The countdown is well underway here and the constant thought of all those gathered in this beautiful town on the shores of the Mediterranean is: When are they coming? The thought is a grotesque one. “They” are the ones that the children have come to fear. “They” are the ones that hundreds of Jews have come to look upon as the threat. “They” are the Jewish soldiers of the army of Israel. It is the Kfkaesque tragedy.

… The truth is that I am appalled at the lack of organization and policy here. The settlers simply do not what to do. There is no definite line. When the soldiers come, what should the reaction be? Should people simply leave? Should they sit down and be dragged out? Should they fight? There are no directions from the leaders because they themselves are not sure.

The bomb shelters, which, if stored with food, water, light and other supplies would be ideal fortresses that would take the army days to break into and pull out the settlers, are all locked. [ed: Rabbi Kahane and his followers eventually took over one of these bomb shelters, calling it “Bunker Kiddush Hashem”. This stronghold turned out to be the only serious resistance against the dismantlement of Yamit) The settlers spend their time going to meeting after meeting, all of which end with ringing declarations that mean little, and a decision to meet again.

Sholom Oren meets me. He is the reporter for Israel Radio. What do I think of the situation? I tell him. What do I intend to do about it? I am forming a second command post which will advocate using counter force against any effort to drag Jews away by force. I make it clear that I am opposed to any force if the army does not use it but that the halacha is clear: “If the King comes to violate a law of the Torah, we do not listen to him.” That night, the interview is broadcast on state radio. A debate develops in Yamit.. I explain the halacha and add: “I respect anyone who refuses to lift a hand against the army. But let that person know that he will not stop the retreat. The army uses force and a Jew does not depend on miracles. Faith yes, but along with it, the self-sacrifice needed..

A number of rabbis, notably those from Merkaz HaRav, as well as Hanan Porat, are alarmed. They sense that many of the settlers are frustrated and want concrete answers. Some of the rabbis, including Rabbis Nerya and Aviner forbid any violence. Rabbi Nerya, head of yeshivot Bnei Akiva, is quoted in the papers as having told two of his students, now soldiers, that if the army orders them to drag away settlers, they must obey. I am appalled. The halacha is clearly the opposite.

..Unfortunately, the leaders of the Stop the Retreat Movement (ed: a conglomerate of Gush Emunim and nationalist Techiya party ) had no coherent plan to seriously deal with the naked fact of Israeli army force. The elementary question of how to deal with the arrival of the army was simply ignored. Does one resist or simply give in to the soldiers with guns, the gas, and the strength? If one resists, the questions remains how?.. If there are no plans to physically fight the soldiers, then the retreat is assured because Begin and Sharon will have no fears or hesitations about moving against people they know are not “dangerous”..

When I arrived and told the news media that the answer was either determined resistance or guaranteed retreat, many Jews were angered, but many others frustrated and hapless agreed. Above all, for the first time, a red light flashed in the government’s mind.

For months, Begin..has lived in fear of a serious clash in Yamit between Jews.. He has no fear of Tchiya, a Geula Cohen or Hanan Porat. They are “moderates” who will be forcably moved out with relatively little trouble. It was the sudden arrival of Kach with its image of “extremism” that caused the pulse rate of the PM’s office to quicken. The point is so clear and logical, that one almost wants to weep in frustration: The way – the only way to stop the Begin-Sharon steamroller is to have them believe that they are dealing with “fanatics” and “extremists” who may do anything…

An Oylem Goylem

What Alexander Hamilton said in his day (“the masses are asses”) was a mere echo of a famous Yiddish folk saying, “der oylem iz a goylem”. The golem, one recalls, is that brutish being incapable of independent thought, and keyed to the will of its master. Alas, the more things change, the less anything in the Jewish world does. The OYLEM, the Jewish audience, remains a GOYLEM…

I speak of the incredible willingness of the Jew to want to believe any lie, fraud and cynical manipulation – as long as that allows him to preserve his illusions of heroes. I speak of the almost absolute ability of politicians to do and say anything, in the knowledge that their idolatrous followers will see only divinity and truth in them – despite the fact that if the same act would be done to by a politician they despise, they would be crying for “the traitors scalp.” And I write this, as the cult of Ariel Sharon spreads among the masses that is a GOYLEM, the masses of asses.

There is an apparent need on the part of human beings, and certainly Jews, for a hero. There is a need for man to worship. Alas, G-d lacks charisma for the modern Jew, who seeks something more exciting. And in every decade there is someone else to worship, some other god with feet and mind and soul of clay. Now, it may be legitimate to raise high the banner of a leader, but only the GOYLEM refuses to see his feet of clay and his nakedness of principle.

In the past it was Moshe Dayan, he of the one eye and the lion heart of Judah. Jews of the Exile, humiliated for two millennia, ached for a hero and here was the Jewish Samson who smote the gentiles and gave every Jew in Levittown pride and self-respect. Little matter that Dayan was a man of tiny faith and immense fear of the gentiles, who along with Golda Meir (yet another Jewish winner) – refused to allow the Israeli Army to strike a preventive blow a day before they knew the Yom Kippur War was to begin, out of fear of the American reaction.

No less than 4,000 Jewish boys fell because of that criminal decision by Moshe the lion-hearted, who was quoted in the first week of that war that seemed to be a debacle, “we are seeing the destruction of the Third Temple”. And who recalled, or cared to, that it was Dayan, who, in the Six Day War, opposed reaching the Suez Canal and capturing the Golan Heights lest Israel get involved with the Soviets. (It was Divine Providence that saw the Israeli Army outrun Dayan’s pathetic orders). And who recalls, or cares to, that it was Dayan who refused to expel the Arabs in 1967, when the world stood awe-struck, lest as he put it, “the world think that there is another wave of Arab refugees.” Indeed, he ordered the army to return thousands of Arabs who had fled on their own, and the tragedy of today is in such large measure the doing of Moshe Dayan, hero of the Jewish people. And yet he continues, incredibly, to dwell in the private Pantheon of millions of Jews.

Indeed, an OYLEM GOYLEM.

And Golda, the architect of the murder of 4,000 Jewish soldiers because of fear of the world. The architect, too, of the saying that will surely enter the Hall of Fame of Insanity, as she declared: “I can forgive the Arabs for having killed our soldiers but I can never forgive them for making us kill theirs.” And yet, this person still remains in the eyes of millions “the only GEVER (man) in the Israeli cabinet…”

And Begin. What shall we say about a man who will go down in history as the saddest and weakest of all Prime Ministers, while, at the same time, continuing to reap the koodoos and hurrahs of millions who make up his OYLEM GOYLEM. Had Peres given up the Sinai, with its huge oil supplies and land area, knocked down Jewish settlements and dragged out Jews; had Peres stopped the Israeli Army in Lebanon from annihilating the PLO and its leadership and thus cause more than 650 Jewish soldiers to die for nothing; had Peres allowed his army officers to take the blame for Sabra and Shatilla – Begin and his groupies would have taken to the streets calling for the head of the “traitor”. But since it was Begin who did it, the GOYLEM accepts it as the decision “forced upon him”. What an OYLEM! What a GOYLEM!

Every decade, every year, the goylem finds himself another hero. Shamir. He is better than Peres. Why? Only G-d knows why a man who arrested and prosecuted the Jewish underground; who is Prime Minister of the “intifada”; whose plan for elections is a guarantee of a Palestinian State (It was Shamir who first raised the idea of holding elections in the territories as part of his government policy – and this was adopted eventually at the Oslo Accords – editors note); who lied on every issue (except money) to the religious parties; who speaks loudly and carries a small twig – is lionized by the OYLEM GOYLEM. And worst of all – is Sharon.


It was a Saturday night and Begin was on the verge of signing the infamous, insane Camp David Accords. The sticking point was Sadat’s absolute refusal to allow Jews to remain, hence the need to dismantle the settlements and remove the Jews. Begin feared one man. Sharon. He called him from the U.S. to ask if he would support the plan. What else was said we can only guess. But what is known is that Sharon agreed to support it, voted for the Camp David accords in the Knesset (Shamir did not) and then was appointed Minister of Defense.

And as Minister of Defense, it was Ariel Sharon, hawk, hero, salvation, who hovered over the area in his helicopter directing the knocking down of Jewish settlements (and creating a precedent for Judea and Samaria) and bodily dragging out Jews from their homes. If Peres had done that, what would the hawk have said? What would the hero have shouted? What would the salvation have exclaimed? Masses. Asses. OYLEM, GOYLEM.

I know of countless cabinet ministers in the world, and even some in Israel, who resigned over principle. If the handling of the “intifada” is so terrible (as Sharon then said as a minister in the Likud government, after being Minister of Defense -editors note), and it is, and if Israel is headed toward disaster (and it is!) , why does not Sharon resign? And what can one say about a man who in November 1987 and then again in December of that year and again after that, called for the drafting of Arabs into the army and who condemns Meir Kahane for his proposal to expel them instead?

Donkeys, asses, are programmed in their limitations. They cannot see; they cannot grasp reality. Human donkeys are different. They can – but they are worse than the four-legged brand because they refuse to see and admit truth and reality. The same Ariel Sharon is a man whose word is suspect (and I attempt to be kind). In an interview with the newspaper “Ma’ariv” on the eve of the 1973 elections, he told the paper that he supported equal rights for all wings of Judaism – Reform, Conservatism, as well as Orthodox, and was for public transportation on the Sabbath. Today he goes to the Lubavitcher Rebbe for his “blessings” in his battle against Shamir’s elections plan, and the OYLEM GOYLEM goes wild in ecstasy.

And all the rest. Tchiya and Geula Cohen (whose hatred for Kahane is more than pathological). She writes a letter to “Ha’Aretz ” in July, 1986 offering Israeli citizenship to any Arab of the territories who wishes it after annexation. And Prof. Yuval Neeman, indeed a good man and the finest of all of them, but who is interviewed by two French journalists who write: “He says that in no way is he a racist and claims that he would accept an Arab son-in law, provided of course he adhered to the values of the Jewish State…”

And Rabbi Levinger who is a good man, just as the Arab he thankfully shot was not, but like Gush Emunim which blasted any idea of expulsion of Arabs and instead raised high the lie of coexistence with them, (“lest they be branded “racists”) – is responsible in the end for the “intifada” and for the Arabs who stoned his car.(And as a result, he shot and killed one of them as mentioned above – editors note) The February 10, 1984 issue of the Jewish Press carries a long article on a Levinger trip to America. In it he says: “In Judea and Samaria, in general, there is no trouble. Arabs and Jews work together, travel together… It is not only good to live in a settlement near Arabs, it is good to live together…”)

I could go on and on. But hopefully the point is clear to that percentage of Jews that has risen above the OYLEM GOYLEM, who have achieved more than donkey status. Be honest. Be truthful. AND ABOVE ALL, CEASE BEING IDOL WORSHIPERS. A horror committed by Ariel Sharon is just as horrendous as one committed by Yossi Sarid. The Likud is not better than Labor and either in the end is Tchiya or Moledet whose leader, Rechavam Ze’evi called for an Arab Vice-Speaker of the Knesset and never tires of disclaiming any attempt to force Arabs out of the country (“I speak of voluntary transfer..)

TO GO AS ALLIES WITH THE BEST OF THE WORST – OF COURSE. But when the question is whom to support and join and believe in – the answer is only those whose record is that of consistency; who never changed and never wavered and never compromised. Anything less than that will never bring salvation. Ever.

No, It Is Not Peace

    “Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20). “Hear, ye deaf, and look, ye blind, that ye may see” (Isaiah 42:18).

    The Anatomy of a Peace Treaty – On the morning that the Knesset was to vote on the Egyptian-Israel “peace” treaty, it was discovered that the copies of the document that had been given to the members of Parliament were not those of the final, official version. The picture of the Knesset members about to vote without having seen an accurate, final version, is mirrored in the general, gleeful Jewish belief that peace is underway. It is a belief by Jews who TO THIS DAY have never read the text of either the treaty or the Camp David accords that gave birth to it. It is because of this that we so utterly fail to comprehend the dangerous reality of the Sinai withdrawal and the true implications of the autonomy plan of Mr. Begin. Worse, because of our ignorance of the agreements so solemnly signed by the Prime Minister of Israel, we fall prey to the illusions spread by official government sources, notably the Prime Minister himself, illusions based on the premise that we have taken a major step towards peace.

    When Mr. Begin says that there will never be a “Palestinian state,” a careful look at the agreements he signed reveals something not quite as certain. When he defines his autonomy as being a mere grant of “administrative” power to the Arabs, a cursory study of the accords shows this to be untrue and that persistence in this claim must lead to collapse of talks with blame for this collapse leveled directly at Israel. When we are told by a smiling Prime Minister that the signing marks a great day and that peace is at hand, the hollowness of the statement is seen by merely reading the agreements that Israel signed. It is my contention that a careful reading and study of the various agreements will make it abundantly clear that no possible real accord can be reached unless Israel does the unthinkable – give up the liberated lands in their entirety (including Jerusalem) and set up a “Palestinian” state (and even this will prove to be only a temporary lull until the next step); that since Israel will never agree to this, the “peace” with breakdown will occur AFTER Israel has given up most of the Sinai with attendant strategic importance and vital oil and other natural resources; that the breakdown will be blamed on Israel; that the reason for this will have its roots in the agreement by Prime Minister Begin to various concepts and concessions, an agreement that was originally planned as an evasive maneuver to escape pressure, and that was purposely couched in vague and foggy terms in the belief that it is possible to evade problems through deception and deliberate imprecision. It may be a well-meaning policy but it is one that will cost us dearly.

    And so, because Jews should know what they are talking about; because they should understand the unfortunate deviousness of government policy and statements; because the fate of people and state are at stake – we must study the words and paragraphs agreed to by the Prime Minister of Israel. For they are obligations that no one – neither Washington, Cairo, the American people nor American Jewish leaders will allow Israel to ignore. It is crucial that we know the course we are taking so that we can change it, lest we pay heavy penalties for hopeless deviousness.

    I. “Palestine” and Autonomy Prime Minister Begin has been adamant in stating that there will “never be a Palestinian state” and “we will never speak with the PLO.” Yet in the Camp David Accords, Mr. Begin agreed to the following: “Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the representatives of the Palestinian people should participate in negotiations on the resolution of the Palestinian problem in all its aspects.” And again: “The solution from the negotiations must also recognize the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements.” The “Palestinian” people. For decades, Israeli leaders were careful never to speak of or recognize a “Palestinian people.” For if there exists a “Palestinian people,” what is a more just requirement and a more legitimate right than a state of their own? What is the most basic right of any people if not the right to its own state? How can we speak of a “Palestinian people” and then say “but they cannot have their own state!” And if we speak of the “representatives of the Palestinian people,” what will be if these “people” choose as their representatives, the PLO? And any Israeli leader who tells us that the majority of the “Palestinians” do not accept the PLO as their leaders, lies to us, and proof is his for the asking by simply allowing free elections in which the PLO is allowed to participate.

    Indeed, there is ludicrousness in the repeated pledges against speaking with the PLO even as there is daily contact and cooperation with the PLO mayors of Hebron, Ramallah, Shchem and other towns. When Begin signed an accord which had in its official English translation the concept of a “Palestinian people” and its “legitimate and basic rights,” he set the stage for a confrontation with the entire world, a confrontation which is of his own making. Instead of having cleaved to a staunch, open and honest disclaimer of any “Palestinian people,” he, for the countless time, chose the path of deviousness by which he signed an accord that speaks of a “Palestinian people” and then stated in a letter to President Carter that he construes “Palestinian people” to mean “Palestinian Arabs.” It is, once again, the tortured legalism that Begin uses so often to evade confrontation but which is so meaningless to the world. The official version speaks of a “Palestinian people” and its legitimate rights, the most basic of which is clearly the right to the same kind of state that Jews have.

%d bloggers like this: