April 2004
April 2, 2004 Watching the Watchers
April 4, 2004 President Bush is About to Meet with Sharon in April
April 11, 2004 Unilateral Withdrawal - The Failure of "Pragmatism"
April 13, 2004 Defying The Will of G-d
April 15, 2004 Arafat Was Behind U.S. Terror Attack
April 16, 2004 A Scandalous Arrangement
April 19, 2004 No more ethnic cleansing
April 19, 2004 Bush's April 2004 Speech - A Disaster for Israel
April 20, 2004 Landau's Letter to Sharon Protesting Quashing of Debate
April 20, 2004 Upcoming Events
April 22, 2004 U.S.Foreign Policy Must Accord with Bible Morality
April 23, 2004 People are beautiful, the world stinks
April 25, 2004 A Few Words of Encouragement
April 27, 2004 The Agenda of Islam - A War Between Civilizations
April 28, 2004 An Appeal to Avert Evil in the Holy Land!
April 29, 2004 Movilization for Day of Referendum
April 30, 2004 Mapping Survival
*******************************************************
April 2, 2004
Watching the Watchers
Dear Friends,
We urge you to volunteer at an Army Checkpoint nearest you, in
connection
with Women in Green's new campaign entitled "Fifth Column Watch".
Please
call our office (02-624-9887) in order to volunteer your services, and tell
us the hours you are able to be at the site you choose. Below, you can read
about this new campaign in the news report of Arutz 7 (Item # 6 entitled
"Watching the Watchers").
Up until now, we have mainly been going to the Army Checkpoint at the
entrance to Bethlehem. After the Passover Holidays we hope to cover other
Army Checkpoints as well. (Around Jerusalem, Kalandya, Aram, and Abu
Dis,
Schem (Nablus), Tulkarim, and others.)
Donations for the new project would be greatly appreciated. In order to be
effective and reach all the Army soldiers involved, we must take out costly
ads in the Hebrew Press, and provide the different teams of "Fifth Column
Watchers" with digital cameras, video-recorders, and hand recorders. This
can only be done by way of your generous donations.
A Joyous Passover to everyone.
-------------------------
Machsom Watch ("machsom" means "checkpoint" in Hebrew) is an
organization
of Israeli women that monitors and reports alleged human rights abuses by
IDF soldiers at checkpoints throughout Judea, Samaria and Gaza. It is also
an organization that harasses and threatens soldiers, and incites the Arab
population, according to Women in Green. In response, Women in Green
has
set up Fifth-Column Watch and published a flier informing soldiers of their
right to file charges against the members of Machsom Watch.
Machsom Watch, which won an award from the Israeli Human Rights
Coalition,
was founded in January 2001, according to the organization's literature,
"in response to repeated reports in the press about human rights abuses of
Palestinians…. The excessive Israeli response to the El Aksa Intifada, the
prolonged closure and siege of villages and towns on the West Bank
provided
the stimulus and the motivation…."
The goals of the group are, again as per their own publications: "1) To
monitor the behavior of soldiers and police at checkpoints; 2) To ensure
that the human and civil rights of Palestinians attempting to enter Israel
are protected; 3) To record and report the results of our observations to
the widest possible audience, from the decision-making level to that of the
general public."
Nadia Matar of Women in Green, a grass-roots Land of Israel lobby group,
claimed this week that, in fact, Machsom Watch activities constitute direct
and indirect harm to Israeli soldiers manning the checkpoints.
Matar says that the women of Machsom Watch "place themselves
alongside IDF
checkpoints, displaying open hostility towards our soldiers and clear
admiration for the Arab population. They photograph our soldiers non-stop,
embarrass them before the Arabs, pass among the Arabs with a pad of
paper
and incite them against the IDF. They do so by asking the Arabs if they
have a complaint against any of the soldiers. The Arabs, of course, gladly
provide the goods. And then, without checking the accuracy of the
complaints, they [the Machsom Watch activists] immediately file charges
against the soldiers."
Matar further claims that if a soldier "does his job faithfully, and checks
an Arab and his possessions thoroughly and at length, he hears curses
and
condemnations from the women of Machsom Watch."
In this way, by constantly threatening the soldiers with charges, Machsom
Watch "compels the soldiers to do a negligent job, and threatens the
security of the citizens of Israel," Matar says.
"In truth," the Women in Green leader concludes, "that group is worthy of a
badge of shame for its collaboration with the Arab enemy."
Women in Green began 'watching the watchers' sporadically in March of
2002,
and this week the organization announced the establishment of Fifth-
Column
Watch, in order to "monitor the activity of the leftist women, photograph
them and, if need be, file charges against them with the police." Women in
Green published a flier that informed IDF soldiers that they too can file
charges against Machsom Watch activists "if they interfere, curse you,
insult you or threaten you, even by implication, that they will file a
complaint against you…."
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 4, 2004
President Bush is About to Meet with P.M. Sharon in April
(This Media Release was originally sent out in December 2001. It is being
updated because President Bush is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister
Sharon on April 14, 2004, with regard to Sharon's plan to unilaterally
evacuate large segments of Jewish Communities in Biblical Judea, Samaria
and Gaza.)
Eugene W. Rostow, U. S. Undersecretary of State for political affairs
between 1966 and 1969, played a leading role in producing the famous
Resolution 242. He has emphatically stated that 242 "calls on the parties to
make peace, and allows Israel to administer the territories it took over in
1967 until "a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" is achieved. 242
called for secure and recognized boundaries agreed to by the parties.
When such a lasting peace has been "achieved", Israel is required to
withdraw from SOME, but not ALL of the territories it acquired during the
Six Day War, in accordance with the agreement reached by the parties to
the present dispute. The 338 Resolution passed after the Yom Kippur War
in 1973, made Resolution 242 binding.
Professor Rostow pointed out that President Reagan always maintained
that Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria and in the Gaza Strip were
perfectly legal. Moreover, the British Mandate fully recognized the right of
the Jewish People to settlement in the entire mandated territory. In 1922,
Britain withheld Jewish settlement in what is now Jordan, but Rostow
asserts that the Jewish right of settlement in Judea and Samaria and Gaza,
that is west of the Jordan River, is incontestable. Rostow says that right
cannot be terminated and is buttressed by Article 80 of the UN Charter
which provides that nothing shall be construed to alter in any manner the
rights of …peoples or the terms of existing international instruments…"
The Mandate given to Britain by the League of Nations was such an
international instrument. The Mandate recognized the historical connection
of the Jewish People with their Biblical homeland, and the grounds for
reconstituting their national home in that country. Undersecretary of State
Rostow pointed out that therefore the Jews have the same right to settle in
any part of Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip as they have to settle in
Haifa, Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.
The State Department, until Powell's Louisville speech, has never denied
that under the British Mandate the Jewish People have the right to settle in
all parts of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. U.S. Secretary of State
Powell, with President Bush's blessings, has brought an inordinate amount
of pressure on little Israel to comply with the Saudi Arabia sponsored Road
Map. Although seemingly drafted by the United States, the UN, the
European Union and Russia, (with the support of France and Germany), the
proposed Road Map is none other than a disguised Saudi Arabian
approved proposal. The Saudis know that if the Road Map is ever
effectuated, it will mean the destruction of Israel. If that was to occur, the
Muslim dictatorships would have an unhampered rule over the entire
Middle East.
President Bush and US Secretary of State Powell talk about Israel's
"occupation" with regard to Jewish settlements. Their Two State solution
has not the remotest chance of working because of Arab violence and
terrorism. Indeed, true American interests in the area, particularly in Iraq,
require that terrorism not be rewarded by creating another Arab State
within the Biblical Homeland of Israel.
The Bush family's close ties with the Saudis should not prevail over what is
in the true interest of America. Nor should Powell be impressed by Saudi
wealth and royalty. America is being extremely disloyal to its only true
friend and ally, Israel. When will President Bush finally realize that the G-d
of Israel is the ruler of this universe? As the Bible states (Genesis 12:3), He
will surely "curse" those involved in causing the attempted elimination of
Israel from His Holy Promised Land.
Ruth and Nadia Matar
*******************************************************
April 11, 2004
UNILATERAL WITHDRAWAL THE FAILURE OF "PRAGMATISM"
by Yoram Ettinger
President Bush (March 19, 2004): "Any sign of weakness or retreat simply
validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations... No
accommodation will satisfy their endless demands..." A withdrawal from
Gaza would be inconsistent with President Bush's sound statement. It
would defy post-Oslo Palestinian hate-education.
1. Systematic blunders damage Washington. Since 1993, two US and
five Israeli Administrations have embraced the politically-correct
"pragmatist" Oslo, Wye, Mitchell, Tenet, Zuni, Camp David II and the Road
Map accords. They failed to advance a solution and undermined US
prestige; they fueled an unprecedented wave of terrorism (1,400 Israelis
murdered, which is proportionally equal to 70,000 Americans 23 Twin
Towers!), distancing Israelis and Palestinians farther from peace. Reluctant
to learn from past errors, they're now introducing Unilateral Withdrawal.
2. From "Territory for Peace" to "Territory for Terrorism". Unilateral
withdrawal is the offspring of the "pragmatic" territory for peace, which
was followed by the "pragmatic" recognition of the PLO/PA and by the
"pragmatic" tolerance of PA/PLO's hate-education (since 1993) and
PA/PLO's systematically ruthless violation of all accords. A retreat from
Gaza would exacerbate terrorism in Israel, Jordan and Iraq, as was the case
with the prior retreats from Lebanon (2000) and from Gaza and 40% of
Judea & Samaria (Oslo 1993).
3. Peace was achieved following WWII when the rogue Nazi regime (not
just Hitler) was demolished, and Germany was forced to concede territory
to its intended victims, which reciprocated by peace. Peace has been
undermined by the "Pragmatist" Oslo-Wye-Road Map, which legitimized
the rogue Palestinian Authority, and forced the intended victim, Israel, to
concede territory. It has thus rewarded regional terrorism, intensified
regional violence and undermined regional moderation.
4. Deterrence-driven peace is the only possible peace in the violently
unpredictable Mideast. It would be severely undermined if Palestinian
terrorism would be rewarded.
5. Territory for peace assumes illogically that Israel (less than 0.2% of
Arab territory) should concede its scarcest asset territory, while the Arabs
are expected to accord Israel that which they have never accorded to one
another compliance and peaceful coexistence. Would Israel be entitled to
retrieve territory, when the Palestinians renege once again on peace?!
6. "Pragmatists" have sacrificed faith, tenacity, experience and realism
on the alter of cynicism, vacillation, wishful-thinking and superficiality.
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 13, 2004
Defying The Will of G-d
President Bush and Ariel Sharon are meeting on Wednesday, April 14, 2004
with the sole purpose of Defying the Will of G-d. In His Place and Stead
they will be conspiring to fulfill the Saudi Road Map Plan and to destroy the
Jewish State in His Holy Land.
It is fortunate that neither President Bush nor Prime Minister Sharon will
not succeed. No matter the wealth of the Saudis, the Prophets of Israel will
have the final moral word. The Promise the L-rd made to the Jewish People
in His Bible will prevail.
Therefore, Women in Green, along with those from Kiryat Arba and others,
will demonstrate at the time that President Bush and Sharon are meeting at
the White House. The equivalent time at Paris Square In Jerusalem is
Wednesday, April 14, 2004 at 6 P.M.
Unilateral Withdrawal from Gaza, Judea, and Samaria is equivalent with the
Jewish People committing suicide. We cannot and must not allow that to
happen. With G-d's Help and your initiative, this sacrilegious madness
WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO OCCUR !
Ruth and Nadia Matar
*******************************************************
April 15, 2004
Arafat Was Behind U.S. Terror Attack
(The following appeared on the Arutz 7 Israel National News website
www.israelnationalnews.com on Wednesday, April 14, 2004)
The United States has determined that Yasser Arafat approved a terrorist
attack on a U.S. embassy convoy in which three Americans were killed in
2003. Middle East Newsline reports in the name of U.S. diplomatic sources
that an American investigation into the Gaza bombing last October
indicated Arafat's clear role.
The sources said that Arafat did not draft or approve the details of the
attack, but rather agreed to a proposal relayed by one of his high-level
aides for the Palestinians to "send a message" to the United States. The
idea for the attack came at a time when some Fatah officials complained
that American policy towards the PA and the Arabs was unfair.
In the attack, which took place at the Beit Hanoun junction in northern Gaza
on Oct. 15, 2003, three American security personnel were killed: John
Branchizio, 37, of Texas; John Linde, Jr., 30, of Missouri, and Mark
Parsons, 31, of New Jersey.
The PA recently released four "suspects" in the attack, after having put
them on speedy trial two months ago. The trial aroused suspicion from the
outset, coming only two days after the United States offered a reward of $5
million for information leading to the capture of the murderers - and less
than two weeks after an American threat to freeze aid to the PA unless the
matter was resolved. Until then, the PA had refused to cooperate with
American law enforcement officials in attempting to find the guilty parties.
State Department officials informed the PA at the time that the closed-door
trial was unacceptable, and that they demanded "justice" - not a mock trial
against four defendants whom the Americans believed to be innocent. "We
are very concerned, and demand a true investigation that will bring the
guilty parties to justice," said the U.S. statement.
(Surprisingly, the U.S. Government, despite the above findings, has not cut
off the funding to the Palestinian Authority, which apparently continues as
usual. Nor has the U.S. urged Israel to suspend its funding of the
Palestinian Authority, until the guilty parties in question are brought to
justice. )
*******************************************************
April 16, 2004
A Scandalous Arrangement
The Haredi parties, Shas and Aguda, seem to be working together with
Labor to replace the present coalition in the event that the Sharon's Plan
for unilateral withdrawal causes a break-up of the present Government.
This was learned today, fortuitously, in a conversation we had with
someone who is devoting his full time and effort exclusively to effectuate
this new coalition.
This unfortunate move by Sharon to stay in power is overshadowed by the
shortsightedness of Shas and Aguda. These Parties fail to realize where
their respective parties true interest lies, let alone what is in the best
religious interest of the Country in which their constituents reside.
Particularly is this true, in light of Sharon's disappointing meeting with
President Bush, where no concrete benefits to Israel emerged. At best,
inconsequential results were obtained, and we are left with various
interpretations of what occurred in Washington. In this light, the Shas and
Aguda planned move is even more ludicrous.
The failure of our religious leaders generally to lead our people, and
spiritually inspire them to a path that is meaningful and fulfilling, is
notoriously well known. Even our so called sages have not been acting
wisely. By their lack of leadership, they have brought about the emergence
of a political entity who has adopted anti-religious policies. Instead of
drawing secular Jews closer to religion, these sages by their inaction,
indecisiveness and unwillingness to face criticism, have turned these
secularists into enemies of the Jewish religion.
The fact is that the ultra-orthodox religious have not been sharing the
burdens that any society imposes on all of its members, particularly in view
of the vicious nature of our Arab enemy. In the days of King David, there
never was a question about religious Jews not performing military service
against the enemies of Israel. Our sages, such as Rabbi Akiva, would never
have permitted the moral self-destruction of individuals that is taking place
in our society today, by those refusing to share the burden of defending
our People against the Arab enemy.
What are the true interests of Shas and Aguda Parties?. As loyal Jews the
members of such parties should be faithful to our Biblical Promised Land.
All of it, including Gaza, and all of historical Judea and Samaria. The
members of such parties should never permit any of its leaders to sanction
the uprooting of Jews from their homes in their Jewish homeland! They
should be vigorous supporters of the right of Jews to live anywhere in their
Promised Land. While Jewish tradition, and particularly in its prayers, has
always has emphasized peace as a cardinal and central concept, the "land
for peace" doctrine is alien to Halachic law. Every inch of the Promised
Land belongs eternally to the Jewish People, and no Jewish leader, Party,
or any generation of Jews, as Ben Gurion stated long ago, is permitted to
relinquish that right.
It is therefore sad to realize that those who purportedly claim to be faithful
to our traditions, are willing to relinquish parts of our homeland to foreign
entities in order to gain momentary benefits. How Aguda and Shas can
ever consider being part of a government with Labor, or with Sharon which
is willing to force Jews out of their homes in Gaza, is incomprehensible.
The constituents of these Parties should voice their refusal to be party to
any such arrangement.
Ruth and Nadia Matar
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 19, 2004
No more ethnic cleansing
by Joseph Farah,
Editor of World Net Daily
President Bush did the right thing this week when he told Palestinian
refugees they can forget the so-called "right of return" and any future plans
to move to Israel. Their future lies only in "the establishment of a
Palestinian state and the settling of Palestinian refugees there rather than
in Israel," he said. The president twice referred to Israel as a Jewish state.
Any plan that would entertain the notion of millions of Arabs settling in
Israel would, of course, alter the fundamental character of the country.
Bush did not explicitly say that the United States supports Israel keeping
some of its large Jewish communities on the West Bank _ home to about a
quarter million Israelis _ but he endorsed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon's plan to withdraw the few thousand settlers from the Gaza Strip.
Why is it important to dispense with the idea of "the right of return"? And
why is it important for Israel to maintain Jewish communities on the West
Bank?
Any other alternative would amount to a green light for anti-Semitic ethnic
cleansing in the Middle East _ something the region has witnessed far too
much over the past 50 years. Yasser Arafat has promoted the "right of
return" as one more tactic in his ultimate goal for the destruction of the
state of Israel. He knows it is impossible for millions claiming Arab refugee
status to prove claims their property was ever taken from them. He knows
the tiny Jewish state could easily be overwhelmed by Arabs laying claim to
real estate or citizenship in Israel. He knows that the so-called "right of
return" amounts to his "final solution" _ a one-state solution that would
permit the vastly out-numbered Jews in the Middle East to be voted out of
their own country. Likewise, it is imperative for Israel to protect its well-
established Jewish communities in the West Bank, traditional Jewish
lands, because the Palestinian Authority is on record as insisting no Jews
be allowed to live in its future Palestinian Arab state.
This is one of the great untold stories of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Arafat and his allies demand that all Jews get out of the country they are
attempting to create. In any other part of the world, this kind of racist, anti-
Semitic effort at ethnically cleansing a region would be roundly condemned
by all civilized people. Yet, because most people simply don't understand
the clear, official plan by the Arab leaders to force out all Jews from the
new Palestinian state, Arafat retains a degree of sympathy, even political
support, from much of the world.
Think about what I am saying: It is the official policy of the Palestinian
Authority that all Jews must get off the land! Why is the United States
supporting the creation of a new, racist, anti-Semitic hate state? Why is the
civilized world viewing this as a prescription for peace in the region? Why
is this considered an acceptable idea? Is there any other place in the world
where that kind of official policy of racism and ethnic cleansing is tolerated
_ even condoned?
Why are the rules different in the Middle East? Why are the rules different
for Arabs? Why are the rules different for Muslims? Would America
consider it acceptable if the new Iraqi government said the few Jews
remaining in Iraq would have to leave? Would America consider it
acceptable if the new Iraqi governing council said Christians would have to
go?
Of course not. So why _ even before a Palestinian state is created _ why
do we accept as a fait accompli that Jews should be forced off their land in
the coming state of Palestine? Why are U.S. tax dollars supporting the
racist, anti-Semitic entity known as the Palestinian Authority?
Joseph Farah is a Christian Arab who is the editor of World Net Daily on
the Internet.
*******************************************************
April 19, 2004
President Bush's April 2004 Speech - A Disaster for Israel
By Nadia Matar
Chairperson of Women in Green
Shalom, this is Israel Radio News. The time is 10 a.m., April 14, 2006. Today
is the second anniversary of President Bush's speech in Washington, but
instead of celebrations, more funerals are being held for "disengagement
victims." The security forces, Magen David Adom,
Zaka [Disaster Victims Identification], and many volunteers continue
digging in the attempt to find signs of life in the ruins of the Azrieli Towers
that were razed in a terrorist attack, after the Palestinians fired a salvo of
sophisticated rockets from Gaza to Tel Aviv.
The grim forecasts of the opponents of disengagement have come to pass,
and despite all the painful concessions by the Israeli government, the quiet
that we sought after is not on the horizon. To the contrary - since Prime
Minister Sharon uprooted all the settlements of Gush Katif and the area
was handed over to the Palestinians, Israel's southern cities have been
under constant attack. Day after day, the Palestinians continue to fire
Katushas at Ashdod, Ashkelon, and Beersheva, with large numbers of
casualties. The IDF is incapable of defending Israeli citizens.
In addition to the troubles from Gaza, there are serious problems from the
Palestinian State in the east. A quarter of a million Arab refugees - men,
women, and children - are marching towards Jerusalem to pray on the
Temple Mount. From there, they intend to march to Sheikh Munis (north
Tel Aviv) and other villages in the Gush Dan area that their families
abandoned in the '48 war. We are waiting for an update by our
correspondent on this mass march.
The IDF soldiers are powerless to respond to this march. Teargas for the
dispersal of demonstrations cannot be used to disperse hundreds of
thousands of people. Shooting at the refugees is not an option - live fire by
IDF soldiers against unarmed marchers would be condemned throughout
the world.
The refugees have succeeded to destroy the fence completely. They are
continuing to march on to Jerusalem with nothing standing in their way.
Our other correspondents are reporting that masses of Israeli Arabs have
taken to the streets to greet their brothers from the Palestinian state. Just
as in the October 2000 riots, the Arabs are attacking every Jew they
encounter, and are destroying Jewish property whenever possible. This
time, the disturbances are not limited to the Galilee area, but are breaking
out everywhere. Magen David Adom and the police are not capable of
dealing with the masses of rioters and the mounting casualties. After the
2004 Bush speech, the Arabs pretended to be incensed with the American
President, but the truth, of course, was completely different.
Our correspondent in the south reports that half a million Gaza Arabs have
just begun marching onto Gush Dan. The security forces don't know how
to stop this human flood. We're returning the broadcast to the studio, for
further reports.
We want to remind our listeners that, in his April 2004 speech, President
Bush stated: I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states
living side by side [...] and to the roadmap as the route to get there." This
meant that after uprooting all the Jews from Gaza, the settlements in Judea
and Samaria will be completely razed, including the settlement blocs in
Gush Etzion, Ariel, and Maaleh Adumim.
Prime Minister Sharon indeed did attempt to stop the destruction of the
settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria. He relied on President Bush's 2004
speech, which said: "In light of new realities on the ground, including
already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect
that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete
return to the armistice lines of 1949." Israel understood these statements
to mean that President Bush favored the annexation of these settlement
blocs. However, Bush later clarified his statement, to stress that what he
was referring to were the Israeli population centers in Ramat Eshkol and
French Hill in Jerusalem. The American refused to include the
neighborhood of Gilo, in view of the strong opposition of the Arabs in
Bethlehem.
Some two million Arab "refugees" have come to the Palestinian state on
the West Bank, since its establishment in August 2005. The refugees have
no place to live, to work, no livelihood and nothing to eat. Hundreds of
refugee camps have sprung up everywhere. Jordan has erected a fence to
prevent the entry of the refugees into the kingdom. The international
community has demanded that Israel intervene and solve the humanitarian
problems of these refugees, and that is should agree to open its gates to
allow these refugees to live and work in Israel. As of now, Israel has
refused this demand, since the demographic threat would lead to the
elimination of the Jewish State of Israel.
"Shalom, this is Israel Radio News. The time is 10 p.m., April 14, 2006. All
the Jewish residents of Israel are to enter the shelters and remain there
until further notice."
"Salaam aleikum, this is Ishmael Radio News. We, the jihad [holy war] army
of the Arab refugees, proudly announce that al-Quds [Jerusalem] is ours.
We will soon also conquer Lod, Ramle, Jaffa, and all Palestine, from the
sea to the Jordan. We are currently broadcasting from the studios that
used to belong to Israel Radio."
***
The above scenario is what will likely occur as a consequence of President
Bush's April 2004 meeting with Prime Minister Sharon. In the event, G-d
forbid, there is a majority in the Likud referendum, the residents of Judea,
Samaria and Gaza, and their supporters, will have to save the country.
How? By declaring throughout the entire world: We do not accept the
results of the vote. No majority in the world is entitled to deport Jews from
Eretz Yisrael and to hand it over to foreigners.
Just as a majority in the Knesset and the government cannot compel
Sabbath observers to violate the Shabbat, so too, no majority is entitled to
give over the Land of Israel to foreigners and to transfer Jews from their
homes.
If the residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza stand firm on this question of
principle and do not consent to leave their homes, nor succumb to the
temptation of compensation and demagogic speeches about "the
importance of democracy and the will of the majority," the government will
not be able to uproot them. In this manner the residents of Judea, Samaria,
and Gaza will save the entire country from the dangers of the
disengagement plan.
The residents of Judea, Gaza, and Samaria have been entrusted with the
historic task of demonstrating that the only plan that will bring peace and
security to the region, is the divine plan that appears in the Bible. It is the
repetitive Promise that the L-rd made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
beginning with the Promise made to our forefather Abraham: For I give all
the land that you see to you and your offspring forever." (Genesis 13:15)
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 20, 2004
Minister Landau's Letter to PM Sharon Protesting Quashing of Debate
Aaron Lerner The following is IMRA's unofficial English translation:of
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Jerusalem
Mr. Prime Minister,
Mr. Prime Minister. I do not write this letter to you as a politician. As
politicians we have disappointed. I write to you as one of the People, who,
by right, should have his voice heard even if he opposes your position.
I wish to start not with what I, along with most members of the Likud,
opposed with our hearts and souls all these years but instead with what I
support with a certainty: I am for peace, and I know that there will be
compromises for that. I am for that my grandchildren aged one and a half
year won't have to still go to war. I am for battling terror to its defeat, as
you demonstrated again last week that you can do. I am for a Likud that is
based in the principles, wisdom in diplomacy and pragmatism in security
of Jabotinzky and Begin.
I am for the same Ariel Sharon that helped to build the Likud. And that we
all worked hard for in order to elect you as prime minister and as leader of
the People of Israel. And I am for our strong ties with our great friend the
United States, and with our important friend President Bush.
But I am not for the fact that we, the opponents of disengagement, have not
received any opportunity in the Likud. I am not for the fact that the
democratic process has been shamed, the process that is the basis of our
movement and our State. I am not for the fact that the institutions of the
movement are crippled for over a year and a half and that there is no
proper
decision making process.
I am not for your decision that a referendum of such dramatic and historic
importance should be made in a forceful grab. I am not for the fact that the
voting public has been given a total of gross three weeks, that in practice is
less than ten days, to study a matter that has such a fateful impact on the
future of the Jewish People.
I am not for that the democratic Party Election Committee should be
pressured from above, without having even one representative of the
disengagement opponents, and act as the long arm of the prime minister's
advisors.
I am not for the way that decisions were made about the having and then
the canceling of the debate - exclusively in accordance with the needs of
the media advisors of the prime minister and without any consultation with
us.
I am not for the fact that the prime minister promises party members to
accept their decision on his plan,but in practice creates a situation that
prevents any possibility for a genuine referendum..
And in particular I am not for the fact that a hidden threat is added as if
opposition may endanger the strategic ties with the USA, and your status,
Mr. Prime Minister.
I am not for the disgraceful campaign that your advisors have organized
against your opponents, opponents who are saying virtually the same
things that you said only half a year ago. And I speak, Mr. Prime Minister,
on behalf of many members in our Party.
I am not for the fact that our Party, the ruling Party, is driven more by the
force of personal interests than commitment to principles and true
pragmatism.
Mr. Prime Minister, if the path of the referendum that you have imposed on
us was not so crushing, it would be only natural that I would argue with
you in this letter about the quality of the program and ask you how, of all
the people in the world, you should be the one found rewarding terror.
I would argue that this is not true disengagement. After all, you know that
we are not leaving Gaza as we are not now in Gaza, and the Palestinians
will continue to enter to us via the Erez Crossing in their masses to
Ashkelon,Ashdod and Tel Aviv, some with bombs strapped to their waists!
I would have shown, black on white, that there is absolutely nothing
committal in the "benefits", as they were presented in the letter of
President Bush, but after all, you knew this already in the middle of the
celebratory press conference at the White House.
I would also sue for the honor of the Jewish People.
Between Holocaust Day Ceremonies and Memorial Day and Independence
Day ceremonies the Government of Israel says that "the friction has been
reduced" between Jews and Arabs when the meaning of it is the exclusive
transfer of Jews and the advancement of a process under which there will
be two and a half Palestinian states and barely on complete - ever
shrinking - state for the Jewish People. This is moral? This is just?
The truth is that from your standpoint the results of the referendum are no
longer relevant. The politicians are exhausted. But I want to reveal
something to you, Mr. Prime Minister - the Nation is strong! The members
of the Likud are strong!
My friends and I embarked on an unpopular struggle within our Party,
whose institutions don't give any fair chance to. At a time that most of the
media has been recruited to support the plan and make no effort, and not
even the semblance of an effort, to present our positions in a balanced
way.
In our eyes, Mr. Prime Minister, this referendum is no longer on the plan
that you agreed upon with the Americans before we knew the plan. It marks
the beginning of a campaign on the dearest to our heart. On what remains
from Judea and Samaria. On Jerusalem. On personal security in Tel Aviv.
On a democratic Likud. On principles. On diplomatic wisdom. On clean
politics. On the image of the State of Israel.The cancellation of the planned
debate between us put an end to the possibility of having - and even just
the semblance of having - a public
discussion of your unilateral withdrawal plan that is the subject of the
referendum. The public has a right to know. It is your obligation to make
possible democratic debate. To my great sorry the fact that if you wish -
there is a debate and if you don't - it is cancelled, serves witness to the
entire referendum process: as a done deal.
But despite all this we are in this game in order to win.
Respectfully,
Uzi Landau
*******************************************************
April 20, 2004
UPCOMING EVENTS - The Struggle for the Promised Land of Israel is
Constant
and Increasing.
a) The biased media in Israel is portraying the Bush-Sharon meeting as a
"historic achievement", not telling the public that President Bush said
nothing new and that Sharon really got nothing tangible. At the contrary,
the meeting was basically a new "White Paper' against the Jews of Israel,
calling for the uprooting of Jews from Gaza as a first step, with the
intent to continue with the Road Map, i.e. the additional uprooting of the
Jews of Judea and Samaria and the creation of a PLO state in its stead.
b) Bibi Netanyahu and Limor Livnat, on the Day of the Observance of the
Holocaust(!), have betrayed their principles and have joined the list of
weak leaders of the Likud who intend to implement the Hamas platform:
uprooting of Jews from the Promised Land of Israel, ethnic cleansing of
Jews and handing over of entire Jewish communities to the Arab enemy.
This is no time for despair, this is the time to act! For it is true our
political leaders are weak- but the People of Israel are strong.
Women in Green urge all to join the different activities for the survival
of the Land of Israel:
1) In exactly 2 weeks, Likud members will be asked to vote for or against
Sharon's suicidal withdrawal plan. We urge all our members and friends in
Israel to join the efforts of "Manhigut Yehudit" and Moetset Yesha in
convincing the Likud voters to vote against. Call Moetset Yesha
(02-5810624) and you will receive a list of Likud members to visit and
convince.
2) Last week's Women in Green's demonstration (on the day of the
Bush-Sharon meeting) was very successful. Pictures of our opposition to
the
withdrawal plan were seen in tens of different newspapers in Israel and
abroad (of course, as usual, without mentioning our name). Despite it being
very last minute, many people joined and held signs saying "The people
are
with Gush Katif"- The land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel, etc.
This week, Women in Green will go and demonstrate at a place where
mostly
Likud people can be found: the Jerusalem Marketplace of Mahane Yehuda.
WEDNESDAY, April 21, 2004 at 10:30 am we will meet at the entrance of
Mahane Yehuda Marketplace from the Jaffa Road side- holding signs
saying:
"A real Likudnik votes NO" [to the disengagement plan]
"A real Likudnik refuses to transfer Jews"
"A real likudnik loves Erets Yisrael"
"A real Likudnik does not give terror a prize"
3) INDEPENDANCE DAY IN GUSH KATIf Sponsored by Moetset Yesha-
Moetset Gush
Katif-Bnei Akiva-Ezra -Ariel Tuesday April 27th 2004 There will be a March-
activities for children-concert, etc. For details about buses call
02-582-2224. Buses from Jerusalem will leave from Binyanei Hauma from
10:00 to 11:00 am.
4) Fifth Column Watch
Another proof as to how important Women in Green's new "Fifth column-
Watch"
campaign to help our soldiers at the army checkpoints was given
yesterday. Kfir Ohayon, HY"D, is a soldier that was killed two days ago by
an Arab suicide bomber at the Erez checkpoint. Kfir's father Avi, gave an
interview on Radio Zahal and accused the activists of the Left and the
media for the reason for his son's murder. He claimed they harass the IDF
soldiers at the checkpoints. Avi told how, a few days before, activists of
the Left had bothered his son Kfir and had reprimanded him for being firm
with an Arab who refused to lift his shirt. Avi said that the terrorist
attack could have been prevented, had his son not been so worried of the
Leftist criticism.
There is no better way of showing our support to our soldiers, than going
on Yom Hazikaron (Remembrance Day to the soldiers), to the army
checkpoints
and hand out out cold drinks, goodies and most importantly our flyer
"Soldier- know your rights" (see below)
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 2004, YOM HAZIKARON
We will go to the Bethlehem and A-ram checkpoints in Jerusalem. we will
leave in our cars, from the Inbal (formerly The Laromme ) Hotel at 9:30am.
For those who have no cars, please reserve a seat by calling Anita 050-
77254
For our friends abroad who wish to contribute to this campaign: we need
financial donations in order to Advertise in the costly Hebrew Press and
acquire video and still cameras and snacks for the soldiers. Send your
contribution to Women In Green, P.O.B. 7352, Jerusalem, 91072, Israel. Or
go to our Website:
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 22, 2004
U.S.Foreign Policy Must Accord with Bible Morality and G-d's Promise!
When Israel wiped out the Iraqi threat of nuclear warfare in 1981, America
roared in protest. George Will, in an article recently in the Washington Post
on Security Council Resolution 242, notes that the United States finally
came around to the view of the formulators of that Resolution 242, only
after many years had passed from the time when that doctrine was
originally created. What is the message that the above facts tell us? It is
that the United States is not a realistic guide of what is right or wrong.
Unfortunately, the U.S. is influenced by considerations other than the
merits of the matter. The instances of the concept of the "Road Map" and
Sharon's plan for unilateral withdrawal from Gaza are two prime examples
of the wrong path which America has chosen to take once again.
It is utterly unrealistic for the U.S. to think it can change the Arab violence
and terror which Moslem Clerics foster in their congregations. It is
ignoring what has been going on in the Middle East over the last hundred
years. The Arabs will not change their spots, and suddenly live in peace
with the Jewish People. As long as Moslem Clerics instigate Moslems to
violence, and are intolerant of other faiths, this will not happen.
Not only are these Moslem concepts which they preach in defiance of what
is written in the Bible, but they create new immoral standards that are
foreign to, and threaten to overpower the values of Western Civilization,
and those of the Judaic-Christian faiths.
The fact is clear that the Moslem religion is intolerant of other religions,
and in all Arab countries this intolerance is commonplace. The
consequences of such intolerance is that Arabs resent living in, and are by
and large disloyal to, the Jewish State of Israel.
The prime example of this intolerance is on the Temple Mount in
Jerusalem, which Arab Moslems presently control. They do not permit
either Jew or Christians to pray there. Historically, the First and Second
Temples were located on the Temple Mount, although the Arabs typically
deny such facts. For the Jewish People it is the holiest site of the many
holy Jewish and Christian holy sites that exist in Israel. Seemingly, G-d
has hardened the hearts of the Moslem clerics to preach intolerance of
other faiths, in order that Arabs will be unable to live peacefully with Jews
in His Holy Land.
Any serious student of history will tell you that self-interest is the
determining factor for all nations, rather than what is morally correct. Arab
oil and the massive wealth of Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Gulf States
greatly influences the relationships of Arab states with other nations. The
UN is a perfect example of the bias against Israel as a result of the nations
pandering to the Arabs. Such blatant immorality, is indicative of how the
nations of the world determine where their self-interest lies.
Our clear message then is that American foreign policy is extremely
fallible. The "Road Map" and its sundry counterparts must eventually be
replaced. A new American policy must accord with the Biblical Promise G-
d made to the Jewish People, if the Biblical curse (Genesis 12:3) is not to
materialize.
Ruth and Nadia Matar
*******************************************************
April 23, 2004
People are beautiful, the world stinks
by Dennis Prager - April 20, 2004
© 2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
If you love goodness and hate evil, this is a tough time to stay sane. Israel
has killed Abdel Aziz Rantisi, the Hamas terror leader, and almost every
nation in the world and the nations' theoretical embodiment, the United
Nations, have condemned Israel for doing so.
World leaders and the world organization have said almost nothing about
Communist China's ongoing destruction of one of the world's oldest
civilizations, Tibet. World leaders have said almost nothing about the Arab
enslavement and genocide of non-Arab blacks in Sudan. But they convene
world conferences to label Israel, one of the most humane and decent
democracies on earth, a pariah. In order to retain my sanity, I ask the
reader's indulgence as I use this column to express personal thoughts.
I have contempt for "the world." I cherish and admire countless individuals,
but I have contempt for "the world" and "world opinion." "The world" has
never cared about evils inflicted on human beings. The Communist
genocides meant nothing to humanity. The Holocaust meant nothing. With
almost no exception, the mass atrocities since World War II have likewise
absorbed humanity less than the Olympics or the Miss World Contest.
I have contempt for the United Nations. It is one of the great obstacles to
goodness and decency on this planet. Its moral record -- outside of a few
specialized agencies such as the World Health Organization -- is almost
entirely supportive of evil and condemnatory of good. It is dominated by
the most morally backward governments in the world -- those from the
Arab and Muslim worlds, the Communists during their heyday and African
despots. It appointed Libya, a despotic, primitive state, to head its Human
Rights Commission, whose members include China, Saudi Arabia and
Sudan. Neither the United States nor Israel sits on the Commission.
I regard the European Union with similar revulsion. With little opposition,
Europe murdered nearly every Jewish man, woman and child in its midst,
and a half-century later provides cover for those in the Middle East who
seek to do to the Middle East's Jews exactly what the Nazis did to the
European Jews. For the European Union to condemn Israel's killing of a
Hamas leader, when Hamas's avowed aim is another Jewish genocide, is
so loathsome as to board the incredible. For Germany and France (who,
unlike America, have almost never shed blood for the liberty of others) to
do everything they can to undermine America's attempt to liberate Iraq is
similarly repugnant.
As for the international news media and journalists, I regard most of them
as aides to evil. This is not new. The 1932 Pulitzer Prize, American
journalism's highest award, was given to Walter Duranty of the New York
Times for reporting from the Soviet Union. In his reports, Duranty
repeatedly denied Stalin's forced starvation of Ukrainians that led to the
murder of more than 6 million of them. The same "newspaper of record"
deliberately toned down reporting on the Nazi annihilation of Jews 10 years
later so as not to appear "too Jewish."
The Soviet decimation of Afghanistan was so little reported in the
international media -- especially radio and television -- that when I talked
about its scope and horror on my radio show in the 1980s, listeners kept
wondering if I was telling the truth -- they had never heard anything about
it.
In the last years of the Saddam Hussein regime, according to John Burns
of the New York Times, major news reporters refused to write stories about
Iraqi mass murder and atrocities lest the Saddam regime remove their
press credentials. For most journalists, and their newspapers and
television stations, it was better to lie for Saddam and have a bureau in
Baghdad than to tell the truth but have no Baghdad bureau. And not one
international news organization calls Hamas or any of the other Palestinian
terror organizations "terrorists."
I love learning and revere the title of "professor," but with few exceptions,
universities, too, merit contempt. The vast majority of professors who take
positions on social issues are moral fools. They teach millions of students
that America and Israel are villains and that the enemies of those decent
societies are merely misunderstood victims who are often justified in their
hatred. And they loathe the American Judeo-Christian value system that
has made the United States the world's land of opportunity and beacon of
liberty.
In sum, I feel that I am living in a world that is morally sick. Good is called
bad, and bad is called "militant," "victimized," "misunderstood" and "the
product of hopelessness," but rarely bad. Only those who fight the bad are
called bad.
I am kept sane by the knowledge that there are hundreds of millions of
individuals who can still tell the difference between good and evil; by the
knowledge that there was never a time that humanity was particularly
decent; and by a strong belief that a good God governs the universe even
though He allows evil many triumphs. And I believe this God will judge
Osama bin Laden and Jacques Chirac appropriately.
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 25, 2004
A Few Words of Encouragement
by Nadia Matar
Over the past two weeks, something wonderful has happened: the people
have woken up and have started working hard for the survival of the
Jewish State of Israel.
I would like to share with those who live abroad, what has been going on:
As you know, PM Ariel Sharon has announced that he was bringing his
suicidal 'disengagement plan" for a referendum to all 200,000 Likud
members - the voting is supposed to take place in a week, on May 2nd,
2004. All national groups and movements have gotten their act together
and joined, in one way or another, the struggle to convince the Likud
members to vote against Sharon's disastrous plan.
Honestly, at the beginning, the fight seemed hopeless: the biased media
has been pushing in favor of the plan, day and night, President Bush has
embraced the plan; the 3 major Likud ministers, Netanyahu, Livnat and
Shalom- caring more about their seat and their fancy Volvo than anything
else- have reluctantly agreed to support Sharon too; the polls were
showing a 20% advantage for Sharon. Did the opponents of Sharon's
retreat plan have any chance?
The message was clear: we must at least try. The residents of Gush Katif
were showing the way: each and one of the 8000 Gush Katif residents
dropped everything and decided to devote themselves totally to the
struggle. True, unlike the PM, they do not have the monies nor the media-
but they have one big advantage: the knowledge that they are right and a
massive network of supporters all around the country, who certainly will
volunteer to help. The goal was set: visiting each and one of the 200,000
Likud members and trying to convince them to vote against the retreat
plan.
All movements and organizations joined in to help. Each community
received a different area in which they are supposed to go, knock on the
door of Likud members and convince them to vote against. The
mobilization has been overwhelming. The willingness of people to
volunteer and spend several evenings out of their homes in order to visit
other, far-away, cities and convince Likud members to vote against, has
been over and above what could ever be expected. If in the past, we saw
mainly youth coming out and demonstrate, this time it is the adults who
leave their homes in the hands of their bigger children and themselves go
and do the work.
I can testify that in my own community of Efrat in which till now always the
same few activists went to the streets- now, hundreds and hundreds of
adults, together with youngsters, have joined the action committee to save
the Land of Israel.
And the results are tremendous. After one week in which tens of thousands
of Likud homes have been visited by activists, the polls have shown that
there is only a 4% gap between those in favor and those against the plan.
Because the moment one is confronted, personally, with the true facts
about this horrendous plan, one cannot get himself to vote in favor.
Thursday and Friday, all newspapers and reports, known to be leftists,
were panic-stricken: "The opponents of the plan are getting stronger!"
"Polls show Sharon is loosing the battle-help!"
Women in Green did not need the polls to know that the people are against
the plan. On Wednesday, Women in Green members spent several hours in
the Likud stronghold in Jerusalem, the Machane Yehuda Market, handing
out material against the retreat plan, in favor of the Land of Israel. How
uplifting an experience! The vast majority were adamant against the plan. It
is important to go to such places to be reminded of what a wonderful
people the people of Israel are. It is true that our political leadership is
weak and defeatist, but let me tell you: the people are strong, they love
their land, they love their heritage and they do not want to give it away!
That is exactly the feeling people got, going from house to house to Likud
members. The vast majority are against it, and there is a real chance we
can win and therefore it is of utmost importance to continue this week with
the important work of door-to-door explanations and demonstrations.
With all this optimism we must be cautious and realize that Ariel Sharon
and his team will pull out all dirty tricks to try and win. They have already
started doing so. Likud members related that they had been called by
people who pretended to be Gush Katif residents and who told them:
"Shalom, I am a Gush Katif resident and I am calling you to urge you to
vote in favor of Ariel Sharon's plan because all I want is to get
compensations and then leave the area as soon as possible". Others
pretended to be victims of terror living in Gush Katif and were also calling
Likud members urging them "to vote for Sharon's plan in order to bring
more security". All those phone calls were proven to be fake and
originated probably from Omri Sharon's team.
In addition, there is no doubt that, a day or two before the referendum, Ariel
Sharon will try to impress Likud members by eliminating yet one more
terrorist leader- who knows, maybe even the mass murderer Yasser Arafat.
As much as we all pray for Arafat and other terrorists to be killed- that
certainly should not be done in order for people to vote in favor of a plan
that will reward terror and create a terrorist state in Judea, Samaria and
Gaza.
To conclude: the national camp has risen to the challenge of fighting for
the survival of the State of Israel. The tens of thousands of volunteer
activists understand the true meaning of this referendum: a majority in
favor of Ariel Sharon's suicidal retreat plan would be a victory for Arab
terror and a big blow to the survival of the State of Israel. A majority
against Sharon's suicidal retreat plan would finally announce the end of the
Oslo era and would be a victory for Zionism, a victory for the right of the
Jewish People to its land, a victory for justice and truth.
Whatever the results will be on May 2nd, the fight for the Land of Israel will
still go on. If we win, please G-d, Sharon has already announced that he will
try to bypass the will of his own party and will have the Knesset and
Government approve it anyway. If we lose G-d forbid, there is still a long
way and lots of possibilities to prevent the implementation of Sharon's
plan.
But one thing is for sure- this struggle has, on the week of Israel's
Independence Day, taken
hundreds of thousands of Israel lovers out of their homes to go and spread
the simple message that says: The Land of Israel belongs to the People of
Israel based on the Torah of Israel- we have a beautiful and wonderful
country- never will we agree to give it away! We must do all we can to win-
We certainly deserve to win- with G-d's help we will win! The People of
Israel Will Live Forever!
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 27, 2004
THE AGENDA OF ISLAM - A WAR BETWEEN CIVILIZATIONS
by Professor Moshe Sharon
There is no Fundamental Islam
"Fundamentalism" is a word that came from the heart of the Christian
religion. It means faith that goes by the word of the Bible. Fundamental
Christianity, or going with the Bible, does not mean going around and
killing people. There is no fundamental Islam. There is only Islam full stop.
The question is how the Koran is interpreted.
All of a sudden we see that the greatest interpreters of Islam are politicians
in the western world. They know better than all the speakers in the
mosques, all those who deliver terrible sermons against anything that is
either Christian or Jewish. These western politicians know that there is
good Islam and bad Islam. They know even how to differentiate between
the two, except that none of them know how to read a word of Arabic.
The Language of Islam
You see, so much is covered by politically correct language that, in fact,
the truth has been lost. For example, when we speak about Islam in the
west, we try to use our own language and terminology. We speak about
Islam in terms of democracy and fundamentalism, in terms of
parliamentarism and all kinds of terms, which we take from our own
dictionary. One of my professors and one of the greatest orientalists in the
world says that doing this is like a cricket reporter describing a cricket
game in baseball terms. We cannot use for one culture or civilization the
language of another. For Islam, you've got to use the language of Islam.
Driving Principles of Islam
Let me explain the principles that are driving the religion of Islam. Of
course, every Moslem has to acknowledge the fact that there is only one
God. But it's not enough to say that there is only one God. A Moslem has to
acknowledge the fact that there is one God and Mohammed is his prophet.
These are the fundamentals of the religion that without them, one cannot
be a Moslem. But beyond that, Islam is a civilization. It is a religion that
gave first and foremost a wide and unique legal system that engulfs the
individual, society and nations with rules of behaviour. If you are Moslem,
you have to behave according to the rules of Islam which are set down in
the Koran and which are very different than the teachings of the Bible.
The Bible
Let me explain the difference. The Bible is the creation of the spirit of a
nation over a very, very long period, if we talk from the point of view of the
scholar, and let me remain scholarly. But there is one thing that is
important in the Bible. It leads to salvation. It leads to salvation in two
ways.
In Judaism, it leads to national salvation - not just a nation that wants to
have a state, but a nation that wants to serve God. That's the idea behind
the Hebrew text of the Bible.
The New Testament that took the Hebrew Bible moves us toward personal
salvation. So we have got these two kinds of salvation, which, from time to
time, meet each other.
But the key word is salvation. Personal salvation means that each
individual is looked after by God, Himself, who leads a person through His
word to salvation. This is the idea in the Bible, whether we are talking about
the Old or the New Testament. All of the laws in the Bible, even to the
minutest ones, are, in fact directed toward this fact of salvation.
Secondly, there is another point in the Bible, which is highly important.
This is the idea that man was created in the image of God. Therefore, you
don't just walk around and obliterate the image of God. Many people, of
course, used Biblical rules and turned them upside down. History has
seen a lot of massacres in the name of God and in the name of Jesus. But
as religions, both Judaism and Christianity in their fundamentals speak
about honouring the image of God and the hope of salvation. These are the
two basic fundamentals.
The Essence of Islam
Now let's move to the essence of Islam. Islam was born with the idea that it
should rule the world. Let's look, then, at the difference between these
three religions. Judaism speaks about national salvation - namely that at
the end of the story, when the world becomes a better place, Israel will be
in its own land, ruled by its own king and serving God. Christianity speaks
about the idea that every single person in the world can be saved from his
sins, while Islam speaks about ruling the world. I can quote here in Arabic,
but there is no point in quoting Arabic, so let me quote a verse in English.
"Allah sent Mohammed with the true religion so that it should rule over all
the religions."
The idea, then, is not that the whole world would become a Moslem world
at this time, but that the whole world would be subdued under the rule of
Islam.
When the Islamic empire was established in 634 AD, within seven years -
640 - the core of the empire was created. The rules that were taken from the
Koran and from the tradition that was ascribed to the prophet Mohammed,
were translated into a real legal system. Jews and Christians could live
under Islam provided they paid poll tax and accepted Islamic superiority.
Of course, they had to be humiliated. And Jews and Christians living under
Islam are humiliated to this very day.
Mohammed Held That All the Biblical Prophets Were Moslems
Mohammed did accept the existence of all the Biblical prophets before him.
However he also said that all these prophets were Moslems. Abraham was
a Moslem. In fact, Adam himself was the first Moslem. Isaac and Jacob and
David and Solomon and Moses and Jesus were all Moslems, and all of
them had writings similar to the Koran. Therefore, world history is Islamic
history because all the heroes of history were Moslems.
Furthermore, Moslems accept the fact that each of these prophets brought
with him some kind of a revelation. Moses, brought the Taurat, which is the
Torah, and Jesus brought the Ingeel, which is the Evangelion or Gospel -
namely the New Testament.
The Bible versus the Koran
Why then is the Bible not similar to the Koran? Mohammed explains that
the Jews and Christians forged their books. Had they not been changed
and forged, they would have been identical to the Koran. But because
Christians and Jews do have some truth, Islam concedes that they cannot
be completely destroyed by war [for now]. Nevertheless, the laws are very
clear - Jews and Christians have no rights whatsoever to independent
existence. They can live under Islamic rule provided they keep to the rules
that Islam promulgates for them.
Islamic Rule and Jihad
What happens if Jews and Christians don't want to live under the rules of
Islam? Then Islam has to fight them and this fighting is called Jihad. Jihad
means war against those people who don't want to accept the Islamic
superior rule. That's jihad. They may be Jews; they may be Christians; they
may be Polytheists. But since we don't have too many Polytheists left, at
least not in the Middle East - their war is against the Jews and Christians.
A few days ago, I received a pamphlet that was distributed in the world by
bin Laden. He calls for jihad against America as the leader of the Christian
world, not because America is the supporter of Israel, but because
Americans are desecrating Arabia with their filthy feet. There are
Americans in Arabia where no Christians should be. In this pamphlet there
is not a single word about Israel. Only that Americans are desecrating the
home of the prophet.
Two Houses
The Koran sees the world as divided into two - one part which has come
under Islamic rule and one part which is supposed to come under Islamic
rule in the future. There is a division of the world which is very clear. Every
single person who starts studying Islam knows it. The world is described
as Dar al-Islam (the house of Islam) - that's the place where Islam rules -
and the other part which is called Dar al-Harb - the house of war. Not the
"house of non-Muslims," but the "house of war." It is this house of war
which has to be, at the end of time, conquered. The world will continue to
be in the house of war until it comes under Islamic rule. This is the norm.
Why? Because Allah says it's so in the Koran. God has sent Mohammed
with the true religion in order that the truth will overcome all other
religions.
Islamic Law
Within the Islamic vision of this world, there are rules that govern the lives
of the Moslems themselves, and these rules are very strict. In
fundamentals, there are no differences between schools of law.
However, there are four streams of factions within Islam with differences
between them concerning the minutiae of the laws. All over the Islamic
world, countries have favored one or another of these schools of laws. The
strictest school of law is called Hanbali, mainly coming out of Saudi Arabia.
There are no games there, no playing around with the meanings of words.
If the Koran speaks about war, then it's war.
There are various perspectives in Islam with different interpretations over
the centuries. There were good people that were very enlightened in Islam
that tried to understand things differently. They even brought traditions
from the mouth of the prophet that women and children should not be
killed in war.
These more liberal streams do exist, but there is one thing that is very
important for us to remember. The Hanbali school of law is extremely strict,
and today this is the school that is behind most of the terrorist powers.
Even if we talk about the existence of other schools of Islamic law, when
we're talking about fighting against the Jews, or fighting against the
Christian world led by America, it is the Hanbali school of law that is being
followed.
Islam and Territory
This civilization created one very important, fundamental rule about
territory. Any territory that comes under Islamic rule cannot be de-
Islamized. Even if at one time or another, the [non-Moslem] enemy takes
over the territory that was under Islamic rule, it is considered to be
perpetually Islamic.
This is why whenever you hear about the Arab/Israeli conflict, you hear -
territory, territory, territory. There are other aspects to the conflict, but
territory is highly important.
The Christian civilization has not only been seen as a religious opponent,
but as a dam stopping Islam from achieving its final goal for which it was
created.
Islam was created to be the army of God, the army of Allah. Every single
Moslem is a soldier in this army. Every single Moslem that dies in fighting
for the spread of Islam is a shaheed (martyr) no matter how he dies,
because - and this is very important - this is an eternal war between the two
civilizations. It's not a war that stops. This war is there because it was
created by Allah. Islam must be the ruler. This is a war that will not end.
Islam and Peace
Peace in Islam can exist only within the Islamic world; peace can only be
between Moslem and Moslem.
With the non-Moslem world or non-Moslem opponents, there can be only
one solution - a cease fire until Moslems can gain more power. It is an
eternal war until the end of days. Peace can only come if the Islamic side
wins. The two civilizations can only have periods of cease-fires. And this
idea of cease-fire is based on a very important historical precedent, which,
incidentally, Yasser Arafat referred to when he spoke in Johannesburg
after he signed the Oslo agreement with Israel.
Let me remind you that the document speaks of peace - you wouldn't
believe that you are reading! You would think that you were reading some
science fiction piece. I mean when you read it, you can't believe that this
was signed by Israelis who are actually acquainted with Islamic policies
and civilization.
A few weeks after the Oslo agreement was signed, Arafat went to
Johannesburg, and in a mosque there he made a speech in which he
apologized, saying, "Do you think I signed something with the Jews which
is contrary to the rules of Islam?" (I have obtained a copy of Arafat's
recorded speech so I heard it from his own mouth.) Arafat continued,
"That's not so. I'm doing exactly what the prophet Mohammed did."
Whatever the prophet is supposed have done becomes a precedent. What
Arafat was saying was, "Remember the story of Hodaybiya." The prophet
had made an agreement there with the tribe of Kuraish for 10 years. But
then he trained 10,000 soldiers and within two years marched on their city
of Mecca. He, of course, found some kind of pretext.
Thus, in Islamic jurisdiction, it became a legal precedent which states that
you are only allowed to make peace for a maximum of 10 years. Secondly,
at the first instance that you are able, you must renew the jihad [thus
breaking the "peace" agreement].
In Israel, it has taken over 50 years in this country for our people to
understand that they cannot speak about [permanent] peace with Moslems.
It will take another 50 years for the western world to understand that they
have got a state of war with the Islamic civilization that is virile and strong.
This should be understood: When we talk about war and peace, we are not
talking in Belgium, French, English, or German terms. We are talking about
war and peace in Islamic terms.
Cease-fire as a Tactical Choice
What makes Islam accept cease-fire? Only one thing - when the enemy is
too strong. It is a tactical choice.
Sometimes, he may have to agree to a cease-fire in the most humiliating
conditions. It's allowed because Mohammed accepted a cease-fire under
humiliating conditions. That's what Arafat said to them in Johannesburg.
When western policy makers hear these things, they answer, "What are you
talking about? You are in the Middle Ages. You don't understand the
mechanisms of politics."
Which mechanisms of politics? There are no mechanisms of politics where
power is. And I want to tell you one thing - we haven't seen the end of it,
because the minute a radical Moslem power has atomic, chemical or
biological weapons, they will use it. I have no doubt about that.
Now, since we face war and we know that we cannot get more than an
impermanent cease-fire, one has to ask himself what is the major
component of an Israeli/Arab cease-fire. It is that the Islamic side is weak
and your side is strong. The relations between Israel and the Arab world in
the last 50 years since the establishment of our State has been based only
on this idea, the deterrent power.
Wherever You Have Islam, You Will Have War
The reason that we have what we have in Yugoslavia and other places is
because Islam succeeded into entering these countries. Wherever you
have Islam, you will have war. It grows out of the attitude of Islamic
civilization.
What are the poor people in the Philippines being killed for? What's
happening between Pakistan and India?
Islamic Infiltration
Furthermore, there is another fact that must be remembered. The Islamic
world has not only the attitude of open war, but there's also war by
infiltration.
One of the things which the western world is not paying enough attention
to is the tremendous growth of Islamic power in the western world. What
happened in America and the Twin Towers is not something that came
from the outside. And if America doesn't wake up, one day the Americans
will find themselves in a chemical war and most likely in an atomic war -
inside the U.S.
End of Days
It is highly important to understand how a civilization sees the end of days.
In Christianity and in Judaism, we know exactly what is the vision of the
end of days.
In Judaism, it is going to be as in Isaiah - peace between nations, not just
one nation, but between all nations. People will not have any more need for
weapons and nature will be changed - a beautiful end of days and the
kingdom of God on earth.
Christianity goes as far as Revelation to see a day that Satan himself is
obliterated. There are no more powers of evil. That's the vision.
I'm speaking now as a historian. I try to understand how Islam sees the end
of days. In the end of days, Islam sees a world that is totally Moslem,
completely Moslem under the rule of Islam. Complete and final victory.
Christians will not exist, because according to many Islamic traditions, the
Moslems who are in hell will have to be replaced by somebody and they'll
be replaced by the Christians.
The Jews will no longer exist, because before the coming of the end of
days, there is going to be a war against the Jews where all Jews should be
killed. I'm quoting now from the heart of Islamic tradition, from the books
that are read by every child in school. The Jews will all be killed. They'll be
running away and they'll be hiding behind trees and rocks, and on that day
Allah will give mouths to the rocks and trees and they will say, "Oh Moslem
come here, there is a Jew behind me, kill him." Without this, the end of
days cannot come. This is a fundamental of Islam.
Is There a Possibility to End This Dance of War?
The question which we in Israel are asking ourselves is what will happen to
our country? Is there a possibility to end this dance of war?
The answer is, "No. Not in the foreseeable future." What we can do is reach
a situation where for a few years we may have relative quiet.
But for Islam, the establishment of the state of Israel was a reverse of
Islamic history. First, Islamic territory was taken away from Islam by Jews.
You know by now that this can never be accepted, not even one meter. So
everyone who thinks Tel Aviv is safe is making a grave mistake. Territory,
which at one time was dominated by Islamic rule, now has become non-
Moslem. Non-Moslems are independent of Islamic rule; Jews have created
their own independent state. It is anathema.
And (this is the worst) Israel, a non-Moslem state, is ruling over Moslems. It
is unthinkable that non-Moslems should rule over Moslems.
I believe that Western civilization should hold together and support each
other. Whether this will happen or not, I don't know. Israel finds itself on
the front lines of this war. It needs the help of its sister civilization. It needs
the help of America and Europe. It needs the help of the Christian world.
One thing I am sure about, this help can be given by individual Christians
who see this as the road to salvation.
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 28, 2004
An Appeal to Avert Evil in the Holy Land!
Attached is to be found the English translation of the Hebrew Text which
we wish to place as a Full Page Ad in Yediot Achronot and Maariv Hebrew
newspapers, this Friday, April 30, 2004. It is the Ten Commandments For
True Members of Likud, who will be voting this Sunday, May 2, 2004 on the
referendum of whether to approve of the Sharon Plan to unilateral withdraw
from Biblical Gaza. Full Page Ads in both these Israeli newspapers costs
approximately $25,000. and we don't have that money!
Nadia Matar, one of our co-leaders has thought of the idea to reach out to
Likud members who will be voting, this Sunday. She has written in Hebrew
on tablets resembling the Ten Commandments, an appeal to true members
of Likud, to reject the Sharon unilateral withdrawal plan for Biblical Gaza,
which would be followed by abandonment of historical Biblical
Communities in Judea and Samaria.
By taking an ad out in the Hebrew Newspapers,with the largest circulation,
we will be able to reach out to a great many of the Likud Members who
otherwise are daily being told by the left oriented media here in Israel, of
their support of the Sharon plan. Putting such an ad addressed to Likud
Members will counter balance the distortions that the left-oriented Media is
making. This is an opportunity for you to directly participate in helping to
fulfill the Biblical Promise G-d made.
You are thereby directly helping to defeat the Sharon Plan for uprooting
Jews from their homes and communities that they painstakingly built in
Biblical Gaza. You are also preventing the desecration of the Word of G-d.
You can contribute to making possible the ad in these newspapers as
follows: Go to our Website
Top of Page |
End of Page |
What We Say Index Page |
To Home Page
*******************************************************
April 30, 2004
MAPPING SURVIVAL by George F. Will
Washington Post, April 18, 2004
The United States government is not a speed reader, but after 37 years of
reading U.N. Resolution 242, the government finally read it accurately on
Wednesday. The government saw what is not there -- the missing definite
article, "the."
Passed after the 1967 Six Day War, 242 required the withdrawal of Israel
"from territories occupied in the recent conflict." Not from "the territories."
Israel insisted on deletion of the "the" because it implied, as Arab and
other powers acknowledged by vehement opposition to the deletion --
withdrawal from all territories.
This was strategic ambiguity. On Wednesday ambiguity was abandoned. In
his letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, President Bush said:
"In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major
Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of the
final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice
lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have
reached the same conclusion."
It is fine to talk about "new realities," such as patterns of settlement, but
this new U.S. policy also, and primarily, comes to terms at long last with an
old reality. It is that 242 also recognized the right of every state in the
region to "secure and recognized boundaries," which Israel's 1967 borders
were not.
But wait. Palestinian spokesmen, denouncing the new U.S. position, speak
not of the 1949 armistice lines but "the 1967 borders." It is not in the
interest of the Palestinian Authority to have the world reminded -- being
willfully forgetful, it needs much reminding -- that Israel's 1967 borders
were accidents of the military facts on the ground 18 years before that.
Bush, by emphasizing 1949 rather than 1967, reminds those who forever
say "Israel is being provocative" that for 56 years -- since Israel's founding
in May 1948 -- the problem has been that, to Israel's enemies, Israel's being
is provocative. Hostility to Israel predated 1967 and would not be cured by
a return to 1967 realities.
The territories occupied by Israel since 1967 have been lawfully held
because a nation that occupies territories in the process of repelling
aggression launched from them can hold them until the disposition of the
lands is settled by negotiations between the relevant parties. Palestinians
and their supporters have tried to erase this fact by semantic infiltration of
the world's political vocabulary, getting the territories routinely referred to
as "Palestinian lands." Actually, in law the territories are unallocated
portions of the 1922 Palestine Mandate, the final disposition of which is still
to be settled by negotiations.
And there, for 56 years, has been the rub -- the absence of a suitable
interlocutor for Israel. Meaning a negotiating partner not committed to the
destruction of the "Zionist entity," or completion of the project interrupted
but not abandoned when the last Nazi death camps were liberated 59 Aprils
ago.
It is instructive -- and wonderful -- how few and optional have been
references to Yasser Arafat in discussions of Wednesday's developments.
In a life of terror, his only service to peace was his demonstration, at Camp
David in July 2000 with President Bill Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Barak, that the most that Israel could ever offer in the way of
concessions is less than the current Palestinian leadership will accept.
Which is why Wednesday's policy flowed ineluctably from Bush's June 24,
2002, pronouncement that the first prerequisite for progress is for the
Palestinian people to produce "regime change": "I call upon the Palestinian
people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror." That
prerequisite being unattainable, Sharon has chosen unilateral
disengagement -- the fence -- and a long wait for the time when, in Bush's
words, "the Palestinian people have new leaders, new institutions and new
security arrangements."
In 1998 the then-governor of Texas, visited Israel and was given a
helicopter tour of the nation's vulnerabilities. Bush saw the place where
Israel, from 1949 until 1967, had been nine miles wide. Back home, Bush
said: Why, in Texas we have driveways longer than that. Bush's host in the
helicopter was Sharon.
Sharon, who is 76, is a reminder of why it is reasonable to prefer young
doctors but old politicians. Young doctors, because recently in medical
school they learned the latest panaceas. Old politicians, because, having
lived long enough to not hope for miracle cures to political problems, they
do what they can, on their own.
Top of Page | What We Say
Index
Page | To Home Page