Monday, March 31, 2008

Londonistan Rising

By Dan Rabkin | 3/27/2008

I am writing to advise you that following the London bombings in July 2005, the Home Secretary announced a list of particular activities that would normally lead to a person being excluded or deported from the UKThe list of unacceptable behaviours covers:

-writing, producing, publishing or distributing material;

-public speaking including preaching;

-running a website;

-using a position of responsibility such as a teacher, community or youth leader

To express views that:

-foment or justify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs;

-seek to provoke others to terrorist acts;

-foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts;

-foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.

The Home Secretary has considered whether, in light of this list, you should be excluded from the United Kingdom. After careful consideration, she has personally directed that you should be excluded from the United Kingdom…”

British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, who heads the ministry responsible for counter-terrorism, recently sent the above quoted letter to a recipient in the Middle East. It is worrying to realize who the recipient was and what that implies about Britain’s role in the global struggle against radical Islam.

Was it sent to a Hezbollah official in Lebanon or Iran? Not a chance; “Army of Allah” officials are always welcome guests in the UK. Ibrahim Moussawi, Hezbollah’s chief propagandist, recently concluded a British “speaking tour” with no objections from Ms. Smith’s Home Office.

Perhaps it was sent to a radical imam or cleric somewhere in the Gulf? Wrong again; Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi was successfully granted a visa five out of the last six times that he has applied. Al-Qaradawi, a Muslim Brotherhood affiliated cleric, is known for praising terrorist attacks against Israelis and Americans, calling for the destruction of Israel, and stating that homosexuals should “be put to death”. During his last trip to Britain, where he chaired the annual meeting of the European Council of Fatwa and Research at London's City Hall, London mayor Ken Livingston compared him to the Pope.

Shamefully, this letter was sent to a politician in the Jewish State. Moshe Feiglin, the head of the Jewish Leadership faction within the Likud party, initially had thought that the letter was a prank, as he had no intentions of visiting the UK and had not applied for a visa. He was shocked to learn that the letter was indeed authentic and that Britain had become the first nation on earth that banned his presence.

In addition to the excerpt quoted above, the letter listed a few statements attributed to Mr. Feiglin as evidence of his ability to “foment and justify terrorist violence”. One of the quotes, "The Arab is not the son of the desert, but rather, its father", pulled from one of Feiglin’s articles, was not even his at all. Ironically, Feiglin took that quote directly from the book The Desert Yesterday and Today written by none other than, British High Commissioner of Sinai, Sir Claude Jarvis in 1938. In other words, as Feiglin likes to joke, he is being barred from Britain for quoting a British official.

About whose “terrorist violence” were the Brits so worried? Did they think that after one of Feiglin’s trademark synagogue lectures, about the need for Jewish unity and the sanctity of an undivided Jerusalem, the elderly Jews in the audience would be so riled up that they would decide to blow themselves up on the Tube? Or were they more concerned about the violence of the over 2000 Islamists MI5 has under surveillance for being “actively involved in supporting al-Qaeda”?

Appeasement of radical Muslims and their leftist allies is nothing new to the British. The United Kingdom, a country that values its freedom of speech so much that it consistently lets Islamists protest chanting the vilest of expressions, has a long history of silencing Jews. Whereas Islamists in Britain are free to chant “May Allah and Osama Bin Laden bomb you!”, “Nuke, Nuke UK and USA, Blair and Bush you will pay!”, and “Europe is the cancer, Islam is the answer!”, Israeli officials are frequently denied visitors’ visas, threatened with arrest upon entry and worse.

The letter to Feiglin was far from the first time that British authorities acted out against Israelis to mollify their homegrown Islamists. Former Israeli Prime Ministers, Menachem Begin and Yitzchak Shamir, have also received similar letters. Last December, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter cancelled a trip to Britain over fears he would be arrested for “war crimes”. Transport Minister and former Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, former IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon, and Major General Doron Almog have all encountered similar problems. Almog had already arrived in London to do fundraising for a handicapped services organization, when the Israeli military attaché phoned him to tell him not to get off of the plane. Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism officers were waiting in the airport to arrest him, so Almog stayed on the plane for two hours until it finally headed back to Israel.

British appeasement of radical Islam does not end with the Israelis. Domestically, Londonistan is quickly becoming Europe’s Islamist accession capital. In a speech earlier this year, Home Secretary Smith outlined Britain’s new policy with respect to labeling Muslim terrorists; the slogan “war on terror” is out, deemed “aggressive rhetoric” and too offensive, while “Islamist terrorism” will now be reffered to as “anti-Islamic activities”. BECTA, the government’s educational technology agency, also recently deemed the Three Little Pigs fairytale as being too offensive to Muslims. Last year, the Department for Education and Skills released a study in which it confirmed that schools across the UK are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending the Muslim community, where Holocaust denial is considered a matter of fact. Add to the mix the recent statements from the Archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Church of England about integrating Sharia law into the British judicial system and the scope of the problem in the nation where Muhammad is rapidly becoming the most popular baby name becomes clear.

All of this comes at a time when Britain is facing a crisis within its Islamic community. Intensifying militancy and the springing up of “no-go zones” for police are just the tip of the iceberg. In 2006, NOP Research conducted the most comprehensive survey to date of Muslim opinion in Britain. The results are terrifying. Only one-fourth of British Muslims consider the UK “their country”. The same number believe the 7/7 terrorist attacks on London’s Underground were justified. 30% of respondents hope that Britain becomes a “fundamentalist Islamic state” governed by Sharia law. And an astounding 78% support punishing those who “mock Muhammad”. All in all, 38% classify themselves as “hardcore Islamists” or “staunch defenders of Islam”. While only 3% of British Muslims surveyed took consistently pro-Western, pro-freedom of speech positions on the questions. A survey undertaken by the Daily Telegraph released at about the same time revealed that one-third of British Muslims found Western society “decadent and immoral” and believed that Muslims should “seek to end it”.

At a time when many European nations, facing similar terrifying realities, are starting to stand up to the threat of radical Islam (the Danes, for one, should be applauded for their reprinting of the Muhammad cartoons in response to the scuttled jihadist plot to assassinate cartoonist Kurt Westergaard), it is a shame that this is going on. On March 5th, 2004 former British PM Tony Blair said “the nature of the global threat we face in Britain and round the world is real and existential and it is the task of leadership to expose it and fight it, whatever the political cost; and that the true danger is not to any single politician's reputation, but to our country if we now ignore this threat or erase it from the agenda in embarrassment at the difficulties it causes”— four years later it seems his nation is backsliding into another Chamberlain-esque “Peace for Our Time” moment.

How The West was Lost

By Ted Belman

This is a Cultural/Religious War

Moshe Feiglin was in New York on 9/11. Two weeks later he wrote this profound article, Why America Has Already Lost the War.

For him it was a cultural/religious war. The same war that Israel had been fighting for a century and losing. Islam destroyed the greatest symbol of the West, he wrote, namely the Twin Towers and nothing less would do but to destroy Mecca, Medina and al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

Instead America organized a mighty coalition to go after cave dwellers in Afghanistan, hornets if you will, while ignoring the nest. It even called the religion, that has been at war with Christianity since its inception, and in whose name the Twin Towers were destroyed, a "religion of peace". It seeks to accommodate its mortal enemy rather than destroy it.

The "peace process" is aimed at destroying Judaism's symbols, in that it seeks to remove from Jewish sovereignty its biblical heartland and Jerusalem. What will be left?

He explained the conflict,

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

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

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

If you disagree with his thesis' please explain how the west is to win and what winning means.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Apologies to the Moshe Feiglins of the World

By Moshe Feiglin

Adar II, 5768
March, 08

The sailors carefully folded the sails. The large, exhausted family alighted from the boat and onto the Jaffa port. One after the other, they kneeled and emotionally kissed the earth under their feet - the holy Land of Israel. Moshe Zalman, the eldest of the brothers, was the busiest of all. His father, Yaakov Tzvi, and his grandfather Nachum were no longer youngsters and most of the challenges of the long journey had fallen on his shoulders.

The year was 1889. The corrupt Turkish regime ruled the Land of Israel. The Land was almost completely empty. All the roads were dangerous. The pleas of the family's neighbors and friends from Mogilev in White Russia still echoed in their ears:

"Why give up your prospering businesses? Why settle in such a dangerous land?" But the Feiglins' desire to live in the Land of Israel, to till its soil with their own hands and to fulfill the Divine directive to settle the Land was stronger than all reason.

As it turned out, the neighbors were right. The family suffered terrible hardship and tragedy. Many died and all of their money was lost. Nevertheless, Yaakov Tzvi Feiglin, his eldest son Moshe Zalman and his brothers merited to lay down their roots in the Land of Israel. The family played an important role in establishing the first settlements in Israel's North. The Feiglins were among the pioneers of the old Mishmar Hayarden, Hadera, and Menachamia. My grandfather, Avraham, the son of Moshe Zalman, was the first baby to be born in Metulla.

World War I began. The Turks severely abused the Jewish settlement in Israel. They confiscated the roofs of theirs homes for fuel for their engines. The Jewish first born were forcibly drafted into the Turkish army. Moshe Zalman had no choice but to escape. He traveled to Australia, which was desperate for farmers at the time. There he established a thriving Chabad community and became famous throughout the Jewish world as the "Avraham Avinu" of Australia.

A few years after Moshe Zalman Feiglin died, I was born in the Land of Israel. Of course, I was named after him. But I wasn't the only one. Many other family members desired to express their deep admiration for their righteous ancestor, and more and more Feiglin babies were named Moshe Zalman. As of now, I share my name with quite a few cousins.


Before one of my ascents to the Temple Mount about a year ago, a Chabad chassid stopped me at the entrance to the Western Wall and addressed me in a familiar, Australian accent. "Hey Moishe!" he called. "I'm Moshe Zalman, your cousin from Australia. Did you know that I missed my flight from London to Israel because of you?" he continued with a broad smile. "They arrested me in London and asked me all sorts of questions. It must be because they thought that I was you."

I simply figured that my young cousin was overenthusiastic. He had probably been arrested in London because of some ridiculous bureaucratic mix-up that had nothing to do with me. I parted with my friendly cousin, and continued on my way, not giving the matter a further thought.

Two months ago, I received a letter from the British Home Office informing me that I am banned from England. The letter quoted from articles that I had written a long time ago, citing that my opinions could potentially disturb the British sense of peace. One of the sentences quoted in the British letter was: "The Arab is not the son of the desert. He is its father." The Home Office attributed this sentence to me. If they had done their homework, they would have realized that I was quoting from none other than the British High Commissioner to Sinai, Sir Claude Jarvis. In other words, the British will not allow me into their country because I quoted their High Commissioner.

In my response to the Home Office, I thanked the British government for including me in the honorable club of others who have been banned from England: Menachem Begin, Yitzchak Shamir and currently, IDF officers who have dealt with Israel's enemies as an army officer should. The British newspaper, The Guardian, printed a comment by a British minister in which he claimed that I actually had been to London and was even arrested for a few hours. At first, I thought that the minister was lying. But later I realized that their hapless victim must have been one of my cousins, arrested for his suspicious' name.


The letter from the Home Office should be displayed proudly in my living room. There are very few people in Israeli politics who correctly understand the Islamic threat. It seems that the British - who have already caved in to the Islamic onslaught (they wouldn't even put up xmas trees in London this year for fear of ruffling Islamic feathers) have targeted me as someone who threatens the Islamic offensive. This curious story has reinforced my confidence that the path that I have chosen is correct.

Nevertheless, I must apologize to all the Moshe Feiglins who are paying the price of our shared name. My advice is that you take pride in your name. Not because of me, of course, but because of our common great grandfather, Moshe Zalman Feiglin.

Keep up to date with our latest articles and audio updates

Visit our "What's New" Webpage

The Manhigut Yehudit Solution/Revolution

"How can you lead the entire nation?" one influential Religious Zionist recently asked Moshe Feiglin at a well-attended lecture. "After all, we are a minority!"

"I am a member of kibbutz Daliah," Manhigut Yehudit member Nimrod cut in and introduced himself to the group. (Daliah is a secular, left-leaning kibbutz). I was born into the sector that did not ask any questions and did not wait for anybody's approval. The pioneers of three generations ago had a vision and a goal. They led the nation even though they were just 3% of the Israeli public. Today, this sector no longer has a vision, a goal or the strength to lead. But you, the Religious Zionists, have the answers and the motivation. Why are you afraid to lead?"

Nimrod, who grew up as part of the leadership elite of the State of Israel has been returning to his Jewish identity through his quest for Jewish leadership. Philosopher Ohad Kamin, is another example of a fervent Manhigut Yehudit supporter who is not observant, yet invests his time and efforts into creating Jewish leadership for Israel. Ohad's new book, To Perfect the World, analyzes the struggle between Jewish tradition and the State of Israel and offers practical, Jewish solutions for the crisis engulfing Israeli society.

Both Nimrod and Ohad are examples of a revolution taking place before our very eyes. They are not classic ' returnees to Judaism' who have put a kippah on their heads and joined the ranks of the religious people being shepherded and, at times - manipulated - by secular leaders. They are part of the growing movement of Israelis that disregards the traditional religious-secular divide and demands a Jewish state led by a believing Jew who will lead Israel based on Jewish values.

As opposed to the mere 3% who have led Israel until now with deception, coercing its Jews to disengage from their heritage and values, Manhigut Yehudit strives to give Israelis true freedom of choice. We have no doubt (and statistics prove) that the decisive majority of Jews in Israel wishes to express its Jewish values.

The Manhigut Yehudit idea is flourishing in the most unexpected places. It is the hope for Israel's future and the answer to the Oslo despair. It is time to dare to lead!

Monday, March 24, 2008

Pesach in Cancun, Greece or Las Vegas?

By Shmuel Sackett

Adar II, 5768
March, '08

I just finished reading a Jewish newspaper that a friend sent me from the States and I am totally confused!!! This paper had over 20 pages of ads from various Pesach programs and I can't make up my mind. Please read my dilemma and if you can help me, email me your advice at I would greatly appreciate it.

My first choice was actually one of the many hotels in Florida. My favorite one advertises a "Hawaiian Luau Night". What a great Pesach experience - matzah, marror and a good old-fashioned Hawaiian Luau. I was about to make my reservation but noticed that the ad did not say "non-gebrokts". Hey, Luau or no Luau, I insist on non-gebrokts only! What do you think I am? Some kind of modern Jew???

The next ad I liked was about Pesach in Greece. The ad boasted, "an enlisting atmosphere of Torah". Think about that. A few months ago we celebrated Chanukah when the Greeks did not allow Jews to study Torah and now Jews are traveling on Pesach to Greece to have "an enlisting atmosphere of Torah". Boy, have times changed!

My wife refused to go to Greece. Why couldn't I marry a true Eyshet Chayil? So, I had to look further. The next ad was for a beautiful hotel in Cancun. WOW!!! Pesach in the Caribbean!! How holy is that???!!! To make things really exciting, the ad said the following; "Chassidishe and Bais Yosef Shechita". I have to admit that I have no idea what that means but it sounds very "machmir" and we all know that machmir is good. Can you imagine being machmir in Cancun? As my kids would say: COOOOOL!!

Well, we found out that it's too hot in Cancun so we kept looking. Let's see; there was Pesach in Los Cabos that said "Glatt Kosher and Scuba Diving" (but is the "Glatt" in Los Cabos also Bais Yosef?), Pesach in Italy on the Italian Riviera, Pesach in Las Vegas that boasts a "World championship golf course, 18,000 square ft European Spa and a Fully stocked Bais Medrash" (but how far is the Bais Medrash from the European Spa? I hate walking on Pesach) and Pesach in Disney with "100% hand Shmurah matzah, Daf Yomi and totally non-gebrokts" (does Mickey know that too??).

I'm telling you this is hurting my Shalom Bayis! I want Greece but my wife absolutely refuses. She wants Los Cabos. (Where is that anyway???). Two of my kids want Disney while my frum son insists on Chassidishe shechita which would leave us only with Cancun!

My daughter tells me that the Rabbi of the shul we used to dovin in is the Scholar-in-Residence in Spain where the ad says "No Kitnios". But when I demanded to know how fully stocked their Bais Medrash was she could not answer me!!! I'm telling you - kids today just don't get it!

So what do I do? I called my Rabbi back in New York and asked him what he felt. He said that he's going to Disney and if I book through him I can save 10%. Any suggestions?

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Remember History

By Moshe Feiglin

Adar II, 5768
March 16, 08

This past Shabbat, Jews throughout the world read the Torah portion, Zachor, in which we are commanded to remember Amalek and his evil schemes to obliterate the Nation of Israel. But currently, Israel is in the throes of a desperate attempt to erase its history. In doing so, it has lost its internal reference point, leaving it completely dependant on its enemies. Without Judaism, we have no right to be here. We are nothing more than foreigners occupying the land of the Hamas, who are simply fighting a war of independence.

Those who had mistakenly assumed that Israels leadership was beginning to understand reality received a chilling wake-up call last week from Israels president. Why do we need to learn history? Shimon Peres stumped for Education Minister Yuli Tamirs educational methodology. Everything is in the computer, anyway.

I do not think that there is another leader in the world who would dare make such a foolish and dangerous remark. No nation, no matter how young and remote, would demonstrate such blatant scorn for the history of the world and its own, national history. But the king of the Jews - the president of the country that claims to represent the most ancient nation in the world - wants to stop our children from learning history. After all, everything is in the computer and can be easily accessed with the press of a button.

Technically, Peres is correct. The problem is that if history - the foundation on which our culture, heritage and justification for existing in the land rests - is in the computer and not in our heads and hearts, we will have no idea what we are doing here, why we should stay here and suffer, and certainly not why we should fight for this land.

I hate history, Peres explains, completely negating the Divine directive to remember history. Everything is in the computer. And anyway, he continues, we live in a world in which territory has no significance.

The entire post-modern ideology in which everything is virtual is personified by the president of the State of the Jews. Nothing is real anymore. The Land is virtual, the Kassams are nothing more than Shmasams as Peres called them and Israels policy is nothing more than a spin. In other words, reality is the amount of time that a given item stays in the headlines. Nothing else has any significance. Even pain is no longer real. Luckily for Israels leaders, the two soldiers who unnecessarily died in the IDFs meaningless venture in Gaza last week were killed and not captured. Otherwise, we would have been forced to remember them. Now that they have died, they are nothing more than their mothers problem.

Shimon Peres and the rest of the Oslo priests have enslaved us in a language and mentality that have made our reality meaningless. How can we stop the missiles from being fired on Israel when so many of its streets and structures are named after Rabin - the person who, more than anyone, symbolizes the process that has brought this catastrophe upon us?

Israel must free itself of the Oslo mentality. The key is to keep the memories in our heads and hearts - not in our computers.

Feiglin Not Interested in Flying to England

After publication of the British Home Office letter barring Moshe Feiglin from entering England, Manhigut Yehudit has received tens of indignant expressions of support from the entire Jewish world. Currently, Moshe Feiglin is the only politician in Israel who has merited this privilege. "The British, who completely succumbed to extreme Muslim violence, have apparently identified the man most significant to the struggle against this spreading evil," Moshe Feiglin commented on Israels Channel 10.

In response to the Home Office letter, Moshe Feiglin wrote as follows:

25 Adar I, 5768
March 3, 08

To the British Government
Home Office
Border and Immigration Agency

Two months ago, I received a letter from your office in which you stated that I am not welcome in your country. As I was under the impression that the letter was a practical joke, I attempted to clarify its authenticity before I replied. Now that I have ascertained that the letter is indeed authentic, I wish to make a few points:

1. I did not request entry into Britain and I have no immediate plans to do so.
2. It would be proper to investigate the reasons for this strange initiative against a political figure in Israel. This initiative constitutes yet another example of European interference in Israels internal affairs.
3. Being that infamous terrorists such as Ibrahim Moussaui of the Hizbollah are actually most welcome in Britain, while I -- who have never harmed anyone - am not, I understand that your policy is to encourage and support terror.
4. As is clarified in your letter, the basis for your decision is material that I had written years ago citing the necessity to fight Arab terrorists and my analysis of the culture from which terror grows. Among other facts, you quote my article in which I wrote that "The Arab is not the son of the desert, but rather, its father."
For your information, that quote was taken directly from the book "The Desert Yesterday and Today" written by none other than British High Commissioner of Sinai, Sir Claude Jarvis in 1938.
5. Considering the moral depths to which your nation has sunk, I find your letter most complimentary. It is a great honor for me to join the illustrious list of former prime ministers of Israel, Menachem Begin and Yitzchak Shamir, who also received similar letters from your offices.


Moshe Feiglin

Sunday, March 09, 2008

We Climbed the Wrong Mountain

By Moshe Feiglin

Adar I, 5768
March, '08

Translated from the NRG website.

Have you ever been on a military maneuver, climbed a mountain, and then, as you try to catch your breath, discovered that you are sitting on top of the wrong mountain? I don't think that anybody who has passed through IDF officers' training has not had that experience. After the searing moment of realization sinks in, there is no choice but to go all the way back down and then to climb up the right mountain. One thing is for sure. There are no shortcuts, and before you can ascend the right mountain, you must go all the way back down to the bottom of the wrong mountain.

That is more or less what is happening now in Israel. Two thousand years of exile had passed until we reached the absolute bottom of the mountain - the place where killing a Jew was just like killing a mosquito. And then, approximately one hundred years ago, the Nation of Israel began to search for its fitting place in history. Paradoxically, the very religion that had preserved the Jews during the two thousand years of exile, was perceived during that period as the obstacle to returning to history. The national culture that had contracted to 'religion' when the Temple was destroyed and Israel exiled could not unzip itself like a computer file. Culture takes time, and likely hundreds of year will pass until the Torah will truly be our national culture.

But the historical alarm clock was ringing. It was time for the the Jews to return to the Land of Israel and to become a nation once again. Those who managed to get the most energy together and to begin the climb up the mountain were Jews who had rejected their religion. The mountain that they chose to climb on their ascent back into history was not the Jewish identity mountain. It was the normalcy mountain. It is easy to understand why. They reasoned that they would establish a state just like all the other enlightened states, join the family of cultured nations, be rid of the Jewish exile hunchback and be a nation like all other nations.

The success of Zionism was dizzying. We miraculously reached the summit of the mountain. It was no longer possible to kill the Jews like mosquitoes. Just the opposite. The Jews had learned to be superior warriors.

The ascent had been successful. But more or less about the time of the Yom Kippur War, the first signs that we had climbed the wrong mountain began to appear. It turned out that even after the amazing victory in the Six Day War, the neighbors still did not recognize our right to exist. The anti-Semitism that reminds us of the Judaism that we so wanted to forget and that Herzl promised would disappear as soon as we established a state - simply changed its form. We tried to fool ourselves and flip a different switch. Instead of being a normal nation by conquering the land, we would be normal by surrendering it. We convinced ourselves that the hatred of Israel stems from the "Occupation" and the settlements, and that if we just retreat to the pre-Six Day War lines, we will finally merit our longed-for normalcy. But the more that we destroyed the settlers and disengaged from the land, the more the hatred grew. Worse yet, the price of the blood of our children began to decrease. Currently, the murder of a Jew in Sderot or Ashkelon has once again become a trivial matter which we must accept.

So now what do we do?

For ten years, Manhigut Yehudit has been trying to explain that we are climbing the wrong mountain. When Rabin shook Arafat's hand, we warned that rockets would explode in Ashkelon. When nobody listened, we blocked the roads. Nothing helped. Reality has proven time and again that we were right. But the illusion that we had finally discovered the secret to turning into a normal nation is very strong. Now we are sliding down the mountain, nearing the point at which even here, in the Land of Israel, in our super-high-tech normal state, armed to the teeth - killing a Jew is like killing a mosquito. And the world accepts and justifies it.

I read an interview this week with Professor Ze'ev Tzachor, the dean of the Sapir College in Sderot, where a student was killed by a Kassam last Thursday. (This is the same college at which an Arab lecturer forced a student out of class because he was dressed in his army uniform). Professor Tzachor explained how his British colleagues rationalize the reason for hatred of Israel in England:

"We had dreamed of a place in which the new Book of Books would be written as a prelude to world-wide redemption. After all, you are G-d's treasured nation and the world has expectations. But look at what you have done."

Do you understand? The world does not expect us to be normal! The world expects us to be ourselves and to develop our unique culture so that we can be a source of inspiration and hope for all mankind. In the eyes of the world, when we insist on being 'normal,' we lose our very right to exist!

So now we are sliding down the slippery slope. Gush Katif, Sderot, Ashkelon. Everybody knows that sooner or later, it will get much closer to home. But unfortunately, we have not yet reached the bottom of the mountain. When we do get there, we must be sure to begin our climb up the right mountain. Not the mountain of 'normalcy,' but rather, the mountain of Jewish identity.

Friday, March 07, 2008

The Powerful and the Pathetic

By Jason Gold

So it has come to this. In a desperate attempt to salvage their credibility and prove that indeed their vote cannot be bought (but can be rented for a period of time) Shas MK's stand up and proudly proclaim that as soon as the Olmert government begins discussing Jerusalem, they are gone, oops they meant that if discussions continue, then they are gone. And while the insipid dithering goes on and Yahadut HaTorah tells us not to judge them by Shas's decision, eight beautiful Jewish boys are lying dead with 14 wounded after a savage attack at Mercaz HaRav by a so-called "Israeli Arab". Did anyone in Shas or Yahadut ask him if he was a moderate? A supporter of Abbas? Never have the holders of such potential power in their hands to completely reshape the Jewish Landscape, looked so pathetic.

How do you sleep at night Eli Yishai? How do you sleep at night Meir Porush? If only you realized how truly powerful you are; how you could do so much good for all of klal Yisrael; not just those who look like you, dress like you and speak like you but for all. Yet you only care about your constituents; making sure the yeshivas are full and that there are handouts for those who have large families and have no desire to support them. After all, that's what keeps you in power isn't it? So what if you are playing the game of Mr. 3% prime minister and all of those faithless incompetents that have come before them. Your mission is to put more torah scholars on the streets, regardless of cost to country or human life of those who do not vote for you. Your job is do this while alienating the secular Jews that you could draw closer while you hunker down in your shtetel or dhimi mindset and wait for Mashiach to knock on the door. It really makes me wonder if you tell the truth to your revered scholars Rav Ovadia and Rav Elyashav because in my heart I cannot believe if they truly knew what was going on outside the walls of their homes, be it in Bnei Brak, Jerusalem or elsewhere, that they would sanction this. Truly a band of the powerfully pathetic.

From one shomer Torah U'Mizvot Jew to another I ask you Eli and Meir how can you stand this? I can see your rationalization on Sderot, after all it's not Jerusalem. And even leading rabbinic figures at the OU can support your position as they freely admit it is not their place to mix in as they only care about Jerusalem anyway. But now, eight Yeshiva boys lie dead, their blood screaming from the ground for justice. Their families will not sleep well for a very long time. How do you sleep Eli and Meir? You and your cronies sit in a corrupt, Godless government of thugs, shysters and blatant incompetents. You are complicit in murder, you are no better than the savage that slaughtered these boys and so you are indeed murderers Eli and Meir. You feign outrage shake your fist and then do nothing. In Rome, men would fall on their swords for allowing this to happen. Where are your swords? You have taken the Torah and corrupted it in the most vile way running after money to put more rabbis on the streets. Do we really need more rabbis on the streets of Israel today if this is the cost? No, Eli and Meir, you are no better than idol worshippers and murderers no matter how many pages of gemara and zohar you learn every day because of your twisting of the Torah. Nothing will change the fact that you enabled what happened today and what has been happening in Gaza all this time, going back to having been bought and paid for by Sharon for the disengagement.

Nothing will change Eli and Meir. Nothing will change until the chillul Hashem of the so-called religious parties in government propping up a kleptocracy such as this is swept out along with the trash that is currently the "ruling elite". Nothing will change until the people realize that they can and must have leadership that is faith-based and cares about ALL the people of Eretz Yisrael. Leadership that restores Jewish pride and Jewish justice. That truly believes that the Jews belong in Eretz Yisrael. That this is our land, God given, not the land of some mythical made-up Arab people. That lets the army do what it is supposed to do regardless of what CNN or the New York Times says. That when all is said and done, we have no real "friends" in the world; that we are destined to be a people apart and not part of so called "western" culture. Go Eli and Meir. Leave the government now with you perks and your bloated salaries and your Volvos and go beg forgiveness from the people of Sderot and the families of these beautiful murdered boys and at their graves. Olmert Livni and Barak won't. Neither will Peres or Beilin or Avineri or Bibi or the others who have brought death and destruction down on Eretz Yisrael and Am Yisrael. Repent and perhaps your day of reckoning will not be as severe of the others. Do the teshuva you need to do, for all of us. Be powerful, not pathetic.

Monday, March 03, 2008

Israel's Courts vs. the Jewish Majority

By Moshe Feiglin

"You are not allowed to pass through here," the Arab said to me. When I ignored him, he stood in the middle of the path and blocked my way. I got off my bicycle and clarified that I would be continuing on the path. "I'm going to call the courts!" he shouted after me. "The courts will take care of you!"

I was not passing through private property. I was riding on a mountain path that is used by the public. But the Arab knew that he had a powerful weapon. Israel's court system will automatically side with him.

Mordy and Elitzur Harel have been sentenced to long jail sentences. They were arrested during the protests for Gush Katif for planning to block the Ayalon highway with two burning cars. Mordy, his wife and five children are victims of the Expulsion. They were driven out of their home in Homesh in the Northern Shomron. Mordy's brother, Elitzur, is from Elon Moreh. He is married and the father of a baby.

The two brothers were bombastically charged with endangering life in a traffic thoroughfare. This charge has never been pressed against road-blocking protesters from the labor unions or the long list of other protesters who blocked roads to get their points across. This law can and should be used against those people who truly do intend to endanger the lives of the drivers on the roads. But not surprisingly, it is not used against Arab rock throwers. If they are arrested at all, they are generally released without charge. The extreme leftist rock throwers who have already taken out the eye of one border policeman and caused the death of another will never be sentenced to long prison terms. The Arab who murdered Ido Zoldon, may G-d avenge his blood, had previously been released from prison for the minor' crime of tying soldiers up and stealing their weapons. The Druze rioters who kidnapped a policewoman and burned Jewish homes in Peki'in received a very severe sentence - a friendly soccer game with the police.

But Israel's courts have made sure that two young Jewish fathers, who planned to effectively protest the pogrom being planned against them, will be sitting in prison for a long time. Israel's justice system enthusiastically supplied the judicial tools that the State of Israel needed in order to perpetrate its sensitive and determined' pogrom against the Jews faithful to the Land of Israel. Clearly, the exaggerated verdict against Mordy and Elitzur are part of the program to neutralize one of the most effective means of protest that the Land of Israel faithful have.

Tzviyah from Elon Moreh has already spent long months in prison. She could have gotten out long ago, but she is unwilling to identify herself or to cooperate in any way with the evil system. And she is right. The courts in Israel are anything but neutral arbiters in the ongoing political dispute raging in Israel. Their lack of objectivity has been proven countless times. As far as Tzviyah and many others are concerned, there is no reason to continue to play their zero-sum game. The left's political coercion is masquerading as a court and Tzviyah is not willing to take part in the theatrics. She understands that the courts are one of the most effective tools of the Israeli Left and Israel's enemies.

How do we rectify this situation?

Israel needs a political force that will change the rules of the game. Israel needs legislation that will obligate judges to undergo a public hearing before they are elected and to use Jewish law as the main source of their decisions. Israel needs legislation that will define the extent of the authority of the attorney general.

Manhigut Yehudit has the tools to make the needed changes in Israel - in the justice system, the media and more. But we need your help. By joining Manhigut Yehudit, you become part of the Jewish majority that dares to make a deep change. When you join and register your friends and family, you are doing your part to ensure that the State of the Jews will finally become the Jewish State.

Manhigut Yehudit needs your help now more than ever. You can also help create the Jewish majority revolution. Now is the time to support Manhigut Yehudit. Click here for our on line secure donation form. If you are in Israel, now is the time to volunteer to help. For more information, call (Israel) 02-996-1123.

The "One-Gallows" vs the "Two-Gallows" Solution

By Prof. Steven Plaut

I have received several requests from people who are not unsure how to answer the question, "Which do you prefer, a Two-State Solution or a One State Solution?"

Let me explain. Israel's Far Left is divided these days between those promoting a "Two State Solution," and a "One State Solution." By "Two State Solution," they mean a situation where Israel is annihilated in stages, after first agreeing to the setting up of a "Palestinian" Arab state in the West Bank and Gaza with some sort of land bridge connecting them and dividing the Negev and a "right of return" for "Palestinian" "refugees." That terror state will then be used to escalate terrorism and rocket attacks on Israel until all the Arab and Moslem armies rush in to aid it in its "defense" against Israeli aggression, and then Israel will be defeated militarily and the Jews exterminated in a new Holocaust.

The "One State Solution" leftists are essentially those who wish to revive the long dead ideas from the 1930s of creating a bi-national state to replace Israel, a predominantly Arab state in which the Jews will have dhimmi second-class status, and in which Jewish sovereignty and self-determination are ended. That is, until the dominant Arabs in the new progressive bi-national state annihilate the Jews in a new Holocaust.

By the "One State Solution," the Left obviously does not mean that one Jewish state, Israel, will control all of the Land of Israel west of the Jordan, a "one-state" alternative we all might consider. Actually, what they mean by a "One State Solution" is a "Rwanda Solution," where the Jews end up with the same fate as the losing side in Rwanda.

For years, when asked whether I prefer a "Two State Solution for Two Peoples" or a "One State Solution," I would reply that I am willing to settle for a 23 state solution for two peoples, where the Arabs get to keep their 22 existing states and the Jews get to keep their single state.

But that is losing its edge and many people miss the message in that quip of an answer.

In any case, when people whether you prefer a "Two State Solution" or a "One State Solution," what they are really asking you is which version of the far Left's agenda you choose, where you are not allowed to choose anything other than one of the Left's two "solutions."

So after careful consideration, I have come up with a better answer to that question about one-state vs. two-states. When asked whether you prefer a "Two State Solution" or a "One State Solution," the best answer should be: "That is not the correct question. The correct question is whether we should have a Two-Gallows Solution or a One-Gallows Solution for Traitors."

Should Jewish and Arab traitors both be hanged from the same gallows or from separate gallows? That is the REAL conundrum! There are advantages to each alternative. Hanging them separately might cause anti-Semites to denounce Israel for its apartheid system of gallows. Hanging them together on one set of gallows might cause problems of congestion. After all, so many people will want to come watch the traitors get hanged that highways and parking lots are likely to get jammed up.

Oy, Choices, choices, choices..

The Two State Solution?

Why pass this resolution now or at all?

By Ted Belman

ted-4.jpgI was shocked to receive a note from Dr Paul Eidelberg advising that The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) had endorsed for the first time a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The umbrella organization representing 14 national Jewish groups and 125 local Jewish community relations councils, resolved that

“the organized American Jewish community should affirm its support for two independent, democratic and economically viable states — the Jewish state of Israel and a state of Palestine– living side-by-side in peace and security.”

The JCPA includes, inter alia, the Orthodox Union (OU) and the American Jewish Congress. I wrote to all members of the Coordinating Council for Jerusalem, an umbrella organization dedicated to preserving Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel.,

By endorsing this resolution is the OU and the others saying they support a two-state solution regardless if it necessitates the division of Jerusalem? Or do they mean they are only endorsing it if Jerusalem remains undivided? Unfortunately the resolution implies the former.

Furthermore, how can one support a solution that is unachievable?

If the resolution is nothing more than wishful thinking or a platitude, why bother?

What motivated the need to support this resolution now?

Who is behind this effort?

To my mind this resolution is very detrimental as it makes it harder for alternates to be forwarded.

Within minutes I was advised by Nathan Diament, the OU Director of the Institute for Public Affairs, of the following CLARIFICATION: OU POSITION AND ROLE ON JCPA RESOLUTION

The Orthodox Union is a member agency of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) and participated in its annual conference this week.

As reported in the media, the JCPA debated and adopted a resolution with regard to the Israeli - Palestinian peace process. The media report, however, did not fully and accurately present the Orthodox Union’s position and activities with regard to the resolution; we do so here.

The OU delegation engaged in the debate over this resolution by proposing and/or opposing provisions of or amendments to the resolution text. The following were the actions of the OU on this matter:

The OU attempted to remove the resolution’s text which would have, for the first time, put JCPA on record in support of the “two state solution” - but we were defeated by a vote of the delegates to the JCPA.

The OU succeeded in inserting into the resolution’s text the statement that “Israel’s repeated offers to establish ‘two democratic states living side by side in peace and security’ have been met, time after time, by violence, incitement and terror.”

The OU attempted to remove the resolution’s text calling for American Jewish support for any negotiations by the Israeli government over the re-division of Jerusalem - but we were defeated by a vote of the delegates to the JCPA.

The OU succeeded in inserting into the resolution text which calls upon the American Jewish community to support Israel’s insistence upon being recognized by the Palestinian Authority as a “Jewish state.”

The OU succeeded in defeating a proposed amendment to the resolution text which would have stated that the American Jewish community views the establishment or expansion of Israeli settlements as an “impediment to peace.”

At the conclusion of the debate and amendment process, the OU delegation abstained from the vote on final passage of the resolution and informed the JCPA of our intention to file a formal, written dissent from the portions of the resolution with which the OU disagrees.

I was satisfied with this position. I then send the same note to key officials with the American Jewish Congress and David Twersky, its Director of International Affairs, wrote back within minutes with its position. He then asked me not to use his statement because he wanted to amend it and I asked him to call which he did.

I advised the OU and everyone on the CCJ of our conversation,

David’s position and that of the American Jewish Congress is that if Israel doesn’t cut a deal that we will be confronted by demands for a bi-national state. So in effect they support Olmer/Livni/Rice/Bush approach. So does the JCPA. The only issue is whether the US should impose a solution of leave it to the parties to dance around.

He believes that the two-state solution is the least worst of all “solutions”.

I am not satisfied that all the alternatives have been fully considered.

Perhaps the status quo is the best option at the moment. I also recognize that there is no such thing as a status quo. It is always changing. It is imperative that Israel channel that change in ways that st5rengthen its claims rather than weaken it claims. At the moment it is trying to enable facts on the ground in Jerusalem which will facilitate dividing it rather than keeping it al.

I suggest that we should hold some king of conference to fully air the status quo and all options.

In my conversation with David Twersky we had a major disagreement. He was adamant that the Saudi Plan offer a peace agreement and I was equally adamant that it only offered the possibility of normalization after Israel withdrew to the ‘49 Armistice Lines.

Ami Isseroff suggested I look at the The Arab Peace Initiative in which the Arab League,

1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.

2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:

I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:

I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries

5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighbourliness and provide future generations with security, stability and prosperity

A quick reading would suggest that Twersky is right but do not be taken in.

The Middle East Intelligence Bulletin entitled Syria and the Saudi Peace Initiative in 2002 discussed the amendments to the Saudi plan as a result of Syrian protestations.

The Summit Resolution

The Arab League summit transformed Abdullah’s simple declaration of principles into a more convoluted resolution that is less likely to achieve a breakthrough with Israel. Although Syrian efforts to replace the term “full normalization” with “complete peace” were unsuccessful, they were able to reduce it to the watered-down phrase “normal relations” (alaqat tab’iyya), which carries a very different connotation in Arabic - meaning the establishment of relations that are not unusual, rather than a process of improving political, economic, and cultural ties.

A far more critical amendment to the Saudi proposal concerns the status of Palestinian refugees from within Israel’s pre-1967 borders. The resolution added the demand for a “just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194″ and, at the insistence of Syrian and Lebanese delegates, a phrase affirming “the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.”

The reason for this added amendment was that Resolution 194 refers to compensation for refugees “choosing not to return,” implying that they should be given a choice. The phrase “special circumstances” refers to the Lebanese constitution, which bans the patriation of refugees. Thus, with respect to the 350,000 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, the Arab League resolution calls not for their “right of return” (as the Palestinian delegation lobbied for), but mandates that they must be settled in Israel.

I never understood what para 4 (Palestinian patriation) ’til now.

Totally aside from the fact that there is no way Israel will accept these terms for any number of reasons, which means there will be no “normal relations” or peace agreement in the offing, there is no recognition here of Israel as a Jewish State.

In this regard, the PA has been adamant that it will not relent in its demand for the right of return and will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Nor will it relent on its demand for East Jerusalem to be its capital.

Since it provides for the return also of the Golan, Syria effectively has been given a veto.

This is not news to the people involved in negotiations as can be seen in my article “Annapolis” is a separation process, not a peace process.

That being the case, how do we understand yesterday’s resolution,

“the organized American Jewish community should affirm its support for two independent, democratic and economically viable states — the Jewish state of Israel and a state of Palestine– living side-by-side in peace and security.”

We don’t. It is an affirmation of the goal of the Roadmap with the word “contiguous” left out consciously or otherwise, and it is silent on Jerusalem and the right of return. It seems to me that there was no need for such a statement but my guess is the Government of Israel wanted it to counter the Arab threat to withdraw their initiative or to undermine the position of the CCJ and the Israeli public which is demanding no division of Jerusalem. In effect, it gives approval for the continuation of negotiations for a two state solution knowing that there is no deal other than the Saudi Plan which is just a mirage as I have pointed out. To my mind, to support the two-state solution is to support the Saudi Plan, because there is no other way it will come into being.

James Woolsey Jr, former Director of the CIA recently spoke in Toronto and said “Two-state Solution out of reach”. Read the article because he had other important things to say on the Middle East.

From my point of view, the JCPA should have sided with the people and not with the Government or should have stayed on the sidelines.

I suspect that this resolution was initiated by Olmert who created the controversy over whether Jews in the Diaspora had a right to a say on Jerusalem. He has in effect co-opted them to be supportive of the peace process.

Right Left Confusion

Slowly but surely, the traditional stands of Israel's Right and Left seem to have interchanged. Leftist journalist Yaron London calls to turn Gaza into dust, while Manhigut Yehudit calls to encourage Arab emigration from Gaza by financial and organizational means. Manhigut Yehudit warns against a military incursion into Gaza, while more and more leftists call for a major military operation there. The Left insists that Sderot's children must stay in the missile-stricken city, while Manhigut calls for their immediate evacuation.

What is going on here? Has the Left become more patriotic than the Right? Not really. The difference between the Left and the Right is not in their respective desires for peace or in their humanism thresholds. The difference is at a completely different point: The point of Jewish identity. Transferring the Arabs out of Yesha as part of an orderly and humane plan to rehabilitate them in some other place on the globe would leave us alone with the Land of Israel. It would leave us with Shechem and Hebron, the Temple Mount and Rachel's Tomb. It would connect us to our irritating Jewish identity. And as the Left sees it, if we can't get rid of our Jewish identity by giving the land to the Arabs, then let's destroy some of them and force them to give us our hoped for normalcy. This is actually the concept that reigned in Israel from 1948 until 1973.

The Left has invented a new, cynical form of patriotism' at the expense of Sderot's children. Throughout modern history, children have been temporarily evacuated when their homes came under attack. But in Israel of 2008, that is unthinkable.

Why doesn't the Left want the children to be evacuated from Sderot? In the past, Israel would fight wars. When we fight a war, we can hope for victory and feel confident that the children will return. But the Left wants to erase our Jewish identity. To accomplish that, it invented the Oslo peace' process. The solution to the Kassam problem entails a complete turnabout from the Oslo concept. First, it means understanding that this is our land. Second, it means accepting that we are not in a peace process, but rather, in a war over our land. Third, it means that we must decide to destroy the enemy, to triumph in war, to conquer Gaza, annex it to Israel and settle the entire area with Jews. But this change means that we connect to our Jewish identity, and the Left does not want that to happen. So Israel will not really go to war and it will be sure not to really win.

If there is no real victory, the children of Sderot will not return home. In fact, their parents will join them and the rest of the dominos of the State of Israel will quickly collapse. So the children of Sderot are actually hostages of the Oslo concept. They are the cannon fodder on the altar of the Israeli dream of normalcy.

We must demand the evacuation of the entire non-combat population of Sderot. The State must find them a respectable solution in another place until it fulfills its most basic responsibility and restores peace and quiet to the area. The IDF is supposed to be the defensive shield of the State - not the children of Sderot.