Ponder a more serious betrayal: the government's policy of self-restraint toward Arab terrorism. This unethical policy logically entails a permissive attitude toward the murder of Jews. Coupled to the government's release of Arab terrorists, including murderers, it follows that murder is tolerated by the State of Israel. This cannot but undermine a nation?s sense of justice. Consider some consequences.

If the murder of Jews can be tolerated, so can the expulsion of Jews
from their homes, despite Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. And if Jews can be expelled from their homes, their land can then be given to their enemies, despite the prohibition of Israel's Penal Code governing treason.

The government's contempt for the rule of law is notorious. But
inasmuch as ethics ultimately requires the support of law, contempt for the rule of law cannot but undermine a nation?s ethical standards.

When this happens, not only will politicians become more ruthless, but the ethical sensibilities of decent men will be eroded while such
politicians remain in power. Of course, in this democratic era, ruthless politicians will use the mantra of democracy to conceal their crimes. Deceit or fraud will become the order of the day. This deceit will infect even decent men, and pious frauds will become more numerous.

Time to Call a Spade A Spade
Recall how Prime Minister Ariel Sharon reneged on his promise to abide by the Likud referendum on his ?Disengagement Plan??which he and his Likud party campaigned against in the January 2003 election. Any decent person would regard Sharon as a knave, a man devoid of honor or integrity. Since 64% of the public regard him as corrupt, yet even more regard him as ?strong leader,? Sharon may well be regarded as the biggest fraud in Israel.

But Sharon would not be in power were it not for other frauds. In name only a few of his accomplices:

1) Israel's Supreme Court, above all, Chief Justice Aharon Barak, who
swept Sharon's criminal activities under the judicial rug and legalized his criminal Disengagement Plan.

2) The members of the Likud Party, above all Benjamin Netanyahu?but
even opponents of the Sharon Plan?for not arousing and organizing public opposition to that Plan when it was first announced in December 2003 at the Herzliyah Conference (perhaps as a trial balloon), and for not forcing Sharon to resign before the Plan could be implemented.

As for those who now join the Likud in the hope of cleansing that
corrupt and perfidious party, their political rationalizations are but evidence of Israel's declining ethical standards.

3) The National Union and National Religious Party that signed
Sharon's March 2003 coalition guidelines, which required these parties to honor the Oslo Accords.

Some of the leaders of these parties, instead of resigning and making
way for a new and untainted leadership, have the audacity to call for a single bloc of ?right-wing? parties to prevent another "Disengagement."
What "right-wing" parties? There are none, and the language is
obsolete. The issue is not "Right" versus "Left". It is not even "peace". The issue is whether Jews are going to be expelled from their homes.

But wait! If the expulsion of Jews from their homes in New York or in Paris was a campaign issue in their respective countries, would there be a "Right" and a "Left" on that issue in Israel? But that was the issue in March 2003 when Avigdor Lieberman, Benny Elon, and Effie Eitam endorsed Oslo by signing Sharon's coalition agreement and thereby signed the death warrant of Gush Katif!

4) Finally, add United Torah Judaism, whose five Knesset mandates made the present Sharon-Peres government possible. UTJ received 65 million dollars a pittance compared to the cost of expelling 10,000 Jewish men, women, and children from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria. No party is more culpable and contemptible.

Clearly, the State of Israel must be deconstructed. Since revolution
is not a practical option, we must radically reform of its political and judicial institutions. Only fools believe that reform can originate within the system: the system is a primary generator of corruption. This poses a dilemma.

To change the system one must obviously establish a party capable of
entering the system by gaining seats in the Knesset. But what will
distinguish this party from other parties, and how will it avoid succumbing to systemic corruption?the fate of all other parties? Here?s how.

The new party must propose, to begin with, a program for parliamentary electoral reform which, if successful, will eliminate that party from the Knesset!

Meanwhile, it must not only advocate such reform on every public forum, but it must constantly inform the public how Israel?s existing
political and judicial institutions violate both Jewish and democratic principles and are constantly betraying the Jewish people.