing the re-occurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that mission, nothing has impeded it more, than the systematic assault on the truth.

Yesterday, the president of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he, again, claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20th, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided to exterminate my people. They left detailed meetings -- or minutes of that meeting, and these minutes have been preserved for posterity by successive German governments.

Here is a copy of the minutes of the meeting of senior Nazi officials instructing the Nazi government exactly how to carry out the extermination of the Jewish people. Is this protocol a lie? Is the German government, all German governments, lying?

The day before I was Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz Buchenwald concentration camp. These plans -- these plans of the Auschwitz Buchenwald concentration plans, I now hold in my hand. They contain a signature by Heinrich Himmler, Hitler's deputy himself. Are these plans of the Auschwitz Buchenwald concentration camp, where one million Jews were murdered, are they a lie, too?

This June, President Obama visited another concentration camp, one of many. The Buchenwald Concentration Camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie, too?

One-third of all Jews perished in the great conflagration of the Holocaust. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and his three brothers and all the aunts and uncles and cousins, all murdered by the Nazis.

Is this a lie?

Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come and to those who left in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity, and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this holocaust denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere, have you no shame? Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies the murder of 6 million Jews? While promising to wipe out the state of Israel, the state of the Jews? What a disgrace. What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations.

Now, perhaps - perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime, perhaps they threaten only the Jews. Well, if you think that, you're wrong - dead wrong. History has shown us time and time again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many, many others, for this Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst on to the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries.

In the past 30 years, this fanaticism has swept across the globe with a murderous violence that knows no bounds and with a cold-blooded impartiality in the choice of its victims. It has callously slaughtered Muslims and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherence of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they impose a backward, regimented society where women, minorities, gays, or anyone else deemed not to be a true believer, is brutally subjugated.

The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st Century against the 9th Century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.

Now, the primitivism of the 9th Century are to be no match for the progress of the 21st Century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future, and our future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope, because the pace of progress is growing, and it is growing exponentially.

It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the Internet. What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code, we will cure the incurable, we will lengthen our lives, we will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuel and, yes, we will clean up the planet.

I'm proud that my country, Israel, is at the forefront of many of these advances, in science and technology, in medicine and biology, in agriculture and water, in energy and the environment. These innovations, in my country and many of your countries, offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise. But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom, they will prevail only after a horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind.

This is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fundamentalism and the weapons of mass destruction. The most urgent challenge facing this body today is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the members of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom? Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and then gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the sidewalks, on the street, choking on their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsor and practitioner of terrorism? Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do thousands of people who have been protesting and demonstrating outside this hall all of this week. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

Well, ladies and gentlemen, the jury's still out on the United Nations. And recent signs - recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here in the United Nations have condemned their victims.

This is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating terrorists with those they targeted. For eight long years Hamas fired rockets - fired those rockets from Gaza on nearby Israeli citizens - and citizens, thousands of missiles, mortars, hurling down from the sky on schools, on homes, shopping centers, bus stops - Years after - year after year as these missiles were deliberately fired on our civilians, not a single - not one UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing, absolutely nothing, from the UN Human Rights Council - a misnamed institution if there ever was one.

In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. It was very painful. We dismantled 21 settlements, really, bedroom communities, and farms. We uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We just yanked them out from their homes. We did this because many in Israel believed that this would get peace.

Well, we didn't get peace. Instead, we got an Iranian-backed terror base 50 miles from Tel Aviv. But life in the Israeli towns and cities immediately next to Gaza became nothing less than a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket launchers and the rocket attacks not only continued after we left, they actually increased dramatically. They increased tenfold. And, again, the UN was silent - absolutely silent.

Well, finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was forced to respond - but how should we have responded? Well, there's only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. This happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the Allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. I'm not passing judgment. I'm stating a fact, a fact that is the product of the decision of great and honorable men - the leaders of Britain and the United States, fighting an evil force in World War II. It is also a fact that Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime, of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians, Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes directed against the rocket launchers themselves. Now, mind you, that was no easy task because the terrorists were fighting missiles - firing their missiles from homes and from schools. They were using mosques as weapons depots, as missile caches, and they were ferreting explosives in ambulances.

Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas. We dropped countless flyers - they cannot be counted, there were so many, obviously - countless flyers over their homes. We sent thousands and thousands of text messages to the Palestinian residents. We made thousands and thousands of cellular phone calls, urging them to vacate, to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way, yet faced with an absolutely clear-cut case of aggressor and victim, who do you think the United Nations Human Rights Council decided to condemn? Israel.

A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn, and quartered and given an unfair trial to boot. By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.

Now, delegates of the United Nations, and the governments whom you represent, you have a decision to make. Will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism, and when an automatic majority could be mustered to declare that the earth is flat.

If you had to choose a date when the United Nations began its descent, almost a freefall, and lost the respect of many thoughtful people in the international community, it was that decision in 1975 to equate Zionism with racism.

Now this body has a choice to make. If it does not reject this biased report, it would vitiate itself, it would begin - or re-begin the process of vitiating itself from its own relevance and importance. But it would do something else. It would send a message to the terrorists everywhere saying terrorism pays. All you have to do is launch your attacks from densely populated areas, and you will win immunity.

And then a third thing, in condemning Israel this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Let me explain why. When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that even if they don't stop, at the very least Israel would have made this gesture - extraordinary gesture - for peace. But it would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self defense if peace failed. What legitimacy? What self-defense? The same U.N. that cheered Israel as we left Gaza, the same U.N. that promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us, my people, my country, of being war criminals. And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense? For acting in a way that any country would act with a restraint unmatched by many.

What a travesty. Ladies and gentlemen, Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report provides a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel? Or will you stand with the terrorists? We must know the answer to that question now. Now, not later.

Because if Israel is again asked to take more risk for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace. And make no mistake about it, all of Israel wants peace. Anytime an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein.

And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government and my people will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace.

In 1947 this body voted to establish two states for two peoples, a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted this resolution. The Arabs rejected it and invaded the embryonic Jewish state with the hopes of annihilating it. We asked the Palestinians to finally do what they refused to do for 62 years, say yes to a Jewish state. As simple, as clear, as elementary as that. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation-state of the Jewish people.

The Jewish people are not foreign conquerers in the land of Israel. It is the land of our forefathers. Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great biblical vision of peace: Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more. These words were spoken by the great Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem.

We are not strangers to this land. This is our homeland. But as deeply connected as we are to our homeland, we also recognize that the Palestinians also live there. And they want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, living in prosperity, living in dignity.


NETANYAHU: Peace, prosperity and dignity require one other element. We must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves, except a handful of powers that could endanger Israel, and this is why the Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. I say effectively because we don't want another Gaza or another south Lebanon, another Iranian-backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.

We want peace. And I believe that with good will and with hard work, such a peace can be achieved. But it requires, from all of us, to roll back the forces of terror led by Iran that seek to destroy peace, that seek to eliminate Israel and to overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or to accommodate them.

Over 70 years ago, Winston Churchill amended what he called -- he called it the confirmed unteachability of mankind. And by that, he meant the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep and to slumber until danger nearly overtakes them. Churchill bemoaned what he called -- I'm reading -- the want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong.

Ladies and gentlemen, I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the unteachability of mankind is for once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history, that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future, and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.


Thank you very much.


September 24, 2009

We Are In Disarray...Or Are We?


I am writing to you from the occupied territory of Upstate NY.

As we approach the day of Atonement, my mind wanders from personal Tsuvah to the fate of Yisrael. I will do my best on Tsuvah, but perhaps the need for Tshuvah is greatest in Israel?

Israel was deemed to be in Jewish hands as long as the HaShems Torah is followed.
It appears that what we have now is a hybrid sort of existence for the Jews of Yisrael. We live there and yet did not follow this:

Deut. 20:16-18

But from the cities of these peoples that HaShem, your G-d, gives you as an inheritance, you shall not allow any person to live. Rather you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite, the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite, as HaShem, your G-d has commanded you, so that they will not teach you to act according to all their abominations that they performed for their deities, so that you will sin to HaShem, your G-d.

You shall not allow any person to live.
It is not to late to remove the Arabs from Yisrael. Just to begin the program will count as Tshuvah. In this day and age Yisrael can transport and pay them to leave.
Start by making it a rule that all MK's need to be Jewish period.
Then start removing them, neighborhood by neighborhood. At the same time shut off Yisrael to all more Arabs allowed in to "work" etc.
No more Xtian's allowed to do more than visit. Overrun the Temple Mount and remove all non-JEWS ASAP! Notify Egypt that the Gaza East border will be shut until Yisrael begins to retake Gaza and expel the squatters.

there are many who want to do it, there are many more who will be happy to go along with it...knowing it will make them safer.

There are of course many Leftist Secular Jews that want Yisrael to be a Western country and it is well past time for them to find a Secular Country...

Moshe Feiglin has it right!

Just what Manhigut Yehudit has been saying all along

Israel National News: Judaism Attracts Modern Israeli Youth

Tishrei 4, 5770, 22 September 09 05:56
by Hillel Fendel

( A survey of nearly 2,900 Jewish youths from around the country finds that 85% feel it is important to maintain religion and tradition.

The poll was carried out by TGI (Target Group Index) Israel, of the global TGI network of single-source market research surveys, on 2,897 young Israelis between the ages of 18 and 35. It was commissioned by L'Omek HaTodaah (To the Depth of Awareness), a public relations firm targeting youth.
The survey turned up some surprising results, especially for those who are disappointed by what appears to be an increasingly secular society. Over 71% said they plan to fast on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), and 73% define "religious faith" as something "very important."
In addition, 84.3% say it's important to maintain religion and tradition, while nearly 60% make sure to separate meat and dairy products. Kissing the mezuzah - Torah passages affixed to the doorpost - is more popular than might be assumed; 38.5% practice this custom.
Three out of every seven - 43% - say they feel more Jewish than Israeli, and 40.4% say that bars, theaters, and the like should be closed on the Sabbath.

Ziv Poplevsky, Chairman of L'Omek HaTodaah, explained, "Despite the permissiveness and adventurousness of Israeli youth, it appears that many of them believe that there is a Jewish tradition that must be maintained and accepted. It's part of a recent trend that we call ‘pro-religion.' We see many performers, from Madonna to Evyatar Banai, who pull the crowds in this direction."

Tel Aviv's Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau attributes more significance to the findings. "I sense an increasing interest in the treasures of Judaism on the part of youth that did not grow up in the lap of Torah. Instead of grazing in foreign pastures in India, Nepal and Latin America, many of the youth are finding their way to the Jewish bookshelf and tradition."

Rabbi David Stav of the Tzohar Rabbis Organization, and rabbi of the city of Shoham, said, "We all see that there is a thirst for Judaism among the public. When I gave a talk to the public high school in Shoham, 90% of the students raised their hands when I asked who would fast on Yom Kippur - and when I asked if their parents would fast as well, far fewer hands were raised."

"There might be many reasons for this awakening," said Rabbi Stav, "including disappointment in the State institutions, disillusionment from the idols of silver and gold, or maybe even because the idols themselves returned to Judaism. But in the end there is one very simple root cause: G-d's promise that the soul will not go to waste, and will always try to awaken and rouse sparks among each of us. We are happy to be in this generation that sees this happen."

Analysis: Netanyahu, Obama, Abu Mazen Summit: By Moshe Feiglin

5 Tishrei, 5770
Sept. 23, '09

What does Abu Mazen want?
Abu Mazen, (who holds a Soviet doctorate for his Holocaust denial thesis)          wants to destroy Israel - just like every other Jew-hater in the world.          Like every reasonable Moslem Arab who lives in Dar el Islam (a.k.a. the          Middle East) that is polluted by the Zionist entity, Abu Mazen would also          be pleased to carry on with the murders, rapes and mutilations that we all          remember from the Arab riots of 1929, 1936, Israel's War of Independence          - and from every opportunity that the Arabs in the Land of Israel have had          to express their unique talents.

But in the meantime, Abu Mazen's immediate goal is to perpetuate the current          situation. At the present, he needs Israel to prevent the Hamas from taking          over Ramallah and throwing him off a local rooftop. He also has to prevent          the establishment of a Palestinian state - at any price. Why? Because in          addition to all the honor and authority that he enjoys even now as "head          of state", he would actually have to take responsibility for the Arabs of          Judea and Samaria. Abu Mazen is not a pushover. He knows that as soon as          there is "peace" he will interest no one. What will he do then? Take care          of the sewage problem in Bir Zait?

Sound confusing? Just wait for the rest. For now, just remember that Abu          Mazen needs to talk peace and to present Israel as intransigent.

What does Obama want?

The places in which Obama grew up and was educated, the mentors and events          that, as per his own testimony, shaped his personality and world view -          do not leave room for sweet speculation. Obama is a dangerously radical          leftist who willingly subjugates himself to the most radical Islam.

Obama wants to appease all the dictators of the world - first and foremost,          of the Moslem world - at Israel's expense. Anti-Semitism has always been          subtly present in American governments. But the common values shared by          the US and Israel had always afforded the two countries a basis for cooperation.          Obama is past all that. As opposed to the previous US presidents of this          generation, Obama sees no justification for Israel's very existence.

In the meantime, what is important to Obama is to talk peace and to appease          the Arabs by presenting Israel as intransigent.

What does Netanyahu want?
This is the hardest question. The analysts in Israel can't seem to decide          if Netanyahu would like to retreat but cannot, or if he can retreat but          does not want to. As we are not mind-readers, we will try to get to the          root of the matter.

What Netanyahu wants is what the State of Israel has wanted since it was          established and even before that. A state wants to be normal, a country          like any other country, a nation like any other nation. To accomplish that,          Netanyahu needs to keep up normal relations with the US and the western          world. The paradox is that the more that Israel surrenders its strategic          and tangible assets (its land, settlements, army checkpoints) as well as          its principles (recognition of our very right to a Jewish state) the more          that the nations distance themselves from her. The more that we surrender          our unique identity and destiny, the more that we insist that we seek only          peace - the more that we become an international pariah.

But Netanyahu has nowhere to run. The concepts of holiness, of Israel's          uniqueness and of Jewish rectification of the world are completely foreign          to him. All that he can do is to continue to play the peace game and to          hedge his bets that Abu Mazen will back down first.

In summary:
Abu Mazen wants to perpetuate the current situation.
Obama wants to appease Islam.
Netanyahu wants the US and the West to stop pressuring Israel.

The only one of the three who will get exactly what he wants is, of course,          Abu Mazen.

Jewish Justice or no Justice: By Moshe Feiglin

Translated from Makor Rishon

"Today the world is being born, today all the creations of all the worlds stand in judgment." "And it will be determined for the countries, which for the sword and which for peace." (Rosh Hashanah liturgy)

As we enter the gates of our synagogues this Rosh Hashanah, it looks like we will also be entering the gates of the International Court in The Hague. This is the inevitable destination of a nation that insists on detaching its Judaism from its national life. If we are not interested in Jewish justice in Jerusalem, we will be treated to Western, Christian justice in Spain, England or The Hague.

When a Swedish newspaper reported that Israel's soldiers slaughtered "Palestinians" so that they could sell their organs, we didn't believe that anybody would take the bizarre story seriously. But it is actually making quite a few waves. Soon an international investigative committee will be established to reveal "the truth." After all, such serious charges must be investigated thoroughly. And who, if not the judges of enlightened Europe, are more worthy to reveal the truth with clarity and complete objectivity?

Blood libels are nothing new. There is nothing more logical about selling "Palestinian" organs than about slaughtering Christian children to use their blood to bake matzahs. So how do these absurd claims become legitimate? It is not really a matter of legal fact. It is a matter of the location of the judicial body.

When a Jew is in exile and the Christians are the judicial authority, the blood libel becomes a possibility. The question is not if the Jews slaughtered Christian children to use their blood to bake matzahs. The question is if the issue is justiciable. In the Christian courts of the Middle Ages the answer was affirmative.

Likewise, in the current organ harvest story, there is no question of revealing the truth. The only question is if the judicial tribunal that we have accepted upon ourselves will decide to judge these ludicrous accusations.

Then – in the days of the blood libels, the Jews did not have the option to choose which judicial authority they would accept. They lived under the dominion of the judicial authority that considered these libels fact. But today, the Jews willingly surrendered their own judicial authority. They chose, of their own free will, to forgo their ethical sovereignty and to deposit it in the hands of the Western world and the International Court in The Hague.

"What is the problem in Azoun?" my frustrated neighbor asked me the other day, after a steady stream of rocks and firebombs has continued to emanate from this 'peaceful' Arab village. "They bring in an entire IDF division and they still can't stop the violence? Wouldn't it just be easier to cut off their electricity?" Technically, my neighbor is right. We could easily leave the reserve soldiers at home and enjoy quiet nonetheless. But the State of Israel and the IDF are fettered to the Christian judicial dominion that we have brought upon ourselves.

As the Beijing Olympics approached, I wrote that the State of Israel, as the representative of the Jewish Nation, should boycott the games. The Chinese have established concentration camps for opponents of the radically leftist regime there. Next to the concentration camps there are "medical centers" that specialize in supplying human organs by order. No lines, no problems finding the proper match, any organ can be supplied; kidneys, corneas, hearts – the organs are always fresh and plentiful. They belong to "criminals" who have been executed but who, at the last minute repented and donated their organs as an act of atonement. How noble. In reality, the organs are harvested while the victims are still alive. That is probably the best way to keep them fresh.

I claimed that Israel - the representative of the Jewish Nation, the People of the Book who herald the ethics of the prophets – must see itself as a lighthouse of morality for the world and should not lend legitimacy to the regime of horrors in China by attending the Olympic Games.

The reactions that I received were more or less: "America, England and France are not boycotting the Olympics, and you expect Israel to boycott them?" In other words, it cannot be that we bear a more fundamentally ethical insight than the Western world. Furthermore, we are so small, so who are we to boycott the Chinese giant if the US and Europe are not doing so? In other words, morality is measured in square kilometers and the size of a country's population and army.

When charges of organ harvesting by Israel's soldiers began to emerge, I thought that it was quite "measure for measure." We rejected our universal role and refused to take a stand on the Chinese organ harvesting issue, and got it right back in our own collective face.

We are the children of the King. We do not have the privilege to stand passively at the sidelines and to be "just another country." We have only two options: One is to judge the world according to Jewish justice – the ethical justice of the prophets that must be restored to Jerusalem. The second option is, right after Rosh Hashanah, to re-lock our universal responsibility safely in our synagogues and to leave Judaism strictly in the domain of religion. If that is the option we choose, we will not be judging the world according to the ethics of the prophets. The world will judge us – in the International Court in The Hague.

September 23, 2009

Goldstone Report Is a Barrier to Peace

There are many things wrong with the Goldstone report**, which accuses Israel of deliberately targeting civilians in order to punish the people of Gaza. First, its primary conclusions are entirely false as a matter of demonstrable fact. Second, it defames one of the most moral military forces in the world, along with one of the most responsive legal systems and one of the freest nations in the world when it comes to dissent. Third, it destroys the credibility of "international human rights" and proves that this honorable concept has been hijacked for political purposes directed primarily against one nation -- Israel.
But fourth, and most important, it has set back prospects of peace by making it far more difficult for Israel to withdraw from the West Bank. When Israel was considering its withdrawal from Gaza, some critics predicted that the transfer of Israeli troops out of this dangerous area would encourage terrorists to fire rockets at Israeli civilians who live in close proximity to the Gaza Strip. Those who favored the withdrawal argued that if Palestinian terrorists were to fire rockets from the unoccupied Gaza, Israel would have a perfect right to do whatever it took militarily to stop its civilians from being targeted by enemy rockets. They pointed out that every country has the right to self defense under the United Nations Charter and under the rules of international law. (I favored the withdrawal, as did many liberal supporters of Israel and believed that Israel had the military capacity to respond to any rocket attacks.)
As soon as the Israeli army left the Gaza Strip, Hamas decided to launch rocket attacks on Israeli civilian targets. The Hamas website proudly proclaimed, "The Zionist Army is afraid that the Palestinians will increase the range of the new rockets, placing the towns and villages in the [Zionist] entity in danger." These Hamas rocket attacks increased over the years until more than a million Israelis were within range. Thousands were traumatized, dozens were injured and several were killed by the thousands of anti-personnel rockets that targeted children, women and other civilians. As candidate Barack Obama said when he went to visit Sderot, the town most devastated by these unprovoked Hamas war crimes:
"The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. And so I can assure you that if...If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israeli to do the same thing."
Israel protested these rocket attacks to the United Nations, but to no avail. They increased in frequency and range.
The citizens of Israel, especially those in range of the attacks, demanded that their army protect them and not wait until a rocket hit a school bus filled with children or a nursery. Since most of the rockets were fired while children were on route to or just beginning their classes, the risk of a cataclysmic tragedy were considerable. Finally after enduring years of rocket attacks, Israel decided to undertake military action to stop them.
Just before the hostilities began, Israel offered a carrot and a stick: it reopened a checkpoint to allow humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. It had closed the point of entry after the checkpoint had been targeted by Gazan rockets. (On several prior occasions, Hamas rockets had targeted Israel points of entry through which aid had been provided. It was as if Hams was deliberately trying to manufacture a humanitarian crisis. Israel's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, also issued a stern, final warning to Hamas that unless it stopped the rockets, there would be a full-scale military response.
This is the way Reuters reported it:
"Israel reopened border crossings with the Gaza Strip on Friday, a day after Prime Minister warned militants there to stop firing rockets or they would pay a heavy price. Despite the movement of relief supplies, militants fired about a dozen rockets and mortar shafts from Gaza at Israel on Friday. One accidentally struck a house in Gaza, killing two Palestinian sisters, ages 5 and 13. [T]he deliveries could ease the tensions that might have led to a military action to end the rocket attacks. Palestinian workers at the crossings said fuel had arrive for Gaza's main power plant and about a hundred trucks loaded with grain, humanitarian aid and other good were expected during the day."
Finally in desperation Israel launched an attack designed to stop the rockets. It succeeded in large part though some rocket attacks have continued. Because Hamas fired its rockets from behind human shields, it was inevitable that there would be civilian casualties, despite Israeli efforts to reduce them by making hundreds of thousands of phone calls and leaflet drops warning civilians to stay out of the streets.
Goldstone's one-sided condemnation on Israel will make it far more difficult for Israeli leaders to persuade their citizens to remove their soldiers from the West Bank. Rockets fired from the West Bank would endanger far more Israeli civilians and threaten to close the Ben Gurion Airport. Israel now knows that if it were to try to defend itself against such rockets, it would once again be condemned by the United Nations. It will now be far more difficult for Israelis who oppose a continued presence of Israeli troops on the West Bank to persuade a majority of Israelis that the army can protect them even if they leave the West Bank, without incurring the wrath of the international community.
The effect, if not the intent, of the Goldstone report will be to keep Israeli troops in the West Bank longer. President Obama was right when he said that "the first job of any nation is to protect its citizens." The Goldstone report has made it virtually impossible for the Israeli army to protect its citizens against rocket attacks from territory that is no longer militarily occupied. It encourages Israel's enemies to provoke Israeli self-defense measures, which they know will produce condemnation of the Jewish state. This is a great tragedy, for Israelis, for Palestinians and for all who favor a two-state solution and an end to the occupation.

**  (
       575 Pages

Holy Temple Mikveh Discovered Near Western Wall

( A 2,000-year-old mikveh (ritual bath) has been uncovered just 20 meters from the Western Wall.
Given its location just outside the Holy Temple - where untold numbers of Jews regularly immersed before entering - the newly-revealed pool is among the largest ever discovered in Jerusalem. 
The mikveh was found at the site known as the Western Wall Tunnels, which has long been under excavation and study by the Israel Antiquities Authority.

It is located about 30 meters past the entrance to the Tunnels, in the general direction of the Western Wall. Once it becomes open to the public, the 11 broad steps leading down to the mikveh will be seen approximately 8 meters below floor level.
Josephus, the famous turncoat general and historian of the period, wrote that the administrative and governmental center of Jerusalem was located at the foot of the Temple, and that among the buildings there were the National Council and the Lishkat HaGazit, Chamber of Hewn Stone, where the Sanhedrin – Israel’s Supreme Court – convened. The archaeologists feel that it is possible that the luxurious hall aside the mikveh was originally one of these structures.

Leonard Cohen urged to scuttle concert

A Palestinian rights group held a protest Saturday afternoon in the Plateau Mont Royal district to urge Montreal-born Leonard Cohen to cancel his Tel Aviv concert scheduled for later this month.

The protest followed on the heels of similar events outside of the singer’s concerts in Belfast, Liverpool and New York, where fans urged Cohen to boycott Israel in solidarity with Palestinian organizations seeking to end Israeli control over Palestinian territories and the expansion of Israeli settlements.

Instead of cancelling his performance in Israel, however, Cohen scheduled a concert in Ramallah in the West Bank.

That concert was cancelled soon afterwards, however, as Palestinian groups said Cohen would only be welcome in the West Bank if he joined the boycott of Israel.

In Toronto, film festival organizers this week decided to go ahead with their spotlight on Tel Aviv, despite the opposition of more than 50 artists, filmmakers and academics, including actors Jane Fonda and Danny Glover, and culture critic Naomi Klein, who likened the focus on Tel Aviv to a propaganda campaign for Israel.

September 21, 2009

Thousands Request Pollard's Forgiveness

( In the days before Yom Kippur, known as the days of repentance, Jews have the custom of asking forgiveness from any person they have wronged over the course of the past year. This year, in what may be the largest group apology of its kind, thousands of Jews from Israel and around the world are coming together to ask forgiveness of one man – Jonathan Pollard.
Pollard has served 24 years of a life sentence in prison in the United States for passing classified security-related information to Israel. His supporters say the sentence is unjust and is much harsher than the sentences given even to those who spied on the U.S. on behalf of enemy states.

Israelis who signed a letter which will be sent to Pollard in the near future asked Pollard's forgiveness on their government's behalf, for its failure to take action to have him released. “We are ashamed that after you have suffered for 24 years in an American prison, our government still ignores you, and does not make even the minimum effort towards an Israeli agent who acted on the state's behalf and for the state's security,” they said.

September 17, 2009

J Street - NY Times article

After receiving emails from groups and friends about the organization J Street, I read the story in this weeks NY Times magazine that pretty much laid it out. It described their mission and I am certainly against who they are and what they claim to stand for.

"J Street shares the Obama administration’s agenda" - this is enough to make me understand that their view is fatally skewed.
They appear to be Reform-Lite Jews that claim their mission  :
“is to do whatever we can in Congress to act as the president’s blocking back.”

"The average age of the dozen or so staff members is about 30. Ben-Ami speaks for, and to, this post-Holocaust generation. “They’re all intermarried,” he says. “They’re all doing Buddhist seders.” They are, he adds, baffled by the notion of “Israel as the place you can always count on when they come to get you."
They are all intermarried. These are Jews that are on the way out and should not wait any longer. They should leave the rest of us alone. Their agenda as exiting Judasim can only be to eliminate it fully. They work for the other side.

This is a bad group of people that we should all look out for!


September 15, 2009

Probe of Asaf Ramon crash

In 1999, Netanyahu signed away much of Judea and Samaria at Camp David, receiving at best, empty promises in return. His Science Minister, Benny Begin quit the Likud Party in retaliation. The reaction of Shimon Peres in the Knesset was instructive. He told Begin, "I'm sick of you and your sh#tty family." Yes, he uttered that in Israel's parliament! In March, 2000, Begin's son Yonathan was killed when he, supposedly, contracted vertigo in his F-16 fighter jet and crashed. Noted was that no pilot crashed because of vertigo since the computer was added to cockpits.
      Now, Asaf Ramon, son of Ilan Ramon, the astronaut who died in the Columbia shuttle disaster, died in his F-16...and there are too many mysteries for many of my readers to let it go as an accident. Without delving into the possibility that he knew more than he should have about his father's fiery demise, let's look at how mysterious his accident really was:


Probe of Asaf Ramon crash to focus on human factor
Haaretz, Sept.13/09

Israel Air Force Capt. Asaf Ramon, 21, was killed Sunday when the F-16A Falcon jet he was flying crashed during a routine training flight near the southern Hebron Hills.
Ramon is the son of Col. Ilan Ramon, the first Israeli astronaut, who died during the disastrous Earth reentry of the space shuttle Columbia in 2003. Like his son, Col. Ramon was an F-16 pilot. There was no immediate comment on the cause of the crash. However, the main focus of the investigation is on human factors, and there is a high probability that some physiological problem may have led to the crash.


Ramon took off from the Nevatim air base at 1 P.M. on a routine training flight in a single-seat Falcon as part of the advanced flight training course that the pilot began in July. The formation was led by A., a veteran pilot, and was meant to exercise at an altitude of 18,000 feet over the Hebron Hills and the West Bank.
The two aircraft were to simulate dogfighting. The training was fairly basic, as this was a somewhat early stage of Ramon's fighter pilot training. The two aircraft were supposed to pass each other, and then perform a fairly wide turn in order to continue the exercise.
A. was supposed to see Ramon several seconds after the two aircraft had passed each other, but quickly realized that he could not find him. He called him on the radio: "Watch your altitude," but there was no response.
The incident occurred at about 1:30 P.M., when Ramon's aircraft disappeared off radar. Several minutes later reports began coming in from people living in the area south of Hebron that an aircraft had been seen flying at low altitude over the Hebron-Be'er Sheva highway, and of an explosion, followed by a cloud of smoke.


The lead pilot reported that he had lost eye contact with Ramon's aircraft. Quickly, other jets arrived at the scene, along with helicopters, looking for the Ramon's plane.
The search and rescue operation commenced nearly immediately, initially with IDF ground forces in the area and civilians from nearby. IDF helicopters were also dispatched. Meanwhile, the other pilot in the formation began making low passes in an effort to identify the precise location of the crash.
The mountainous terrain made it difficult to find the location of the crash. A crater that had been carved by the downed plane was located some 90 minutes after the incident.


An IDF officer who was one of the first on the scene said that "all that was left was a big, burned out crater, with very little debris."
The remains of the aircraft were spread over a wide area and the IDF brought hundreds of soldiers who began combing the mountains for debris. Ramon's remains were found not far from the crater. He had not been able to eject from the aircraft before the crash.


Ramon's aircraft began falling when it was at 18,000 feet. When it was last seen, the jet had its nose slightly downward. Based on its speed and altitude at the time, the plane likely struck the ground with enormous force within 20-45 seconds from when it began to fall.


Ramon had managed to complete 47 flights as part of his advanced training program, and 15 of those included simulated basic dogfight training. The type of training that this particular flight involved was not extreme, but it was done at nearly 720 km/h (400 knots) which is about the maximum allowable speed.
Pilots perform this sort of exercise while keeping sufficient distance and height between the aircraft in order to avoid flying into each other.
Ramon had completed pilot training three months ago and was named best cadet in his class. At an advanced stage of his training, when he flew an A-4 Skyhawk as part of the fighter-aircraft training, the engine stalled and Ramon successfully restarted the engine by carrying emergency procedures. He landed that aircraft safely.


President Shimon Peres awarded Ramon his wings at his graduation ceremony in July.

Sh P…is HE somehow related to this?
I told you, woman on the radio heard an explosion BEFORE the crash & also they radioed him to WARN him, but he didn’t respond.

Nehushtan, and Maj. Gen. Avi Zamir, chief of personnel at the IAF, arrived at the Ramon home in Ramat Gan Sunday to deliver the news to Asaf's mother, Rona. Peres, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi all issued a messages of condolence to the family.
As is customary, Asaf Ramon was promoted to the rank of captain posthumously.


September 14, 2009

US Pressure – A Guide for the Perplexed, Yoram Ettinger

"News 1st Class," Sept. 9, 2009

Fact: In 1950, the US Administration pressured Israel to refrain from Jewish construction in Jerusalem and from declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel – Prime Minister Ben Gurion built, relocated government agencies and thousands of immigrants to Jerusalem and declared Jerusalem the capital of the Jewish State.

In 1967, the US Administration pressured against annexation of East Jerusalem – Prime Minister Eshkol annexed, reunited Jerusalem, and built the formidable Ramat Eshkol neighborhood. In 1970, the US Administration pressured Israel to relinquish control over parts of Jerusalem – Prime Minister Golda Meir constructed the neighborhoods of Gilo, Ramot and Neveh Yaakov (current population over 100,000!). The US Administration pressured, Israel constructed, Jerusalem expanded and the Jewish State earned strategic respect.
Fact: In 1948, the US Department of State, Pentagon and CIA pressured Ben Gurion to avoid a declaration of independence. In 1961, President Kennedy pressured to stop the construction of Israel's nuclear reactor in Dimona. In 1967, President Johnson pressured against pre-empting the Egypt-Syria-Jordan military offensive. In 1977, President Carter pressured Prime Minister Begin to abstain from direct negotiation with President Sadat and participate – instead – in an international conference, focusing on the Palestinian issue and Jerusalem. In 1981, President Reagan pressured Prime Minister Begin against bombing Iraq's nuclear reactor.  Defiance of pressure entails short-term cost but enhances long-term national security. Submission to pressure exacerbates pressure. Fending off pressure is required, in order to attain strategic goals.  Avoiding pressure – through concessions - leads to departure from strategic goals.

Fact: US public and Congressional support of Israel is robust. "The Rasmussen Report" documents a 70% support (Aug. 10, 2009) and "Gallup" ranks Israel as the fourth-favored ally (March 3, 2009). 71 Senators signed an August 10, 2009 letter calling upon President Obama to shift pressure from Israel to Arab countries. The Democratic Chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Howard Berman, called upon Obama to end his preoccupation with settlements. The Democratic Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer, resents Obama's opposition to Jewish construction in East Jerusalem. The strongest (Democratic) Senator, Daniel Inouye, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, is the most effective supporter of the US-Israel connection since 1948. Obama cannot get his legislative agenda without Inouye's support. While Congress has reservations about Israel's settlements policy, Congress opposes sanctions against Israel.

Fact: Following the 1991 Gulf War, Israel asked for emergency assistance, which Bush/Baker rejected, Congress supported and Israel received $650MN in cash and $700MN in military systems.  In 1990, Bush/Baker attempted to cut 5% of the foreign aid to Israel because of Israel's settlement activities. Congress opposed the cut and the initiative was rescinded. The Legislature and the Executive are equal-in-power and fully independent of each other. The US Congress has been a systematic bastion of support of the Jewish State since before 1948.

Fact: President Obama has been transformed from a coattail President to an anchor-chained President, taking a dive from a 65% approval rating in January to less than 50% in September, the sharpest decline in recent decades, other than President Ford's (due to his pardon of Nixon). Thus, Democratic House candidates/members are experiencing the lowest ebb in two years, while Republicans enjoy a systematic edge. Obama is confronted by an effective Blue Dog Democratic opposition.

Fact: President Obama exercises psychological pressure against Israel. He cannot exert an effective tangible pressure. He was not elected to uproot Jewish settlements and prevent Jewish construction in Jerusalem.  His political future – and that of Democratic legislators – does not depend on these issues. The Arab-Israeli conflict is not among Obama's top priorities, and his position on Israel is not compatible with most Democrats. Obama needs the support of Israel's friends on Capitol Hill, in order to advance his primary domestic and national security/international agendas.     

September 11, 2009

The Temple Mount - a Symbol of Israel's Fecklessness?

As a whole Israeli's want peace. Some, want acceptance by the rest of the world.

Hopefully most don't care about acceptance, only compliance with HaShem.

Bibi is a politician and his motives are questionable.

Moishe Feiglin is working to take leadership of Israel and the Jewish people to lead them in a biblical direction. Moishe is doing this from within the Likud.

Why are the more religious groups not joining Moishe...or why is Moishe not co-operating with the Nation Union etc? Is this division the reason that Israel is not going in the right direction? I believe it is.

Perhaps a meeting of all of the "Religious" right political parties could come up with a compromise. I guess the problem is that the Orthodox feel they can't compromise...and don't. They feel that things will change when HaShem wants them to and they are sort of standing by to participate as they work towards the Redemption and guaranteeing they are part of it.

So, what to do? Does Feiglin feel that the only people that Manhigut Yehudit should try to convince are the least religious? The group that wants peace at any cost and has no concern for giving away parts of Israel. What benefit can he offer?

Would a movement to regain control of the Temple Mount provide a unifying factor for the general population? What percentage of Israeli citizens care?

If a group that advocated regaining control of the Temple Mount...started a petition and went door to door...  Would 1 Million signatures mean anything?

What will it take?


The Third Jihad Film Warns of Non-Violent Muslim Takeover

The 70-minute film is narrated by a devout Muslim American, Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, and opens with the following statement: “This is not a film about Islam. It is about the threat of radical Islam. Only a small percentage of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims are radical. This film is about them.”

In honor of the 8th anniversary of 9/11 terror attacks in the United States, the full feature-length documentary - produced by the founder of, Rabbi Raphael Shore - is being made available to the public for free online viewing.

The film is available for free streaming in its entirety until Tuesday, September 15, on the film's official website:  

September 10, 2009

"There can be no deals with terrorism whatever the circumstances."

by Yehuda Avner

How does one treat terrorists? Deal with them and you're done for; don't and innocents die. Take the case of Schoenau. It is a tale of infamy that seized the assemblage of the Council of Europe in September 1973.

The Council of Europe, Strasbourg, is that continent's approximation to a representative House. At the time in question its 400-odd delegates watched with various degrees of curiosity as a stooped, aging woman with a face deeply scarred with tragic lines, mounted the podium. She was Israel's Prime Minister Golda Meir, and she was there at the invitation of the European Council to state the case for Israel.

Generally speaking, Golda Meir preferred to speak extemporaneously, but since this was a formal occasion protocol required she deliver a pre-prepared address. I, her in-house speechwriter, drafted one. In its preparation I had torn up a dozen or more versions, leaving tooth marks on my pen as I wrote and rewrote page after page, scribbling deranged doodles while mentally struggling for concise, rhythmic, salvationary nouns and alliterative descriptions in my effort to give her words a defining oratory.

Finally, a coherent theme emerged and a speech surfaced. It thanked the Council and individual European parliaments for raising their voices in support of Soviet Jewry's right to freely emigrate to Israel [this was at the height of the worldwide "Let my People Go" campaign], delved into the intricacies of the Middle East conflict, pleaded for "the European Council's help to enable the Middle East to emulate the model of peaceful coexistence that the Council itself had established," and perorated with a quote from the great European statesman, Jean Monnet, that "Peace depends not only on treaties and promises. It depends essentially upon the creation of conditions which, if they do not change the nature of men, at least guide their behavior towards each other in a peaceful direction."

Seven Jews were taken hostage, among them a 73 year-old man, an ailing woman, and a three-year old child. The terrorists issued an ultimatum.

To my consternation Golda never enunciated a single one of these words. Instead, she scanned the assembly from end to end, jaw jutting, her expression defiant, and after combing back her hair with the fingers of both hands, brandished the written speech, and in a caustic tone said, "I have here my prepared address, a copy of which I believe you have before you. But I have decided at the last minute not to place between you and me the paper on which my speech is written. Instead, you will forgive me if I break with protocol and speak in an impromptu fashion. I say this in light of what has occurred in Austria during the last few days."

Clearly, the woman had decided it was idiotic to read her formal address after the devastating news which had reached her just before leaving Israel for Strasbourg:

A train carrying Jews from communist Russia en route to Israel via Vienna was hijacked by two Arab terrorists at a railway crossing on the Austrian frontier. Seven Jews were taken hostage, among them a 73 year-old man, an ailing woman, and a three-year old child. The terrorists issued an ultimatum that unless the Austrian government instantly closed down Schoenau, the Jewish Agency's layover near Vienna where the émigrés were processed before being flown on to Israel, not only would the hostages be killed, but Austria itself would become the target of violent retaliation.

The Austrian cabinet hastily met and, led by Chancellor Bruno Kreisky, capitulated. Kreisky announced that Schoenau would be closed forthwith, and the terrorists were hustled to the airport for safe passage to Libya.

The entire Arab world could hardly contain its glee, and a fuming Golda Meir instructed her aides to arrange for an early flight from Strasbourg to Vienna where she intended to confront her fellow prime minister, her fellow socialist, and her fellow Jew, Bruno Kreisky, herself.

To the European Council she said, "Since the Arab terrorists have failed in their ghastly efforts to wreak havoc in Israel they have, of late, taken their atrocities against Israeli and Jewish targets into Europe, aided and abetted by Arab governments."

This remark caused a fidgety buzz to drone around the packed chamber, and it seemed to deepen when she spoke bitterly about the eleven Israeli athletes kidnapped and murdered at the Munich Olympics the summer before, an outrage compounded by the German government's subsequent release of the surviving killers in return for the freeing of a hijacked Lufthansa plane and its passengers.

"Oh yes, I fully understand your feelings," said Golda cynically, arms folded as tight as a drawbridge. "I fully understand the feelings of a European prime minister saying, 'For God's sake, leave us out of this! Fight your own wars on your own turf. What do your enmities have to do with us? Leave us be!' And I can even understand" -- this in a voice that had gone grimmer than ever -- "why some governments might even decide that the only way to rid themselves of this insidious threat is to declare their countries out of bounds, if not to Jews generally then certainly to Israeli Jews, or Jews en-route to Israel. It seems to me this is the moral choice which every European government has to make these days."

"...there is but only one answer — no deals with terrorists; no truck with terrorism."

And then, chopping the air with balled fists, her face as granite as her eyes, she thundered, "European governments have no alternative but to decide what they are going to do. To every one which upholds the rule of law I suggest there is but only one answer — no deals with terrorists; no truck with terrorism. Any government which strikes a deal with these killers does so at its own peril. What happened in Vienna is that a democratic government, a European government, came to an agreement with terrorists. In so doing it has brought shame upon itself. In so doing it has breached a basic principle of the rule of law, the basic principle of the freedom of the movement of peoples -- or should I just say the basic freedom of the movement of Jews fleeing Russia? Oh, what a victory for terrorism this is!"

The ensuing applause told Golda Meir that she had gotten her message across to a goodly portion of the European Council, so off she flew to Vienna.

Ushered into the presence of the impeccably dressed, bespectacled, heavy-set man in his mid-sixties whom she knew to be the son of a Viennese Jewish clothing manufacturer, she extended her hand which he shook while rising with the merest sketch of a bow, but not budging from behind the solid protection of his desk. 'Please take a seat, Prime Minister Meir," he said formally.

"Thank you Chancellor Kreisky," said Golda, settling into the chair opposite him, and placing her copious black leather handbag on the floor. "I presume you know why I am here."

"I believe I do," answered Kreisky, whose body language bore all the signs of one who was not relishing this appointment.

"You and I have known each other for a long time," said Golda softly.

"We have," said the chancellor.

"And I know that, as a Jew, you have never displayed any interest in the Jewish State. Is that not correct?"

"That is correct. I have never made any secret of my belief that Zionism is not the solution to whatever problems the Jewish people might face."

"Which is all the more reason why we are grateful to your government for all that it has done to enable thousands of Jews to transit through Austria from the Soviet Union via Schoenau to Israel," said Golda diplomatically.

"But the Schoenau transit camp has been a problem to us for some time," said Kriesky stonily.

"What sort of a problem?"

"For a start, it has always been an obvious terrorist target..."

Golda cut him off, and with a strong suggestion of reproach, said, "Mr. Kreisky, if you close down Schoenau it will never end. Wherever Jews assemble in Europe for transit to Israel they will be held to ransom by the terrorists."

"But why should Austria have to carry this burden alone?" countered Kreisky with bite. "Why not others?"

"Such as whom?"

"Such as the Dutch. Fly the immigrants to Holland. After all, the Dutch represent you in Russia."

It was true. Ever since the Russians had broken off diplomatic relations during the 1967 Six Day war the Dutch embassy in Moscow represented Israel's interests there.

"Oh, I'm sure the Dutch would be prepared to share the burden if they could," responded Golda, trying to sound even-tempered. "But they can't. It doesn't depend on them. It depends entirely on the Russians. And the Russians have made it clear that they will not allow the Jews to fly out of Moscow. If they could we would fly them directly to Israel. The only way they can leave is by train, and the only country they will allow Jews to transit through is yours."

"So let them be picked up by your own people immediately upon arrival in Vienna, and flown straight to Israel," argued the chancellor holding his own.

"That's not practicable. You know and I know that it takes guts for a Jew to even apply for an exit permit to leave Russia to come to us. They lose their jobs, they lose their citizenship, and they are kept waiting for years. And once a permit is granted most are given hardly more than a week's notice to pack up, say their goodbyes, and leave. They come out to freedom in drips and drabs, and we never know how many there are on any given train arriving in Vienna. So we need a collecting point, a transit camp. We need Schoenau."

The chancellor settled his elbows on the desk, steepled his fingers, looked the woman directly in the eye, and said sanctimoniously, "Mrs. Meir, it is Austria's humanitarian duty to aid refugees from whatever country they come, but not when it puts Austria at risk. I shall never be responsible for any bloodshed on the soil of Austria."

"And is it also not a humanitarian duty not to succumb to terrorist blackmail, Herr Chancellor?" Her words, sudden and raw and angry, were a declaration of war. What had begun as conflicting views between opponents was now a nasty cut and thrust duel between antagonists.

Kreisky shot back: "Austria is a small country, and unlike major powers small countries have few options in dealing with the blackmail of terrorists."

"I disagree," seethed Golda. "There can be no deals with terrorism whatever the circumstances. What you have done is certain to encourage more hostage taking. You have betrayed the Jewish émigrés."

"You have opened the door to terrorism, Herr Chancellor."

The man's brows drew together in an affronted frown. "I cannot accept such language, Mrs. Meir. I cannot..."

"You have opened the door to terrorism, Herr Chancellor," the prime minister spat undeterred. "You have brought renewed shame on Austria. I've just come from the Council of Europe. They condemn your act almost to a man. Only the Arab world proclaims you their hero."

"Well, there is nothing I can do about that," said the Austrian in an expressionless voice, looking uncomfortably still. And then, with a hint of a shrug, "You and I belong to two different worlds."

"Indeed we do, Herr Kreisky," said Golda Meir in a voice cracked with sardonic Jewish weariness. "You and I belong to two very very different worlds." And she rose, picked up her handbag, and made for the door. As she did so an aide to the chancellor entered to say the press were gathered in an adjacent room awaiting a joint press conference.

Golda shook her head. She asked herself, what was the point? Nothing she could say to the media could make any difference. Kreisky wanted to keep in the good books of the Arabs — it was as simple as that. So, she turned and hissed in Hebrew to her aides, "I have no intention of sharing a platform with that man. He can tell them what he wants. I'm going to the airport." To him she said contemptuously, "I shall forego the pleasure of a press conference. I have nothing to say to them. I'm going home," and she exited through a back stairway.

Five hours later she told the waiting Israeli press at Ben-Gurion airport, "I think the best way of summing up in a nutshell the nature of my meeting with Chancellor Kreisky is to say this: he didn't even offer me a glass of water."

Postscript: Schoenau was shut down, but Golda Meir's remonstrations triggered such an international whirl of protest that the Austrian chancellor had no choice but to offer alternative arrangements.

One day a few years later, after Menachem Begin assumed the premiership [1977], I was about to walk into the room of his bureau chief, Yechiel Kadishai, when a bedraggled-looking fellow in a battered trilby hat and a tattered raincoat, whom I recognized as a peddler of matches in downtown Jerusalem, walked out.

"What's that hawker doing here?" I asked. "Do you know him?"

"Sure." said Yechiel, his face deadpan. "His name is Kreisky,"

"Kreisky who?"

"Shaul Kreisky, brother of the Chancellor of Austria, Bruno Kreisky."

My mouth dropped open. "You're pulling my leg," I said.

"No I'm not. He's been living here for years. The Prime Minister occasionally helps him out. He's a great fan of Begin. Run after him and ask him."

I did. It was true.

This article originally appeared in the Jerusalem Post.

September 9, 2009

Response to the TIFF Letter - Cameron Bailey: City to City

Watch as Cameron becomes a Eunuch before your very eyes....
Intimidated by the Muslim was machine perhaps?
Greyson's Gay movie themes would seemingly be out of place
with an Israeli orientated affair, but this was about Tel Aviv.

The withdrawal smacks of attacking freedom of expression or an imposed censorship.
Perhaps this will stir a controversy...


An Open Letter on City to City: Tel Aviv

On August 27, John Greyson withdrew his film Covered from the Toronto International Film Festival as a protest against our City to City focus on films from Tel Aviv. The next day, he and nine other Torontonians issued a petition inviting the city’s cultural communities to “protest TIFF's complicity with the Israeli propaganda machine.” We felt it was important to directly respond to these allegations.

Obviously we are disappointed by John’s decision to withdraw his film. We are great admirers of his work and have been presenting his films at our Festival for almost 20 years. That said, we were surprised that he took this action given the facts of the situation.

As the programmer of City To City, I was attracted to Tel Aviv as our inaugural city because the films being made there explore and critique the city from many different perspectives. Furthermore, the City to City series was conceived and curated entirely independently. There was no pressure from any outside source. Contrary to rumours or mistaken media reports, this focus is a product only of TIFF’s programming decisions. We value that independence and would never compromise it.

The goal of City to City is to take a closer look at global cities through a cinematic lens, especially cities where film contributes to or chronicles social change in compelling ways. We believe that the 10 films in our inaugural programme do just that. We encourage everyone to see the films, engage in debate and draw their own conclusions.

In addition to City to City, our Festival lineup also includes other important films from the region, including two films by Palestinian filmmakers and others from Lebanon and Egypt. As these films address the past history and current realities of the region, we hope they will become part of this year's conversations.

John writes that his protest isn’t against the films or filmmakers we have chosen, but against the spotlight itself. By that reasoning, no films programmed within this series would have met his approval, no matter what they contained. For us, the content and form of films does matter. In fact, when I met with a number of the signatories earlier this week, I encouraged them to see the films before passing judgment on the programme. Regrettably, they chose a different route. We know some of them to be veterans of Toronto’s battles against censorship -- all the more surprising to watch them denounce a film series without seeing the films in it.

We recognize that Tel Aviv is not a simple choice and that the city remains contested ground. We continue to learn more about the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. As a festival that values debate and the exchange of cultures, we will continue to screen the best films we can find from around the world. This is our contribution to expanding our audiences’ experience of this art form and the worlds it represents.

Cameron Bailey
Co-Director, Toronto International Film Festival

Letter to the Toronto International Film Festival (For the love of film)

Below is a letter signed by some infamous Anti-Semites.
According to Naomi Ragen, the Jewish Federation in Canada spread the word and the members bought all of the tickets to show support.
Below is the list of criminals that hate, hate, hate.


An Open Letter to the Toronto International Film Festival:

September 2, 2009

As members of the Canadian and international film, culture and media arts communities, we are deeply disturbed by the Toronto International Film Festival’s decision to host a celebratory spotlight on Tel Aviv. We protest that TIFF, whether intentionally or not, has become complicit in the Israeli propaganda machine.

In 2008, the Israeli government and Canadian partners Sidney Greenberg of Astral Media, David Asper of Canwest Global Communications and Joel Reitman of MIJO Corporation launched “Brand Israel,” a million dollar media and advertising campaign aimed at changing Canadian perceptions of Israel. Brand Israel would take the focus off Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its aggressive wars, and refocus it on achievements in medicine, science and culture. An article in Canadian Jewish News quotes Israeli consul general Amir Gissin as saying that Toronto would be the test city for a promotion that could then be deployed around the world. According to Gissin, the culmination of the campaign would be a major Israeli presence at the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival. (Andy Levy-Alzenkopf, “Brand Israel set to launch in GTA,” Canadian Jewish News, August 28, 2008.)

In 2009, TIFF announced that it would inaugurate its new City to City program with a focus on Tel Aviv. According to program notes by Festival co-director and City to City programmer Cameron Bailey, “The ten films in this year’s City to City programme will showcase the complex currents running through today’s Tel Aviv. Celebrating its 100th birthday in 2009, Tel Aviv is a young, dynamic city that, like Toronto, celebrates its diversity.”

The emphasis on 'diversity' in City to City is empty given the absence of Palestinian filmmakers in the program. Furthermore, what this description does not say is that Tel Aviv is built on destroyed Palestinian villages, and that the city of Jaffa, Palestine’s main cultural hub until 1948, was annexed to Tel Aviv after the mass exiling of the Palestinian population. This program ignores the suffering of thousands of former residents and descendants of the Tel Aviv/Jaffa area who currently live in refugee camps in the Occupied Territories or who have been dispersed to other countries, including Canada. Looking at modern, sophisticated Tel Aviv without also considering the city’s past and the realities of Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza strip, would be like rhapsodizing about the beauty and elegant lifestyles in white-only Cape Town or Johannesburg during apartheid without acknowledging the corresponding black townships of Khayelitsha and Soweto.

We do not protest the individual Israeli filmmakers included in City to City, nor do we in any way suggest that Israeli films should be unwelcome at TIFF. However, especially in the wake of this year’s brutal assault on Gaza, we object to the use of such an important international festival in staging a propaganda campaign on behalf of what South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, and UN General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann have all characterized as an apartheid regime.

This letter was drafted by the following ad hoc committee:

Udi Aloni, filmmaker, Israel; Elle Flanders, filmmaker, Canada; Richard Fung, video artist, Canada; John Greyson, filmmaker, Canada; Naomi Klein, writer and filmmaker, Canada; Kathy Wazana, filmmaker, Canada; Cynthia Wright, writer and academic, Canada; b h Yael, film and video artist, Canada

Endorsed by:

Ahmad Abdalla, Filmmaker, Egypt

Hany Abu-Assad, Filmmaker, Palestine

Mark Achbar, Filmmaker, Canada

Zackie Achmat, AIDS activist, South Africa

Ra'anan Alexandrowicz, Filmmaker, Jerusalem

Anthony Arnove, Publisher and Producer, USA

Ruba Atiyeh, Documentary Director, Lebanon

Joslyn Barnes, Writer and Producer, USA

John Berger, Author, France

Dionne Brand, Poet/Writer, Canada

Judith Butler, Professor, USA

David Byrne, Musician, USA

Noam Chomsky, Professor, USA

Guy Davidi Director, Israel

Na-iem Dollie, Journalist/Writer, South Africa

Igor Drljaca, Filmmaker, Canada

Eve Ensler, Playwright, Author, USA

Eyal Eithcowich, Director, Israel

Sophie Fiennes, Filmmaker, UK

Peter Fitting, Professor, Canada

Jane Fonda, Actor and Author, USA

Danny Glover, Filmmaker and Actor, USA

Noam Gonick, Director, Canada

Malcolm Guy, Filmmaker, Canada

Mike Hoolboom, Filmmaker, Canada

Annemarie Jacir, Filmmaker, Palestine

Fredric Jameson, Literary Critic, USA

Juliano Mer Khamis, Filmmaker, Jenin/Haifa

Bonnie Sherr Klein Filmmaker, Canada

Paul Laverty, Producer, UK

Min Sook Lee, Filmmaker, Canada

Paul Lee, Filmmaker, Canada

Yael Lerer, publisher, Tel Aviv

Jack Lewis, Filmmaker, South Africa

Ken Loach, Filmmaker, UK

Arab Lotfi, Filmmaker, Egypt/Lebanon

Kyo Maclear, Author, Toronto

Mahmood Mamdani, Professor, USA

Fatima Mawas, Filmmaker, Australia

Tessa McWatt, Author, Canada and UK

Cornelius Moore, Film Distributor, USA

Yousry Nasrallah, Director, Egypt

Rebecca O'Brien, Producer, UK

Pratibha Parmar, Producer/Director, UK

Jeremy Pikser, Screenwriter, USA

John Pilger, Filmmaker, UK

Shai Carmeli Pollak, Filmmaker, Israel

Ian Iqbal Rashid, Filmmaker, Canada

Judy Rebick, Professor, Canada

David Reeb, Artist, Tel Aviv

B. Ruby Rich, Critic and Professor, USA

Wallace Shawn, Playwright, Actor, USA

Eyal Sivan, Filmmaker and Scholar, Paris/London/Sderot

Elia Suleiman, Fimmlaker, Nazareth/Paris/New York

Eran Torbiner, Filmmaker, Israel

Alice Walker, Writer, USA

Thomas Waugh, Professor, Canada

Howard Zinn, Writer, USA

Slavoj Zizek, Professor, Slovenia

(May they all be judged accordingly)

September 8, 2009

To Hell With the United Nations!

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

The United Nations is the most pernicious, malevolent, and corrupt organizations on earth. Israel should quit this den of iniquity.

“Praiseworthy is the man who walked not in the counsel of the wicked, and stood not in the path of the sinful, and sat not in the session of scorners” (Psalm 1:1.)

The UN’s Anti-Israel Vendetta

For decades, the United Nations has passed countless resolutions condemning Israel for its actions against the Palestinians, while almost never formally addressing Israel's security concerns and the ongoing campaign of Palestinian terrorism against Israelis. The UN General Assembly has become an international forum for promoting Palestinian statehood and deligitmizing Israel.

Before Oslo, the General Assembly either “condemned" or "deplored" or “censured" or "denounced" Israel 321 times––the Arabs: Zero condemnations. Meanwhile, the Security Council "condemned" or "censured" or "deplored" Israel 49 times; Arab states: Zero.

Israel should cease demeaning itself and vacate this international cesspool. Having a forum at the UN is of dubious value, as is the UN itself. John Bolton, former acting US. Ambassador to the UN, has said “There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States."[a] He also said that "The Secretariat Building in New York has 38 stories. If you lost ten stories today, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."[b]

Fred Fleitz, a former senior adviser to Bolton, exposes UN waste and corruption and the resulting human costs. His book, Peacekeeping Fiascoes of the 1990s provides a comprehensive critical assessment of the UN. Among other debacles, he shows how the failed UN mission in Bosnia led to unmitigated atrocities; how the UN debacle in Somalia emboldened terrorists the world over; how the UN peacekeeping operation in Haiti collapsed, with the billions of dollars squandered on it primarily benefiting Haitian President Jean-Bertrande Aristide. And then there is Iraq and the “oil for food” scam between the UN and Saddam Hussein.

Turning to Iran, it’s obvious the UN will do nothing, and can do nothing, to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program. And judging from the Obama Administration’s policy of appeasing Islam, Iran is close to becoming a nuclear power. It may be months away from producing its first bomb.

For Israel, a nuclear-armed Iran is an existential issue that raises the specter of another holocaust. Israel must therefore take its future into its own hands; it must act unilaterally and choose the moment to attack Iran—as Bolton urged in the Wall Street Journal on December 7, 2007.

Bolton wrote that if Israel attacks Iran’s nuclear facilities, the U.S. should aid Israel before, during, and after such an attack. But this was before Obama’s election. Dare Israel pull a fait accompli as it did with the Osiraq reactor in 1981? Dare it wait until Iran deploys the bomb? Bolton would surely say no.

Let us take a closer look at what a nuclear-armed Iran portends not only for Israel, but for Europe and the United States—indeed, for Western civilization. Here, let us consult Robert Baer, a most farseeing and experienced former CIA operative in the Middle East. Last year, in his book The Devil We Know, Baer convincingly argues that Iran, contrary to what most believe, Iran is not a regime of crazies. Its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, head of the Revolutionary Guard, is pursuing a political strategy whose goal is to restore the Persian Empire. Iran’s nuclear weapons program must be viewed in these grandiose terms. As for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he is Khamenei’s subordinate.

Ahmadinejad’s imprecations “Death to America” and “Death the Israel” should not be dismissed as the ranting of a maniac. It is a double entendre. It prompts the naïve to trivialize, hence obscure, Iran’s Machiavellian modus operandi. For the cognoscenti, “Death to America” and “Death the Israel” signify the demise of Christianity and Judaism and the global ascendancy of Islam. Let us take a closer look at the location of Iran, a nation of 70 million people, 90 percent of whom are Shiites, 51 percent Persian, and, on the whole, better educated than most Muslims.

Iran’s strategic location on the Persian Gulf will enable its Revolutionary Guard to turn off the flow of oil on which the West’s survival now depends. Moreover, Iran is rapidly developing a worldwide network of power. Iraq, which is about 60 percent Shia, will succumb to Iran when the Americans leave. Iran is luring Turkey into its orbit, as it did Syria. Iran’s proxy Hezbollah is positioned to control Lebanon. Iran is the main supplier of Hamas, and Iran has eyes on Fatah.

Apparently, Iran has already penetrated the Suez Canal. Iran has sleeper cells throughout Europe, and even in America. Iran is collaborating with anti-American forces in South America. And of course Iran supports countless mosques in the United States that preach jihad against America and the West. If this were not enough, hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout the world support Jihad.

If Iran’s long-range ballistic missiles are tipped with nuclear warheads, Europe, already inundated with more than 50 million Muslims, will be blackmailed into submission. Without Europe and its economy, the American economy will collapse beyond repair. Iran knows this. The U.S. is necessarily Iran’s primary target, but Israel, the Small Satan, comes first. Perhaps Iran will not need to devastate America by exploding an Electro-Magnetic Pulse over Washington to terminate the Great Satan.

Viewed in this light, the United Nations is passé and good riddance. If a new UN is desirable, it should consist solely of the ninety or so states classified as democracies by Freedom House, in which the state is merely the custodian of man’s God-given rights to Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness.

If any country, from both a historical and theological perspective, is qualified to promote the formation of such a United Nations, it is Israel—of course, not the Israel that kowtows to terrorist thugs. I mean an Israel on the way to constructing the Third Temple, when Jerusalem will stand majestically as in the days of King Solomon, attracting nations near and far. Let your heart and soul recall with me the prophecy of Zechariah when

… ten men of every nationality, speaking different languages, shall take hold of every Jew by the corner of his garment and say, “Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you”

Yes, ten men of every nation—surely they will be nations that abide by the Seven Noahide Laws of Universal Morality, the true catholicism included in the Torah for all humanity. Ten men of every nationality journeying to Jerusalem the City of Peace as well as the City of Truth. But at this point in time, let us not be carried away by tenderness.

For peace and truth to unite and prevail, Israel must first triumph over her enemies—today led by Satanic Iran. Today Israel is waiting for the moment. She knows that the mullahs of Iran are driven by the memory of the Persian Empire. She knows that a nuclear armed Iran in control of the Persian Gulf would ensure Iran’s hegemony over the Middle East and beyond. Israel also knows that she will be the first target; for if Iran controls Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, a billion Muslims will exult in victory, will explode in frenzy and wreak havoc on the world, screaming Allah Akbar!

So Israel will strike first, and this will mark the beginning of a new Middle East, one that hardly anyone dreams of. While Iran is being devastated, the Israel Defense Forces will crush Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah, and Syria. Israel will eliminate the entire terrorist network west of the Jordan River. Countless Arabs will flee from Judea and Samaria as well as from Gaza—as they did after the Six-Day War.

The cruel and cynical peace charade will be over. The mendacity of Lilliputian politicians will be silent. The Lion of Judah will have triumphed. During the aftermath of perhaps two decades, Israel will organize the peace in cooperation with Muslim reformers that will be found throughout Middle East, who have been silenced by the mullahs and dictators. The Seven Noahide Laws of Morality will unite the region. Non-secular constitutional democracies will begin to flourish as outlined in a former paper of mine. The United States will cooperate, but petro-dollars will no longer lubricate its diplomacy.

And so at last, the ethos of jihad will cease to torment mankind, and the people of the Middle East, with the cooperation of a God-inspired Israel, will gain a new birth of freedom.

Happy New Year!