Three monumental lies have been generated from Jerusalem. The first, that Israel is a Democratic State. The second, that Israel is a Jewish State. The third, that this State can obtain genuine peace from Arab-Islamic despots.

The First of the Three Lies

If proof is wanted that Israel’s system of government, despite periodic multiparty elections, is not democratic, it was provided, unwittingly, by Benjamin Netanyahu after his election as prime minister in May 1996.

Mr. Netanyahu stated on various occasions that no one ever expected him to

1. accept Oslo, i.e., the Israel-PLO Agreement, as a basis for the “peace process”;
2. meet with Yasir Arafat;
3. withdraw from Hebron; and
4. release 30 female Arab Jew-killers.

Ponder the significance of this remarkable statement or confession. This self-incriminating statement, unbeknownst to Mr. Netanyahu, reveals an undemocratic if not autocratic attitude. If no one, in his own words, expected him to take the four steps mentioned above, it then follows that Netanyahu ignored—really betrayed—those who elected him Israel’s Prime Minister!

That he could publicly boast—as he did to foreign audiences—of his unexpected adherence to Oslo reveals a callous indifference to public opinion at home, in contrast to an unmanly concern for his image abroad.

His rationalization, that Israel, as a democracy, is obliged to implement his predecessors’ agreements with Yasir Arafat is insulting and absurd. Who does not know that Arafat has repeatedly violated that (illicit) agreement? Who does not know that democracies commonly violate international agreements which they deem contrary to their national interests?

Britain’s violation of the Mandate

Britain violated the League of Nations Mandate when it created TransJordan on 80 percent of the intended Jewish homeland in Palestine. The United States reneged on its agreement with Taiwan when it transferred its recognition of the latter to Communist China. Neither agreement was nation-threatening, the one to Britain, the other to the United States. This cannot be said of the Israel-PLO accords, which Netanyahu admitted could lead to Israel’s annihilation. Of course, the admission was made prior to his election.

The only time Israeli politicians are attentive to public opinion at home is during an election campaign. Once ensconced in power, they feel no obligation to fulfill their campaign promises to the nation, even on life-and-death issues. Yet these politicians pose as champions of “democracy.” Thus Bibi Netanyahu.

The moral obtuseness underlying his boast that no one expected him to genuflect to Oslo – hence to become Yasir Arafat or Bill Clinton’s lackey – is symptomatic of Israel’s undemocratic political culture. The late Yitzhak Rabin lied his way into office in 1992 by promising NO withdrawal from the Golan Heights, NO negotiation with he PLO, NO “Palestinian” State, and NO negotiation over Jerusalem.

The same Rabin, while negotiating with the PLO in violation of Israel’s criminal law, scornfully declared: “Don’t bother me with legality.” His successor, Shimon Peres, who never ceases to pay lip-service to democracy, boasted in the name of David Ben-Gurion that he gives the people not what they want, but what he thinks they need.

Israel is not a democracy

Yet virtually everyone persists in calling Israel a “democracy,” including critics of the peace process. Apart from such criticism, the critics do little more than lament this or that government’s “betrayal of democracy.” Heaven forbid they should candidly state that Israel is not, and never has been, a democracy. Ben-Gurion said as much in his Memoirs when describing Israel’s parliamentary system of fixed party lists a formula for oligarchy!

Whoever heard of a democracy whose legislators represent political parties rather than constituents or citizens? Whoever heard of a democracy whose Prime Minister can disregard the law with impunity? Whoever heard of a democracy whose Government can make treaties without public or parliamentary debate, such as the one ratified on the White House lawn?

Whoever heard of a democracy—or even of a monarchy!—whose Prime Minister can sign away the land of his people to a criminal organization specified as such in the penal code of his country? Whoever heard of a democracy whose Government, under the facade of “administrative detention,” can incarcerate citizens for months at time without trial and without even informing them of the charges? Whoever heard of a democracy who’s Prime Minister can release terrorists convicted of murder? Thus Benjamin Netanyahu and his two predecessors. But to attribute such ruthless injustice to a Jewish State is even more monstrous.

The Second Lie

Whoever heard of a Jewish State whose founders were atheists? Whoever heard of a Jewish State whose citizens need not be Jewish? (Contrast Japan, a democracy where citizenship is limited to ethnic Japanese.) Whoever heard of a Jewish State who’s President or Prime Minister can, by law, be a Moslem?

To be sure, 79 percent of Israel’s population is Jewish. Nevertheless, in this “Jewish” State (as a colleague of mine has pointed out) certain Knesset Members have made nasty statements about Judaism and Jews that in Germany—in Germany!—would get them kicked out of parliament and perhaps into prison.

So Jewish is this Jewish State that the term “Judaism” has been erased from the Soldiers Code of Ethics—thanks to Israel’s first native-born Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin (to say nothing of Prime Minister Ehud Barak who was Chief of Staff at the time). So Jewish is this Jewish State that Rabin’s successor, Shimon Peres, who applied for Israel’s membership in the Arab League! So Jewish is this Jewish State that its Government abandoned 80 percent of Hebron, the burial place of the Patriarchs and Israel’s first capital under King David. Nor is this all.

The first land-for-peace treaty: 1994

So Jewish is this Jewish State that its religious parties, in 1994, and contrary to Jewish law, supported a treaty with Jordan whereby Israel relinquished 330 sq. kilometers of Jewish land (whose annexation by Jordan in 1950 was recognized only by Pakistan and England). Did these parties support the treaty for the sake of peace? But as Jordan’s late Janus-faced monarch King Hussein understood, Jordan’s survival, in the face of Syrian ambitions, actually depends on the Israel Defense Forces, which saved that regime in 1970. The treaty did not establish genuine peace between the two countries, but rather formalized a de facto state of affairs. Hamas and Islamic Jihad headquarters are still operating in Amman, and selling land to a Jew in Jordan is a capital offence.

Those 330 sq. kilometers of clearly Jewish land were not exchanged for peace, or as benighted religionists might say, because of pikuach nefesh, to avoid danger to human life. Seven Jewish school girls were subsequently murdered on that land. The treaty was a public relations extravaganza concocted by a Labor Government to bolster its failing “land-for-peace” policy, which made hundreds of Jews widows, orphans, cripples. In truth, Jewish lives and Jewish land were (and are) being sacrificed to the god of Power, to which the religious parties also genuflect.

Religious parties no help

Not only did the religious parties forsake Israel’s God-given right to this land, but these same parties, like Mr. Netanyahu, chose to forget that King Hussein was responsible for the desecration of Jewish synagogues and thousands of Jewish graves in eastern Jerusalem. In certain respects, therefore, the religious parties are more culpable than their secular counterparts for Israel’s humiliation.

It will be said, of course, that the religious parties, despite their faults, preserve and spread Judaism. Perhaps, but they have not made the State of Israel—its governing institutions—Jewish.

The Third Lie

Turning to the third lie, the Middle East “peace process,” let us first quote from a December 10, 1996 U.S. House of Representatives “Task Force Report on International Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare”:

Approaching the end of 1996, the Middle East may well be on the verge of a major regional war. Numerous sources in the region report that the supreme leaders—both civilian and military—in most Arab states (including Egypt and Jordan), as well as in Iran and Pakistan, are convinced that the present vulnerability of Israel [resulting from the “peace process”] is so great that there is a unique opportunity to, at the very least, begin the process leading to the destruction of Israel. Toward this end, several Arab states, as well as Iran and Pakistan, have been engaged in a frantic military build-up and active preparation in the last few months….

[T]he PLO’s preparations for an imminent war are evident. In Gaza, Arafat ordered the marked acceleration of the building of a personal bunker four stories deep. Moreover, the PLO is rapidly building, all over Gaza, a chain of command centers, ammunition and weapons-storage areas—all of them underground and well fortified to even withstand Israeli bombing and shelling. The PA’s [Palestine Authority’s] security forces are also accumulating large stockpiles of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons, including missiles, even though they are forbidden by the Oslo Accords.”

It should be noted that this report was issued prior to Netanyahu’s decision to abandon Hebron to Arafat and the PLO. That decision stands in conflict with the democratic election that made him Israel’s prime minister. That decision can only wet the insatiable appetites of Israel’s enemies.

The Fateh Constitution

But to further expose the mendacity of the “peace process” and those who foist this hoax on the public, let us quote from the 1998 Fateh Constitution. (Fateh is the spearhead of the PLO, and every iota of its constitution has the approval of PLO chief Yasir Arafat.) Below are 11 of the Fateh Constitution’s 27 paragraphs:

Principles

• Palestine is part of the Arab world, the Palestinians are part of the Arab nation and their struggle is part of the struggle of the Arab nation.
• The Palestinian struggle is an integral part of the worldwide struggle against Zionism, colonialism and international imperialism.
• The liberation of Palestine is a national duty demanding physical and spiritual assistance from the whole Arab nation.
• The Zionist movement is racist, colonialist and aggressive in its ideology, its goals, is organization and its methods.
• The foundation of Israel’s existence in Palestine is the Zionist occupation, based on colonialism.

Goals

• The complete liberation of Palestine and the economic, political, military and cultural elimination of Zionism.
• Establishment of an independent, democratic state in all of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital.

Method

• A revolutionary military struggle as the sole method of liberating Palestine.
• A military struggle is not a tactic but a strategy, and the military revolution of the Arab Palestinian nation is a decisive component in the struggle for the liberation and the removal of the Zionist entity; the struggle will not be complete until the Zionist state is destroyed and Palestine, in its entirety will be liberated.
• Opposition to any political solutions recommended as an alternative to the destruction of the Zionist occupation of Palestine.
• Convincing the countries of the world to prevent Jewish emigration to Palestine as a method of solving the problem.

The rulers of the so-called democratic and so-called Jewish State of Israel are aware of this document, which is more lethal than the PLO Covenant. Yet, while contending for personal and partisan advantage, they not only ignore the deadly goals and military preparations of Israel’s enemies but appear even anxious to surrender the heartland of the Jewish people to the successors of the Nazis.