In Exchange for Hostages: "The Terrorist Who Tried to Kill Me – Lives Next Door Once Again"

by Hagit Rosenbaum, Besheva newspaper, translated by Hillel Fendel.

 

In exchange for the dozens of Israeli hostages cruelly captured and held by Hamas, Israel released three times that number of terrorists – women and minors (as if it makes a difference to their victims). While none of them actually murdered Jews, some of them came quite close to doing so, and only miraculously are their victims still alive. 

Hagit Rosenbaum of the BeSheva weekly interviewed a Jewish mother of the Shimon HaTzaddik neighborhood in Jerusalem, in light of the release of a female terrorist who tried to stab her to death before the eyes of her four children. The attacker, 16-year-old Nafouz Jez Aref Hamed, was sentenced to 14 years in prison, but served only two of them before the hostage-terrorist deal came along.  

"When they originally told me that she was on the list of terrorists to be released," Moriah Cohen said, "I refused to believe it. Even now, I still can't believe that she has returned and is living right here in the neighborhood. It is terribly frustrating, as well as scary. I had to sit with my children and try to calm them down. I had to find a way to help them overcome their fear, even though there is really no way, since she's no longer in jail and is right here. Today they refused to go outside to the car even for a minute unless I went with them. They were with me during the attack and they saw everything." 

Cohen asks: "Why couldn't they at least have demanded that she not return to her home? Why can't they nullify her citizenship? To return her to her home right opposite the children whom she almost murdered – it's insane!" 

With the help of the Honenu civil rights organization, Moriah Cohen has begun a campaign to bring about the distancing of the would-be murderer from her home forever. "We will do everything we can so that we will not have to see her and that she should not frighten us and disrupt our routine," said Moriah.  

The campaign has been partially successful thus far. Following a request/demand by Honenu, the Jerusalem Magistrates Court issued a temporary restraining order forbidding the young terrorist from coming near Mrs. Cohen or children, and from making any contact with them. Another hearing will soon be held on permanent restrictions.  

Honenu continues to demand that this small step be expanded, and that the police do whatever necessary to ensure the security of the Cohen family. 

Two other Jews - shot at and injured moderately-to-seriously by a young Palestinian terrorist almost a year ago – asked that "their" terrorist not be freed. Yaakov Moses and Moshe Hass, who are still undergoing procedures for their full recovery, asked PM Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant to remove his name from their lists of terrorists to be released. They were unsuccessful, however, and the terrorist – whose legal proceedings had not yet even begun – was released. Atty. Chaim Bleicher of Honenu demands that the authorities give more consideration to the victims of terrorist crimes when deciding whom to release – and how to release them. 

Wrong, Blinken: Settler Violence is Minor

adapted from articles by Shilo Fried, Makor Rishon newspaper, translated by Hillel Fendel. 

It has been widely reported that the Biden Administration, perhaps most vocally represented by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has placed a heavy emphasis on stopping "settler violence" against Arabs of Judea and Samaria. The U.S. has even announced that it will restrict the entry of some Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria into its borders. 

But the facts actually indicate that there is no such phenomenon as "settler violence." Even IDF Central District Commander Gen. Yehuda Fuchs - in many ways no friend of the Jewish settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria – has said, "99% of the hilltop youth do nothing wrong to anyone, not to the army and not to others. There is no such concept as 'settler violence.' There are incidents of violence in all kinds of places." 

Left-wing organizations have initiated a campaign of late against a supposed increase in settler violence, which has had international success. Belgium, for instance, has announced that it will forbid entry into the country of "extremist settlers."  

However, Shiloh Fried of the Makor Rishon newspaper has reported, based on law-enforcement sources, that there is actually a significant decrease in violent incidents in general between Jewish residents and Arabs in Judea and Samaria.  

The data show that in the month beginning Oct. 7, there were 20 violent incidents – as compared to 53 in the same period last year. Similarly, the number of cases in which property was damaged during this period was down from 19 last year to 10 this year.  

Prime Minister Netanyahu has addressed the issue, minimizing its extent while at the same time seemingly trying to appease the White House. He has said that only "a handful of extremists who do not represent the public take the law into their hands and cause great damage to Israel. We are unwilling to tolerate this and we will act against it." General Security Service (Shabak) head Ronen Barr said that the number of these "extremists" is not more than 40, of whom some do not even live in Judea and Samaria.  

In response to strong accusations and even sanctions against Yesha extremists – which often leave the impression that the entire Yesha public is guilty – Yesha Council head Shlomo Ne'eman said: "We were surprised to see that the President of the United States, who from the beginning of the war has been on the side of truth and justice, has chosen to fall into the trap of the deceptive campaign by [left-wing organizations] B'Tzelem and Breaking the Silence. Mr. President, please understand that 'settler violence' is the fruit of the imagination of fringe left-wing propaganda." 

Strong punitive measures have been taken against Jews of Yesha, at least some of which have been found to be unjustified. For instance, just last month an IDF soldier was returned to his army unit, after having been under arrest for five days on suspicion of having killed an Arab in the Shomron. Ultimately, the IDF Military Court ordered him released after finding that a small Arab mob had approached, threw rocks and dangerous objects, and threatened the lives of his family, leading the soldier to shoot in self-defense and kill one of the Arabs.   

Just today, a youth named Elisha Yered, who resides in southern Shomron, was placed under administrative arrest for at least 24 hours, with no explanation. He has been living in the Jordan Valley for the last several months because of a restraining order signed by Gen. Fuchs. An IDF military court shortened the order, such that it was to end three weeks from now. In the meanwhile, however, Fuchs submitted an appeal of this decision – and Yered suddenly found himself under arrest. 

Approximately six other Jews are currently being held in administrative detention. Just this past Friday, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant signed a four-month order against one youth, leading to strong criticism by the Honenu civil rights organization: "Gallant is acting like the representative of the US in the Israeli government. There seem to be no laws, no government – just orders from Biden, the result of a campaign to blacken the settlers by anti-Semitic organizations abroad. Israel deserves its own Minister of Defense, not one acting on behalf of the U.S." 

Fried further reported that MK Tzvi Sukkot (Religious Zionism), Chairman of the Knesset Subcommittee on Judea/Samaria Affairs, turned to the IDF Spokesman and asked that an announcement be issued denying the phenomenon of "settler violence." Sukkot said today, however, that no official announcement to this effect has yet been issued. 

Also just recently, the IDF Prosecution announced that because of a "lack of evidence," it will not indict axe-wielding Arab attackers of a Jew. The reason is that the Israel Police refuse to question the Jew, for two reasons: He is still undergoing operations after having been seriously wounded in the attack, including a loss of consciousness, and also because of the message it would give over. "This was a nationalist attack of Arab terrorism against a Jewish victim, and we will not cooperate with placing the blame on the latter," Fried was told in the name of the police. Thus, just a month after the nearly fatal attack, the perpetrators have been set free.  

In short, it may be justifiably said that the "settler violence" being bandied about in high-level negotiating rooms and in the media should more correctly be applied to the violence perpetrated upon the settlers.

Terrorists Who "Give Up" Must Still be Shot

by Michael Puah in INN, translated by Hillel Fendel. 

This past Thursday, Yuval Kestelman shot and killed a terrorist who had just murdered three Jews, then raised his hands and showed that he had no bomb on him – and was shot and killed by a reserves soldier who thought he was a terrorist. Was the soldier wrong?  

The death of the hero Yuval Kestelman was very shocking and tragic – but it must not confuse us: Terrorists who commit, or try to commit, murderous attacks must be killed. 

Yuval was a true hero. This past Thursday morning, he ran towards two Hamas terrorists who were in the midst of gunning down Jews at the entrance to Jerusalem. He was practically on top of one of them when he, together with two IDF reserves soldiers, shot and killed him and the other terrorist. He thus saved many people. However, in the midst of the raging battle, and specifically because he was so close to the terrorists, the soldiers thought he was one of the attackers. Yuval raised his hands, and even his shirt, but it didn't help him: The soldiers figured that terrorists can also raise their hands and shirt. At least one of them fired, and Yuval was taken to the hospital with wounds from which he would not recover. 

This terrible incident is hard to swallow and raises strong emotions from all angles. The heart of the question is: Should terrorists engaged in an attack, but who appear to present no threat at the moment, be shot? 

The raising of hands during warfare is a universally agreed-upon signal by which to signal surrender. According to Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention, armed forces that lay down their arms must be treated humanely. The idea is that when armies battle against each other, a soldier who lays down his arms and raises his hands thus leaves the circle of combat and becomes a prisoner of war, whose rights are clear and defined by the Convention. 

However, Article 4 of the same Convention states that these principles apply only to parties that are bound to the Convention and who bear an identifying mark that can be identified from afar. Clearly, terrorists who murder civilians do not operate according to the laws of war and do not identify themselves in advance. Their claim to protection by virtue of their raising hands and laying down weapons does therefore not apply to them.  

For years, the judicial establishment and the Israeli left operated in opposition to this principle and sought to imbue us with the deception that it is forbidden to kill a terrorist after he raises his hands or is wounded. [Translator's note: This phenomenon continues even as this is being translated: IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Hertzi HaLevy said this afternoon that terrorists with their hands up should not be shot…] This undermines our ability to protect ourselves. It has led terrorists to take advantage and continue to shoot even after they had "given up."  

Even worse, citizens and soldiers who endangered their lives to liquidate terrorists have found themselves under interrogation, even being punished, for their courageous actions. We all remember the trial and imprisonment of El'or Azariah, whose case brought the issue to the heart of the headlines. 

Of late, the understanding was beginning to take root that a terrorist who even merely attempted murder, and all the more so if he succeeded, must not come out of the attack alive. This, even though the Shabak would then be unable to interrogate him and obtain important information. On the other hand, the deterrence factor is invaluable, and in addition, we will also be saved from having to hold him in luxurious prison conditions throughout his life – or at least until the next prisoner exchange… 

A dead terrorist will not be able to serve as a bargaining chip for the release of Israeli hostages, will never be released in any deal, and will certainly not return to terrorist activity, as many prisoners who were freed did – including Hamas chieftain Yichye Sinwar. In short, a dead terrorist will never kill again. Killing terrorists under these conditions is the appropriate way to act, morally and justly – even though it can also be painfully dangerous, as unfortunately happened in the death of Yuval Kestelman. 

We can sum up and say that whoever shoots, even when seemingly justifiably, must be very cautious and focused. But as a society that desires to exist, we must support and back even soldiers who make a mistake.  

The IDF announcement that no one whose hands are raised may be shot, and the interrogation "under caution" and the arrest of the soldier in the Kestelman shooting, endanger all of us. It returns the State of Israel to the old and dangerous conceptions that brought us to the horrific events of this past Simchat Torah. To liken the terrorists of Hamas in any way to soldiers protected by the Geneva Convention is simply an unethical comparison. It grants preference to the cruel perpetrators of atrocities over Israeli citizens and soldiers who endanger their lives in battle with them. This mistaken "morality" sometimes even enables the terrorists to continue their cruel attacks – whether immediately in the same attack, or later after they are released. 

The killing of the courageous Yuval Kestelman is truly heart-rending – but we must not allow harm to befall soldiers who made a mistake, no matter how grave the results. The soldiers involved must be questioned at length, so that we can learn from their mistakes. But they must not be questioned under caution, i.e., with the express suspicion that they have committed a crime. Nor must they be taken to task for the way they acted under the pressure of a hopefully life-saving mission that lasted for mere seconds. Similarly, confiscating their weapons and imposing other disciplinary measures against these heroic soldiers is liable to cost us immediate responses in future attacks.  

We don't want to castrate ourselves as a society that desires life, and we don't want further murders. 

To be Continued – or Else

by Emmanuel Shiloh, editor of the Besheva newspaper, translated by Hillel Fendel. 

The release of some of the hostages is a sacred goal, achieved in the merit of the successful military campaign – but the destruction of Hamas is absolutely critical to the very existence of the State of Israel.  

1. The release of some 60 of our brothers and sisters from Hamas captivity is primarily a clear sign of the great success of our forces' successful ground operation in Gaza City and throughout the northern Gaza Strip. 

Each of our hostages comes at the price of three freed Palestinian terrorist prisoners, not including – for now – those who actually murdered Jews. This is a very problematic price ethically, as well as a security danger – but it is still a low price compared to other exchanges in the past. Most notably, our soldier Gilad Shalit's freedom was achieved after over five years at the price of more than 1,000 (!) terrorist prisoners. Among them, incidentally or not, was current Hamas PalestiNazi chieftain arch-murderer Yihye Sinwar. He clearly would not have agreed to such a low price in the current deal if his military situation were not so desperate, threatening not only his own life but also that of the entire Hamas regime in Gaza. 

2. The ground attack in Gaza, with great Divine help, support from the Israel Air Force, and cooperation from many different IDF units, has dealt Hamas a decisive blow. We have killed thousands of terrorists and destroyed weapons and arms production facilities on a huge scale. We have conquered fortified strongholds and large areas, and taken over symbols of government such as the Gaza parliament building, the main court, and the particularly problematic Shifa Hospital. Yes, dozens of wonderful young soldiers and commanders have paid with their lives – each of whom was an entire world unto himself – but the number of casualties is significantly lower than what we feared and what our enemies hoped.  

The cruel Sinwar and his henchmen also understand that even the elaborate tunnels enterprise that they have built up for years so that they can hide out like rats [keep in mind that Hizbullah chief Nasrallah has reportedly not left his bunker in Beirut since 2006, for fear of Israeli assassination] will not last long. It has been severely damaged over the weeks of war, and with G-d's help our forces will soon totally destroy it. And so, just days before Israel was to complete its conquest of above-ground Gaza and begin dealing in earnest with the underground Gaza, suddenly Hamas showed its willingness to release hostages at bargain prices. This is because what most interests Sinwar is not the release of his Hamas comrades, but a ceasefire.  

3. Israel set for itself two major objectives in the current war: the destruction of Hamas, both militarily and politically, and the release of all the 240 or so Israelis and others taken hostage on Simchat Torah, October 7th. Israel has made good progress in both these areas, showing that the military pressure helps advance the goal of freeing our hostages.  

Sinwar is hoping that the ceasefire will extricate him from his hopeless predicament. Now that he has achieved a ceasefire of five or six days, he is hoping for a permanent ceasefire and an end to the war altogether. Reports are that he has offered to free every single last hostage to that end. But as Finance Minister Betzalel Smotrich has said, such a deal would mean the end of Israel – for it would put Israel's weakest points on display for the entire Arab world to see. 

At present, Sinwar is hoping to offer ten additional hostages for each extra day of ceasefire. The Israeli government has already approved up to ten ceasefire days for this purpose; more than that would require another Cabinet meeting and vote. It will not be easy for the Netanyahu government to reject a proposal for the release of additional hostages, even at the cost of more ceasefire days. And then, the longer the ceasefire lasts, the international pressure to make it permanent and final will only increase. 

At the same time, it comes as no surprise that Hamas is utilizing this ceasefire period to reorganize and rearm its battered and scattered forces. This is liable to be no small threat to the IDF when the fighting resumes.  

4. No one disputes the fact that by agreeing to these days of ceasefire, Israel has taken upon itself a heavy risk, on behalf of the sacred goal of the release of some of the hostages and their return to their families. It can hopefully be assumed that before the IDF leaders encouraged the government to agree to this deal, they checked carefully and found that we have the ability to avoid harm to our soldiers - both during the ceasefire and also after Hamas has had the chance to reorganize before the fighting resumes.  

As far as Israel is concerned, the greatest danger we face is that the ceasefire will in fact be extended and that the war will end without a decisive defeat and destruction of Hamas. We simply cannot tolerate a situation in which Hamas continues to present a security danger to the communities of the Gaza envelope that were so cruelly targeted on Oct. 7th – and thus to Israel in general. Sinwar entered into the current agreement with the hope that it would lead to a permanent ceasefire, and the Israeli government promised that this would not happen. The upcoming days will tell which side was smarter.  

5. Let us present the current dilemma in the most biting and painful manner: If Hamas would actually offer us the immediate return of all the captives in exchange for the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and a years-long ceasefire, should Israel accept it? Keep in mind, as noted, that hints to this effect have already been received.  

This would present a head-on clash between the war's two objectives, because in such a case, the hostages would be released, but Hamas would be far from destroyed. 

There are those who hold that the goal of freeing the hostages must take priority over all else. Yet, despite the pain and difficulty in saying this, they are wrong – bitterly so. The terrible blow that Israel suffered that black Shabbat of Simchat Torah leaves us with absolutely no option of leaving this ruthless Palestinazi Amalekite in the region as a viable entity.  

Our own viability as a state is nil if we do not engrave in the consciousness of all our many enemies that whoever attacks us so cruelly, directly decrees upon himself death and destruction.  

Every Arab country in the wider region, from Yemen to Lebanon to Iran, as well as those who have signed peace treaties with us, will be looking closely at our reaction. They will want to know if, though we were caught by surprise, we still know how to act as the regional superpower we claim to be - or if we are truly only a paper tiger and they can start planning our destruction, Heaven forbid.  

There is no greater Torah ideal and commandment than the redemption of captives – except for the redemption of the entire State of Israel from an existential threat.  

6. These days, as we receive dozens of our captives with both joy and tears, our military commanders and forces in Gaza will require every last ounce of patience and restraint, in order to hold back at present but still retain total readiness for whatever might come – as well as preparedness to resume their brave and successful fight on short notice. They can take comfort in the knowledge that the return of the women and children to their families was achieved only in the merit of their dedication, courage, and prowess. They know that the entire Nation of Israel stands behind them in prayer and with support and admiration, and eagerly awaits the resumption of the successful offensive as soon as possible. 

We are all of the hope and prayer that all of the captives, including the soldiers, be released quickly and without the need to pay dangerous prices. We similarly hope and pray that the supreme goal of the campaign will soon be realized: the obliteration of the memory of the Hamas Amalekite enemy from under the heavens and from under the earth.

Not the PA and Not Egypt

by Emmanuel Shiloh, editor of the Besheva newspaper, translated by Hillel Fendel. 

Post-war Gaza must be under the total security control of Israel. Control over the residents must not be in the hands of unfriendly foreigners –
but the best solution is consensual immigration.

1. The entire nation is supporting our soldiers – logistically, motivationally, and in other ways – as they successfully battle in Gaza and inflict ever-increasing damage on Hamas-ISIS. The latter, for its part, is trying very hard to achieve a ceasefire while cynically and cruelly using the 240-or-so hostages as a pressure point. Most of our attention is focused on the two major goals of the campaign: the destruction of Hamas and its government organs, and the rescue of the hostages and their safe return home. There is an unshakable and welcome national consensus around these two goals, and unity of opinion and hearts is particularly important at this time. At the same time, however, we are not exempt from dealing with "the day after." Prime Minister Netanyahu and other government ministers have made some bombastic but unspecific announcements regarding what will be in Gaza when the IDF completes its missions there, and the Americans seem to have strong opinions on the matter as well. While position papers are quietly beginning to be prepared, we must not be taken by surprise. If we want to influence these plans, we must be ready and prepared. It will be a true tragedy if the ones who frame the political and security situation in newly liberated-from-Hamas Gaza come from the same school of thought and mindset that brought upon us the past years' series of catastrophes and various diplomatic and security failures. The list begins with the Oslo Accords, followed by the Disengagement, the Gilad Shalit terrorists exchange, and the conception that Hamas terrorism could be "contained" with bi-annual "rounds" of battles, the Iron Dome, and the border fence that ultimately was so tragically and easily scaled. 2. On the security front, Israel learned in the most painful way that what it has to do from now on is to prevent, at all costs, its Arab enemy from arming itself and building its military force. The Oslo Accords designers promised us that in the areas given over to PA control, the only weapons PA men would bear would be the light arms necessary for routine, or routine-plus, police work. But this concept broke down within a few years, and the security situation in Judea and Samaria – and especially in Gaza – has deteriorated severely ever since. Even the thought that we can function for years alongside a cruel enemy that wishes to destroy us and actively builds himself a military force for this purpose, has proven to be an illusion. We made a bitter mistake when we thought that we were safe and protected, that our intelligence always knows how to read the enemy's intentions, and that we would always be strong enough to deter them from realizing their dream of "itbah al-Yahud [slaughter the Jew]" that is so central to their religion and culture. We thought we learned this lesson 50 years ago after the Yom Kippur War – but no. It took another 1,200-plus dead Israelis, and some 240 abductees, to teach it to us once again. Once again, our intelligence misread the map, underestimated the enemy's capabilities and intentions, and trusted our fortified border which proved to be insufferably weak. The conclusion is clear: Our intelligence must always be improved, but even more important is to ensure that future mistakes will not have such catastrophic consequences. This can be done by ensuring that the enemy is never again able to build up his military capabilities to the point that he can harm us. This is true regarding Hamas, regarding Hizbullah – and regarding Iran as well. 3. And yet another lesson must be learned: We can never trust anyone else to do our work for us. When Peres and Rabin gave up Gaza to the control of arch-murderer Arafat, they promised that Arafat would be able to fight Hamas "without the constraints of the Supreme Court and [civil rights org] B'Tselem." But in practice, Arafat had no desire to do this, and Hamas built up its terrorist structures that not only inflicted painful losses upon us, but also led Ariel Sharon and his government to quit Gaza with our tail between our legs. The ideological right-wing and the religious-nationalist public, which fought mightily against the withdrawal from Gush Katif and expulsion of its 9,000 Jews, warned desperately that Gaza would become a center of terror targeting Ashkelon and Ashdod. But even they never really considered the eventuality of an arsenal of thousands of rockets that would reach Tel Aviv and further. Within just two years after Gaza became Jew-free, Hamas violently wrested control of the region from the PA and Fatah. The Jihadistic Hamas terrorist organization thus found itself with the resources of a small country, which it chose not to use these for its citizens' welfare, but to enrich its leaders and prepare militarily to attack Israel however possible. It increased its rocket capabilities, built thousands of launchers, dug an amazing array of underground tunnels, and developed a trained commando force. This past Simchat Torah, it succeeded beyond our worst fears, with cruelty, sadism, and military prowess that caught the IDF by total surprise. 4. It is therefore 100% clear: The Disengagement and the Oslo Accords must be nullified, at least militarily. The IDF must retain, and not just for a short period of time, the ability to act anywhere within Gaza and to nip in the bud any attempt there to build up terrorist and military capabilities. This cannot happen unless we maintain a permanent and massive military presence in various places throughout Gaza. Obviously we have to keep our American friends in mind as well. We must explain to them that it would be totally irresponsible to put our trust in Abu Mazen – PA chief Mahmoud Abbas – in this matter. Aside from the fact that he is aging and will not be around forever, he himself supports and encourages terrorism. Under his leadership, the PA has centered itself around a culture of adulation of terrorists and murderers, and educates its young children to hate Jews. The only reasons why Judea/Samaria is not a headquarters for Gaza-like rockets and terrorists are a) the IDF presence and b) the half-million Jewish "settlers." Can Egypt be considered for the task of policing Gaza? No. Egypt is not a true friend of Israel, and is liable to turn again into a bitter enemy at any time. The relative stability of our peace agreement with Egypt leans heavily on the ban on significant military forces in the vast expanses of the Sinai Desert buffer between us and them. Bringing the Egyptians to Gaza would create a new temptation for them to try to harm Israel – dangerous not only in and of itself, but also a threat to the Camp David agreements that are somehow still holding up. The idea of an international peacekeeping force is a non-starter. This is because the motivation of a hodge-podge group of soldiers to do an effective job far from their own homes, in a dangerous situation, is basically nil. We have seen this in other areas on Israeli borders and around the world. No foreign army, and certainly not a UN force, can do our work for us. 5. So who then will run the lives of the Gazans when the war ends? The most practical answer to this question might be to return to the format of an IDF Military Administration, as existed before the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995. Other methods have been tried, but this one seems to have been the safest and most effective not only for Israel, but also for the Arabs of Gaza. But it could be that this idea will not go over well even within the Israeli populace. Another solution, then, is to divide Gaza into separate cantons, in which representatives of the local family clans [hamulot] will reign. This will prevent the development of a central government in Gaza that will be able to translate its economic power into military force. The Gazan regional "governments," with their authority dependent upon Israel, will be obligated to prevent incitement and terrorism. It will be up to us to ensure that the destruction that Hamas brought upon the Arabs of Gaza always be remembered by those who will rule and live there from now on. And after this canton system proves itself in Gaza, and after Abu Mazen leaves the scene, we can replicate it in Judea and Samaria as well.

Return to Gush Katif?

In truth, we can and should strive for even more. After Gaza City becomes uninhabitable, maybe we can convince the international community that, instead of chipping in to rebuild it once again, a more correct solution would be to spread the population of the Arab terror capital among various countries of the world. When Rehavam Ze'evi raised the idea of an agreed-upon transfer as a solution to the Palestinian problem, he was ostracized and denounced as a racist extremist. But now, after the horrific pogrom committed by the Gazans, a "transfer" of some sort doesn't seem as outlandish as it did. Even in the left-wing kibbutzim just east of Gaza, people are saying that they won't return home until Gaza is erased and they can see the Mediterranean from their homes. So why should Gaza remain desolate? Let's make sure that what the kibbutz members see from their homes will be good Jews, including soldiers who fought to liberate Gaza, living in beautiful new Jewish neighborhoods built on the beachfront of Israeli Gaza. Amen!