Britannia Radio

 

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:

So AIPAC sends its people to Capital Hill with the faith based pigs-can-fly
approach supporting a Palestinian state that would insure peace.

Will they then be able to explain the unfortunate reality that Dumbo only
leaves the ground in the movies and it is absolutely impossible for a
sovereign Palestinian state to insure peace or alternatively, as
unfortunately has sometimes been the case for a lobbying group that for
fundraising purposes openly proclaims its ostensible power on its website
and elsewhere (unlike any other powerful lobbying group) will it opt to sit
on the sidelines in a battle it fears it will fail?]..

[Freeman Note: AIPAC continues to drift toward the extreme left and can no longer be counted as a pro-Israel organization. We suggest diverted your contributions to AFSI, ZOA, Freeman Center, Women in Green and others truly dedicate to the security and survival of Israel. Please read my early article deunking the idea of a falistanian terrorist state.]

AIPAC to lobby for two-state solution -Seeks to Fulfill Terrorist Vision

hilary leila krieger, washington and jerusalem post staff , THE JERUSALEM
POST May. 4, 2009
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710853298&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

While Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is refusing to explicitly endorse a
two-state solution to resolve the Palestinian conflict, participants at the
American-Israel Political Action Committee Policy Conference will this week
be urging their elected representatives to press President Barack Obama for
precisely that.

The pro-Israel advocacy group's annual conference culminates each year with
a mass lobbying effort, in which the thousands of participants from across
the United States spread out across Capitol Hill for meetings with their
respective members of Congress and encourage them to endorse policies and
positions that AIPAC believes will advance the American-Israeli interest.

In this year's lobbying effort, to take place on Tuesday, the AIPAC
thousands will be asking their congressmen to sign on to a letter addressed
to Obama that explicitly posits the need for a "viable Palestinian state."

It is expected that the overwhelming majority of the congressmen will sign
it.

Netanyahu has been aware of the letter's content for some time, according to
his senior adviser, Ron Dermer.

Dermer said that despite the letter's language, the important issue was that
of underlying policy.

"On the substance, I don't think there's a difference in our position and
the position of AIPAC," he said.

It is understood that the letter is being advanced despite its discrepancy
with the prime minister's stated positions, because its content reflects
both longstanding American policy and longstanding AIPAC positions.

The idea is that the letter would form a bridge between US and Israeli views
on the diplomatic process at a time when neither country is looking to
provoke arguments despite having different perspectives.

Furthermore, it is being noted here that Netanyahu has made plain that his
government will honor previous agreements, which include the road map with
its specific framework for a path to Palestinian statehood.

It is not known whether Netanyahu will publicly endorse a two-state solution
when he meets here on May 18 with Obama, but it is widely assumed that,
privately at least, he will make plain to Obama his government's commitment
to previous accords.

Several versions of the letter are included in the kits being given out to
participants in this week's AIPAC conference.

One version, bearing a "United States Senate" letterhead, addressed to
Obama, and left open for signature, states: "We must also continue to insist
on the absolute Palestinian commitment to ending terrorist violence and to
building the institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living
side-by-side, in peace with the Jewish state of Israel."

This version also gives explicit support for programs such as the
US-supervised training of Palestinian Authority security forces.

"The more capable and responsible Palestinian forces become, the more they
demonstrate the ability to govern and to maintain security, the easier it
will be for [the Palestinians] to reach an accord with Israel," it states.

"We encourage you to continue programs similar to the promising security
assistance and training programs led by Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, and
hope that you will look for other ways to improve Palestinian security and
civilian infrastructure."

A second, similar version, also addressed to Obama and signed by staunchly
pro-Israel Majority Leader Stony Hoyer and Republican Whip Eric Cantor, sets
out a series of "basic principles" that, if adhered to, offer "the best way
to achieve future success between Israelis and Palestinians."

Among the principles cited is the requirement for the two parties to
directly negotiate the details of any agreement, the imperative for the US
government to serve as "both a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to
Israel," and the need for Arab states to move toward normal ties with Israel
and to support "moderate Palestinians."

The clause that discusses statehood demands "an absolute Palestinian
commitment to end violence, terror, and incitement and to build the
institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living side by side in
peace with the Jewish state of Israel inside secure borders."

It continues: "Once terrorists are no longer in control of Gaza and as
responsible Palestinian forces become more capable of demonstrating the
ability to govern and to maintain security, an accord with Israel will be
easier to attain."

A third version of the letter, addressed to their colleagues, is signed by
Senators Christopher Dodd, Arlen Specter, Johnny Isakson and John Thune.

It states that "we must redouble our efforts to eliminate support for
terrorist violence and strengthen the Palestinian institutions necessary for
the creation of a viable Palestinian state living side-by-side, in peace
with Israel."

Netanyahu chose not to attend this week's AIPAC conference in part because a
Washington visit now would have included, as its central element, talks at
the White House with Obama, and Netanyahu preferred to defer that meeting by
another two weeks in order to complete his ongoing foreign policy review.

Instead, the prime minister will address the AIPAC delegates by satellite on
Monday. Hoyer and Cantor are set to address the same session.

President Shimon Peres is attending the Washington conference in Netanyahu's
stead, and will speak on Monday along with Vice President Joseph Biden.
Peres will meet with Obama at the White House on Tuesday.

Netanyahu has long indicated that his concerns about Palestinian statehood
are practical, rather than ideological - arising from the fear that a fully
sovereign Palestinian state might abuse its sovereignty to forge alliances,
import arms and build an offensive military capability to threaten Israel.

Aides to the prime minister have also argued in recent days that it is
unreasonable to demand that Israel formally endorse statehood for the
Palestinian people when the Palestinian leadership is emphatically opposed
to recognizing Israel as the state of the Jewish people.

The Hoyer-Cantor letter opens by acknowledging the "formidable" obstacles to
peace, but endorses Obama's position "that every effort should be made to
try to realize that peace at the soonest possible time."

THE FREEMAN CENTER VERSUS AIPAC
The Truth and the Consequences
by Bernard J. Shapiro

We recently were witness to the large AIPAC Conference in Wasington D.C. All the presidential candidates plus many Israeli and Amrican political leaders spoke to the group. These included: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Ehud Olmert, John McCain and Condoleezza Rice Ehud Olmert, Benjamin Netanyahu and other major political leaders.

There are many Americans (especially in the State Department, CIA, academic, Muslim and left-wing communities) who believe that AIPAC is an evil force that distorts US Middle East policy to our detriment. On the other hand, there are many pro-Israel Jews and Christians, who believe that it is indispensable in the defense of Israeli interests in Washington. Tens of millions of dollars are raised annually to support this organization.

The Truth is not found in these two views of AIPAC described above. Up until 1992, one could say that the second positive view of AIPAC was correct. For many years Tom Dine headed that organization and led a never ending battle supporting Israel and Zionism. The in the Israeli election of 1992, Labor leaders Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres took over Israel. Rabin became Prime Minister and Peres a Foreign Minister.

Peres with his associate, extreme anti-Zionist Yossi Beilin, began negotiating with the outlawed terrorist PLO. It became necessary to emasculate AIPAC to prevent American Jewish criticism of the planed Oslo Agreements. Dine was ousted after many years of great service in a very nasty coup. AIPAC was now in the hands of pliable leaders who would follow every lead of the Israeli government, NO MATTER HOW SELF DESTRUCTIVE.

And those self destructive plans came one after another in rapid succession: Oslo, Hebron, Wye, Road Map, Expulsion of Jews from Gaza, restriction on building in Judea and Samaria, persecution of religious Jews and violation of their civil and human rights and finally the elimination of the Jewish right to self defense. Education in Israel ceased being patriotic or Zionist and building a Palestinian pseudo state became the goal of the Israeli Government. AIPAC said nothing and cheered the government’s mad dash to dismantle the long sought for Jewish State.

THE BOTTOM LINE

There are still some TRUE Zionist organizations in America. The ones that have fought the longest and the hardest for Israel are American’s For A Safe Israel, Freeman Center For Strategic Studies, Zionist Organization of America and Pastor John Hagee’s Christians United For Israel. These are the organizations deserving of your support.

OUR PRO ISRAEL PHILOSOPHY COMPARED TO AIPAC

1. TRUE ZIONISTS: All of Eretz Yisrael belongs in perpetuity to the Jewish People
AIPAC: We will negociate away any part of Eretz Israel the government believes will bring "peace"

2. ZIONISTS: Israel’s right of self defense should be aggressive and not dependent of America or world opinion
AIPAC: Israel’s defense should be based on what America allow and world public opinion find acceptable

3. ZIONISTS: It is moral and just to expel or transfer a hostile terrorists loving population from Israel. No racial implication, only behavioral characteristics. For example: Those who want to kill us should not be our neighbors.
AIPAC: It is immoral to transfer Arabs but it is Moral to transfer and expel Jews, as in Gush Katif and Yesha.

