Speaking The Truth

30 Sivan 5769

YNET: Speaking The Truth

"Various parts of Land of Israel are more than just strategic security assets."

The original title was "Confusing Means and Goals." YNET also edited out a few sentences, found below in blue italics.

Yoel Meltzer
24 Sivan 5769/June 16, 2009


It is occasionally said that keeping the Shabbat is a good way to strengthen family unity and closeness. Since parents and children are together for a day without the usual weekly distractions, they are forced to spend quality time together. The problem is that this assumption reduces the Shabbat to a means for fostering better family ties. If it is only a means for nurturing better family ties, then someone else can rightly claim that a Shabbat barbecue on the beach with the whole family also fosters family unity. If so, what need is there to observe the Shabbat? The point is that the Sabbath has tremendous value in and of itself, regardless of what benefits one may or may not receive from observing it. Of course to make Sabbath observance a goal rather than a means and also to appreciate its true value, it must be concomitantly practiced and understood in its fullness. Otherwise it can turn into an external empty act devoid of any meaning.

The same can be said regarding the Land of Israel. Many good intentioned people state that the only reason Israel cannot relinquish any territory in Judea and Samaria is because these lands are vital for the strategic depth they provide to Israel. Once again, the problem with this approach is that it conveys the message that an Israeli presence in certain areas in the Land of Israel is only important as a means for acquiring security.

However, if this is true, then other means can be found to supposedly provide security, such as a 20 meter-high security fence, international observers, electronic surveillance equipment, etc, etc. The point is that the Land of Israel - be it in Tel Aviv, Shiloh, Karmiel, The Jordan Valley or Arad - has tremendous value and meaning in and of itself, regardless of what benefits settling it might provide. Yet to make settling the land and establishing Jewish sovereignty a goal rather than a means and also to appreciate the real significance of the Land of Israel, the subject must be seriously studied and internalized.

In light of Prime Minister Netanyahu's recent Bar Ilan speech, this point should be kept in mind. The "taboo" has finally been broken and now every major Israeli political party officially endorses the "two-state solution." Moreover, the prime minister's stated conditions for the establishment of such a state – Arab recognition of Israel as Jewish state and an eventual demilitarized Palestinian state – will quickly be sidestepped or forgotten. Unless something miraculous happens we will be staring at a new Arab state in our midst within the coming years.

Security Argument Will Be Defeated
Of course this new entity, which in all probability will be quite hostile towards Israel, will require the forced removal of tens of thousands of Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria. In such an environment, all that remains is to speak the truth. Therefore, anyone with influence who really cares about the Jewish people and the divine mission they've been entrusted with, a mission which is integrally related to establishing Jewish sovereignty throughout the Land of Israel, needs to speak up.

However, if their defense of the Land of Israel is based solely upon security issues, they will eventually be defeated. Maybe not today and maybe not tomorrow but with time they will be defeated since other means, no matter how problematic or controversial, will be adopted to allegedly provide security.

As appealing as the security argument might be, the truth is that various parts of the Land of Israel are not simply strategic assets that must be held on to for security reasons, any more than the entire land itself is merely a safe haven for Jews to escape pogroms and anti-Semitism. At this point in time, anything other than the truth will not hold up.

Yoel Meltzer has an MA in Middle Eastern Studies and lives in Israel.

Cross-posted on Esser Agaroth.

What Is "Extremist?"

7 Adar 5769

YNET: What Is "Extremist?"
I have A LOT of acquaintances, yet very few friends. I consider Yo'el Meltzer one of them. I hope my saying so publicly will not hurt his writing career. Yo'el has a certain knack for saying it like it is, reaching a relatively wide audience, yet without compromising principles.

The above link is to YNET, which published this article first and which has already hosted some lively debate on it. See my comments #20 and #25. If you prefer Arutz 7, you can click here.

Yoel Meltzer
5 Adar 5796/March 1, 2009

As coalition talks heat up, the phrase "extremist coalition" is frequently heard. At times, it is Kadima stating that they will not join an "extremist coalition", while at other times it is the leadership of the Likud saying they will form a right-wing coalition, albeit not an "extremist" one. With the term being bantered about so regularly, perhaps it should be clarified what exactly this term means.

For starters, according to one dictionary, "extremist" means "one who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm." Hence, right from the start, it should be clear that "extremist" is a relative term. Moreover, something is determined as extremist only in relation to its position vis-a-vis the "norm" (which, of course, is also a relative term). Thus, for example, we find that according to this definition, Zeev Jabotinsky's frantic pleas in the 1930s to European Jewry "to liquidate the exile before the exile liquidates you," would certainly be considered extremist, since the majority of European Jewry (the "norm") did not agree with Jabotinsky's prediction. Nonetheless, history proved that Jabotinsky was unfortunately correct, while the majority (the "norm") was clearly wrong.

This is just one example of many to show that what occasionally is considered an extremist approach is, in retrospect, correct, while what is considered the norm is, in retrospect, mistaken. Of course, this is not a fixed law and sometimes the opposite is true. What is important, however, is to understand that these terms are purely subjective and relative. Thus, whoever designates an idea or approach as "extremist", and by default what is the norm, is doing so from his own personal, subjective point of view and world outlook. This is an important point that should be kept in mind when confronted by such terms.

A much healthier approach would be if public officials would clearly state what they consider extremist in another party, and why, and in the process clarify what is their own unique point of view and world outlook. Thus, for example, if Kadima or Likud were to state why they believe that Yisrael Beiteinu's calling for citizenship based on loyalty is extremist, perhaps Yisrael Beiteinu would respond with their own reasoning of why they believe that such a position is legitimate and required. Whatever the outcome of such a dialogue would be, at the very least the public would be presented with some clear ideas of what our public officials actually believe in, rather than being fed the usual cliches.

Turning to another dictionary, we find that "extremism" is "any political theory favoring uncompromising policies." Thus, for example, based on this definition Kadima could easily claim that HaIchud HaLeumi has an extremist point of view, since they are 100% opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state in any shape or size, in any part of the Land of Israel. In other words, they are totally uncompromising and therefore extremist. However, similar to the case above, if Kadima would only state this clearly, rather than talking in general terms about an "extremist coalition", perhaps some genuine public dialogue would ensue.

In such a scenario, HaIchud HaLeumi might respond by saying that Kadima's determination to establish a Palestinian state in the majority of Judea and Samaria - despite the experience of missile attacks from Lebanon and Gaza during the past few years and despite the direct threat that such a state would pose against Tel Aviv and Jerusalem - is not only foolish, but it is also extremist, due to Kadima's uncompromising commitment to bring such a policy to fruition. Or perhaps they would respond by explaining in an intelligent way that from a Jewish perspective their position is actually the norm, while everything else should be viewed relative to their position.

The debates could go on and on, but the point here is that rather than continuing to spend endless time delegitimizing and vilifying other parties who have different points of view, the time has come for Israeli pubic officials to start engaging in real discussions based upon actual ideas and approaches, rather than mere sound bites and cliches such as "extremist". The Israeli public deserves this from their elected officials.


Yo'el Meltzer lives in Israel and works in the finance department of a non-profit organization.

Cross-posted on Esser Agaroth.

Israeli Election Ploy

11 Tevet 5769

By now, most in Israel have caught on to the election ploy that is the current Israeli Defense Forces' [IDF] action in Azza. Necessary and proper as this action is, there is no doubt that it is taking place now, and not three months ago, nor three years ago, due to our proximity to the Israeli national elections to be held on 16 Shevat/February 10.

Fortunately, some Jews in the U. S., like Debbie Schlussel, are also on the ball, and can see through the veil of this war.

I was in Tel Aviv yesterday, and the Kadima and Labor posters were up in force, starting sparsely on the border of the Greater Tel Aviv area (Petah Tiqwah), then all over the place once withing Tel Aviv and suburbs, save for the religious, and mostly Haredi city of B'nei Braq whose votes will undoubtedly go to Shas and United Torah Judaism [UTJ], with some going to the Nationl Union and Likud.

Everywhere there was a Tzippi Livni (Kadima) billboard, an Ehud Baraq (Labor) one was right next to it,...almost as if they were running mates.

In many ways, the Israeli news media has been portraying Foreign Minister Livni as the defacto prime minister,...with very little mention of standing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. And, now all of a sudden it is politically-correct to root for the IDF against the Arabs. That is because it is Kadima and Labor doing the attacking,...and trying to win an election.

Needless to say there are no such posters, let alone billboards in the Shomron (Samaria), almost all of which would be on the chopping blocks if a Kadima/Labor/Mere"tz goverment had anything to say about it. Even Kadima MK Otniel Schneller knows better than to expect any votes to come from his town in the Binyamin Area, Ma'aleh Mikhmas.

There may be some Kadima/Labor efforts in Yehudah (Judea), where two large chunks are said to be included within final status borders in any agreement between Israel and the Arabs. After all, 12% of the City of Efrat voted for Labor, back in 1999.

According to the latest polls, Binyamin Netanyahu (Kadima) could still create a right of center/right wing coalition government of 61, probably too weak for his taste. He may join with Kadima in a unity government. Some time ago, Likud candidate Dan Meridor was talking of trying to convince Netanyahu to make the bold move of giving up the Golan Heights. Many want to know why Meridor is on the Likud list at all. No doubt it is to get his supporters' votes.

It seems that Meridor has been silenced,...at least for the time being. Talk of giving up the Golan will lose votes for the Likud to other farther right-wing parties, threatening the Likud's expected plurality.

Projected seats for Labor have jumped from 8 to 15. Kadima and Likud are still neck and neck. The ploy seems to be working.

I am not optimistic.

Cross-posted on Esser Agaroth.

What Took 'Em So Long?

Zoth Hanukkah 5769

Everyone else is jabbering on about the attacks in Azza, while I sit here in front of my computer screen in an area proving to be one of the safest places to be in Israel, b'il eyin hara: Efraim (Central Samaria), safe from rockets from Azza and Lebanon, safe from bomb attacks in Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv,...for now.

Funny how people are also asking ME if I am scared to live where I do, let alone travel around by tremp, and unarmed.

Don't worry, the gub'ment has plans for us, too. Then I'll start to get worried, and have to snap out of my complacency.

In the meantime, I'll also provide my 10ag on the current goings-on in Azza.

What I want to know is what took 'em so long to bomb Azza?

Sure. They've gone in beforehand, but it was always a half-ass job, going only into the limited areas allowed by big brother and sister George and Condi, followed by the requisite, quick retreat. OR it was those lovely targeted assassinations, carefully avoiding "innocent civilians" (Central Samaria), known to every other country as "collateral damage."

There are a few theories as to what took 'em so long....

1. Election Ploy
This will get votes for Livni (Kadima), and for Baraq (Labor), showing the center that even though they want to continue "piece" negotiations with the Arabs, they can be tough like Netanyahu (Likud) says he will be, and not as wishy-washy like Olmert (Kadima). They can spin the incessant threats to strike Azza, and taking so damn long to do so, as a clever strategy, taking the Arabs by surprise.

Hey, even I'm beginning to believe that Ehud Baraq isn't such a buffoon after all. Tzippy Livni was actually pretty effective in her interview on Fox & Friends. I mean her Godless/Torahless approach is completely wrong, of course, but she certainly demonstrated that she knew her audience. Her biggest mistake was thinking that making a case to the American public was in the least bit important. (...and too bad they kept calling her "Zippy.")

Did I say that there were a few theories? Well, actually, I can only think of two.

But you're not gonna like this last one...

2. Fear
The wealthy, Ashkinazi powers that be were not in such denial of the Arab threat after all. The rockets did not actually have to reach Tel-Aviv before they were able to snap out of it. They knew that it was only a matter of time before the rockets reached Ashdod, you know, where there are actually some of those "nice" neighborhoods. After all they had reached Qiriyath Gath. Even though no one cares about Qiriyath Gath, it was an indicator of just how close the rockets were getting to the Ashkinazi, leftist headquarters of North Tel-Aviv. (See the map below to see just how close.)

No one cares about Ashqelon either. But the rockets inching closer to the power station there was problematic to the powers that be. Losing one-third of the country's power, due to lack of inaction, will lose you votes, even from "piece" negotiation-pushing Leftists, addicted to electrical appliances.

Translation into American terms: Rich white people were going to start getting killed.

I told you, you weren't going to like it.

(Click the map to enlarge it)

Red dots indicate locations having been hit from the south or north. Half red indicates having been hit on the outskirts of the city. Netanyah's outskirts were hit, but publicity over this was hushed up.

Ashqelon, Qiriyath Gath, and S'deroth are indicated by red dots , but not labeled. Be'er Sheva has not been hit,...yet.

The map demonstrates how the rockets have been creeping closer to Tel-Aviv as well as to Ben-Gurion International Airport.

Cross-posted on Esser Agaroth.

Israeli Government's Sleazy Practices...

Ethical Sleaze // Shalev Ben Ya'akov

David Wilder // Ben Bresky
July 08, 2008

Today three "major' topics were headline news. The first was absolutely revolting, dealing with sex allegations against former President Moshe Katzav. Coverage of accusations against Katzav are described almost down to the last detail. It's as if Israel radio and tv news are attempting to compete with porno shows, rated triple X. Disgusting. I would suggest that anyone in Israel with children at home keep an ear out for such sordid details and be ready to turn down the volume real fast. Before the kids start asking for explanation.

The second item is the juicy quote from our illustrious Education Minister, Yuli Tamir, a founder of Peace Now. During a meeting of the Knesset Education Committee, she said to the former Director General of that ministry, Ronit Tirosh: "I'm clearing out the trash and sh-t you left me."
What fine examples from official Israel radio/tv and the Education minister to Israeli children!

The third item making big news is the impending draught. A former Israeli water authority chief, interviewed during the daily radio news program this morning, said that one of the repercussions will include empty water faucets. That shook up the country. Especially when he added that a good rainy winter this year will not solve Israel's water deficiency.

However, no one is asking the really important question which is: why isn't there any water. I'm not talking about the technical reasons: no rain, and refusal by the treasury to finance massive construction of desalinization plants. That's the easy side. But what is at the root of the problem.

Observant Jews repeat at least twice daily Kriyat Shema. However we repeat not only Shema Yisrael, HaShem Elokenu, HaShem Echad. We also recite two other paragraphs from the Torah. One of them speaks specifically about rain. If we implement G-d's will, He will reward us with rain. If we don't do as He instructs us, we will suffer droughts.

Last night a story on the TV news seemed to explain why we are drying up. It was not enough that the Israeli government expelled almost 10,000 Jews from Gush Katif. Yesterday an Arab who worked for a Jewish farmer in Gush Katif filed suit against his former employer because he, the Arab, had lost his job. The official reaction from the SELA authority, supposedly assisting the expellees, was that the compensation granted to the former Gush Katif residents included funds to pay damages to Arabs demanding reparation because they had lost their jobs and that any such court cases were the expellee's problem, not theirs.

In other words, the government expects citizens who were expelled from their homes, who still don't have permanent residences or employment, to pay off terrorists who are today shooting rockets into Israel from Gush Katif, with whatever is left of their compensation. And of course, it doesn't take too much imagination to figure out where most of that money will go.

Corruption takes many shapes and forms. Israel has witnessed more than its share of corrupt politicians, judges, police, prosecutors and others. Most corrupt people are attempting to either get rich/richer or obtain/maintain power.

But there's another type of corruption. I'll call it moral, ethical sleaze. What could be sleazier than telling people evicted from their homes that they have to pay off their terrorist enemies because the government stole their land and employment from them? This is more repulsive than the Katzav affair mentioned above.

Of course, this is not a 'major news story.' After all, who really cares what happens to those 'settlers' who dared 'occupy' Arab land and were rightfully kicked out of their homes, which were subsequently destroyed?

But in my humble opinion, this is why we are in the midst of a major draught. We are doing it to ourselves. We are drying ourselves out.
(Anyone wishing to express a thought or opinion to the Sela Authority can email them at: sela@sela.pmo.gov.il or fax them at: 972-2-6529217)

ARAB TERRORISTS ROAM FREELY IN JERUSALEM

Blogmaster's comment: I give this article by Caroline Glick Five Stars...she is right on target. Only if someone would listen to what she has to say...

Anatomy of a massacre

Caroline Glick,

THE JERUSALEM POST July 4, 2008

Government and police spokesmen would have us believe that the carnage in Jerusalem on Wednesday was unavoidable. Husam Taysir Dwayat, the convicted rapist, burglar and drug dealer turned jihadist who mowed down innocent people with his bulldozer on Jaffa Road was not suspected of links to terrorist organizations. The sociopathic, violent criminal who had "returned" to Islam over the past month raised no red flags. There was nothing to be done. No one is to blame.

If the protestations of the government and the police that nothing could have prevented
Dwayat from using his bulldozer to murder three people sound familiar, it is because they are. Immediately after Ala Abu Dhaim entered into Mercaz Harav yeshiva on March 6 and
massacred eight students, government and police spokesmen said the same thing. There was no way to prevent the attack. No one is to blame.

These statements are no more than easy excuses for incompetence. While it may be true
that neither Dwayat nor Dhaim were members of a terror group, it is certainly true that
both of these Jerusalemite terrorists operated in an atmosphere that engenders both
radicalism and lawlessness. Their decisions to murder innocent people were products not only of their own evil natures, but of an atmosphere of permissiveness that naturally
intensifies any latent desire to cause death and mayhem. If they had been operating in a
different environment, it is possible they would have behaved differently.

Four months ago, Dhaim was able to enter Mercaz Harav by dint of his job as a driver for the Jerusalem Arab-owned transport company HaPnina. HaPnina had a city contract to transport school children. Dhaim, who arrived at the yeshiva in a company van, aroused no suspicion when he entered the yeshiva with a large box where he hid his rifle.

After Dhaim committed his massacre, the municipality immediately tried to abrogate its
contract with HaPnina. HaPnina sued and the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court issued a
temporary injunction requiring the city to continue using HaPnina until the judge ruled on the case. When Judge Hagit Mack-Kalmanovich finally decided in the municipality's favor on June 13, she noted that that the company had ignored a court order to provide
documentation showing that its drivers had no criminal records and were qualified to
transport children.

If the municipality were more vigilant in overseeing its contractors, it could have
discovered that HaPnina was employing criminals well before the massacre. Perhaps then Dhaim wouldn't have been able to enter the yeshiva.

It is a criminal offense to praise acts of murder. When hundreds came to pay their respects for Dhaim and proclaim him a hero, the police could have arrested and interrogated all of them. Among those who arrived at the Dhaim's mourning tent was Wednesday's terrorist,Dwayat. If he had been arrested then, it is possible that police would have discovered that this convicted rapist had recently become a jihadist. It is also possible that Dwayat himself would have been intimidated.

But rather than enforce the law, the police did nothing. Rather than arrest the hundreds
who came to praise Dhaim, the police excused their inaction by bemoaning the fact that the due process rights of Jerusalem Arabs made it impossible to destroy the homes of Arab terrorists in the capital without proper legal authorization. That is, they justified their decision to do nothing by complaining that they can't do everything.

The police's permissive behavior is nothing new. In Dhaim's and Dwayat's Arab
neighborhoods in Jerusalem, as in the Beduin settlements in the Negev and the Arab cities and villages in the Galilee, the police simply refuse to enforce the law. They do not patrol the streets. They do not arrest religious, educational and political leaders who solicit terrorism or incite hatred. They do not enforce building laws. They do not protect state and privately owned land from squatters. Today some 90 percent of Arab construction in Israel is carried out without permits. Whole towns in the Negev have been built on stolen state land. And the police do nothing.

As a consequence of police inaction, thieves, smugglers, terror solicitors and other
dangerous criminals are allowed to operate in the open. Fearing the wrath of human rights groups on the one hand and Arab rioters on the other, the police simply do not enforce Israeli law in the Arab sector.

This police passivity manifests itself not only in times of relative calm but also in
emergency situations. For instance, at both Mercaz Harav and on Jaffa Road, the police
were inexcusably passive. In both attacks the terrorists were only stopped by citizens who took the initiative when the police failed to act.

On Wednesday Dwayat killed two motorists and overturned a truck before a policeman and a security guard climbed into the cab of his bulldozer. And then, instead of shooting him, the policeman simply tried to restrain him. Due to the police's refusal to shoot, Dwayat killed 33-year-old Batsheva Unterman while the policeman was standing next to him in the bulldozer's cab. It was only the intervention of "M.," an unarmed IDF commando soldier on furlough, that ended the carnage.

M. climbed onto the bulldozer, took the security guard's gun and shot Dwayat in the head three times. Another policeman only shot Dwayat after M. had already killed him.

At Mercaz Harav, it took the police some 20 minutes to show up in force. Until then, only one police officer was at the scene. And as he heard the anguished cries of teenagers being murdered, he opted not to go in and protect them. He stood outside and did nothing.

Dhaim was only stopped when yeshiva student Moshe Dadon and furloughed paratrooper Capt. David Shapira killed him. As luck or providence would have it, Shapira is M.'s brother-in-law.

In failing to act against Arab Israeli lawlessness and the terror it engenders, the police are little different from the government. Like the police, the government turns a blind eye to the radicalization and lawlessness of Arab Israeli society. And when the unchallenged lawless and jihadist atmosphere leads inevitably to massacre, the government talks of how its hands are tied and makes angry, tough declarations not backed by policy. Then it quickly moves to change the subject.

The government's refusal to form a coherent policy regarding the deteriorating situation in Israeli-Arab society was exposed at the Knesset on Wednesday. There, just as Dwayat was on his killing spree, the Knesset was scheduled to vote on two bills written by opposition lawmakers after the Mercaz Harav massacre. If passed, the bills will allow the government to revoke the citizenship of terrorists and their family members and prohibit the families of dead terrorists from publicly celebrating their actions.

The government's Ministerial Committee on Legislation voted to oppose the bills some
weeks ago. It only changed its mind in light of the massacre on Jaffa Road. As opposition leader and Likud Chairman Binyamin Netanyahu noted on Thursday morning in an interview with Israel Radio, the government's support of the bills was pure political opportunism. The sudden change in its position made clear that the government has no policies, only postures.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak reacted to Wednesday's attack by loudly proclaiming their support for destroying Dwayat's home. But as Netanyahu noted, they are policy-makers, not spokesmen. Their job is to act, not to declaim about their preferences.

And yet, making loud, crowd pleasing declarations is the only policy the government has for dealing with anything. Both Barak and Olmert know that in sovereign Israel it is legally impossible to simply destroy a house without due process. Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz is still trying to work out how to legally destroy Dhaim's home four months after he attacked. If Barak and Olmert really were interested in destroying terrorists' homes, they could pass a law explicitly empowering the government to do so.

While the police could end the atmosphere of lawlessness by enforcing the laws already on the books, the government can take positive steps to reverse the trends toward
radicalization of Israeli Arab society. It can pass regulations barring anti-Zionist propaganda in public school curricula and sanctioning the immediate firing of public school teachers who teach students to hate Israel. It can suspend government funding of municipalities and local councils that do not enforce building codes. It can set up well-paid community police comprised of loyal citizens. The government can prosecute Arab politicians and leaders who treat with the enemy for treason.

But not only is the government doing none of these things, it is taking active steps to
legitimize Israeli-Arab rejection of the State of Israel. So it is that far from barring the study of the myth of the so-called Nakba, or catastrophe of Israel's birth, in Arab schools, Education Minister Yuli Tamir is encouraging Israeli Jewish schools to teach the lie to their Jewish students. Rather than take action against Arab leaders who actively work to radicalize Israeli-Arab society and solicit terrorism, the government bends over backwards to appease these leaders in the name of multicultural pluralism.

The government has not sufficed with seeking to appease Arab radicals by embracing their anti-Israeli propaganda as legitimate. It is also actively working to marginalize the sectors of Israeli society that support policies aimed at reversing the trend of Arab radicalization.

M., the hero of Wednesday's attack, is case in point. M., a clearly motivated, resourceful
and brave soldier, is 20 years old. At his age, he should have already been in the army for nearly two years. But he was only drafted four months ago. It turns out that the IDF didn't want him. Even as IDF commanders bemoan the dwindling draft rolls as more and more
young men and women evade military service, the IDF fought for two years to keep M. out of its ranks.

The IDF opposed M.'s service because in 2005 he was arrested for protesting against the
withdrawal from Gaza. Charges were never filed against him. But the mere fact that he was arrested for opposing one of the stupidest and most disastrous government policies the IDF has ever implemented was sufficient to make him politically suspect.

Then, too, by Thursday morning, unnamed government sources were warning that "right-
wing extremists" were planning to start attacking Jerusalem Arab neighborhoods.
It is far easier to attack imaginary enemies than to face real ones.

It is possible that both Dhaim and Dwayat couldn't have been stopped. But it is certainly
true that given the environment of lawlessness and governmental flaccidity in which they
operated, there were no countervailing forces in their lives that might have led these evil men to have second thoughts about murdering innocent Israelis in the name of Allah.

Political bluster will not prevent the next attack. There are policies that Israel can enact
today that will make the option of mass murder less attractive to its Arab citizenry. But as Barak, Olmert and their colleagues have made clear, nothing will happen under the current government.