Thursday, December 10, 2015
Peace Before Multilateralism
Diplomacy is the pursuit of a patient exploration of the emotions and freely chosen needs and priorities of all sides in a dispute. Bilateralism is two sides talking it out. Multilateralism is many countries working toward a common goal. Often peacemaking. Theoretically, a friendly but non partial third party helping one side to negotiate with the party with whom it is involved in a conflict with can fall under Multilateralism. They are both thus all but synonymous with diplomacy. But it is not the full measure of diplomacy. Multilateralism and it's younger sister, bilateralism, are useful tools; actually, more than that, the prefered methods of diplomacy. But not the true goal of honest diplomacy, which is peace.
Historically, we find that whenever political hawks are criticizing diplomats for being too left wing, what they are really saying is that, there is a certainty that continued pursuit of this line of diplomacy will surely bring further violence, not less violence. For example, when Yugoslavia was negotiated away, sacrificed on the altar as a peace offering to the Nazi regime during the prelude to World War 2. Those talks were multilateral, which for those obsessed with the trappings of peace, as Neville Chamberlain was, should have been a sure fired guarantee of peace. Indeed, he cried out "Peace in our time." Due to the dedicated pursuit of the highest ideals of multilateralism, only without regard to the goals of diplomacy: true peace.
It is easy to confuse multilateralism for peacemaking, as 99 percent of the time, that is the way to go. The only proper path to go to get a diplomatic process moving and keep it on track. But there is an inherent dependency within multilateralism. All sides need to be willing to negotiate in good faith. There is no way around that for any peace deal signed to not be destined to fail from the very start.
Like a basketball team with less time on the game clock than the shot clock, if the team gets distracted on the current methodology of trying to run it's offense, the game may end before they get to shoot any shot at all towards the basket. Which would be worse than at least firing off a low percentage shot. If the players lose track of time, the game will end very badly. If not, there is a hope for success. Similarly, a diplomat must focus on the greater goal of true peace at all times, even if the minutiae of keeping the diplomatic process going, is the very air that the diplomat breathes. If war breaks out because of the very diplomacy, then it is better that there had been no diplomacy at all to begin with.
In the negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, time is about to run out, and Israel must consider a unilateralistic approach that can actually prevent war, rather than continue with multilateral or bilateral diplomacy that only gives terrorists a chance to win the fight to make more innocent blood be spilt.
Palestinian Arab leadership must conform to the rules of multinational civilization, not merely pan Arabic conquest, to be a real peace partner with Israel. Relationship building with a group of people who think they need not be civilized at the end of diplomacy, ends the hopes for peace. Whereas, inviting them to realize they cannot get away that, begins a workable relationship framework from which to build a mutual relationship towards a true and lasting peace. Even if these steps must be unilateral, Israel acting on it's own, if it furthers the cause of peace, that is a very good thing. That is the very goal of ideal diplomacy.
The goal of ideal diplomacy, is peacemaking. Not the even handed alignment of interests for its own sake. Therefore poor diplomats will repeat ad nauseum the mantra of multilateralism while good diplomats will know when to not interfere with a cessation of negotiations with a pro terroristic leadership. Good diplomats will support a low percentage shot that at least gives the team a chance to win, even if it is a unilateral approach.
May the wisdom of this be accepted by all that need to understand it. So that Israel is not any longer goaded by it's allies into being a sacrifice for peace, in it's own land. May that idolatry end forever. May it very soon be so, by the grace of God.
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Middle East Peace Plan Comparison Chart, Updated Edition
B'Ezras HaShem Yisborach, by the grace of God, in today's post I've updated the popular Jerusalem Defender peace plan comparison chart to include my assessment of the Caroline Glick peace plan. There are now a total of eight other proposed peace plans that are included in this latest version of the chart, all compared using the same six criteria that I have evaluated my Everyone Wins Peace Plan through.
Caroline Glick's proposed plan is very wise in several areas. It is unilateral and does not depend on bilateral negotiations with arch terrorists and their supporters. It also does not propose to ignore Scriptural "intel" that forewarns the world that Israel is going to have Judean and Samarian ("West Bank") territories no matter what people try to negotiate away, so it prevents running down a diplomatic path that would be doomed to fail from the start. It further does not destroy current societal configurations as most other peace plan suggestions of the past would. Most importantly, it ends the possibility of those territories being used as staging ground for a war against Israel. This is a plan that actually has a chance to work.
The main issues I have with Caroline Glick's proposed plan are that it does not, to my knowledge, demand that current criminals are filtered before given an option to naturalize into Israeli society, and it seems to kick the can of the entire Gaza Strip issue down the road.
I believe that you have to filter out terrorists if you are going to naturalize the Palestinian Arabs. You can't naturalize terrorists. As I wrote before, "The beginning of peace does not come by the placation of terror; that is it's anathema."
I am also for a more decisive conclusion to the conflict with the Palestinian Arabs that does not allow for war over this issue ever again. As long as Gaza is still out there, what do you think a Hamastan would desire a few years down the road? Not trade and peace, that's for sure. If Fatah could not be trusted for peace, how can you possibly hope to trust Hamas? It seems as if this part of the plan is a manufactured vehicle to avoid naturalizing the Arabs of Gaza, not an actual solution based on a consistent policy. If policy accurately emanates from truly noble principles, consistency should rarely be a problem. We do not need to rely on such a conveniency as this.
The process of naturalization, I feel, must be as methodical as necessary to not risk Israeli electoral balance or anything else. Using the slow nature of bureaucracy to everyone's benefit, we can reduce dangerous mistakes that could cost bundles of cash, or even lives. Trying to fix it all overnight is not as good as selecting the correct path as soon as possible, but then taking the time to implement it as wisely as possible.
The Glick plan proposes to save the Arabs of Judea and Samaria from despotic leaders, but abandon their cousins in Gaza to that very fate. It calls for increasing the Arabic voting ratio within "Green Line" Israel, giving them more votes than today, but my Everyone Wins plan calls for maintaining current voting ratio levels in the State of Israel.
///
A Summary of the "Everyone Wins" Peace Plan can be found at theses URLs:
///
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Israel Needs a Change of Strategy
To end Palestinian Arab violence, Israel must do it's part to end it's inadvertent support for it via inappropriate police action. The focus has been on how to chase down active terrorists and avenge bloodshed. Only incremental changes are required on that front. But a major shift of strategic goals is required to provide a long term and conclusive solution. The main problem in the policing of the current stabbings is not in the Tactical minutiae, but primarily broad based Strategic blunders that have bottle-necked Israel into the current predicament. To put it bluntly, a change of the rules of the game is in order. Stop empowering Fatah to support terror by disavowing it as a potential peace partner.
The Knesset has to do more. But it's important to know what needs only a tweak here and there and what needs upheaval level of change. They should not merely announce how brave a random policeman was, as wonderful as that is. Or that it demolished another home of another terrorist. This is just treading water, not fixing the fundamental problem. I'm not a big fan of destroying homes, either, though. Take it over, sell it, and then give the proceeds to families of terror victims. That would be a better method to deal with the homes of terrorists. But the main fix that is needed is in the big picture.
Tell Abbas, three strikes and you are out. The Palestinian Authority is the PLO; a terrorist group posing as politicians, and by repeated intifadas, it has proven that it's alleged retraction of support for terror, in preparation for the Oslo Accords, was a lie that it could not maintain. The boss always lets the enforcer get his hands dirty so he can seem innocent. That is all that Abbas is doing. A politician in sheep's clothing. And he was always viewed as the supposed moderate in Arafat's camp.
Every lie has a shelf life, apparently. They would not have dared lie so badly if they thought it would lead to this. They did not expect it to take this long. 20 years and they still have not broken Israel's spirit. They have not rewritten the truth with a million and one lies. Imagine the past 20 years are a resume and today Israel was sitting down with Fatah for the first time to establish a peace deal. There is no partner in peace. It's clear now that there never was.
Therefore to support even administrative Fatah rule over the territories is to, in part, support eventual terror against the State of Israel and the immediate outpouring of slander and libelous deception against the rights of Jews to be in their homeland.
My apologies to those who are terrified of demographics, but there is no other way to view it.
End support of Palestinian Arabic violence by annexing the territories today, as Caroline Glick has called for. Only with 3 additional vital provisions. 1) A filter to remove terrorists from the naturalization process, and to completely resolve matters, 2) include Gaza among the territories you plan to annex, but 3) naturalize slow enough to not endanger Israeli electoral balance or anything else, off setting it with the increased immigration due to the natural boon to aliyah that true peace would bring. Thus all fears of demographic dangers will be proven fallacious. The new united State of Israel will be stronger than ever and just as Jewish and democratic if not more so. There also will be no one over the green line that someone in Europe is weeping over for, mistakenly believing that they are in some kind of a concentration camp, when they are more likely in a shopping mall.
Until you get the gradual absorption process completed, a group of Israelis, primarily consisting of Arabs, should govern the territories during the several years it will take to do this safely. Once the appointment is controlled by the democratically elected Knesset, a closer version of democracy will immediately be felt by the residents of the territories until full inclusion into the democratic state of Israel can be fully implemented.
Put all fears aside and do not stand idly by the blood of your fellow. This is the path to end the terror within Israel's border and keep it away. Fight terror and also avoid future causes of discontent via this annexation and slow but sure naturalization. You can't get there any other way. As I have written before, "The beginning of peace does not come by the placation of terror; that is it's anathema. At it's end, there must neither be the destruction of innocent societies."
For the past eight years I called such a plan, the Everyone Wins peace plan. But whatever you call it, it needs to be done as soon as possible. It's dangerous not to. Therefore there is no time like now to get it done. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Temple Mount Status Quo Fuel of Violence
I do not blame antisemitism alone as the source for all anti Israel media bias. There is antisemitism in the world today, no doubt. There are people who hate Israel for no good reason and some are even in the media as well. But there is a another reason on a deeper level behind this.
Well what can that reason be? And how do we know this to be so? Even some friends of Democracy and freedom of religion are showing bias against Israel. And that's the problem, it's not the media all people know or strongly suspect to be antisemitic, it is the moderate media that is mimicking them that is the main problem that causes the current hasbara nightmare out there. Why? Everyone knows that Israel tried it's best to install a negotiated peace deal. So everyone knows that Israel does not hate peace. Everyone knows you can't hate Jews, that's antisemitism. You can't hate Judaism, that's culture bias. So why?
Go back in time before the recent stabbing attacks began. It began on the Temple Mount. Jews prayed there, and the Arabs complained, but no outbreak of stabbings. The Knesset reiterated support of the current status quo on the Temple Mount and only then this new dimension of terror ensued. Why? Is it true that the status quo is fair? No, the Temple Mount is the Jews' Holy of Holies, literally. You can't say any religion has more rights to Mecca than Islam, and you can't say any religion has more rights to the Temple Mount than the Jews. At least if truth is the agenda.
Now for any deception to be believed by a friend, against you, it must have a ring of truth, otherwise the friend would never stoop to that level.
It is not because your friends hate you that they speak against you. It is because they are basing it on what you spoke against yourself and against God's holy mountain.
"What has happened in the city over the past few days and weeks is heartbreaking and must be strongly condemned. Let me be clear; those who wish to turn the tragedy between us into a religious war have blood on their hands."
If only the president stopped there, yet he continued,
This doctrine of the Israeli political center is a can of worms. A fuel for the problem. It brings in the concept of Freedom of Religion to the forum of Palestinian Arabic attempts to establish statehood. But in truth, this is a lie. It is exclusively the Jews' Holy of Holies! Stop trying to share what you have no mandate to share. Let our rabbis lead in this.
If only the president stopped there, yet he continued,
"We hear again and again, lies about Israel's intentions toward the holy mountain - holy to Jews and Muslims. So again, I say clearly, Israel has no intention to change the status quo. But this status quo - this important understanding - needs two sides to keep it.”
President Rivlin stressed that Israel would “continue to respect Muslim prayer at the site, the Mosque and the Shrine. But Muslims must respect the Jewish connection to Jerusalem, the Jews who live in Jerusalem, and the Jews who visit its holy sites. Only then can we begin – Jews, Muslims, and Christians - to live like we did before , together in the city of Jerusalem and all the holy land.”
And it is this doctrine that the current government has been handing out to the very terrorists that plague our nation. The doctrine of minimizing legitimate Jewish claim to the Holy Mountain for the sake of friendliness to your neighbor, at the expense of abusing your family. Stop that now! The politicians should stop interfering in Judaism and ask the Rabbis how to proceed from here. Stop this foreign worship of a foreign policy, and things will immediately begin to get better.
You can say, "We tried to share this holy mountain with our Arab neighbors, but they themselves do not wish to share. Under those circumstances, we must reclaim our Holy of Holies. From now on, no stranger shall approach this holy mountain, as per the Will of the Creator who bestowed this mountain to our forefathers as an everlasting abode for the Temple worship we direct towards Him. Before Isaiah's prophecy of "a House of Prayer for all people" can occur, the words of Joel must first be adhered to. "And you shall know that I, the Lord your God, does dwell in Zion, My holy mount, and Jerusalem shall be holy, and strangers shall no longer pass through there."
This would reverse the co-option of Freedom of Religion as a fuel for violence, and turn it into a source of peace in the world, as true religion was always meant to be. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Sunday, August 16, 2015
Toward a Unified Policy on the Temple Mount
Would you ask a Christian if you could replace the main sanctuary of his church with a synagogue? If not, then why should Jews allow a Mosque on the place reserved by God for His Holy Temple? And when God has tied world peace to the rebuilding of the Jews' Temple, on it's reserved place, on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, this call for fair play is much more than that. It is indeed an imperative, our communal call for Divine mercy to descend upon all humanity, to finally remove the scourge of war from this blessed planet, and protect the lives of all innocent among the wondrous creations, built in the image of God, by the blessed Creator Himself.
The Temple is a seal of approval from Heaven and acknowledgement from humankind that God is real and God is with us and we accept His Will. The Temple Mount has for thousands of years been the reserved location for a third Temple. The prophecies could only be speaking of a Temple that has not yet been built so far, as it is tied to the time of world peace,
The Temple is a seal of approval from Heaven and acknowledgement from humankind that God is real and God is with us and we accept His Will. The Temple Mount has for thousands of years been the reserved location for a third Temple. The prophecies could only be speaking of a Temple that has not yet been built so far, as it is tied to the time of world peace,
"And it shall be at the end of the days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be firmly established at the top of the mountains, and it shall be raised above the hills, and all the nations shall stream to it. And many peoples shall go, and they shall say, "Come, let us go up to the Lord's mount, to the house of the God of Jacob, and let Him teach us of His ways, and we will go in His paths," for out of Zion shall the Torah come forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he shall judge between the nations and reprove many peoples, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift the sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore." (Isaiah, Chapter 2)
There are those who are for freedom of Jewish worship on the Temple Mount today. Jewish prayer groups just as there are Muslim ones. But in Talmudic Law, that movement is problematic for the following reasons.
First if a place is reserved for one religion, to share it equally is an assault on the religion to whom the site is most holy. If no Church in Mecca or Mosque in the Vatican, then no Mosque on the Temple Mount either.
Second, a more nuanced matter, while these Temple Mount activists mean very well, and are making a profound nationalistic political statement, and are trying to adhere to a great rabbi's opinion, not just doing only as they desire for nationalism. But as I have stated before they should not be going on the Temple mount for this activism. The majority of Rabbis say it is still forbidden for any human to go there until the Biblical methods of purification are reinstituted. They consider it an act of desecration, not holiness with each visit to the Temple Mount under current circumstances. By Torah Law, the halacha must follow the majority of the great rabbis of a generation. Therefore the activists, and we as a nation, should not rely on a minority view to represent a place where all of the eternal religious aspirations of our entire nation are focused on.
There are those who are for freedom of Jewish worship on the Temple Mount today. Jewish prayer groups just as there are Muslim ones. But in Talmudic Law, that movement is problematic for the following reasons.
First if a place is reserved for one religion, to share it equally is an assault on the religion to whom the site is most holy. If no Church in Mecca or Mosque in the Vatican, then no Mosque on the Temple Mount either.
Second, a more nuanced matter, while these Temple Mount activists mean very well, and are making a profound nationalistic political statement, and are trying to adhere to a great rabbi's opinion, not just doing only as they desire for nationalism. But as I have stated before they should not be going on the Temple mount for this activism. The majority of Rabbis say it is still forbidden for any human to go there until the Biblical methods of purification are reinstituted. They consider it an act of desecration, not holiness with each visit to the Temple Mount under current circumstances. By Torah Law, the halacha must follow the majority of the great rabbis of a generation. Therefore the activists, and we as a nation, should not rely on a minority view to represent a place where all of the eternal religious aspirations of our entire nation are focused on.
I agree, it's important to claim it as our own. But rather than allowing only those who follow Rav Goren's heter (dispensation) to do the work for us, we need to find a way to do this together. If we find a common ground we can have a universal policy by religious Jews for the Temple Mount. The imperative to widen the Temple Mount movement is clear from both religious and political perspectives.
The method of doing so, I suggest, would be for now to place a full blanket prohibition of any humans on the Mount for the time being.
Now that most not just some Rabbis are saying that Moshiach (the messiah) is coming soon, it's not too much to demand this from the followers of Rav Goren, to temporarily close it down to all traffic for the sake of a unified policy and message. But this is only possible if it is clear we are doing this for God's honor, as told to the prophets of Israel. If we try to continue with the old policy of equal freedom of religion on the place of inner sanctum of the greatest of all synagogues, we are failing to keep our faith as God clearly intended for us.
Now that most not just some Rabbis are saying that Moshiach (the messiah) is coming soon, it's not too much to demand this from the followers of Rav Goren, to temporarily close it down to all traffic for the sake of a unified policy and message. But this is only possible if it is clear we are doing this for God's honor, as told to the prophets of Israel. If we try to continue with the old policy of equal freedom of religion on the place of inner sanctum of the greatest of all synagogues, we are failing to keep our faith as God clearly intended for us.
If we continue to fight as a small group of Maccabees, but in competing directions, politically we cannot expect to mirror the success of the Maccabees with such incredibly well intended but effectually contentious behavior.
The Temple Mount prayer now movement is trying to fight the good fight, but it is not the rebellion against Hellenism it is intended to be. Effectively speaking, it is separation from the majority of rabbinical support, and thus a majority of religious Jewish support. Consequently, it is a part of the division of religious defense of the very Temple Mount rights it proposes to defend. But not from evil, only from an ineffective political stance, at the risk of angering a majority of the very religious constituency the movement requires in order to grow.
The Temple Mount prayer now movement is trying to fight the good fight, but it is not the rebellion against Hellenism it is intended to be. Effectively speaking, it is separation from the majority of rabbinical support, and thus a majority of religious Jewish support. Consequently, it is a part of the division of religious defense of the very Temple Mount rights it proposes to defend. But not from evil, only from an ineffective political stance, at the risk of angering a majority of the very religious constituency the movement requires in order to grow.
By uniting to place a full blanket prohibition of any humans on the Mount for the time being, this new hybrid Temple Mount Movement could easily quadruple enrollment overnight. And without disrespecting the majority rabbinical position, many people of conviction would be enabled to step forth to join the new movement. One based on consensus building with that segment of society that would house the majority pool of ardent activists.
To remove Divine wrath against the world that war may forever be removed from the Earth, we first need to remove the excuses and false fears that prevent us from making this a priority. And as making this a priority is guaranteed by God to usher in the era of world peace, to fail to do so should be recognized as a crime. To fail to do so should be recognized as an anathema to the project of the continued path of human enlightenment and world peace. We should do that which will bring humanity the Divine blessing of world peace, the building of the Third great Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. May it soon be so, B'Ezras HaShem Yisborach, by the grace of God.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
The "Everyone Loses" Nuclear Agreement with Iran
Analysts that try to put a positive spin on this Yes Nukes deal with Iran will for the most part be found wanting if the deal is implemented. It is important for Congress to take a stand here to fix this very bad deal. If not, it boxes Israel in a corner and that is not in the interests of peace either.
If congress is able to cancel this agreement, they may seek a compromise solution of editing and limiting the agreement rather than to repeal it entirely. It all depends on how many democrats take this for the serious threat to national security that it is. Although the President should have the right to conduct foreign policy, it must be on behalf of American interests, and this agreement does not seem to pass that test. Although it's best for America to look decisive, it's vital for America to not be self-destructive, nor the diplomatic epicenter of World War III.
Outright rejection of the treaty would be preferred, as it would act as a gentle form of censure of the President for risking national security so brazenly.
If congress is unable to act, the only good thing is that now there will be no room to allow Iran to continue to get away with it once they violate it and everyone not high on diplomatic euphoria knows that they will. The moral outrage of a broken deal is the only thing left that can wake a left wing in the West that is preoccupied and distracted from the clear evil intentions of the Iranian regime. Unfortunately that may mean a war somewhat akin to World War III, but that is where Western leaders have joyfully allowed Iran to lead them.
Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif made a statement today, calling this a Win-Win agreement and historic. He said, "We are reaching an agreement that is not perfect for anybody, but it is what we could accomplish," Zarif continued, "and it is an important achievement for all of us. Today could have been the end of hope on this issue. But now we are starting a new chapter of hope."
If you wish to translate through the obfuscation, just reverse everything he said and then you'll come out with the truth. It is a lose-lose agreement that begins the loss of hope of avoiding war.
Meanwhile President Obama has stated he did this deal to prevent a spiral into war, but unfortunately it is very likely to provide just the opposite. The deal would have had to be much tougher to prevent war. Now the President has written that spiral into war into a treaty.
Without any moral reversal of their hatred for America and Israel, Iran is to be allowed Nuclear Research and Development and Missile production as RIGHTS.
Inspections would have to have zero notice capability to have meaning. Iran is to be given weeks. (See Annex 1.78 for details. It would take 14 days to request Iran to CONSIDER meeting IAEA requests for an inspection, and another 7 days to set a committee to deal with the issue, and 3 days for Iran to respond, and thus to be able to compel Iran, from time of complaint until the last day Iran could get away with delaying compliance, it would be a total of 24 days!) More than enough time to hide things that could embarrass any signatory of this deal, but not meaningful to prevent nukes. Depending on diplomatic matters and procedure more than inspection imperatives can only bring disaster. There are other loopholes as well.
Meanwhile they continue to threaten Israel and hold American citizens in their prisons.
As Prime Minister Netanyahu pointed out, giving billions in sanctions relief to Iran even as they pledge to continue their unofficial war against the West, will undoubtedly be used to immediately bolster funding of terror throughout the world.
There is too much wiggle room for Iran and too little reassurances to Israel to avoid conflict. There is a very good chance that Israel would have to strike sooner than they would have liked to, since there would no longer be the USA as a giant shot blocker in the background helping Israel to defend the basket.
Whether they are attacked by Israel first or not, Iran could be planning to attempt to strike at a dozen nations at once rather than fight a traditional bi-national war, considering their affiliated international terrorist network. Israel has the right to defend itself under international law. But in forcing them into this hole, against a country they can wound but not overwhelm with one conventional strike, Obama, has unwittingly perhaps set the stage for a protracted multinational war. The calling of US troops into harms way is an inevitable 3rd act to this play as it currently is written.
Thus the only way to avoid war is if Congress takes a stand. It's time for the Legislative branch of government to step up and limit the error of the Executive branch. Optimally, they should cancel the agreement. Minimally, edit it.
Congress can still override President Obama's veto and overturn this decree against peace in the world. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
If congress is able to cancel this agreement, they may seek a compromise solution of editing and limiting the agreement rather than to repeal it entirely. It all depends on how many democrats take this for the serious threat to national security that it is. Although the President should have the right to conduct foreign policy, it must be on behalf of American interests, and this agreement does not seem to pass that test. Although it's best for America to look decisive, it's vital for America to not be self-destructive, nor the diplomatic epicenter of World War III.
Outright rejection of the treaty would be preferred, as it would act as a gentle form of censure of the President for risking national security so brazenly.
If congress is unable to act, the only good thing is that now there will be no room to allow Iran to continue to get away with it once they violate it and everyone not high on diplomatic euphoria knows that they will. The moral outrage of a broken deal is the only thing left that can wake a left wing in the West that is preoccupied and distracted from the clear evil intentions of the Iranian regime. Unfortunately that may mean a war somewhat akin to World War III, but that is where Western leaders have joyfully allowed Iran to lead them.
Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif made a statement today, calling this a Win-Win agreement and historic. He said, "We are reaching an agreement that is not perfect for anybody, but it is what we could accomplish," Zarif continued, "and it is an important achievement for all of us. Today could have been the end of hope on this issue. But now we are starting a new chapter of hope."
If you wish to translate through the obfuscation, just reverse everything he said and then you'll come out with the truth. It is a lose-lose agreement that begins the loss of hope of avoiding war.
Meanwhile President Obama has stated he did this deal to prevent a spiral into war, but unfortunately it is very likely to provide just the opposite. The deal would have had to be much tougher to prevent war. Now the President has written that spiral into war into a treaty.
Without any moral reversal of their hatred for America and Israel, Iran is to be allowed Nuclear Research and Development and Missile production as RIGHTS.
Inspections would have to have zero notice capability to have meaning. Iran is to be given weeks. (See Annex 1.78 for details. It would take 14 days to request Iran to CONSIDER meeting IAEA requests for an inspection, and another 7 days to set a committee to deal with the issue, and 3 days for Iran to respond, and thus to be able to compel Iran, from time of complaint until the last day Iran could get away with delaying compliance, it would be a total of 24 days!) More than enough time to hide things that could embarrass any signatory of this deal, but not meaningful to prevent nukes. Depending on diplomatic matters and procedure more than inspection imperatives can only bring disaster. There are other loopholes as well.
Meanwhile they continue to threaten Israel and hold American citizens in their prisons.
As Prime Minister Netanyahu pointed out, giving billions in sanctions relief to Iran even as they pledge to continue their unofficial war against the West, will undoubtedly be used to immediately bolster funding of terror throughout the world.
There is too much wiggle room for Iran and too little reassurances to Israel to avoid conflict. There is a very good chance that Israel would have to strike sooner than they would have liked to, since there would no longer be the USA as a giant shot blocker in the background helping Israel to defend the basket.
Whether they are attacked by Israel first or not, Iran could be planning to attempt to strike at a dozen nations at once rather than fight a traditional bi-national war, considering their affiliated international terrorist network. Israel has the right to defend itself under international law. But in forcing them into this hole, against a country they can wound but not overwhelm with one conventional strike, Obama, has unwittingly perhaps set the stage for a protracted multinational war. The calling of US troops into harms way is an inevitable 3rd act to this play as it currently is written.
Thus the only way to avoid war is if Congress takes a stand. It's time for the Legislative branch of government to step up and limit the error of the Executive branch. Optimally, they should cancel the agreement. Minimally, edit it.
Congress can still override President Obama's veto and overturn this decree against peace in the world. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Monday, July 6, 2015
The Racism of a Two State Solution
Rabbi Kahane wanted to offer Arabs money to relocate from Israel and was called a racist. What then do you call those who want to relocate Jews from Judea and Samaria, the land of their forefathers, without compensation? Jews not being welcomed to remain in their homes under a proposed Fatah ruled West Bank. A true definition of apartheid, yet perhaps because it's against Jews, not enough people are speaking of it.
President Obama is mocking the memory of activists from the Civil Rights Movement.
Attempts to make a One State Solution are falsely labeled apartheid, even if they are the antithesis.
Obama is acting like a White Democrat clone out of the 1950s, not a thinking person able to think beyond the party line. I expected more from him. Who would not.
People like Martin Luther King were not just activists but also humanitarians. They worked for the betterment of mankind, based on objective God given standards and not an arrogant agenda based solely on where they personally felt mankind needed to go. Why is this trait lacking from the White House?
God gave the Holy Land to the Jews, so let them live there in peace. Stop supporting lies against them and against the Zionist project. Because the policy of anti Zionism is apartheid and therefore anti Zionism is based in racism.
To give you a better understanding of the foundations to my perspective, I'm now in my second marriage. In my first, I was married to an Orthodox Jewish woman who happened to be African American. For the first two and half years of my life as a married man my expectation in my fulfilling the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying would be to create, in all likelihood, beautiful black Jewish babies. Unfortunately that marriage did not work out, but it still had a profound impact upon me. It also provided me with personal experience of the real world difference between racism and the absence of racism.
President Obama's current policy for Israel of a Two State solution is a racist policy. If it did not start that way, it has become so. He needs to stand down from his current path or go down in history as a symbol of hypocrisy in governance and moral equivalence.
MAYBE a couple decades ago you could get away with supporting a Two State solution. But when not only Hamas but even Fatah intends to not allow Jewish freedom in a proposed Palestinian State or even recognize Jews in a state of their own, an imbalance against the Jews exists. Separating my backyard from my neighbors is not racism. Segregating half of my neighbor's backyard into a backyard for me and for him, only for my benefit, is Apartheid. That is what is being suggested against the Jews of Judea and Samaria. The leaders of Israel need to accept this and incorporate it into their policy if they have not yet done so.
Obama would likely be called a racist by the time honored standards held dear to civil rights activists 65 years ago. But this need not be his legacy, he can still back off and return to the fold. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
President Obama is mocking the memory of activists from the Civil Rights Movement.
- 1900-54 White Democrats attempt to legalize discrimination against African Americans via Segregation in USA schools.
- 2008-2015 An African American Democrat President attempts to encourage discrimination against Jews in the Holy Land via Segregation within said Holy Land so Arabs who never had a country there can make a country where Jews are not welcome in the very land of their forefathers.
Attempts to make a One State Solution are falsely labeled apartheid, even if they are the antithesis.
Obama is acting like a White Democrat clone out of the 1950s, not a thinking person able to think beyond the party line. I expected more from him. Who would not.
People like Martin Luther King were not just activists but also humanitarians. They worked for the betterment of mankind, based on objective God given standards and not an arrogant agenda based solely on where they personally felt mankind needed to go. Why is this trait lacking from the White House?
God gave the Holy Land to the Jews, so let them live there in peace. Stop supporting lies against them and against the Zionist project. Because the policy of anti Zionism is apartheid and therefore anti Zionism is based in racism.
To give you a better understanding of the foundations to my perspective, I'm now in my second marriage. In my first, I was married to an Orthodox Jewish woman who happened to be African American. For the first two and half years of my life as a married man my expectation in my fulfilling the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying would be to create, in all likelihood, beautiful black Jewish babies. Unfortunately that marriage did not work out, but it still had a profound impact upon me. It also provided me with personal experience of the real world difference between racism and the absence of racism.
President Obama's current policy for Israel of a Two State solution is a racist policy. If it did not start that way, it has become so. He needs to stand down from his current path or go down in history as a symbol of hypocrisy in governance and moral equivalence.
MAYBE a couple decades ago you could get away with supporting a Two State solution. But when not only Hamas but even Fatah intends to not allow Jewish freedom in a proposed Palestinian State or even recognize Jews in a state of their own, an imbalance against the Jews exists. Separating my backyard from my neighbors is not racism. Segregating half of my neighbor's backyard into a backyard for me and for him, only for my benefit, is Apartheid. That is what is being suggested against the Jews of Judea and Samaria. The leaders of Israel need to accept this and incorporate it into their policy if they have not yet done so.
Obama would likely be called a racist by the time honored standards held dear to civil rights activists 65 years ago. But this need not be his legacy, he can still back off and return to the fold. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Friday, June 19, 2015
Jewish Freedom of Religion on the Temple Mount
The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism. So why does the government continue to deny Jews freedom of worship in their holy place. The government is still unfairly elevating Islam above Judaism on the Temple Mount and no wonder that God has given them Islamic countries to worry about. But this could change immediately for the better.
If the Knesset does not want to take responsibility for governing the Temple Mount directly, authority should be removed from the Muslim Waqf and immediately granted to the Rabbis or either the Cohanim or to the known descendants of King David, who in turn would hire Cohanim to man the holy site.
The seal of world peace has long been revealed in Tanach. The Lord will first return the Jewish people to the Holy Land and in the time when the Third Temple is built, the wolf will lay with the lamb, and swords will be made into plowshares. This is guaranteed by the Creator.
"And they shall build houses and inhabit them" (Isaiah 65, verse 21)
i.e. a house of government and then the house of the Lord, and only then,
"A wolf and a lamb shall graze together" (Verse 25)
For the upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain therein. But the wicked shall be cut off from the land, and the treacherous shall be uprooted therefrom. (Proverbs 2)
In the Book of Ezra, Cyrus, the Great, inspired by the prophecy of Daniel many years before, allowed the Jews the right to rebuild their temple on it's mount. Who can the Jews appeal to among the politicians in Israel? For all the good the government does, to make the return of Israel to the Holy Land more bitter than exile itself by denying the birth of the seal of world peace, the Third Temple, at the birth stool, is cruelty to their own people and those among the nations of the world who also yearn for peace. Hasbara for this can and should be done. And in fact it is guaranteed success if attempted.
"Will I bring to the birth stool and not cause to give birth?" says the Lord. "Am I not He who causes to give birth, now should I shut the womb?" says your God. (Isaiah 66)
"The wicked will be overthrown and they are no more, but the house of the righteous will stand." (Proverbs 12)
"...and the Sanctuary of the Lord shall be in its midst." (Ezekiel 48)
For true freedom of religion to exist in this matter, the Muslims must have their holy place in Mecca and the Jews must have their holy place in Jerusalem, on the Temple Mount, replacing the Dome of the Rock and the Mosque there. Anything less is not true freedom of religion for practitioners of both faiths in the purest sense.
A few years ago Jewish Home MK Zevulun Orlev called for the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple.
He said that removing the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque would mean that the “billion-strong Muslim world would surely launch a war.” However, he added, “everything political is temporary and there is no stability (anyway.)”
A couple years ago Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel also called for the rebuilding of the Temple.
In other words, these members of Knesset believe that the threat of war is relative. The constant danger Israel is in is a greater threat than any potential violent backlash against removing the Waqf from authority on the Temple Mount. It's not worth worrying about such consequences, according to these members of Israel's government.
But there is another layer to this. The enemies of Israel hate them no matter what, but if Israel stands up to the oppression and for their God given rights, they will surely receive Divine assistance the likes of which have not been witnessed for a long time. Just as Israel strives to cater to the religious needs of the gentiles living in the State of Israel, so too should they do so for the Jews who live in Israel. It is the right thing to do. And a host of Scriptural sources would encourage such a risk. Most investments are risks, and yet people make them all the time. But the best of intelligence sources, the Prophets of Israel, tell us that having a Temple is a protection, not a cause for fear. And the third Temple is a seal of peace, not a cause of war.
The fear of battle at the time the Jews built the Second Temple was not due to the Temple being built, but for the settlement and building of Jerusalem itself.
"Now it came to pass when Sanballat, and Tobiah, and the Arabs, and the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites heard that the wall of Jerusalem was repaired, that the people who were exposed had commenced to be closed in, that they became very angered. And they all banded together to come to wage war against Jerusalem and to wreak destruction therein." (Nehemiah 4:1,2)
... Despite the fear at the time, fortunately the war was prevented...
"And I saw, and I arose, and I said to the nobles and to the prefects and to the rest of the people, "Do not be afraid of them; remember the great and awesome Lord, and fight for your brethren, your sons and your daughters, your wives and your households. And it came to pass when our enemies heard that it had become known to us, that God had frustrated their counsel, that we all returned to the wall, each one to his work.(Nehemiah 4:8,9)"
If the Arabs are not attacking for settlement of the land, why would they attack for a holy place that is not truly one of their main holy places. They would not go to war only for that. And if they did it would only be a pretense. They already have all the pretext they need, because Jews love life, and the radicals of the Arabs love death. When they feel it's time for a battle, they look for excuses for a new intifada or battle. Remember when Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount and then an intifada began? The timing was right for an intifada or else it would not have amounted to much to the radicals. The government of Israel builds all the time, and only occasionally is there an attack. It's based less on what Israeli policy does, than on perceived opportunities to attack and internal Arabic war preparation timelines. But it is wrong to assume that it would start when people show the Creator respect. That is a fallacy, conceived in the heart of those who have little hope or trust in a higher power and beneath God's nation, the kingdom of priests, the people of Israel.
It's only a matter of time until a government of Israel does what is right, and they can then share in the blessings of peace that will bring in it's wake. But the current Knesset has the opportunity decide if they will be that fateful assembly that will acknowledge the God given inalienable rights of the Jews to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, as Cyrus, the Great, did long ago. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
An artificial glass ceiling prohibits the Jews from their Temple Mount. For thousands of years, it has been known that the Jews will return to their land and rebuild their Temple. If the only wrong that was done was to delay the building of the Temple, that would have been tragic enough, but even equal access as is granted to Islam is also not on the table. In fact it was recently announced that Muslims from Judea and Samaria will now also be granted access for the month of Ramadan, but no mention of freedom for Jews at least during the month of the High Holidays, Tishrey. This is the antithesis of the concept of freedom of religion, and by leaders of the very people who God commanded, "proclaim liberty throughout the land." (Leviticus 25) But this can be changed, "With the blessing of the upright, the ceiling is raised," (Proverbs 11)
There is a well known Talmudic dictum that the way a person judges others, they themselves are judged. (Sotah 8b) Before Iran became an enemy it was an ally. Before Israel gave the keys to the Temple Mount to the Muslim Waqf, it had an opportunity to first offer it to the Rabbis, or the Cohanim (priests), or even direct descendants of King David, the original purchaser of the Temple Mount. But the governorship was instead given to the Waqf. Measure for Measure, the forsaking of this, spiritually speaking, turned a friend into the worst of enemies. It began the spirit of the land for peace philosophy that has delayed peace in the region all these years. It created the spiritual foundation for the current predicament with the Islamic state in Iran and the rise of radicalism in the region. While there were dangerous nations before, the West had leaders who knew how to deal with Arab countries that endangered humanity. Now, the West is mostly confused on how to fix things. Israel conquered the Temple Mount, but quickly sought to surrender it. George W. Bush quickly conquered Iraq, but soon became overwhelmed after the victory. From a Torah perspective these events are not isolated from each other. If Israel would soon hand control of the Temple Mount to an appropriate Jewish authority, it would create a spiritual reversal of fortune that would soon find its way into the "real" world. It's a matter of destiny that it will happen, but how blessed would it be if it preceded the messiah and did not wait for him to occur.
But I'm not settling for mere equal rights to the Temple Mount, for the causes are not equal. Muslims who pray on the Temple Mount turn their backsides to God's most Holy place on Earth, in order to pray to Mecca. They are there only to ultimately deny the Temple Mount's holiness, not embrace it. In their mind it is not that holy. They do not intend it as evil, but as for us, who are bidden to treat that place as the most sacred on Earth, how do we allow it? For this we're delaying a Third Temple? If they at least needed the Temple Mount too, it would not hurt as much, but they do not; not religiously at least.
If the Knesset does not want to take responsibility for governing the Temple Mount directly, authority should be removed from the Muslim Waqf and immediately granted to the Rabbis or either the Cohanim or to the known descendants of King David, who in turn would hire Cohanim to man the holy site.
The seal of world peace has long been revealed in Tanach. The Lord will first return the Jewish people to the Holy Land and in the time when the Third Temple is built, the wolf will lay with the lamb, and swords will be made into plowshares. This is guaranteed by the Creator.
"And they shall build houses and inhabit them" (Isaiah 65, verse 21)
i.e. a house of government and then the house of the Lord, and only then,
"A wolf and a lamb shall graze together" (Verse 25)
For the upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain therein. But the wicked shall be cut off from the land, and the treacherous shall be uprooted therefrom. (Proverbs 2)
In the Book of Ezra, Cyrus, the Great, inspired by the prophecy of Daniel many years before, allowed the Jews the right to rebuild their temple on it's mount. Who can the Jews appeal to among the politicians in Israel? For all the good the government does, to make the return of Israel to the Holy Land more bitter than exile itself by denying the birth of the seal of world peace, the Third Temple, at the birth stool, is cruelty to their own people and those among the nations of the world who also yearn for peace. Hasbara for this can and should be done. And in fact it is guaranteed success if attempted.
"Will I bring to the birth stool and not cause to give birth?" says the Lord. "Am I not He who causes to give birth, now should I shut the womb?" says your God. (Isaiah 66)
"The wicked will be overthrown and they are no more, but the house of the righteous will stand." (Proverbs 12)
"...and the Sanctuary of the Lord shall be in its midst." (Ezekiel 48)
For true freedom of religion to exist in this matter, the Muslims must have their holy place in Mecca and the Jews must have their holy place in Jerusalem, on the Temple Mount, replacing the Dome of the Rock and the Mosque there. Anything less is not true freedom of religion for practitioners of both faiths in the purest sense.
A few years ago Jewish Home MK Zevulun Orlev called for the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple.
He said that removing the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque would mean that the “billion-strong Muslim world would surely launch a war.” However, he added, “everything political is temporary and there is no stability (anyway.)”
A couple years ago Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel also called for the rebuilding of the Temple.
In other words, these members of Knesset believe that the threat of war is relative. The constant danger Israel is in is a greater threat than any potential violent backlash against removing the Waqf from authority on the Temple Mount. It's not worth worrying about such consequences, according to these members of Israel's government.
But there is another layer to this. The enemies of Israel hate them no matter what, but if Israel stands up to the oppression and for their God given rights, they will surely receive Divine assistance the likes of which have not been witnessed for a long time. Just as Israel strives to cater to the religious needs of the gentiles living in the State of Israel, so too should they do so for the Jews who live in Israel. It is the right thing to do. And a host of Scriptural sources would encourage such a risk. Most investments are risks, and yet people make them all the time. But the best of intelligence sources, the Prophets of Israel, tell us that having a Temple is a protection, not a cause for fear. And the third Temple is a seal of peace, not a cause of war.
The fear of battle at the time the Jews built the Second Temple was not due to the Temple being built, but for the settlement and building of Jerusalem itself.
"Now it came to pass when Sanballat, and Tobiah, and the Arabs, and the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites heard that the wall of Jerusalem was repaired, that the people who were exposed had commenced to be closed in, that they became very angered. And they all banded together to come to wage war against Jerusalem and to wreak destruction therein." (Nehemiah 4:1,2)
... Despite the fear at the time, fortunately the war was prevented...
"And I saw, and I arose, and I said to the nobles and to the prefects and to the rest of the people, "Do not be afraid of them; remember the great and awesome Lord, and fight for your brethren, your sons and your daughters, your wives and your households. And it came to pass when our enemies heard that it had become known to us, that God had frustrated their counsel, that we all returned to the wall, each one to his work.(Nehemiah 4:8,9)"
If the Arabs are not attacking for settlement of the land, why would they attack for a holy place that is not truly one of their main holy places. They would not go to war only for that. And if they did it would only be a pretense. They already have all the pretext they need, because Jews love life, and the radicals of the Arabs love death. When they feel it's time for a battle, they look for excuses for a new intifada or battle. Remember when Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount and then an intifada began? The timing was right for an intifada or else it would not have amounted to much to the radicals. The government of Israel builds all the time, and only occasionally is there an attack. It's based less on what Israeli policy does, than on perceived opportunities to attack and internal Arabic war preparation timelines. But it is wrong to assume that it would start when people show the Creator respect. That is a fallacy, conceived in the heart of those who have little hope or trust in a higher power and beneath God's nation, the kingdom of priests, the people of Israel.
It's only a matter of time until a government of Israel does what is right, and they can then share in the blessings of peace that will bring in it's wake. But the current Knesset has the opportunity decide if they will be that fateful assembly that will acknowledge the God given inalienable rights of the Jews to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, as Cyrus, the Great, did long ago. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
Vote Torah in World Zionist Election
For those residing chutz learetz, outside of Israel, I suggest voting for the Torah party in the World Zionist Organization Election. Here are some quotes and links related to this process. The voting goes through tomorrow (April 30, 2015) and it's for representation for Jews outside the land of Israel.
Religious Zionist Slate on Facebook
Rabbi Pesach Lerner's letter urging to vote Torah (slate #10)
Vote Online via this link!
Rabbi Pesach Lerner's letter urging to vote Torah (slate #10)
Vote Online via this link!
If you are at least 18 years of age, live in the US, and accept the Jerusalem Program, you are most likely eligible to vote. In the United States, the election is managed by the American Zionist Movement, the umbrella organization of Zionist bodies and the representative of the World Zionist Organization in the United States.
Monday, April 27, 2015
Gaza and a One State Solution
Is Gaza an Israeli province with the Palestinian Authority as current governor, or is Gaza a land already given to the Palestinian Arabic people? I have presented the former perspective as the preferred interpretation of International Law, but it is easier to follow the latter perspective since you don't have to deal with Gaza to get it done. If the latter perspective on Gaza, that it is irrevocably surrendered, is established as Israel's foreign policy, then implementing Everyone Wins or a similar one state solution would focus only on Judea and Samaria for the time being. But what if I am right, that Gaza has never been fully transferred to another country? That then would do two things. First, it creates a legal mechanism for regime change of Hamas in Gaza without the need for concern of foreign complaints. It is an internal matter in Israel. Next, it would reveal a moral and legal liability to Israel for what Hamas does while on Israel's watch, urging immediate police action against Hamas rather than passively allowing the risk of their regime's existence next door to Ashkelon, Sederot and the other neighboring communities.
My position is based on the concept of where is the other state? There is no Successor State. There has been no alternative UN member state that has accepted the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority is not that yet, and by the grace of God, nor will it ever be. When it assumed control of Gaza, it did so as an entity, an organization more than a nation, and certainly not a member nation of the United Nations. Further the current regime is no longer the regime that Israel tried to give Gaza to. Fatah recently called for the destruction of Hamas. Hamas is clearly no longer a member of the Palestinian Authority which was the supposed Successor of the Gaza Strip. Hamas's control of Gaza has nullified even that.
If you are familiar with the first chapter in Talmud Shabbos, this situation is likened to the concept of Hanacha (placement) and Akira (acceptance.) There was arguably (in the position suggested by some legal authorities such as esteemed Professor Eugene Kontorovich) a placement of the item (The legal evacuation from Gaza, under the International Law: "Session"). But to my knowledge there has been no mention that no member nation of the U.N. has received it as of yet (Succession). Thus we come to the startling realization that Gaza awaits acceptance as a full nation even today. I would go further still, that the Session of Israel leaving Gaza has already ended the moment Gaza became a fledgling terror state, nullifying the intent of the Session from Gaza by Israel that the act of leaving Gaza was predicated on. Thus it is a policy of self-restraint alone that keeps Israel from retaking Gaza immediately, legally, under International Law.
As recently as last year, Professor Malcolm N. Shaw's 7th guide on International Law continues to speak of the lack of clarity in the matter of Succession. But he does state clearly that International obligations fall upon the new State. In Gaza, what new state are we discussing? The Arabs in Gaza still remain unaccepted as a legal nation, and therefore cannot accept Gaza legally unless they are accepted, Heaven fore-fend.
With this in mind, let's analyze the most recent one state solution, that of Jerusalem Post editor Caroline Glick. She has written and spoken of annexing Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) immediately. She has even written a book on the topic. Caroline Glick's thesis is a world of improvement over current Likud policy of waiting indefinitely for leopards to change their spots and terrorists to repent. I would be happy if her plan succeeded, but optimally speaking, from a peacemaking perspective, in my opinion, it is not far reaching enough to achieve maximum peace. I wish to illustrate the difference between her proposal of annexation of the entire Judea and Samaria and the concept of annexing all territories Judea, Samaria and Gaza simultaneously, and also the concept of filtering naturalization applicants from pro terror elements as per the plan I suggested.
My 'Kulam Marvichim, Everyone Wins' peace plan contains mechanics that could be beneficial even if the will of the people was to only annex Judea and Samaria. So it is worthwhile for fans of Everyone Wins to continue to share links and info on it where appropriate. However, there are some reasons to not settle for an edit to the plan. As I stated when I first wrote it in regards to Rabbi Elon's / Israeli Initiative / Jordan is Palestine peace plan, I would be happy if that would work, because no peace is worse than a less than perfect peace. But it is not politically viable to place your nation's national security in the hands of another parliament (Jordan). True peace is more important than personal accolades. So I urge my fans to not slander any true peace deal, even if not authored by me. The Almighty God shall reward our good efforts in any case.
The main difference between Rabbi Elon's peace plan and Caroline Glick's is that Rabbi Elon's is not politically viable but is a full peace plan, while Caroline Glick's plan is a partial resolution of the peace problem, but is more politically viable. Everyone Wins is a plan in the middle of them, and still the path that I recommend as the way to go. For Everyone Wins is politically viable and resolves the conflict.
The main reasons Everyone Wins must still be on the agenda are:
1) What about justice? We must not allow a terror state on Israel's doorstep to be established. Under my position on International Law, and the removal of Jews from Gaza several years ago, Gaza is still Israel's property. Gaza today is a province of Israel, under the governorship of the Palestinian Authority, awaiting ratification of the legal process of Succession which has never occurred. That means, if the law is like my position in this matter, it is then Israel's moral responsibility to stand up to terror under their watch and within their nation. Hamas must fall and by Israel's hand or at least approval, according to International Law itself. Why didn't George W. Bush attack Gaza before leaving office and get rid of the Hamas led pseudo government? Israel said no.
2) For those concerned with Halacha (Talmudic Law), there were two main perspectives discussed on Gaza. I'll say them in the name of two of the main rabbis of the previous generation, peace upon them, who supported those positions. One was the position of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, which supported the surrender of Gaza for the sake of peace and protection of life. The other was the position of Rabbi Aharon Soloveichik, which opposed any land concessions as even a little would strengthen violence and bloodshed. With utmost respect to my mentor, Rav Aharon, I personally felt we should follow Rav Yosef's advice, on condition it was followed with common sense, i.e. that the Palestinian Authority would be founded in a manner of gratitude, not arrogant triumph. They would teach their children peace, not jihad. But that provision was not the path followed and therefore I returned back to Rav Aharon's position on the matter due to the poor implementation of the Oslo Accords by Rabin, Peres and Beilin. After the gift of Gaza was accepted with arrogant triumph that empowered years of terror, intifada and bloodshed, Rav Ovadia Yosef also withdrew his support of Gaza-for-peace. Therefore, there no longer exists a halachic mechanism to surrender the God given gift of parts of the Holy Land by any significant number of Rabbis. Whereas Everyone Wins remains halachically acceptable. If International Law of Israel's current possession of Gaza still remaining intact has been correctly stated by me, then there is no reason to not take back Gaza and accept God's gift. If the International Law is like Professor Kontorovich's previously stated position, and the land was already forsaken, then there may exist a halachic reason to allow passivity, in the retake of Gaza unless war or Moshiach decide otherwise, from this theoretical aspect.
3) Most importantly, there must be no cities of refuge for terror. Halacha and Interntional Law would both agree with that. It's a grave danger to life to allow Hamas to rule. (A Jus Cogens for the state of Israel.) Gaza is enough real estate to be a entire state for terror, not just a city of refuge for terror. Attempting to reserve at least Gaza for a future Palestinian state a generation from now, is also reserving for a potential terrorist state a generation from now. IT's TIME TO END THIS. (If the Law is as Professor Kontorovich stated in regard to Israeli rights to that territory, then within that concept, a regime change in Gaza would still be on the table. And the search for Arab political moderates to become new governors in Gaza should, under such circumstance, then commence once the terrorists have been brought to justice.)
We are attempting to offer democratic life to the innocent among those who have tried to kill us, not by or for any evil by this annexation. This is the underlining belief in Caroline Glick's thesis as well, otherwise how can we even offer the suggestion of annexation? Therefore, it's merely a question of adding Gaza without being overwhelmed by the volume of naturalization applicants, which the mechanics of Everyone Wins handles well. Another strength of Everyone Wins is that it does not change the electoral balance in favor of Arabs, whereas Caroline Glick's plan slightly favors Arabs over other creeds and races in Israel by adding more Arabs than Jews in one lump sum to the State of Israel.
If the West truly wanted a peaceful Palestinian State, it would have demanded that Palestinian Authority schools and media not irresponsibly indoctrinate their children with terrorists as heroes and bloodshed as a virtue. A majority of Palestinian Arabs have repeatedly called for violence against Israel. If you consider the Oslo Accords as an application for statehood. There simply is not enough virtue to consider it anymore. For the sake of it's own existence, Israel should not risk it.
Support Jordan is Palestine for any who want their own country, if you like, but don't rely on Jordan is Palestine to end this conflict, for that is not likely to occur.
A slow but sure approach to annexation, is a sure way to a slow relief from terror, we need to resolve this soon. But a slow but sure approach to naturalization of incoming Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza (as in the Everyone Wins peace plan) is a sure approach to lasting peace.
Annex the territories now with the provision in the law that Israel will naturalize the citizens there in a way that does not harm Israel's economy, infrastructure, or electoral balance. That works whether or not Gaza is included.
In lieu of that, annexation of Judea and Samaria first, however less than ideal, may need to be the path to go, but with the mechanics of Everyone Wins in place.
May the Lord of Israel enlighten us to the true path to peace. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
My position is based on the concept of where is the other state? There is no Successor State. There has been no alternative UN member state that has accepted the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority is not that yet, and by the grace of God, nor will it ever be. When it assumed control of Gaza, it did so as an entity, an organization more than a nation, and certainly not a member nation of the United Nations. Further the current regime is no longer the regime that Israel tried to give Gaza to. Fatah recently called for the destruction of Hamas. Hamas is clearly no longer a member of the Palestinian Authority which was the supposed Successor of the Gaza Strip. Hamas's control of Gaza has nullified even that.
If you are familiar with the first chapter in Talmud Shabbos, this situation is likened to the concept of Hanacha (placement) and Akira (acceptance.) There was arguably (in the position suggested by some legal authorities such as esteemed Professor Eugene Kontorovich) a placement of the item (The legal evacuation from Gaza, under the International Law: "Session"). But to my knowledge there has been no mention that no member nation of the U.N. has received it as of yet (Succession). Thus we come to the startling realization that Gaza awaits acceptance as a full nation even today. I would go further still, that the Session of Israel leaving Gaza has already ended the moment Gaza became a fledgling terror state, nullifying the intent of the Session from Gaza by Israel that the act of leaving Gaza was predicated on. Thus it is a policy of self-restraint alone that keeps Israel from retaking Gaza immediately, legally, under International Law.
As recently as last year, Professor Malcolm N. Shaw's 7th guide on International Law continues to speak of the lack of clarity in the matter of Succession. But he does state clearly that International obligations fall upon the new State. In Gaza, what new state are we discussing? The Arabs in Gaza still remain unaccepted as a legal nation, and therefore cannot accept Gaza legally unless they are accepted, Heaven fore-fend.
With this in mind, let's analyze the most recent one state solution, that of Jerusalem Post editor Caroline Glick. She has written and spoken of annexing Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) immediately. She has even written a book on the topic. Caroline Glick's thesis is a world of improvement over current Likud policy of waiting indefinitely for leopards to change their spots and terrorists to repent. I would be happy if her plan succeeded, but optimally speaking, from a peacemaking perspective, in my opinion, it is not far reaching enough to achieve maximum peace. I wish to illustrate the difference between her proposal of annexation of the entire Judea and Samaria and the concept of annexing all territories Judea, Samaria and Gaza simultaneously, and also the concept of filtering naturalization applicants from pro terror elements as per the plan I suggested.
My 'Kulam Marvichim, Everyone Wins' peace plan contains mechanics that could be beneficial even if the will of the people was to only annex Judea and Samaria. So it is worthwhile for fans of Everyone Wins to continue to share links and info on it where appropriate. However, there are some reasons to not settle for an edit to the plan. As I stated when I first wrote it in regards to Rabbi Elon's / Israeli Initiative / Jordan is Palestine peace plan, I would be happy if that would work, because no peace is worse than a less than perfect peace. But it is not politically viable to place your nation's national security in the hands of another parliament (Jordan). True peace is more important than personal accolades. So I urge my fans to not slander any true peace deal, even if not authored by me. The Almighty God shall reward our good efforts in any case.
The main difference between Rabbi Elon's peace plan and Caroline Glick's is that Rabbi Elon's is not politically viable but is a full peace plan, while Caroline Glick's plan is a partial resolution of the peace problem, but is more politically viable. Everyone Wins is a plan in the middle of them, and still the path that I recommend as the way to go. For Everyone Wins is politically viable and resolves the conflict.
The main reasons Everyone Wins must still be on the agenda are:
1) What about justice? We must not allow a terror state on Israel's doorstep to be established. Under my position on International Law, and the removal of Jews from Gaza several years ago, Gaza is still Israel's property. Gaza today is a province of Israel, under the governorship of the Palestinian Authority, awaiting ratification of the legal process of Succession which has never occurred. That means, if the law is like my position in this matter, it is then Israel's moral responsibility to stand up to terror under their watch and within their nation. Hamas must fall and by Israel's hand or at least approval, according to International Law itself. Why didn't George W. Bush attack Gaza before leaving office and get rid of the Hamas led pseudo government? Israel said no.
2) For those concerned with Halacha (Talmudic Law), there were two main perspectives discussed on Gaza. I'll say them in the name of two of the main rabbis of the previous generation, peace upon them, who supported those positions. One was the position of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, which supported the surrender of Gaza for the sake of peace and protection of life. The other was the position of Rabbi Aharon Soloveichik, which opposed any land concessions as even a little would strengthen violence and bloodshed. With utmost respect to my mentor, Rav Aharon, I personally felt we should follow Rav Yosef's advice, on condition it was followed with common sense, i.e. that the Palestinian Authority would be founded in a manner of gratitude, not arrogant triumph. They would teach their children peace, not jihad. But that provision was not the path followed and therefore I returned back to Rav Aharon's position on the matter due to the poor implementation of the Oslo Accords by Rabin, Peres and Beilin. After the gift of Gaza was accepted with arrogant triumph that empowered years of terror, intifada and bloodshed, Rav Ovadia Yosef also withdrew his support of Gaza-for-peace. Therefore, there no longer exists a halachic mechanism to surrender the God given gift of parts of the Holy Land by any significant number of Rabbis. Whereas Everyone Wins remains halachically acceptable. If International Law of Israel's current possession of Gaza still remaining intact has been correctly stated by me, then there is no reason to not take back Gaza and accept God's gift. If the International Law is like Professor Kontorovich's previously stated position, and the land was already forsaken, then there may exist a halachic reason to allow passivity, in the retake of Gaza unless war or Moshiach decide otherwise, from this theoretical aspect.
3) Most importantly, there must be no cities of refuge for terror. Halacha and Interntional Law would both agree with that. It's a grave danger to life to allow Hamas to rule. (A Jus Cogens for the state of Israel.) Gaza is enough real estate to be a entire state for terror, not just a city of refuge for terror. Attempting to reserve at least Gaza for a future Palestinian state a generation from now, is also reserving for a potential terrorist state a generation from now. IT's TIME TO END THIS. (If the Law is as Professor Kontorovich stated in regard to Israeli rights to that territory, then within that concept, a regime change in Gaza would still be on the table. And the search for Arab political moderates to become new governors in Gaza should, under such circumstance, then commence once the terrorists have been brought to justice.)
We are attempting to offer democratic life to the innocent among those who have tried to kill us, not by or for any evil by this annexation. This is the underlining belief in Caroline Glick's thesis as well, otherwise how can we even offer the suggestion of annexation? Therefore, it's merely a question of adding Gaza without being overwhelmed by the volume of naturalization applicants, which the mechanics of Everyone Wins handles well. Another strength of Everyone Wins is that it does not change the electoral balance in favor of Arabs, whereas Caroline Glick's plan slightly favors Arabs over other creeds and races in Israel by adding more Arabs than Jews in one lump sum to the State of Israel.
If the West truly wanted a peaceful Palestinian State, it would have demanded that Palestinian Authority schools and media not irresponsibly indoctrinate their children with terrorists as heroes and bloodshed as a virtue. A majority of Palestinian Arabs have repeatedly called for violence against Israel. If you consider the Oslo Accords as an application for statehood. There simply is not enough virtue to consider it anymore. For the sake of it's own existence, Israel should not risk it.
Support Jordan is Palestine for any who want their own country, if you like, but don't rely on Jordan is Palestine to end this conflict, for that is not likely to occur.
A slow but sure approach to annexation, is a sure way to a slow relief from terror, we need to resolve this soon. But a slow but sure approach to naturalization of incoming Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza (as in the Everyone Wins peace plan) is a sure approach to lasting peace.
Annex the territories now with the provision in the law that Israel will naturalize the citizens there in a way that does not harm Israel's economy, infrastructure, or electoral balance. That works whether or not Gaza is included.
In lieu of that, annexation of Judea and Samaria first, however less than ideal, may need to be the path to go, but with the mechanics of Everyone Wins in place.
May the Lord of Israel enlighten us to the true path to peace. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Monday, April 13, 2015
On Implementation of a One State Solution
Based on a series of essays that I wrote 7 years ago.
The sooner a one state solution that does not kick all Palestinian Arabs out of Israel is implemented, “Apartheid State” (and other such false claims like that) would simply not hold water when the Palestinians have been accepted into Israeli society. At that point if anyone criticizes Israel, they would be criticizing the homogenized Jewish/Arabic post-conflict democracy of the Israel of tomorrow. But it must be done in a way that does not create a terror sub-state within Israel's heartland.
In regard to this policy of Arabic absorption upon which the Kulam Marvichim/Everyone Wins version of the One State Solution depends... Obviously, and even Arab Israelis would agree, that you cannot allow entry into the State of Israel and grant the right to vote to terrorists with blood on their hands or those who strongly support terror. This then brings us back to the concern we raised before that, according to that several polls have stated a majority of West Bank Palestinian Arabs support terror against Israel. So how is it possible for a significant enough number of Palestinians in the territories to be eligible to become naturalized Israelis even in the eyes of their own Arab cousins in Israel?
Again, the good part of bureaucracy comes to the rescue. To best illustrate first we need to categorize the intensity of the problem, and next we prioritize the organization of the Arabic naturalization rate according to a Score of the Level-Of-Probable-Innocence (L.O.P.I. Score, to coin a phrase) of each immigration applicant. The higher the L.O.P.I. Score rating, the better chance they have to become an Israeli.
Categorization:
LOPI Point Level 1: Terrorists with blood on their hands or their sponsors are the worst and are ineligible to become Israelis by any standard. They are not merely unqualified applicants. They are inhuman. It it less a question of whether they are eligible to naturalize as to whether they are eligible to be captured alive and not dead.
LOPI Point Level 2: Terrorists without blood on their hands are only slightly better. They look forward to murdering someone.
LOPI Point Level 3: Avid supporters of terror who curse the existence of the State of Israel. Their hatred is deep.
LOPI Point Level 4: Supporters of terror who are only doing so out of frustration and would likely stop if the frustration stopped.
LOPI Point Level 5: Supporter of terror for political reasons. In the sick, Pro-Hamas culture, if you support terror, then your stock goes up in the eyes of the government. We have seen this in history in the cultures of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. It may mean more food on their tables each week. This explains why a majority of Palestinian Arabs answer in polls that they support the use of terror against Israel, yet also want dual citizenship in Israel.
LOPI Point Level 6: Those courageous Palestinian Arabs who stand up to peer pressure and reject any connection whatsoever with terrorism, even though they are ostracized by their own neighbors.
A L.O.P.I. Score of 3 or less means they are ineligible to become Israeli citizens. Level 4 supporters may end up being rejected by both Jewish and Arab Israelis as being potential immigrants, but perhaps not. Level 5 would get some opposition from the political right, but certainly less than level 4. I would think most would agree that level 6 Arab applicants are a highly desirable crop of potential immigrants.
How to determine the difference between a level 5 and a level three terror supporter? For some in these categories it could be as simple as asking them to pledge support of Israel and forswear terror as a legitimate form of civil disobedience in the world. Those close to terror may not be able to take such a citizenship pledge, while for those far from terror in their hearts it may be very easy for them to take such a pledge.
For those in between categories; the externally indefinable citizenship applicants, how do we determine their true colors?
Through intel and acceptable probabilities.
To fully comment on the intelligence aspect, one would need to know certain classified security secrets that most do not have access to, in order to be able to offer any form of coherent and specified advice. But fear not, there are those who could answer this query already in place in our governments.
For those who are less of a risk but still a gray area, we consider a system of acceptable probabilities of loyalty. Acceptable probabilities are the expertise of actuaries and similar specialists. Just as credit card companies have a method to determine one's credit score and probable trust ratio, the same process can be held for people who are trustworthy enough to reach this level of appraisal.
What to do with those who are determined to be terrorists? Bring them to justice. The others whom all Israelis, Jew, Arab, all groups alike collectively reject, those rejects who pose no active danger to the State, yet reject the idea of joining the State civilly, should not be kept in a segregated camp in perpetuity, but be given provisions and financial compensation and sent on their way (out of the country), in the spirit of pardoning sinners as on the Biblical Jubilee. This should be done with as much compassion as possible, all according to the nature of the crimes and the will of the people at the time such an event would occur.
* * * * *
And this is the distinction that I've tried to express through my Everyone Wins peace plan. We find that other one state solutions believe in shipping one nation or the other to another country, tearing asunder civil rights such as the right to reside in one's own property and the right to vote, thus also creating discontent on both a societal as well as a national scale. Therefore any true peace deal must minimize feelings of dissatisfaction that are caused by any one side "losing" the negotiations, and also any peace deal must be able to create a permanent solution, otherwise all gains will eventually be lost and the cycle of violence would not cease, God forbid.
By naturalizing West Bank and Gaza Arabs, but in a corresponding ratio based system to Jewish immigration, both key individual national desires of full political rights for Palestinians in the territories and an end to security risks for Israelis will be met. Both sides would also benefit from peace without withdrawal, which makes no political losers on a national scale, plus the right in many cases to keep a family homestead that has existed for dozens and dozens of years, no losers on a societal scale. The newly united State of Israel would experience a massive investment surge from overseas companies and industries, the likes of which have never been seen in the country before.
Anticipating and tracking any change in the status quo of the rate of immigration is crucial to keep this peace deal fair. First the electorate must set the ratio. If currently there are more than 5 Jews for every Arab. So would 2 Arabs admitted to the State of Israel for every 10 Jews admitted be what the electorate would choose? It is important to set a fair and an appropriate ratio. For example, if current demographics in Israel are that 15% of Israelis are Arabs, then the ratio could be set at 15%. That is, for every 100 immigrants, 15 West Bank and Gaza Arabs who are not a threat are allowed in. So if in a given year there are 100,000 Jewish immigrants, 15,000 friendly Arabs would naturalize.
Whatever the numbers, and I am not in a position right now to make any solid suggestions on what the will of the people should be or is in this regard, nevertheless I feel that the ratio should not necessarily be considered written in stone. Through the wise fluctuation of the ratio rate of immigration and naturalization on a sliding scale in favor of the "disadvantaged" population it is possible to avoid major potential causes for flare ups in the future. It is certain that a ratio too extreme in either direction would be a costly mistake for which there is no need to extrapolate.
Once true peace exists, I would expect that Jewish immigration will likely increase by no less than 300% of current rates. Plus financial stability and growth will be at unheard of levels. The ability to power infrastructure growth and the greater Jewish immigration numbers will allow Israel to naturalize more Arabs faster and safer than currently possible. Thus the entire conflict will come to an end that much sooner. It's completion will occur exponentially. If 15,000 naturalize the first year, expect 50,000 shortly after due to the ever increasing immigration rates.
The majority of those who would make aliyah "sometime before they retire", would do so much sooner if long term peace and prosperity were assured. Too many stories of terror may not frighten war veterans in Israel, but it does reduce immigration rates significantly for foreign born Jews who never served in the military. That would end once a good and reliable peace process is in place.
If I am ever quoted on this, allow me to point out that I never said terrorists should be granted citizenship. No country would make a citizen out of wanton felons, let alone murderers. But also that Palestinians have clearly been reacting to a series of Israeli and Western leaders supporting terrorists in diplomatic clothing such as Abbas. Such Palestinian leaders are PLO terrorists, not true moderates. Therefore peace negotiations in the past have taken unfair turns. All because the stand that the USA took against Hamas' take over in Gaza, was how pseudo moderates like Abbas should have been dealt with as well. It was the Western support of Arafat and Abbas that created the group psychological phenomena that propelled terror into the sphere of political option in the minds of Palestinian voters.
Only by having zero tolerance toward fake diplomats such as Abbas can then the rise of true moderate, third way candidates be seen amongst the Palestinians and become widely acceptable to the public. This is an essential step in the local self governance that is necessary in primarily Palestinian Arab populated regions in the West Bank and Gaza, in order to allow Palestinian towns to be added one by one to the body of the State of Israel. The transitional period between implementation and completion of this great naturalization project, will require local Palestinian leaders, regional and municipal level leaders, to help and not hurt this process, even as current national level leaders are rejected.
It should be clearly understood that all other peace deals have been begun by taking the first step with the wrong foot. The beginning of peace does not come by the placation of terror; that is its anathema. At it's end, there must neither be the destruction of innocent societies. If your goal is trying to keep people from dying or losing their homes, then please let these words that I have told you take on meaning in your heart.
What do I answer to those who say, well what if in the end it turns out that most Palestinians utterly and eternally reject peace in support of terror. Will all this effort have all been in vain if only a few thousand can be saved? To them I say: What of the flowers among the thorns? What of the innocent ones among them? Avraham/Abraham, the forefather of Jews and Arabs prayed for those innocent trapped among the guilty. This is an opportunity for Abraham's descendants to show respect for this great legacy, and this most sacred family tradition. Let us, we and our Arabic cousins, live in peace, together, forever. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
The sooner a one state solution that does not kick all Palestinian Arabs out of Israel is implemented, “Apartheid State” (and other such false claims like that) would simply not hold water when the Palestinians have been accepted into Israeli society. At that point if anyone criticizes Israel, they would be criticizing the homogenized Jewish/Arabic post-conflict democracy of the Israel of tomorrow. But it must be done in a way that does not create a terror sub-state within Israel's heartland.
A Discussion on the Mechanics of the Naturalization of Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza to the State of Israel
In regard to this policy of Arabic absorption upon which the Kulam Marvichim/Everyone Wins version of the One State Solution depends... Obviously, and even Arab Israelis would agree, that you cannot allow entry into the State of Israel and grant the right to vote to terrorists with blood on their hands or those who strongly support terror. This then brings us back to the concern we raised before that, according to that several polls have stated a majority of West Bank Palestinian Arabs support terror against Israel. So how is it possible for a significant enough number of Palestinians in the territories to be eligible to become naturalized Israelis even in the eyes of their own Arab cousins in Israel?
Again, the good part of bureaucracy comes to the rescue. To best illustrate first we need to categorize the intensity of the problem, and next we prioritize the organization of the Arabic naturalization rate according to a Score of the Level-Of-Probable-Innocence (L.O.P.I. Score, to coin a phrase) of each immigration applicant. The higher the L.O.P.I. Score rating, the better chance they have to become an Israeli.
Categorization:
LOPI Point Level 1: Terrorists with blood on their hands or their sponsors are the worst and are ineligible to become Israelis by any standard. They are not merely unqualified applicants. They are inhuman. It it less a question of whether they are eligible to naturalize as to whether they are eligible to be captured alive and not dead.
LOPI Point Level 2: Terrorists without blood on their hands are only slightly better. They look forward to murdering someone.
LOPI Point Level 3: Avid supporters of terror who curse the existence of the State of Israel. Their hatred is deep.
LOPI Point Level 4: Supporters of terror who are only doing so out of frustration and would likely stop if the frustration stopped.
LOPI Point Level 5: Supporter of terror for political reasons. In the sick, Pro-Hamas culture, if you support terror, then your stock goes up in the eyes of the government. We have seen this in history in the cultures of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. It may mean more food on their tables each week. This explains why a majority of Palestinian Arabs answer in polls that they support the use of terror against Israel, yet also want dual citizenship in Israel.
LOPI Point Level 6: Those courageous Palestinian Arabs who stand up to peer pressure and reject any connection whatsoever with terrorism, even though they are ostracized by their own neighbors.
A L.O.P.I. Score of 3 or less means they are ineligible to become Israeli citizens. Level 4 supporters may end up being rejected by both Jewish and Arab Israelis as being potential immigrants, but perhaps not. Level 5 would get some opposition from the political right, but certainly less than level 4. I would think most would agree that level 6 Arab applicants are a highly desirable crop of potential immigrants.
How to determine the difference between a level 5 and a level three terror supporter? For some in these categories it could be as simple as asking them to pledge support of Israel and forswear terror as a legitimate form of civil disobedience in the world. Those close to terror may not be able to take such a citizenship pledge, while for those far from terror in their hearts it may be very easy for them to take such a pledge.
For those in between categories; the externally indefinable citizenship applicants, how do we determine their true colors?
Through intel and acceptable probabilities.
To fully comment on the intelligence aspect, one would need to know certain classified security secrets that most do not have access to, in order to be able to offer any form of coherent and specified advice. But fear not, there are those who could answer this query already in place in our governments.
For those who are less of a risk but still a gray area, we consider a system of acceptable probabilities of loyalty. Acceptable probabilities are the expertise of actuaries and similar specialists. Just as credit card companies have a method to determine one's credit score and probable trust ratio, the same process can be held for people who are trustworthy enough to reach this level of appraisal.
Prioritization
Very simply, a L.O.P.I. Score of 6 or something very close to that equals being accepted. Under the Kulam Marvichim/Everyone Wins peace plan, that threshold would occur as soon as a corresponding amount of Jewish immigrants come to Israel as well, a provision in Everyone Wins which protects the electoral balance in the State of Israel.What to do with those who are determined to be terrorists? Bring them to justice. The others whom all Israelis, Jew, Arab, all groups alike collectively reject, those rejects who pose no active danger to the State, yet reject the idea of joining the State civilly, should not be kept in a segregated camp in perpetuity, but be given provisions and financial compensation and sent on their way (out of the country), in the spirit of pardoning sinners as on the Biblical Jubilee. This should be done with as much compassion as possible, all according to the nature of the crimes and the will of the people at the time such an event would occur.
Absorption Selection Methodology
Either via national lottery and or by adding one model citizen type village at a time. The advantage of such template villages is they would be a boon for hasbara (PR) of the peace process.* * * * *
Toward a Truly Evenhanded Policy for Peace in the Holy Land
And this is the distinction that I've tried to express through my Everyone Wins peace plan. We find that other one state solutions believe in shipping one nation or the other to another country, tearing asunder civil rights such as the right to reside in one's own property and the right to vote, thus also creating discontent on both a societal as well as a national scale. Therefore any true peace deal must minimize feelings of dissatisfaction that are caused by any one side "losing" the negotiations, and also any peace deal must be able to create a permanent solution, otherwise all gains will eventually be lost and the cycle of violence would not cease, God forbid.
By naturalizing West Bank and Gaza Arabs, but in a corresponding ratio based system to Jewish immigration, both key individual national desires of full political rights for Palestinians in the territories and an end to security risks for Israelis will be met. Both sides would also benefit from peace without withdrawal, which makes no political losers on a national scale, plus the right in many cases to keep a family homestead that has existed for dozens and dozens of years, no losers on a societal scale. The newly united State of Israel would experience a massive investment surge from overseas companies and industries, the likes of which have never been seen in the country before.
Anticipating and tracking any change in the status quo of the rate of immigration is crucial to keep this peace deal fair. First the electorate must set the ratio. If currently there are more than 5 Jews for every Arab. So would 2 Arabs admitted to the State of Israel for every 10 Jews admitted be what the electorate would choose? It is important to set a fair and an appropriate ratio. For example, if current demographics in Israel are that 15% of Israelis are Arabs, then the ratio could be set at 15%. That is, for every 100 immigrants, 15 West Bank and Gaza Arabs who are not a threat are allowed in. So if in a given year there are 100,000 Jewish immigrants, 15,000 friendly Arabs would naturalize.
Whatever the numbers, and I am not in a position right now to make any solid suggestions on what the will of the people should be or is in this regard, nevertheless I feel that the ratio should not necessarily be considered written in stone. Through the wise fluctuation of the ratio rate of immigration and naturalization on a sliding scale in favor of the "disadvantaged" population it is possible to avoid major potential causes for flare ups in the future. It is certain that a ratio too extreme in either direction would be a costly mistake for which there is no need to extrapolate.
Once true peace exists, I would expect that Jewish immigration will likely increase by no less than 300% of current rates. Plus financial stability and growth will be at unheard of levels. The ability to power infrastructure growth and the greater Jewish immigration numbers will allow Israel to naturalize more Arabs faster and safer than currently possible. Thus the entire conflict will come to an end that much sooner. It's completion will occur exponentially. If 15,000 naturalize the first year, expect 50,000 shortly after due to the ever increasing immigration rates.
The majority of those who would make aliyah "sometime before they retire", would do so much sooner if long term peace and prosperity were assured. Too many stories of terror may not frighten war veterans in Israel, but it does reduce immigration rates significantly for foreign born Jews who never served in the military. That would end once a good and reliable peace process is in place.
If I am ever quoted on this, allow me to point out that I never said terrorists should be granted citizenship. No country would make a citizen out of wanton felons, let alone murderers. But also that Palestinians have clearly been reacting to a series of Israeli and Western leaders supporting terrorists in diplomatic clothing such as Abbas. Such Palestinian leaders are PLO terrorists, not true moderates. Therefore peace negotiations in the past have taken unfair turns. All because the stand that the USA took against Hamas' take over in Gaza, was how pseudo moderates like Abbas should have been dealt with as well. It was the Western support of Arafat and Abbas that created the group psychological phenomena that propelled terror into the sphere of political option in the minds of Palestinian voters.
Only by having zero tolerance toward fake diplomats such as Abbas can then the rise of true moderate, third way candidates be seen amongst the Palestinians and become widely acceptable to the public. This is an essential step in the local self governance that is necessary in primarily Palestinian Arab populated regions in the West Bank and Gaza, in order to allow Palestinian towns to be added one by one to the body of the State of Israel. The transitional period between implementation and completion of this great naturalization project, will require local Palestinian leaders, regional and municipal level leaders, to help and not hurt this process, even as current national level leaders are rejected.
It should be clearly understood that all other peace deals have been begun by taking the first step with the wrong foot. The beginning of peace does not come by the placation of terror; that is its anathema. At it's end, there must neither be the destruction of innocent societies. If your goal is trying to keep people from dying or losing their homes, then please let these words that I have told you take on meaning in your heart.
What do I answer to those who say, well what if in the end it turns out that most Palestinians utterly and eternally reject peace in support of terror. Will all this effort have all been in vain if only a few thousand can be saved? To them I say: What of the flowers among the thorns? What of the innocent ones among them? Avraham/Abraham, the forefather of Jews and Arabs prayed for those innocent trapped among the guilty. This is an opportunity for Abraham's descendants to show respect for this great legacy, and this most sacred family tradition. Let us, we and our Arabic cousins, live in peace, together, forever. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
Monday, March 30, 2015
Fatah is the Problem
The problem with the Two State solution is that Israel is the only state involved. The others side consists of three elements. Many innocent people who recognized the good in Israel, many people who want Israel to be punished despite the many benefits Israel has handed them, and both of those groups being led by a horde of men of bloodshed and deceit, empowered by the Oslo Accords to keep their Iron grip over their people. The end result is, there is no way for a Two State solution that leads to peace. But there is an alternative.
Recently, Palestinian Authority leader Abbas called for the destruction of Hamas. Begged Arab states to attack Hamas. After all, Hamas crossed a line, they did not do as Fatah demanded. It was not to battle terror that he stated this. They got in his way and they had to die. That's how his mentor Arafat would have handled it, and that is what he demanded in his speech and put into his foreign policy against... his unity government partner? It was Abbas who wanted a unity government with Hamas. He worked hard for a peace deal with Hamas. But now they've gone too far and they must go.
If we apply logic, no offense to any lingering Oslo Accord proponents who are unable to use logic. But if we do use that logic stuff, we come to a worrisome conclusion. If Fatah would not hesitate to betray their word to their brethren whom they chose over Israel, why would they keep a treaty with Israel?
Fatah are leaders willing to make a peace deal. And they are also leaders who desire that their enemies whom they made a treaty with should die the moment they do not continue to get their way.
So that makes Fatah not candidates to become men of peace, nor potential peace partners. That makes them men of bloodshed in sheep's clothing.
If they would do this to their brethren in Gaza, obviously no one is sacrosanct from their potential treachery.
Tell your congressmen. WARNING: This is how Fatah treats people they make peace deals with.
The moment Arafat called the path to "peace" a "strategic choice for peace", I knew something was up. But what does Arafat have to do with Abbas? Arafat was an arch terrorist, Abbas is a man who "we can make a deal with."
Recently, Palestinian Authority leader Abbas called for the destruction of Hamas. Begged Arab states to attack Hamas. After all, Hamas crossed a line, they did not do as Fatah demanded. It was not to battle terror that he stated this. They got in his way and they had to die. That's how his mentor Arafat would have handled it, and that is what he demanded in his speech and put into his foreign policy against... his unity government partner? It was Abbas who wanted a unity government with Hamas. He worked hard for a peace deal with Hamas. But now they've gone too far and they must go.
If we apply logic, no offense to any lingering Oslo Accord proponents who are unable to use logic. But if we do use that logic stuff, we come to a worrisome conclusion. If Fatah would not hesitate to betray their word to their brethren whom they chose over Israel, why would they keep a treaty with Israel?
Fatah are leaders willing to make a peace deal. And they are also leaders who desire that their enemies whom they made a treaty with should die the moment they do not continue to get their way.
So that makes Fatah not candidates to become men of peace, nor potential peace partners. That makes them men of bloodshed in sheep's clothing.
If they would do this to their brethren in Gaza, obviously no one is sacrosanct from their potential treachery.
Tell your congressmen. WARNING: This is how Fatah treats people they make peace deals with.
The moment Arafat called the path to "peace" a "strategic choice for peace", I knew something was up. But what does Arafat have to do with Abbas? Arafat was an arch terrorist, Abbas is a man who "we can make a deal with."
What does it take to be wed to a murderer? What does it take to be the most trusted assistant to an arch terrorist? A gang leader's wife may not have as much blood on her hands, but would you trust your kids to her if she offered to babysit? That is by a woman with an innate extra dose of kindness. What of by a man who was mentored by an arch terrorist? Who uses the same disregard of life when he does not get his way?
That is what every proponent of a peace deal with Fatah is suggesting. Trust Abbas and his cronies with your back? Do you really think this is a path to true peace or only to perpetual conflict?
And Abbas is just the figurehead. Another variation of the same terrorist in politician clothing would take his place if this head of the hydra was gone. Therefore, do not make a deal with the hydra at all.
The few successes of political leadership in Judea and Samaria (The West Bank) by Fatah were actually performed by the local leadership, which existed prior to the Oslo Accords. The local mayors and township leaders are the true leaders of the Palestinian Arabs in the territories, but they will never be allowed to truly lead their people to maximum social improvement, unless Israel annexes the territories and enables them with true democratic freedom. The only way to bring that level of governance is to stop trapping them behind a fence with a bunch of terrorist bullies who always put their agenda of bloodshed before civil and social services.
Hamas is Fatah without the act, without the sheep's clothing. The Fatah is Hamas with political spin. Hamas is the stick, Fatah is the carrot. The goal is only Jihad not the betterment of their people. The conquest of all land West of the River Jordan, without real concern over what happens to their people after their benefactors in Israel are gone.
But their people know. There have been reports of a dual sentiment among individuals who were interviewed. They want the PA to take over, yet they also want to be a part of Israel. Why is that phenomena occurring?
Innocent Palestinians Arabs in the territories want the PA to be successful but mainly for sentimental reasons. Like someone voting for a person of their race who runs for political office, even if they do not like their policies. The media does not report there is palatable fear in Arabs of the territories in their daily existence under Fatah rule and also over what happens the day after a potential Israeli withdrawal. On such a day, when the only government that truly is concerned for their social welfare, Israel, is no longer part of the picture.
Palestinian Arabs are keeping their heads low and trying to stay out of the way of the Palestinian Authority. They turn to their local leaders and hope they need not rely on the corrupt and vindictive national leadership of Fatah's Palestinian Authority.
Why are Arabs still leaving the Palestinian Authority for places like the USA? While exact figures are unknown since the PA conveniently controls the release of that information, even they have admitted that it exists. It is too large of an emigration to pretend it is not occurring at all. But wait, haven't we been told that their independence is more important to them than life itself? Why not participate in the "political messianic project" of Palestinian Authority leadership if independence is so important?
Because the Oslo Accords are not about helping Palestinian Arabs, or bringing them peace, or even true independence. It's about making the West feel better with themselves and about how they view the state of the World today. Not what happens a few years or months down the road after the big "Peace in Our Time" festival would be held. For such a fake peace, we do not establish a prelude to perpetual war and a purgatory for a people that no one among their own national leaders really wants to save.
Remove the Palestinian Authority from power. Annex the territories and naturalize those who are innocent of terror.
For Israel there exists in this phenomena a double edged sword. Over 40 percent of the people want the Palestinian Authority to be dissolved, and more than that seem OK with violence against Israel. As I warned years ago, the marginalization of the good people among the Palestinian Arabs has eroded the amount of Palestinians who would be eligible to become Israeli citizens should a One State solution occur.
In order to save as many Palestinian Arabs as possible, as well as vindicate Israeli intentions towards them, Israel must trade the two state path for a one state path, and soon. Lest a regional war make this matter mute, and the opportunity for the Sanctification of God's name in this matter, God forbid, be lost.
Let us show mercy on the Palestinian Arabs who are living in fear and discontent under terrorist leadership by allowing them into the fold of the united State of Israel. Only in a way that does not harm Israeli economy, infrastructure or political balance, such as with a plan like the Everyone Wins Peace Plan. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
* * *
http://www.jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2014/06/kulam-marvichim-everyone-wins.html
July 2009 Summary Letter to PM Netanyahu
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2010/04/netanyahus-path-to-peace-and-everyone.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2008/05/discussion-on-mechanics-of.html
But their people know. There have been reports of a dual sentiment among individuals who were interviewed. They want the PA to take over, yet they also want to be a part of Israel. Why is that phenomena occurring?
Innocent Palestinians Arabs in the territories want the PA to be successful but mainly for sentimental reasons. Like someone voting for a person of their race who runs for political office, even if they do not like their policies. The media does not report there is palatable fear in Arabs of the territories in their daily existence under Fatah rule and also over what happens the day after a potential Israeli withdrawal. On such a day, when the only government that truly is concerned for their social welfare, Israel, is no longer part of the picture.
Palestinian Arabs are keeping their heads low and trying to stay out of the way of the Palestinian Authority. They turn to their local leaders and hope they need not rely on the corrupt and vindictive national leadership of Fatah's Palestinian Authority.
Why are Arabs still leaving the Palestinian Authority for places like the USA? While exact figures are unknown since the PA conveniently controls the release of that information, even they have admitted that it exists. It is too large of an emigration to pretend it is not occurring at all. But wait, haven't we been told that their independence is more important to them than life itself? Why not participate in the "political messianic project" of Palestinian Authority leadership if independence is so important?
Because the Oslo Accords are not about helping Palestinian Arabs, or bringing them peace, or even true independence. It's about making the West feel better with themselves and about how they view the state of the World today. Not what happens a few years or months down the road after the big "Peace in Our Time" festival would be held. For such a fake peace, we do not establish a prelude to perpetual war and a purgatory for a people that no one among their own national leaders really wants to save.
Remove the Palestinian Authority from power. Annex the territories and naturalize those who are innocent of terror.
For Israel there exists in this phenomena a double edged sword. Over 40 percent of the people want the Palestinian Authority to be dissolved, and more than that seem OK with violence against Israel. As I warned years ago, the marginalization of the good people among the Palestinian Arabs has eroded the amount of Palestinians who would be eligible to become Israeli citizens should a One State solution occur.
In order to save as many Palestinian Arabs as possible, as well as vindicate Israeli intentions towards them, Israel must trade the two state path for a one state path, and soon. Lest a regional war make this matter mute, and the opportunity for the Sanctification of God's name in this matter, God forbid, be lost.
Let us show mercy on the Palestinian Arabs who are living in fear and discontent under terrorist leadership by allowing them into the fold of the united State of Israel. Only in a way that does not harm Israeli economy, infrastructure or political balance, such as with a plan like the Everyone Wins Peace Plan. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.
* * *
A Summary of the Everyone Wins Peace Plan can be found at theses URLs:
http://www.jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2014/06/kulam-marvichim-everyone-wins.html
July 2009 Summary Letter to PM Netanyahu
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2010/04/netanyahus-path-to-peace-and-everyone.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2008/05/discussion-on-mechanics-of.html
Thursday, March 26, 2015
Internal and External Threats to Israel from Current Obama Administration Initiatives
There are two Obama Administration Initiatives that involve Israeli National Security that are a danger to the State of Israel. I want to offer ideas for alternative policy by discussing the Internal threat of Supporting the Palestinian Authority in making a Two State "solution" to the conflict. Also, the external threat of empowering Iran's nuclear program against the counsel of Israel's leaders.
Internal Threat: Palestinian Statehood
The failure to reject a Two State Solution with the terror loving Palestinian Authority has put fuel on the fire for the political oppression by the Obama Administration against the Likud led government the past month. They find extreme leftist statements from left wing American organizations and they repeat it as mantra, trying to embarrass Likud out of wise policy. Likud will not support statehood with an actively terror loving Palestinian Authority. And that is the weak link. Because Likud is willing to support statehood with the leopard if it puts a blanket on it's spots, not if it changes them, all this harassment the past month has come about.
I'm not trying to blame the victim. I'm trying to instruct the abused on how to end the abuse and not be subject to it anymore.
Standing on a fence does not afford defense, only by being on one side of it is there protection. Well in this case, there is a mad dog on one side, waiting to commit terror. So, only one solution to find shelter, climb down onto the correct side of the fence. The side of the fence where, whether the dog is mad or not. Whether the dog is mad a month from now or a year from now or ten years from now. Be on the right side of the fence and you are safe.
The VERY argument Bibi has used to warn against Iran, is the VERY reason, Israel MUST give up a Two State solution. If you do not prevent terror ten years from now, it's not a good deal. With a pseudo government dedicated to educating their children to hate Jews, who live a mere 20 meters over the security fence, in some cases, there can never be a deal. Even if Hamas packed up and moved away, and even if Abbas agreed to every stipulation Likud ever requested. If his words say Jewish state and his intention is another generation of terror, you still can't take that deal.
Peace should end war, not be a prelude to a next war. There can be no peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority because that is not their goal. EVER.
Rather, Israel and the USA must focus on improving the lives of Palestinian Arabs, within a united State of Israel. Democracy, economic opportunity, and peace. It all begins by filtering out terrorists, and certainly not giving them strategic parcels of land. You can't share land with terrorists, but you can with people.
For further details on this path to true peace, you can read about my Everyone Wins peace plan on this blog.
http://www.jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2014/06/kulam-marvichim-everyone-wins.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2009/07/peace-in-middle-east-everyone-wins.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2010/04/netanyahus-path-to-peace-and-everyone.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2008/05/discussion-on-mechanics-of.html
External Threat: Iranian Nukes
Remember President Kennedy's reaction to the Cuban Missile Crisis? Why was it such a cause for American ire? What happened to the idea of a Democratic President who loves peace? Besides evil intent of the USSR, Cuba was on the United States' doorstep and who wants nukes on their doorstep? Iran is similarly in much closer proximity to Israel than to the United States. It is on Israel's doorstep and it is only normal for Israel to be more concerned about how it is dealt with. Why would Kennedy be so tough? Why did he not try out the "let bygones be bygones" approach of Obama and Kerry?
If Obama and Kerry spoke about the Cuban Crisis back then, with the current mindset from the Administration, Obama would have criticized Kennedy for being a warmonger and demand that he recall the navy immediately. But would either have helped America in that dark hour, by following the philosophies behind this policy at a time when realism is urgently needed? Should a school bus driver drink alcohol while he is driving kids? Should Obama follow left wing dreams in this crucial moment in American and Middle East history?
Prime Minister Netanyahu delineated a plan of action, of very tough sanctions, and that plan was followed and it worked, it brought Iran to the negotiation table, which prevented war. Prime Minister Netanyahu delineated a subsequent plan of action and has warned that deviation will strengthen the danger, not end it.
Obama and Kerry have removed their sticks and have apparently brought loads of carrots with them to the negotiation table. Congress, not just Israel, have rejected this path of negotiation, with this kind of regime in Iran. If a democratic choice, the President is out numbered on this one.
Yet suppose the fantasy for a moment that the President was somehow correct in his plan? Why then has he not tried to sell it better to Israel or Congress, but instead chose to pick a fight over Israel's internal issues? ...Remember how close was the USA to war with the USSR in the waters of Cuba... Think about how close, will failure to assuage Israeli fears, drive our friends to the brink of war with Iran, even if our Executive branch is calm about the whole affair. Israel will not attack unless they feel threatened. And, news flash, they already do. Bibi has been saying in other words, be tough with Iran for the sake of Peace. But Obama has not listened.
If Israel bombs Iran and Iran counter attacks, it will be because of what we failed to do to prevent this Israeli version of a Cuban Missile Crisis from escalating. Because it is also against the advice of Congress, the onus is more fully on the shoulders of the Obama Administration. Does the phrase "No More War" have any meaning to the Democrats any more?
"As streams of water is the heart of kings in the hand of God, unto all that He desires, He leads it." (Proverbs 21) May God thwart the evil plans of His people's enemies in Iran and wherever they may be. May God's wisdom impress the Obama Administration with the right paths and may they follow those new paths immediately. May it very soon be so, by the grace of God.
Internal Threat: Palestinian Statehood
The failure to reject a Two State Solution with the terror loving Palestinian Authority has put fuel on the fire for the political oppression by the Obama Administration against the Likud led government the past month. They find extreme leftist statements from left wing American organizations and they repeat it as mantra, trying to embarrass Likud out of wise policy. Likud will not support statehood with an actively terror loving Palestinian Authority. And that is the weak link. Because Likud is willing to support statehood with the leopard if it puts a blanket on it's spots, not if it changes them, all this harassment the past month has come about.
I'm not trying to blame the victim. I'm trying to instruct the abused on how to end the abuse and not be subject to it anymore.
Standing on a fence does not afford defense, only by being on one side of it is there protection. Well in this case, there is a mad dog on one side, waiting to commit terror. So, only one solution to find shelter, climb down onto the correct side of the fence. The side of the fence where, whether the dog is mad or not. Whether the dog is mad a month from now or a year from now or ten years from now. Be on the right side of the fence and you are safe.
The VERY argument Bibi has used to warn against Iran, is the VERY reason, Israel MUST give up a Two State solution. If you do not prevent terror ten years from now, it's not a good deal. With a pseudo government dedicated to educating their children to hate Jews, who live a mere 20 meters over the security fence, in some cases, there can never be a deal. Even if Hamas packed up and moved away, and even if Abbas agreed to every stipulation Likud ever requested. If his words say Jewish state and his intention is another generation of terror, you still can't take that deal.
Peace should end war, not be a prelude to a next war. There can be no peace negotiations with the Palestinian Authority because that is not their goal. EVER.
Rather, Israel and the USA must focus on improving the lives of Palestinian Arabs, within a united State of Israel. Democracy, economic opportunity, and peace. It all begins by filtering out terrorists, and certainly not giving them strategic parcels of land. You can't share land with terrorists, but you can with people.
For further details on this path to true peace, you can read about my Everyone Wins peace plan on this blog.
http://www.jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2014/06/kulam-marvichim-everyone-wins.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2009/07/peace-in-middle-east-everyone-wins.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2010/04/netanyahus-path-to-peace-and-everyone.html
http://jerusalemdefender.blogspot.com/2008/05/discussion-on-mechanics-of.html
External Threat: Iranian Nukes
Remember President Kennedy's reaction to the Cuban Missile Crisis? Why was it such a cause for American ire? What happened to the idea of a Democratic President who loves peace? Besides evil intent of the USSR, Cuba was on the United States' doorstep and who wants nukes on their doorstep? Iran is similarly in much closer proximity to Israel than to the United States. It is on Israel's doorstep and it is only normal for Israel to be more concerned about how it is dealt with. Why would Kennedy be so tough? Why did he not try out the "let bygones be bygones" approach of Obama and Kerry?
If Obama and Kerry spoke about the Cuban Crisis back then, with the current mindset from the Administration, Obama would have criticized Kennedy for being a warmonger and demand that he recall the navy immediately. But would either have helped America in that dark hour, by following the philosophies behind this policy at a time when realism is urgently needed? Should a school bus driver drink alcohol while he is driving kids? Should Obama follow left wing dreams in this crucial moment in American and Middle East history?
Prime Minister Netanyahu delineated a plan of action, of very tough sanctions, and that plan was followed and it worked, it brought Iran to the negotiation table, which prevented war. Prime Minister Netanyahu delineated a subsequent plan of action and has warned that deviation will strengthen the danger, not end it.
Obama and Kerry have removed their sticks and have apparently brought loads of carrots with them to the negotiation table. Congress, not just Israel, have rejected this path of negotiation, with this kind of regime in Iran. If a democratic choice, the President is out numbered on this one.
Yet suppose the fantasy for a moment that the President was somehow correct in his plan? Why then has he not tried to sell it better to Israel or Congress, but instead chose to pick a fight over Israel's internal issues? ...Remember how close was the USA to war with the USSR in the waters of Cuba... Think about how close, will failure to assuage Israeli fears, drive our friends to the brink of war with Iran, even if our Executive branch is calm about the whole affair. Israel will not attack unless they feel threatened. And, news flash, they already do. Bibi has been saying in other words, be tough with Iran for the sake of Peace. But Obama has not listened.
If Israel bombs Iran and Iran counter attacks, it will be because of what we failed to do to prevent this Israeli version of a Cuban Missile Crisis from escalating. Because it is also against the advice of Congress, the onus is more fully on the shoulders of the Obama Administration. Does the phrase "No More War" have any meaning to the Democrats any more?
"As streams of water is the heart of kings in the hand of God, unto all that He desires, He leads it." (Proverbs 21) May God thwart the evil plans of His people's enemies in Iran and wherever they may be. May God's wisdom impress the Obama Administration with the right paths and may they follow those new paths immediately. May it very soon be so, by the grace of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
