By Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen, BESA July 5, 2021
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 2,088, July 5, 2021
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The establishment of the Evyatar outpost is a direct continuation of the activist pioneering ethos that the Yishuv leadership developed during the Arab riots of 1936-39, and that has long been lost to considerable parts of the Israeli political establishment.
The Evyatar outpost was set up in the midst of the recent war in Gaza. Located on a hill overlooking Highway 5—the Trans-Samaria Highway— from the north, it has a vital security importance. In the past, a military base on that hill enabled the seizure of weapons and terror operatives in the area.
The highway is a main corridor between greater Tel Aviv and the Jordan Valley. During the Oslo process, PM Yitzhak Rabin, in demarcating Area C, identified the corridors crossing the West Bank from west to east as vital to Israel. In his view, keeping the Highway 5 corridor under Israeli control was a necessary condition for controlling the Jordan Valley. When the Trump plan was issued, the struggle over control of the highway intensified, including the Palestinian occupation of the ancient Hasmonean fortress of Tel Aroma.
The timing of Evyatar’s establishment must be understood in a wider context that includes the Arab rioting in Israeli cities during the latest Gaza war. During the 1936-39 riots, the Yishuv leadership realized that alongside defense and security efforts, it was crucial to take a proactive approach. Amid the tension that emerged between adopting a proactive mode of struggle and the moral restriction on revenge attacks on Arabs, David Ben-Gurion chose to expand the settlement enterprise as a form of activist Zionism. In that regard, the creation of Evyatar is part of the pioneering approach taken during the founding of the modern State of Israel.
In the face of this pioneering initiative, the state authorities, led by the defense establishment, are focusing their attention on the technical violations involved in building this community without the necessary documentation.
Circumstances that can justify taking the law into one’s own hands, if they in fact exist, require a moral-philosophical discussion beyond the purely legal. Even a country like Britain, with its age-old legacy of the rule of law, was able to recognize the special conditions under which taking the law into one’s own hands can be justified and expedient as a circumstantial necessity.
The Zionist enterprise has had to deal with this tension for more than a century. The basic problem concerns the ongoing struggle in the Land of Israel over the control of territory. As Zionist activist Manya Shohat, in her letter to Henrietta Szold in March 1909, described it:
[In] Palestine the land must not remain untended. When an Arab sees that no one is working the land, he settles on it, and from the moment he has eaten bread from that land he will not leave it. Then he has to be expelled by force, and the trials begin…. This, in turn, creates hatred between Arabs and Jews. Because the land cannot be left untended, it has to be leased to an Arab, and then the story that I described repeats itself…. The Arabs do not leave the land that was leased to them and the outcome is agrarian riots, trials, prison.
More than a century later, little has changed. What has changed—for the worse—is the degree to which many of Israel’s leaders and jurists are aware of and sympathize with the difficulties of the pioneering struggle in the frontier areas. The complex dynamic of the struggle over territory in the Land of Israel continues to require approaches stemming from a sense of emergency. It is in light of the emergency conditions in which this struggle is still being waged that acts regarded from a formal legal standpoint as “taking the law into one’s own hands” should be judged.
In the old days, the leaders of the labor movement understood the interrelationship between the institutional leadership and the pioneering groups who faithfully carried out the settlement enterprise. In the summer of 1967, cabinet minister Yisrael Galili visited Kibbutz Merom Golan, and when the residents asked for a promise that from the Israeli government’s standpoint they were there to stay, he replied, “You people [should] promise that you will fight any Israeli government that tries to uproot you.” That should be the basic principle for managing the tension between a state and its pioneers—a principle that considerable parts of the Israeli political establishment appear to have forgotten.
This is an edited version of an article published in Israel Hayom on July 2, 2021.
Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen is a senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies. He served in the IDF for 42 years. He commanded troops in battles with Egypt and Syria. He was formerly a corps commander and commander of the IDF Military Colleges.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if, by the time when the court finally decides to continue Netanyahu’s case, another indictment is added to the lot, namely, for TREASON?
Some people have been questioning his sanity lately, actually.
The Likud for 17 years in a row voted to extend the Unification Law, with the exact wording Shaked had proposed. The purpose of this law is the security of the State of Israel to keep terrorists from infiltrating it based on past experiences where more the terrorists from within Israel had via unification.
An opposition party loyal to the State of Israel first and foremost would have agreed to continue the annual extension of this law. The opposition (not the right) including the United Arab List voted against the law. Hurting the State of Israel by potentially allowing terrorists into just to hurt the government is an act of disloyalty to the State of Israel.
@Peloni you are in my view making a factual error in your argument. Bennett was and did try to negotiate with politicians on the right of the political spectrum. On the unification law Shaked was in charge and she did try to no avail.
@Bear
I have never really appreciated this term, as it is only ever employed to convey an insult upon some politician or partner. No, we are not likely to agree, I guess. It is funny that people often are infuriated that an accomplished politician may be seen to be capable of controlling both sides of the chess board by only controlling, to one degree or another, one half of the board. And yet, when a task is deemed necessary and obligatory to your survival, would your intent be to hire someone who is half competent to complete it?
But beyond this term, your description labels Bibi with a more sinister appetite than I find reasonably supported by his record. The annoyance that he dealt among his allies is that he failed to be un-removed from his great position by his many successes and, even now, he still commands the stage, due in no small part to Bennett’s mistakes, while having been unseated. These many successes, and Bibi’s refusal to retire from the game, have annoyed and alienated his allies who were too desirous of being his successor, as they hold too high opinions of their low capabilities to aptly replace him.
And yet, they have demanded the right to test the limits of their talents. Well, these same men, annoyed and alienated, have control of the stage, no small feat of success it is true, but have recently displayed a great incapacity of completing this very basic obligation of competency in this office. Politics is always an unfriendly sport and bruised egos are but the uniform designed for it, but this toxic attitude of intolerant negotiators among men who are paid as state agents to negotiate state matters should result in some penalty and not the reward of high office.
Indeed, the limits of Bennett’s parliamentary success in winning his office is the very obstruction that lies between him and the reasonable negotiation that he finds is either beneath his ego or obnoxious to his allies – whichever is the source of his obstinacy in completing this matter, it harms the state.
The PM is not a king or a president – and they too will always find the need to negotiate. The PM needs the flexibility of negotiating a settlement with disliked adversaries or lacking the ability to achieve this, they will simply fail. It is not a mark of disrespect that Bennett should seek this settlement, it is only the duty of his office which conflicts with his own mistake of accepting incomplete partners which makes this need obligatory.
But the need is real and the consequences of this recent failure is stark as your description yesterday portrayed quite aptly. And the members with whom he might negotiate are 59 in number – the Right would be the reasonable source for him to choose as a negotiating partner, but reason seems irrelevant to the topic when great egos have been the target of political objectives for nearly 3yrs now.
With this in mind, perhaps Bennett could gain Tibi’s incomplete assistance to bond to Abbas’ and conclude this currently incompleted duty – mind you I despise Tibi, but Abbas’ employment seems to make any partnership possible. I will note that Bennett’s refusal to negotiate with the Right to prevent this disaster is more a statement of his own intractability than I would have suspected as reasonably attributable to him, but perhaps Lieberman’s shameful virus has now finally come to infect Bennett as well…
@Peloni I think I will in my manner of writing sum it up we disagree! Bibi kept coalition of the right from being formed. He did not annoy but alienated numerous other political leaders. He is completely Machiavellian
and only interested in power now and is employing scorched earth methods. Claiming Bennett should have negotiated with the right?? You mean the opposition. This is not the right. Again we disagree and will not agree on this issue I am sure.
@Bear
I believe the issue of blame is a distraction that makes what must be achieved, passage of some guidance on Arab immigration, more difficult and less possible – and this needs to be the focus for any and all Zionists at this time. The blame really belongs to many players and the electorate as well, but it is beyond the point of the discussion of any settlement should we accept that it is Lieberman’s intolerance of Bibi, Bibi’s annoyance of his allies, Saar’s intolerance of Bibi, Bennett’s association with Abbas, Bibi’s intolerance of Bennett, or Bennett’s negotiated bargain with Abbas.
This matter needs to be settled. Bennett needed the Right to pass that bill. It is not a rationalization to state that Bennett chose to avoid dealing with the Right by negotiating with Abbas and still failed. Hence, he needs to limit the damage and negotiate with the Right, as I say unless he has some other way to move to this objective quickly – like the use of the defectors, should 4 members of Likud defect, yet, this seems to me to be a high number from only 30 MKs. If he doesn’t he needs to negotiate with the Right and make some accommodation with them, just as he tried with Abbas.
It may fail still, as the focus of all these egoists, and many of their supporters, will too long remain fixed on this issue of who is right and who is to blame, rather than finding a settlement that these disparate members can each find agreeable – yet, this is the task of governing. Should these men finally place the good of the state ahead of this continued game of egos, it would be a significant breakthrough. These egos have been in a position of primacy for too long, among both the electorate and their political choices in the body politic – for years now.
I don’t think any of this is rationalizing anyone’s guilt or minimizing the unfortunate acts taken by any member in this high stake contest of wills which has led us to this disaster, but unless elections are to be the solution, which means there will be no solution til the next gov’t, there will be time enough to deal with the issue of blame after the matters of State are resolved equitably. So, these are my views, in any case.
@Bear
I don’t mean to belittle the building projects as it has long been noted by me as an undue burden on the public and an imbalanced limitation upon the state. I only meant by comparison to the terrible consequence of a dilution of the Jewish content of the state, the building issue is on another level of significance, as I see it.
The new law passed will allow as view as 4 Likud members to separate from the party. There are rumblings that some will leave and join the government. If this does occur this could be just enough to pass important legislation.
@Peloni there certainly are limitations what this broad coalition can do. Building in Judea/Samaria is however extremely important. There are other very important things they possibly can do. We will see what happens. Bibi in my view is now totally negative and I buy zero rationalizations nor transference of blame from his scorched earth behavior.
@Bear
But, with this in mind, why can these two, Bibi and Bennett or their proxies(probably a better idea), not negotiate a common need that is clearly required by the State and the public? Bennett can not achieve it alone, this was the only point that was achieved in the recent vote. It is good that he has influence over part of his cabinet, i.e. Gantz and others he can marry to his many purposes, but these projects are, as you will likely agree, far less significant than the Citizenship Law.
A compromise needs to be made and now. Bennett alone can do this, and it is his responsibility to do so. Egos are too bent to approach this topic lightly, but, also, it stands as too vital a topic to leave it in the temporary state of abandonment in which it now stands for reasons you aptly describe. Certainly, he will have to scrap the amendments made with Raam, but Abbas failed to pass the measure even with the added limit of Bennett’s gifts to them on this topic.
I believe it is not beyond Bennett’s talent to amend this law to gain support from many on the Right, as he stands to gain far more members of the Right in this task than the potential loss of the entire anti-Zionists faction, should they wilt and fold over a negotiated settlement with Likud. I have likely spent too much internet ink on this topic, but its import is beyond discussion and must be seen to and soon. And, yet, Bennett is the only one who can do the seeing. I wish him luck and success in passing the measure or one better to replace it.
Bennett has now moved building projects along in Judea/Samaria that were held up during the last months of Bibi’s reign. Gantz held them and since Bibi had politically screwed him he had no leverage to get the 31 projects built. Bennett had done this in a couple of weeks.
Bennett to put it bluntly and understated does not have an ideal coalition to say the least but he is getting some things done. If Bibi were not such scorched earth personality and worked for the good of the state first, Israel could get more things done for the good of the Zionist state.
When the Pal -Arabs apply for citizenship the Shin Bet will likely turn their application based on security needs. The Shin Bet clerks will be very busy and may even get overwhelmed.
The Pal-Arab turned will have a right to appeal to a court to overturn their denial of citizenship based on security needs. The whole system will get bogged down.
Hopefully soon Shaked will find a way to unification law passed to stop the avalanche or headaches.
@ Peloni.
Understood. Thank you indeed. I don’t actually write with “passion” but for effect, and sometimes from logic based exasperation. -no need for more……
(2 of 2)
The fact that the Citizenship Law is not passed is horrifying. Everyone, save Tibi and his two cousins in Raam, who voted against it will have a conflicting mixed sense of shame and success about this vote forever, and they should. It was a testament to the harm they see possible from Bennett’s allies that they would place the state in this toxic moment of impassioned impasses – and this is an endorsement of the belligerence that Bennett should expect going forward. Forcing this vote only succeeded in hardening the resolve of these men upon this unfortunate position. So how can Bennett see a reasoned path forward?
Bringing the vote before he had support of the measure, any measure, but certainly this measure, betrayed a lack of wise judgement by Bennett, I believe – for him, for the nation and for the Opposition. Bennett is meant to be the leader of them all. I don’t mean to speak too harshly, but I see no way to excuse this short sighted political gain against the trauma that the nation has been marked as having a limited ability about Zionist aims which is likely not to benefit anyone.
But this matter needs not to be a point of political gambles. Bennett does not have the votes and he needs this legislation finalized now, and will likely need other legislation like it passed in either the near or distant future. He should meet with Bibi and come to an agreement that will suit the nation, actually it is imperative that he do so, unless he has another method to see this matter solved quickly. His coalition failed the nation.
He has a choice to seek such support, or allow his gov’t’s inability to govern to cause such harm upon the state, as was evinced by this failed vote. It is not about Bibi, the Right or even Abbas. It is about the nation that Bennett has been chosen to lead and needs to perform it with better aptitude than he displayed with this failed vote. There was no need for this high stage drama – it benefited no one but the Dentist.
Should Bennett and Bibi come to an agreement it should provide an ability to achieve what needs doing til Bennett achieves his defectors or a new election comes due. Doing so could actually reignite the tensions within Likud to trouble Bibi once more – you will note there is not much talk of this lately. But allowing the nation to remain within this perplexed state of political paralysis is beyond forgiveness to any, and political gamesmanship be damned.
/2
@ READER..
No need for your smug “I told you so” quoting the JP, not them most reliable news outlet for at least the past 10 years.
And……lest you forget…….that is….if you ever knew..”.applying” does NOT mean “being accepted”..
{an aside}. I came to Israel right away when the Sochnut sent me a telegram that a suitable home was available for me. After arriving and FINALLY (another megillah) finding the right office, the woman “Sara Ya’ari, looked at me, disregarded my telegrams, shrugged and said, “available doesn’t mean built”. She showed me on a wall map that it was just a construction site still.. Si I had to hustle around and find a private apartment in Tel Aviv.
So let “smug” be replaced by “crestfallen” as reality (always difficult for you) sinks in.
If you had the ability to research the depths of Interior Ministry records, I would bet that you’d find that every year there are many applications from Jew Hating Arabs for “family unification”. In past years, long before you bestowed your great ressoning skills upon us, many fake applications were uncovered and exposed. By that same Jerusalem Post, in the days when it tried for honest reporting.
I recall them well, in fact there were several incidents, one on a very large scale, when I was actually living in Irael.
As I’ve related before, Arabs are as crooked as corkscrews, even worse that some Israeli Jews who made an art of it. I drove several times across the 9 mile Line, and saw, in Arabs stores for SALE,, piled up bags of all kinds of eatables and staples stencilled UNWRA, which was strictly illegal.
Arab mendicant look-alikes wandered around offering sheafs of permits for all sorts of things, which they had to have collected illegally. They held them between every finger. so their hands bristled with “permits” “green” cards, refugee allowances and more.
As well as this, there was (and likely still is) a massive business of forged land ownership documents. I myself was asked by an Arab acquaintence, to accompany him to the Land Registry in Akko. I drove him there. He had always beguiled me with the stories of how his ancestors had been living in his lovely little cultivated valley, for centuries and etc.etc.
The fact was, that the Land Registry pronounced his Deeds FAKE, and on th way back, he admitted to me that he and his family came from Syria, only 5 years before, with some goats, found this little valley with an old deserted Turkish house, moved in, and in a few weeks the place looked as if it had been lived in for generations.
I described this here more than once. Maybe irrelevant in today’s climate but I would disagree. Arabs are always Arabs, and the local kind are by far the worst.
(1 of 2)
So, Bibi is no longer PM, this is true. But it is also not really, entirely true. He was elected out of office, but he holds the Zionist votes aside him in the Opposition to this Zionist PM, though his numbers are not enough to pass any measure or bring down Bennett’s gov’t.
Yet, Bennett can make no strident marks on behalf of the state without him. Hospitals, yes. Arab donatives, yes. A new airport, probably. But these are not contentious Zionist measures that this Zionist must now accept he needs Zionists at his command, and he has too few to be a successful Zionist leader. I know you are supportive of Bennett, so forgive me for my bluntness, but it can not be helped if we should be honest – Bennett displayed a naivete about the consequence of bringing this measure to a vote without having the support to pass it – a point of weakness that Bibi would be loath to play because knowingly doing so would only undermine his image in the office he is suppose to command.
And Bennett knowingly achieved this with his announced bargain with Abbas. He had to be aware that this bold move would be seen as rash enough to cause Likud to withhold support from any of their members and, thereby, return the authority of PM, ie dictating passage of the bill, back to Bibi to make his threats real. He forced a vote he knew he would lose. In doing so, his political hopes of scarring the Opposition undermined himself, as it affected the nation as well.
There is a standard of law, not in the great code books, but in the great performances of court within the high stage of great cases, and small cases too: Don’t ask a question to which you do not already know the answer, as sometimes it can surprise you and affect many things, including your standing with the Judge or Jury. So, it still remains to be seen how this will all play out, but Bennett displayed a poor sense of judgement in this vote that HE LOST!… Let’s put it in context, he is PM, he is suppose to have the support of the gov’t to provide the needs of the people. And his first shot at the ball, he intentionally misses to undermine the pitcher’s popularity with the public? On any topic, this seems foolish, but on this topic it was reckless.
/1
@Reader
Yes, Reader, it is no surprise to you or any of us or the the Opposition. It was this that I wrote of as being the terrible consequence that the Right undertook and will be judged by the electorate, as opposed to Bennett’s bargains and close association with the Brotherhood will carry its own onus of ill-will. The public will weigh these matters and choose a solid majority of Zionists who will find the means of cooperation as being less arduous than empowering terrorists and Statists. And they will make their opinions known in an untainted poll, called an election, where hopefully the press will have little influence upon the counting of the votes that the public submit. Til then, we will see what Bennett has envisioned as his next tasks for his gov’t to turn the nation ten steps to the Right…
@Edgar
You need no invite to share your thoughts, as you say it is a public forum where we all gain from the free expression of ideas(don’t tell Google). Furthermore, your content is always well reasoned and well stated, though a sometimes more impassioned, it displays your ability to scribe a much more succinct commentary when compared to my limited skill to keep things pithy. I had wanted to respond to @Reader’s comments but I was quite occupied, and now I have the time, I think your response well enough states a summary of my own thoughts – though, it will likely not leave you surprised that I agree with you.
