“Beyond Words” also includes a number of extra features:
Chronology of Rabbi Kahane's life.
“Beyond Words” now can be bought at Amazon.com. On the search line, type… Beyond Words Kahane.
Beyond Words
Selected Writings of Rabbi Meir Kahane, 1960-1990
Volume 3
“A Treaty with the United States,”
Jewish Press May 5, 1978
Jewish Press May 5, 1978
As the pressure grows on Israel to commit suicide, the
United States – through carefully planned leaks – has begun to wave a trial
balloon and a seductive proposal to Israel, and more important, to the Jews
there and without, who seek any “reasonable” solution. The seduction is called a formal treaty
between the United States and Israel by which the Americans would guarantee the
survival of the Jewish state.
Who in possession of even a modicum of common sense would
trust the United States to carry out a treaty obligation that would involve the
use of American troops and possible heavy losses?
Who will trust the Americans, whose “faithfulness” to their
South Vietnamese allies is legendary?
Who does not realize that a treaty will only tie Israeli hands as every
decision to retaliate against terror raids or wars of “attrition” will be
vetoes by the senior partner?
Let the Americans keep their treaties and let the Jews renew
theirs with the ALL Mighty. And never were the words of the prophet (Isaiah
30:2-3) more true: “Who go down to Egypt and have not asked of My mouth . .
. to trust in the shadow of Egypt!
Therefore shall the strength of Paraoh be your shame, and the trust in
Egypt your confusion.” The L-rd, only
the L-rd.
“Brzezinski: Is He
Good for the Jews,”
Kahane Magazine,
September 1978, pp20-22
The
United States surely acts upon its own interests and this is most
legitimate. But Washington conceives of
its interest in ways very different from the Israeli ones. The State Department and the Pentagon (and
there is no basic difference here between Democratic and Republican
administrations) look at American interests in terms of oil, potential business
contracts and investments in the Middle East, and, above all, to increase
American influence in the Arab world.
When the presidential advisor says “a settlement of the Arab-Israeli
conflict is in the American interest,” what he is really saying is that a
solution that the Arabs will find relatively favorable is in the
American interest, and if that solution conflicts with Israel’s security or
moral obligation, that is unfortunate.
The historical
record shows an America that refused obstinately to give weapons to the
beleaguered Jews in 1948, that attempted to shelve the U.N. plan for a Jewish
state in favor of a trusteeship and that pressured Ben-Gurion not to declare a
Jewish state. It shows American pressure
forcing the Jews to give up the northern Sinai after it was captured from the
invading Egyptians in 1948 and to surrender the Sinai and the Gaza Strip in 1956
after Israel had smashed the Nasser noose that threatened to strange it. It shows an America that pledged to keep the
Gulf of Aqaba open and the United Nations peace-keeping forces between Israel
and Egypt, and that then reneged on its promise in the terrible two weeks that
preceded the June 1967 war. It shows an
America that refused to sell Phantom jets to Israel all through 1971; that
prevented Israel from striking a pre-emptive blow on the eve of the Yom Kippur
War (that, not Israeli intransigence, was what cost
2,5000 lives); that held up arms shipments to a bleeding Israel so as to
prevent their routing the Arabs; that forced Israel to accept a cease-fire when
it was on the verge of wiping out the Egyptian Third Army; and that brutally
pressured Israel through “reassessment” – cutting off arms shipments and
economic aid – into giving up the vital Sinai passes and all Israel’s oil.
. . . Who believes
that America will do better for Israel than it did for its formal ally, South
Vietnam? The only reality is American
pressure to force Israel to do what is good – in the Administration’s eyes –
for America, regardless of whether it is suicidal for Israel.
“On Yo-Yoism,”
Jewish Press,
February 3, 1978
Let us stop the
nonsense of: We will not talk to the PLO but only to other “Palestinians.” What madness!
To begin with, such talk legitimizes the concept of “Palestinians” when
it is imperative to cry out that there is no such concept, that there is no
“Palestine” or “Palestinian” people. For
if there is indeed a “Palestine” people, surely they have a right to a state of
their own. The PLO is no more dangerous
than Assad of Syria with whom Begin is willing to meet, and indeed, the Syrians
are a great deal more dangerous with their tanks and MIG-25s. The PLO is no more dangerous and desirous of
throttling Israel than any of the other Arabs of East Jerusalem or Shchem and
Hebron. And end to the differentiation
which only puts us into a dangerous trap.
Let us place all the Arabs in the same role: that of wanting, through
different measures and tactics, to put an end to Israel. There is nothing wrong with sitting with all
of them, including the PLO, and saying: NO
[We put ourselves
into this dangerous trap that Rabbi Kahane warned us about. bg]
The above articles
came from 1978 Quotes
If you did not receive this article personally and would like to
be on my weekly Rabbi Meir Kahane article e-mail list, contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com
Previously sent articles can be viewed on:
www.barbaraginsberg-barbara.blogspot.com 
No comments:
Post a Comment