THE MACCABEAN ONLINE - September 2005

GAZA AND KATRINA
A Terrible Connection
by Bernard J. Shapiro

We have witnessed two great tragedies in the last few weeks. One, the expulsion of Jews from Gaza, was a man made catastrophe. In fact, it was a crime against the Jewish People perpetuated by the Jewish government of Israeli PM Ariel Sharon. Sharon was not alone in this criminal act. The United States, through its State Department and President George Bush aided and abetted this act against G-d’s Covenant with Abraham.


The second tragedy appears to be a natural phenomenon. Sometimes the wrong that men do seems to go unpunished. Sometimes the consequences are quick and furious. I have received many dozens of letters from both Christian Zionists and religious Jews telling me that they feel that Katrina was retribution for Gaza. The people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast of Mississippi were not guilty of the crimes against the Jews of Gaza. Unfortunately the Scales of Justice do not work with perfect human logic. They are subject to a divine purpose not always apparent to us. Jewish history is filled with nations who persecuted us and then fell and disappeared into the dustbin of history.

The Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Persians the Greeks and the Romans persecuted us and destroyed our Temples - and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up high and mighty and now they have vanished. In the 20th Century, we witnessed the German attempt to exterminate us and the Soviet Communist persecution. Where are they now? Gone. In 1948 and many times since the Arabs have tried to destroy Israel. They never succeeded, but now they are aided by the Israeli government of Sharon and the American government of Bush.

Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director International Christian Zionist Center, had this to say about the connection of Katrina and Gaza:

"God’s answer was shocking in its severity. The same scenes the whole world had been watching just barely a week before were now again before our eyes, this time however not in Israel’s Gush Katif, but in Louisiana’s New Orleans and other parts of the United States: People driven from their homes – put in buses to be brought to hotels or other places of assembling – just as a few days ago, under pressure and to words of praise from President Bush and his Secretary of State, Israelis had been cruelly uprooted from their own homes and livelihood and put on buses. Who can deny the parallel and the finger of G-d in all this, of Him Who says through His Word that ‘He who touches you, Israel, touches the apple of His Eye’?

On August 15, 10,000 patriotic Jews were expelled from their homes and made refugees in their own country. This was done to fulfil the dictates of the US-sponsored Road Map to Peace.

Steven Plaut made the following observation: "There are approximately 6 million people in Israel. 10,000 divided by 6,000,000 equals 0.00167.

Two weeks later, Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in the southern United States, and laid waste and complete desolation to the City of New Orleans. New Orleans has a population of 500,000. US News agencies are openly calling those displaced by the hurricane "refugees."

There are approximately 300 million people in the United States. 500,000 divided by 300,000,000 equals 0.00167."

Gershon Salomon of the Temple Mount Faithful spoke in Houston recently to a large crowd of over 200 Christian Zionists and a few Jews. When he mentioned the connection between Gaza and Katrina, there was loud applause. This was a group of people who voted for Bush and are among the most patriotic Americans. But they saw G-d's hand in the disaster in New Orleans. I don’t believe that the people who draw this connection are exploitative or opportunistic. They are quite sincere and G-d fearing people. It seems that there is a division of opinion on the connection similar to that between those who believe in Darwin’s evolution and those who believe in creationism or inteligent divine design.

I am a political analyst and not a religious scholar. But I see the Hand of G-d in recent events and it brings trembling to my soul. I have always believed in the importance of Israel in the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Over the past 57 years, I have seen many miracles in the Land of Israel. The power of the Jews when reunited with the Land of Israel was magnified greatly. In strictly military terms, it power was much greater than the sum of its arms and men. In intellectual and economic terms, we have all witnessed miracles from Israel.

I believe the forced expulsion of the Jews from Gaza and N. Shomron has upset the Holy biblical command to "settle the Land." This retreat from the principles of Zionism has severe consequences for all that were involved in that policy. It may not be politically correct to say it, but we are only beginning to witness the full extent of the Wrath of the Almighty. History has proven over and over again that "He who blesses Israel will be blessed and he who curses Israel will be cursed." Another important less of history enunciated by Santayana is: "Those who fail to learn from history, are condemned to repeat it."

Jews as well as the nations of the world frequently failed to learn these lessons. The post-Zionist leadership of Israel had best begin to educate themselves about the consequences of their actions. Of course, this is equally true of the nations of the world. It is my fond hope that the future will be better for all concerned as TRUTH begins to penetrate the darkness.

Bernard J. Shapiro is the Executive Director of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies and the editor of its monthly Internet magazine, The Maccabean Online.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Egyptian Military on Gaza Border Threatens Israel's 'Edge'
IsraelNationalNews - August 30, 2005 / 25 Av 5765

Egypt's deployment of troops along Gaza's Philadelphi route ends a 26-year-old peace treaty with Israel, and severely threatens Israel's 'qualitative military edge' over its southern neighbor.

According to a military agreement initially ratified by the Israeli cabinet Sunday, 750 Egyptian troops will be responsible for border control between Egypt and the newly vacated Gaza Strip. The Egyptian military will be responsible for ensuring that weapons and other contraband are not smuggled across, or under the Philadelphi route previously patrolled by Israeli troops.

The formal agreement will be voted upon in the Knesset on Wednesday.

The peace treaty signed between Egypt and Israel in 1979 prohibits any Egyptian military presence in most of the Sinai peninsula which borders Israel. The treaty was formulated after Israel ceded control of the Sinai, after winning possession of the large, resource filled, land mass in the Six Day War of 1967.

Although many consider the peace with Egypt to be “cold” at best, with both Egypt and Israel advancing their military capabilities over the past several decades, the peace treaty has held, as neither side has provoked or initiated any military attack. Militarization of the Sinai will effectively end the longstanding agreement.

One of the primary principles for keeping the Sinai demilitarized, was to maintain Israel's “qualitative military advantage” over its southern neighbor, according to a report by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). The United States was a key broker in the 1979 treaty, under the administration of President Jimmy Carter.

The U.S. has been committed to this advantage for one reason: “Israel will always be militarily outnumbered with regard to the artillery, tanks, and combat aircraft that can be deployed by a coalition of Arab States,” according to the JCPA report originally published in 2001. By having a demilitarized Sinai, Israel has established an integral military buffer zone between its largest opposing army in the case of war.

U.S. President George W. Bush and previous Secretary of State Colin Powell reaffirmed America's commitment to Israel's qualitative edge during the President's first term in office. However, the U.S. is one of the largest sponsors of Egypt's military buildup over the past twenty-five years.

According to the JCPA, “On the one hand, the United States has argued that Egypt is not a threat to Israel, and the entire military aid program to Egypt is based on the premise that Egypt is at peace with Israel. On the other hand, the U.S. tacitly accepted Israel's point that it cannot ignore Egypt's capabilities when calculating the military balance in the region.”

And now with the Israeli cabinet's approval of a military buildup in Sinai along the Gaza border, it is Israel who is negating its own qualitative edge over its militarily equipped neighbor.

While 750 troops do not in themselves represent a significant military buildup, it is some of the supporting military equipment permitted in the new Philadelphi agreement which is raising the fears of opposing Israeli politicians and security brass.

Knesset Member Yuval Steinitz (Likud) has been publicly criticizing the proposed agreement over the past several days claiming the deployment of Egyptian forces and equipment “severely harms the greatest achievement of the treaty with Egypt, the demilitarization of the Sinai.” He later called the decision, “a bad and dangerous agreement that will harm Israeli security and destabilize the peace between Egypt and Israel.

Egyptian forces stationed along the 14 kilometer Philadelphi Route will be permitted to carry sidearms, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, and machine guns. On the ground, troops will be supported by armored vehicles, jeeps and all-terrain-vehicles.

In addition, Egypt will patrol the border from above with a helicopter fleet. According to Middle East Newsline, the Egyptian's fleet includes a number of Western made aircraft including the U.S. Made AH-64 Apache, the SA-342 Gazelle, the light transport UH-12E, and the S-70 Black Hawk.

Aside from infantry, artillery and air cover, thirty naval officers will be stationed at the coastal border. The Egyptian Navy will be allowed to patrol the territorial waters of Sinai and Gaza.

MK Benyamin Netanyahu, who announced his candidacy for the Likud leadership Tuesday, strongly attacked the Philidelphi agreement, claiming “This is another mistake of PM Ariel Sharon, which will give a tailwind to terrorism and infuse terror bases in Gaza with weapons.

As part of unilateral disengagement, the United States has demanded that the Palestinian Authority (PA) be permitted to open an international seaport, as well as the reopening Gaza's international airport. The PA has repeatedly requested that Israel refrain from inspecting foreign items entering Gaza, a source of contention among many Israeli military officials.

If Israel concedes to the demands, this would most likely establish an even deeper role for the Egyptians in Gaza. PA Information Minister Nabil Shaath stated that Egypt and the PA will share joint control of Gaza's airport, as both oppose the presence of Israeli soldiers at border crossings. “There's an understanding between [Egyptian] President Mubarak and [PA Chaiman] Abbas to jointly operate the international airport,” Shaath said Sunday.

Egypt's agreement with Israel requires Egypt to counter terrorism, smuggling, and infiltration across the Philadelphi route. However, Egypt has done little to prevent weapons smuggling over the past few years. On Monday, Israel Defense Forces uncovered an intricate underground smuggling tunnel between Egypt and Gaza. Numerous such tunnels have been discovered since the start of the most recent, and ongoing intifada.

In another indication of Egypt's neighboring military capabilities, Egypt's foreign minister declined a request Saturday to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sharon Secretly Rewards Egypt with Naval Control of Gaza’s Territorial Waters up to Ashkelon

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report

August 27, 2005, 10:47 PM (GMT+02:00)

Failing a government or Knesset veto of the still unsigned Israel-Egyptian military protocol, the Sharon government will make Egypt two if not three strategic gifts: naval control over the territorial waters off the Gaza Mediterranean coast up to Ashekelon, for one. A second unpublished clause will place within range of Egyptian air force surveillance Israel’s big air forces bases in the Negev and its armored and ground forces’ deployment around the evacuated Gaza Strip.

These clauses have been withheld from the public, cabinet ministers and Knesset members. Sunday, August 27, the cabinet will be asked to approve the protocol; the Knesset’s ratification will be sought Wednesday, August 31.

These sweeping Israeli concessions are set forth in a secret appendix to the military protocol. They are the price prime minister Ariel Sharon and defense minister Shaul Mofaz are willing to pay Cairo for relieving the Israeli army’s of its security missions on the Gaza-Egyptian border.

Egyptian border guardsmen are ranged on their side of the Rafah border ready to cross over upon the protocol’s signature.

For Israel, these concessions signify the end of the Sinai Peninsula’s demilitarization, one of the most valuable defense assets the Begin government attained in return for withdrawing from Sinai under the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

For Egypt, they are a military bonanza: its navy and air force are restored to Sinai’s air space and eastern Mediterranean shores.

But that is not all. Our exclusive sources learn that Israel is also willing to let Egypt build a new 300-meter naval pier for six 300-ton naval ships on the shore of Rafah, the town divided between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. The craft are roughly the same size as Israel’s “Storm” missile vessels. Command and storage structures will be built on the wharf.

There are only two limitations: no missiles may be mounted on the Egyptian warships and not breakwater built to enclose the waterfront.

DEBKAfile’s military experts say the Egyptian navy has two types of vessel that fit the secret appendix’s specifications: The fast, 60-meter long Ambassador Mk.III with a crew of 35, newly supplied by the US. Its advanced electronic equipment makes these vessels resistant to radar detection. The second craft is the fast US-made Bertan built for US SEAL commandos to perform intelligence gathering and other tasks. They can land troops on shore and pull out to sea at great speed.

Israeli naval experts fear that, in no time, the Egyptians will bring into the Rafah facility one of their six Ramadan class missile corvettes. Their 350 tons can be shaved down to 300 tons without too much difficulty.

It is a little-known fact that the Egypt has one of the largest and strongest navies in the Arab world; it is considered by experts to be superior to the Israeli navy. A place to moor war ships in Rafah will greatly enhance the Egyptian fleet’s tactical edge, especially in conjunction with the air cover provided by the helicopters accompanying the Egyptian border troops earmarked for the Philadelphi border strip inside Gaza.

According to our sources, Israel’s air force commander and AMAN military intelligence chief have both warned the prime minister, defense minister and chief of staff that the Rafah naval facility will afford Egypt control over Gazan waters and its shore. This control threatens to drive a hole in the Israeli naval presence along the southern stretch of its Mediterranean coast. Ships from Lebanon or other hostile countries will be free to put into Gaza port without undergoing Israeli inspection of their passengers and cargos. The Egyptian navy will be in place for blocking any attempt by an Israeli vessel to inspect or interdict a suspect terrorist vessel entering Gaza waters.

