An uncomfortable question resurfaced in the government clash with the rabbinical courts: who is a Jew? Israel was never a secular state; rabbis had established the criterion of citizenship. Now liberal atheist state refuses to part with the traditional – religious – definition of a Jew and resorts to bizarre option of reforming rabbinical courts. Other liberal democracies secularized; Israeli state usurps control over the religion.

Israel ran into a bind of Jewish – atheist – ethnically blind state. The only alternative to religious definition of Jewishness is bloodline. Such genetic definition raises doubts about many Jews whose ancestral lines cannot be traced, and bans newcomers. The bloodline criterion is inconsistent with historically accepted definition of Jewishness through religion and permanently relegates non-Jewish citizens of Israel to inferior status in the Jewish state. Religious conversion is the only way to equalize non-Jewish citizens in Jewish state. Israeli government has to retain the religious definition of Jewishness to remain both Jewish and remotely democratic. But the core issue of defining the proper citizens is too sweet for the totalitarian machine to leave it to the religious establishment.

Religious conversion doesn’t solve the inherent incompatibility of Jewish state with ethnic-blind democracy. Even offered the most liberal conversion procedure, Arabs won’t switch to Judaism. Faced with increasing presence of Arabs and other non-Jews, Israeli government will abandon the notion of Jewish state and switch instead to Israeli nationalism. Israeli nation will include Arabs, Slavs, and Blacks, Muslims and Christians. Jewish state will be salvaged for ethnic-blind democracy.

The government would likely draw the line between the religious Jews and other Israelis, thus lumping non-observant Jews together with Arabs and others. Atheist Israeli Jews will be thus stripped of their Jewish identity; assimilation will speed up.
The rabbinical conversion is obnoxious and in many points outright silly. Given the large number of atheist Jews, it makes sense to accept the conversion of sympathetic Gentiles who are already in Israel. Alienating them and their half-Jewish children is impractical. Rabbis are correct, though, to erect a barrier to be overcome by proselytes. Faced with hundreds of millions of hostile Muslims nearby and hostility from much of the Christian world, the new Jews must not falter. The barrier of conversion, while high, need not be offensive. Instead of learning to tear the toilet paper in advance of the Shabbat, proselytes could prove their loyalty to the Jewish nation in more relevant ways, such as settling in frontier towns of Israel - which many do, anyway.

The would-be proselytes often blame the rabbinical courts for forcing them to become “religious rather than Jewish.” But we know no other way to Jewishness rather than through religion. An alternative would have been a course in Jewish history and cooking, an evidently untenable proposal. The conversion aspirants also complain that at the end of the study, their conversion is not assured. Though the rabbinical courts indeed cheated many aspirants who otherwise knew Judaism reasonably, the conversion process’ positive result could never be assured. There is hardly a danger of mass fake conversions in Israel; the Gentiles already here have little reason to join the Jewish nation other than out of pure intentions. On the background of scores of atheist and leftist Jews, most converts know a lot about Judaism.

The rabbis correctly refuse to recognize Jewishness of many Slavs who apply for conversion but retain Russian culture and mentality. Closing down Russian-language media in Israel would go a long way toward more numerous and efficient conversions.

With the average time span of Israeli ministers of less than two years and often not even one, who controls the country? The political appointees who shuffle between various government offices are professional in neither field. Their time in offices doesn’t allow them to learn and steer the ministries. Newcomers scrap pet programs of their predecessors to assert their own power. The parties’ nominees assume ministerial positions to get bribes and PR benefits; the rotation signals: you have stolen enough, let me. The real power rests with long-time director-generals and bureaucracy. Even bribes are mostly channeled through bureaucrats; the ministers, ever fearful of the police, take bribes from the close circle only.

Israeli socialism was conducive to forming bureaucratic state. Bureaucracy is empowered with the socialist hands-on economic management, totalitarian regulation, monopolies, and trade unions. Economic win or loss became dependent on connections rather than skills or luck. Bureaucracy is pro-left because the left regulates a lot. Ministers from conservative parties are sabotaged and mostly fail. Bureaucracy cemented an alliance with leftist courts and the security services historically manned by leftist appointees.

Thus the backlash against Jewish settlers and especially Noar Gvaot, the people who moved into the hills of Judea and Samaria to live semi-nomadic lives outside of the Israeli jurisdiction. They set a dangerous precedent of escaping the bureaucratic embrace. Totalitarian states have to control every citizen; when the pressure of government oppression runs sufficiently high, even a small hole allows many to escape and still more to admire them.

Economic deregulation down to free market level will destroy bureaucratic state and its political cover, the leftism. Deregulation should not be confused with privatization which passes ownership to oligarchs but leaves the controls over monopolist enterprises in bureaucracy’s hands. Breaking up monopolists, deregulating industries, and rising commercial competition to government enterprises must precede privatization.

As the Shoah commemoration day draws near, Israeli TV started seasonal broadcasting of the Holocaust horrors. The real lessons are ignored, as usual.

Thousands of Jews marched to annihilation scarcely guarded by hapless German police and ever-drunk Ukrainians. The Diaspora Jews lost not only pride and common sense, but the will to live. Jewish establishment is bent on presenting the Jews as victims and does not allow the ugly side out: we allowed ourselves to be slaughtered like sheep, not killed like humans. Israeli establishment doesn’t want the Jews who stand tall unto the death, but needs more sheep to join the victims of the peace process.

World indifferently watched extermination of Jews, whether by Germany or by Arabs in 1948 and 1967. Help is not forthcoming about the Iranian or Pakistani nuclear weapons. Civilized countries would add nuclear annihilation of Tel Aviv in their schools’ history lessons. The same world that bends over backwards about the Blacks in jerkwater Darfur, pushes Israel to accept Arab state 14 miles from Tel Aviv.

The Jews don’t care of other Jews. American Jews parties when European Jews died in gas chambers. Israeli Jews party when Jews are dying in Sderot from the Palestinian rockets. The question, what could I do? is irrelevant. Every Jew should do everything in his or her power to stop the Israeli mass suicide of creating a Palestinian state, including demonstrations, clashes with the police, and giving money to settlers. We should do our part, and leave it to the Almighty to do his.

Jews use to live on the brink of death. That leaves little space for compassion to neighbors, let alone to others. Jews, accordingly, grew treacherous. From the shameful episodes of the Holocaust to Israeli abandoning the Christian South Lebanon Army to delivering thousands of Israeli Palestinian collaborators into the hands of Arafat after the Oslo agreements, Jews betrayed their friends. Betrayal is silly: a friend helped in danger might not feel indebted, but at least he would cling to the benefactor for practical purposes. Israel betrayed the SLA, and lost the 2006 war in Lebanon because she lacked brutal associates who could do the necessary dirty work. When the abandoned friend does not go away, he has to be suppressed. Thus Israel represses the settlers who manned her frontier areas for decades.

Defeatist opposition touts the importance of media – which, admittedly, silences or misrepresents the conservative views and actions. Absence of coverage is elevated into a reason for inaction. Mahatma Gandhi assembled mass movement in the age of limited media capacities. Rumors, facilitated by door-to-door distributed pamphlets, offer adequate coverage. Israel is a small, deeply interconnected country. Army service makes social networks. Peer-to-peer talk is easy and extremely efficient. Talk to the people you know and ask them to talk to their friends. Be serious about talking.

When going door-to-door, ask for money. People put their mind where their money is; they could give twenty shekels only, but after that, they would be much closer to the right wing. People tend to praise the charities they donate to. Giving even a minor amount immediately draws the mainstream Jews into the right movement: after all, who is more involved than the financiers? Money is a token of cooperation, a seal on the contract. Ask for a minor token, and get a follower.

People lean to victorious party. A system, slowly on the rise, suddenly receives a windfall of followers. Persistency is perceived as success. Conservative Jews must keep doing myriad routine things, knocking thousands doors, and wait to see the sudden change in the public mood.

Jews, used to perpetual denigration and persecution, have messianic mindset. Many accept their utter insignificance and divinize leaders like Rabin or Sharon. Leaders who already achieved prominence are the best candidates for messiahship and are most readily divinized. It is a common attitude among Israeli public that leaders are wise and responsible, thus no independent action is required on the commoners' part. A country imbued with personal irresponsibility – the most un-Jewish attitude – is doomed. Government could be stupid, corrupt, anti-Semitic, and irresponsible; in fact, it is. Majority could be wrong; in fact, leftist-Arab majority is Israel's enemy. Torah enjoins the Jews from following majority to evil; it follows, we have to fight the majority and its government.

The Democrats' imposition of a deadline for withdrawal from Iraq could be a responsible act of defiance of the President's wrong policy, but realisitcally it is farce. Democrats could afford such a gesture because Bush will veto it. When things go sour in Iraq, Democrats will refer to their attempt to end the fiasco. Their responsibility is zero because the bill would not be implemented.
If Democrats are so concerned about American lives and money, why not withdraw from Iraq immediately or, as their budget power allows, in early 2008? Whether Iraq plunges into chaos now or in 2009, makes no difference. There is no way that any peaceful balance between Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds could be achieved in a year.
The withdrawal timeline, if accepted by Bush, would provide a clear signal to the militants: not only hold on a bit longer, but also make a final push to gain tactical advantages in the relatively calm situation now before the major battle unfolds after the US troops leave. The Democrats' bill is a victory for insurgents: de jure, they have pushed Great Satan out of Iraq. They could even keep quite for a year and devote their time to training and military build-up, and wait for the US to leave.
Bush is wrong on Iraq. The Democrats are demagogic.

Israelis imagine that they could withdraw behind the Green Line, and then adopt no-holds-barred policy against the Palestinian intrusions. Presumably, the land behind the Green Line is Jewish, we won’t concede it to anyone, and would fight the guerrillas to death. That's a soothing lie. Jews already gave away that land to burgeoning numbers of Arab Israelis. It matters not whether the West Bank Palestinians encroach on the Jewish state from without, or Israeli Palestinians encroach on her from within. If the West Bank Palestinians take over Israel, Jews would be reduced to non-sovereign minority. When the Israeli Arabs breed enough, the Jewish sovereignty would be similarly extinguished. Israel makes sense as a Jewish state; as a place which merely allows the Jews to live in, she has no advantages over the US, and plenty of disadvantages.
If Israelis would strenuously oppose Arab cross-border attacks over the Green Line, why not oppose them now? If Israel is capable of crushing the Palestinian insurgency, why withdraw at all instead of crushing the Arab resistance and expanding? Passive security never worked. No nation could hide behind its borders for long. Only active defense, willing to pursue the enemy in his turf, works. Passive defense won't work for Israel like it didn't work for the settlements. Fenced Israel would provoke the attacks just as the fenced settlements do. The line between offense and pro-active defense is blurred. If Israel is capable of either, why withdraw?

Jerusalem was central for Christian consciousness for centuries. Now most Christians are willing to concede Jerusalem to Jews or Muslims. After some time, Muslims could grow similarly indifferent to Jerusalem. Alternatively, Christians could become more interested in the city. Only a few decades ago, Jerusalem was meant to be an international city. If Jews show the weakness of dividing Jerusalem with Muslims now, Christians will kick both Jews and Muslims out and put the city under control of international organizations. Religion did not go away from foreign policy.

People who break the law for political reasons are not criminals. They act perfectly legally: they deliberately break a law and suffer the legally prescribed punishment. Their actions remain within the legal system. The proper question is, do they act morally? The Jews who sabotage Israeli government are not doing so for personal gain or base motives, but for the highest ideals of Judaism as they see it. They act out of the best motives sanctioned by Jewish society. Basic law takes precedence over derivative laws. Moral basis of the society is the highest common law. Conservative Jews are right to break the technical laws in order to sustain the moral basis of legal authority in the Jewish state.

America long developed the doctrine of freedom of expression which goes beyond the mere speech. Actions like civil disobedience, though technically illegal, are lawful because they immediately serve the higher purpose of free political debate. Society could live with traffic violations and blocked roads, but political freedom is indispensable. Israel not only restricts political expression, but also censors free speech. Western supporters of Israel should know that that country is more totalitarian than many Soviet bloc countries. America does not protect public figures against libel and invasion of privacy because of the great public interest in exposing the wrongs of political establishment. Israel bans many types of critique of public figures and policies. Liberal countries relax the protection of public figures compared to commoners; Israel provides the high-level scoundrels stricter protection than the general public. Jews are jailed in Israel for peaceful protests, criticizing the government, writing articles and pronouncing phrases which fall incredibly short of "calling 'Fire' in crowded theatre." Arguing against the government policy of concessions to Arabs is a punishable offense. Moshe Feiglin was sentenced on the charges of rioting which include "disrespect to the state" and "arousing discontent." Numerous students were sent down for criticizing the government. Israeli police hunts the political enemies of the establishment.

Invincibility of Israeli army is over-touted. Training in the hi-tech branches is superb, but overall planning and logistics are awful, especially in the infantry. From the earliest days of the 1948 war into the muddle of the 1973 war and until the strategic defeat of Lebanon-2006, IDF's operational planning was terrible. That is only expected given the Jewish indecisiveness, opinionated mentality, and politicking. Sharon's thrust behind the Suez was improvised; Lebanon war was finished by non-feasible massing of firepower. Lack of the depth of defense after the giveaway of Sinai, Judea, and Samaria makes Israeli trademark vacillation suicidal, but Israeli military culture offers no alternative for the better. The army becomes worse: less ideologically charged, driven apart by opposite political views, corrupt, inefficient. Arab armies become better day-by-day. Their modern weapons and better training aside, they possess the most significant wartime advantage - of coherent leadership. They also possess the human and territorial mass.

Jews are smarter and braver than the Arabs. In short limited war, we would defeat the Muslim enemy. In a longer or total war, Israel stands no chance. There is no alternative to the first use of nuclear weapons.