Media Releases – November 1996
November 1996
November 3, 1996 Except The Lord Build The House
November 5, 1996 Et Tu Rifkind!
November 6, 1996 Hypocrisy Thy Name Is Channel 1
November 11, 1996 Let the Jewish People Decide On Hebron!
November 13, 1996 Arch-Criminal Nadia Matar Arrested For Leading Protesters
November 17, 1996 “You Promised, We Believed, You Betrayed”
November 19, 1996 A Bereaved Mother’s Plea
November 24, 1996 “Confrontation” a la The PLO And The PA
***
Jerusalem, November 3, 1996
“Except The Lord Build The House,
They Labor In Vain That Build It.”
(Psalm 127:1)
The heavens opened up and poured forth a
continuous torrent of rain. It was hardly an inducement
for a large turnout for a scheduled nationalist rally in
downtown Jerusalem in an attempt to counter-balance the
inordinate pressures being brought on Prime Minister
Netanyahu’s new Government. Today the issue was Hebron;
but the implications of any decision made as to that
Ancient Jewish City, affected and had ramifications with
regard to the right of the Jews to Jerusalem, the Jewish
right to live, grow and expand in Judea, Samaria, and
Gush Katif, and yes, even the issue of the safety of Tel
Aviv residents.
There were heavy rains throughout the day,
and it was nothing short of a miracle that as many as 20,000
(according to the low estimate of the intellectual Labor
oriented newspaper “Ha Aretz”), had braved the elements
in order to express their concern and identification with the
brave Jewish Community of Hebron. Intuitively these Jews
felt, as Nadia Matar pointed out when she spoke to this Mass
Rally, that re-deployment by the Israel Army in Hebron
is like the act of the brothers of Joseph when they
threw him into a pit full of snakes and scorpions. The
well known sordid violent record of the volatile Arab
Hebron Community, the center of the Hamas movement in
Israel, bodes ill to the Jews of Hebron in any event,
even if the Israel Army were not to re-deploy. However,
should the re-deployment take place in a manner similar
to that which Peres had formerly agreed to, the Jewish
Community in Hebron would be virtually doomed.
Particularly ominous were the recent Arab riots, where
Palestinian Police used the arms that Peres had given
them under Oslo, to kill and maim Jewish soldiers.
To make arms available to an Arab community which has
a long track record of violence is shocking and
irresponsible. It puts at terrible risk the lives of the women,
children and men of the Jewish Hebron Community, and it
is a crime of such historical magnitude, that there is no
adequate punishment for those responsible for the
predictable consequences which will flow from such
army re-deployment.
In this regard, Rabbi Moshe Levinger, one
of the early pioneers who led the Jewish return to
Hebron after the miraculous victory of
1967, pointed out when he was called upon to address
the gathering, that in all the years he has lived in
Hebron, he had not experienced the fear he now has in
anticipation of the Israel Army’s re-deployment.
Speaker after speaker spoke in a similar vein, including
Rosh Yeshiva Eliezer Waldman, of neighboring Kiryat
Arba, Noam Arnon a leader of the Hebron Jewish
Community, and Nadia Matar of the Women In Green. The
article in HaAretz reporting on the event which appeared
the following day, dwelt mainly on the comments of
Nadia, which won sustained enthusiastic applause from
the audience. Nadia pointed out that the anniversary of
the Nazi Krystalnacht occurred about this time of year,
in early November. Krystalnacht was a forerunner of
the unspeakable horrors of the subsequent Holocaust.
Among other heinous acts, they burned holy books then
too. Heinrich Heine, a famous German author, had
earlier written with great wisdom and foresight: ” One
Who Begins By Burning Books Will In The End Burn People”
Similar to Krystalnacht, there were ominous warning
signals from what occurred throughout the Land of Israel
during the recent widespread Arab riots instigated by
Arafat. One of the more ghastly events occurred at
Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus: a House of Study was burned
down by the Arabs, along with thousands of holy books.
She stressed that the Arabs have exactly the same
attitude towards the Jews and their religion as did the
Germans. To ignore that hatred and bigotry is to invite
disaster.
What Nadia said captured the spirit of what
Chagi Ben Artzi, Netanyahu’s brother-in-law, has been saying,
as widely reported in the press recently. Chagi complained
that Netanyahu was showing unfortunate weakness in
submitting to the overwhelming pressures being brought on
him by America, the Europeans, the local and international
press, the disloyal opposition of Labor led by Peres, and
Meretz and the Peace Now Movement. Nadia, as well,
reminded Netanyahu of his prior statements concerning Hebron:
“Whoever abandons Hebron, abandons not only the security of its
Jewish residents, but also 4,000 years of Jewish History.” She
wisely stated: “We chose you because your intentions, as
reflected by such statements, was in accord with the Jewish
majority. But now is the testing time. The pressures upon
you are great from without and within – at the head of the
anti-Zionist minority stands Shimon Peres, the one who gave
guns to the Arabs that later killed our soldiers. Opposite these
pressures stand the majority of Am Yisrael and begs: Guard
Hebron, the City of the Forefathers, for all generations; do not
break your Covenant with Am Yisrael; do not forget what you
wrote in your books and said in your pre-election speeches.
Do not surrender to murderers.” What Netanyahu would be
doing by adhering to Peres’ Oslo Accords, is giving Hebron
over to the Arabs, as a result of world pressure. He
rationalizes this abandonment of our ancient historical City by
telling us he is bound by the former Government’s
Agreements. However, this is not a valid reason for his
abandonment of the Jewish historical claim to this holy
City, in effect, tearing Hebron away from the
inheritance of Caleb of the tribe of Yehuda, as recorded
in our Bible. History will not judge Netanyahu kindly
if he allows this tragedy to occur.
At the close of the evening, there was
a planned march to the nearby American Consulate on
Agron Street. The rain had temporarily stopped, and
there were a few speeches in English in front of the
Consulate, addressed to President Clinton. Nadia Matar,
among others, spoke again. She urged President Clinton
not to put one-sided pressure on Israel concerning
Hebron, while at the same time completely neglecting
Arafat’s failure to comply with the Oslo Accords. That
the rationale that we can not put pressure on Arafat
because of his unstable position with the Arabs, is an
irrational policy doomed to failure, and leading to
disaster. Furthermore, she reminded President Clinton
of the blatant injustice in not freeing Pollard, and
pleaded with him to pardon him without further delay.
It is incumbent on Jews everywhere, both
here in Israel and those living abroad, to raise their
voices in protest to Prime Minister Netanyahu that he
not surrender our rightful inheritence and claim to this
historical Jewish City. Thousands of years ago, as
reported in the book of Joshua (14: 13,14), Hebron
was captured by Joshua and given over to Caleb
Ben Yefunah for an inheritance. Ironically, the reward
to Caleb Ben Yefunah, one of the two whose
unshakeable faith in the Lord’s Promise to
give the Land of Israel to the Jews, despite the
pressures of the majority of the other ten spies, was
now being given away by Netanyahu to the Arabs, as a
result of world pressure.
U.S. President Bill Clinton, who told us
before the Oslo signing, that he was fortified in his
decision by reading the Book of Joshua, ought to read
that book again. He will find in that book that the
Jews inherited this ancient City from the Lord himself.
Clinton’s role in pressuring Netanyahu to re-deploy from
this City and urging that Peres’ Oslo Accords be
complied with in the name of achieving “peace” with the
Arabs, runs counter to the clear meaning of the Book of
Joshua. How audacious it is for Clinton to imply that
he is basing his support for the Oslo Accords on the
Bible and on the Book of Joshua. How sad it is for
Netanyahu to believe that peace can be achieved by
ignoring the faith and experience of his forefathers,
and the promises of the Lord on High in the Book of
Books. If the Lord’s behest is not synchronized with
any Accord, “they labor in vain”, even though they claim
their work is in search of peace.
Ruth Matar
Top of Page | End of Page | What We Say Index Page | To Home Page
Jerusalem, November 5, 1996
Et Tu Rifkind!
When the history of the Jewish People is
definitively written, it will reveal many harsh
discriminatory practices by the Gentiles of this world
against this unique nation which has survived as no
other People on earth, despite its 2000 year exile from
its Land.
It will unfortunately reveal, as well, several
practices among the Gentile nations which are quite
predictable. Whenever they wish to do Israel in, they
have a Jew living in their land represent them to do the
job. For example, the U.S. uses Dennis Ross and Martin
Indyk for this purpose. It is a fool proof way of
escaping criticism; they can always claim how fair they
are to have a Jew represent them in such “sensitive
matters.” On the other hand, the Jew whom they
appointed for this purpose, can be counted on to be much
harsher and more demanding towards Israel, bending over
backwards to show he in no way favors Israel; at the
same time he feels he must clearly demonstrate how very
loyal he is, no matter how grotesquely unfair and unjust
that Country’s position might be.
Malcolm Rifkind, present British Foreign
Secretary, is a classic example of the Jew placed in
such a role. To begin with, Malcolm Rifkind, from the
statements he has made here on his brief visit to
Israel, clearly shows he no longer has, if he ever had,
any notion of what it means to be Jewish. He is the
typical assimilated English Jew, who must prove to the
English that he is more English than Churchill, and to
clearly demonstrate where his loyalties are, by unjustly
bashing Israel. Thus this “English Jew” has the
temerity to publicly announce that the settlements of
the Jews living in Judea and Samaria are “illegal”,
despite the great weight of legal opinion of experts on
international law which holds to the contrary . So too
are the words of the God of Israel “illegal”, for his
repeated “promises” in the Bible giving this Land to the
Jews. The British Balfour Declaration must similarly be
“illegal”. And the League of Nations in granting the
Jews a homeland, which included Judea and Samaria, also
acted “illegally”. The British Mandate to implement
the establishment of this Jewish Homeland was “illegal”
as well. The Chutzpah of this English-Jewish messenger
apparently knows no bounds. For a Jew or anyone else to
say that Jews cannot live in settlements in Judea and
Samaria, is inciteful, shameful and downright
irresponsible.
But damaging, interfering statements, such as
Rifkind’s, have become commonplace. Chirac, who is not
a Jew, preceded him with such behavior. Netanyahu,
whose timidity in allowing these remarks to be made
without immediately protesting against such hypocritical
outpourings by foreign leaders, must take responsibilty
for the resultant tarnishing of Israel’s image. If
Netanyahu as our leader shows no national pride, what
can we expect from others? As Netanyahu allows Israel
to sink further into the morass of Oslo, and
capitualates on Hebron, it does not help us, even were
he now to justifiably murmur: “Et Tu Rifkind!”
Ruth and Nadia Matar
*
Jerusalem, November 6, 1996
Hypocrisy Thy Name Is Channel 1
Television Station Channel 1 is Government owned.
Public funds, through a special tax on listeners, and
funds directly supplied by the Knesset, enable it to
function. Its huge annual budget is overburdened with
an extraordinary number of “workers”, approximately
1500 of them! Its entrenched personnel are Meretz,
Labor and secular oriented, and its presentation of the
news, and programming reflect their personal likes
and dislikes.
The “Kopatch” affair brought the “defenders of
the faith” out of the woodwork, shouting the usual
lovely phrases which they themselves in daily practice
completely ignore. They protested against the criticism
of the vulgar caricatures of Kopatch in his parody of
the Torah portion on Sabbath evening. “Freedom of
Speech”, “the Continued Independence of the IBA”,
“Religious Coercion”, all the favorite pat phrases of
the left were paraded out. Lost in all the shouting was
the grim hypocrisy of the shouters, and their lack of
honesty.
The sad truth of the matter is that the
Government owned Channel 1 is tightly controlled by a
leftist clique that ruthlessly suppresses the right of
the majority to hear and see what they believe in. When
Rina Shapira, Chairwoman of the Israel Broadcasting
Authority’s Executive Committee, in response to the
attacks on the vulgarity of Kopatch, states: “I believe
this executive unequivocally gives rights of expression
to all groups” she is telling the public a deceitful,
bald faced lie. The showings on Channel 1 today do not
reflect the beliefs of the majority. Labor and Meretz
representatives get a vast disproportionate amount of
coverage, just as they did prior to the last elections.
The content of the television fare is mediocre, lacking
in Jewish content, and revealing the lack of belief in
Judaism of its personnel. Nationalist groups such as
“Women In Green” are deliberately banned from coverage
on its screen, lest they awake in the populace the pride
in their nation, and love of its Biblical Land, and its
history, which this Channel avoids promoting at all
costs; such coverage, they believe, would work against
the Peres-Oslo process which they favor. For example,
Channel 1 deliberately barred showing Women In Green’s
street theater outside the French Consulate protesting
the pro-Arabic Chirac bias. Entirely ignored by Channel
1, French and other European television gave it wide
coverage.
Peres approved IBA Chairman Kirschenbaum, a
Peres advocate, refuses to resign, and allow the new
Government to appoint to this key post someone who
reflects what the majority of the People of Israel want.
Such a resignation would smack of democracy at work! The
prevailing dictatorial views held by the personnel of
Channel 1 and its permissive Chairman, make the chances
slim indeed of such a voluntary resignation taking place.
Ruth and Nadia Matar
Top of Page | End of Page | What We Say Index Page | To Home Page
*************
Jerusalem, November 11, 1996
Let the Jewish People Decide On Hebron!
These are days where the weak of heart and
those of little faith are prominent among the People of
Israel. These “practicalists” offer only certain catastrophe
if their advices are taken; for their advices are founded on
fear and trepidation, are shallow, and cannot withstand close
scrutiny and review. The issue of Hebron is on the table.
Those around Netanyahu, and Netanyahu himself, do not seem to
be able to rise to the occasion; they have not, up to
now, come up with a decision that is consonant with the
dignity and glory of this People whom the Bible has made
into a majestic force in shaping the history of man on
this earth, and the relationship of humans with the only
One Lord on High.
Netanyahu is taking the weak leader’s
cop-out. He is telling the Jewish People, but mostly
America and the world at large, that he feels bound by
the previous Government’s Oslo Accords with Arafat and
the PLO. Accordingly, he says he is willing to redeploy in
Hebron, which means in actuality that he is willing to turn
over the ancient Jewish City of Hebron to Hamas, the PLO
and Arafat. In taking such a stand, he is joining the
leaders of the ten tribes, who, when they were inspecting
the Land in the days of Moses, came back to tell the People
that the Jews could not possibly overcome the local populace
who resided in the Land at the time. Interestingly enough it
was Caleb, from the tribe of Judah, who was in the minority,
and who urged Israel to be faithful to their Lord and his Promise.
He told them that if they demonstrated their faith in
HaShem, they would be able to overcome whatever obstacles
that may seem to them at the time to be insurmountable.
Caleb proved to have the ultimate wisdom, when the Jews indeed
came into the Land, and under Joshua, overcame their powerful foes.
Caleb was rewarded by being given Hebron for an eternal
inheritance; Netanyahu, in contra-distinction, is a man
who appears to have much less faith, and is prepared to
disinherit Caleb and the Jews from Hebron, in our own
times. Netanyahu is going along with the rationale of
Peres and the Goyim that since the Arabs far outnumber
the Jews living in the area, this Jewish City should be
given over to them, with only a token symbolic area to
be kept for the Jews.
The proper perspective, however, is that it
is only within the last 90 years of our 4,000 years of
Jewish History in this Land, that the Arabs have settled
in Hebron, and outnumber the indigenous Jewish population.
These Arabs migrated to Israel because the Jews had built
up this previously barren land. Under a rationale limiting the
rights of people to live in a certain place if they merely
constitute a minority at any given time, the Jews
could never have returned to their Land and rebuilt it
as they have done. Moreover, the Jewish Community is
comparatively small in Hebron, only because it was the
Arabs who are responsible for the small number of Jews
presently living in this Jewish Holy City. The Arabs of
Hebron massacred the Jewish Community in 1929 and drove
out those who survived. In addition, a British Mandate
acting against its own Balfour Declaration of declaring
Israel to be a Jewish Homeland, had restricted the Jewish
Community from naturally expanding and developing in this ancient
Jewish City even prior to that 1929 pogrom, as did unfortunately
the previous Jewish Governments in Israel since 1967.
What Netanyahu refuses to think through is
that the redeployment of the IDF in Hebron, and its
virtual abandonment to Arafat, the PLO and Hamas rule
will not bring “peace” to Israel. Far from it. Not
only will such redeployment expose the existing small
Jewish Community to inordinate exposure to harm and
death, the innate hostility of the existing Arab
community, fomented by adding Arafat and the PLO as
their leaders, can only bring disaster to the
possibility for peace there or anywhere else in Israel.
Hebron is the litmus. If a workable arrangement cannot
be set up there, it will not work anywhere. And it will
not work there, if the arrangement contradicts what is
clearly written in the Bible. Doesn’t disaster always
result when there is not adherence to what our
forefathers taught us to be His Divine teachings? You
cannot take the Jewish City of Hebron and give it to
Arafat, and expect that something good will result from
this betrayal of faith.
It appears inexplicable why Netanyahu has
failed to insist on the reciprocity he previously urged
as necessary, before proceeding further under Oslo.
However, the very least you would expect Netanyahu to
do, faced with such an unworkable, and seriously
breached Oslo Accords on the part of the Arabs, is to
turn to the People of Israel and let them decide; It
should be left to them by referendum to determine
whether they truly believe, as Ben Gurion did, that
“the Bible is their Mandate” as to Hebron. When
Netanyahu stated that his Government would be bound by
the Accords the previous Government signed, subject to
the necessary security arrangements for the continued
existence of the Jewish Community of Hebron, he got
nowhere with Arafat. Whatever legitimate security
precautions he would be seeking would never be accepted
or adhered to. Arafat is not proceeding in good faith, and any
provisions for security that does not allow for the IDF
to be in complete control of the situation spells
disaster. A security dependent in the slightest way on
Arafat’s good will and intentions is doomed from its
inception.
It should be stressed that neither Rabin nor
Peres entered into the Oslo Accords wherein sections of
the ancient Land of Israel were relinquished to the PLO
and Arafat without ever having the mandate of the Jewish
People to so act. Nothing in the platform of the Labor
Government on the basis of which Rabin was elected even
hinted about such an abandonment of important segments
of the Jewish Homeland by the acts of a Jewish
Government. So the fact of the matter is that the
People of Israel never had an opportunity to sanction
what took place under Oslo, until the elections of May
1996 took place. In those elections however, they
turned out of office the very Government who had entered
into Oslo, and a fair interpretation of their actions
would be that they rejected both the architect of Oslo,
and Oslo itself in its present form, and the one sided
way it was being carried out by the parties thereto.
Rabin himself, during the time he was Prime
Minister, had pledged to the Israeli public that he
would have such a referendum decide any Agreement with
regard to the Israel giving up any portion of the Golan.
It would seem therefore that Netanyahu had a precedent
to hold such a referendum with regard to giving up on
part of our ancient Homeland. In addition, he can
rightfully claim his mandate from the Jewish People in
the last elections, supported his decision to turn to
them at this time for this referendum.
There is no doubt that Netanyahu has
capitulated to pressure. Of his own announced prior
convictions, there is little doubt he did not believe
in the efficacy or wisdom of turning this ancient Jewish
City over to the Arabs. What he obviously lacks
is having the necessary strength to stand by his
convictions in the face of pressure from the “Goyim” who
never have, nor never will, act on the basis of what is
good for the Jewish People to survive with dignity. The
risks involved the Goyim are willing to take, since those
risks only involve “Jewish” lives; the Holocaust has
shown us that the nations are not prepared to do anything
to prevent a repeat of such an horrendous eventuality. What is
deplorable is that we have a Jewish Prime Minister and a
Jewish Defense Minister who are willing to take unnecessary
risks, knowing full well in advance that the results are known
at the outset, and that innocent Jewish blood will once
again flow incessantly. Such leadership on the part of
Netanyahu is weak, shameful and irresponsible. He does not
deserve the support of the majority of the Jews who
elected him if he persists in this mindless, myopic cave-in.
It is a Ghetto Jew’s response to the Goyim’s dictates. It
is not the appropriate action of a Jewish leader who
must look beyond the immediate problems of the hour, and
tackle as well the long range aspirations of this ancient
Jewish People, as they rebuild their future with hope, faith
and confidence, in their own Homeland.
Ruth Matar
Top of Page | End of Page | What We Say Index Page | To Home Page
Jerusalem, November 13, 1996
Arch-Criminal Nadia Matar Arrested For Leading Protesters
More and more there is a startling resemblance
between the Netanyahu Government and the suppressive
regime of Shimon Peres, and the ordinary citizen will
find it increasingly difficult to distinguish between
them. Netanyahu’s words and promises are quite
different than the positions which Peres held, yet
with regard to deeds, it becomes increasingly hard to
notice any real change since Netanyahu has become
Prime Minister.
The Police were a notorious instrument which
Peres often used to suppress dissent and criticism of
his regime. Netanyahu is using this same tool against
Jews, as well as the anti-civil rights weapon of
Administrative Detention. The tactics employed by the
police today against Women In Green were hardly
distinguishable from when Peres held sway.
Early this morning, Women In Green held a
“surprise” demonstration outside the home of Netanyahu
in Bet HaKerem in Jerusalem. The demonstration was
novel, in that Women In Green, for the first time,
harshly criticized Netanyahu. The Women deplored his
apparent “cave-in” on Hebron, going against all his
statements and promises prior to the recent elections,
relating to the Biblical City of Hebron, and its
ancient Jewish roots. The great bulk of that city
is being given to Arafat and the Hamas oriented
hostile Arabs, together with guns, and the bulk of the
Jewish property that was stolen from the Jews during
the 1929 Arab pogrom. Such a move will inevitably
lead to further spilling of Jewish blood, and severely
restrict the normal growth and development of that
important Biblical City where the graves of the
founders of Judaism are located.
Police reaction was brutal. They arrived in a
force well exceeding the number of protesters, which
included special “riot” squads. They manhandled the
ladies, pushing and shoving them forcibly into police
pens which hid them from view, some distance from
where they had been peacefully standing adjacent to
Netanyahu’s residence. At the end of the brief
demonstration, they arrested one of the ladies whom
they previously had knocked to the ground; they
singled out Nadia and took her in a police car with
her four month old baby son “Yisrael Amichai” for
“questioning.” After Nadia was “interrogated” they
were prepared to let her go, provided she sign a bond
for her possible re-appearance. On advice of counsel
she refused to sign such a bond; she was therefore
formally arrested, and subsequently released. All
this took place under the very nose of Netanyahu, who
was home but refused to receive the Women In Green,
nor a letter they wanted to deliver to him; he thus
can’t claim that he was unaware of such brutal police
tactics. Shades of Mr. Peres! For Shame, Mr.
Netanyahu!
Ruth Matar
******
Jerusalem, November 17, 1996
“You Promised, We Believed, You Betrayed”
There is a big problem facing the nationalist
camp today. On the one hand, there is widespread
recognition that the change of Government was
beneficial to the principles of Zionism that were in a
rapid process of abandonment by the previous Rabin-
Peres Government. On the other hand, the Government
of Netanyahu has so far been a great disappointment in
its failure to carry out by concrete deeds what it
professed to believe in both before and after the
elections. All the arguments and rationalizations for
the lack of action are well known. It was still too
early, Bibi has been in office such a short time, we
must wait and give him a chance; the pressures on him
from both outside and inside are tremendous; his
coalition partners themselves are not a cohesive group,
each seeking their own selfish ends, which do not give
him the kind of support necessary to make bold
decisions; and, his own party, the Likud, is terribly
fragmented idealistically, and has several important
members in it who are weak in nationalistic feeling,
and are indistinguishable from Peres in their way of
thinking. In addition, there are unfortunately many
signs that Netanyahu himself is not a strong enough
leader, not in faith, nor conviction, and all too ready
to bow to the “nations,” especially America, to be
liked by them personally as one of the “boys,” etc.,
etc.
Nevertheless, there are crucial decisions being
made, even by inaction, or just going along with the
Oslo process in the same way that Peres had done:
no insistence on reciprocity, no demanding fulfillment
of obligations of Arafat & Co. under Oslo, which have
not been honored, and constitute serious breaches
on their part of those Agreements. It does not need
any great intelligence to understand that not taking a
firm stand now on strict compliance with the obligations
undertaken by Arafat, will bring on repercussions
creating problems that are not solvable with regard to
dealing with Jerusalem, and the rest of the Oslo
Accords. The nature and kind of redeployment in Hebron
involves ominous and dangerous risks, including the
risk of virtually abandoning a vital part of historic
Eretz Yisrael to hostile forces who seek the
destruction not only of the Jewish Community in Hebron,
but the entire State of Israel. Certainly we can wait
no longer, when all the indications are that by
silence, and not criticizing Bibi, we are blindly
showing support for a man who has not at all proven
himself as yet to be a strong and inspirational leader,
even taking into account the great difficulties he is
facing. Too much is at stake to be silent. While we do
not in any way wish to partake in bringing this
Government down, we have decided that it is beneficial
to the national cause to raise our voices in vigorous
protest when we see the ominous signs of the direction
which this present Government is taking. Accordingly,
we decided to take decisive action in criticizing
Netanyahu for his failure to date to carry out what he
had promised our Jewish People.
Therefore, early Wednesday morning, November
13, 1996, Women In Green held a “surprise” demonstration
outside the Netanyahu home in Bet HaKerem in Jerusalem.
The Prime Minister was scheduled to depart to address a
large Jewish Federation Audience in Seattle the following
day, and our Women wanted to remind him about his
promises about Hebron before he left, as the media kept
telling us that the signing of an Agreement with Arafat
concerning Hebron was imminent.
In April of this year, prior to the elections, Netanyahu
had unequivocally stated in an interview with Israeli radio
station Arutz 7: “I believe in our inviolable right to this Land,
and the right to settle it, and our obligation to concern
ourselves with security issues in any negotiations that
may come about. I say “may” because I emphasize that
there will only be negotiations with the Palestinians
if they honor their obligations to fight terror and
change their Covenant. If they don’t we feel no
obligation to talk with them.
Q: In case you assume office when most of Hebron is
still in our hands, will you withdraw the IDF from the
city?
A: I repeat, they didn’t fulfill their obligations,
and I see no reason to withdraw from Hevron….It is
the City of the Patriarchs and the site of Judaism’s
most ancient settlement in the world. The Agreement…
should never have been made for these reasons alone.
I’ll add another factor…Hebron has the biggest
concentration of Hamas activists, so that if only from
a purely ‘security’ aspect, it is clear that we may not
allow ourselves to withdraw from Hebron. Therefore,if
Hevron will remain in our hands, it will not happen.”
One of our signs, which appeared in color on
the front page of the Jerusalem Post the following day,
in a report of the Women In Green demonstration,
proclaimed: “You Promised, We Believed, You Betrayed.”
That brief message stated concisely the theme of our
protest that morning.
The demonstration was novel, in that Women
In Green, for the first time, harshly criticized Netanyahu.
We deplored his apparent “cave-in” with regard to the
Biblical City of Hebron, which Netanyahu heretofore
eloquently spoke about; moreover, he had promised
that if Hebron had not been turned over to Arafat, and
he was elected, “it will not happen.” Now it appears that
the great bulk of that city was being given over to Arafat
and the Hamas oriented hostile Arabs, by Netanyahu,
together with the Jewish property that was stolen from the
Jews during the 1929 Arab pogrom in Hebron. In addition,
Netanyahu is giving them more guns, and allowing the
creation of a Hamas oriented Police force in this
ancient Jewish City, despite what we recently
experienced with Arab Police during the recent riots at
the end of September, where 15 of our soldiers were
killed and many seriously wounded by guns supplied to
them by the Rabin-Peres Governments. Such moves are
not only a breach of faith with the Lord’s promise to
the Jews concerning the Land of Israel; Women In Green
further pointed out that such a turnover of Hebron to
Arab control would inevitably lead to further, and
continuous, spilling of Jewish blood. As Nadia Matar
has said previously, the IDF redeployment in Hebron was
tantamount to throwing the Jewish Community of Hebron
into a pit of vipers and snakes, just as in Biblical
times, his brothers had acted to Joseph. In
Netanyahu’s own words: “Hebron has the biggest
concentration of Hamas activists, so that only from a
purely ‘security’ aspect, it is clear that we may not
allow ourselves to withdraw from Hebron.” The facts
are blatantly clear; Hamas will not allow the Jews to
peacefully live in the holy Jewish City of Hebron.
The demonstration was deliberately held
without prior notification to the media or the police.
It was kept under 50 protesters so that there was no
legal need to apply for a permit and thus alert the
police and Netanyahu. Despite the short notice, the
media turned out in full force. After all, it was big news:
Women In Green were demonstrating against Netanyahu? They
who had fought so hard to elect him?!
Police reaction was brutal. They arrived
in a force well exceeding the number of protesters,
including special “riot” squads. They manhandled the
ladies, pushing and shoving them forcibly into “police
pens,” and put them where they were hidden from view,
some distance from where they had been peacefully
holding their vigil, adjacent to Netanyahu’s residence.
All this took place under the very nose of Netanyahu,
who was home, but who refused to receive the Women In
Green, nor a letter they wanted to deliver to him;
thus he can not claim he was unaware of the brutality
the police exhibited towards our women that morning.
Two of our women, including Women In Green leader NADIA
MATAR, were arrested and later released on bail.
Shades of Shimon Peres? For Shame Mr. Netanyahu?!
Ruth Matar
Top of Page | End of Page | What We Say Index Page | To Home Page
Jerusalem, November 19, 1996
A Bereaved Mother’s Plea:
Please know that the issue of “IDF Freedom of
Action” in all parts of Hebron that now delays the
signing of the accord between Israel and the
Palestinian Authority has little to do with the four
hundred Israeli citizens who live in the center of
Hebron.
From my own tragic experience, the matter of
“IDF Freedom Of Action” concerns all potential
murderers who are not being pursued by the IDF, and
who have been afforded “havens of hospitality” by the
Palestinian Authority.
Speaking personally, my son David, age 16, was
murdered by Palestinian terrorists while coming home
from school on May 13, 1996. The IDF could not
extricate the killers, who escaped into the cities under
the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.
Yet despite the fact that Israeli and American
intelligence officials have informed me as to the name
and the whereabouts of at least one of my son’s killers,
the Palestinian Authority refuses to punish him, or to
hand him over to the Israeli Authorities as required
by the Oslo Accords.
What makes matters worse is that Arafat’s press
spokesman himself announced on October 8, 1996
that none of the nineteen murderers of Israelis who
have taken refuge in the PA areas will ever be
handed over for trial, Oslo Accords notwithstanding.
The question remains: Under such circumstances,
will Hebron become another haven of refuge to which
killers of Jews, from all over the country, may escape?
The issue of “IDF Freedom Of Action” is not in
any way merely of hypothetical concern, nor is it
confined exclusively to the fate of four hundred Jews
in Hebron.
Please understand that what happened to our
family could happen to any Israeli citizen, wherever
they live. The IDF must be allowed the prerogative of
“Freedom Of Action” against terrorists who escape to
a new “city of refuge” for killers in Hebron.
Fax Prime Minister Netanyahu today! Demand
that he remain resolute on this issue of “IDF Freedom Of
Action” in Hebron. His Fax No. Is: 02 – 566 4838.
Joyce Boim
************
Jerusalem, November 24, 1996
“Confrontation” a la The PLO And The PA
The headline caption of the news report read
unobtrusively enough. It announced that the
Palestinian Authority and the PLO had devised a
“Confrontation Plan” against settlement expansion.
What that meant in practical terms showed itself very
quickly when Arabs invaded the yet undeveloped hills of
the town of Efrat, in Judea, even before the above
report surfaced in the newspapers. They came with
bulldozers and clubs to the Hill of Zayit, which the
Court had already established was Jewish land, and
where the authorized building of residential dwellings had
already been in progress for some time. When the Police and
army were advised of this attempted Arab invasion, the
Arabs were quickly dispersed, but not before shouting violent
threats and epithets against the Jews. The “peaceful”
message these Arabs addressed to the Jews of Efrat was: “We
know where you live, and we will come and kill you.”
The Police did nothing to prosecute such violent
verbal offenders, since instructions from above
apparently were not to “upset the Arabs”, in order not
to jeopardize the “peace process.”
Outside my home in Jerusalem (within the so-
called “green line”) there are a few ancient olive trees.
Looking out my window, I observed several Arab women and
children recklessly climbing these fragile trees, breaking
branches in the process of mercilessly beating the
trees so that the olives would fall and become more
easily available for their gathering, at the expense of
the life and beauty of the tree. The phenomenon of
this invasion by Arabs during the olive season is quite
common in Jewish neighborhoods. Jews who would dare to pick
anything from trees in Arab neighborhoods, would do so at
the risk of losing their very lives. When I came out and
requested that these Arab women not break the branches of
this ancient tree, and suggested that with a ladder they
could pick the olives without causing damage, they shouted
back the now widespread battle cry that appears to have become
part of their common parlance towards Jews: “We know
where you live, and we will come back and kill you.”
Here again, as if carrying out a national policy, the
Police who were called, did nothing to punish those who
had used these verbal ominous threats of violence, merely
disbursing them, and sending them on their way.
The above are not isolated incidents, but
rather are occurring with increased frequency throughout
Israel, Judea, Samaria, and Gush Katif in the Gaza strip.
There is nodoubt about it, that the Arabs know that the Jews
will not normally react violently to such “provocations”, and
at the worst, Arabs will only be peacefully “turned away”,
if and when the Police are called. What would invoke physical
violence on the part of Arabs were the Jews to do the same sort
of acts in Arab controlled areas, has now become the official
announced policy of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority.
“Confrontation”, rather than amendment of the PLO Charter
calling for the destruction of, and violence against, Israel, has
now formally been adopted as a tactic by the Arab
leadership. Netanyahu is on the defensive, and has become
intimidated by Arab accusations that he is a Jewish nationalist,
bent on maintaining a Zionist Jewish State, and promoting
Jewish growth and development in Judea, Samaria and the
Jewish Gaza Strip. Would that it were true! How
wonderful it would be if Netanyahu turned out to be a
strong faithful Zionist, unashamedly asserting the Jewish right
to build and develop the Biblical Land of Israel, and backing
his words by actual deeds. Unfortunately, in the face of Arab,
Peres-Meretz, and expected world adverse reaction, Netanyahu has
been treading water to date, and has done nothing to
show he is a Zionist; he has virtually gone along with
the Peres formula for peace, which amounted to continuous
concessions to the Arabs. Peres and Rabin had turned over
large sections of the historic Land of Israel, to persuade the
Arabs not to act in their usual violent manner. Now Netanyahu,
on the pretext that Peres had already committed the Jews by
the Oslo Accords, is preparing to turn over the bulk of
Hebron to Arafat. With regard to Hebron, Netanyahu
has forgotten his pledge to the People that he will require
full compliance with the Arab obligations under Oslo,
before Israel will be further obligated under those
Accords. His approach on Hebron is just another form
of the prior Peres policy of appeasement to the Arabs,
proceeding, without first requiring concrete proof on
their part that they are indeed seeking a peaceful
solution with the Jews of Israel.
This policy of appeasement has not and will
not work with the Arabs. Witness the new PLO, PA policy of
“confrontation.” Arafat has learned from the intafada
experience that violence pays, and brings about more concessions.
There is never any appreciation for any of the concessions made.
No nation on this earth has previously done what Israel
has, to voluntarily give up large portions of its
historic Country. Rather, there is increased hatred of
the Jews being taught in their school systems, in their
Mosques, and broadcast on a television and radio
network which Israel has given to the PA and PLO.
Not peace, but Arafat’s praise of violence against
Jews is what is being taught among the Arabs.
President Clinton has attempted to wage
war on terrorism, and has invited the leading nations
of the world to participate in this campaign, purportedly
initiated at the Sharm El Sheik conference on terrorism.
Yet, he too, and the other member nations, are completely silent
in the face of Arafat’s and his underlings’ continued virulent
incitement to terror, calling for jihad, stone throwing
and worse, against Jews.
No lasting peace can emerge from such a
background. Sweeping under the carpet, and ignoring
dangerous signs of present and future Arab violence,
both with regard to Hebron, Jerusalem, and all other
areas in the Land of Israel where Jews reside,
including Tel Aviv, is a Chamberlain approach that invites
certain disaster. We have a problem, a real problem,
and the sad fact is that avoiding facing up to the
realities will bring pain and suffering not only to Jews
who are nationalistic, but also to the Labor-Meretz oriented Jews
amongst us. History has taught us, that hatred of Jews
by our enemies, and violence towards them, is not confined to
those who practice Judaism, and oppose appeasement.
When the violence comes, as we saw in Germany and
elsewhere, it attacks all Jews; in our long history,
the enemies of the Jews never distinguished between
Jews; those Jews who identified with the Arab Cause,
will not be spared. We should have learned by now
that we can not rely on anyone but ourselves.
No doubt about it, we could resolve the problems
that now face us much more easily if we were united in
the belief in ourselves, and in our inalienable right
to the Land of Israel. But resolve it we will. We have
faced worse problems in our long history both in Galut, and
here in the Land of Israel; with pride in ourselves, belief
in our Biblical destiny, and with the necessary wisdom,
fortitude, and faith, WE SHALL OVERCOME!
Ruth Matar