When Bush Comes To Shove

Letter from Ruth Matar (Women in Green) Jerusalem
Thursday, August 9, 2007

Dear Friends,

I have done you a great injustice by, even for a moment, doubting your firm belief in the Judeo-Christian Bible, which was also the belief of America's Founding Fathers and the Framers of the American Constitution.

For Bible believers there is no question that the Bible is G-d's word. Therefore, there is no doubt possible that the Holy Land is the everlasting inheritance of the Jewish People (Genesis, Chapter 17).

I have never received as many e-mail replies as I did to last week's article: 211 replies up to this moment, and they're still coming in.

Thank you, dear friends, from the bottom of our Zionist hearts! In the hostile world in which Israel lives at this time, we need continual reassurance of your support.

There is no cloud without a silver lining. I now understand the situation much better.

Christians United for Israel held their annual Washington-Israel Summit on July 16, 2007. This major Christian-Zionist group lobbied President Bush against the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

On July 29, 2007 the New York Times published a letter entitled "Open Letter to President Bush from Evangelical Leaders". This letter by "self described" Evangelicals encourages Bush to go ahead with his two-state vision.

Now I learn from your responses that this letter to President Bush , published in the New York Times, (a paper none too friendly to Israel), was meant to be DAMAGE CONTROL, as a reaction to the very successful Christian United for Israel Summit.

The Christian authors of this letter are known to be very liberal thinking in their Christianity, along the lines of the Presbyterians who voted for divestment from Israel.

Most of the people who signed the letter to President Bush subscribe to Supersessionism (Replacement Theology), namely that the Church is the new Israel and Christians have replaced the Jews as G-d's covenant people.

Actually, I have come across this concept of Replacement Theology before .Some years ago I sat in a coffee shop, in Washington, D.C., with my very good Christian friends, the Kepleys from Virginia. A couple came to our table to say hello. The husband was a Pastor, I don't remember from which church. My friends introduced me as "our friend, Ruth Matar, from the Holy City of Jerusalem". The woman answered quite antagonistically: "I thought that Israel has been replaced by the Church, and that we have replaced the Jews as G-d's people!"

I was shocked, but my friends told me to ignore her, and that she was neither a nice person, nor representative of American Christians.

Dear friends, I need to share something with you that has worried me for some time, ever since President Bush gave his famous two-state-vision speech on June 24, 2002. Unfortunately, since that speech, this two-state-vision has become the cornerstone of his Middle-East policy. I have often wondered
why it is that President Bush feels so adamant about dividing the Holy Land.
Bush said recently: "The Israelis should find practical ways to reduce their footprints in Judea and Samaria." A shocking request!

In her most recent visit to Israel, Condoleezza Rice, as President Bush's official messenger, said the following: " Israel is occupying Palestinian land! JUDEA AND SAMARIA MUST BE PART OF AN ARAB STATE." This is how she speaks about the heartland of biblical Israel? But, Condoleezza Rice graciously allows that " Israel may retain the Galil and the Negev!"

How outrageous and arrogant of President Bush and his government to feel that they can supersede the word of the G-d of Israel!

(Very often I get letters from you, my e-mail friends, as to whether I admit that I made a mistake in working for the reelection of President Bush against John Kerry. I knew, at the time, that Bush was not the perfect candidate for the Jews, because of his family background, but I had reliable information about Kerry which seemed to make him a worse candidate. I had learned that Kerry actually had been sending presents to Arafat.)

Recently, I have learned that President Bush is a member of the United Methodist Church, and that this church may be a proponent of Replacement Theology.

I am also greatly disturbed by President Bush's proposed $20 billion arms sale to jihad-promoting Saudi Arabia.

The following is a ZOA News Release from August 3, 2007 on this subject.

ZOA APPLAUDS MOUNTING CONGRESSIONAL OPPOSITION TO BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S
PROPOSED $20 BILLION ARMS SALE TO JIHAD-PROMOTING SAUDI ARABIA

New York -- The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has applauded the mounting level of opposition within the Congress to the Bush Administration’s proposed $20 billion arms package for Saudi Arabia, a state which promotes jihadist violence against Israel, the United States and the West, lavishes funds on Islamist institutions disseminating hatred of Jews and other non-Muslims and rewards suicide bombers who murder Israelis. Two of the 2008 presidential candidates, Senator John Edwards (D-NC) and Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) have declared their opposition to the sale and 114 House Members have signed a letter vowing to support a resolution that would scuttle the sale (New York Sun, August 3).

The arms package is expected to include Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) -- a low-cost guidance kit that converts existing unguided free-fall bombs into accurately guided "smart" weapons as well as satellite-guided bombs, which Israeli defense establishment officials have warned that these have
the potential to constitute a strategic threat to the state of Israel ( Jerusalem Post, July 30). Congressmen Anthony Weiner (D-NY), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Robert Wexler (D-FL) have already publicly condemned Saudi Arabia as a sponsor of terrorism unworthy of American military support and promised
to introduce legislation to oppose it as soon as Congress is officially notified. Congressmen Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Mike Ferguson (R-NJ) have also expressed deep concern about the proposed package and Congressman Roy Blunt (R-MO) has indicated that Congressional opposition will make passage of the bill a challenge for the Administration. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), has declared that "the Administration must do more to address the Saudi government’s propagation of Islamic extremism, violation of basic human rights, and support for elements of the Iraqi insurgency."

Dr. Mordechai Nisan, Professor of Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has recently written in a monograph, Saudi Arabia's jihad in the Middle East and the World: Implications for the US and Thoughts for American Policy, that "It is Saudi Arabia, more than Iran or al-Qaeda, which is the primary promoter of global jihad in our times ... Israel ... is a target of relentless Saudi ambitions ... A revision of Washington’s traditional policy towards Saudi Arabia is the issue to be considered."

Criticism of the proposed Saudi arms deal from legislators:

* Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD): "I have deep concerns about the president's proposal to sell $20 billion in new arms to Saudi Arabia. It is not good policy to provide more arms to regimes that may not be stable or that may not be able to maintain control of the military arms that are sold to them" (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, July 31).

* Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): "The folly of this arms deal is beyond belief. Saudi Arabia is the no. 1 exporter of terrorism in the world today. They are not our friends. We cannot trust how they will use their arms. ... We don't have to give them high-tech weapons which may be turned against our friends or us" ( New York Sun, July 30).

* Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY): "They are paying the bills for the suicide bombers. It is not an accident that 15 of the 19 suicide attackers here on our soil were Saudis ... looking for the moderate Arab state might be akin to looking for the unicorn" ( New York Sun, July 30); "The reputation of the Saudis has taken quite a beating since 9/11, and despite the fact that the administration has done everything to portray them as part of the moderate Arab world, members of Congress of both parties are increasingly skeptical" ( Washington Post, July 29). " Saudi Arabia should not get an ounce of military support from the U.S until they unequivocally denounce terrorism and take tangible steps to prevent it." (Press release, May 24).

* Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee: "This is not a sale at Macy's that you go in and buy a bunch of stuff. There are a complex set of relationships behind it, and while it's very desirable to have the Saudis and others recognize that Iran is an existential threat, there is also a degree of responsibility that they have to show on broader U.S. foreign policy interests" (Washington Post, July 29).

* Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY): "We have grave reservations that this arms sale to Saudi Arabia could allow weapons to slip into terrorist hands" ( New York Sun, July 30).

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "The ZOA praises those members of Congress of both parties, growing rapidly in number, who have quickly recorded their opposition to this arms sale to an anti-Semitic, racist, jihad-promoting regime which remains an enemy of Israel. We urge more Senators and House members to join the fight to prevent this counter-productive and misconceived arms package.

"The Bush Administration should not be doing this. To sell massive quantities of sophisticated arms to a regime that is helping the terrorists in Iraq, propagates the poisonous religious ideology of jihad that nourishes al-Qaeda, funds Hamas murderers, represses basic human rights, including those of women and freedom of worship, is neither wise nor principled. Saudi Arabia has not assisted America in fighting jihadists and bringing peace and democracy to the Middle East -- President Bush's declared primary goals -- which alone would merit any American support of this type. Saudi Arabia is presently not at risk of invasion from anyone so this arms sale does nothing to stabilize the Middle East. In fact, the supply of such arms might well endanger Israel and contribute to the insecurity of the region, something that no-one would have thought would be the result of a decision by a president who has described himself as the 'best friend Israel ever had.'

"President Bush once declared, rightly, that other states would have to decide whether they are fighting terror or supporting terror. Today, unfortunately, he would have to say that either you are fighting terror or you are supporting terror, in which case the U.S. will sell you billions of dollars' worth of arms. This is a repudiation of the Bush doctrine. If implemented, this arms deal will fail to stabilize the Middle East, allow the Saudis to continue supporting jihad without consequences, put off the prospect of peace and do nothing to bring about an end to Arab/Islamist terror against Israel. We urge the Bush Administration to withdraw this bill and Congress to oppose it if they don’t."

* * *

President Bush has called for a big Mid-East Summit Conference to take place in America in September. Saudi Arabia has stated that it is very "keen" to attend. We can imagine why!

We must all stay constantly vigilant that the countries of the world do not succeed in destroying Israel!