jump to navigation

Bush tells Israel to get out of Palestine and the Jewish Response January 21, 2008

Posted by Daniel Downs in Arab states, Chrisitanity, Ehud Olmert, foreign policy, George W. Bush, God, Iran, Islam, Israel, Jews, Judaism, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Middle East, Muslims, news, Palestinians, peace, politics, Prof. Paul Eidelberg, religion, Saudi Arabia, Torah, United Nations, United States.

President Bush During his visit to Israel, President Bush demanded Israel end its occupation of Judea, Samaria, and East Jerusalem. In light of the recent Annapolis Peace Summit, Bush’s get-out-of-Palestine statement further supports his determination for a Palestinian state. According to a recent Middle East Media and Research Institute (Memri) report, the Arab press claims Iran is beginning to win the struggle with the U.S. for superpower status in the Middle East. With American influence waning, Bush’s statement may also be seen as an attempt bolster America’s coalition of moderate Islamic states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, and Jordan, who want improved relations with Iran.

The problem is Arabs are not buying Bush’s views. Memri also translated a number Arab newspaper articles on Bush’s visit to the Middle East. Arab writers view Bush as far more threatening than Iranian President Ahmadinejad. In fact, they regard our President’s acknowledgment of the state of Israel as proof. Muslim commentators portray Bush as an oppressive warmonger pillaging the Arab world in the name of humanitarianism and democracy.

Arab criticism of Pres. Bush was loud, but Prime Minister Olmert’s silence to Bush’s demand was deafening. Olmert’s silence trumpeted approval of Bush’s opposition to Iran’s developing Middle East hegemony. It further sounded his support for the bloody land-for-peace agenda initiated by the United Nations and doggedly pursued by both Arab states like Saudi Arabia and by the United States. As other presidents, Bush hopes his claim to fame will include the mandated Palestinian state and Middle East peace. One can only hope his dream of peace comes true.

However, two things come to mind: One is the statement of Ahmadinejad’s about eliminating the state of Israel. The second is the statement by the Jewish Apostle Paul who wrote, “While they are talking about the possibility of real peace and safety then comes sudden destruction” (1 Thes. 5:3). Let us hope Ahmadinejad or his allies do not actually possess nuclear bombs.

What do Israelis think about Olmert’s silence and Bush’s demand?

Paul Eidelberg, president of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy, said, “Leaving aside the self-serving motives of Israel’s secular elites, they are abysmally ignorant. They have no understanding of the grandeur of the Jewish heritage, hence of what should be the character of the so-called Jewish state. They know not how to deal with the Arab Palestinian problem. Many would sacrifice much of the Land of Israel in the belief that this would solve that lethal problem. Mr. Bush is also drowning in ignorance, to say nothing of Saudi oil.”

Eidelberg makes a legitimate point. After 60 years of failed peace plans, “[i]t should be obvious that neither democratic politics nor political science can deal adequately with these issues. The time has come for an unconventional approach.”

What? An expert in constitutional and democratic politics says democracy is not capable of solving the Israel-Arab problem? What unconventional approach does Prof. Eidelberg suggest? He proposes one based on the Torah.

According to Eidelberg, “the New Jewish Congress, recently inaugurated in Jerusalem, declared that the Land of Israel does not belong to the State but to the Nation—the Jewish People. The State is nothing more than a trustee of the Jewish People to whom this land was given by God Almighty….” This statement is based on the Torah, which “repeatedly declares that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people…. But if Prime Minister Olmert does not recognize this truth, what can we expect of President Bush?”

“Since Israel’s secular elites deem the State supreme—a fascist doctrine—and since they reject the idea that the Land of Israel belongs to the Nation, the Jewish People, logic dictates that the State, as presently conceived, must perish if the Jewish People are to retain their only homeland—Eretz Yisrael. But inasmuch as the power of the State is concentrated in its political and judicial institutions, these institutions must perish or be radically transformed.”

Eidelberg is not advocating a violent or non-violent overthrow of the Israeli government. He is advocating a revolutionary reformation. Israel’s democracy is flawed. Voting and electing government officials is not enough to change the situation. The fact is the Israeli people did not vote in Ariel Sharon and Olmert to give up their land for a Palestinian terrorist state. They voted them in to end the perpetual terrorism. Instead, Sharon and Olmert betrayed their trust, and the courts has supported it. Consequently, Israelis, like Prof. Eidelberg, call for restructuring Israeli’s institutions so that a genuine representative democracy will be established.

Eidelberg makes another very interesting observation concerning Israel’s occupation of the land:

“The Arabs, descendants of Ishmael, condemn the Jews as ‘aggressors’ for having ‘usurped’ the land of ‘Palestine.’ President Bush calls us ‘occupiers.’ This denunciation was anticipated in Rashi’s commentary to Genesis 1:1. There the question arises: Why does the Torah begin with Creation and not with the first commandment given to the Jewish people? Rashi answers:

So that if the nations of the world should

and say: ‘You are robbers in that you have seized by force the territories of the seven nations’ [of Canaan that had previously occupied the land], Israel can retort: ‘The entire world belongs to the Holy One, Blessed be He. He created it and gave it to whomsoever it was right in His eyes. It was His will to give it to them and it was His will to take it from them and give it to us.’

“Of course, Rashi’s commentary would be dismissed by nations no more disposed to recognize the truth of biblical prophecy than to abide by the Seven Noahide Laws of Universal Morality. Why should it be otherwise, since the secular Zionists who founded the State of Israel in 1948 dismissed the Torah, the only rational justification for Jewish possession of the Land of Israel?”

It is true the Jews do occupy much of the land, but that is what God told them to do in the first place. The Jews return was precipitated by the Holocaust and initiated by ruling members of the United Nations. Israel agreed to their plan but the Arabs did not. The Arabs responded in two ways: They created their own League of Arab Nations and created and executed a policy to exterminate the new Jewish state. Israel’s possession of the Judea, Samaria, Golan Heights, and all of Jerusalem was the result of wars initiated mostly by the Arabs. Therefore, Israel’s possession of the land came as a right to exist as well as a right of self-defense. The Arabs still have not renounced their intentions to eliminate the Jewish state. They have shown little good faith to any peace agreement except to their own agendas. Because of the frequent wars, terrorism, bombings, attacks, and unrelenting anti-Israeli propaganda, past U.N. policy should be regarded as null and void, which would also render the U.S. Road Map equally invalid.

The West demands a secular Israel, the Arabs a subservient Israel, and Israeli leaders demand their people agree. Why? Because it will be profitable for Jews, Palestinians, and the entire Middle East. At least that is how the plan is being sold, and history proves it is right. When Israel lived under the rule of Babylon, the Jews did okay. When they were ruled by Caesar, they prospered—a few more than most. As long as the Jews agreed to the dictates of their ancient imperial masters, all enjoyed true peace and prosperity. Of course, not all of Rome’s Caesars thought the Jews should worship their one and only God. Romans were and modern global secularists are morally tolerant multiculturalists, but good Jews never are.

As demonstrated throughout Israeli history, every time Jewish leaders betrayed right reason and covenantal loyalty in order to be accepted by other nations and peoples, the results have been disastrous.


Herb Keinon, Bush Tells Israel: End the Occupation, The Jerusalem Post Online 10 January 2008.

Paul Eidelberg, “Bush said, “End the Occupation,” and Olmert Was Silent, 21 January 2008, email transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, January 21, 2008. See also his organization, The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy for more information.

Memri, Editor of Liberal Arab Website Aafaq: The Era of Iranian Hegemony in the Middle East Is Upon Us, Special Dispatch Series (No. 1817) 22 January 2008.

Memri, Columnists in Brutal Attack on Bush’s Gulf Visit, Special Dispatch Series (No. 1818) 22 January 2008.

Memri, Mixed Reactions in Egyptian Government Press to Bush’s Visit to Egypt, Special Dispatch Series (No. 1819) 22 January 2008.

Technorati Subscribe by Email Permalink



1. Iran » Bush tells Israel to get out of Palestine and the Jewish Response - January 22, 2008

[…] Daniel Downs wrote an interesting post today on Bush tells Israel to get out of Palestine and the Jewish ResponseHere’s a quick excerptAccording to a recent Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri) report, the Arab press claims Iran is beginning to win the struggle with the US for super- power status in the Middle East. With American influence waning, … […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: