War: Open fire orders will initiate the end of the Labor Zionist regimes
and their globalist agenda for Israel
|firstname.lastname@example.org Manhigut Jehudit Weekly Update - 10th January 2005||
(Return to Archive: Israel Government)
The Struggle for Eretz
Israel and the Existence of the State
Gush Katif is not just another outpost that can be evacuated one day and returned to the next. The battle for Gush Katif is a strategic one. If, G-d forbid, Gush Katif were to fall this would be liable to cause weakening in other parts of Yesha. Jonathan Bassi's job would be far easier when he comes to the Yesha settlers with proof of the destruction of Gush Katif. No-one has illusions that Sharon's tsunami will halt in the Gush. In fact this is a battle for the entire settlement enterprise in Yesha.
But even this definition is not exact. If, G-d forbid, the settlements in Yesha are destroyed, nothing will continue to hold the remaining narrow coastal strip. The end of settlements in Yesha will destroy the Jewish hold over Eretz Israel from the moral aspect, and as a direct result also from the security, social, and economic aspects. This is therefore a struggle for a Jewish State that we can pass on to the coming generations.
Have we in fact begun to wage this struggle? More and more groups and organizations are joining in the struggle for Gush Katif. The sit-down demonstration that began this week opposite the Knesset represents an important catalyst and we congratulate the Yesha Council for organizing it. However, it is important to remember that in the end the fate of Gush Katif will be decided by thousands of responsible citizens who will be prepared to violate the law in a non-violent manner and pay the full price of a jail sentence.
A good example of this was provided by residents of Gush Katif who for two hours blocked Kaplan St. in Tel Aviv, the major traffic route leading to the Kirya. Non-violent civil disobedience is a recognized and accepted method in real democracies, and we shouldn't pay too much attention to the declarations of interested parties and Leftists.
The destruction of Yamit was a fatal mistake, but the struggle against it assumed a different character since unfortunately at that time the nation supported Begin. Begin did at least act in a democratic manner. Rabin at his time, and Sharon now, created a pattern of dictatorial and militant behavior in a superficially democratic guise. The public doesn't understand the deep meaning of what is happening, but it smells the odor of despotism and senses very well how its basic human rights are being nullified.
Sharon seeks manipulation disguised as democracy in order to continue on his militant path. We hereby clearly declare that the expulsion of Jews from Eretz Israel is obviously immoral, and is therefore obviously illegal, regardless of the forum deciding it. We are convinced that the faithful public will never obey the expulsion order.
It seems that the public atmosphere is ready for non-violent civil disobedience, and many initiatives are emerging and forming into one great step. We are talking about soldiers signing declarations that they will refuse to obey orders (see the Defensive Wall website: <http://www.hmagen.com/">http://www.hmagen.com/>http://www.hmagen.com/); preparations being made by layers to aid the numerous political prisoners, preparations by action teams throughout the country; unequivocal declarations by important rabbis, etc.
The Creator was merciful to us when he enabled Sharon to chalk up a victory in the last Likud Conference. Now that Peres is in the picture, all the settlers have finally realized that love alone will not win, and the struggle for Gush Katif has taken the path leading to victory.
Those who read the articles in Ha'aretz, and listen to the Left in the media, can sense how the atmosphere is being prepared for a civil war. It is important to remember that from the Left's point of view the struggle for Gush Katif is one of to be or not be. They represent a negligible percentage of the population, who are convinced that they were born to rule, and this is their last battle before they leave the stage. If, after they have recruited (apparently by coercion) the Cossack who robbed the Likud for them, and despite being supported by all the media, the judicial system, the internal and external security establishment, the political and economic systems if after all this Gush Katif remains standing, this means that the Left can pack its bags. Remember that when their regime is at stake, they have no inhibitions.
A civil war is the last thing to frighten the Left. They have already initiated such battles in the past (the "open season", the Altalena) and they long for such a war with all their hearts. This is a substantive part of their ideology. As the Left frequently declares, a civil war is not likely since the settlers are not their brothers. The basic orientation of a person from the extreme Left is cosmopolitan. He wishes to remove national barriers in order to prove that he is neither a Jew nor an Israeli, but a citizen of the world.
"In the future there will be no more nations. We shall form part of the new Middle East". (Shimon Peres) "There are no longer here Jews against Arabs, but supporters of peace against opponents of peace". (Yitzhak Rabin) The Left is re-drawing its lines of loyalty. This was once called treason, but now it's a sign of enlightenment. The dream of the extreme Left is that all the enlightened people of the world will join hands and crush with their jackboots the primitive religious settlers. A juicy civil war will prove to them that they have in fact crossed the borders of nationalism. They are no longer Jews, nor even Israelis, but part of the enlightened world fighting against the unenlightened one. They have demonstrated their loyalty, they have acquired with integrity their new cosmopolitan identity, just like a collaborator who perpetrates a terrorist attack in order to demonstrate loyalty. They have finally freed themselves from the stigma of Jewish identity.
A recruitment notice appears in the Peace Now website. They declare that for every soldier who refuses to participate in the eviction, they will recruit volunteers from all over the world. There is a list there of countries whose citizens are called upon to volunteer to come and destroy settlements together with enlightened Israelis. France, Germany, the Gaza Strip We are no longer Jews. The fraternity of nations will destroy an ancient nation
Fortunately this is a negligible minority, less than one percent of the population. The problem is that this minority is holding all the strings. They won't open fire themselves. They lust for a juicy civil war but the nation is healthy and they lack the troops to implement it. Consequently they are covertly organizing the provocation that will cause the soldiers and policemen to do this for them. This must be understood and publicized. We have to be ready for this. The more emotionally prepared for this we are, the more we talk about this, the less will be the chance of a civil war actually breaking out.
We received clear indications of the preparations for such provocation this week in the destruction of the Yitzhar outpost and the statements by GSS director Avi Dichter. Obviously the organization of the performance in Yitzhar was intended to serve a political objective. The soldier who fired was not threatened. An enquiry should be held into who exactly is this soldier. Was he an organic part of a regular unit and why did the army so quickly announce that the shot fired by that soldier was legitimate. When the Left holds the strings there is no democracy, and we all remember very well who opened the champagne.
As an immediate continuation of this terrible act, the director of the GSS announced that the extremist settlers were preparing provocations that would lead to firing against IDF soldiers. Ran Edelist, an extremist Left journalist, explained in a broadcast that Dichter has no concrete information, and his intention is to create an atmosphere in which it will be possible to make broad scale administrative arrests. Edelist didn't say this in order to protect the rights of the citizens in Yesha. He was simply convinced of the need for such action.
Consequently we are witnessing a move designed to prepare the way for opening fire. These are talks, articles, and declarations by senior officers, and all these affect the activities in the field.
How should loyal people act? The faithful public faces a terrible dilemma. It is impossible not to fight with determination on behalf of the settlements and the existence of the nation. On the other hand the Left is dragging us into a civil war and also marks the end of the State. What can we do?
Fortunately the public is on our side. We have to remember the Likud referendum and learn this. The vast majority of the Israeli public remains healthy despite the brainwashing it is exposed to. If we do not fall into the trap of the provocations of the Left, if the soldiers don't become convinced that their lives are in danger, they will never open fire.
We have to declare on every possible occasion that in any area of friction with Israeli soldiers and policemen we are not bearing arms. If you decide to participate in the struggle, leave your weapons in a safe place outside the area.
Anyone who bears arms in the area of the struggle should be suspected of being a provocateur.
A person who fires from a group of settlers is certainly a provocateur. He should be neutralized, his weapon taken from him, and he should be tied up. Throw him out. We call on IDF soldiers to act in precisely the same way in such a situation. Soldier! Don't take a weapon with you if you enter an area of confrontation with Jews. If you see next to you a soldier firing at Jews, know that he is a political provocateur. Take away his weapon, tie him up, and throw him out.
The settlers will defend themselves with their bare hands against any organized violence. But guns are out of bounds.
If we are fired on we shall take cover, and not fire back. For years the Arabs are firing at us, we have been abandoned by the authorities, but we are continuing to hold on to Eretz Israel with great self-sacrifice. When the Left plants provocateurs to fire at us, we shall call on all our sources of spiritual strength and not fire back. This time we are not fighting to protect the country, but to protect the existence of the nation and the State. If such rules are made clear in every possible way, this will guarantee that the extremist Left will be unable to initiate a civil war between us. If we clarify this point unequivocally, any order to IDF soldiers to open fire on their loyal brothers will lead to the immediate fall of the evil regime that initiated it. We have seen numerous examples of this recently in Eastern Europe.
Is Refusal to Obey Orders a Threat to the Existence of the State?
The argument that refusal to obey orders undermines the IDF and the State is a false one. When the Left makes such a claim there is no point in addressing the issue. The Left developed the theory of refusal to obey orders, and gave it full legitimacy. To our shame, some people in the national camp also support this foolish argument.
The Rambam, in Hilchot Melachim, said that: "It need hardly be said that if the king orders any of the Mitzvot of the Torah to be violated, he is not to be obeyed". This is not a simple Halachic ruling. The opening "It need hardly be said", means that some things are quite obvious. It is quite clear that we must refuse to obey an immoral order that conflicts with the Torah. This need hardly be said. This order should not be obeyed, even according to the IDF rules of conduct.
Actually, someone who does not act in this way is responsible for destroying the State and society. Over the course of history, obedience and disregarding of conscience on the part of the individual has led to the degeneration of society, to the rise of evil regimes, and to distorted norms of behavior. People have freedom of choice and responsibility. Those who did not refuse to obey orders and did not attempt to oppose Rabin now bear responsibility for the march of death that followed the Oslo process. They cannot look their children in the eyes and claim that they were only small bolts in the machine, simple citizens.
"When the regime is evil, jail is the refuge of honest people", said Jefferson, one of the founding fathers of the American nation. The obedient person who ignores his own conscience loses his country, his property, and in the end his life. Thousands in Israel have already paid the price of obedience to the Oslo criminals. Only refusal to obey orders will save the country, property, and lives.
The question is not how orders can be disobeyed in a democratic country, but how a person can permit himself not to disobey in such circumstances.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Blom" <email@example.com>
To: "Christian-Zionist Forum" <Christian-Zionist@topica.com>
Sent: Tuesday 29 June 2004 1:11 PM
Real Jewish democracy vs. dictatorship in Israel
Democratic Because it's Jewish. By Moshe
28 Jun 2004 ManhigutEn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The motto, "a Jewish and democratic State", has become meaningless. Aharon Barak, with an abundance of tortuous explanations, has drained its Jewish aspect of significance and has in fact declared that what (in his opinion) is democratic is Jewish.
The Haredim and the national religious Jews who are trying to face the issue are going wrong in the opposite direction. They are giving up democracy (as it were) in favor of Judaism. In other words, they are accepting the interpretation of the head of the Supreme Court and are in fact saying that if democracy means the end of Judaism, they want no part of it. Give us a king, who will enforce the wishes of the Almighty.
Belief-based people who adopt this approach are falling into the trap twice. The first time, because they are abandoning the most basic principle in Judaism freedom. The second time, because they are giving up the sole brake that can halt Israel's current slide into violent totalitarianism, a process that we are now witnessing.
To be a Jew is to be a free man. The Jewish people brought the message of liberty to the entire world. All human progress from slavery to a flesh and body king, towards human liberty, starting with the English Magna Charta, continuing with the American constitution, and ending with the French Revolution Judaism formed the source of inspiration for them all, as they publicly declared.
The division of authority, the recognition that the king is not the source of authority but the representative of the sovereignty, and that he is subject to constant criticism by the parallel institutions of clarifications and direction (Sanhedrin, kehuna), and that all of them the king, the institutions, and the people, are equally subject to the same rules, are the fundamental elements of the modern free regime, or in other words, the foundations of democracy.
However, the term democracy has been made meaningless by the extremist Left that has compared the democratic method to its values. Aharon Barak's test of a "civilized person" is an outstanding example of the way in which the concept of democracy is distorted. It is not surprising that many people currently tend to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The term democracy may well have become so distorted that it can it can no longer be used, just as happened to the term "Israeli" in its original meaning. It may well be preferable to return to the term "liberty", but it would be a grave error to abandon the real values forming the basis of the term.
It is not easy to understand the meaning of democracy. Hundreds of definitions have been given, and all kinds of people (including mass murderers) have drawn legitimacy from the term for their own needs. (examples are the People's Democracy of China, or the democratic elections held by Arafat's murder gangs.) However, before trying to understand why the belief-based public is the sole chance for democracy in Israel, or, if you wish, why Israel can be democratic only as a Jewish State, and why, if it abandons its Jewish character, it inevitably acquires totalitarian characteristics, let us examine Israeli reality.
It is difficult to call the first days of the State of Israel democracy. Ben-Gurion's regime after the establishment of the state was very centralized, the opposition was persecuted with the aid of close cooperation between the defense establishment and the ruling party, and great courage and an independent income were required to oppose the regime.
Let us therefore focus on the four decades that have elapsed since the Six Day War (in which the Herut party first entered Eshkol's unity government). It can be said that during this period Israel began really progressing towards a regime based on the fundamentals of democracy. Since 1967 we have been relatively democratic.
However, it is easy to point to two occasions during this period in which Israeli democracy retreated towards dictatorship in the guise of democracy.
The separation fence between a free state and a totalitarian one has no color, nor can it be felt. It can only be discovered using the sense of smell. And just like any stench, those lying inside it don't feel it. There have been numerous examples in the 20th Century of free societies that crossed the fence without noticing it, and continued to believe that they were free and advanced, even when the atmosphere of freedom was replaced by the stench of dictatorship.
As we have said, this fence has been crossed twice since the Six Day War. The first person to lie on it was Yitzhak Rabin, and the second, Ariel Sharon, is doing so now.
These leaders were not the first to wish to hand over parts of the country to the enemy, to destroy entire settlements and drive out their residents. The first to do so was Menahem Begin, to his everlasting ignominy. But Begin didn't do this terrible deed while crossing the fence. He possessed public legitimacy for his action. The majority of the nation, hypnotized by Sadat's visit to Jerusalem, supported him. Begin didn't change the rules of the game and fit them to his needs, but acted in accordance with them. His opponents were opposed to the retreat, but not to Begin. They could not contest Begin's legitimacy as the elected democratic prime minister.
Rabin and Sharon crossed the fence quite blatantly. The hypnotizing spell of the first Camp David Conference had faded away, and the public had already developed the intellectual antibodies needed to understand what it was really getting. In order to overcome the basic Jewish values, the fundamental loyalty to Eretz Israel, and Jewish identity, that again played a key role in the public consciousness, Rabin at that time, and Sharon now, had to cross the fence separating democracy and dictatorship, between those people whom Rabin discounted, and his voters, whom he had promised there would be no talks with the PLO. His government was a minority one, and he achieved the majority necessary for these fateful steps by bribing people such as Segev and Goldfarb. In this way, with a fragile coalition, a leader of a free state initiated a major national decision that split the nation over fundamental issues. Broad popular protest was suppressed with great violence, and the media, as in every dictatorship, supported the regime. Only in this way could the Oslo Process, whose results are well known, be sold to Israeli society.
The current situation is far more serious. The intensity of the controversy is unchanged, but the hopes planted at the time of the Oslo process no longer exist. But the fence crossed by Sharon has exactly the same smell.
There is no argument about the nature of the majority achieved by Sharon. He lost in the referendum and doesn't deny this. As long as he has the support of the Left, he is not obligated to observe any rules, not even those he himself fixed. He no longer attempts to bribe his ministers, but fires them. The human rights of those planned to be evicted no longer exist. Now, just as then, the media have been recruited to support the regime. "We shall not only evict you and destroy your homes" (in the name of the new democracy), "we shall also fix the rules governing how you will be permitted to resist, what language you may use, and perhaps even the thoughts you will be permitted to think If you don't obey, you will be responsible for a civil war "
Not only the media but the courts and the Public Prosecutor's department have been recruited. The idea of trying to halt this madness through an appeal to the High Court of Justice, based on the law, "The dignity and freedom of man", is just ridiculous.
Israeli totalitarianism is now advancing, and all the media are in a count-down to the day when thousands of citizens will be called on to pack up their belongings and move to a new place, and every morning on the State radio Arieh Golan comes up with a new idea for implementing the new democracy, such as a unit of sharpshooters deployed on the roofs and equipped with live ammunition. In such a state of affairs it will not be surprising if at some stage they start hanging people from the lamp posts, naturally in the name of the law for dignity and freedom of man, and in order to protect the values of civilized persons.
This sounds far-fetched?
How many Arab collaborators were hanged on the lamp posts as a sacrifice for the Oslo process? Not only the Left looked aside, but also the Right. The High Court of Justice did not intervene, but accepted Rabin's declaration that "this is a political issue and not a judicial one".
During the Rabin era the emperor thought he was dressed and attempted to persuade the nation of this. At least there was some kind of plan, and an attempt was made to create the impression of democracy. However, Sharon now knows that he is naked, but doesn't care. "The referendum was morally but not legally binding." All this in the name of the "rule of law". And I am the law.
This is a time to keep one's distance from the lamp posts.
Without noticing it, we have fallen into a situation of dictatorship whose stench is already making itself felt.
Let us now try and understand what democracy is, and why only a Jewish State can be democratic.
The most important feature of democracy is the subservience of both the ruler and the ruled to the same set of rules. This has been clearly violated by both Rabin and Sharon.
There are several viewpoints of democracy and I shall only address two of them: the liberal and the community approaches.
The liberal tradition supports a single fundamental criterion, a universal standpoint that does not recognize a different culture, tradition, or values. It believes in the values of equality and freedom of the individual, where the state is intended to serve the individual only. The state has no purpose and does not represent the values of its society.
The second viewpoint is the community one, according to which a person needs recognition by society in order to achieve self awareness, and in this way express his opinion regarding the issues of morality and values. Consequently the community plays a decisive role, and through it the individual identifies with his country. The community and the state are assigned an important role in the realization of the values and identities of the citizens.
According to this interpretation, democracy is a method of government permitting the expression of the basic values of the society. Every society whose basic values are those of freedom can and must be democratic, but it must fit the lid to the pot, and adopt its form of democracy to its nature and its unique values. Those who understand democracy using this approach can also understand that the first democratic approach described, as adopted in Israel, must inevitably lead to dictatorship.
The dispute regarding Eretz Israel is not about territory or security. The issue of national identity currently finds expression through Eretz Israel. Those who wish to abandon parts of the country in fact want to sever the links with their Jewish identity.
"The Jews defeated the Israelis", explained Shimon Peres in an interview for Ha'aretz after he lost to Netanyahu. The argument is between those holding on to their Jewish identity and those who wish to disengage from it and replace it with a new Israeli one.
The process of disengagement is one of enforcing the new identity on the vast majority of the nation. Consequently it must inevitably lead to a dictatorship, as is actually happening. Only if Israel lives in harmony with its Jewish identity, and tries to serve this identity instead of fighting it, will it also be really democratic.138 33 195
|Please support Gush Katif, other Gaza settlement and settlements in general
with all you have.
On the right is the Gush Katif demo flag. Israel should be flooded with these flags!!
|(Return to Archive: