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."

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.

* * *

A Summary of the Everyone Wins Peace Plan can be found at theses URLs:

July 2009 Summary Letter to PM Netanyahu

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.

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.

Monday, March 16, 2015

On the Elections for the 20th Knesset

Unless moshiach (messiah) arrives by tomorrow, Bibi must win. The shadow of Iran is too great to allow weak leadership at a time like this. Bibi is just such a statesman as the nation needs, beyond his imperfections in other areas. Only Moshiach could make me think about Bibi's flaws. Herzog is not Moshiach. But for those who wish to vote for another party besides Likud, I wanted to discuss the other parties on the right, to help put things in perspective. Before doing that, however, I must comment about the new Labor party.

Will the call letters EMT, which stands for Emet/Emes/Emeth/truth, the union of Livni and Labor is anything but truthful representation of leadership.  First, I don't know if Herzog can run his own party or if Livni will be pulling the strings. Second, would that be worse? I don't know. Third, I don't know if, Heaven forefend they should possibly win tomorrow, if they would run the Knesset or Obama would. Fourth, I don't know if they would not try to remove Torah truth from the world if given the chance. Which brings me to the fifth thing I do not know, how they could have such a significant following to begin with.  Well, since it's clear I don't know, I'll try not to speak of them further in this article.

Here's some things I do know.

One, if I was fortunate enough to live in Israel, I would seriously consider voting Likud for the first time in this election.  Nothing would empower Bibi more than a vote for Likud. Only there are other issues as well, so I won't give Likud my full endorsement, only my full support of the decision to vote for them whereas in the past I may have outright objected.

I'll have to allow myself the permission to speak of the Labor party again. Labor should have not worked so hard to cancel direct elections of the Prime Minister after the loss of Peres to Bibi the first time he became PM. And then the Israeli electorate would still have full freedom to vote for Bibi for PM as well as for any party of their choice for Knesset, as in that election, but unfortunately that is no longer the case, and we have to deal with what is left of Israel's democracy after the modern Labor party got it's clutches on it.

Labor is officially far left of center, not center-left, as they were back in the 1970s. Likud is the true left-center party in Israel in my opinion. Pragmatism alone, not nationalistic wisdom has brought Bibi and those among Likud who think like him to declare no more Palestinian State on his watch. Right-center party members like Danny Danon are the exception and by Bibi's choice.

The economy has fallen on Bibi's watch, so I fully understand the idea of not voting for Likud for more than one reason. But the Iran situation, with the Obama dynamic, makes this a time to drop judgement and if someone does not vote for Likud, they should only think of a nationalistic or religious party as an option. This Labor party is a mockery of the roots that the party came from, and if David Ben-Gurion were alive today, he would have no part of it.

Now to discuss center-right parties with viability of gaining seats in this election.

To form a coalition government, the largest party in the proposed coalition, not necessarily the largest party overall, has to have enough coalition partners supporting it in order to be given a chance by the Israeli President to form a government.

Jewish Home has announced that they will form a government only with Likud. This kind of announcement makes them a legitimate option at a time like this. While not as perfect a support of Bibi as a direct Likud vote, it is better in other ways, for economy, respect for religion and political diversity in a Likud led government.  So if Likud wins, it's a good idea to have a party like Jewish Home as a top junior partner to them.

My natural affinity would be with a party like United Torah Judaism. But they have made a statement that they would join a government with extreme left wing Meretz but not with the more center but anti religious Lapid.  Yet this party and that party are both not kosher, and yet being willing to dare pledge to form a coalition with national security risk Meretz? If so, why object so much to Lapid? To join with Meretz for the sake of Torah so that they would not take dollars from yeshivos. That leaves open the question. So you would honor Torah by risking the lives of the nation by joining with Meretz, but you would not honor Torah by joining with Lapid so that he would not be free to attack Torah without your objection?  It does not make a logical argument for kavod HaTorah (reverence for God's Torah), therefore, without Torah on your side, you leave yourself open to nationalistic questions. Consequently, I cannot endorse UTJ this time around either. God and Nation both, not just one or the other.

Shas and Rabbi Eli Yishai's Yachad parties... This reminds me of a conversation I was blessed to have with one of my great Torah mentors, Rav Aharon Soloveichik.  We discussed when Degel HaTorah was first formed by leaving Agudas Yisrael, and at that time I commented to Rav Aron, "The religious parties do not have enough seats (and political power) in the Knesset that they have to divide (their vote)?"  He said with a smile at my analysis, "Right."

Those parties later joined to form United Torah Judaism, which is my hope for Shas and Yachad as well.

The least I would ask the religious parties is, if you do not join forces to create a multi issue party with a platform broad based enough that can lead instead of Likud, then at least emulate Jewish Home and pledge to only form a government with Likud in this special circumstance. Any party that does not, I advise to not vote for in this election.

Avigdor Liberman's party has not been consistent in it's own values, nor in Torah ideals. But it is not left wing. Still, I would not vote for them when there are better alternatives.

Moshe Kahlon's party is identical to Bibi's Likud, in their attitudes to the Palestinian Arab question, only no track record, and no Bibi, so I'd prefer Likud over them.

So that means, as of this moment I would have to debate, Jewish Home or Likud as my voting options. I hope the religious parties would offer more support to Bibi and then I would consider them an option in the urgent context of this election. I hope by tomorrow, they will offer such a pledge to offer support to the national security project of re-electing Bibi, as Jewish Home has.

May Moshiach come soon so that we don't have to worry about which party to settle for and simply rejoice in the good leadership that God has given us. But in the context of this point in history, Bibi has been a gift from God as well, and we should not reject that gift. May it very soon be so, by the grace of God.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

The Iran Deal Obama Should Make

PM Binyamin Netanyahu's historic address to congress today has been delivered. The reaction to the speech by the White House was difficult to understand, saying that no alternative was suggested. I'll translate the PM's speech for the White House if they are having a hard time understanding English.  Perhaps if the Prime Minister spoke in Hebrew or to simplify matters, in Persian, they would take the time to pull out all of the diplomatic measures it took to analyze exactly what was said in today's speech as requested by a senior member of this nation's government, Speaker John Boehner.

Bibi said the USA should demand 3 things, signs of commitment to peace and nuclear responsibility by Iran and implied the solution on how to get it. Perhaps out of deference to the President, he did this with circumspection.  But I will say it explicitly to remove a false excuse from the White House for pursuing a policy that endangers what is left of the free world that has tolerated the plague of state sponsored terrorism for far too long.  The Prime Minister said, in other words, be tough in your negotiations President Obama, and don't fall for it if Iran says that they will leave negotiations if you remain tough.  The reason the White House rejected Bibi's speech today as offering no solutions, is because it did not want to hear the truth that their personal philosophy to bend over backward to please despots has put them on a path to do that which is dangerous to America, to Israel, and to the free world.

So that is my take on what Bibi said and that President Obama seems to not want to hear. But I would go farther than Bibi said with the following.  You remember that graph Bibi showed at AIPAC yesterday?  How many countries has Iran sent terrorist operatives to perform terrorist attacks in? More than a dozen.  So I would say to the White House if they are listening. Fellows, wake up, Iran is at war with the world. The only question is if this war goes nuclear before the evil power is defeated.  So with a totalitarian regime at war with the World, history and specifically American military history has shown an effective method to win such a war. Unconditional surrender of the enemy. Demand nothing less. If you only stop Iran nukes but leave the terror network in place, you have still failed to live up to the lessons taught by America's own Greatest Generation in the face of an evil totalitarian regime bent on global domination of it's twisted philosophy.

For this reason we cannot  allow our own mistaken ideas to lead us astray. If even a person without strong moral fiber sees a child in danger, do they remain in their perversions or try to save the kid?  Certainly for diplomats on the caliber of the members of this White House, should we expect anything less? Possibly, if we allow distractions from the dangers, but impossible, if we realize the danger. So don't attack the prophet; listen and save the people whom you could help, those that Almighty God has entrusted you to help. May it soon be so, by the grace of God.