Carolyn, please name the Israeli policies towards the Arab world you object to

[Michael Eisenstadt]

From: <globe@zipcon.net>
To: "Michael Eisenstadt" <michaele@HotPOP.com>
Cc: <globe@zipcon.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: Carolyn, please name the Israeli policies towards the Arab
world you object to


> The new settlements and the building of the Wall.  they are not doing
anything
> to ease tensions.

Carolyn,

There are NO new settlements. Sharon did authorize the building of
1000 new houses in existing settlements. Maybe not a great idea but
there are NO new settlements.

As for the building of the Wall, where this has been done, in the north
of the country, it has stopped terrorist incursions completely. There have
been NO incursions where the wall is in place. In the lastest outrage, in
Beersheba in the Negev in the south, where 2 suicide bombers blew
themselves up in 2 buses killing 16 innocent people killed and wounding
90, there is NO wall yet built. The mayor of Beersheba and others,
subsequent to the bombing and even before, have been demanding that
the erection of the wall be speeded up and implemented in the south.

You are AGAINST this? It stops terrorist incursions. This has been
proved where the wall is in place. How can you not be in favor of
finishing the wall?

You speak of these Israeli actions (building houses and raising a wall)
as not "easing tensions." Hamas and Islamic Jihad are bent on the
total destruction of the Israeli state and they make no bones of stating
this frequently. According to the standard interpretations of the Koran,
no territory ever ruled by an Islamic government may lawfully be ruled
by a non-Islamic government. Much less by jews. So in theory the
Iberian peninsula, southern France, Italy as far north as Naples, and
the predominantly Christian Balkan countries must be returned to
Islam. In fact, according to the Spanish police, that was the stated
motive of the gentlement who blew up the 4 trains in Spain, an action
that was 5 years in the planning, long before the conservative
government of  Spain sent troups to Iraq in support of Bush.

You also wrote:

>   This  betraying of secrets affair the FBI is investigating is serious
because
> it would mean that Israel gets a peek and can influence our policy twards
> Iran.  I am sure you don't think it is a good idea if we invade Iran with
the
> Israelis.

No of course not. However if the Iranians provide themselves with
nuclear armed rockets, I rather imagine Israel will take steps. Ya know,
the Iranians are mightily opposed to the existence of Israel probably
for the religious reasons outlined above.

First let me point out that Wolfowitz does not make policy in the Bush
White House. At least that is what Jim Mann, the author of The Rise
of the Vulcans says (a very interesting book if you want to know ALL
about Rumsfeld, Chaney, Powell, Wolfowitz and Armitage.

The gentleman being questioned by the FBI in connection with what
AIPAC did or did not tell the Israeli embassy (American Israeli
Political Action Committee) does NOT work for Wolfowitz. He works
for someone named Feith. He has NOT been charged with anything
(yet). Neither has anyone from AIPAC. So why do you assume that
Israel is guilty of something?

It's like you are expressing a mood, a feeling, some kind of aversion
to Israel. What is husband John's opinion on these matters?

Excuse the long rant.

Michael