The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy

30-Nov-2008

How To Deal With Islamic Jihad

Filed under: Islam & ArabIntifada & TerrorismUS & Global PolicyUN — eidelberg @ 7:29 am Edit This

A day after 9/11, the present writer pondered the problem of how to deal with Islamic Jihad. Here is a brief scenario.

The President calls in the ambassadors of every Islamic country. He hands them the draft of a message and instructs them to send to it the heads of their respective states. The message reads something like this:

The President of the United States requests that you assemble your religious leaders and inform them that, unless they publicly renounce the ethos of Jihad and abrogate Islamic verses referring to non-Muslims as subhuman, the United States will take the following actions:

  1. The American ambassador to your country will be recalled. (more…)

Mumbai

Filed under: Islam & ArabIntifada & Terrorism — eidelberg @ 7:23 am Edit This

I have been saying this since 9/11, but will say it once more in view of the Mumbai massacre. We need an awesome victory over Islam, lest there be no end of Mumbais.

Islam has cowed Europe. It will cow America, the last hope of civilization.

28-Nov-2008

Why?

Filed under: Foreign PolicyIslam & ArabPoliticians — eidelberg @ 6:48 am Edit This

Few people really understand why Israel, despite its superior military forces, is retreating to her precarious 1949 armistice lines. Before discussing this strange phenomenon, let us review the stages of Israel’s shrinkage or capitulation.

The first shrinkage of Israel was made by Prime Minister Menachem Begin in the Camp David Agreement of September 1978. Begin, a vaunted nationalist, signed away the Sinai to Egypt, a military dictatorship. He also compromised retention of Judea and Samaria by referring to their Arab inhabitants as a “people”—in fact rival Arab clans from diverse countries of the Middle East. Begin ignored this fact, in consequence of which Israel has become a pariah.

The second shrinkage of Israel was made by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in the Israel-PLO Agreement of September 1993. Contrary to his June 1992 election campaign, Rabin virtually surrendered Judea and Samaria to the PLO, a criminal organization cited as such in Israeli law. He even opened negotiations with Syria, a terrorist state, to give away the Golan Heights. Rabin violated his word, reason, as well as the law.

The third shrinkage of Israel was made by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the Wye River Summit of 1998. There he agreed to yield 40 percent of Judea and Samaria to Yasser Arafat, a bloody murderer. (He had already yielded 80 percent of Hebron to that murderer.) (more…)

26-Nov-2008

Democracy and the Secret “Rule of Law” in Israel

Filed under: Constitution & RightsDemocratic MethodsRepresentation — eidelberg @ 5:32 am Edit This

There is much misunderstanding in the Diaspora and even in Israel about Israel’s system of government—an assortment of institutions that endow a few men with concealed and despotic power.

A basic reason for this pernicious state of affairs is Israel, unlike France or the United States, has no written constitution. Instead, Israel has a crazy-quilt variety of “Basic Laws” passed at different times by different governments led by different political parties.

Israel’s first Basic Law, The Knesset, was initiated by the Knesset Law Committee in 1958, ten years after the founding of the State. Some other Basic Laws are Israel Lands (1960); The President of the State (1964); The Government (1968); The State Economy (1975); The Army (1979); Jerusalem, Capital of Israel (1980); The Judiciary (1984).

A word about Basic Law: The Government. This law stipulates, “The Government is competent to do in the name of the State, subject to any law, any act whose doing is not enjoined by law upon another authority.” The Government can therefore declare war, make treaties, and change the exchange rate without ever consulting the Knesset! (more…)

24-Nov-2008

Bibi and Shimon: Odd Bedfellows

Filed under: Islam & ArabOslo/Peace ProcessPoliticians — eidelberg @ 11:58 pm Edit This

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, November 24, 2008.

Shortly after his election as Prime Minister in May 1996, Binyamin Netanyahu addressed a joint session of the United States Congress. There he denied any clash of civilizations between Israel and its Arab-Islamic neighbors. This denial—disingenuous or not—underlies Netanyahu’s current economic plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By building up the Palestinian economy, which of course will be partly dependent on Israel, peace between Jews and Arabs will eventually follow. Netanyahu has joined Shimon Peres, author of The New Middle East.

Before examining the mode thought of these odd bedfellows, note that Netanyahu and Peres are secularists. I mention this because Abdallah al-Tall, an Egyptian spokesman, has said that “The propagandists of secularism, who leave out of account the religious factor in the Palestine problem, ignore the fact that this is the only bone of contention in the world which has persisted for thirty centuries and is still based on religious and spiritual foundations.”

According to the “propagandists of secularism,” economics trumps religion. This, of course, is indicative of a Marxist mode of thought. This mode thought, we shall see, also underlies capitalism, and that’s what links Bibi to Shimon, the author of the Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement which Bibi refused to abrogate. Both are wedded to Oslo. (more…)

An Untried Policy

Filed under: JudaismOslo/Peace Process — eidelberg @ 5:25 am Edit This

An updated version of an article published in 1995.

Countless Jews are appalled or dumbfounded. They cannot understand how a Jewish government, backed the Israel Defense Forces, could give away Judea and Samaria, the sacred heartland of the Jewish people to terrorist thugs.

The Prophets and Sages of Israel predicted that, in the end of days, the Jews would have such a government. They foresaw that Israel would be ruled by “scorners” of the Torah. These scorners, said the Prophet Hosea (12:1-3), will fill Israel with lies and deception. They will strive after wind (“peace”) and make alliances with Israel’s enemies.

The Prophet Isaiah (28:14-18) chastises these insolent Jews. He foretells that they will make a “covenant with death,” but that this pact will not protect them, indeed, that they will be swept away like refuse. Remarkably, the Targum translates this pact with death as a contract with “terrorists” (mechablim)!

Similarly, the Zohar (Exodus 7b) predicts that in the end of days certain Jews in Israel will make an alliance with the enemies of the Jewish people. The Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles fits this dire prediction. (more…)

21-Nov-2008

Mushrooms

Filed under: PoliticiansHumor — eidelberg @ 5:58 am Edit This

Molecular biologists contend that man is descended from mushrooms. Believe it. Some mushrooms have evolved into politicians. They flourish in Israel. Ever seen such bland politicians?

Because mushrooms lack chlorophyll, they’re destitute of color, and, like Israeli prime ministers, they crumble under the slightest pressure.

Mushrooms, of course, are fungi, and many reproduce by asexual means. That’s pretty much the case of Israeli politicians: Israel’s system of proportional representation produces an abundance of sterile politicians.

Some mushrooms are deadly. They’re called “toadstools.” A weird assortment of such fungi populated Israel’s Knesset. The head of the Knesset’s most numerous fungi forms Israel’s cabinet.

Like a toadstool, with its umbrella-shaped cap, the cabinet caps the most ill-assorted fungi. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has been classified as coprinus comatus, the Latin designation of a Horsetail Mushroom. (more…)

19-Nov-2008

Israel’s Disarray

Filed under: Democratic MethodsMulticulturalism/Moral Relativism — eidelberg @ 7:25 am Edit This

Israel today is in a state of political disarray. Established political parties like the National Religious Party are dissolving. Other parties like Labor have become politically comatose. The ruling Kadima Party, formed by political opportunists from other parties, has no ideology apart from multiculturalism. This essentially anti-Jewish party wants to dissolve the State of Israel into “a state of its citizens.”

So does a new left-wing coalition emerging from the ruins of Labor and Meretz. Also emerging is a hodgepodge of reputedly right-wing groups opposed to any further territorial withdrawal, but like others, it lacks a national strategy.

Meanwhile, the Likud, which spawned Kadima, has opened its doors to various national figures to secure its chances of winning the February election. Lacking, however, is confidence that the Likud, under Benjamin Netanyahu, will withstand U.S. pressure to withdraw from Judea and Samaria. After all, the Likud voted against abrogation of the Oslo Accords, and Netanyahu, in addition to surrendering part of Judea and Samaria to the Palestinian Authority at the Wye Summit, also voted for “disengagement” when he was a minister in the Sharon government. So, while he is preferable to Tzipi Livni, serious people wonder whether he has the spine or the stamina to stand up to the United States and its bipartisan support for a Palestinian state?

The preceding is a small fraction of the political chaos now reigning in Israel. (more…)

18-Nov-2008

Alexander Hamilton

Filed under: PoliticiansUS & Global PolicyIranian Threat — eidelberg @ 2:41 am Edit This

Alexander Hamilton was regarded by no less than Talleyrand as the greatest statesman of his age, greater than Pitt, Fox, and Napoleon. Hamilton was not only George Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury, he was, in effect, Washington’s “prime minister.” He wrote most of Washington’s “Farewell Address,” widely regarded as America’s greatest state paper.

Hamilton’s state papers on Manufactures and on a National Bank contributed greatly to America’s ascendancy as the most powerful nation on earth. No less significant are his contributions to The Federalist Papers, whose essays on presidential government are unsurpassed in depth and clarity. Would that Israel had statesmen to assimilate Hamilton’s wisdom and apply it to the reconstruction of Israel’s decrepit system of multiparty cabinet government.

But I have another reason for speaking of Hamilton, especially now in the context of a secret war that has been going on between the United States and Iran since 1979.

Let’s first go back to 1793, when France was under the Directory, which in fact was a military dictatorship. The issue arose as to whether the United States should accord the French government diplomatic recognition. (more…)

John Bolton and Iran’s Development of Nuclear Weapons

Filed under: US & Global PolicyIranian Threat — eidelberg @ 2:32 am Edit This

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, November 17, 2008.

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, is a man of superlative intellect, political integrity and moral clarity. Germany’s President Angela Merkel told President George W. Bush, “I like your ambassador to the UN more than I like mine…. I understand [him] much better than my own. I’ve been thinking about having your ambassador represent Germany.”

What follows is based very much on Chapter 12 of Bolton’s book Surrender is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad (2007). The chapter is entitled “Iran in the Security Council: The EU-3 Finds New Ways to Give In.” EU-3 stands for Britain, France, and Germany—three members of the European Union. Despite Bolton’s heroic efforts, the EU-3 failed to obtain Security Council resolutions calling for serious sanctions against Iran’s nuclear weapons program, a program that violated the International Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Unfortunately, Bolton was encumbered by Colin Powell, secretary of state during George W. Bush’s first term, and Condoleezza Rice, who succeeded Powell during Bush’s second term. Neither of these secretaries of state possessed an adequate understanding of Iran. Iran is the key player of the “axis of evil.” Iranian control of the oil flowing through the Persian Gulf would make it a superpower if this nation of 70 million people produced nuclear weapons. Imagine how Islamism would skyrocket throughout the world if Iran obtained, through its proxies, control of Jerusalem. (more…)

14-Nov-2008

Israel Versus Democrats and Despots

Filed under: Islam & ArabJudaism — eidelberg @ 8:03 pm Edit This

To grasp the world-historical significance of the conflict between Israel and democratic nations now allied with Arab despots, one must identify the great question that has confronted the architects of Western thought since the 16th century: the G-d question.

It was this question that preoccupied the fathers of the secular state: Machiavelli, Hobbes, Spinoza, Rousseau, Marx. It was they who undermined the Biblical tradition and removed religion from the domain of truth. These were the real legislators of the contemporary mind. It was they who educated the educators who now dominate the colleges and universities of the democratic world.

These political philosophers provided the ideological foundations for the separation of religious and public law. It was their mode of thought that permeated the political Zionists who established the secular State of Israel. And now their post-Zionist descendants, under U.S. auspices, are exchanging the Land of Israel to the Arabs for the pottage of “peace.”

Meanwhile, Israel’s secular nationalists, in the Likud, for example. are powerless to prevent this insane treachery, for they, too, have been emasculated by a spiritually vacuous, territorial Zionism. (more…)

Capital Punishment and Abortion

Filed under: EthicsPoliticians — eidelberg @ 6:24 am Edit This

Barack Obama opposes capital punishment. Yet he voted against legislation that would put an end to full-birth abortion. Full-birth abortion means nothing less than “kill the baby”—inflicting capital punishment not on the guilty but on the innocent! Hence, I am prompted to republish an article I wrote three decades ago. The reader should bear in mind however, that wherever the article refers to the “unborn child,” today we must add the “born but unwanted child.”

* * *

In the Mishna we read: “Therefore but a single man was created in the world, to teach that if any man has caused a single soul to perish, Scripture imputes it to him as though he had caused a whole world to perish; and if any man saves alive a single soul, Scripture imputes it to him as though he had saved alive a whole world.”

To avoid misunderstanding, let me state at the outset that, except in extreme cases, I do not advocate capital punishment in Israel at this time. Nor do I regard as correct the Catholic view of abortion. But there is something very curious about the liberal position on these two issues, especially by liberals who advocate the American practice of “abortion on demand.”

Among the arguments against capital punishment is the contention that society has no right to take the life even of the most savage murderer. (more…)

13-Nov-2008

The Pathological State of Mankind

Filed under: EthicsDisengagementMulticulturalism/Moral Relativism — eidelberg @ 6:00 am Edit This

In II Samuel 12:1-4, the prophet Nathan teaches the following parable:

There were two men in one city: the one rich, and the other poor. The Rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds; but the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared; and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own morsel, and drink of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and it was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveler unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him, but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come unto him.

The emotions normally evoked by this parable are anger and compassion: anger toward the rich man, compassion for the poor man.

Suppose, however, that upon hearing Nathan’s parable, a person were to evince anger toward the poor man and compassion for the rich man. (more…)

The Most Dangerous Enemy

Filed under: Iranian Threat — eidelberg @ 5:16 am Edit This

Iran has been at war with the United States and Israel for thirty years—ever since the Iranian Revolution initiated by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. I dare say this is the most far-reaching revolution in human history. Iran is the epicenter of international terrorism. Its ultimate goal, however, is to restore the Persian Empire and spread Shia Islam throughout the world. This is not a mere fantasy.

Iran now controls southern Iraq, including Basra from which Iraq ships its oil through the Strait of Hormuz. All of Iraq will fall to Iran once the Americans leave. Meanwhile, Iran is gaining decisive influence on Syria. Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, virtually rules Lebanon. Hamas is another Iranian proxy, and Tehran has its sights on the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority.

Of global significance, Iran controls the world’s spigot of oil flowing through the Persian Gulf, This nation of 70 million people can wreck the world’s economy. If Iran’s economic power is backed by nuclear weapons—in process of development—Iran will control the Middle East, and much more. (more…)

10-Nov-2008

Five Basic Arguments Against A Palestinian State

Filed under: Democratic MethodsIslam & ArabOslo/Peace Process — eidelberg @ 11:28 pm Edit This

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, November 10, 2008.

Contrary to the governments of the United States and Israel, various experts in both countries reject the “two-state” solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I shall mention their views while developing five decisive arguments against a Palestinian state: Economic, Demographic, Political, Strategic, and Democratic. Let’s begin with the—

1.  Economic Arguments

a.  A RAND study indicates that a Palestinian state would not be economically viable. It would require $33 billion for the first ten years of its existence—and this study was made before the economic crisis now confronting the United States and entire world.

b.  Besides, to confine more than two million Arabs to the 2,323 square miles of the so-called West Bank, and to squeeze another million into the 141 square miles of Gaza, is to doom these Arabs to economic stagnation and discontent. The projected state would be a cauldron of envious hatred of Israel fueled by the leaders of one or another group of Arab clans or thugs parading under the banner of Allah.

c.  Moreover, to compensate perhaps 200,000 Jews expelled from the “West Bank”—or even half that number—would bankrupt Israel’s government, to say nothing of the resulting trauma and civil discord. (more…)

Treason and Multiparty Cabinet Government

Filed under: Foreign PolicyParty StructuresPoliticiansIsrael’s Sovereignty — eidelberg @ 7:41 am Edit This

The present writer is repeatedly asked to discuss the pernicious character of Israel’s system of multiparty cabinet government. Many concerned citizens appalled by a political system in which the cabinet consists of the leaders of five or six or more rival political parties.

It is obvious to my interlocutors that the leaders of such a cabinet, far from being animated by a coherent, resolute, and long-term national program, are primarily motivated by their own personal and partisan interests, which means they compete with each other for political power and a larger share of the public treasury. This self-aggrandizement fosters public cynicism, which of course undermines the people’s confidence in their government.

What is not widely known, however, is that multiparty cabinet government also conduces to treason. To illustrate, let us go back to 1988. A so-called National Unity Government was then in power. The coalition agreement specified that Likud chairman Moshe Shamir would hold the post of Prime Minister for the first two years of the Government’s tenure, that Labor chairman Shimon Peres would be PM for the second two years, and that during Shamir’s tenure, Peres would hold the post of Finance Minister.

Bearing this in mind, let us now recall certain heated altercations that took place in an August 1989 session of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. (more…)

09-Nov-2008

Myths About Science

Filed under: EthicsJudaism — eidelberg @ 6:39 am Edit This

Let’s reflect on some not very well-known facts in the history of science as well as about scientists.

First, the astronomer Hiparchus, who lived in the second century before the common era, calculated the distance of the moon as 30 and 1/4 earth dimensions. That involves an error of a mere 0.3 percent. Not bad.

Second, in the sixth century before the common era, educated men knew that the earth was a sphere. Twelve hundred years later the earth was thought to be a disc.

Third, and more familiar to moderns is the name of Copernicus. Few people know, however, that Copernicus got his idea of a heliocentric (as opposed to a geocentric) universe from Aristarchus who studied the heavens some eighteen centuries earlier. Still less known is the fact that Pope Leo X gave a lecture on the Copernican system contained in The Book of Revolutions. The book was published in 1543. Seventy-three years later the Church, under another pope, placed the book on the Index.

Consider, now, the reputed founder of modern science, Galileo, who brought astronomy down to earth by his mathematization of nature. (more…)

07-Nov-2008

America, Israel, and the Malaise of Democracy

Filed under: US & Global PolicyMulticulturalism/Moral Relativism — eidelberg @ 4:53 pm Edit This

“Labor, Kadima: ‘Republican’ Bibi can’t be Obama’s counterpart”
The Jerusalem Post, November 6, 2008

It is unquestionably legitimate for any native-born American, be he or she black or white, Hispanic or Asian, Christian or Jewish or Muslim, to become the country’s president. Indeed, some wonder whether one need any longer be an American to become the nation’s Chief Executive.

Be this as it may, if all nations were to imitate multicultural America, all would cease to have any distinct national identity. This is the malaise of multicultural democracy, where moral and cultural relativism flourish. This malaise is evident in Israel.

Israel’s left-wing parties, Labor and Kadima, like America’s left-wing dominated Democratic Party, are committed to multiculturalism. This attitude cannot but eventuate in the extinction of their respective country’s heritage. We see this in Europe, with Sweden as the trend-setter. Sweden’s left-wing government recently renounced the country’s Swedish nationality by enacting multiculturalism into law in recognition of Sweden’s East Asian minority.

To appreciate the ascendancy of multiculturalism in Israel, consider the titles of its advocates: (more…)

06-Nov-2008

Biblical Freedom of Speech

Filed under: Democratic MethodsEthicsJudaism — eidelberg @ 6:55 am Edit This

Freedom of speech is a fundamental human value. This value seems to have its home in liberal democracy. In fact, liberal democracy exalts freedom of speech over all other values. Unfortunately, the exaltation of this freedom has led to its degradation. Today freedom of speech lacks rational and ethical constraints. Divorced from truth, freedom of speech has become a license to lie. To redeem and elevate freedom of speech, let us explore its pristine origin, the Bible of Israel.

Recall Abraham’s questioning the justice of G-d’s decision to destroy Sodom: “Peradventure there are fifty righteous within the city; wilt Thou indeed sweep away and not forgive the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from Thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked, that so the righteous should be as the wicked; that be far from Thee; shall not the Judge of all earth do justly?”

G-d permits Abraham to question Him. By so doing, the King of Kings affirms freedom of speech as a fundamental human right. But clearly this right, from a Judaic perspective, can only be derived from man’s creation in the image of G-d. Only because man is endowed with reason and free will does he have a right to freedom of speech. This right, however, must be understood in terms of the purpose or function of speech. (more…)

05-Nov-2008

Truth Versus Democracy

Filed under: Democratic MethodsJudaismUS & Global Policy — eidelberg @ 10:54 pm Edit This

Although democracies are hospitable to philosophy, it does not follow that democracies are truth-oriented. To the contrary, the freedom of speech and press enjoyed in democracies is actually rooted in the denial of truth. If democracies were truth-oriented they would not be tolerant of error. But as everyone knows, tolerance is a fundamental prerequisite of all democratic or pluralistic societies.

The pluralism of which democracies boast is another indication of their lack of truth-orientation. For this pluralism extends to the question of how should man live, and who does not know that democracies tolerate virtually every kind of “life-style”? Thus homosexuality has become as respectable as heterosexuality, and cheating has become a commonplace in high schools and colleges.

Democracies reduce truth to a private possession. Each individual becomes his own source of truth regarding good and bad, right and wrong, just and unjust. This is why public opinion polls have become the standard for public policy. In other words, opinion polls are required in democratic societies because in such societies each man’s opinion is deemed as valid as the next. This equality of opinion, manifested in the principle of “one adult, one vote,” is logically related to the denial of objective truth, the denial of objective standards as to how man should live or how society should be governed. (more…)

      — Next Page »