Nobody won the Israeli elections. Tzipi Livni’s Kadima managed to overcome the initial lead of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud by siphoning off left-wing voters from Labor and Meretz. Kadima, however, would have great difficulty setting up a coalition. Likud lost many voters to Avigdor Lieberman’s more strident Yisrael Beiteinu party, but the right-wing and religious bloc will control a 65-seat majority in the Knesset. Kadima’s slight lead over Likud notwithstanding, the country has moved significantly to the right.
Yet hardly three years have passed since Israel’s last election seemed to redraw the political map, with the centrist Kadima as the country’s leading political force.Kadima won a significant victory in the 2006 vote, taking a solid plurality of 29 mandates.The right-wing Likud shrank to only 12 seats — its worst showing in two generations.
Ariel Sharon’s decision to disengage unilaterally from Gaza in 2005 — dismantling more than 20 settlements and evacuating nearly 9,000 settlers — appeared to have broken the stalemate between right and left that had characterized Israeli politics for decades. Indeed, despite Sharon’s incapacitation after his January 2006 stroke, his newly formed Kadima party conclusively won the elections that followed.
By advocating a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, Kadima gave Israeli voters a choice between the Greater Israel policies of the right and the left’s seemingly futile attempts to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. Sharon’s approach appeared to offer a fresh alternative that galvanized the imagination of many Israelis and convinced them that even if negotiations with the Palestinians don’t lead anywhere, Israel can still make hard decisions about its future.
So how did we get from the centrist triumph of 2006 to the rising right-wing tide of 2009?
In the days that followed Kadima’s 2006 electoral win, things looked hopeful for Israel’s newly empowered political center: Sharon’s successor, Ehud Olmert, set up a coalition government with Labor and immediately began planning for further disengagement, this time in the West Bank. The idea was to dismantle between 20 and 25 of the smaller, more isolated settlements, involving the evacuation of some 25,000 settlers. Most West Bank settlers would remain in place, but they would be concentrated along the l967 Green Line, thus creating a more or less contiguous Palestinian territory.
Then things went off course: Only four months after the elections, the new government found itself sucked by Hezbollah into what became the Second Lebanon War. Olmert’s initial boasts that the war’s outcome would facilitate further disengagement backfired when it became clear that Israel’s war machine would not be able to achieve its aims. Olmert’s failure in the war made further disengagement virtually impossible for his government.
Next, Hamas’s bloody 2007 putsch in Gaza undermined the very logic of Israeli unilateral disengagement. With Hamas slowly but consistently increasing its almost daily shelling of Israel with ever more sophisticated rockets and missiles, many Israelis who had initially supported the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza began to ask themselves whether disengagement was counter-productive: If what Israel was getting in return for disengagement was a fundamentalist Islamist government in Gaza committed to its destruction, then perhaps, many Israelis concluded, Kadima’s strategy was flawed and should be abandoned.
Finally, the various police inquiries into Olmert’s financial deals further weakened an already bloodied prime minister, ultimately forcing his resignation. (Although he has yet to be indicted on any charges.)
Against this background, the slogans of the right — “Only a strong government” (Likud) and “No loyalty, no citizenship” (Yisrael Beiteinu) — sounded much more appealing. After the failure of all methods of moderation, a frustrated public embraced those promising toughness, not compromise. With the international community’s failure to address Iran’s nuclear threat, such voices became even more appealing. And with Labor now relegated to fourth place, behind Yisrael Beiteinu, Israel’s political center has been significantly weakened.
The country is left with a number of unappealing options: a right-wing Likud government, including Yisrael Beiteinu and some combination of smaller right-wing or religious parties is one possibility — yet even Netanyahu must realize that this would be both a brittle coalition and not the kind of government he can present to the world. Another option would be a Kadima-led coalition, including both Labor and Lieberman — which is not very appealing or sustainable.
And then there’s what most Israelis would likely prefer, regardless of whether Livni or Netanyahu would lead it: a government comprising Kadima, Likud and Labor — not really a new center, but as close to it as possible, and excluding Lieberman’s racism-tainted party.
The coming days will witness a lot of horse-trading, some of it ugly: But maybe a hidden hand will guide a splintered and not always coherent political system toward what may, at the end of the day, be the only rational way out of the present conundrum.
Shlomo Avineri is a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a former director-general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry.
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
As First Maharats Graduate, Roles for Orthodox Women Take Leap Forward
Samantha Power's Support for Israel Is Deeply Personal 
Why I Only Date Jewish Guys
Barbra Streisand Visits Western Wall After Landing in Israel With Puppy
Taking Aim at Corporate Jewish Burial Business
You've successfully signed up!
I've notice that all of David L Nilsson's comments end with the link to the Neturei Karta website. However, his identification with the extreme anti-Zionist positions has made it difficult for him to perceive reality as it is. There is only one Jewish center in the world that has a clear and constant increase in population - Israel - which has risen up as the largest of all Jewish communities in the world. No one knows what the future will bring, yet demographers seem rather confident that within a generation more than half of world Jewry will be living in Israel. So, Mr Nilsson, you may despise Israel and wish her only the very worse - but in reality, her rise to the central stage of Jewish life against all odds is simply amazing.
I find myself dissappointed by Professor Aviner's state of denial. There is no Labor Lieberman Kadima option. A majority voted for the Likud position and why should we get a tripartite coalition that will lurch leftwards and continue the discredited policies of the outgoing government. To dress this up as expressing the general will of Israelis is an exercise in flim flam that is worthy of Kadima's spinmeister's Arad and Adler but not of Shlomo Avineri.
Left, centre, right. Phooey. Charms to call shlemiels into a circle. Whatever the labels, whatever the claimed differences, every Israeli party with a shot at government believes devoutly in one "ism": nepotism. The state shimmers with corruption, sexual antics, deceit and bad faith. The settlements go on growing, the Palestinians go on suffering and being balkanized into ghettoes, no matter whether it's "compassionate" liberals such as Peres crying croc tears over the Jews' enemies and lamenting their stupidity, or an ignorant clown such as Lieberman threatening to strip Arab Israelis of citizenship and cleanse bits of it ethnically. The single list PR system, that unique bizarrerie, is intended to produce deadlock and haggling. Jews are so good at dealmaking, got to play to their strengths! PR freezes non-Jews out of the process of forming administrations and ensure that graft broadens down from precedent to precedent and generation to generation. The generals keep an eye on the Knesset shell game and dive in whenever it shows any danger of getting "democratically" out of hand. Judges oblige by banning pols who don't sign up to the entrenchment of racial supremacy, the secular sacredness that is Zionism. The stink is getting too great even for Jewish nostrils, hence the drop in turnout since the early days. One day they'll give an election and nobody will show up. Meanwhile the kids long to emigrate and two-thirds of the world's Jews say "Aliyah? You're kidding!" www.nkusa.org
I think given the chance, Mr Nilsson would like to round up left, right and center, and even Neturei Karta Jews and place them in a revitalized Auschwitz, perhaps somewhere in Illinois or Iowa. He sounds like some of the misfits in German society whose career was revitalized by "service" in the SS
I went to Israel on aliyah as part of a revolutionary new concept in immigration. Instead of the designation "oleh chadash" I went under the designation "oleh chodesh". I predetermined that one month of shtuyot would be all I could take so that is what I signed up for. When I arrived ba'aretz, I listed all my assets in the U.S. for the tax ministry officials who seemed quite interested. They kept getting my name wrong and calling me "Yehudi Asheer“. I also underwent the prescribed mandatory full body cavity search for wads of currency and jewels. The tax collector who performed the rectal probe did not use lubrication. He told me that "to be an Israeli, you have to be tough!" I was glad that I had the foresight to bring along a supply of KY jelly. I spent my month as an oleh chodesh waiting on lines at the Sachnut and various other governmental bureaucracies and sampling the Israeli ambience and cuisine. I grew quite fond of olives and cucumbers. Israeli pizza is quite distinctive! Instead of pepperoni, they use chicken livers. I drove to a number of new settlements to see where I might have lived had I decided to stay longer. An interesting option was a town called "B'nei Bakak" overlooking an Arab shanty town on the West Bank. The night life was rather limited as there was only one little kiosk where you could sit and “lishtot caffe“. The Israeli Sabra women were rather standoffish and kept saying "learn hebrew!" when I tried to be friendly and speak to them. So I adapted the "international language" and would just extend my tongue and wiggle the tip at them. I find it amazing that women all over the world understand the "international language". I visited several kibbutzim but the men I encountered were all depressed looking. When I inquired why they looked so miserable in such a sunny, picturesque little community they replied that, "since their kibbutzim stopped utilizing Volunteers, there are no longer any horny loose volunteer girls from Europe and the U.S. to shtupp. They had to go back to masturbating in the orchards and raiding the dairy barns" The driving patterns in Israel are quite unique. To save road space, Israeli drivers tailgate within eight inches of the car in front of them. I rented a car and drove around for a day and a half straight. I was afraid to slow down to stop because there was always an Israeli driver speeding along right behind me by only inches. The highlight of my month was when I saw a Russian immigrant urinate publicly on a street in Tel Aviv. How did I know he was Russian? His speaking to his associates in Russian gave me a clue. It was then that that deep emotion overcame me and I appreciated what aliyah meant. "L'hyot am chofshi", to be a free people. And what is freer than a man displaying his circumcised organ under the bright Israeli sun and freely urinating? After my month was up, I returned to my home in the U.S.A. whistling "Ha Tikvah" and "God Bless America".
"the new government found itself sucked by Hezbollah into what became the Second Lebanon War." Well, they THOUGHT they were getting sucked by Hezbollah into etc, but their illegal border provocations had less felicitous results, which Kadima found hard to swallow. Peace is such a threat to Israelis, and to Jews in general. Perhaps Freud was right about its role in group cohesion, and Victimhood is always morally liberating! But we "goyim" see you for what you truly are... outnumbered, etc.
Oops, brain outpaced fingers. Freud: "Perhaps it is due to anti-Semitism that we survive as a race." Antagonism is the drug. BTW, it would be nice to see Jews save themselves for a change, and spare the world in the bargain.
Is there any way that I can get a picture of Tzippy Livni in a bathing suit? I would prefer one from 20 or 25 years ago but a current one would still be awesome! She has an excellent set of bubbies and, from what I can see from the newspaper pictures, quite a nice tukhis also. It is a nachis to see an attractive female Israeli politician. Golda Meir just didn't do it for me. The fact that Tzippi had a background as an intelligence operative adds to her sexiness. Todah Rabah v'shalom l'yisroel!
Perhaps the most serious and most dangerous problem we face is the normalization of evil. That’s the title of an essay published on Feb. 3, 2009 in the Wall Street Journal by Judea Pearl, father of Daniel Pearl, the 38-year-old Wall Street Journal reporter who was beheaded by Islamofascist terrorists in Pakistan.
The title of the article, “The Normalization of Terror,” and its theme carry a devastating message, showing how the mainstream media, many of our leading universities, and people like Jimmy Carter and Bill Moyers have succeeded in transforming the most despicable, immoral, genocidal degenerates into a respectable category freedom fighters, part of a resistance movement even though they are using the most illegitimate, immoral, and illegal ends to achieve their political goals.
These are the real moral degenerates of our time, with the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Moyers leading the parade of evil, followed by many in our elite universities and the mainstream media. They speak in Orwellian language, turning evil into good, murder and genocide into resistance, and blowing the brains out of young children into acts of heroism. What is most disturbing about this terrible trend is that barbarism seems to be going mainstream even in America.
This is the story that Judea Pearl tells so well and so powerfully that it is a classic of the English language and a message that should be engraved on the mind and soul of every civilized person.
At the end of his powerful message to establish moral clarity in a world gone mad, Mr. Pearl writes, “Danny’s picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.”
Mr. Pearl says it is now seven years after the murder of his son, and then asks, “Would Danny have believed that today’s world emerged after his tragedy?
“The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.
“Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South American reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheiky Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of the sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of ‘the resistance.’ Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnapers deserve international recognition.”
Judea Pearl would have thought that the murder of his son, Danny, would actually be a turning point in man’s inhumanity to man, and that the slaughter of innocents to communicate political messages would once and for all be universally condemned by civilized people and sent to the ashcan of history, where such gross barbarism is no longer tolerated, the place reserved for such atrocities as slavery, human sacrifice, and other shocking and totally discredited practices of an era long gone.
But the moral degenerates mentioned above have given these icons of evil, these most degenerate of moral degenerates, moral standing in our society and acceptance in elite circles of universities, of the media, and of political leadership. Mr. Pearl says we have reached the point where we are no longer disgusted by evil: “Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.”
I am not so sure we have been numbed by violence into acceptance of evil. I don’t think people like those moral degenerates Jimmy Carter and Bill Moyers are numbed by anything. That would be an excuse. They are not numbed but have placed themselves in the hands of the devil by dark prejudices of various sorts that are lodged deep in their psyches. The people I associate with have not been numbed and they can still recognize evil, be disgusted by it, and reject it. Mr. Carter and Mr. Moyers can no longer do that, but that is due to dark prejudice, not numbness.
This is the way Mr. Pearl explains the described descent into evil. He reasons that well-meaning analysts in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy but only a tactic. Thus the mechanism that drives terrorism was made to disappear and in its place we now have the more “manageable ‘tactical’ considerations.”
Armed with that kind of reasoning, the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, in July 2005 could tell Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man’s second nature: “In an unfair balance, that’s what people use.” So the slaughter of innocents, the blowing the brains out of babies, was suddenly transformed into human nature, an almost reflex-like inevitability with moral neutrality. It’s not a choice or a moral decision, but more like breathing out and breathing in. Terrorism is magically transformed into the morally acceptable.
But our former president, Jimmy Carter, the most degenerate of the moral degenerates of our time, makes the clearest argument for terrorism and the slaughter of innocents. In his book, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, this is the way Mr. Carter slyly justifies terrorism with what is an appeal to suicide bombers: “It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel.” Translation: Acts of terror are no longer taboo, but are just a legitimate means to a political end. Until you get what you want, terrorism is perfectly acceptable. Jimmy Carter, in effect says, “Keep killing women and children, and blowing up babies; as a former president of the U.S. I find your terrorism and even genocide perfectly acceptable.” And a subtext of that translation: The Palestinians should continue the slaughter of innocents until Israel yields to their demands, however reasonable or unreasonable, and without regard to whether the acceptance of those demands would spell the eventual destruction of Israel. Whenever I hear of Mr. Carter’s foreign policies misadventures, I wonder if there is a way to impeach an ex-president. If the answer is yes, I recommend starting with Mr. Carter.
Mr. Carter, whose ability to do evil knows no bounds, has put forth the dominant paradigm now widely used to justify, humanize and legitimize terrorism. When Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, was asked what Israel should do to end rocket attacks aimed at innocent civilians, she replied, “They should end the occupation.” In other words, terrorists must have their demands met before they agree to stop murdering innocents and blowing the brains out of babies.
Mr. Pearl also notes that the media, in the U.S. and abroad, have played a major role in making terrorism acceptable. Qatari-based al-Jazeera television keeps providing Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi hours of free television time to spew the murderous interpretation of the Quran, authorize suicide bombings, and call for jihad against Americans and Jews.
Don’t think it can’t get worse, as it always does thanks to the international media and our own mainstream media. In August 2008 came the birthday of Samir Kuntar, an unrepentant killer, who is 1979 smashed the head of a 4-year-old Israeli with his rifle after first killing her father before her eyes. (But remember, Jimmy Carter, in effect, gave him the OK to do that.) al-Jazeera elevated Mr. Kuntar to heroic heights, writes Mr. Pearl, “with orchestras, fireworks and sword dancers, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society’s role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose al-Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera’s management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.”
American pundits like Bill Moyers see the world just like al-Jazeera, so they should not be surprised to find the blood of innocents dripping from their hands. Mr. Moyers, after the war in Gaza, was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a “resistance movement.” And he resorted to the old cycle of violence, to make moral equivalence between Hamas’ deliberate slaughter of innocents and the Israeli attempts at self-defense.
He said, each side greases the “cycle of violence” and one man’s terrorism becomes another’s resistance to oppression. Thus, whether blowing up innocents or acting in self defense, it’s all the same. There is moral equivalence and neutrality; anything goes in this immoral world of Mr. Moyers, Mr. Carter and much of our mainstream media. Mr. Moyers uses this moral equivalence to indict the victims of terrorism as if they are merely actors in the endless cycle of violence.
Then Mr. Pearl turns to the universities, which he says are being manipulated into the support of terrorist and genocidal organizations like Hamas. He uses his own university, UCLA, where he is a professor of computer science, to illustrate the point. At UCLA there was a symposium on human rights, which was turned into a recruiting tool for Hamas. The director of the UCLA Center for Near East Studies selected only Israel bashers for the panel, and every member of the panel concluded Israel is the greatest criminal in human history.
Here is the way this human rights symposium turned out: “ The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, ‘Scholars says: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza,’ to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western mind.” For more on the sorry state of our colleges and universities read David Horowitz’s classic, The Professors, and his second book on the subject, Indoctrination U.
So, as Mr. Pearl’s article so artfully documents, we are losing our ability to distinguish between good and evil. We are being brainwashed into thinking that evil is good. Our media, our academics, and some of our political leaders are transforming terrorists and genocidal murdering maniacs into freedom fighters. If we lose our moral clarity, losing everything else we hold dear may not be far behind.
I have often written about the mainstream media, our academic institutions, and some of our political leaders seem to have become pro-terror and even anti-American. The Pearl essay is another classic statement of this theme. If I were editing one of those “Patriot’s Handbooks,” I would put Pearl’s piece in it. I would recommend it for inclusion in the second edition of William Bennett’s fine book, The American Patriot’s Almanac.
I was struck by something else about the article. I missed it when it originally appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Feb. 3, 2009, the seventh anniversary of the death of Daniel Pearl. In retrospect, I thought it significant that it appeared in the Wall Street Journal, one of the few major American papers that has retained its moral clarity and that is able to distinguish between good and enable. You would not find this article in the New York Times or Philadelphia Inquirer, as they are part of the problem, the part that gives legitimacy to terror, murder and genocide.
And where did I come across the Pearl piece after missing it in the Journal? It is reprinted on Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism Web site ( www.investigativeproject.com). It is significant, that one of the most powerful forces in identifying and fighting terrorists and terrorism has the moral clarity to see the importance of Mr. Pearl’s message, and consequently pay for the republication of the piece on its Web site. People like Steven Emerson have more moral clarity and common sense than the mainstream media put together. It is also significant that the mainstream media, which did not and probably would not publish the Pearl piece or one like it, are also that segment of America that has lost moral clarity and that has virtually become friends and advocates of terrorists and other enemies of America.
Can we fight and win the war on terror when such powerful opinion makers as the mainstream media and our elite academic institutions often seem to be on the side of terror? Can we fight and win the war on terror when political leaders such as the moral degenerate Jimmy Carter are dedicated to legitimizing terrorism, terrorists and their organizations?
Let me clarify one point, as in the course of this column I may have paid the likes of the Jimmy Carters and Bill Moyers of this land, the mainstream media, and our elite academic institutions an undue compliment. I’ve done that by implying they are on the same moral level as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the world’s other terrorist and genocidal organizations. The compliment is undue because I said they were on the same level as the terrorist and genocidal organizations. I should make it clear they are on a lower level. They have had the advantages of living in the greatest country in the history of the world, reaping all of its limitless advantages, and enjoying its right of citizenship. Yet they turn on their own country in favor of terrorists and the other enemies of America. This puts them on an even lower plain than the terrorist organizations. They, like Jimmy Carter, are indeed among the most morally degenerate of the morally degenerate.
Perhaps this all raises an even more fundamental question: Has America lost its moral bearings? We’ve seen Europe lose its moral bearings, where even religion is virtually disappearing from the scene. We’ve seen powerful observers of the scene, such as Mark Steyn in America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, and Bat Ye’or in Eurabia, show us how Europe has pretty much surrendered to Islam and Shariah. Is that one more sign it has lost its moral bearings and doesn’t even defend its values? Like Europe, are we too becoming victims of multiculturalism (all cultures are of equal value) and political correctness? When you observe the pathetic moral and verbal gyrations of the mainstream media, our academic elite, and leaders such as the moral degenerate Jimmy Carter, you tend to answer America may be far along on the road traveled by Europe.
Perhaps this suggests we better get back to fundamentals, and have less tolerance for who clearly can’t distinguish between good and evil. We better start treating the likes of the mainstream media, those academic elites, and the political leader exemplified by Jimmy Carter for what they are worse than the terrorists and genocidal maniacs we are at war with. That means no support for such political leaders, media outlets, and academic institutions where these types hold forth (such as Columbia and UCLA). If Americans don’t make a stand on this issue, no one else will. If Americans don’t make a stand now, America itself may be lost.
The above commentary was provided by a long winded gas-bag. If brevity is the soul of wit, this individual is soul-less and wit-less.
I would be grateful to be informed as to how the real estate developers building settlements and communities in West Bank territory got title to this land in order to be able to sell off parcels to homebuyers at premium prices. From WHERE did these orthodox personages get ownership title and WHO gave them authority set up these real estate businesses in west bank territory and to sell this property only to orthodox buyers? Most, if not all, of the rogue settlements on the West Bank, such as Hashmonaim, were originally peopled by orthodox zealots who moved in and took over a site. Who directed them to engage in this activity? Who organized and coordinated these moves. NAMES PLEASE! Is this a means by which orthodox big shots get their hands on land for nothing to be subsequently sold at a premium? Is this the price that the orthodox political parties demand for cooperation in any coalition government? Just who is making big shekels from the sale of this contested territory? Why should any businessmen, whether they wear a yarmulka or not, be permitted engage in this type of cynical and greedy manipulation in the Land of Israel? What of these “motivated” settlers. Is their motivation that the real estate that they squat on today will increase exponentially in value after a while and they can eventually sell at an astronomical profit. If the real estate is returned to the Palestinians as part of a peace agreement, will these “motivated” settlers expect compensation from the government for their “loss“? Where will the government get the money to pay the settlers and home buyers the inflated value of the property? Will Israel ask the U.S. for a monetary bailout for peace? That would take chutzpah but is well within the realm of possibility. Inquiring minds want to know! Shalom and zei gezunt for now. The ads below are presented as documentation:
Hashmonaim Listings: If your interested in real estate in the religious yishuv of Hashmonaim, we have many interesting propositions. For details please contact us. For Sale 4 bedroom semi detached house. Very close to Synagogue, Yeshiva and schools. $345,000 pictures We now have a large selection of beautiful, well designed houses for sale in Hashmonaim. Great Investment opportunities!
Land within Hashmonaim is expensive (see box), and though duplexes start at around $375,000, private homes - which are being built bigger every year - can fetch well over half a million dollars, residents said.
CHILDREN MUST BE INCULCATED AS TO THE BENEFITS OF MASTURBATION IN THE ATTAINMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF A HEALTHY MIND AND A HEALTHY BODY! PENT UP SEXUAL FRUSTRATION IN CHILDREN HAS NEVER BEEN HONESTLY AND ADEQUATELY DISCUSSED AND DEALT WITH IN JEWISH DISCOURSE AND DOCTRINE. MODERN LIFESTYLES AFFORD INDIVIDUALS THE PRIVACY AND HYGIENIC FACILITIES NECESSARY TO MASTURBATE IN A PRIVATE, DIGNIFIED AND SANITARY MANNER. ONE CAN WELL UNDERSTAND THE IRE THAT WAS AROUSED BY MASTURBATING INDIVIDUALS FOUR THOUSAND YEARS AGO WHEN AN ENTIRE LARGE FAMILY LIVED TOGETHER IN A TENT IN AN ARID LOCATION. NOBODY WANTED TO HAVE A WAD OF FLYING JISSUM HIT HIM IN THE EYE OR LAND IN HIS HUMUS. WATER WAS SCARCE AND ONE HAD TO WALK , SOMETIMES LONG DISTANCES, TO THE WELL TO GET IT, IF IT WAS AVAILABLE AT ALL. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT WAS A CHOICE OF WATER FOR DRINKING OR WATER FOR WASHING EJACULATE OFF OF ONE’S HANDS. THIS IS WHY THE EARLY SAGES WERE SO VOCIFEROUS IN THEIR CONDEMNATION OF MASTURBATION. WE JEWISH PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A HORNY BUNCH AND, IF THERE WEREN'T THESE SEVERE STRICTURES AGAINST MASTURBATION AT THAT TIME, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN ERRANT CUMSTAINS ALL OVER THE PLACE AND THE SMELL OF FRESHLY RELEASED JISSUM WOULD HAVE WAFTED FAR AND WIDE, EVEN WITHIN THE HALLOWED HALLWAYS OF THE SACRED TEMPLE ITSELF. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. IF PARENTS TODAY STRESS THE BENEFITS OF MASTURBATION TO THEIR CHILDREN, THEY WILL HELP LESSEN THE OCCURRENCE OF STDs, AND UNPLANNED PREGNANCIES. SCHOLARSHIP LEVELS WOULD INCREASE DRAMATICALLY WITH THE RELEASE OF PENT UP ADOLESCENT EJACULATORY TENSION.. IF NECESSARY, PARENTS SHOULD SET AN EXAMPLE FOR THEIR CHILDREN AS TO THE PROPER METHODOLOGY FOR THIS ACTIVITY AND FOLLOW UP AND MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CHILDREN ARE MASTURBATING REGULARLY AT AN OPTIMUM FREQUENCY. KEEPING A MASTURBATION DIARY COULD BE A VERY USEFUL TOOL IN MAINTAINING THE PROPER SCHEDULE. EVERY PARENT SHOULD ASK HIS CHILDREN ON A DAILY BASIS, "DID YOU DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND MASTURBATE TODAY?" OH, OF COURSE, THE CHABADNIKS AND THE FRUMNIKS WILL YELL OUT, "BUT RAMBAM SAID THIS, AND RASHI SAID THAT AND RABBI AKIVA SAID THIS, AND THAT, ABOUT THE EVILS OF MASTURBATION." PROBABLY ALL THREE OF THEM WERE MASTURBATING WHILE THEY WERE WRITING THESE STRICTURES, ANOTHER CASE OF "DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO". WE MUST NOT CONTINUE TO LET OTHERS DO OUR THINKING FOR US UNDER THE GUISE OF RELIGIOUS EXPERTISE. SHALOM AND ZEI GEZUNT!