JAHG-USA Newsletter: Week of 24 Tammuz, 5765 / July 31, 2005

Responses picked up notably last week (although things still appear to be in summertime mode). In answer to the question,"Should the (US) troops (in the 2003 Iraq War) have been provided more strength (more divisions and air support)?" 86% of the respondents voted that the troops should, indeed, have received more assistance, and all responses, including the "other" category, were in favor of making sure the troops were properly armed. No one felt certain the troops had enough military force.

Starting early in his administration (and months before the 9/11 terrorist attacks), President George Bush was quietly exerting pressure behind the scenes in favor of Saddam Hussein's regime. He defied rising conservative pressure to do something about Hussein, pushing instead for easing the sanctions on the Marxist regime in Baghdad, and to move away from any possibility of war.

After 9/11, in the face of rising political pressure to identify and take action against whichever governments sponsored the attacks, Bush's policy slowly changed — though only superficially. He repeatedly stalled and delayed any decision on an Iraq war, and when his administration finally presented a "plan" for invasion, it was met with unprecedented horror and protest by many of the most senior officers in the US military (including some retired ones). Bush's strategy (which was later implemented, over vigorous protests from military officers) radically cut down US forces, from the recommended 200,000-plus soldiers with full aerial bombing to only a few tens of thousands of soldiers and almost no air support at all. And while Bush was dragging his feet on war preparations, he actually approved his long-desired easing of Iraqi sanctions (as it later turned out, the weakened sanctions allowed Soviet Russia and other Communist governments to re-arm the Iraqi Marxist regime to fantastic levels; by the time the US troops entered the country, they were badly outnumbered by Iraqi forces).

During the war itself, the Bush Administration constantly interfered with even that little bit of military strength. The "shock and awe" attack was completely cancelled at the last minute. Bombing campaigns were cut drastically short, numerous strategic targets were declared "off limits," a major infantry division was held back in America while the other troops were forced to go ahead, American troops were constantly recalled from battlefields after winning surprise victories, and even Communist terrorists of the PKK and the MEK were protected from attack. Today, US troops are generally not allowed to entered terrorist-controlled areas of Iraq, and their occasional counterattacks are severely limited by "rules of engagement" much tighter than those of the Vietnam War. The nail in the coffin of US victory is Bush's requirement that all US military activities in Iraq must be approved by the "new" government of "former" Communists and secret police — who, unsurprisingly, do everything they can to handicap and sabotage any US response to attacks by fellow "former" Communists from the regime.

Under the Noachide Laws, the Torah requires any nation's leaders either to fight a war to win, or not to fight at all. This is an obvious minimum requirement of the commandment to maintain law and order, which authorizes the king (or whatever government the nation may have) to wage wars that are necessary, even those which may involve preemptive attacks. Any government that enters a war without the desire or intent to win is betraying its people and violating the fundamentals of G-d's Law.

Only one answer per e-mail address will be accepted; only e-mail addresses on our subscription list are eligible. Please send your input by Monday, August 8, 2005, 8pm PST.

This week's example:
Rabbi Dov Newman, Chabad of Beverlywood, Los Angeles, CA
(and a special update on Rabbi Yaacov Schwei of Brooklyn, NY)

Rabbi Newman received our proclamation (calling on all Jews to get involved in the campaign to defund the PLO) on March 4 at 11:51am, yet we have never heard back from him. To give him a second chance, we contacted him by e-mail on June 26, and yet all we hear is deafening silence.

Rabbi Newman's Chabad House is located in one of the more affluent areas of Los Angeles (right next door to Beverly Hills), a choice spot no California Chabad representative may have without permission from Rabbi Boruch S. Cunin, head of the Chabad-Lubavitch organization for the entire state. And as we have already noted, Cunin has long made clear his absolute lack of interest in anything that doesn't help build his California fiefdom (the story of Cunin's fight against the Rebbe's Noachide campaign is told at www.noahide.com/cunin.htm). So it really is no surprise that Rabbi Newman doesn't show enough backbone to stand up to Cunin's intimidation tactics — although the Torah clearly does require Rabbi Newman to show some self-sacrifice and jeopardize his career for the sake of saving lives in Israel. It's too bad he doesn't.

Special Update: A few weeks ago we reviewed the refusal of Rabbi Schwei, a member of the official beis din (Jewish rabbinical court) of Lubavitch in Brooklyn, to sign the proclamation. As we mentioned, he brushed off our volunteer by insisting that we go ask another rabbi instead. In other words, Rabbi Schwei clearly doesn't think he has any responsibility to get involved in defunding the PLO.

Now, behold an astonishing wonder!

We recently received notice of a special flight to Israel being planned for this month, to bring a few Lubavitchers to help protest Ariel Sharon's expulsion of Jews from settlements. Those protests, naturally, cannot succeed in the face of a coordinated government attack — which is precisely the reason hidden infiltrators in Jewish ranks, pretending to be on "our" side, are pushing this futile effort so noisily; the intent is to demoralize Jews everywhere, to make the surrender to the PLO seem unstoppable, and to distract everyone from the only real strategic path to victory (through defunding the PLO, of course).

And of all things, for this diversionary nonsense Rabbi Schwei does step forward to give his endorsement! Is the rabbi on the the side of the Jewish people in this war? For the moment, we'll assume he's just caving in to pressure coming from behind the scenes, generated by traitors blending in amongst regular Jews. But at the same time, we must now watch Rabbi Schwei carefully to see if we can detect a consistent pattern of betraying his fellow Jews. It's one thing for a rabbi to show cowardly unwillingness to participate in anything outside of his comfortable community; it's quite another to oppose victory for Israel (through defunding, and thereby destroying, the PLO) while actively supporting useless, futile protests that demoralize Jews and clear the way for PLO victories (G-d forbid!).

In other words, is Rabbi Schwei a puppet manipulated by evil forces, or is he an active, willing collaborator? Only time will tell.…

This week's example: Rabbi Avraham Gerlitzky, Oholei Torah Yeshiva, Brooklyn, NY

A JAHG-USA volunteer approached Rabbi Gerlitzky in person on May 26, showing him the proclamation. In the presence of several other rabbis, he signed it on the spot. Those present, all teachers in one of the two major Lubavitch boys' schools, agreed fully with the Torah rules in the proclamation — i.e., that we are all morally obligated to get involved in defunding the PLO. Such a duty as this may not be ignored or pushed aside for other matters, especially since it is an issue of saving lives endangered by PLO terrorism. As the betrayal of Israel proceeds, it becomes ever more obvious that none of us can afford to ignore this issue any longer. We thank Rabbi Gerlitzky for underlining that message with his signature.

What do you think about Jewish leadership on PLO defunding? Send us your comments at [address withheld].

For a complete listing of all rabbis who have received our proclamation, and the up-to-date status of their responses, visit ATTAC Report at http://www.attacreport.com/plo/.

This week's edition of our sister site, ATTAC Report, presents: A peek behind Russia's new iron curtain; new profiles of several terrorist groups now active in Central America; our map of 200 concentration camps in eastern Siberia — including death camps for the handicapped, or where victims are poisoned with radiation.

• (Regarding last week's survey question about the 2003 Iraq War):
"Really appreciate your fearless messages about GWB etc. Probably the troops were put in an impossible situation just as they were in Vietnam...." — JEC.

Note: Limited space (and time) force us to postpone answering some past letters (of which we still have a few). G-d willing, we'll continue answering them in upcoming issues.