The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy

Judea and Samaria activist Yechiel Leiter, a possible candidate on the Likud Party list in the February elections, is promoting a plan that calls for immediate steps that will lead to the annexation of 50% of Judea and Samaria.

Since Leiter has served as an adviser to Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu, it’s reasonable to assume that his proposed plan expresses Netanyahu’s position. If so, this plan corresponds to Netanyahu’s policy of “reciprocity” in dealing with the Palestinian Authority.

What is more significant, however, is that Leiter’s plan—he’s religious—may be a political consequence of Netanyahu’s secular mentality, manifested in a statement he made before a joint session of the United States Congress shortly after becoming Israel’s Prime Minister in May 1996. There he baldly denied any “clash of civilizations” between Israel and her Arab-Islamic neighbors.

This denial reflects a widespread inability in the secular democratic world to acknowledge the true nature of Islam. By the “true nature of Islam” I mean the demonstrable fact that Islam is, in the words of Bat Ye’or, a “culture of hate”— (more…)

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…)

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…)

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…)

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…)

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…)

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…)

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…)

In view of the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of America’s two major political parties, and regardless of the outcome of the November election, I urge Christian Zionists, religious Jews, and those dedicated to the Natural Rights doctrine of the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution to form a new political party—to organize branches in every State of the Union to compete in the midterm elections of 2010.

Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President

Did those of you who are old enough thrill to these words of President John F. Kennedy: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

Alas, they are unknown or forgotten by Kennedy’s Democratic Party, now headed by Senate majority leader Harry Reid and House majority leader Nancy Pelosi, who, in the midst of our war in Iraq, have vilified America’s commander-in-chief. Does this treacherous attitude trouble Americans?

It troubles the present writer, a former officer in the United States Air Force. I am dismayed by the new and unpatriotic Democratic Party that has arisen in America. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when America’s new Democrats compare Barack Obama with John F. Kennedy—Obama, so anxious for the United States to turn tail and withdraw American forces from Iraq. This is the same Obama that regards Iran, a nation of 70 million people, as a mere “nuisance.”

(This play-actor does not know that Iran is well-positioned to annex Iraq. He does not know that the combination of Iran’s current production of 4.21 million barrels of oil a day with Iraq’s 6 mullion would enable Iran to out-produce Saudi Arabia. He does not know that a 50 percent cutback of this oil would utterly collapse America’s shaky economy for which his party is primarily responsible. Goodbye Oprah!) (more…)

Dear Friends:

Here is an admittedly desperate message.

Please try to make contact, directly or otherwise, with Professor Henry Kissinger and urge him to announce publicly his support of Senator John McCain for President of the United States.

Please do not respond by saying this is far-fetched. Of course, I could mention other notable Americans who know that Barack Obama is not qualified for the office he seeks—as has been said by black ministers who are spreading the truth about the junior senator from Illinois.

I simply ask you to make an effort to get this message to Dr. Kissinger. He certainly knows what is at stake in the November election.

Thank you.
Prof. Paul Eidelberg

If you are wondering why the deluge of information about Obama’s shady past has not eliminated him from the presidential race;

If you are wondering why Obama may become America’s next president despite voluminous evidence of his being a liar and a fraud;

Let me reveal the secret underlying this grotesque state of affairs.

We are living in a postmodern world where truth and falsity are no longer relevant. In Barack Obama postmodernism (moral relativism) unites with the modernism that began with Machiavelli, who deified the self—the self-creating self that dispensed with the verities of the Bible. (more…)

Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, says, “Every [American] citizen interested in our survival as a free and safe country should read [Norman Podhoretz] World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism, 2007, 2008.”

I fully agree, and would only add, please do so before the November election.—Paul Eidelberg

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey express the highest praise for Norman Podhoretz’s book World War IV: The Long Struggle Again Islamofascism (NY: Vintage: 2007, 2008).

Iran, a nation of 70 million people, is the epicenter of Islamofascism. Its government may deploy nuclear weapons in less than a year. Senator Barack Obama regards Iran as a mere “nuisance.” This is enough to indicate that an Obama presidency would be disastrous.

Obama is so infatuated with his oratorical skills that he thinks he can persuade Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to halt Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. The junior senator of Illinois Obama ignores the fact that five years of American and European diplomacy and sanctions have only given Iran five more years to develop a nuclear arsenal. (more…)

Herbert Marcuse was the philosopher of the New Left, which surfaced in academia in the 1960s and has since permeated American higher education.

Marcuse’s philosophy is an amalgam of existentialism and Marxism with a dash of Freud. I limit myself to existentialism which more readily solves the mystery of Senator Barack Obama.

The most well-known existentialist in the 20^th century was Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre was a moral relativist who chose to become a Marxist—not because Marxism is true, but because he deemed Marxism a convenient suit for the “nothingness” of his soul—a tabula rasa inherently devoid of identity. Sartre is famous for his philosophical dictum “existence precedes essence.” This dictum raises the question of an individual’s authenticity. To be authentic, one must choose one’s essence, that is, one’s own identity, which may also be called one’s “narrative.”

Of course, the fact that Obama is biracial has intensified his quest for identity. But Obama has also been influenced by existentialism, which requires the individual to mold or create himself. He cannot be authentic by affirming and living according to the principles of his nation’s heritage.

Besides, in this postmodern era of multiculturalism, the heritage of each nation appears arbitrary, another “narrative.” For almost a century, America has been immersed in a partisan, “liberal-conservative” narrative. Obama transcends this narrative, or so he would have us believe. His views of government have much in common with Progressivism. (more…)

In an article dated October 14, 2008, Iranian-born journalist Amir Taheri writes: “Prepare for a new America: That’s the message that the Rev. Jesse Jackson conveyed to participants in the first World Policy Forum, held at [Evian, France] … last week.” Jackson went on to say: “Obama is about change. And the change that Obama promises is not limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of the way America looks at the world and its place in it.”

Jackson has more or less confirmed the present writer’s assessment of Barak Obama or what I perceived in his campaign slogan of “Change.” But let me be more precise.

Senator Obama has nothing less in mind than regime change—a radical change in the political philosophy on which the American government is based, namely, the basic principles and values of the American Declaration of Independence.

This revolutionary document affirms that man is endowed with certain inalienable rights, among which are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. An Obama government would substitute a right to happiness for the pursuit of happiness. Such a government would thus be utterly paternalistic—a tyranny. (more…)

Identifying the enemy is a precondition of fighting and winning any war—and the United States and Israel are at war with the same enemy. Indeed, the strategic issue of the presidential election, the issue that most clearly divides Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain, is precisely their different views of the enemy. It may even be said that Obama lacks any serious conception of the enemy!

Perhaps no one has understood the enemy of the United States better than Lee Harris. His book Civilization and Its Enemies is a classic, and unless its insights are internalized by the next President of the United States, Western civilization, now on the slippery slope, may perish.

Harris mentions two kinds of enemies. “First, the enemy is someone whom we have mistreated and oppressed. Second, the enemy is someone who demands to be recognized for his superiority.” The second describes Islam, which regards all “infidels” as sub-human.

If the enemy was simply an oppressed group fighting to have equal recognition of his status vis-à-vis other groups, his enmity could be eliminated or gradually abated by granting him the status he is seeking. (more…)

Edited Transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, September 22, 2008.

“Praiseworthy is the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the wicked, and stood not in the path of sinners, and sat not in the sessions of scorners.” Psalms 1:1

Israel’s ruling elites suffer from a pathology clearly manifested in the pages of Exodus describing the behavior of the Egyptian Pharaoh.

Despite one devastating plague after another, the Egyptian despot stubbornly refused to let the Jews go. After the seventh plague, God hardened his obstinate heart to enable him to endure further attacks. Since he was responsible for so much evil, he was deprived of the freedom to repent and desist from his obviously ruinous policy. Clearly, the Pharaoh was driven by egomania, but this egomania was reinforced by God. I call this egomania the Pharoic syndrome.

The Pharoic syndrome afflicts Israel’s political elites. During the past 15 years, six successive Israeli prime ministers—Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert—mindless of the enormity of evil, have tried to make peace with the PLO, an organization whose record of terrorism and murder dates back to its formation in 1964. These politicians were so morally obtuse that they regarded the PLO’s genocidal objective, proclaimed in its Charter, as negotiable. (more…)

On September 17, Kadima, the ruling party of Ehud Olmert’s coalition government, held an election to determine who would replace him as Israel’s Prime Minister. The election was won by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, portrayed in the media as “Mrs. Clean.” The previous day, Caroline Glick, deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post, wrote: “Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni may not be a crook, but she is a fraud … just one fraudulent election away from becoming our next prime minister.” [View article.]

As we shall see, however, Livni is not the mother of all frauds—merely one of its many children.

Glick sees that “unlike all the other party primaries that have been held over the years, the Kadima primary is designed not as a preparatory step ahead of general elections to the Knesset. Rather, it is intended to replace general elections.”

Having won that primary, Livni will have 42 days to put together a ruling coalition. Failure to do so would mean a new general election in early 2009, a year and a half ahead of schedule. Olmert, who is a crook as well as a fraud, will remain as a caretaker leader until a new coalition is approved by the Knesset. (more…)

Two cheers for Nathan D. Wirtschafter, a member of the Likud, whose article in The Jerusalem Post (September 11, 2008), “Direct elections begin with the Likud primary” comes close to advocating some of the institutional reform proposals of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy and of the Yamin Israel Party.

Mr. Wirtschafter calls for “regional elections with single-member districts, a professional cabinet and a new judicial selection system … ”

To propose a professional cabinet is to propose, in effect, separation between the executive and legislative branches of government. The proposed cabinet would then no longer consist of the leaders of rival political parties (one of the root causes of Israel’s malaise). Mr. Wirtschafter could have clarified matters by simply and explicitly calling for a presidential system of government.

Unfortunately, his party leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, in an interview with the Russian Chanel-7, rejected district elections as well as a presidential system of government—and on the most frivolous grounds. As if he never heard of the U.S. House of Representatives and its 435 districts but only two political parties, Netanyahu said that district elections in Israeli would produce sixty political parties! (more…)

Three months from now, American citizens will be voting for the next President of the United States. They will be faced by the choice of voting for Senator John McCain or for Senator Barack Obama. This may well be the most momentous decision of their lives, for in the next few years Iran, if not prevented, will have nuclear weapons. With such weapons and the range of its current launching systems, Iran will dominate not only the Middle East and its enormous oil reserves, but also pacifist Europe on which the economy and therefore the way of life and even the survival of the United States ultimately depend.

So what should be going through the minds of Americans before they vote for Senator McCain or for Senator Obama?

To begin with, let us consider how one of America’s Founding fathers, James Wilson, thought about the general subject of voting.

James Wilson of Pennsylvania was one of six men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. His contribution to the deliberations of the Federal Constitutional Convention of 1787 was second only to that of James Madison. He was also the principal draftsman of Pennsylvania’s own constitution of 1790. (more…)