Furthermore, should Cairo violate its undertaking and arm its ships with missiles, Israel’s strategic ports of Ashdod and Ashkelon where main power stations, harbors, oil port and naval bases are situated, will be in easy range of those ships’ missiles.

It would take no more than a few hours to mount the missiles from hiding places in warehouse on the quays of Rafah or El Arish in Sinai further down the Mediterranean coast. The secret appendix makes no stipulation that would entitle Israel to inspect the Egyptian warships and ascertain there are no violations.

Israel commanders are under no illusion that Cairo’s commitment to refrain from building a breakwater at Rafah will hold up for much longer than necessary to allow Sharon and Mofaz to protest that the Rafah facility holds no security hazards for Israel. Eventually, with or without asking Israel, the Egyptians can be expected to build a breakwater and locate intelligence apparatus and guns there.

Under another secret clause, Egypt’s Gaza border force will be provided with a fleet of 8 military helicopters - not just light reconnaissance craft as claimed by Sharon and Mofaz. The helicopters will carry missiles and sophisticated surveillance instruments. Their deployment along the 14-km Philadelphi strip means the helicopters will be placed at 1.75 km intervals along the route.

The Sharon government has left pending for discussion at a later date Cairo’s demand for permission to deploy military troops the full length of the Egyptian-Israeli border – from the Mediterranean to Eilat. But it has not been rejected. Egypt will undoubtedly expect this force, if approved, to be armed with military helicopters in the same ratio as the Philadelphi unit, i.e. 140 military aircraft strung down Israel’s western land border.

AMAN chief Maj-Gen Aharon Zeevi has repeatedly cautioned Sharon, Mofaz and chief of staff Lt.-Gen Dan Halutz of a still more immediate peril.

The Egyptians make no bones about the helicopters patrolling the Gazan border being equipped with sophisticated electronic instruments capable of picking up high-value intelligence on Israel’s aerial movements and activities at its important Negev air bases. They also mean to keep a close eye on Israel’s post-disengagement deployment around the Gaza Strip. The danger here, according to general Zeevi, is acute: in the event of an outbreak of Palestinian terror from Gaza against southwestern Israel, any IDF counter-terror action in the Gaza Strip would be wide open to surveillance from these Egyptian helicopters. They will be able to forewarn the Palestinian terrorists of every step the Israeli troops are taking and their routes to targets. Israeli forces would lose the tactical advantage of surprise and Palestinian terrorists would know exactly where to lie in wait for them.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A road map for the Right

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Freund, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 30, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hardly a week has passed since Gush Katif was emptied of its Jewish residents, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is already promising more expulsions of Jews.

In a televised interview with Channel 10 broadcast Monday, Sharon made clear that he plans to uproot additional Jewish communities in the future. "Not all the settlements presently in Judea and Samaria will remain there," he said, adding that "the final map will be presented only at the last stage of negotiations."

So there you have it. Talks with the Palestinians have not even resumed and Sharon is already busy making concessions, effectively promising to dismantle further, as yet unnamed communities as part of a final deal.

As if this wasn't bad enough, Sharon has also done virtually nothing to counter the renewed terrorist onslaught launched by the Palestinians of late.

In just the past few days a Palestinian terrorist stabbed and killed a young Israeli yeshiva student in Jerusalem; an Israeli border policeman was stabbed in the throat in Hebron by a Palestinian attacker; two Kassam rockets were fired from northern Gaza at Sderot; firebombs were thrown at Israeli vehicles in Gush Etzion, and a Palestinian suicide bomber blew himself up at Beersheba's bus station.

Thus far the government's response to this renewed wave of violence has been limited to verbal denunciations and a bit of finger-wagging, which are hardly likely to be taken very seriously by the gunmen of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

So not only is Sharon demonstrating weakness at the bargaining table, he is also projecting frailty on the military front, inviting still more violence and pressure in its wake.

This combination of weak knees and feeble muscle poses a grave danger to the country and to its national interests.

As Haifa University Professor Dan Schueftan recently pointed out to The New York Times, the way things are looking now, "The next stage of disengagement is inevitable... We are basically retreating slowly toward the fence."

More than ever, then, it is essential that the Right get its act together and find a way to save the country from the desperate, devious and dithering man who now runs it.

To be sure, the retreat from Gaza and northern Samaria was a terrible blow, but the perils that lie ahead may prove even more ominous. Israel is essentially slouching its way back to the pre-1967 Armistice Lines, which would endanger the state and its interests.

In order to prevent this, the Right must lick its wounds from the Gaza debacle and formulate a strategy aimed at forestalling any future retreats. The time to do so is now because, with a little foresight, we can and will prevent more Jews from losing their homes.

SUCH A strategy should encompass a number of key spheres: political, practical and ideological, and it should not be left in the hands of any one organization to implement. Rather, the various forces must combine their efforts and work in tandem to bring it about.

In the political realm, the number-one priority at this stage should be to remove Sharon from power. It is critical that he be punished politically for the Gaza retreat so other politicians will see there is a heavy price to be paid in terms of their careers for daring to expel Jews from their homes.

It is not enough merely to bring down the government. Rather, Sharon must be seen to suffer a stinging political rebuke, such that it will be obvious to all that the withdrawal led directly to his downfall.

Similarly, it is time for Israel's Right to adopt a modified form of one of the most successful tactics used to date by American Conservatives – the taxpayer protection pledge, which has been championed for some two decades by Americans for Tax Reform, a Washington-based lobbying group.

In the US, the idea is simple: force politicians to live up to their pre-election rhetoric by asking them to sign a short document in which they promise not to support new taxes once they are in office. This effectively binds the signatory, in writing, to live up to his word to the voters.

In America it has come to be known as the "No New Taxes" pledge, and it has proven immensely effective in compelling politicians to take a stand and stick with it. Over 1,200 state officeholders, and nearly 50% of the US Senate and House have signed on, and their adherence to the pledge is duly monitored and reported to the public.

HERE IN Israel, the Right could initiate a "No New Withdrawals" oath which would require politicians to solemnly declare that they will never agree to yield territory or uproot Jewish communities. Anyone refusing to sign, or violating the pledge, would then lose the support of right-wing voters, and would be branded a "pledge-breaker" for all to see.

On the practical front a major push must be made to get more people to settle in Jewish communities that could potentially be on the chopping block should Sharon have his way. Bolstering towns such as Shavei Shomron in Samaria, or Tekoa in Judea will make it harder for any future government to part with them, just as Ariel and Ma'aleh Adumim have been taken off the table thanks to their sizable population growth.

Whether this means encouraging more Israelis to move there, or persuading American Jews to purchase homes in these places, it is crucial to shore up these communities and reinforce their numbers as soon as possible.

Finally, on the ideological front, the Right must not allow its failure to prevent the Gaza withdrawal to lead to despondency or despair. The protests on behalf of Gush Katif may not have achieved their ultimate aim of preventing the pullout, but they did tap into a strong and dynamic undercurrent of enthusiasm and love for the Land of Israel.

That energy must not be allowed to dissipate. It should be marshalled to prepare for the next stage of the struggle, before Israel's dangerous slide toward retreat truly does become a reality.

The writer, served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Israeli Prime Minister´s Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Post-disengagement Impact Analysis

by Dr. Michael Anbar



To receive a building permit for a new development in ant American city, one must file an environmental impact report – how will this new housing development affect the quality of air and water, the local flora and fauna, the noise level, the traffic, the view from other dwellings, the load on utilities, schools and neighborhood services, etc., etc. This article similarly analyzes the impact the Sharon Plan is likely to have on different relevant dimensions, in the short and long run. Was such an analysis done before the implantation of Sharon’s plan, it could never have gotten a go ahead. It is important to learn from this analysis now, in order to prevent the same or similar mistakes in the future. Contractors know that a viable development needs more than a bulldozer.



It has been repeatedly stated by numerous political analysts that Sharon’s unconditional retreat from the Gaza Strip is a colossal political blunder for a number of reasons:




It endorses Islamistic religious premise that Jews cannot reside in “Arab territory” as is the case in Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
It yields to and rewards Islamic terrorism and thus emboldens Islamic militancy all over the world. It invites Arab military threats and Western political pressure on Israel to continue and unconditionally surrender territories (free of Jews!!!) to the Arabs until the last Jewish vestige in Israel disappears from the map.
It endorses Arab claims that Israel has no legitimate sovereignty over “Arab territory”, i.e., territory conquered by Arabs in the 7th Century. This includes, in addition to the Gaza Strip, all of the Land of Israel.



In brief, Sharon’s move must be seen as abandonment of the principle of reciprocity that has coupled Israeli territorial concessions with appropriate Arab political compromises, and that Arab aggression would entail appropriate penalties. Israel’s survival has depended on this principle. Its current violation puts Israel in mortal danger.



Sharon’s retreat from the Gaza Strip is also an amazingly military blunder:





It puts Israel at the mercy of Egypt, its historical enemy (remember the wars of 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973), which is expected to “protect” Israel from Arab terrorists. In 1953-55, Arab terrorism was orchestrated by Egyptian Army intelligence officers based at the time in Gaza City; this resulted in Israel’s active participation in the 1956 war. It has been repeatedly stated by Israeli and American military analysts that Sharon’s retreat will allow Islamic militants to use that territory as launching pad for terrorist activities in Israel as well as all over the Western world. It puts Ashkelon and possibly also the vital port of Ashdod in the range of medium-range Iranian missiles, which are likely to be imported into Gaza from Lebanon. Shorter range missiles smuggled from Gaza to Samaria would endanger Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Herzeliah, Netaniah, as well as many other Israeli cities and towns. If bombardment of those remote villages in Gush Katif resulted in an unconditional Israeli retreat, what will be Israel’s reaction to bombardment of its major urban centers, resulting in hundreds, if not thousands, of casualties?



We are being told that if Arab aggression from the Gaza Strip would persist or possibly expand to Samaria, Israel will have little choice but reoccupy most, if not all, the Arab “liberated” territories (probably at the cost of more IDF casualties than in the limited 2002 offensive, because by then the Arabs will be much better equipped and trained). If this is being seriously contemplated, why should the IDF have to abandon any territory before there are no more security threats?



The strength of a nation is not measured by its armed forces but by its economic productivity. Sharon has not only demoralized the IDF but has undermined Israel’s economy for years to come.



The foreseeable economic damage of Sharon’s “disengagement” is enormous. The destruction of a highly productive part of Israeli economy (export of hundreds of million of dollars worth of agricultural products) coupled with the welfare costs of these new self-made refugees, is just a minor part of the equation. This added economic burden may be bearable.



However, enhanced Arab terrorism, which has started even before the retreat was completed, and the persistent projections in editorials all over the world that the Israeli unconditional retreat might indicate the eventual demise of the State of Israel, will discourage future investments in the Jewish state. What investors will put money in a terror-ridden country, the very future of which is in doubt? What investors will build industrial plants in a territory that might be arbitrarily given up for destruction, as was the industrial park in Gush Katif?



In his inexplicable, unconditional retreat, Sharon has demonstrated that Israeli government’s policies are unreliable, as are its obligations and guarantees. Nothing can be more detrimental to economic development. The recent significant declines in Israel’s stock exchange are a measure of declining investors’ confidence in Israel’s economic future following recent events.



Now Israel is asking the US to pay for the retreat (after all, it has pleased the Arabophils at the State Department). Israel is asking again for loan guarantees. However, with the self-inflicted poor prospects for Israel’s economy, such a loan will entail higher interests, which may become another impediment to economic growth. Israel also expects the American Jewish community to contribute to the resettlement of those self-inflicted, home-grown refugees. Sharon reminds one of the fellow who murdered his parents and then asks for charity because he has been orphaned.



On the other hand, had Sharon extracted significant Arab concessions in return for Israel’s retreat from Gaza, which would have been an indication for a possible final settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel’s economy would have boomed. In such a case, a national referendum would have endorsed the withdrawal even if it would have involved resettling of residents from some dismantled Jewish communities; those people would have then cooperated for the overall benefit of their nation. This is the gist of Sharon’s folly.



The retreat will also have demographic consequences. One of the excuses for the retreat from Gaza has been the notorious “demographic bomb,” i.e., the declining ratio between Jewish and Arab voters in Israel. Sharon’s mistreatment of the idealistic pioneers in Gush Katif and the other evicted Jewish communities, combined with the expected deterioration of Israeli economy, continued terrorism, and the dire projections for Israel’s future, will encourage mass emigration of talented Israelis who might find jobs elsewhere; this will result in a further decline in Israel’s high-tech dependent economy. At the same time, there will be a very significant decrease in the number of religious Jewish immigrants, many of whom used to settle in the “disputed territories” for ideological reasons. In other words, Sharon’s policies are likely to make the “demographic bomb” a reality, rather than helping to avoid it.



Yet another consequence of giving up the right of Jews to live anywhere they wish in their ancient homeland, and the forceful uprooting of religious Jews who believed until the last moment that miraculously Sharon’s cruel edict will be abolished by an act of God, combined with the possible abandonment of Jewish sacred places in Judea and Samaria in the foreseeable future, will undoubtedly have long-term theological ramifications both in Judaism and Christianity. Like after the Holocaust, some Jews may lose faith in God while others will rationalize this disaster as God’s punishment for lack of sufficient faith or His retribution for some transgressions.



However, there might be a far more profound effects on Christian theology. The major resettlement of Jews in Israel in the 19th Century was associated with British Christian Zionism. The creation of the State of Israel in 1948 gave a boost to American Christian Zionists. It has been interpreted by them as the fulfillment of God’s promise to the Jewish people to bring them back from exile to their homeland. Hundreds of millions of dollars were contributed by religious Christians, Christian Zionists, to assist Jews all over the world to immigrate to Israel. The same Christians have been maintaining political support for the Jewish state and affecting US policies to a great extent. I do know first hand that these Christians were vehemently opposed to Sharon’s plan for ideological reasons.



Now, Sharon’s expulsion of Jews by Jewish troops must have created a serious theological dilemma for Zionist Christians. Does Israel’s political leadership stop supporting the settling of Jews from the Diaspora all over the Holy Land, as God has promised? Does not Israeli political leadership, which seems to persecute Jews, evicting them from their homes against their will, remind one of those wicked Jewish Priests who supposedly persecuted Jesus (the classical excuse for hatred of Jews by Christians)?



Furthermore, Christians may ask: Has God forsaken the Jews? Those evicted Jews, like the Zionist Christians, have been praying for weeks for Sharon’s edict of eviction to be revoked, and it did not happen. God did not answer all those prayers. If so, Christian may conclude that the Replacement Doctrine, which has become less popular in the last 100 years, is theologically correct, and Jews are destined to be exiled for ever. This may then also rekindle dormant Jew-hatred even in the US. All this, which might seem esoteric and irrelevant to secular Israeli politicians, might result in diminished political support for Israel by the Christian religious Right in America; and this is support that Israel badly needs, especially at this point in time.



The productivity of any society depends on its cohesiveness. That cohesiveness depends on commonality of ethical values and morality. At the socio-psychological level, the breakup of cohesive Jewish communities that grew organically for decades, is another misfortune associated with Sharon’s self-inflicted exile. The expulsion of Jews by Jews for purely political reasons was unethical, and the pitting of secular against religious Jews was certainly immoral. The cohesiveness of Israel’s society is today in shambles, and so is also the level of idealism in large segments of Israeli society. The cohesiveness of this society that was forged by facing external enemies, has been broken up by Sharon’s actions. The demise of secular nationalistic Zionism, which has been touted by proponents of expulsion, is another manifestation of social decaden! ce. The severe damage in economic productivity and in the morale of the IDF is going to be significant, endangering Israel’s capacity to withstand serious extramural challenges.



One worries that the eviction of Jews from the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria might be followed by of a far more disastrous calamity – the eviction of additional 80 to 250 thousand Jews from Judea and Samaria, as well as the division of Jerusalem. These possibilities have been officially declared by Ehud Olmert, Sharon’s deputy and architect of the Gaza retreat, in concert with Condoleezza Rice’s recent statements and Abu Mazen’s diatribe. A thorough multidimensional impact analysis, as well as cost/benefit analysis of possible alternatives, are mandatory to avoid the pitfalls of Sharon’s disastrous Gaza plan.



One truly wonders whether this could be achieved within the framework of the current Israeli autocracy.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Gaza Betrayal
By Nissan Ratzlav-Katz
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 29, 2005


In almost every news story or political commentary show aired of late, the same lie has been consistently repeated: that the majority of the Israeli people were in favor of the Disengagement Plan. In truth, every time the question of ceding to the Arabs those areas of Judea, Samaria and Gaza settled by Israelis was made a central issue in any authoritative vote, the Israeli people, or any part thereof, actually rejected the proposal.




Prior to 1993, Yitzchak Rabin campaigned on two basic points: no talking with the PLO, and "Whoever considers descending from the Golan Heights is abandoning - abandoning - the security of the State of Israel." (I know that latter quote by heart because it was featured in a campaign by Golan residents against descending from the Golan Heights, as proposed by Rabin's party.) Rabin won the premiership from Yitzchak Shamir, who had allowed PLO representatives to be seated under the aegis of the Jordanian delegation during multilateral talks in Madrid.





The Oslo Accords then followed, passed through the Knesset only thanks to two Knesset members who defected from a now-defunct far-right party, Tzomet. These delegates were literally bought off at taxpayers' expense, giving Rabin a one-vote majority for the single most far-reaching decision adopted by the Israeli parliament. In effect, the last twelve years of history in the Jewish State were determined by a majority dependent on ideological turncoats and on Arab, anti-Zionist representatives.





At a conference at Bar-Ilan University in 1994, the year of the official implementation of the Oslo Accords, former Justice Minister Yossi Beilin was asked why he and the Left had not informed the Israeli people of the negotiations with Yasser Arafat's PLO. Beilin, one of the key architects of the agreement, forthrightly replied: "We kept it a secret because they would have stopped us."





Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin went on to dismiss opponents to the accords with Yasser Arafat as "propellers" that can spin and spin without getting anywhere. As the implementation of the Oslo Accords proceeded, Rabin lost public support. Then-Likud party opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu spoke again and again against territorial concessions, warning against the "establishment of a terrorist Palestinian state next to our heartland." 1995 public opinion polls showed Netanyahu defeating Rabin in elections for prime minister.





And then, Rabin was assassinated.





Shimon Peres, who took over the reins of power in the wake of the murder, called for new elections when it became clear that Netanyahu's popularity had declined considerably in the aftermath of the assassination. But the decline did not help Peres, and Netanyahu was elected prime minister. Peres, in an interview with Ha’aretz after his defeat, said, "We lost."





"And who won?" the interviewer asked.





Peres: "Call it the Jews."





After three years, Netanyahu was also forced to call early elections. His Labor party opponent, Ehud Barak, ran on a campaign of separation from the Arabs of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Ironically, he adopted a slogan of the far-right Moledet party, which advocates the transfer of Arabs to achieve the same end, "Us, here. Them, there." Within a year, Barak put forward a proposal to relinquish 98 percent of the land of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, to divide sovereignty over Israel's capital, and to offer the PLO 2 percent more land in pre-1967 Israel.





Arafat reacted to the proposal with the massive assault that became known as the Oslo War, or the Second Intifada. Israeli casualties from terrorism, already higher than they were before the Oslo Accords, skyrocketed.





Early elections were again called. Ariel Sharon ran at the head of the Likud and defeated Barak. Conceding to Sharon in February 2001, Barak said, "[My policy vis-a-vis the Arabs] requires a heart-rending sacrifice, and it could be that the nation is not yet ready for it...."





By the end of 2002, new elections were called again. This time, Sharon opposed the newly-chosen Labor party leader Amram Mitzna, a former mayor of Haifa. Mitzna's campaign focused on the promise of a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the destruction of Jewish towns there. Appearing on the Politika talk-show on November 27, 2002, Mitzna promised to "disengage" from Judea, Samaria and Gaza areas if elected. Within a year of the election, he said, he would withdraw Israel from Gaza, uprooting all Jewish communities there, and begin the process of uprooting "isolated settlements" elsewhere.





Reacting to the Mitzna campaign, Ariel Sharon stated publicly on multiple occasions that unilateral withdrawal was both dangerous and un-Zionist. On April 23, 2002, addressing a meeting of the Knesset Foreign Affairs & Defense Committee, he repeated, again, "The fate of Netzarim is the fate of Negba [a Negev town] and Tel Aviv." He would not be uprooting any communities, he declared, including "isolated" ones. For good measure, Sharon further explained, "Such an evacuation would encourage terrorism and bring pressure on us."





The Likud platform, likewise, read: "The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear _expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."





In January of 2003, voters sent Mitzna and the Labor party as a whole to an unprecedented defeat. Ariel Sharon's Likud won more seats than it had ever won before.




By the end of 2003, however, safely ensconced in the prime minister's chair, Sharon began making comments to the effect that it was "obvious that in the end, we will not be in all the places we are now." Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert telegraphed Sharon's transformation in early December when he told Yediot Acharonot that he favored a unilateral withdrawal from most of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, implying that he would uproot and dismantle all but the largest "settlement blocs".





Shortly thereafter, unconfirmed reports began to appear to the effect that Sharon had been conducting high-level consultations towards the removal of the Gaza community of Netzarim. But even then, he supposedly planned to replace the civilian residents of the community with IDF troops, not to relinquish the land to the PLO. Evidently, he subsequently altered his position. Reports from December 16 quoted the prime minister as telling closed forums, "It's clear that we won't be able to remain in Gaza forever."




Sharon finally dropped the bombshell publicly at a lecture in Herzliya on December 18, 2003. And his proposal had a name: the Disengagement Plan (sound familiar, Mitzna?).





The Likud members were furious. A demand for a membership-wide referendum in the Likud was pushed through in 2004. Despite initial opposition, after polls showed the Disengagement Plan handily passing in the referendum, Sharon announced that he would abide by the results. On May 3, 2004, the final results of the referendum were tabulated: 59.5 percent opposed to Sharon's policy, while 39.7 percent supported the Disengagement Plan. Sharon ignored the results, fired right-wing ministers opposed to Disengagement and entered a coalition with the electorally crushed Labor party.





On September 6, 2004, former senior Labor figure Uzi Baram commented, "Sharon's behavior is scandalous; there is no other word. He went to the Likud referendum and promised the nation that he would abide by its results; then he went to the Likud Central Committee and was defeated there as well; and yet he continues along his merry way. I may be personally in favor of his position, but my democratic sense totally opposes it."





Many of Israel’s leading statesmen, having seen that Likud mechanisms made no impression on Sharon, next called for a nationwide referendum on the prime minister's plan. Sharon, and his Labor allies, rejected the idea. In September 2004, Israel's Channel Two television news reported that the prime minister's office opposed a national referendum because the Disengagement Plan might lose.




So, after all that, on what evidence do Israeli "experts", leftist politicians and news reporters now rely for their confident, unchallenged claims that "the majority supports Disengagement"? Opinion polls: the same reliable barometers that foresaw Shimon Peres winning the 1996 elections and that predicted the Likud electorate overwhelmingly supporting Disengagement.





But if the subject is polls, here are some results of which the pundits never heard.





In February of this year, over 500 respondents were asked whether they "prefer the 'Sharon/Peres Disengagement Plan,' which stipulates the transfer of Gaza and northern Samaria to Palestinian control and the expulsion of all Jews who live there" – or do they "prefer a plan known as the 'Jewish Alternative Disengagement Plan,' which includes the Israeli annexation of these territories and the expulsion of the Arabs living there to an area outside Israel." The results showed that 39 percent supported Sharon's plan to transfer Jews and 31 percent supported the plan to transfer Arabs. The poll was conducted by Mutagim, a major Israeli polling agency, and commissioned by Mishalot Yisrael, which has been conducting its own independent "referendum" on the streets of Israel.





In June, representatives of the respected US web site World Net Daily monitored a Mishalot Yisrael polling station outside Jerusalem's central bus station. After three hours, WND correspondent Aaron Klein reported that nine ballots favored evacuating Jews, while 798 were in favor of evacuating Arabs.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



After The `Disengagement` — Israel`s Approaching `Sickness Unto Death`
THE JEWISH PRESS - Posted 8/24/2005
By Louis Rene Beres
More than anything else, what now emanates from Prime Minister Sharon`s willful deportation of pious and peaceful Jews in favor of avowed Palestinian terrorists is an overwhelming scent of impurity. Surely it had been bad enough for the embattered Jewish inhabitants of Gaza to endure endless and inexcusable Arab cruelties, but to compound this unique suffering with a self-imposed policy of territorial dismemberment was beyond all reasonable explanation.

The next stage, of course, is perfectly obvious. Bolstered by Washington and London, the Palestinian side (Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, it makes no difference whatsoever) will demand that Israel leave Judea, Samaria and "Arab East Jerusalem." When Israel cries out with incredulity that this is "unfair" and "unjust" — after all, hasn`t the country already taken great strides at compromise? — the Arab answer will be more exploding buses in Tel-Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem.

How sadly predictable it all is. The ongoing Arab/Islamic war against Israel is not about compromise. It is about annihilation. Jewish annihilation. Complete annihilation. The only "compromise" Israel could ever offer that would be acceptable would be to disappear and to die. To commit an auto-genocide. It is true, certainly, that Sharon`s "disengagement" is already a step in that incomprehensible direction, but even Israel`s most diehard champions of self-delusion and national surrender will likely draw the line at more direct complicity in collective Jewish immolations.

Here, therefore is a stunning irony. Following the government`s enthusiastic "disengagement," Israel — in spite of the extraordinary heroism of its Gaza settler resistance — is seemingly determined to die. Yet, Israel`s existential enemies won`t oblige this self-annihilatory determination all at once. Instead, they will "allow" Israel to disappear slowly; first, by more volitional territorial dismemberment and then by relentless war.

This long-planned Arab jihad will be initiated in carefully measured phases. Only when the IDF is contentedly fawning upon its own doom — an unutterable humiliation already begun during the "disengagement" — would the dissolving Jewish state become the inert object of absorption into "Palestine." Significantly, so long as Israeli soldiers are commanded to deport their fellow Jews in order to create sanctuaries for Arab terrorists, such absorption would likely be undertaken without even the use of force. Facing a so-called Jewish state that indefatigably defeats and defiles itself, force would no longer be necessary.

Washington and London will be pleased. Still unable to understand that Gaza will now become the ideal staging area for mega-terrorism against America and England, leaders in the West will celebrate Israel`s "incorporation" into a "democratic Palestine." Captivated by the anesthetized marketplace of empty jingles, and demanding a shared Jerusalem as the price of "fairness," their meticulously-crafted words will have a comforting ring. Yet their solution to Middle East "peace," accompanied by massive Jewish flight and quasi-medieval expulsions, will be an exterminatory one. If present Israeli surrender trends remain constant, disengagement will have begun the recognizable end of Israel and a corollary Jewish re-diasporization.

Despair, we learn from the philosopher Kierkegaard, "is the sickness unto death," and it is now Israel`s likely fate to despair for a long, long while, even to a point where it might prefer to die. The torment of Israel`s despair will be precisely this; that it will not be able to die, not until its enemies decide that they are ready for the moribund Jewish state, stained and stripped of all grace, to exit the earth. To be sick in this grotesque fashion, to be sick unto death and not even to be able to die, will be, for all Israel, the cruelest blow of all.

The despairing state, like the despairing individual, cannot die. For Israel, the agonizing hopelessness — in this case, even the last hope of death will be unavailable — will entail "dying the death," actually living to experience death. This fate is so much worse than simply being allowed to die; quickly, completely, blessedly. But to die and yet not to die, to actually die the death, would be for Israel a fate worse than death.

Israel probably will not be removed in the sudden spasms of an unconventional war. While this sounds like a prediction that ought to elicit far-reaching relief among all who love Israel, exactly the opposite is true. For the present Third Jewish Commonwealth may not avoid death altogether, and it will perhaps expire at the hands of its many villainous enemies. This Jewish state may die, but only after a seemingly endless period of despair in which death, paradoxically, will appear as distinctly welcome.

Thus it is that despair, this sickness in the Israeli-Self, that is the Jewish state`s sickness unto death. The despairing Jewish state is mortally ill, but it will not be allowed to die, at least not for a while. To be delivered from this sickness unto death is impossible, unless — unless — Israel`s profound sickness of the spirit is quickly understood and cured. This sickness, a rotting of Israel`s Jewish soul, is vastly more dangerous than enemy armies and missiles. Although it is certainly correct that a dramatic synergy exists between enemy military might and Israel`s growing "soulessness," it is the latter that breeds a virulent sickness unto death.

Israel`s sickness of the spirit is not its sickness unto death. Rather, it is the pathology that leads to the sickness unto death. It is, then, an illness that leads not to death directly (that would be a relatively favorable outcome), but to death very indirectly by an extended despair.

Israel`s sickness of the spirit has several expressions. One is the pervasive and collective self-loathing that turns away from everything Jewish in the country`s desperate search to be modern and "post-Zionist." Another is the unapolgetic servility with which successive Israeli governments have capitulated to every outrageous Palestinian demand. Proceeding from one forfeiture to the next, a proudly de-Judaized Israel has neglected all obligation, dignity and common sense in its frenzied ambition to become Los Angeles.

Fear and trembling. It is time for Israel to experience these sorts of dread, to acknowledge that the Third Temple Commonwealth may not live to see a Third Temple, and to understand that expelling its own people is always an unforgivable crime. But Israel is not simply destined to corrupted forms of wisdom. Instead, it has consciously chosen to be "progressive" so as not to appear "too Jewish."

Whatever his politics or degree of religious devotion, no Jewish soldier of Israel has the right to forcibly expel Jews to make way for openly-declared terrorists and genociders. Not now. Not ever. In such existential matters, there is a clear and overriding obligation to identify expulsion orders as manifestly illegal. This is true not only because of the generic Nuremberg obligation of all soldiers to resist crimes of the state, but also because of the specifically Jewish obligation not to be complicit in Jewish national suicide. The idea that this point should even have to be raised before a Jewish army in the post-Holocaust world reveals the grievously pitiable condition to which Israel has now allowed itself to fall.

It is not enough for the tormented Jewish soldier of Israel to weep together with his inconsolable Jewish deportees. An inexcusable act is not rendered permissible merely because of conflicted personal feelings. Now, Israel`s only hope to avoid the sickness unto death is to celebrate the stark difference between blind obedience and indispensable resistance.

The raw heroism of young Israelis who sought to defy the vile Gaza expulsions with every fibre of their Jewish beings is today a singular source of residual hope — a hope that even Sharon`s poisoned Israel can still avoid the sickness unto death. Alone and abandoned by America`s mainstream Jewish establishment, ridiculed by Israel`s terribly sophisticated literati and impressively enlightened intellectuals, these Jewish heroes — fighters armed with olive oil and eggs and fruit — were determined not to encourage future Arab terrorism. To prevent the delivery of Jewish land to the next generation of Arab terrorists was their only goal. They acted magnificently, with a clear sense of impending and inevitable failure. Facing an unspeakable complicity between their government and their prospective murderers, their inspirational resistance manifested the very definition of civilized nobility and high tragedy. However refined its editorial accents, no twisted column in Haaretz or The New York Times praising the collaborators can ever change this fact.

The Palestinian Authority`s appointed clergy, preaching on the Temple Mount, recently offered the following familiar sermon: "Palestinians spearhead Allah`s war against the Jews. The dead shall not rise until the Palestinians shall kill all the Jews....All agreements with Israel are provisional." As for expected Palestinian gratitude to the United States and Great Britain for pushing Israel into the "Road Map" gambit of genocide, here is what another PA-appointed preacher said on the Gaza-based Al Quds radio station the day following the July London bombings: "We welcome these blessed acts...."

The Palestinian solution for "The Jews" is an openly Final Solution. As long as Israel agrees to yield to such a plan, its sickness of the spirit will spread and spread. Finally, unless it can still be reversed by the sort of Jewish heroism just displayed by the faithful Gaza resisters, it will become the sickness unto death.

© Copyright. All Rights Reserved. The Jewish Press.

LOUIS RENE BERES was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971). He lectures and publishes widely on international relations and international law, and is Strategic and Military Affairs columnist for The Jewish Press.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



DISENGAGEMENT FOR DUMMIES


By Gary Fitleberg


“Disengagement” is for the deaf, dumb and blind.




It is destructive and disastrous for Israel and the Jewish people everywhere. It is WRONG. Biblically. Historically. Economically. Legally Morally. Politically. Strategically. Let’s not be delusional and illus ional. Land for peace? No. Land for terrorism. Let’s not be in denial. No. I’m not talking about an Egyptian river.



The so-called “Disengagement Plan” should be called what it really and truly is. The Evacuation, Eviction and Expulsion Edict. Sharon’s surrender to Terrorism. Suicide.


Transfer of Jews. Arab Appeasement. It is wrong in every sense (or lack thereof).



Anyone who truly believes in the Bible and G-d must believe that the rightful land owners are the Jewish people. After all, the oldest book in the world documents that G-d gave two precious gifts to the Children of Israel. The Holy Land or Promised Land or Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) and the Torah (otherwise called Bible, Chumash, Five Books of Moses, Old Testament or Pentateuch) which is the deed of trust to the land.


These two precious gifts were given in an eternal covenant that can never ever be given away or stolen away.



After all of the numerous occupations by the Assyrians, Babylonians, Crusaders, Mameluks, Turks, British and Arabs the land will eventually return to its rightful owners.


Forever and ever. Once and for all. I am referring to the Children of Israel, otherwise known as Hebrews, Israelites, Jews (from the tribe of Judah and area of Judea), or the “true blue” original Palestinians.



According to the Balfour Declaration the whole British Mandate or Palestine Mandate was set aside for a Jewish homeland. The British later reneged and gave away 80% of the Jewish land to the Arabs (77% percent for the creation of the fictional and fictitious Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan, today Jordan and another 3% allocated to Syria.) This British allocated and stolen Jewish land was t! o be the Arab “Palestine” but was rejected by the Arab League of Nations who instead attacked the newly created state with the intent of its annihilation. The Arabs attacked and conquered Israel. As a result Egypt and Jordan conquered the three disputed territories of Gaza, Judea and Samaria (which was later wrongfully named “West Bank’) and occupied them for nineteen years from May 1948 through June 1967. The Arabs again they launched another attack with the intent of Israel’s annihilation. Israel reconquered its land and territories which it won back, fair and square, in a defensive war forced upon it once again by the Arab aggressors.



According to international law, when an aggressor attacks and loses land it becomes the legal property of the aggrieved and not the aggressors.



Disengagement is for dummies…



It is destructive and disastrous economically. It is destructive and disastrous emotionally.


It is destructive and disastrous for the safety and security of Jews throughout the world.



Many of the so-called “settlers” who the whole world wants to portray as crazy religious fanatics are responsible for an important part of Israel’s economy.



Love of the Land has turned this area from desert yellow to leafy green. A desert of wandering dunes has become the flagship of Israel’s agricultural exports. A completely desolate desert was transformed into a Garden of Eden by the Gaza Jews.


In Gush Katif Bloc’s unique hothouses, using the most advanced technology, leafy vegetables and herbs are grown, all bug-free, answering to the strictest health, aesthetic and religious requirements. Most of the chemical-free organic agricultural products are exported to Europe. In addition, the community of Atzmona has Israel’s largest plant nursery, and the Katif barns with 800 cows are the second largest in Israel.





When one notes that of Israel’s total exports abroad that Gush Katif provided 95% of bug free lettuce and greens, 70% of organic vegetables, 60% of the cherry tomatoes, 60% of geraniums to Europe.



It is not just agriculture in Gush Katif. A number of industrial zones provided work for not only Gush Katif’s residents but for hundreds of residents of Israel’s south.



The “Disengagement Plan” will be an economic disaster for the State of Israel. The economy will be affected in countless ways. Dismantling the towns and evicting its Jewish residents will cause serious damage to exports, cause increased unemployment, and increase the burden and national deficit causing economic turmoil.



That’s not all. The truth is that the EU will pursue those individuals who do not meet their agreements to produce the produce with legal ramifications. This is not published at all in the mainstream media.



Unfortunately, there was never ever any real economic plan and infrastructure in place to pay for the so-called “disengagement’ plan. It is a pay as you go plan. A one moment at a time wing it plan.



Who will pay for the disengagement plan? America? England? France? Germany? How about the oil rich Arab League of Nations with plenty of land and money? What about the EU that has funded the terrorist Palestine Authority/Palestine Liberation Organization for a number of years now? What about Israel’s best benefactor of anti-Israel incitement known as the United Nations? Repressive rights violator and pro Jewish Russia or Soviet Union? What song or tune will the “Quartet” sing after its “Road Map” creates another State of Terrorism?



The "disengagement" plan will affect the economy in countless ways. Who will pay for the "disengagement"? Israel and the Jewish people.


Here are only two real statistics that can spell out the economic disaster of “disengagement” for you:




*15% of Israel’s agricultural exports will be lost representing at the very least over $200 million in lost GNP annually.




*3.5 billion (probably much more) cost to the Israeli government –already cash strapped and burdened economically.




Who will pay for the disengagement plan? You a Jew. With anti-Semitism and quite possibly your blood and perhaps your own very life one day.





Most importantly, is the moral aspect. Basically, this is ethnic cleansing and population transfer of a race of people based on their religion. Nothing more. Nothing less.



Politically, Israel has lost any credibility when the whole world sees Jews willing to transfer Jews. The whole world will not respect Israel if Israel fails to respect itself.



Last but not least, is the concern of safety and security of Jews everywhere in the world but especially in Israel.



Gaza is Israel’s buffer and security zone and its strategic importance should not be denied, forgotten or ignored by those sworn to safety and security of Israel’s citizens.


All of them. Those in the disputed territory as well.



Gaza is a deep sea port. It can, has been, and definitely will be used as a smuggling base and center. The Karine-A, financed by Iran, was caught off the sea coast with 50 tons of weapons of mass destruction to be used against the Jewish State of Israel. It was not the only ship stopp! ed. The shipment of arms included missiles, rocket launchers, mines, anti-tank artillery an