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.

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 StateThere 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.

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.


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.


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.