I hate to say “I told you so” but here it goes:
@Peloni you are correct!
However, by voting against the reunification they (Bibi and Likud) in essence sided with the United Arab Lists purposes to inch away on at Israeli Jewish demographic advantages plus allow terrorists into the country.
Bibi is the leader of the Likud and the Opposition so I blame him as he has the power to have the law passed. So he now acts as political and Israeli poison in his power quest over all!! It is extremely unlikely that he will ever be PM again. Hopefully he will stop the scorched earth actions!!
He still has not moved out of the PM’s residence on Balboa Street!!
@Reader..
I must be still asleep. Did I just read that YOU posted “Maybe I’m wrong”…….? Make way for th Mshiach , he’s on his way.. At least you are learnig to temporise a little by less confusing text. Nothing is better than plain speaking, untrammelled by “they… said-she sit-it was repoered etc.”….to which you are so addicted.
Your gaffe re Netanyahu and his “influence” with ther Suptrme Court, just could not be passed over , being a perfect example of your cloudy thinking. With all the rest, it passed otherwise unnoticed.
If Ted wants to ban me he needs no urging from you, He is the publisher and makes his own decisions T.G.He prefers amicable exchanges I know, but there are some, and yours prominently come to mind, which need exposure. I try to do this lthough ntruding-in a way. But it is an open forum..
There is no “love” affair with Netanyahu, as his present predicament shows. But he is the greatest, the only Statesman that Israel has ever produced and saved us from immense dangers, and has been rewarded shabbily. . To deny him this with a shrug off and denigration, is puerile.
His legal positions are, by unanimous world assertation of it’s greatest legal mins, , is specious and concocted by his political enemes, who have [ut their hatred above the good of the State..
The polls showing that his oppsition to the passing of the Citizenship Law, ,which is what you seem to mean when saying the people are against him, was not worth a spit. Polls can be included in the old daying “therr are lies, damned lies and statistics”.
So, keep up with your nonsense, I get enjoyment from reading it’s jumbled resoning.
TED- I hope this passed with you O.K. If not I can do no better, but fade out…..
PELONI..apologies for cutting in.
@peloni
Well, now the state doesn’t even have that band-aid.
And if the Arabs are not dumb (which they are not), they will now submit tens of thousands of applications that would be, technically, illegal to deny no matter how hard Shaked and her ministry might try to stem the tide since they were submitted within a window when the law did not exist.
In addition, the interior ministry would be flooded with huge amount of work just reviewing the applications which will distract it from the real work it should be doing.
But “all is fair in love and war!”
OPPOSITION, REJOICE!!! (Together with the “Palestinians”)
P.S. I anticipate your response that Likud had this wonderful new law to replace the “band-aid”, however, new major laws are not put through practically overnight and as a result of blackmail.
@Edgar
Please no ad hominem attacks.
(2 of 2)
The Opposition has no oath to the gov’t’s choice of policy. Their oath should be to the state. The reality is that the inclusions of this alliance of anti-Zionists so intimately involved in the matters of state is a danger to the state, and this is aside from the routine Left wing parties, whose desires to partition the homeland as an appeasement chip to our murderers are, let’s be honest, a rather dangerous group all by themselves.
With the inclusion of these anti-Zionists into the coalition, the Right saw the potential that could exist for an ambitious leader to be led by desperation between his political demise and the use of the manipulations of the office of Minister of Interior to allow a dilution of the Jewish population to leverage towards his continued role in the gov’t.
They don’t trust Bennett with the authority that has been strictly controlled by the Right-wing and Left-wing parties over the past 20yrs, but never by Meretz and never by the Brotherhood. You and others may trust Bennett to maintain a proper distance between these enemies of the State and their diminishing designs upon this gov’t. The Right does not, and means to remove this unwise practice of allowing the Minister of Interiors judgement to determine this matter.
So the games of Power Politics as you label them have a meaningful basis, even if you place your trust upon these people, the Right does not. And they should not be labeled as dishonest for their fears or obstructionists for not supporting Bennett – recall we are only in this scenario because Bennett’s Right-wing allies sought to ally with the Brotherhood over their own former partners in Likud.
And political polls are what the liberal press care to make of them – they are manipulated to achieve a point of political outcome, and we can discuss this further if you like, but they should only be refereed to while knowing their useless meaning is their authors opinion or intent.
/2
@Reader
(1 of 2)
Forgive me for responding to your comments to Edgar, as I am sure he will respond before long, but the topic was originally between we two and I have some input I would like to share on your most recent comment.
It is true that the Opposition has prevented the passage of this measure which is important to the state. But to say that they have harmed the state is to suggest this challenge is over – it is not – or that they have no counter legislation to pursue – which they do.
The task of the law makers is not to acquiesce to methods or laws that they instinctively believe to be less useful to the state or less beneficial to the people. It seems to me that because you oppose them, you would label this action final and ignore the Law they propose. Perhaps Bennett will too, it seems this will be his approach.
But that is Bennett’s role – to see to the passage of legislation necessary to the state. I would suggest that the role of the Opposition is to, not oppose Bennett or the wise governance of the state, but to make it certain that their support for the gov’t is only to the end of a wise governance of the state as they see it.
The band-aid that was placed upon the State to prevent the terrorists entry and the dilution of the Jewish population was not a bad law, but it was passed when the gov’t was devoid of un-Jews and Brotherhood elements.
The assertion that Bennett could be trusted to hold the Redlines he committed to seemed to be undermined, frankly, by the very elements of his desperate coalition – and this would be true of Bibi if it were he in the position that Bennett currently holds, but he is not.
/1
@Reader
Yesterday you suggested my statements which you never seem to respond to led you to believe my reasoning was based on emotion. The only basis of this provided by you was that I type his name as Bibi. It is his nick-name, that you yourself and many of his greatest enemies use. I find Bibi to have done remarkable things for the state in the face of great opposition and brought the state to the place of prominence among the nations that it holds today. This is a fact. You don’t have to like him for this fact, but you can’t ignore it.
I will say that there is a point of emotion about my motives in the debate we are discussing., and that is and always will be to support, in any contest, a leader or policy that will carry the State of Israel to a greater position and greater security than the others. I would suspect that this would be a prominent point upon which Jews in general would support, with a well reasoned approach towards an emotional attachment to our homeland.
@Edgar
You keep up your insults, and I’ll request from Mr. Belman that he ban you from the site, at least temporarily, so you’ll have time to think over the style of your posts.
Unlike you, I am not in love with Bibi, or Bennet, or any other politician.
All I am trying to say that the opposition caused harm to the state by playing political power games largely on behalf and at the instigation of their opposition leader but also for their own reasons.
This is not my unique opinion but the opinion of the majority of Israelis who were asked in a poll to approve or disapprove of the opposition’s voting down the reunification law.
It is an interesting game, of course, to keep looking for excuses and justifications for the way the opposition is acting but the result remains the same.
As far as the court is concerned, I am sure it wouldn’t be as accommodating to a regular guy without all those attorneys – I suspect being a man in power does count – maybe I am wrong?
Yes Ben Zion was a great man an ardent Zionist to the core… and it’s unthinkable that any of his family either immediate or more distant, would be anything else but. I suppose in his mid 90s and a scholar used to correct phraseology, he was claiming the privilege of age with a dignified retort. But the fact is, that nearly everyone in Israel has or has had at some time or other a nickname, either affectionate, a baby’s inability to pronounce, or derisory.
I recall that the assassinated Minister Rehavam Ze’evi was called “Gandhi”, and even Moshe Ya’alon is called “Bogie”.(an allusion to Casablanca- unlikely,,,,,??) . And our new political hack President, has had the nickname “Bougie” from birth almost……My own nickname from childhood also, is “Jerry”, far from my correct name, by which I began to be called, by my then wife, who didn’t like nickname..
.eventually (26 years) didn’t like even me……….!!!!
Chief of Staff Eitan who drowned whilst swimming, was nicknamed “Raful”……
And talking about “derisory”, I’ve been following your endless, extremely polite combat with Reader and sende a slight “heating up” on your part. My reactions have beenmany, and varied, whilst waiting for the “hammer” to drop. This is what I meant when alluding to your “diplomatic” skills.
But it seems clear that you are not capable of telling someone to “bugger off”…..-as the good old British saying goes…….I can, and do, and have.
He will never admit for one second that he is wrong.. He’ll say “a report said”…and if he gives the source it ill be either from “Vorvarts” (which I used to get, but stopped after further investigaion),….. or a many times discredited Ha’aretz reporter. He likes the heavy black emphases, occasionally, generously, even “admitting”: they are his…who cares….1!
@Edgar
Your quick wit and astute responses were well made as usual, Edgar. An unrelated point, but I read an account from a man who worked for his father a few years before Benzioin passed away. The fellow relating the story referred to the younger Netanyahu as Bibi, to which Benzion responded in a tense tone, something to the effect, “Please, never Bibi, Benjamin if you please.” And I have to admit, I am in agreement with his father’s preference on this point – a very interesting man in his own right, Benzion Netanyahu.
@Reader.
I was keeping out of it but this is SO glaring that I can not resist.
You intimate that the courts keep putting off his cases because they are afraid that he may regain the premiership, and blah blah bah… !!
Allow me to remind you, (dear reader) that he was the PM, and had been for many years when those “cases” patently specious, and concosted especially to take him down, were introduced by the snake in the weeds, Mandelblit. He and/or his lawyers have already appeared in court many times.
You have a bad case of “Bibiphobia”., and should see a large team of psychiatrists about it. Some strong medication and serious psychiatric care is indicated.. Or, as has been actually my opinion and posted here several times, you are incurable..
P.S. He is nearly 72, and has been called Bibi from early youth by EVERYONE….HIs deceased brother Jonathan was called Yoni. It is an Israeli custom as you well knw to nickname almost everyone.
@Reader
Actually, everything I have stated that you have failed to address at all, are all based on facts – did you even read the statement that Dichter made? Or do you suspect he stated this to protect Bibi – proposterous!. I will give you but one example but there are others you overlooked as well.
Bibi is facing a challenge from multiple, at least 3 members of his party. You would suggest he is so intimidating that they will not vote agaist his will but they will challenge him for leadership. There is no reasoning in this, none at all. And again, it only needed one of these men or of any of the three dozen men of the Right to stand up to him. I could go further, or you could read what I wrote already, as i would only be repeating myself again.
Following the leadership challenge, Bibi may once again become the powerhouse that you think he is, but right now he is vulnerable and incapable of forcing every one of these factions to support him but Bennett forced them to unify against his bold agreement with Abbas. Do read Dichter’s word’s, it is quite clearly stated.
Unless you are basing this all on you great dislike of Bibi, as I suspect is the truth
@peloni
I am not trying “to make it about Bibi, always Bibi”.
It is Bibi who has always made it about Bibi, always Bibi.
There was no way for them to do it under the circumstances, and there may be other reasons.
As I mentioned, Netanyahu convinced the opposition that the coalition can easily and quickly be destroyed if the opposition would exercise iron discipline and acted as one man.
Another reason might be that Netanyahu after the total of 15 years in power has built some very powerful connections and bases of power, and the Likudniks are simply afraid of him and his talent for intrigue.
Even the court which handles his cases keeps postponing his trial date possibly because he just might pulll the last rabbit out of his sleeve and regain his premiership.
Also, the members of the opposition don’t want to miss the chance to get back into power and regain all those positions and benefits that they lost to the coalition.
I don’t fall in love (or in hate) with politicians.
I think all of your arguments are based on emotions rather than plain facts (you just can’t stop calling a 70-some year old man “Bibi”).
Even if the members of the coalition and their motivations were as bad as you describe (which I think they are not), you have to look at the result of the opposition’s behavior, rather than invent excuses about why the opposition was justified in doing what they did.
THE RESULT consisted, as one journalist put it, in “cutting off the coalition’s nose to spite the country’s face”.
@Reader
Nothing you present here changes the fact that these men, every one of them chose, so far, to oppose Bennett’s alliance to the Brotherhood. If anything, I would suggest that Bennett motivated the Likud to rally around a single point that they could not help but oppose, a point that Rothman had referenced as the impetus for writing his Basic Law reform – an increase in Arab immigration specifically to gain the Brotherhood’s support. Indeed, Dichter stated this quite bluntly.
I know you would like to make it about Bibi, always Bibi, but it is much more significant than Bibi’s influence could alone achieve to keep his many members of the Right from passing a Zionist bill just to benefit his rage. It is true that Bibi is talented, but talent has its limits. Anyone of these members could have supported Bennett’s bargain with Abbas. They did not. And this action was an act by each of them against the agreeements which were secured in the Brotherhood’s bargain with Bennett. As Dichter stated it was about the
And each of these members of the Right will bare the consequence of this vote of conscience to bring down the Citizenship Law. And, admittedly the consequence could be significant should Bennett prove unwilling or incapable of solving this puzzle. In fact, should it cause a loss to the calm that Bibi has held in place over this past 12yrs, this could serve to harm the Nationalist camp significantly.
As I stated earlier, these two movements, Likud on the Right and Yamina on the…well whatever you care to describe his gathering of various members. Each group has struck a bad bargain and should elections come soon, the comparison between these two bad bargains will be judged and rewarded by the public’s perception. Though I am intolerant of Bennett’s partnership with the Brotherhood, I think he holds a less useful argument, but he also holds all the cards going forward. And then you can also add the impossible to predict input from the electorate that always seems to be to divide the right into separate nonfunctional camps.
These are my thoughts, in any case, at the moment, but as I noted to Bear, much might change or not with the possibility of the Likud defections. He only needs four or more from Likud, but four alone is nearly 14% of Likud’s #’s. So…
@peloni
Netanyahu was the author of this whole strategy – to bring the new government down by not letting it govern – remember, he is no longer the PM but he is the leader of the opposition.
He convinced the opposition that if they follow this strategy, the government will fall very quickly and there will be another election.
@Bear
If this statement is to be honest, it was not Bibi who blocked the Reunification bill, as he is in the midst of a quarrel within his party and a clear distinction could be claimed by any member of the Right, from Barkat to Katz to Edlestein to Chikli or any other.
Any one, any single vote of disagreement on this point with Bibi would have secured the bargain struck between Bennett’ and Abbas – not just Bibi. So the indictment you lay against one is a fair judgement against all, but with this distinction made, it is a fair charge you make that they stood beside Tibi, but not in alliance with him – and this is a distinction worth considering when comparing these associations with Tibi against the alliance between Bennett and Abbas.
It is a declaration of the deep opposition held by the Opposition, I believe, that Bennett was unable to sway a single voice from these mend, any of them, even as they stood along side of Tibi. But let us be honest to this point, none of these opposition voices were looking to support Tibi as an ally or anything else. They were entirely focused on breaking the alliance that binds Bennett to Abbas – from Barkat to Katz to Edlestein to Chikli and, yes, Bibi as well.
Their attention was entirely focused upon this disturbing coalition that they were voting against, voting to stop. Now, that the law allowing 4 or more defectors may leave a party, we will see if Bennett can change things, but it should be a change of significance should it result in being rid of Abbas or even his dictates upon the gov’t. But will Meretz allow this move to marginalize their close allies in Raam? Everything may have just become a good bit more interesting, perhaps.
Bibi took the side of the United Arab list and basically did what they wanted in getting rid of the original Unification law by not extending it. Shaked and Bennett wanted to pass the same way the Likud had been doing for years. Now the Likud and Bibi in their power thirst is allowing potential terrorists to roam the streets of Israel with an Israeli I.D, card.
(2 of 2)
You claim that Chikli was ‘worked over by Netanyahu’ – I have no idea what this means. Chikli is a known ideologue who would likely have supported the law with Bennett. Should Bennett not have agreed to his compromise with the Brotherhood, Chikli would likely have followed thru on his support of the measure and others such as Dichter as well and perhaps more than just a few more than these.
Bennett allowed Bibi a distinct victory in forcing Bibi’s many opponents to support him in this vote, much to their discomfort I am sure. Hence, it is easily established that they did not unite in opposition to this measure to be obstinate nor to be obstructionists. They did so because they are Zionists and they find the Brotherhoods control over such an integral characteristic as immigration policy of the state to be both intolerable and abhorrent, which I would think we could all find to be beyond an acceptable price of political compromise.
And this is where I think you miss the greater context with this irrelevant comparison with Deri. First, I am not familiar with the cause of the compromise Deri made as I stated in my response to Edgar below, but it is irrelevant. This current compromise is different than anything that came before this. The Jews are bowing to the dictates of the Brotherhood to diminish the Jewish-Arab demography. I promise you this was not the motivation for Deri. I foam at the mouth over the Brotherhood because they are the Brotherhood, and we would all be wise to accept them as the unkind menace that they see as their role in our future. Ignoring this fact is the only thing that will make their ruin upon our people a certainty.
That they hold any role in the Zionist election is a disgrace upon the Jewish character of the State. Including them in the Zionist gov’t should be seen as a betrayal to founding of the nation. But to allow them to diminish the Jewish component of the State grants them authority over our extinction and this should be seen as treason to our people. There is no greater threat to the state than the possibility that they could obtain this hold on the gov’t, and it has been seen now that they do, unquestionably, have this hold over the gov’t to one extent or another.
I think Chikli and the Right to a man opposed this acquiescence to the Brotherhood’s authority because the reckless involvement of the Brotherhood over immigration is not an issue of numbers, but is a substantively separate topic entirely. It needs to be stopped before it can not be stopped. And so they did stop it, for the moment it would seem at least.
/2
(1 of 2)
@Reader
You have raised many topics, so let me see if I can answer them as easily as you ask them.
Netanyahu’s discussions with Raam were a grave mistake and I stated this the very moment I read of his maneuver. That being said, whoever made it kosher, Bennett made it happen. I am not sure who can find any words to support this move, but this is my view: the Brotherhood is not to be trifled with, and I do not care who it is that would be so foolish as to actually do so, before I would condemn them.
Also none of the Arab parties are to be trusted, but I the Brotherhood stands above the distaste of the others, and I could write two books on the reasons for it, but I think you know my reasons as well as I do. If you don’t, read tomorrow’s headlines and I am sure you will find a recent example of their blood oath against us.
I do not care what you call Bibi and his cohorts, so lets not waste a conversation on semantics.
The Heredi will not vote with a gov’t that has demeaned them and their constituents so vilely as has been done much less as they are soon to be stripped of their state funding. Perhaps later they may see a benefit to join Bennett, but til that time, they will vote with the Right, describe them as you care to.
/1
@peloni
Netanyahu was the first one to invite Ra’am to HIS coalition ()that he failed to put together by the deadline), thus making Ra’am “kosher”.
Besides, why are you foaming at the mouth at Ra’am while completely ignoring the Arab United List which is sitting in the “right-wing”, as you call it, opposition (I would call it anti-Zionist, in spite of the collection of proper labels).
I mean, is the United List right-wing?
Are the Hareidim who adore Shimon Peres because he was so good to them right-wing?
Did I miss something somewhere?
The compromise was achieved OVERNIGHT before the day on which the law expired and not a word of it was changed.
The compromise consisted of a number of Arab families (the same number as the previous government – the interior minister Arye Deri – allowed in) getting visas, establishing a special committee, and renewing the law every 6 months instead of annually.
Chikli was worked over by Netanyahu and lied to Bennett 1 hour before the vote that he was going to vote FOR the law.
Chikli has just hired the girlfriend of Avner Netanyahu as his press secretary.
She is a real cutie.
Here are a couple of new developments:
@Reader
And yet she did barter on this very sensitive point. This was the very proof that the Right, or Opposition if you prefer to call them, was correct in their concerns about her office and the great pressures that the Brotherhood could place upon her. Her concern, naturally, was to make this gov’t viable – it is reasonable and necessary for their political future.
And, of course, it was only a single point of bargain. That is until the next great hurdle when Abbas’ assistance would be needed and then he would be back to expect more from this same trough as it is the key to his movement’s aim. Bad behavior once rewarded is rarely improved upon. Abbas would be back.
Perhaps, Shaked would hold fast on the next occasion, but no one should be trusted with this choice on a matter so key and so sensitive as to maintain the Jewish control on this topic. And never forget, this is the Brotherhood. They only impetus for them to rise each day is to see us dead by sunset. They stand too close to this power and seem too dedicated toward an input upon it – it should not be ‘trusted’ to anyone.
Shaked can call out Smotrich and Bennett can castigate Bibi and Chikli, but they should have not proved their Opposition as Right by succumbing to these blackmails of their anti-Zionist allies. Indeed, their dedication to not support their former allies has been their undoing and cause them to prove Rothman’s fears about them as fairly stated. Though I agreed that Rothman’s solution was reasonable, I have to admit I never thought in opposing the Opposition’s legislation Bennett would serve to prove this point certain for them.
And it is not the burden of the Opposition to see to the safety and security of the nation. This is Bennett’s task, not Smotrich’s, not Chikli’s and not Bibi’s. He, alone, was named Prime Minister, and yet he failed to secure the ability to fulfill even the basic task needed to protect the nation from likely terrorists elements being smuggled into the citizenry by the Brotherhood’s moves without bartering greater influence to this toxic group.
I have to admit I am shocked by his lack of preparation in this role, though it was always a concern as to how he could avoid this matter in the Gordian Knot he created by accepting their duplicitous inclusion into the gov’t whose primary role should always be to secure the safety of the Jews from elements such as Bennett’s current Deputy Minister.
One thing Bennett has achieved, though, was to momentarily unite the Right to rally upon their great opposition to him on this matter. Had he not bartered with Abbas as he found it necessary to do, there likely would have been a break in the Right’s opposition to him. And yet, he had 1/6 of his gov’t that demanded he do so. Still, I believe, it would have been a better path to fail while opposing the Brotherhood’s demands rather then failing while acquiescing to them. Should elections be near again, this will be the toxic portrait that will be placed against the image that Bibi failed to support the renewal of the Reunification bill which holds its own distasteful implications.
Bennett, I believe, holds the greater burden of explanation in this comparison as every explanation has him carrying water for these scions of al-Banna. But we will see.
(2 of 2)
As I noted previously, it was Shaked’s ministry that Abbas had set his designs to become the Deputy Mininster. When this was recalled, it became a certainty that controlling this ministry was his real impetus to enter and support this experiment, as it would meet his movement’s goal of destroying the Jewish State from within.
In fairness too, no one should be trusted with so delicate a role as to have to withstand these impossible pressures while the State’s demography could be changed by the input of this single voice. Knowing that Abbas and his natural allies in Meretz have never been so close, and likely would not be so close again, to the Jewish control on the flow of Arabs to be granted Israeli citizenship, it offered a great burden to oppose them.
Indeed, the point of discovery about this law and the Brotherhood’s motive is when I came to support the prevention of this bill, though it seemed unreasonable, it was the only reasoned path to remove Abbas’ hand from having any influence upon this perilous tide of Arab entry into the nation. It has been noted that Shaked’s bargain was once before met a few years back by Deri.
I don’t know if this is true, and if it was true, I also don’t know the circumstances that cause this bargain to be struck – like many bargains that have been forced upon the State, such as the settlement freeze, no payment in Zionist capital is likely to have been made by the Zionists without some impetus behind it. If maintaining the gov’t was the only force causing Deri to strike this bargain, however, it would only be well reasoned to have oppose it, as it was here.
But a more careful consideration of this comparison would display the current matter was a different thing to any that has come before it. Any fool could deduce that this bill would provide the only currency that Abbas would accept as payment for his Brotherhood’s support of any Zionist measure by this gov’t in the future. And as this gov’t unfortunately decided to barter on this point so soon into this experiment, it proved the Right’s concerns as valid and made it’s blockage paramount.
A statue should be struck in tribute to those members of the Brotherhood, whose pivotal defiance to their Dentist’s will, made it possible to stop this bargain from being fulfilled.
/2
(1 of 2)
@Edgar
In truth, I was shocked by the report when Meretz released the news about the 3000 families. Since Meretz was the only one talking at the time, I placed a great deal of caution about the veracity of their tale. And then I heard Chikli, who was going to support the bill had decided to oppose it, and I realized this fantasy painted by Meretz was actually the nightmare that was first related as possible by Rothman when he described his purpose in drafting the reformed bill to allay the Right’s distrust in this gov’t.
Having finally heard a fair explanation of the concerns that motivated the Right to object to the renewal this Zionist measure, namely that it allowed a great deal of latitude to the Interior Minister, their concerns infected my interpretation of these matters and I too came to share their perception that this renewed law could too easily lead to an increase in the Arab demography within the Jewish State’s citizenry.
And though many suggested that it should not be used as a device to attack Bennett, I saw great merit in restricting any potential abuse of this topic as it’s strict interpretation held the key to Jewish dominance in the state.
And yet, Shaked held this post. Though I fairly esteemed her to be a good judge of reason, ever worrisome, it appeared, about the consequences of her actions in supporting this bold experiment, it was only to be expected that the imbalanced burden that was needed to maintain this gov’t, failing the Heredi defections, would ultimately fall upon her shoulders to oppose it. Yet, the strict interpretation about the management of this law would most certainly become the point of leverage about which Abbas might be swayed to support Bennett whenever his support was necessary – and the deep opposition between Bennett and the Right would show this might be more often than not.
/1
BTW, the content of the law was exactly the same even in the compromise bill
Shaked only tried the compromise deal AFTER all the efforts to convince the opposition to support the citizenship law had failed.
Also, the number of families who would receive the visas under the compromise extension would be the same (as she announced) as the number of families which were approved in the Netanyahu government by Arye Deri (the former Interior Minister).
So it is completely disingeniuous (to say the least) for the opposition to claim to be enraged by the traitorous content of the citizenship law which ’til the last moment Shaked was trying to bring to the vote with no changes or compromises at all.
It looks like Netanyahu is drowning and pulling his party and possibly all the opposition parties under with himself – they must suffer an absolute defeat in the next elections whenever these may come because of their dirty politics and their total lack of concern for their country.
Shaked is reduced to bribing Jew Haters with Israel citizenship; to all the goodies they don’t get with the corrupt mafia-like PA….
She has fallen to a new low. I had a lot of respect for how she handled the Justice Ministry, but of course then, Netanyahu was the PM. She seems to have completely lost her direction since she clung to Bennett’s defection from the Right Wing. She castigates Smotrich, a dedicated Zionist, when it is she who has been at fult.
I think that Adam is not correct in his assumptions. There is much more to it than has been reported, and as Dichter has revealed. I think this was only the tip of the iceberg. Instead of getting the Jew Haters OUT of Israel Shaked and Co, wanted not only to bring in 3000more Jew Hating families, butto add another 1600 as well. CRAZY !!
Interesting
(2 of 2)
Hence, in summary, we find that all the opposition-Zionists voted as one Behind Bibi, but each of them can be said to have taken the ominous responsibility of voting down this Zionist measure, independent of the others, as the simple reality exists that any one of them, actually just one of any of them would have secured the passage of the bill. Thus they were of a single mind to stop this measure from passing – Zionists blocking a Zionist-bill.
So your criticism is fairly labeled but should not be limited to any leaders among them, as this was a effort of each member’s will and it was only successful because these Zionist members were of a single mind – to stop Bennett’s anti-Zionist gov’t even at the cost of this Zionist-bill, regardless of the consequences, which could be significant depending of course on what comes next. Since Bennett now has Likud on record, all that remains to be decided is what path this PM will choose to follow as it is his gov’t.
As a Zionist, he can not leave it sit unaddressed. Hence, he might support the opposition and their Zionist reform of this law to finally create an end to this band-aid called Family-Reunification at the expense of enraging his gov’t partners? Or he might choose to sweeten the bribe with some uncomfortable anti-Zionist compromise to gain the full support of the Brotherhood for the existing law – perhaps he might address the reform mentioned to be made in 6months and deal with this thorny matter now to gain their support in this matter.
Likud have now made their threats certain to a man, but the question still remains, as it did before the distraction of this ridiculous vote today, what path will Bennett as Prime Minister choose to walk – with the Zionists or the anti-Zionists.
Apologies in advance to those who think I mean to belittle or besmirch Bennett’s motives as I do not, but this is a fair analysis of the matter, I believe. Bennett’s bold experiment of including the anti-Zionist factions into offices of authority placed an imbalanced burden upon him to puzzle through a seemingly irreconcilable riddle: How to create a solution to the inconsistent support of the relatively significant (1/6) anti-Zionist factions in his gov’t.
Hence, this current matter, like all the future Zionist matters, was inevitably to arrive at this very moment of decision on how to remedy this irksome detail. Indeed, it is a statement of his abilities to have lost this measure by only 1 vote, but I will note that I see thousands of additional Arab Israelis as a distasteful solution to this problem that will be a very routine dilemma.
Hence, I for one have always been uncomfortable with the possibilities that could result from this issue, but we shall see soon enough how Bennett means to squares this circle.
/2
(1 of 2)
It is true, unless Bennett takes up the threat that was made earlier to defy his partners and pass the law that Likud proposed. But then, this is exactly the course that Bennett should have chosen, given Bennett’s inability to gain his partners full support for even a 6-month measure with the admittance of thousands additional Arabs gaining Israeli citizenship.
In truth, I am puzzled why Bennett chose to hold this vote as he had to know he would lose in this contest and display a lack of authority over his own members, while Bibi was able to display a unflinching resolve to maintain their position – I think this solid support on this point will come to aid Bibi rather than hurt him(just an opinion of course). It did have the political windfall for Bennett of making Likud prove their threats as sincere, but this is only a point of politics which would only be important should a return to elections be chosen – something to think about.
Thus, I believe, this was not the best path forward for Bennett, but it did display his continued adoption of bold moves and even as the vote was razor close, it failed to pass, and he had to know this would be the ultimate result in this matter. Still, the closeness of this vote today was revealing of many things, but not the least of these was the fact that the Right stood up to this move by Bennett to co-opt their support to pass what his own Gov’t would not.
And as you describe it accurately, Zionists stood against a Zionist bill, while many of the non-Zionists supported the Zionist bill. With all of this mental fog seeming to contaminating the judgement of reasonable men/women, a question comes to mind: Amid a party challenge to Bibi’s continued leadership, why did none of the challengers, such as Barkat or Katz or Edlestein, break with this seemingly anti-Zionist standard that, as many would like to suggest, was created by an incensed Netanyahu’s irrational move to defeat former allies who chose to sit with the likes of Horowitz and Abbas to defeat him.
For Bibi, it was a hard moment to lose like that, and it could be conjectured that it could be an easy thing for someone enduring such an ignoble defeat to respond without rationale thought as rage can often warp good judgements. And yet, the Right stood as one with this supposed irrational leader, even amid a growing contest within the Likud. Perhaps, it could be countered that these men feared Bibi’s wrath, but this is easily unconvincing. And then, of course, there is also the matter of Chikli, a known Zionist-ideologue and Yamina-defector, who voted in concert with the supposed irrational Likud members against Bennett and his Zioinist bill – quite a statement.
/1
From today’s Arutz Sheva. I agree with Shaked. Netanyahu, Likud, Jewish Home and the entire right-wing opposition bloc have totally lost their bearings. They are supporting the Arab parties, the PLO and Hamas by voting down the Citizenship law. Now Israel will be deluged with Arab immigrants, all of whom will receive citizenship.