4. ZIONISTS: Gaza should be re-conquered, put under total siege, and starved until the Hamas terrorists surrender. Than means no food, water, medical supplies, electricity or fuel (which they use to fire rockets into Israel).
AIPAC: Humanitarian aid should flow to Gaza and a cease-fire that, leaves Hamas in place to continue the war, should be worked out

5. ZIONISTS: In order to save IDF lives, no consideration should be made for civilian "human shield" of Hamas. Stand off artillery and aircraft bombs should soften targets before ground invasion. Civilian casualties should be NO more considered than the Allies did during WWI in Dresden and Hiroshima.
AIPAC: The IDF military must act with great restraint, even if this means many more Israeli soldier’s deaths.

6. ZIONISTS: No negotiations on the Golan, except demanding the Syrians return to the lines following the Israeli victory of 1973.
AIPAC: Whatever the Israeli government wants to do.

7. ZIONISTS: Protect all of Israel’s water resources, including the Golan, the Judean-Samarian mountain aquifer, as well as prevent the pollution of water resources by sewage spill off Gaza coast and from Arab villages.
AIPAC: Support the Israeli governments plans to giveaway most of Israel’s water resources to hostile enemies. And then they would want to replace this water through costly desalination schemes.

8. ZIONISTS: Would make Israel militarily independent of America and turn the relationship into a true alliance. Now it is an asymmetrical relationship, despite the fact Israel supplies the US approximately 5 times the military aid as America supplies Israel.
AIPAC: Loves to boast about its getting weapons from America, but never reveals the hidden cost. Every deal adds to the diplomatic pressure on Israel foreign policy. Every deal ends up in massive sales to Arab enemy countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Every deal has some detrimental effect on Israel’s local military industries.

=======

OH L-RD, HOW SHALL I MAKE
THE BLIND SEE?

An Editorial by Bernard J. Shapiro (November 1997)

OK, sometimes I do get frustrated. I spend all my time and energy bringing the truth about the harsh realities facing Israel and the Jewish people. Many good people, like the readers of THE MACCABEAN, understand my feeling of despair at our total lack of influence in centers of power in Israel. We are searching for a new course of action that is more effective. Short of a miracle I don't know what to do. For the sake of history this editorial will review the relevant facts. It is my fond hope and prayer that some one in the Prime Minister's office will read and understand our message:

THE HARSH REALITIES

SELF-DELUSION

Just as bigots obscure reality about certain groups in an evil way, reality can be obscured by the seemingly well-meaning, who are deluded. This self-delusion, or self-deception, can sometimes have tragic consequences. Unfortunately, Jews throughout history have deluded themselves about their position in society. They pursue utopian solutions to complex political problems and disputes. Jews rejoiced as the enlightenment spread across Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. Many were eager to give up their Jewishness and become German, French, Italian, and English. In the final analysis those societies viewed them as Jews. Self-delusion came into collision with reality and left us with the stench of burning flesh from the ovens of Auschwitz. Many Russian Jews eagerly supported the communist idea of a worker's utopia with no nationalities and no religion. Reality taught them that their neighbors still considered them Jews.

The left-wing in Israel suffers from gross delusions about Arabs. In the face of all empirical evidence to the contrary they believe peace is possible. In the book Self Portrait Of A Hero: The Letters of Jonathan Netanyahu (1963-1976), Jonathan Netanyahu, the fallen hero of Entebbe and brother of Benjamin, said it best:

"I see with sorrow and great anger how a part of the people still clings to hopes of reaching a peaceful settlement with the Arabs. Common sense tells them, too, that the Arabs haven't abandoned their basic aim of destroying the State; but the self-delusion and self-deception that have always plagued the Jews are at work again. It's our great misfortune. They want to believe, so they believe. They want not to see, so they shut their eyes. They want not to learn from thousands of years of history, so they distort it. They want to bring about a sacrifice, and they do indeed. It would be comic, it it wasn't so tragic. What a saddening and irritating lot this Jewish people is!"

I wish someone would explain to me why ANY INTELLIGENT Israeli could believe the nonsense (PLO/Israel deal) its leaders are expounding. Professor Mark Steinberger (Department of Math and Statistics, State University of New York in Albany, New York) supplied the best answer I have ever heard:

"I would say that leftists must inhabit an alternate universe, except that we wind up having to pay the consequences for their detachment from reality. But while we do live in the same objective world, their vision of it seems to have nothing in common with ours. They do not comprehend reality as we see it, and when challenged with evidence that would seem to buttress our view, they seem either to dismiss it for theoretical reason or ignore it completely. One can list various dangers in the agreement, and give objective evidence that Palestinians have no desire for peace, but still want to drive our people into the sea. What is the reaction? They will tell you that self-determination and prosperity will change the Palestinians' outlook and behavior. On what do they base this? Not on evidence from Arab societies. Rather it is based on theory.

To me, this looks like an unwillingness to deal with reality, and it echoes the unwillingness of the Jewish community of the thirties to recognize the threat posed by the Nazis. Indeed, it seems we have learned nothing at all from our experience with Nazism. The Holocaust has become little more than a tale to frighten children: demons in a morality play. They have turned the Holocaust into an image divorced from real world happenings. Millions more Jews could die in Israel, but they refuse to even imagine the possibility. They will not allow reality to interfere with their myths."

IS PEACE POSSIBLE BETWEEN
ISRAEL AND THE ARAB WORLD???

The answer is YES -- But only after mind-boggling changes in the Arab world. True peace can only be made after the Arab world undergoes democratization. Simply put, democracies rarely go to war with one another. All our major wars of the last two hundred years have been between dictators or between democracies defending themselves from dictators. When a ruler is elected by the people, he has a natural restraint preventing him from sending their sons and daughters into combat in an aggressive war. No such restraint exists anywhere in the Arab world.

ISLAM AND JIHAD

The second major change required of the Arab/Moslem world is to create secular states not subservient to the rule of Islam. The problem for Israel with the rise of Islamic fundamentalism is the very hostile attitude that Islam has toward Jews and any non-Islamic person. Islam is all encompassing and guides behavior, law, religion and attitudes and relations with non-Moslems. Islam perceives the world as two separate parts:

1.The first is Dar el-Islam or the World of Islam

2. All the rest is Dar el-Harb or the world of the sword or the world of war -- that is those non-Muslim nations that have yet to be conquered.

The concept of JIHAD or Holy War has been understood by most of us but there is another concept in the Koran with which few of us are familiar. But it is essential to understand this concept when relating to Moslems. That is the law of HUDAIBIYA which dates back to Muhammad and states clearly that "Muslims are permitted to lie and break agreements with non-Muslims." This applies to business, personal life and politics. Would a peace treaty be worth much if the other party is Moslem?

Islam divides the world between Believers and Infidels. Jews and Christians are relegated to the status of Dhimmis or second class citizens. The Koran clearly calls on Moslems to degrade and humiliate both groups.

The Arab/Moslem world will have to develop a tradition of respect for women, minorities, and human rights in general before they will be ready for peace with Israel. It seems a bit odd that our State Department is pushing democracy and human rights from one end of the globe to the other -- WITH THE REMARKABLE EXCEPTION OF THE MIDDLE EAST. Why are the Arabs insulated from pressure to democratize their societies?

It is obvious that no peace agreement would be worth anything with people believing in the above Islamic tenets, failing to practice democracy or show respect for minorities and human rights.

WAR AND PEACE

Great issues of war and peace as related to Israel are being debated by Jews in Israel and America. There are strong opinions on both sides of the Atlantic as well as both sides of the major issues. Professor Paul Eidelberg of Bar-Ilan University, reviews the historical facts:

"Between 1945 and 1978 the longest time without a war going on someplace was a mere 26 days. On an average day there are 12 wars being fought somewhere on earth. The consensus of scholars has been that the norm of international relations is not peace but war. As Eidelberg reports, "Indeed, the occurrence of 1,000 wars during the last 2,500 years indicates that "peace" is little more than a preparation for war. Which means that peace treaties are WORTHLESS, to say the least."

Eidelberg then quotes from a book by Lawrence Beilenson, entitled THE TREATY TRAP, saying, "After studying every peace treaty going back to early Roman times, Beilenson concludes that treaties are made to be broken. In fact, he shows that treaties for guaranteeing the territorial integrity of a nation are useless to the guaranteed nation, and worse than useless insofar as they engender a false sense of security. Such treaties can only benefit nations governed by rulers intending to violate them whenever expedient."

NATURE OF PEACE

Midge Dector on "peace"-- "What I want to say is something that virtually the whole history of the 20^th century teaches us and yet something we refuse to learn. And that is , when applied to the affairs of nations, peace is an evil word. Yes I said evil. And the idea of peace as we know it is an evil idea. From the peace of Versailles to "peace in our time" at Munich...each declaration of peace or expressions of longing for peace ended in slaughter. Not necessarily immediately and not necessarily directly, but slaughter all the same..."

"For there is no such thing as making peace. Nations who are friendly do not need to do so, and nations or people who are hostiles cannot do so. To cry peace, peace when there is no peace, the prophet Jeremiah taught us long a go, is not the expression of hope, not even superstition but a reckless toying with the minds and hearts of people whose very future depends on their capacity to rise every day to the harsh morning light of the truth."

THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM

The Land of Israel was given to Abraham for the Jewish People in perpetuity. David Ben Gurion, Israel's first Prime Minister and founder of the Labor Party, said the following about the Jewish People's connection to Israel:

"No Jew has the right to relinquish the right of the Jewish People over the whole Land of Israel. No Jewish body has such authority, not even the whole Jewish People has the authority to waive the right (to the Land of Israel) for future generations for all time."

SERIOUS FLAWS IN THE OSLO AGREEMENT

(1) The most fundamental flaw is the renunciation of Jewish claims to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. The right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel is God-given and cannot be renounced by a transitory Israeli government. The present government has no right to deprive future generations of Jews and Israelis of their legal patrimony.

(2) Yasir Arafat's PLO is incapable of providing Israelis with the cessation of violence they so dearly crave. There are ten rejectionist PLO factions plus Hamas and other Islamic fundamentalist factions that will continue to kill Jews.

(3) Without the presence of Israel's internal security force (Shin Bet) inside Judea, Samaria and Gaza, it will be impossible to halt terrorism or even keep it within present levels. The Israel Defense Forces maintain tremendous power but are of little importance in day-to-day terrorism.

(4) Arafat's signature on the agreement and the PLO acceptance is of no consequence as Arafat is a documented liar. Muslims are permitted to lie to to non-Muslims and break agreements with them under the Koranic law of HUDAIBIYA. Treaties and contracts with them are worthless.

(5) By virtue of this agreement, the Israeli government has validated Arab claims to the Land of Israel. Decades of fighting Arab propaganda and distortions of history are trivialized and discounted.

(6.) This agreement puts the status of Jerusalem on the negotiating table. Every previous government of Israel steadfastly stood by the principle of Jerusalem being non-negotiable.

(7) All of Israel's military and civilian communications will now be easily monitored from the hills of Judea and Samaria.

(8) While Israeli radar and military installations are not affected by this current agreement, the future is less certain. Eventually the Arab population will force the Israelis out.

(9) Whether they admit it publicly or not, Israeli leaders know that this is the first step to a Palestinian state.

(10) The "Palestinian right of return" has been acknowledged for the first time by the Israelis and could result in a flood of Arabs to Judea and Samaria.

(11) The inevitable increase in Arab population will result in tremendous pressure on Israel's water supply. As Arab wells are dug in the Judean and Samarian hills, the natural mountain aquifer that supplies much of Tel Aviv and the coastal plain with water will be serious depleted. Such depletion will cause the salt water of the Mediterranean Sea to penetrate Israel's coastal strip, thus destroying all water supplies. This process can be witnessed in California, where sea water has already penetrated five miles into the coast.

(12) Some 70% of Israel's population and industry is concentrated in a small strip of coast and greater Tel Aviv. That population will be immediately threatened by Kaytusha rockets. Fired singly from the hills of Judea and Samaria, and set with timers they will be virtually impossible to stop. The Israeli government plan to coordinate with the Palestinian police is akin to working with the fox to guard the henhouse. The Palestinian police are being recruited from among the terrorists who delight especially in murder and mutilation of bodies. Will they arrest and turn over a terrorist who kills Israelis and then escapes to Gaza?

(13) The Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza will no doubt be victims of ethnic cleansing. The Arabs will insist on a Jew-free country like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. The government has already begun confiscating the weapons of Jews, which could cause them to become vulnerable to massacre like the Bosnians.

(14) The air and seaports planned for Gaza will facilitate the entry of weapons and terrorists, threatening the security of Israel.

(15) The proposed "safe passages" for the PA will facilitate the movement of terrorists and weapons from Gaza to Judea and Samaria.

Is there any need to say more? Please copy and distribute this information as widely as possible. Please urge Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to read it and respond correctly and urgently to the dangers presented.

.......Bernard J. Shapiro, Editor.

9. ZIONISTS: Never discuss or give away any part of Jerusalem and also take over the Temple Mount from Islamic control. And of course allow regular Jewish prayer on the Mount.
AIPAC: Israel should not offend Muslims by asserting Jewish rights in Jerusalem and the Temple mount.

I could list many more differences between true American Zionist organizations and the pseudo Zionists at AIPAC . The above is enough for you to make a decision on who to support.

I ask you to please increase your financial support of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (and other good groups). You may send a tax deductible check for us to: