Doc's Talk: An open letter to Leonard Nimoy

Tuesday, June 07, 2011

An open letter to Leonard Nimoy

Elder of Ziyon

Dear Mr. Nimoy,

I am a fan of your work (well, most of it) and as such I read your letter of support for Peace Now with sadness. It appears that you have not researched the issues as thoroughly as one would hope. Americans for Peace Now, the organization you are asking everyone to donate to, is not quite what it appears.

Peace Now is now a marginal organization in Israel. It is not mainstream and its positions do not reflect what most of the Israeli public wants. That is not to say that Israelis are warmongers; far from it. Every Jew in Israel yearns for peace. Most Israelis support a two-state solution. In fact, even the current Israeli government publicly supports a two-state solution.

The difference is that most Israelis want to ensure that the solution will truly promote peace. They do not want to barrel headfirst into an agreement that could jeopardize their security; they want to ensure that any Palestinian Arab state will not one day turn into an Iranian satellite the way we saw Gaza and southern Lebanon become.

Gaza is instructive. Israel withdrew from the entire territory, yet it did not bring peace. On the contrary, it led to a war, and tens of thousands of Israeli citizens had to live under constant threat of rocket attack. Moreover, thousands of Israelis were uprooted from their homes in order to even bring a chance for peace.

At the time of the withdrawal, Gaza was ruled by the very same Palestinian Authority that Peace Now wants to force Israel to make an agreement "now" with. Yet they could not even control their own territory and Hamas violently took over Gaza.

The Gaza model is exactly what Peace Now demands from Israel, today. They have not learned a thing from that huge failure. Fortunately, the rest of the Israeli public learned the lesson that eludes Peace Now, and Israelis are now far more careful before jumping into any further concessions.

It is not like the Israeli leadership needs outside help in giving up concrete assets for peace. Here you can see how much Israeli governments - especially the "hawkish, far right" Likud - have given up in the often vain hope for peace:

Americans for Peace Now want America to pressure Israel to make concessions that the people are not ready to make, with a partner who is not willing to compromise and which even today routinely refers to Israel as "the enemy." This cynical use of American politics, and their recruiting of spokespeople like you, indicate that they have failed to get their agenda taken seriously by the Israeli people and are instead trying to use outside pressure to convince Israelis "what is really good for them."

This is not showing a love of Israel; it instead shows that they do not respect the Israeli public. It is not as if there isn't robust debate in Israel itself on how a peace plan would work and what compromises are necessary - the subject is a national obsession. The idea that an American actor, no matter how respected, should be used to convince Americans to give money to a movement that cannot gain any traction in the free-wheeling world of Israeli politics is, frankly, insulting to the intelligence of Israelis.

There are other problems with the organization you have chosen to identify with. For example, Peace Now supports the division of Jerusalem, something that is simply not tenable and would increase the misery of Jew and Arab alike.

Moreover, no organization has worked harder to demonize a significant percentage of the Israeli population than Peace Now. I am speaking about the so-called "settlers" who Peace Now believes are the biggest single impediment to peace. In fact, the Jews who choose to return to the Biblical Land of Israel are among the most patriotic members of Israeli society, serving with pride in the IDF and showing a love of Israel that is difficult to match. Peace Now, however, spends a huge amount of time and money specifically to battle their fellow Israelis who live on the "wrong" side of a mythical line that was never, ever a border between two countries, and was never even meant to be one.

It is legitimate to question the tactics and life choices of the Jews who live in Judea and Samaria, as it is legitimate to criticize any group of people out of love. Peace Now, however, has spent the bulk of its time treating their fellow Jews as the enemy. I think you could agree, Mr. Nimoy, that there are few enough Jews as it is that we cannot afford the baseless hatred that Peace Now exhibits towards those they disagree with.

Most Israelis agree that a great majority of these communities across the Green Line will remain a part of Israel, yet this is simply not compatible with how Peace Now acts towards these people. Peace Now actually encourages boycotts and other sanctions against their fellow Israelis and against the wishes of most Israelis altogether.

This year on Jerusalem Day, a remarkable thing happened. For the first time since Israel reunified Jerusalem, Kohanim ascended to the Temple Mount and blessed the Jews who visited their holiest site. They positioned their hands in a way you are most familiar with, as it is the one that you copied as the Vulcan greeting in Star Trek.

Jews must have free access to their holiest places - not only in Jerusalem but in Bethlehem, Hebron and elsewhere. Peace Now is against this. It should not be unusual for Jews to be able to ascend to their holiest spot and to be able to pray freely there.

Your letter refers a number of times to Star Trek, the television show that made you famous. If I may, I would like to mention something else from that show - the Prime Directive. As you no doubt know, this was the most important order that your character and his coworkers had to adhere to - the rule not to interfere in other cultures, even for the best of reasons.

Israel is not a banana republic, and Israelis are well aware of the dangers they face as well as the necessity for peace. When famous actors deign to tell Israelis what is best for them it is not only a violation of this rule, but it is an insult to the entire country, implying that somehow a person in Hollywood knows better than Israelis do of how they should think and act.

I hope that you come to realize the wisdom in the mythical Starfleet General Order #1, and show your love for Israel by supporting everyone who is honorable enough to live there, not by supporting division and hate.

May we all live long and prosper.

Elder of Ziyon

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk