I know, all my critics from the "fall-off-the-right-end-of-the-political-spectrum" will think that Medad has really flipped out now.  Supporting the "right of return"? 

How could I do that?  Have I turned my back on a basic ideological and legal position of all Israel's governments, both right and left?  Have I lost my head?

Well, I declare: I am a humanitarian and, as such, I support the Arab demand for the “right of return” of Pal. refugees to their homes.

Yes, for sure.  I’m all for the right of return of these Arabs 

and these Arabs, too

to go right back to Gaza, all 188 of them.

We should facilitate their return to Gaza immediately (and charge them for medical fees and their hospital treatment also).

Of course, we could fool around a bit and claim that they arrived on the newest Nefesh B'Nefesh aliyah program but methinks that would be pulling your collective leg too hard.

=============================================

UPDATE

Gee, maybe someone in power really does read this blog:

The Israel Defense Forces has begun returning the dozens of Fatah members who escaped from Gaza on Saturday back to the Strip, despite an earlier agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority that the men would be transferred to the West Bank. Security sources told Ynet on Sunday that 32 of the residents were returned to Gaza by the early morning hours. The rest will be sent back later in the day or on Monday.

That was quick.

SECOND UPDATE

And here come the radical left, progressive, humanistics:

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel on Sunday petitioned the High Court of Justice to order the defense ministry to halt the deportation of Fatah members who fled the Gaza Strip over the weekend. Deputy Supreme Court President Eliezer Rivlin has ordered Defense Minister Ehud Barak to respond to the petition by Monday afternoon. "The matter of the petition, by its nature, cannot be deferred," wrote ACRI attorney Oded Feller in the petition. "Continuing [the process of] returning the asylum-seekers to Gaza is liable to endanger their lives, well-being and freedom."

If it's so dangerous in Gaza for these Fatah terrorists, why can't a nationalist group petition the Court to invade the area, eliminate terror that kills us and doesn't contribute to the health of the Fatah either and for once and all, get rid of Hamas?  Wouldn't that be nice for an Israeli court to do?  Really help out Jews, Arabs and all of mankind?

The State Department's attitude towards Israel, and to be specific, its presence in Judea and Samaria is so wrongheaded.  At a daily press briefing last Tuesday at the Department of State, spokesperson McCormack, in one of his responses, said of the meeting between Secretary Rice and Israel's Defense Minister Barak

I can tell you what the intent and the thinking behind the meeting was – is that – to talk about issues related to the Roadmap, Roadmap implementation...also talk about what the Palestinians need to do.

Did you notice that: also talk about what the Palestinians need to do.

I most certainly agree.  As was published, there is

an American-led mission, based in Jerusalem, that is trying to build new security forces on the West Bank that will support stabilization efforts by the Palestinian Authority’s president...The importance of this effort cannot be overstated: unless there are effective Palestinian security forces, Israel will never trust in a Palestinian state or be able to act on the quiet progress being made toward reaching a final settlement...As became all too clear on my visit to Israel, however, this American-led effort is being crippled by decisions within the State Department. The small mission, called the office of the United States Security Coordinator and under the leadership of Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, is effectively locked into a building in Jerusalem. While it’s a military mission, the State Department and the consulate in Jerusalem are in charge of Palestinian affairs and General Dayton’s advisory teams.

I don't believe that the Americans can adequately train so-called "Palestinian polciemen" and thus, they cannot assure Israel's security. But more importantly, does any oversight mechanism - Congressional, Presidential or independent - exist that investigates the workings of this special mission, supported and managed by CIVPOL and referred to as a "Transformation Program". Is it successful? A failure? Is all in order? What specific problems exist?

I wish I could speak with some of these people: Peter Liebert, Mike Thomas, Joe Schreiber, Gherdy Francis (who was an East Timor Site Manager, International Police Program, Dyncorp), Paul Richards, Dick Jones, Rick Trapp, Dave Butzer (who was former deputy chief of the Portland Police Bureau), Dan Mathis, Ben Roberts, Jesse Valdez, Louie Muniz, Holt Coleman, Tom Moselle, Jim Cavalucci, Mark French, Walt Redman among others and ask them about the Leadership and HQ staff course logistics course, the Advanced Police Tactics Course and the Police Support Ops course and other training directions.

They, as well as diplomats at the American Consulate General, are directly responsible for my security, that of my family and friends all across Yesha and also Israel. And, if they truly think they can make sure that the PA's "policemen" can do a proper job, can I suggest they speed things up for, in case they are not aware, Hamas is threatening to take over the PA in Judea and Samaria.

If they fail, they need know that the blame is not solely that of the State Department and their employers but they, too, share that blame. They are supposedly professionals and if they become aware that it their task is one that cannot be accomplished, then they too will face legal steps among others.

Israel and its citizens are not far-away East Timor or Iraq or Kosovo. There are options open to us and we will be aggressive in our own pursuit of justice.

When I wrote on Friday about "not giving them tractors", I thought I was being humorous.

Well, someone perhaps has read that blog post because this morning, look what I found pasted up:

It reads: "Don't Give Them Rifles.  Don't Give Them Tractors.  Don't Give Them A Livelihood".

Now, if we could only find enough Jews to take their places.

Somehow, we Jews always manage, even in the depths of our travails, to crack a joke.  Academic studies exist on the subject.  And if we can't make a joke, we laugh anyway, straining to see the funny side of the situation.  It is probably a defense mechanism or, in my opinion, the triumph of Jewish optimism.

Take, for example, this lady (you should pardon the expression):

Her name is Tali Fahima and many of you will remember her as a veteran of two years or so in an Israeli jail for aiding and abetting the enemy, a Jenin terror commander.  As I wrote here, and trying to be funny myself by making a play on words, she could be termed The Babbling Whore of Palestine for terming her former friend and comrade, a Martyrs' Brigade terrorist, a whore himself for making a deal with the GSS in order to obtain medical treatment in Ramallah.

But the joke is on us.  She became a media personality with T-shirts and rallies.  Her former friend the terrorist, who is in the business of getting Jews killed, is afforded the opportunity to extend his life by Israel.  Of course, he actually could be a collaborator, helping the GSS catch the "real" terrorists and then the joke would be on Tali.

And what about this sign, created by one Dede for the Maariv newspaper:

Twice in one month, tractors have been used as weapons of death by Arabs.  So, what is our response?

Well, we could start a new campaign: "Don't Give Them Licenses!".  We could start bashing the tractoronim, the Hebrew for the mini-tractors, on the principle of "kill them when they're small".  As the old joke goes, a grandfather is showing his grandson around old building sites in Tel Aviv where he worked as a Sollel and Boneh laborer in the 1930s. "Here," he says, "I was a carpenter and there a bricklayer and there I worked on the plumbing."  And the grandson responds, "What, Saba, you were an Arab?"

On another topic, the increase of Jewish same-sex weddings is on the rise.  In one case I discussed, one Andrew Lipka married his friend, Daniel Bloch.  And a Rabbi, Daniel Sklar, officiated at the Sunday ceremony that followed the justice-of-the-peace one.  Okay, admittedly, that's not really funny.  But in a closer reading of the notice I found, it seems that Andrews mother worked for, wait for this, the Jewish Family Services organization in Metrowest (that's another term for New Jersey).  I can't wait for the future Lipka-Bloch family.

If we've mentioned family, Bar Mitzvahs are always a great source for humor.  This summer, we have a film that deals with the English Jewish community when a young lad's big day falls on the same day the English national team gets to play in the World Cup Final against Germany in 1966.  Based on a story by Peter Weiland, they need one Bridget O'Connor to write the screenplay.  Now, I know the Irish and Jews have a lot in common - red hair, fighting a liberation war against the British - but a Bar Mitzvah script?  And don't forget, the Rabbi in the film who helps prepare the kid is - blind!  Ha!  (Since the mother is played by Helena Bonham Carter,                                                                        

it can't be all that bad).

And for the last case, the drop-out rate from Satmar's Kiryat Joel went up by two recently.  Both woman. Both divorced women.  Both divorced women with children.  I blogged about Gitty Grunwald and also found out that Baila Glauber (below):                                                                        

left her community, too, and is now a...policewoman.  Was that just a change of uniform?  A desire to assert dominance?  After all, she could have moved to Israel, achieved the mitzva of yishuv Eretz-Yisrael and made many people happy, including Tzvi Fishman.

And so, have a nice Shabbat, and remember, there's a new charity joint campaign under the slogan: "Help Us So That We May Help Them"                             

Shabbat Shalom.

One of the (very) many organizations and groups who are extremely active in attacking the issue of Israel's right - and that of the Jews world-wide - to establish residency, as revenants, in their historic homeland, is the Foundation for Middle East Peace. I have engaged Geoffrey Aronson, its Director of Research and Publications, in debates and conversations, and we are acquainted for many years.

In its most recent report, I found an article and in it a short paragraph which, for me at least, goes to the heart of the 'problem', the core issue of my right the live in Shiloh. Here it is:-

Settlements are the most visible, potent, and tangible manifestation of Israel’s “staying power” in its ongoing struggle with Palestinians to prevent the creation of a genuine Palestinian state. They represent an existential challenge to Palestinian efforts to establish sovereignty and independence, and thus are understood by Palestinians as the critical benchmark against which the prospect of their liberation from occupation is to be measured.

As I have remarked to diplomats and journalists, if all the Jews need, for the sake of peace it is claimed, to remove themselves from the Yesha communities and to reconverge within the state of Israel in its pre-1967 borders, why not, for a much better peace, that all the Arab residents of the state of Israel move into that future "state of Palestine"? Why not make a switch and remove all possible of internal friction?

One response is "that's immoral"? And I reply, what, only "immoral" for Arabs but not for Jews? A second response is that Arabs are citizens of Israel but we Yesha Jews are not citizens of "Palestine". We don't have a right to stay in "Palestine" but the Arabs have a right to remain in Israel. A third reaction is there must be a compromise but which returns the situation back to 1967 whene no Jews were there whereas Arabs have always been in Israel.

But what this actually all boils down to is that many people are convinced that the Arabs of Israel, as well as the people opposing the existence of the Yesha communities, were cheated either in 1917 (the Balfour Declaration), in 1922 (the Mandate) or in 1947 (The UN Partition Resolution). They got a bad deal and we Jews are still at fault. Not only shouldn't we be in Judea, Samaria and Gaza but - it goes - we should be lucky that we're permitted, in the final negotiations yet to be reached, to remain in the 1967 borders!

That subliminal deep-seated hostility - from Goyim and antizionist Jews - drives the opposition to the Yesha communities and makes any alternative all the more dangerous for Israel.

We should respond by pointing out that the Arabs cannot have a third Arab state in the original Palestine Mandate territory (Jordan, "Palestine Fatah" and "Palestine Hamas") and they surely cannot have a uniethnic state in Judea and Samaria while Israel will have a 20% and growing Arab minority (if I am not mistaken we Jews are about 20% of the population of Yesha right now). And then we can borrow from the above quotation: They represent an existential challenge to Palestinian efforts to establish sovereignty and independence.

But, we write it thus: They represent an existential challenge to Israel's efforts to maintain sovereignty and independence.

Any territorial withdrawal of Israel from Judea and Samaria not only represents a negation of our national, historic, religious and legal rights, not only is it a blow to Zionist ethos and will further decompose Zionist spirit in the face of a resurgent Islam, not only will it endanger Israelis but, it will leave the state with a significant demographic element that has already joined the destructive forces seeking Israel's dismantlement.

Indeed, only the balance of Jewish communities in Yesha can ensure Israel's future existence in any area of the former Mandate. A whittling away of its presence in Yesha will only encourage the trend of diminishing Israel within its pre-1967 borders which, I beleive, is the true goal of the Geoffrey Aaronsons of this world.