Lieberman has introduced a refreshing tone into Israeli diplomacy: it is no longer diplomatic. After Erdogan’s speech in Lebanon, the Israeli FM accused him of “tongue-lashing,” an offensive phrase unthinkable to career diplomats.

Not anymore. In talks with Pharaoh Mubarak, Netanyahu agreed to include the Jordan Valley in peace negotiations with Palestinian Arabs. He also promised to discuss partitioning Jerusalem.

The implication is that Netanyahu expects across-the-board condemnation of his move from his own party.

It is common for Israeli prime ministers to renege on their electoral promises.

Whether Teitel is guilty or not, whether he is a Shabak agent or an honest Jew, is irrelevant. What matters is that he is accused of actions which many people on the right have quietly urged for years—and few Jews have dared to do.

Jewish terrorism against Arabs is no less efficient than Arab terrorism against Jews: it is a reasonable means to an important political end.
Jewish terrorism against ultra-leftists is an expected response to the campaign of terror and incitement ultra-leftists are waging against settlers.
And while we welcome Christians as good friends, missionary activity in the Land of Israel is unacceptable.

It is good to know that Teitel got an attorney from Honenu, a charity which defends right-wing Jews in Israeli courts.

Israeli dignitaries competed with each other in rhetorical nonsense. According to Peres the murderer, Rabin united the country during wartime (he blacked out for the entire duration of the 1967 war) and peacetime (no event was ever so divisive as the Oslo Accords).
Netanyahu praised Rabin’s military genius. Indeed. As Uri Milstein details in his biography of Rabin, the moron transported an unexploded shell in his train luggage and ran from the battlefield at Jerusalem, leaving his soldiers to die.

And of course, none recalled publicly the real reason why Peres killed his nemesis. At some point, Rabin began wavering over further concessions to the PLO and declared in his last Knesset speech that the Jordan Valley must remain in Israeli hands and a Palestinian state must not be formed. That attitude made him more valuable as a martyred peace hero than as a living politician.

Zeevi was murdered by Fatah Arabs under very strange conditions, which strongly suggests the involvement of Shabak. Zeevi’s guard left his side just before the assassination.

The mastermind behind Zeevi’s assassination is to be freed in the Shalit exchange.

Police did not believe the Arab’s confession and detonated the phone, just in case.

Rahat is the only Bedouin city in Israel (all the others are villages), and has long been a criminal nest, off-limits to Jews.

The US Administration aims to bring down Netanyahu’s government by placing him in pincers: Kadima is encouraged by American support, and Likud is discouraged by Bibi’s concessions to Obama.

Somewhat childishly, the letter promised death to Shamni’s family, but went on to predict his eviction after the authors take power in the state.

Halacha leaves no doubt that Shamni indeed must be executed, like anyone else who abandons any piece of land which Jews control. Sanhedrin is unnecessary for the judgment: during emergencies, community rabbis are entitled to pronounce death sentences on those who endanger the Jewish masses. No such honest rabbi had arisen yet.

Arguably, the actions of Shamni & Co. fall even under milhemet mitzva, the obligatory war commandment: regardless of the Sanhedrin, kings, or rabbis every Jew has an individual obligation to go to war when the enemy wants to take away any land that we hold.

We don’t know what is so Jewish about an Israel which violates Shabbat, Pesach, Yom Kippur, and every conceivable commandment. As for democracy—the Arabs’ right to change the country’s flag to green—we reject it.

The problem is, Netanyahu isn’t bombing Iran, either. And why mix the two things? We would support a government which bombs Iran, but need not unite around someone who evicts Jews from the hilltop communities.

Netanyahu cynically uses the Iranian threat to push Israelis into obedience to his treacherous policies.

Afterwards, Netanyahu will fly to Amman to meet Jordan’s king Abdullah. Even such a petty ruler cannot be summoned to Jerusalem for negotiations.

The Arabs are peddling to Netanyahu a new peace plan, which places Jerusalem under UN control for Arab use. Israel would thus be the first nation in history to win all its wars and cede its core territory to its enemies.

The problem is that it all hinges on one man, Netanyahu. If he accepts the peace plan, the Likud MKs wil join him. With the support of leftist and Arab MKs, they will easily ratify the capitulation treaty.

The government will appoint Lieberman to head the strategic dialogue committee with the US. Where Peres and Netanyahu have failed, Lieberman would be a disaster.

A great guy to head Shabak, Lieberman is out of place in the Foreign Ministry.

In the opposition, the NU will be powerless to help its settler constituency and will lack the media platform accorded to government officials.

Lieberman’s arrogance is amazing: a provincial Jew would bring together the two great world powers, who are still locked into their Cold-War attitudes toward each other.

The Arab mob shouted slogans accusing Baruch of terrorism (we thought it was the Arab occupation) and promising to bury him on arrival (which, evidently, is not terrorism). The town’s mayor and Arab MKs, all of them on the Israeli payroll, led the mob.

Despite the court orders, police can still cancel the march on public security grounds. Major clashes are unlikely due to the number of police involved, but the Arabs can still block the march.

To somewhat pacify the Arabs, the government approved today hundreds of illegal housing units they have built on public land. Similar approval for Jewish houses in Smaller Israel is unimaginable: they are razed immediately if built without permits.

Still, the very sight of a Jew is so offensive to Israeli Arab citizens that thousands of police will guard the march.

1. It is morally wrong. Transfer of foreigners cannot be morally wrong by definition because morality is an intra-group phenomenon. Our moral needs conflict with those of the Palestinians. Also, something which is standard cannot be immoral, and population transfers took place many times during the twentieth century.

2. It turns Israelis against their state. A lot of Israelis are against their state, anyway. The Haredim despise the Zionist state. Ultra-leftists despise the Jewish state. Almost everyone, even down to the hardcore leftists despises Arabs, so the transfer is unlikely to exacerbate tensions. On the contrary, in the long-term perspective, the transfer would remove a major reason for Jewish-Arab and right-left divisiveness. Also, why did the government not worry about division when evicting the Gush Katif residents?

3. It infuriates the American ally. The United States cannot afford to rethink its alliance with Israel, its only real ally in the Middle East, a major arms customer, and lobbyist par excellence. President Wilson approved Turkey’s Greek population transfer, and the equally idealistic President Roosevelt approved the forced transfer of twelve million Germans from Eastern Europe.

4. Inflames, not discourages, the Arab enemy. Transfer would end terrorism by Israeli Arabs. Almost all recent terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by Israel’s Arab citizens and residents. They riot continually and have developed into the backbone of Israeli crime. Enmity with foreign Arabs is not a real problem because they are afraid to attack Israel. Other Arabs don’t care about the Palestinians and hate Israel to the utmost, thus the transfer cannot worsen the situation.

The transfer is the only option to sustain a Jewish state. Arabs already constitute 34 percent of Israel’s young and in twenty years will become the largest Knesset faction.

Without the National Union, Netanyahu’s coalition would be the narrowest possible: 61:59.

Asked why Yisrael Beitenu hid their position during the election campaign, Lieberman’s MK Danny Ayalon said that “No one asked us during the campaign if we were in favor of a Palestinian state.”

Lieberman’s perceived opposition to the Palestinian state was a major factor behind his electoral support.

Now, that’s a problem for Finkelstein, the right-wing kingmaker. His PR firm brought victory to Netanyahu in 1996, but broke relations after Netanyahu turned to the left. Then he tried it with Lieberman, to the same effect. It seems Finkelstein has run out of clients in Israel.

As the National Union’s MK Michael Ben-Ari delivered his introductory speech, Arab MKs walked out as they—and Jewish MKs, too—used to do when Rabbi Kahane was speaking. One can only hope they don’t come back.

True—in his previous prime-ministership Netanyahu lost for the Jewish state Hebron and 13 percent of Judea and Samaria.

Thought he would deprive disloyal Arabs of Israeli citizenship?

It is unlikely that Lieberman will risk his right-wing credentials by bringing Kadima into the coalition solely to make the haredi parties irrelevant and push through his civil marriage law.

By facilitating a wide coalition, Lieberman pays Kadima back for its help during the elections (Kadima propped Lieberman to draw voters from Likud), or pays them off to hang the criminal proceedings against him.

Kadima accepted all of Lieberman’s coalition demands except the loyalty test for citizenship, paving the way to a government without Likud. Netanyahu welcomed Livni into the coalition, paving the way to an amorphous national unity government. In the most newsworthy (but commonly ignored) development, Lieberman urgently flew to Byelorussia, probably to meet his major sponsor for consultations. In his absence, Yisrael Beitenu’s negotiations are handled by Mr. Misezhnikov Stanislav (what a nice Slavic name, Stanislav). But look, if Kadima accepted all his demands, what is so right-wing about Lieberman?

Lieberman’s popularity, and the establishment’s inability to counter his common-sense arguments suggest that his party will be banned for racist incitement.

The National Union, Jewish Home, Israel Our Home, and Shas all signed the oath.

Short of Meir Porush, the United Torah Judaism Party refused the oath. For these hypocrites the giveaway of the Promised Land is no transgression.

Netanyahu the phony refused the oath, as did most of his cohorts. Among the electable Likud candidates, only Moshe Ya’alon, Yuval Steinitz, Ze’ev Elkin, Ayoub Kara, Tzipi Hotovely, Yariv Levin, and Danny Danon signed the pledge. On the other hand, Netanyahu could not take the oath for fear of grossly alienating Hussein Obama’s administration, which already opposes his election and openly supports Ehud Barak.

Police were widely expected to cancel the event, scheduled for tomorrow; and they did today, citing concerns over public safety.

But consider this: if the police know that the mere sight of Israeli Jews walking in an Israeli Arab town with Israeli flags can cause massive Arab disturbances, perhaps there’s something wrong with Jewish-Arab coexistence? Should the police chief be fired for failing to enforce basic order in Israeli Arab towns? Should the Arabs be expelled as summarily hostile to Jews? Should the entire Umm al Fahm Arab population be jailed for high treason and rioting? No, police found fault with Baruch Marzel: Jew, don’t you dare provoke our Arabs.

Umm al Fahm’s mayor and a number of Arab MKs decry the march. Israeli police have tried to stop it despite the Supreme Court’s order. This is not like a Hebron house eviction, where police eagerly acted on the court’s orders; this time, police will subvert the court’s order.

Marzel’s followers are only allowed to walk in Umm al Fahm with Israeli flags, no banners whatsoever. In the mad Jewish state, Jews need the Supreme Court’s permission to walk with Israeli flags in a town populated by Arabs.

Astoundingly, Netanyahu clings to literal Keynesianism. He vowed government investment in roads and railroads—something that Keynes prescribed for America in the 1930s; but who needs more roads and railroads in Israel now? A labor-intensive enterprise seventy years ago, road-building has become capital-intensive one today, and by road construction Israel would help Germany, Japan, and South Korea, which all produce expensive road-building equipment.

- No direct answer on attacking Iran,
- Nothing specific about dealing with the Gaza problem. Vague suggestions of acting harshly against Hamas.
- The majority of Arabs are loyal citizens of the Jewish state.
- Israel should economically develop Palestinian towns in the West Bank to make their Arabs loyal.
- Netanyahu claims he never made an electoral promise to denounce the Oslo Accords, and therefore he didn’t renege on it. He gave the Palestinians only 2% of the Israeli-controlled land (he keeps silent on giving the Arabs vast territories not fully controlled by Israel).
- He supports giving Hebron to the Palestinians on the grounds that Israel still controls Hebron to an extent.
- Netanyahu promises to refuse the partition of Jerusalem and giving the Golan Heights to Syria, and to freeze the peace process.

Our position is to vote for Baruch Marzel. Netanyahu would still win the elections with or without our readers’ votes, but we need a real Kahanist party in the Knesset.