Christians United for Israel: Brog's Blog

Victory in the Senate- February 1, 2010
Last Thursday, the United States Senate passed the Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act. This legislation combines CUFI's two top legislative priorities into one bill. In particular, this legislation 1) authorizes the President to impose tough new sanctions on any company that sells gasoline or other refined petroleum products to Iran and 2) provides legal protection to state and local governments and fund managers who divest from energy companies doing business with Iran.

This bill passed by voice vote, with no senator objecting. Similar legislation passed the House of Representatives in December. Finally, both houses of Congress have acted to employ the toughest economic means at our disposal to stop Iran from going nuclear.

This Senate action is a significant victory for CUFI. We have made these Iran santions bills the focus of our Capitol Hill meetings for the past two years. We have also sent repeated action alerts to sustain momentum for them -- and you have responded by contacting your legislators in overwhelming numbers. We know that our efforts demonstrated to Congress that support for tough Iran sanctions was broad and deep across America. And we know that our focus and persistence made it clear to Congress that we would not sit by quietly if they failed to act.

While this Senate vote is an important milestone, our work is not yet complete. These Iran bills will now go to a conference committee to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate versions. Then each chamber must vote once more on the compromise language that emerges.

We promise to continue closely monitoring the progress of this legislation. We will let you know if and when we once again need your help to ensure that this legislation continues to move forward.

No one knows for sure if these sanctions will stop Iran's steady march towards nuclear weapons. But the fact that weak sanctions have not worked in the past is no excuse for not trying tough sanctions now. And we all know that the stakes are too high not to try all peaceful means at our disposal.

Haiti: A Window to Israel's Soul- January 25, 2010
Last Thursday, we sent out an e-mail appeal inviting you to donate to an Israeli nonprofit -- IsraAID -- doing lifesaving work on the front lines in Haiti. This was a departure for Christians United for Israel. At our Nights to Honor Israel, we typically raise funds for charities doing work in Israel proper. We save our e-mail appeals for raising the funds that enable us to continue our own operations here at home. But we believed that the emergency in Haiti demanded an exception. We have been encouraged to see from your generous response that you agree.

As we watched the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, we were proud to learn that Israeli search teams were among the first to rescue survivors, and that Israeli medical teams had taken the lead in treating them. I know that this pride was widespread throughout the pro-Israel community. Over and over again, friends of Israel forwarded each other links to videos and articles praising Israel's humanitarian efforts. It was as if members of our own family had traveled down to Haiti to help.

Why such a groundswell of pride? After all, this is hardly the first time that Israel has accomplished an amazing feat. Israel defeated five Arab armies in six days. Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor. Israel has more high technology companies listed on the NASDAQ than any other country in the world except for the United States. The list of outsized accomplishments goes on.

Yet the fact is that Israel's efforts in Haiti do touch us more deeply, and they do so for a reason that goes to the very heart of our Judeo-Christian values. In Leviticus, God commands the children of Israel to love their neighbors as themselves. Jesus would later cite this commandment as one of the two most important in the Bible (next to loving God). The rabbis who wrote the Talmud would do likewise. "Whoever saves a life," the Talmud teaches "it is as if he has saved the entire world." In addition, both Judaism and Christianity anticipate that Israel will play a special role in bringing these blessings of love and respect to all mankind: "and through Israel will all of the nations of the world be blessed."

Both Judaism and Christianity stress the supreme value of human life and the need to love our fellow human beings. Yet when it comes to our support for Israel, we rarely get to celebrate these higher values. Harsh reality forces us -- as it forces the Israelis themselves -- to turn our attention to war and security. Israel is locked in a battle for its very survival with terrorists and fanatics. To defend its citizens, Israeli soldiers must often fight terrorists who plot and attack from the midst of civilian centers. And, as we know from our own experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, such battles too often result in the injury and even death of innocents.

The fact is that Israel's enemies force her and her supporters into roles we despise. The Israelis must embrace -- and we must explain -- the use of guns, missiles and other machinery of death. Yet last week, for a brief moment, we saw Israel playing the role that the Bible promised it would play. For a welcome interval, the Israelis got to do the work they and we have always longed to do. Suddenly, it was as if the dark struggle for survival was put on hold, and Israel could finally emerge into the bright sunshine of our most cherished values. To many observers, Israel's display of humanitarian zeal was a surprise they dismissed as a mere ploy. To us, Israel's efforts were a reminder of the deep humanism we've always recognized in this embattled ally and its people.

Soon, the news from Haiti will begin to fade. Israel will return to the often ugly work of fighting a war on terror that appears to be without end. The world will soon return to seeing Israel as the aggressor and the oppressor. But we will remember Haiti. And we will remember what we've known in our hearts all along: through Israel will all of the nations of the world be blessed. The sooner that Israel is finally living in peace with her neighbors, the sooner the Israelis will be free to focus their energy on what really matters most: serving humanity. We will stand by Israel in its fight while we join the Israelis in their daily prayers to learn war no more.

Missiles being fired from Gaza into southern Israel. Iran marching steadily towards the production of nuclear weapons. Hezbollah and Hamas smuggling and stockpiling arms.

Welcome to 2010. The year may be a new one. But Israel's problems remain largely the same as last year, and the year before.

The persistence of Israel's problems can tempt us to two equally troubling reactions. The first reaction is to grow weary. There are no quick fixes in Israel. No easy answers. Who knew that standing with Israel would be so hard and take so long?

The response, of course, is that we're still novices. Israel has faced such threats for over 61 years, since before the state was even created. The names of her enemies may have changed over time, but the threat of military and terrorist attacks have been a constant. The Israelis have learned to persevere -- and even prosper -- in the face of such endless conflict. We who seek to stand with Israel need to do likewise. We must pray that peace will come tomorrow. But we must be prepared for a long struggle.

The fact is that peace will come only when Israel's enemies truly understand that Israel is here to stay and can never be destroyed. Yet so many of these enemies think not in terms of years or even decades, but centuries. Israel, they claim, will go the way of the crusader kingdom in Jerusalem which lasted "only" 120 years. In short, Israel's enemies take the long view. So must we.

A second reaction to the long-term nature of this conflict, equally dangerous, would be to grow complacent. Despite all the dire warnings, all the threats, Israel is thriving. Hamas is still surrounded. Iran is still without nuclear weapons. No worries. No need to respond to news accounts or action alerts. The Middle East is all sound and fury, but deep down the noise signifies nothing.

Such a view, of course,overlooks the miracle of Israel's survival. And it fails to recognize the larger, quite ominous trends. Israel survives not through inertia, but by constant vigilance. And some threats are growing alarmingly more dangerous by the day. No, Iran is not yet nuclear. But it is far closer to achieving this goal than ever before. Back in 2006, Hezbollah could not strike Tel Aviv with its missiles. Today it can.

We dare not take Israel's existence for granted. We must take the long view. But we must understand that these will not be years of treading water. Our efforts will feel more like swimming against the tide just to stay in place.

So welcome to 2010. We promise no easy answers or quick fixes. We promise only that you can play a role in the ongoing miracle that is Israel. Peace will come when Israel's enemies understand that they cannot destroy her. When millions of Christians across this country openly dedicate themselves to Israel's survival, it sends a powerful message that Israel is indeed here to stay. We have an important role to play. And we dare not grow weary in well doing.

Merry Christmas - December 21, 2009
The end of a year is always a time of introspection. As one year officially passes into the next, we naturally tend to reflect on the year that has passed. We think about our mistakes, our missed opportunities. If we are wise, we also count are blessings.

As I look back over 2009, I know that I have much to be thankful for. And among the greatest of my blessings are the opportunity I have to work for Christians United For Israel and the people I have met through this work.

Israel is not an easy issue - it is complex and controversial. In supporting Israel, we often find ourselves sharing difficult realities - we must sound the alarm about Iran, we must warn of Hezbollah. We must be the ones to remind our neighbors that there is evil in the world. We must bear witness to dangers so many would much prefer to ignore.

No, Israel is not easy. Thus, I find that those Christians who choose to stand up for Israel are so often people of great love and good courage. You weren't born into this issue like so many of us in the Jewish Community. You have chosen to take it on. You have volunteered to make Israel's fight, your fight. You have decided to truly love your Jewish neighbor as yourself.

As I reflect on the most important people in my life, I am always amazed at how many of them are people I have had the privilege of meeting through our work, people on our staff. Our state and city directors, and the people I have visited in communities across America who demonstrate such pure Christian love through their dedication to this cause. Part of the blessing of blessing Israel comes to us immediately, in the form of each other.

As the year comes to an end, I pray that you also look back on 2009 and likewise count CUFI among your blessings. I look forward to working with all of you in 2010. And I wish all of you a very merry Christmas.
Top

Evil Does Exist In The World - December 14, 2009
Accepting his Nobel Peace Prize in Norway last week, President Obama shared a crucial insight with those in attendance. It was an insight with which many of the assembled dignitaries no doubt disagreed. It was an insight which I was not sure Obama himself embraced until the words left his lips. President Obama stated that: "Evil does exist in the world."

This observation -- that evil exists in the world -- is one of the core Judeo-Christian contributions to Western civilization. This recognition of the reality of evil has been the ideological bedrock of conservative thought. Acknowledging the reality of evil has likewise been the foundation of the pragmatic liberalism of men such as Reinhold Niebuhr and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. This is the key insight which separates those who resist evil from those who collaborate with it.

Recognizing that evil exists in the world might seem to many of us to be as basic as recognizing that trees exist in the world. No PhD required here. Yet know this -- millions of your fellow Westerners refuse to acknowledge the reality of evil. They don't see the trees, and thus they do not see the dark forest.

In recent decades, the idea that there is no absolute good and evil in the world has taken root in our universities and sprouted branches deep into our culture. What you and I might see as evil, many people simply characterize as being the "different" path of a "unique" culture. And who are we to judge others? Such fuzzy relativism results in a shocking moral paralysis. And it leads those who refuse to judge our enemies to judge, and judge quite harshly, those among us who dare to do so.

Thus when our leaders have recognized evil in the world and called it by its name, they have been subject to sustained and vociferous condemnation. Recall the reaction when Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an "evil empire." Remember the response when George W. Bush spoke of an "Axis of Evil" comprised of Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Each remark was greeted with complete shock and outrage -- not only by those so accused, but by so many mainstream observers right here at home.

The fact that President Obama both recognizes the existence of evil in the world and is wiling to say so in such a prominent public setting is thus extremely important. Furthermore, Obama did not merely make the observation in the abstract. Like Reagan and Bush, he named names. In his speech, President Obama noted that the Nazis were evil and that we therefore could not have defeated them without force. More importantly, he acknowledged that Al Qaeda is evil and that negotiations thus cannot convince them to lay down their arms.

The urgent question before us now is whether our President recognizes that Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah fall into the same category as Al Qaeda. Does he see that Iran is ruled by an evil regime, and that Hamas and Hezbollah are evil organizations? Does this lead him to conclude that the threats they pose cannot be eliminated through negotiations?

Last month, Iran snubbed the International Atomic Energy Agency's demands to stop its illegal nuclear program and vowed instead to escalate it. Since then there has been a renewed momentum towards imposing serious economic sanctions upon Iran. There are indications that the Obama Administration is finally prepared to support such sanctions as the best way to prevent a nuclear Iran. While long overdue, these sanctions remain the most effective peaceful means we have our disposal to convince the Iranians to abandon their dangerous course.

It is good that the President recognizes that evil exists in the the world. Now let's hope that he knows it when he sees it.

The Two No's - November 30, 2009
As we enjoyed our long Thanksgiving weekend, we received troubling news from the Middle East. On two fronts, good faith efforts were made to diffuse threats to Israel and the United States through negotiation and diplomacy. And in each case, these efforts were flatly rejected. In Israel’s long search for peace and security, such rejection is hardly new. Last week two more “no’s” were added to the large number of rebuffs that have rained down on Israel like so many enemy missiles.

On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made a significant gesture aimed at luring the Palestinians back to the negotiating table: he unilaterally declared a 10-month moratorium on building new homes in the West Bank. Despite Netanyahu’s reputation as a hawk, this was in fact an unprecedented concession. As Defense Minister Ehud Barak, himself a former prime minister, noted: “This step was not carried out in the Olmert government or in the Sharon government, not in my government and not in Yitzhak Rabin's government either. For the first time, we are suspending all new construction for an extended period and therefore giving peace negotiations a chance."

In response to this gesture, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued a prompt and clear “no.” Speaking from Venezuela, where he was visiting the virulently anti-American Hugo Chavez, Abbas stated that the construction freeze "didn't bring anything new because the occupation is going to continue in the West Bank and in Jerusalem. The Israeli prime minister had to choose between peace and occupation. Lamentably, he chose occupation."

In other words, Abbas is refusing to resume negotiations because Israel had not given him what he ultimately seeks in advance of negotiations. Yet the only reason why Israel still controls the West Bank is because the Palestinians have failed to meet their obligation to stop terrorism against Israel. Yes, Abbas’ American-trained security forces have for the first time begun to engage Palestinian militants and defeat them. But they have hardly ended the terrorist threat. According to Israeli sources, the Israeli army typically carries out between 10 and 20 raids into West Bank towns every night to prevent attacks against Israel.

Abbas' “no” was followed by an even more ominous rejection. On Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors voted 25 to 3 to censure Iran for hiding the existence of a uranium enrichment facility near Qom in violation of international law. Thanks to prodding from the Obama Administration and our European allies, even Russia and China joined us in voting to censure Iran.

In the face of this international resolve, Iran could have said yes to disclosures and negotiations. Instead, it did the exact opposite: Iran issued an immediate “no” to the IAEA and the international community. On Sunday, the Iranian Cabinet responded to the criticism over one illegal uranium enrichment plant by ordering the construction of ten new uranium enrichment plants.

These two “no’s” must serve as a reminder to all of us who support Israel in her struggle for survival. So many in the world and in the media want to believe that Israeli intransigence is the source of all of Israel’s problems – and ours – in the Middle East. This is a lovely dream. If reasonable and civilized Israel is the source of our troubles, then all can be well in the world. But the truth is more troubling. The conflict in the Middle East is fueled largely by the failure of so many in the region to reconcile themselves to Israel’s existence and international law. We may not like this reality. But hiding from it will not change it.
Top

Peace and Prosperity, In Palestinian Hands - November 17, 2009
Last month brought some extremely important news from the Middle East. The International Monetary Fund reported that the Palestinian economy in the West Bank was on track to grow at a 7% rate this year. Other West Bank economic indicators for 2009 are also quit promising. Daily wages are up 24%. The Palestinian Stock Exchange is up 18% percent. Over 2,000 new Palestinian companies have been created. Unemployment is falling. While most economies around the globe are suffering, the West Bank is booming.

Observers attribute this growth to two factors. For starters, the Palestinian security forces have grown more active and effective in combating terrorism against Israel and lawlessness in general. And, in response, Israel has quickly reciprocated by removing a series of security checkpoints and road barriers that slow the transfer of goods and services in the West Bank. Indeed, the World Bank emphasized that the only way this economic expansion could be maintained was if Israel continued to lift these barriers to free movement.

Far from resisting these efforts to ease restrictions on Palestinian commerce, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has been an active proponent thereof. In fact, he ran for office pledging to create the conditions for an “economic peace” with the Palestinians by removing the obstacles to their growth as quickly as possible. Since taking office, Netanyahu has dismantled 15 major West Bank checkpoints, and he’s promised that still more will go.

Despite these positive developments, many of Israel’s critics continue to complain. They stress that the Palestinian economy declined steadily after 2000, when Israel first put most of these roadblocks in place. Israel’s decision to finally remove some of these obstacles, they argue, is hardly a cause for gratitude or celebration.

This argument – blaming Israel as if it is operates in a vacuum -- fails to acknowledge the extent to which the Palestinians truly control their own destiny. These critics do not note, and will not admit, that Israel put up the roadblocks in 2000 for the most urgent of reasons: to stop Palestinian terrorists from continuing a wave of bloody suicide bombings that had taken hundreds of Israeli lives. In dismantling some of these barriers, Israel is taking a very real risk that it may enable the resumption of such attacks. The more cars that pass between Israel and the West Bank, the greater the chance that some of these cars will carry explosives, guns or terrorists on the return trip to Israel. Whether Israel removes more roadblocks, or is forced to rebuild old ones, depends entirely on whether Palestinians use their new freedom of movement for commerce or terrorism.

Israel’s critics also note that while economic growth is good, it is no substitute for a peace agreement and an independent state. Fair enough. But no one in Israel is arguing that Palestinian economic growth is an end in itself. Netanyahu and others have stressed instead that such growth is first step towards peace and an independent state, and makes both more likely. A class of Palestinians who are building businesses and thriving economically could significantly bolster a constituency for peace that has thus far been too small and weak. Peace, like prosperity, has been the victim of terrorism. Peace, like prosperity, can and will emerge as soon as terror is extinguished.

Thus two paths lay before the Palestinians – one leads towards peace and continued economic growth, the other towards terror and a return to poverty. Israel has demonstrated time after time that if the Palestinians get serious about fighting terror, it will respond with immediate concessions and take real risks for peace. The more the Palestinians reject the gun and embrace the olive branch, the more they will progress. If the Palestinians choose life, 7% growth rates are only the beginning of the benefits they will reap.
Top

The Friendships That Sustain Us - November 2, 2009
Last week, Pastor Hagee’s Cornerstone Church held its 28^th annual Night to Honor Israel. It was a spectacular event. The orchestra and choir performed rousing songs in impressive Hebrew. The audience waved Israeli flags and cheered themselves hoarse. Pastor Hagee gave a stem winding speech.

One of the highlights of the evening, and actually of my lifetime, was the keynote address given by Elie Wiesel. For those who don’t know him, Elie Wiesel is the most famous Holocaust survivor alive today. He shared his experiences in the hell of Auschwitz in a number of important books, most notably his memoir Night. And he turned his anguish in that place into a deep pool of comapassion for all who suffer genocide and opppression. Elie Wiesel has devoted his life to combating genocide and atrocity across the globe. And for these efforts he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986.

The Cornerstone crowd greeted Wiesel with a sustained standing ovation. And he quickly returned the favor. “Life is not made of years but of moments,” Wiesel observed, “and tonight I had to come here to live a privileged moment, to be with you.” Referring to the massive Christian crowd gathered to stand in solidarity with Israel, Wiesel noted, “Never in the history of my people have we witnessed an event such as this.”

As Mr. Wiesel was leaving the church that night, we introduced him to another friend of CUFI, a Holocaust survivor named Irving Roth. Mr. Roth greeted Mr. Wiesel and reminded him that they had actually met once before. When Wiesel asked where it was that they had met, Roth responded, “Block 66, in Auschwitz.” Over 60 years earlier, these two men had lived in the same barracks in the same death camp, and survived the same hell. They were finally reunited in San Antonio, in the Cornerstone Church, at a Night to Honor Israel.

The fact that these and so many other Holocaust survivors regularly come to CUFI events and embrace our work might strike some as surprising. Wouldn’t these Jews who suffered so terribly at the hands of gentiles be the most wary of them? But we typically see the exact opposite reaction. These men who have experienced the darkest of nights have become much more sensitive to the light. They are able to discern the brightness where others cannot. And they see much light, and great hope, in our work.

More specifically, these survivors understand that the Holocaust was possible precisely because too many Christians were silent when the Jews of Europe were being taken away and slaughtered. When they meet Christians who recognize this failure, who ask forgiveness for it, and who are determined never again to repeat it, they respond in the healthiest of fashions – they return the embrace.

These survivors have seen enough evil in their lifetimes. They know the craggy contours of its face. They do not need to invent it or imagine it where it does not exist. And they see in our efforts not evil, but its antithesis. As one Holocaust survivor put it after a recent Night to Honor Israel, “If only Christians had embraced us like this back in Europe, there would not have been a Holocaust.”

At times our work in CUFI can be discouraging. Standing up for Israel is not easy. And too often, people who know nothing about us jump to the ugliest of conclusions. They ignore our words and actions while ceaselessly searching for the obscure quote that might be manipulated to support their darkest fantasies and conspiracy theories.

Such small souls could learn much from our friends. When Elie Wiesel met Irving Roth, they expressed no surprise at the context of their reunion. They abandoned their fantasies about humanity long ago. And with deep realism, and eternal hope, they recognize friends when they see them.

There is enough honor in the friendship of men such as these to sustain us in our work for a lifetime.
Top

Mistakes Are Not War Crimes - October 19, 2009
Last week, the United Nations Human Rights Council voted overwhelmingly to endorse the Goldstone Report and send it to the United Nations Security Council. The Goldstone Report -- for those who have managed to avoid this ugly bit of news -- summarizes the findings of the Goldstone Commission which investigated Israel's Operation Cast Lead to stop Hamas rocket fire from Gaza. The report suggests that Israel was guilty of war crimes, and demands that Israel investigate these episodes to the UN's satisfaction. Failure to do so could lead to the prosecution of Israeli soldiers at the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

Israel refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Commission. The resolution authorizing the commission gave it a biased mandate -- to investigate only Israel, not Hamas. Moreover, the commission was sponsored by the notorious UN Human Rights Council (HRC). This body -- like the UN itself -- has an egregious record of singling out Israel for repeated condemnation while largely ignoring genocide and human rights abuses around the world. With nations such as Russia, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia sitting on the council, it is no wonder that they prefer to keep the focus on Israel. And it is no wonder that Israel believed it could not get a fair hearing from such a body.

The Goldstone Report suffers from many flaws. The investigative process was incomplete, and seems to have relied far too heavily on evidence sanctioned by Hamas. As Goldstone himself has acknowledged, the report contains no "evidence" of war crimes by Israel. He has further noted that, "if this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven." Instead, he has called the report a "road map" for future investigations. Of course no one except for Goldstone appears to be treating the report as merely a road map.

The bigger problem is the very premise that underlies the report. While the report does critique the Hamas rocket fire that forced Israel's hand, it largely ignores cause and effect. The report equates the Hamas terrorists who launched the rockets year after year and the Israeli soldiers who sought to stop the rocket fire. The report condemns Israel's operations in civilian areas while largely ignoring the fact that Hamas brought the fighting to these areas by operating in dense neighborhoods from behind human shields. The report sets a standard that not only condemns Israel but, if applied more broadly, would condemn the United States, Britain and any other nation facing the difficult challenge of combating terrorists who take shelter among civilians.

The Human Rights Council's vote came as no surprise. Yet there was at least one unexpected bright spot in the debate that preceded the vote. The former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, Col. Richard Kemp, was permitted to make a statement before the council. Col. Kemp's statement injected an important dose of reality into an otherwise surreal debate. His words were important enough that I have chosen to include them in their entirety. Here is what Col. Kemp told the Human Rights Council:

I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan. I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland, Bosnia and Macedonia; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK government's Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

Hamas, like Hizbullah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes.

More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas's way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians.

Mr. President, Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

And I say this again: The IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Time For Action On Iran - September 21, 2009
During the 2008 campaign, President Obama declared that he was willing to sit down for talks with Iran about its nuclear program “without preconditions.” Given Iran’s long record of delay when it comes to such negotiations, the President clarified early in his administration that he would not wait indefinitely for Iran to join us at the table. The President and our allies set September this September as the deadline for talks to begin.

When September arrived, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad sounded a note of complete defiance.   Taking a break from arresting and torturing his political opponents, Ahmadinejad declared that “the nuclear issue is finished” and that “we will never negotiate on the Iranian nation’s rights.” Days later, Iran followed up by stating that any talks would be limited to a narrow list of topics of its own choosing. Notably absent from this list was its nuclear program.

The Iranian offer to talk about everything except the topic that matters most its nuclear program is too transparent to call a ploy. It is a snub. Even the State Department immediately recognized it as such. The day after Iran issued this offer, State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley called it “unacceptable.” A few days later, however, the Administration reversed itself and declared that it would accept Iran’s offer. Talks are set to begin on October 1.

Such behavior from Iran is hardly new or surprising. For years now, Iran has demonstrated its mastery of the arts of delay and obfuscation. When proposals are made, Iran “analyzes” them for months before asking for further “clarification.” When deadlines are given, Iran waits until the last minute to make an unacceptable counter offer. All the while, Iran maintains a pretext of cooperation that delays the imposition of serious economic sanctions. And all the while, Iran is working clearly, unambiguously, and tirelessly on its nuclear program. As Iran’s diplomats spin their delays, Iran’s centrifuges spin day and night, enriching ever greater amounts of uranium.

Those who support the current negotiations insist that, even if they fail, they are necessary in order to build consensus for sanctions. We must, they tell us, demonstrate to the international community that we tried to talk to Iran first. Such a rationale might have made sense when this process first began years ago. But if all of the talks and delays to date have not yet developed a consensus in support of sanctions, why is there any reason to believe that they will do so now?

The time has come it is actually long overdue that Iran see that it will pay a steep price for continuing its march towards nuclear weapons. The Obama administration will begin talks with Iran in October. We wish them well and pray that our deep skepticism about such talks is proven wrong. But in the meantime, we do not have to sit by silently. In fact, we can actually strengthen the Administration’s bargaining position by making clear to the Iranians that their failure to abandon their nuclear program will be met with crippling economic sanctions. We through Congress can give President Obama a stick with which to strengthen the allure of his carrot.

Last week, we sent out an action alert asking you to contact your Congressmen to support the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009. By targeting Iran’s gasoline imports representing 40% of their total gasoline consumption -- this bill provides for exactly the kind of serious sanctions that no Iranian government could ignore.

CUFI Students in Poland and Israel- August 17, 2009
Yesterday I returned from our first CUFI on Campus trip to Poland and Israel. Our goal was to educate our campus leaders about the tragedies and triumphs of Jewish history and inspire them to greater activism. I have no doubt that this goal was accomplished. These 34 students -- an already impressive bunch -- returned home more committed than ever to speaking out for Israel and better equipped to do so. I look forward to seeing the fruit of their energy and dedication in the coming months.

Yet what impressed me most about our trip was not the impact that it had on our students, but the impact that our students had on those they met. Their ability to touch, and comfort, those on the front lines of the struggle for Jewish memory and survival is a credit to them and to all of the members of CUFI.

Our time in Poland was far from fun. Our mission was to visit the death camps where the Nazis murdered Europe's Jews, including Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Majdanek. On these difficult days, we were blessed with the company and insights of Mr. Irving Roth. Mr. Roth was born in Slovakia in 1928, and he suffered and survived the hell of Auschwitz. Most of his family -- including the brother who was his constant companion -- perished in the Holocaust. Yet Irving is a man filled with a love of God, life and humanity. You will find no greater exemplar of the love at the core of our Judeo-Christian tradition than Irving Roth.

Yet despite all of his optimism, Irving reads the newspapers and worries about the future. Once again he sees the world rising up against the people of Israel with precious few prepared to resist the tide of hate and lies. Thus it was of enormous significance for him to meet a group of young Christian leaders who were both deeply touched by his story and clearly committed to preventing its repetition. He saw in our students a "bulwark" against the renewed "demonization" of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. It is as if his prayers of 65 years ago for sympathy and support were finally being answered.

After Poland, we flew to Israel. From the valley to the peak. From destruction to rebirth. When one flies from Poland to Israel, one tastes the reality of miracles.

The ongoing Israeli struggle for security was reflected in the fact that we, like most other tour groups, had an armed security guard with us at all times. Our guard, a young man named Ohad Shem Tov, recently finished his service in the Israeli army and had seen action in Gaza. Ohad longs for peace, but he does not shrink from defending his country when called upon to do so. Ohad has seen hate and bloodshed, but he still loves his fellow man and bears no ill will towards his Arab neighbors. Ohad is remarkable, but he is hardly atypical. Like Irving, he exhibits a love of life and humanity that is central to our shared faiths.

Yet the constant fighting and universal condemnation faced by Israelis takes its toll. It feels sometimes like the whole world is against little Israel. Thus meeting so many Christian students so committed to Israel had a deep impact upon Ohad. He shared with us that CUFI 's existence and the strong Christian support for Israel gave him and his colleagues the courage to keep up the fight. For them, CUFI's presence blasts a hole in the wall of rejection and distortion through which light streams. Once again, our emergence was an answer to prayer. And this time, prayers are being answered in time to make a difference.

Our campuses remain dangerous places, where the next generation of leaders are being taught to hate Israel and our own cultural heritage. We will continue to build up a campus network that can help reverse this tide. We will continue to comfort those who have been, or are, on the front lines of this struggle. And we will continue to move beyond providing comfort to providing concrete support that will make a difference on the ground. If our efforts could inspire men like Irving Roth and Ohad Shem Tov, we know that we have begun a work of enormous importance.

CUFI Goes to Washington- July 27, 2009
Last week, we held our fourth annual CUFI Washington, DC summit. It was a powerful and moving event.

In the middle of this terrible economic downturn, more people than ever before made the trip to Washington to stand with Israel at a critical juncture. They not only came, but they brought with them their unwavering support and uplifting energy. When well over 4,000 enthusiastic CUFI members gathered in the Washington DC Convention Center for our National Night to Honor Israel -- with millions more watching the live television broadcast -- we sent a strong pro-Israel message to our leaders down the street and to our fellow citizens across the nation. When these same delegates went up to Capitol Hill the following day, they made concrete progress towards building support for urgent legislation sanctioning Iran (see below).

The fact is that those who support Israel have felt besieged in recent months. It seems that Israel is being singled out for criticism and pressure. Israel's repeated risks for peace are forgotten. Consistent Palestinian refusals to accept a two-state solution and curb terror are ignored. Meanwhile the greatest threat to the Middle East and beyond -- Iran's daily progress towards nuclear weapons -- has been relegated to a back burner.

Our conference helped to send a strong message to our leaders in Washington and our friends in Israel that American Christians continue to stand solidly behind Israel. We reiterated Israel's long history of compromises and risks for peace. We restated the record of Palestinian obstruction and terror. We refocused attention on the true threats to peace in the Middle East: Palestinian rejectionism and Iranian aggression.

As we stood proudly with Israel, we were joined by some of the most important leaders in Washington and Israel. Senator Joseph Lieberman, Congressman Eric Cantor and Congresswoman Shelly Berkley came to speak to us. Israel's new Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, and Israel's Consul General in New York, Assaf Shariv, also shared with us. Nationally syndicated radio hosts Dennis Prager and Michael Medved made passionate keynote speeches. And Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu joined us live via Satellite. We united Democrats and Republicans, Americans and Israelis, Jews and Gentiles in support of Israel. It was powerful. And it was hopeful.

Perhaps most importantly, our Capitol Hill visits have already produced concrete results. When our members met with their Congressmen on Wednesday, they urged them to co-sponsor two urgent pieces of legislation which would ratchet up the economic pressure on Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program. The first of these bills -- the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act -- has received 22 new co-sponsors since our visit. The second bill -- The Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act -- has gained 18 new co-sponsors since our visit. These results should encourage us to further activism until these bills become law. There is simply no excuse for not using all peaceful means at our disposal to ensure that Iran does not become a nuclear power.

To all the CUFI members who made the trip, we thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Your sacrificial visit made a difference. Your voice was heard. Your comfort was received. And for all those unable to join us this year, I pray that circumstances permit you to join us next year. In the meantime, watch your e-mail boxes. Our work has only just begun.

Waking Up to Iran- June 29, 2009
In recent weeks, the world seems to have finally woken up to the true nature of Iran's Islamic regime. First, Iran's leaders appear to have stolen a Presidential election on behalf of their preferred candidate: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Then they brutally cracked down on those who protested the theft. Rather than admit that the protests are an expression of Iranian dissent, these leaders have made the absurd claim that foreign agitators, primarily British, are responsible.

Finally, a young woman named Neda Agha-Soltan was shot and killed while observing the protests last week. As beautiful Neda died -- her terrible final moments captured on video -- the world's illusions about Iran seemed to die with her.

It is good that the world finally recognizes the true nature of Iran's regime. But it is simply inexplicable -- and inexcusable -- that it took so long for the world to wake up. While Neda's death is indeed tragic, she is hardly the Islamic Republic's first victim. The hands of Iran mullah's drip with blood. The fact that much of this blood is Jewish and American should not make it any less meaningful, or any less shocking.

As we all know, Iran funds, trains and arms the two terrorist groups most committed to Israel's destruction: Hezbollah and Hamas. Iranian support enabled Hezbollah to attack Israel in July 2006 and force over 350,000 Israelis to flee their homes as Iranian-supplied missiles rained down on Israel's northern cities (and killed over 40 Israelis). The Iranians have since rearmed Hezbollah with missiles that can reach almost all of Israel's major population centers. Iran has also been Hamas' main external source of support and has enabled and encouraged Hamas attacks on Israel. Iran is now making every effort to supply Hamas with long range missiles that can reach Tel Aviv.

Of course, Iran has hardly limited its violence to citizens of the Jewish state.

Iranian-backed Hezbollah is widely believed to have been responsible for the 1983 bombing of our marine barracks in Beirut which killed 299 American soldiers. On May 30, 2003, Judge Royce Lamberth of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia found Iran legally responsible for providing Hezbollah with financial and logistical support that helped them carry out this attack. Likewise, Iran's Hezbollah proxies have been linked to the 1996 attacks on the Khobar Towers barracks in Saudi Arabia which killed 19 US soldiers. More recently, our government has linked Iran to the Iraqi insurgents who have killed US troops in Iraq.

In July, 1994, the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, was bombed, killing 85 people and injuring hundreds. Most of the victims were Argentinean Jews. On October 25, 2006, Argentine prosecutors formally accused the government of Iran of directing the bombing, and Hezbollah of carrying it out.

It is for these reasons and many others that our State Department has repeatedly labeled Iran the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

Those who have suffered most under Iran's regime, of course, are the Iranian people themselves. During the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980's, thousands of Iranian boys and teenagers lost their lives after they were forced to run into Iraqi minefields and machine gun fire in repeated "human waves" until a path was cleared for tanks to advance. Thousands of Iranians have been arrested, beaten and even executed for their political views. Members of Iran's Jewish community have been falsely accused of spying for Israel, Iran's Bahai community faces terrible persecution, and Iranian teenagers have been hung for being homosexuals.

Despite this long record of terror and bloodshed, much of the world and even our own Administration has continued to view Iran as a legitimate regime, one that can be reasoned with. For some reason, it took an Iranian clamp down on its own people to penetrate the world's complacency about Iran in a way that this prior record could not. Better late than never.

But this reality raises a concern. Will the world's recognition of the Islamic regime's true nature be as short lived as it has been belated? When the shock of Neda's death fades, will the world remember her and the thousands of other victims of this regime whose violent deaths were never caught on tape? When Ahmadinejad claims that he wants nuclear power for peaceful purposes, will the world remember his lies about this election and about the protests that followed? We hope the world will remember. But we must do everything in our power to remind all who will listen of these facts lest they forget.

Democrats Correct The President- June 22, 2009
Even three weeks later, President Obama's Cairo speech is still reverberating in Washington. To his credit, the President used this speech to shatter an ugly myth when he confronted Holocaust denial. But, unfortunately, the President's speech actually reinforced other dangerous myths about Israel's history and the true obstacles to peace in the Middle East.

Last Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stepped up to set the record straight. And last week, two Democratic senators -- Senator Reid of Nevada and Senator Menendez of New Jersey -- added their voices to this chorus of correction. Taking on a popular President from your own party is never easy. It is therefore of great significance that these two Democrats felt the need to clarify that when it comes to the specifics of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the President does not speak for the party.

On Monday, Senator Harry Reid -- the Democratic Majority Leader -- sent a letter to President Obama. Here Reid politely reminded the President of the real threats to peace in the Middle East. In Cairo, President Obama glossed over the long history of Palestinian rejection of Israel's right to exist. Senator Reid wrote that "I believe that negotiations will be successful only with a renewed commitment from the Palestinians to be a true partner for peace." In Cairo, President Obama largely ignored the leading role of Iran in fueling the conflict with Israel. Senator Reid wrote that the peace process must not "take away from your commitment to deal with the ongoing threat from Iran. Iran has continued to call for Israel's destruction while repeatedly defying the international community with its nuclear program."

The following day, Senator Robert Menendez went to the floor of the Senate to deliver a 12-minute speech on Israel. While not mentioning President Obama by name, he issued a powerful rebuttal of the myths that the President seemed to embrace. In Cairo, the President suggested that Israel's right to exist is based upon Jewish suffering in the Holocaust. In response, Senator Menendez walked through the over 3,500-year-old connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel. "Let's be very clear," Menendez stated, "the Holocaust is not the main justification for Israel's existence."

In Cairo, President Obama stated that Palestinian "dislocation" was a result of "Israel's founding." Senator Menendez noted that, "the more than 700,000 Palestinians who left Israel were refugees of a war instigated by Arab governments bent on seizing more land for themselves." Senator Menendez also mentioned that 750,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries were absorbed by Israel, a fact absent from the President's speech.

While the President downplayed the threat from Iran, Menendez highlighted it. Iran, he stressed, is not a just a "potential threat" to Israel's existence -- it is a present threat to Israel's existence though its arming and funding of Hamas and Hezbollah. Senator Menendez was clear that "Under no circumstances whatsoever can we allow that conventional threat to become a nuclear one."

We live in a time when Israel's enemies are aggressively seeking to delegitimize her by rewriting both the history of the Jewish people and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In such a climate, even people sympathetic to Israel are sometimes swayed. It is thus good indeed to see Israel's friends on both sides of the aisle step up and correct the record. Thank you, Senator Reid and Senator Menendez, for your leadership and your friendship on this issue. Your services to the truth and to Israel are deeply appreciated.

Click here if you would like to view Senator Menendez's floor speech.

Click here if you would like to read Senator Reid's letter.

Netanyahu's Turn - June 15, 2009
Last week, President Obama gave a major speech in Cairo. There he made a number of important points, including issuing a strong rejection of Holocaust denial in front of an audience that has been far too sympathetic to it. Yet while confronting this one myth, President Obama unfortunately helped to perpetuate two other dangerous myths concerning Israel's right to exist and the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Click here to read last week's message.

Yesterday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave what was, at least in part, his response. In a major policy speech at Bar Ilan University, Netanyahu not only set out his proposal for peace in the Middle East, but he provided a quick and cogent rebuttal of the two myths that President Obama appeared to embrace in Cairo. It was good that he did so.

The first myth is that Israel's right to exist is based upon Jewish persecution in Europe, namely the Holocaust. With a thinly veiled reference to Obama's words, Netanyahu clarified that, "The right of the Jewish People to a state in the Land of Israel does not arise from the series of disasters that befell the Jewish people over 2,000 years .. which reached its climax in the Holocaust." On the contrary, Netanyahu noted, "the right to establish our sovereign state here, in the Land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: Eretz Israel is the birthplace of the Jewish people."

This is a crucial point. The connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel dates back over 3,500 years. If the Jewish people had not been born in Israel, had not ruled Israel for centuries, had not returned to Israel consistently even after the Roman exile, and had not made Israel the center of their lives even while away, then they would have no right to a state in this land. The Holocaust did not and could not confer territorial rights -- it merely proved the urgency of exercising these rights.

The second myth Netanyahu confronted is that the Arab-Israeli conflict is driven by Israel's refusal to withdraw from the West Bank and recognize a Palestinian state. Netanyahu was quick to point out that those who take such a view confuse cause and effect. He noted that, "The attacks on us began in the 1920's, became an overall attack in 1948 when the state was declared, continued in the 1950's with the fedayeen attacks, and reached their climax in 1967 on the eve of the Six-Day War with the attempt to strangle Israel. All this happened nearly 50 years before a single Israeli soldier went into Judea and Samaria" (the Biblical name for the West Bank).

If Jewish rejection and occupation is not the source of the conflict, then what is? Netanyahu was quite clear on this point. He emphasized that when the United Nations proposed partitioning Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state back in 1947, "the entire Arab world rejected the proposal, while the Jewish community accepted it with great rejoicing and dancing. The Arabs refused any Jewish state whatsoever, with any borders whatsoever." Thus, Netanyahu concluded, "The simple truth is that the root of the conflict has been and remains the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish People to its own state in its historical homeland."

In the part of his speech that received the most attention, Netanyahu endorsed a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians. While this position may be new for Netanyahu, it is hardly new for Israel. Far from ending in 1947, support for a Palestinian state has been the official policy of Israel's recent governments. These governments have acted on this policy by withdrawing from all of Gaza and much of the West Bank -- only to return to many West Bank towns to stop a wave of terrorism.

Yet Israel's support for a Palestinian state alone cannot bring peace because its absence has not been the primary barrier to peace. The root of the conflict has been and remains the Palestinian failure to accept -- in both word and deed -- the existence of a Jewish state within any border.

In his Bar Ilan speech, Prime Minister Netanyahu set forth an approach to the peace process that enjoys broad public support in Israel. And he has taken a position that recognizes and seeks to surmount the real barriers to a negotiated settlement. Let us hope that our government will respect this Israeli consensus, and recognize this historical reality, as it continues to pursue peace in the Middle East.

President Obama's Cairo Speech: Destroying and Perpetuating Myths- June 8, 2009
Last week, President Obama delivered an address to the Muslim world from Cairo, Egypt. While there is much to criticize in the President's speech (see below), I do appreciate what he was trying to accomplish. For years we have waited for an Arab leader to rise up and inspire his people with a compelling, peaceful alternative to the path of Al Quada, Hamas and terror. Since no such charismatic moderate has emerged, President Obama seems to have stepped forward to fill the void. Standing in Cairo, our President invoked his Muslim and African heritage, denounced terror and set forth an alternative vision of peace.

Let's face it, the President's very name and biography stand as a stark challenge to the negative stereotypes of America so prevalent in the Muslim world. He is right to employ these assets along with the asset of his eloquence to our strategic benefit. As he does so, we may even want to cut him a little slack if he chooses to employ a little historical gloss and moral equivalence while making his larger points. Changing America's image in the Muslim world is a political exercise, not an academic one.

It is no easy thing to stand in Cairo, Egypt and proclaim that America's bond with Israel is "unbreakable." It is no small thing to tell the Arab world that the violence of suicide bombings and rocket attacks is "not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered." It is no simple thing to lecture the Muslim world about the hard facts of the Holocaust. The President did these things, and his doing so was significant.

Yet while the President attacked some myths, he actually helped to perpetuate others. After challenging the myth of Holocaust denial, for instance, he proceeded to reinforce an even more pernicious myth about the Holocaust: that Israel's right to exist is based upon it. As the President put it in Cairo: "the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust."

Let me be clear. An Israel built solely on the moral foundation of the Holocaust has no moral foundation. There is no ethical principle than can justify compensating Jews for their suffering in Europe by giving them a piece of someone else's land in the Middle East. This is why Israel's detractors constantly claim that the creation of Israel was simply an expression of European guilt for the Holocaust -- they know that in so doing they undermine Israel's moral legitimacy. President Obama should never have reinforced this most dangerous of lies.

The fact is that the Jewish connection to Israel is rooted in a rich history that precedes the Holocaust by millennia. It was in the Land of Israel that the Jewish people was born and governed itself for multiple centuries. It was to this land that the Jews prayed daily to return after they were exiled from it by the Romans. It was to this land that the Jews repeatedly did return over their long centuries of exile. It was in Jerusalem that Jews constituted a majority by the late 1800's. It was this land -- in recognition of this history -- that the League of Nations designated as the site of a "Jewish national home" well before the Holocaust in 1922.

President Obama perpetuated a second dangerous myth in Cairo when he stated that Palestinian "dislocation" and "suffering" were the result of "Israel's founding." The fact is that the 1947 partition plan recognizing two states -- one Jewish and one Arab -- in Palestine did not create so much as one Palestinian refugee. Palestinians began to flee their homes only after the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors launched a war to destroy the Jewish state. Had the Palestinians accepted this two-state solution along with the Jews in 1948, there would have not have been any Palestinian refugees, and the Palestinian State would have just celebrated its 61st independence day along with Israel.

Of course, the Palestinian rejection of a Palestinian State in 1948 was not a singular mistake. In 1937, the Palestinians rejected the two state solution offered by the Peel Commission, even though the Jewish state on the table (and accepted by the Jews) was a tiny sliver far smaller than the current State of Israel. In 2000, Palestinian President Yassir Arafat rejected an offer from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak which would have given the Palestinians a state in all of Gaza and approximately 95% of the West Bank, including a capital in East Jerusalem. Just last year, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejected what by most accounts was an even more generous offer from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Palestinian suffering and statelessness cannot be denied. But the myths about the reasons for this suffering do not build the case for peace -- they undermine it.

I hope that President Obama's speech achieves his admirable goals. I hope it boosts Muslim moderates and strikes a blow to terrorist recruiting and momentum. Time may teach us that the President began in Cairo a process that furthered US interests in the Arab and Muslim words. But I fear that in the long run, the myths he perpetuated may well overshadow those he challenged, damaging both the United States and Israel in the process.

Netanyahu Cometh - May 18, 2009
Many friends of Israel are worried that President Obama will pressure Netanyahu into making risky territoritorial concessions before there is a reliable Palestinian partner to receive them. There is reason for such concern. The Administration has sent a series of strong signals that it intends to obtain a peace agreement on an expedited basis. Such talk of a quick peace raises the question of whether the Administration is sufficiently wary of the difficult realities which have so often turned the best of intentions into the most tragic of results.

Yet we cannot judge the Administration on the basis of signals and conjecture. The fact is that we do not yet know what Netanyahu will propose. Nor do we know how Obama will respond. We will know a lot more Monday night than we do Monday morning. And we will probably get the most important. details in the weeks and months to come. As these facts emerge, we will be able to judge the Administration by the only relevant criteria: its actions.

The Israelis have shown a strong and consistent interest in peace and a two-state solution. They have repeatedly elected prime ministers who campaigned on the promise to aggresivley pursue land-for-peace policies. We need to remember that most Israelis don't view land for peace as a gift to the Palestinians. They see withdrawing from the West Bank and Gaza as the only way to preserve Israel as both a Jewish and a democratic state. If Israel retains these heavily populated Arab territories, most experts believe that these Arabs will outnumber Israel's Jews in the very near future.

Yet while Israelis may support land for peace in priciple, they have grown wary of it in practice. Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon was followed by thousands of Hezbollah missiles landing in northern Israel. Israel's withdrawal from Gaza was rewarded by thousands of Hamas missiles landing in southern Israel. Israelis understand that if the strategic high ground of the West Bank fell into Hamas' hands, Israel's major population and industrial centers would all be within range of Hamas missiles.

Thus there is a reason why Israelis elected Binyamin Netanyahu. Concessions have not brought progress. Hamas is ascendant. Mahmoud Abbas' and his Fatah colleagues talk about peace, but they appear to lack the will to teach it to their children and the power to force it upon Hamas. With no reliable partner for peace, Israelis voted to slow the machinery of negotiations and concessions. The Israelis are not ignoring the facts on the ground. Neither should we.

This is why we continue to stand by Israel's people and their democratically elected leaders. And this is why we will be closely watching the outcome of today's meetings. Will President Obama begin to lay the groundwork for a lasting peace? Or will he ignore the facts on the ground and pressure the Israelis into an agreement that they believe will endanger their security? While we would applaud the former, we would object to the latter.

During his campaign, President Obama made a series of important promies regarding the Middle East. He called Israel's security "sacrosanct.". And he called a nuclear Iran "unacceptable.". Now it is time for him to deliver on his promises and keep his vows to the American people.

Last week, the nation was shocked by a brutal murder. Stephen Morgan walked into a Connecticut bookstore and shot 21-year-old Johanna Justin-Jinich to death. In his journal entry that morning, Morgan wrote, "I think it is okay to kill Jews.". Justin-Jinich was half Jewish.

Morgan seems to have been some sort of stalker. His journal, simply the rantings of a lunatic. He will go to jail or a mental institution.

Elsewhere, similar lunatics have written longingly of "killing Jews." Among the crimes of the Jews, they claim, is the fact that "With their money they take control of the world media.... They were behind the French Revolution and the Communist Revolution. With money they have formed secret organizations all over the world in order to destroy societies ... such as the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions, Bnai Brith, etc."

This second quote comes not from the journal of Stephen Morgan, but from the Covenant of Hamas. Far worse than these deranged words, of course, is the fact that Hamas has repeatedly acted on them by killing Jews.

Yet while Morgan is headed to jail, Hamas seems headed towards legitimacy. An increasing number of voices are calling for negotiations with Hamas. Talks, they assert, will accomplish what marginalization has not: moderation.

The best argument for negotiating with Hamas is the fact that the US successfully negotiated with the Sunni insurgents in Iraq. Through a combination of talks and significant financial support, we transformed these insurgents from enemies killing our troops to allies attacking Al Qaeda. This was an undeniable improvement.

Yet the difference between Iraq's Sunni insurgents and Hamas is too stark to ignore. The Sunni insurgents decided on their own that Al Qaeda posed a greater threat to them than the United States. The Sunnis longed primarily for security, status and income, not dead Americans. Once we put them on the payroll, our shared interests far outweighed our differences.

Hamas, on the other hand, perceives no threat greater than Israel, and it harbors no goal above Israel's destruction. Hamas clearly and unequivocally rejects compromise with Israel as "high treason" which will condemn the offending moderates to "hell." So long as the US remains committed to the survival of Israel, there is no scenario under which the US and Hamas could find themselves sharing fundamental interests. Putting Hamas on the payroll won't change what it is they are dreaming of and working towards.

In its Covenant, Hamas invokes the concept that judgment day will not come until "the Muslims will fight the Jews and kill them.". They have already begun to live their homicidal dreams.

We too have dreams. We dream of peace in the Middle East and reconciliation between Muslims and Jews. But as we work to make these dreams come true, we cannot afford to ignore reality. There are partners for peace who live in the real world. And there are lunatics who believe that it is okay to kill Jews. We dare not confuse the two.

April 27, 2009
Last week, the day before Holocaust Remembrance Day, Iran's President Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations anti-racism conference in Geneva. Here, he did a great favor for all who love Israel -- he was honest. He allowed his virulent hate for Israel and his bizarre anti-Semitic conspiracy theories to flow from his tongue largely unfiltered. It was an ugly performance.

The delegates from most European nations walked out on Ahmadinejad's speech. Even the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, was moved to criticism. Most other delegates, of course, remained in their seats. Many cheered.

But Ahmadinejad is rarely so honest. And he is rarely so helpful. It is what this man does in the shadows -- not what he says in public -- that is most dangerous. And what he does in the dark typically gets far less attention.

In a little-noted development last week, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, citing an Egyptian source, reported that unidentified warships torpedoed an Iranian cargo ship off the coast of Sudan. The Iranian ship was reported to be laden with weapons bound for the Gaza Strip. The warship is believed to have been Israeli

In January, there were numerous reports that unidentified warplanes attacked a convoy of trucks passing through the Sudanese desert. The trucks were reported to be filled with Iranian arms bound for Gaza. Well-placed sources have confirmed that the planes belonged to Israel.

Israeli observers believe that this arms convoy contained Iranian Fajr rockets. Such rockets -- with a range of 70 kilometers -- would give Hamas the ability to strike the heart of Tel Aviv.

Looming large behind all of these efforts against Israel, of course, is Iran's nuclear program. Iran continues to enrich uranium in contravention of United Nations resolutions. In February, United Nations officials acknowledged that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for an atomic weapon.

Which leads us to one final news item from last week. In hearings before Congress, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton warned that the US is laying the groundwork for "crippling sanctions" against Iran if diplomacy fails to stop its nuclear program. This is a certainly a positive development. Offering Mr. Ahmadinejad carrots without a stick in sight was unlikely to elicit much of a response.

The Iranian threat is not going away. And walking out on Ahmadinejad's speeches -- while important and deeply appreciated -- does nothing to stop his steady, daily, determined actions to confront Israel. Offering negotiations -- while quite possibly a good way to build greater international support -- must not be allowed to turn into yet another opportunity for Ahmadinejad to delay and stall. It is time for the world to graduate from gestures to actions.

Iran has proven itself able to talk and act at the same time. The Israelis, too, are acting with constant vigilance to keep Iran from arming its proxies on Israel's border. There is no reason why we should not act as well. There is indeed a time for "crippling sanctions" against Iran. That time is now.

March 5, 2009
Last week, Benjamin Netanyahu was sworn in as Israel's new Prime Minister. He is at the helm of a government which comprises a comfortable majority of the Israeli Knesset, and which includes a prominent party of the left in addition to those of the right. By Israeli standards, this government is both large and broad.

Yet even before Netanyahu assumed power, the attacks on him were quickly hardening into a hostile conventional wisdom. Netanyahu is being caricatured as a militant enemy of peace. Forget Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran. According to some observers, Israel's new prime minister is the real threat to peace in the Middle East.

Such claims are rich in drama but short on facts. For starters, Netanyahu just took office -- he does not yet have a record or even an official policy to criticize. If, in lieu of a current record, we were to look at his prior term as prime minister -- from 1996 to 1999 -- what emerges is not an extremist so much as a pragmatist. Although skeptical of the peace process, Netanyahu was nevertheless willing to honor prior agreements and make painful concessions. In fact it was Netanyahu who handed over control of most of Hebron -- Judaism's second holiest city -- to Yassir Arafat in fulfillment of the Olso Accords. If he made such concessions to Arafat, imagine what Netanyahu would have given to a real partner for peace.

In the absence of better talking points against Netanyahu, many critics have focused their fire on Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's new foreign minister. Lieberman is a controversial man who has taken some troubling positions regarding Israel's Arab minority. Yet when it comes to the most important issue that Lieberman will address as foreign minister -- the peace process -- his views are revolutionary only in that they involve giving the Palestinians even more land than most Israel's would like. Lieberman has suggested that as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians, Israel should give them not only most of the West Bank, but also the heavily Arab-populated areas of Israel's Galilee.

The press has made much of the fact that in his first speech as foreign minister, Lieberman rejected the Annapolis framework for negotiations with the Palestinians. Yet in the very same speech, Lieberman explicitly embraced the Road Map process. These two approaches to Middle East peace do not differ in their final goal -- each envisions two states for two peoples as the ultimate solution to the conflict. Instead, the difference is the process by which this goal is achieved. Annapolis proposes that the parties reach a final status agreement first, so that it may serve as a carrot by which to encourage the cessation of terror and other prerequisites to peace. The Road Map, by contrast, demands that these prerequisites come first so that they may serve as confidence building measures that will lead to the final status agreement. The difference is largely one of tactics.

Finally, the fact that Netanyahu has included the Labor Party in his government and retained Labor's leader, Ehud Barak, as defense minister is too significant to ignore. Labor in general, and Barak in particular, are dedicated to a two-state solution to the conflict. The fact that Netanyahu so aggressively sought to retain such a strong voice for the peace process in so central a position makes little sense if Netanyahu's ultimate goal is to shut down that process.

The critics are thus missing the point. What we have with Netanyahu is not a man who rejects negotiations. Rather, we have a leader who has some very strong feelings about how such negotiations should proceed. Netanyahu is skeptical of using the carrot of a final status agreement to try to win certain fundamental changes on the ground. He seems dedicated instead to the proposition that these changes -- namely the cessation of terror against Israel -- must take place before any meaningful negotiations can proceed. Not everyone agrees with this approach, and those who do not do so should by all means express their dissent. But such measured critiques have been the exception in what so far feels more like a rush to judgment.

While the World Slept- February 23, 2009
Last week a shocking milestone was reached. United Nations officials have acknowledged what some private experts have been saying for months -- that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for an atomic weapon. The only steps that remain in building an atom bomb -- purification and weaponization -- are neither beyond Iran's capabilities nor very time consuming.

This story was literally buried under reports about the stimulus bill and the economy. Very few people even noticed it. Even fewer seemed to care.

Our failure to take Iran's steady progress towards nuclear arms seriously is nothing new. When experts announced approximately two years ago that Iran was two years away from enriching enough uranium for a nuclear bomb, few noticed. When observers warned last year that Iran was one year away from having enough uranium for a weapon, the news was largely ignored. Thus we have watched the window slowly shut. The dire prediction proved to be accurate. And the years have passed.

The UN assessment followed the disclosure by the International Atomic Energy Agency last week that its inspectors had found 460 additional pounds of low-enriched uranium at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility that Iran had never reported -- a full one third of its total supply. The only thing surprising about this announcement was that anyone trusted Iran in the first place. Iran has a consistent record of lying, distorting and hiding its nuclear program from international inspectors. They have been trying to get enough uranium for a bomb before the world caught on. It looks like they have succeeded.

What can be done now? The options are grim. Speaking on Fox News last week, Israeli Ambassador Sallai Merridor warned of Iran's imminent nuclear capacity and said that "The world must take immediate and serious action in order to prevent this nightmare from happening." While he did not detail what these actions should entail, he said that "Sanctions should be enhanced significantly."

Last year, Congress made significant progress in passing an Iran sanctions package. Yet our legislators ended up leaving town before voting on its final passage. This was a lost opportunity of tragic proportions. Now we will need to begin the sanctions process all over again. As frustrating and possibly futile as this effort may be, Ambassador Merridor is right. We must aggressively pursue sanctions and we intend to do so.

Ambassador Merridor hinted that the military option was still on the table by saying that, "The only option that is not on the table is to allow Iran to get nuclear capabilities." President Obama has likewise stated that all options are on the table. I, for one, do not presume to know enough about our military capabilities -- and Iran's -- to suggest which option best promotes American security at this juncture. All I know is that even in the midst of our economic crisis, there is one option that must be taken off the table immediately -- continuing to ignore the problem.

What Israelis Want - February 16, 2009
Israel's elections, unlike our own, do not always yield clear or immediate victors. Thus, almost a week after Israelis went to the polls, we still do not know who Israel's next prime minister will be.

Still, there is much we can learn from these election returns about the current concerns and mood of Israel's citizens. Most Israelis want security, peace and a Jewish majority population. It is only in the prioritization of these often conflicting goals that most Israelis tend to differ.

The biggest winners in the elections were Israel's right-of-center parties. Led by Binyamin Netanyahu, these parties stressed security above all other concerns. As the dangers resulting from Israel's withdrawal from Gaza have been on constant disaply in the form of incoming rockets, Israelis are in a security-first mood. "Keep the rockets from crashing into our cities," they said at the polls, "then we'll talk about other things."

Yet while a group of parties on the right took the lion's share of the votes cast, the single party that won the most votes was Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's Kadiama party. Kadima supports a two-state solution to the confllict with the Palestinians, but has shown in the recent Gaza operation that it is still able to defend Israel's security. Kadima's success indicates that while security may be first among Israelis' concerns, peace is not far behind.

Why is it that so many Israelis are still so committed to a two-state solution even after the dangers that have resulted from the Gaza withdrawal? We get an insight into this motive by focusing on the biggest surprise of the election -- the third place finish of the Yisrael Beitenu party. The media has labeled Yisrael Beitenu "far right" and indeed, some of its rhetoric about Israel's Arab citizens has been provocative. But Yisrael Beitenu actually supports a two-state solution. In fact, Yisrael Beitenu has even proposed giving up the heavily Arab-populated areas of Israel's Galilee to an eventual Palestinian State -- a truly radical suggestion with troubling implications.

Why would this "far-right" party want to give up so much land? Do they want to reward the Palestinains for the great job they have done in Gaza? Are they living under a rock? Of course not. What drives Yisrael Beitenu and so many other Israeli supporters of a two-state solution is a pressing problem that many Israelis find every bit as serious as the threats to their security: the demographic challenge.

By most accounts, the Palestinians living west of the Jordan river may outnumber the Jews living west of the Jordan river within a generation. Thus if Israel wants to remain both a demoracy and a Jewish state, they cannot incorporate the large Arab populations of the West Bank and Gaza into Israel. A Palestinian state provides the alternative by which Israel's Jewish majority is ensured. For Israelis, a Palestinian state is not a reward, it is a divorce.

Does Israel's quest for security clash with its desire to retain a Jewish majority? Sadly, it sometimes does. As Gaza proves, giving up land to Palestinians committed to Israel's destruction creates a real and present danger. No one wants to repeat the mistakes of Gaza in the far more strategic West Bank. If Hamas ever gained control of the West Bank, we would no doubt see missiles falling on Jerusalem and Tel Aviv in addition to Ashkelon and Sderot.

Yet holding onto Gaza and the West Bank in any permanent way raises the demographic threat. With the land and the strategic depth comes a large and rapidly growing Arab population. Israel's greatest hawks, some fear, will preside over the end of the Jewish state not through Arab arms but as a result of Arab births.

Thus our Israeli friends march on. They juggle the challenges of security and demography. They weigh long-term threats against short-term ones. They dream of peace and search for hope amidst the rocket fire and troubling statistics. As they do so, the old distinctions between right and left become ever more obsolete.

Happy Birthday CUFI
We haven’t looked back since. We have held three successful and increasingly well-attended Washington summits. We have held over eighty-five Nights to Honor Israel in cities across America. In recent weeks alone, we have held over twenty Standing with Israel rallies in response to the Gaza crisis. We have steadily grown our list of members. We have solicited your support when our leaders in Washington needed to hear from you, and you have responded by the tens of thousands.

While the progress has been steady, the sailing has not always been smooth. Israel is a deeply controversial topic. In addition, Christian efforts to influence American policy - especially our foreign policy - have always enraged critics who would prefer that people of faith stay out of politics. We fully expected that our efforts to unify America’s Christians in defense of Israel would meet with resistance. These expectations have been met and, at times, exceeded.

We in CUFI are accused of longing for the Apocalypse. We read that we oppose peace with the Palestinians and crave war with Iran. Yet these critics ignore the one thing that matters - our record. One need only read The Israel Pledge to understand what it is we really stand for. We stand today and forever in support of Israel's right to exist. We stand today and forever in support of Israel's right to defend itself from terrorism. We stand today and forever in support of Israel’s right to live in peace and security with its neighbors. No matter how hard they try to change the topic, it is those who oppose this agenda who are the real extremists.

The recent conflict in Gaza provided a clear reminder of the importance of our work. In cities across the country, protesters denounced Israel for daring to exercise its right to self defense after thousands of missiles had fallen on its cities and towns. But when Israel’s critics spoke up, we also spoke up. Both in our thousands of e-mails to the White House and our participation in pro-Israel rallies across the country, we made our voice heard. When we did so, we made it clear to all that Israel’s support in America is broad and deep and unshakeable.

Difficult days are coming for Israel. I know this is true because there has never been a moment in Israel’s history when this has not been true. And I know this is true because the threats to Israel are even greater now than ever before in its troubled history. As these threats mount, Israel’s opponents here at home will continue to speak out. But with continued faith and hard work, we know that we will be able to speak far louder. We know we will be able to provide crucial support to Israel in its quest for peace and security. And we know how blessed we are to be able to be part of so just a cause.

Happy Birthday, CUFI. May you continue to go from strength to strength in the years to come!

Bush, Obama and King- January 19, 2009
Israel has ended Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. So long as Hamas holds its fire, Israel intends to withdraw all of its soldiers from the Gaza Strip by the time that Barack Obama takes the oath of office tomorrow.

Until his final day in office, President Bush remained steadfast in his support for Israel and its right to self defense. While so many other world leaders sought to stop Israel from doing exactly what they would do if their cities were under missile fire, President Bush never applied such a double standard. I know that the over 10,000 e-mails we in Christians United for Israel sent to President Bush to encourage him in his stand with Israel made a difference. A large majority of Americans felt that Israel's actions in Gaza were justified. We were wise not to be a silent majority.

As Barack Obama takes office tomorrow, we will pray for his safety and his success. We will pray that he will have the wisdom to lead this country out of our economic troubles and the courage to confront those who plot against us abroad. Finally, we will pray that he will keep the important campaign promises he made to ensure Israel's security and prevent a nuclear Iran.

It is difficult to ignore the symbolism inherent in the fact that the hostilities in Gaza are ending today, on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Dr. King, of course, was a strong supporter of the state of Israel. In a March 25, 1968 speech to the Rabbinical Assembly, for example, Dr. King said: “peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”

While Dr. King believed in and practiced nonviolence, he also understood the limits of nonviolence. King was a student of Reinhold Niebuhr, a Christian theologian who strongly supported America's fight for freedom in World War II and the Cold War. As King himself wrote, "Niebuhr began emphasizing the irresponsibility of relying on nonviolent resistance when there was no ground for believing that it would be successful in preventing the spread of totalitarian tyranny."

If Israel were still fighting British occupation, then nonviolence might be a productive course. But instead, Israel battles enemies committed to destroying the Jewish State and killing as many Israeli civilians as possible in the effort to achieve that goal. In such circumstances, nonviolence would be more than irresponsible -- it would be suicidal. As has been widely noted, if the Hamas were to lay down its arms, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down its arms, there would be no Israel.

If nonviolence doesn't work against tyrants or terrorists, then when does it work? Here is King once again summarizing Niebuhr, "It [nonviolence] could only be successful ... if the groups against whom the resistance was taking place had some degree of moral conscience, as was the case in Gandhi's struggle against the British."

And thus we arrive at the ultimate irony. While Israeli nonviolence against Hamas or Hezbollah would mean the end of Israel, a Palestinian policy of nonviolence against Israel would mean peace. Israelis tend to support a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians provided that the Palestinians will not use the land they are given as a base form which to launch terrorist attacks and/or rockets against Israel. The more the Palestinians engage in terror, the less willing the Israelis become to make concessions that would only further endanger them. Were the Palestinians to finally and truly reject terrorism, the greatest barrier to a negotiated peace would be removed.

As we say goodbye to President Bush, and welcome President Obama, let us honor Dr. King. Let us hope for peace and reconciliation. Let us dream of a day when Israelis and Palestinians meet to break bread, not hearts. But let us remain as realistic as Niebuhr and King himself. There is no other way to the Promised Land.

Signs of the Times- January 5, 2009
As I was walking home last week, I passed a demonstration protesting Israel's Gaza operation being held near the Israeli Embassy The crowd was loud, and angry. I couldn't read all of their signs, but I did see a few protesters holding signs which read "End the Occupation."

So it goes. Reality and context matter little, or not at all. When you are protesting Israel on the streets, or even in the media, just take your best shot.

Israel did end its occupation of Gaza back in 2005. It withdrew every last Israeli soldier from their barracks and every last Israeli settler from their homes. But that is not when the missile fire into Israel from Gaza stopped. That is when the missile fire into Israel escalated. Hamas saw the Israeli withdrawal as a sign of Israeli weakness and was emboldened. It is only the fear of creating a similar situation in the West Bank that has kept the Israeli government from proceeding with a withdrawal from that territory as well.

Sadly, there have been worse signs. At an anti-Israel protest in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, one protestor carried a sign that read "Nuke Israel." As if her sign was not troubling enough, she added a running commentary to her protest. A video camera captured her shouting "into the ovens" and "we need more ovens" at the pro-Israel demonstrators across the street.

While the anti-Israel protesters confuse cause and effect here in America, it seems that some Gaza residents have a clearer understanding. The New York Times reported this morning that upon finding her wounded relatives in a Gaza hospital, one woman shouted, "May God exterminate Hamas!" She seemed to have a very clear sense about who is responsible for the current violence. One wonders how many more Gazans would express similar sentiments if it were not so very dangerous to do so.

But children know no such fear. Last week, The New York Times reported the comments of a 13-year old Gazan who was asked about the Israeli air raids. "I blame Hamas," he said. "It doesn't want to recognize Israel. If they did so there could be peace." He further noted that, "Egypt made a peace treaty with Israel, and nothing is happening to them."

This young Gazan is right. If Hamas would stop firing missiles into Israel, Israel would not be in Gaza. And if Hamas actually recognized Israel and renounced terror, there could be a real peace. Gazans need jobs, opportunities, the freedom to travel. Israelis have no desire to see them suffer. But dreams of post-withdrawal economic cooperation between Israel and Gaza were shattered by terrorist attacks and rocket fire.

Hamas has been a determined foe not only of Israel, but of Arab-Israeli peace. Israel can't end the occupation of Gaza -- it already did. Approximately 6,000 missiles and mortars have fallen on southern Israel since then. Israel waited a very long time before responding to these attacks. Now that it is finally doing so, we pray that there result will be one which brings peace to southern Israel, and to all Israel, and to every Palestinian who dreams of a better life.

A Time for Fighting- December 29, 2008
On Saturday, Israeli military forces launched Operation Lead Cast with the stated goal of stopping Palestinian missile attacks on southern Israel. Since then, the Israeli Air Force has carried out a series of raids against Hamas targets in Gaza, including Hamas command centers, training facilities, missile factories, missile launch sites, and arms smuggling tunnels.

The condemnation of Israel's actions was immediate. But those who criticize Israel have largely overlooked some very basic and important facts. It is worth remembering how we got here.

For starters, this Israeli action is a response to years of rocket fire from Gaza into Israel. After a 6-month cease fire between Israel and Hamas expired earlier this month, Israel sought to extend it. Hamas announced that it would no longer abide by the truce and instead fired hundreds of rockets into southern Israel. The goal of Israel's current operation is simply to stop the rocket fire into southern Israel. "There is a time for calm and a time for fighting," announced Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak at the operation's outset, "and this is the time for fighting."

Secondly, the Israelis are targeting only Hamas facilities and fighters. Even Hamas has acknowledged that most of those killed in the Israeli strikes have been Hamas forces, not innocent civilians. Hamas is a terrorist organization and is recognized as such by the United States and the European Union. Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist, has never renounced terror against Israel, and is trained and armed by Iran. Hamas has proven its dedication to terror by carrying out a series of bloody suicide bombings against Israeli civilians and, more recently, firing rockets into southern Israel.

Thirdly, we must remember the larger context. Israel voluntarily withdrew all of its soldiers and settlers from Gaza in 2005. And the current Israeli government is actively negotiating peace with those Palestinians who recognize Israel and reject terror. Hamas may claim that it is firing missiles into Israeli towns to end the occupation or defend Palestinian land. The reality is that Hamas fires these rockets to extend its power and pursue its goal -- and that of its backers in Teheran -- of destroying Israel.

So far, the Bush Administration has responded responsibly. They have recognized that it was Hamas which violated the cease fire with Israel with its rocket fire. And they have supported Israel right to self defense. While President-elect Obama has not commented on the current crisis, he has in the past embraced the rationale for Israel's operation. In July, Obama visited Sderot, the Israeli city that has suffered the most from Hamas rocket fire. There Obama declared, "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect the Israelis to do the same thing."

That is precisely what the Israelis are now doing.

Finally, there is the matter of civilian casualties. By all accounts, Israel has strived to pinpoint its attacks so that only Hamas facilities and personnel are harmed. The Israelis have even supplemented their typical warning leaflets with text messages sent to Palestinian cell phones warning those who live in close proximity to Hamas facilities to leave.

Yet the fact is that some civilians have been killed, and no amount of precaution can eliminate such deaths. Intelligence is never 100% accurate. And Hamas makes a practice of placing its facilities and missile launchers in civilian areas. Hamas' decisions to place the machinery of war in civilian areas cannot render this machinery off limits.

All this being said, every innocent Palestinian killed is a tragedy. When we see the terrible sight of a dead civilian, we must avoid the simplistic finger pointing at Israel as if there is no context for Israel's actions. But we must also avoid the callousness that blinds us to the unmitigated tragedy of war.

In the final analysis, Hamas has been a significant impediment to peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Let us hope that these attacks will weaken Hamas. And let us pray that once Hamas is weakened, peace will be the ultimate victor.

Protesting Terror- December 8, 2008
I am not aware of any Palestinian Muslim leaders who have refused to allow the remains of terrorists to be buried in their cemeteries. Nor have I read about any Palestinian anti-terror rallies. On the contrary, the Palestinians too often celebrate their terrorists as "martyrs" and name streets and soccer stadiums after them.

A Palestinian would likely argue that we don't see more such protests from the Palestinians because of the difficulties of living under Israeli occupation. Yet this is a rationalization, not an explanation. And it also confuses cause and effect. The only reason Israel has a presence in the Palestinian areas at all today is in response to terrorism. Israel had withdrawn all of its troops from Palestinian cities by the close of the 1990's. Prime Minister Sharon sent Israeli troops back into these areas to end a bloody wave of terrorism that, it turns out, Palestinian leaders were encouraging and sometimes directing.

Another explanation for the lack of public protest of terrorism is fear. Palestinians who protest terror too actively may themselves become its victims. And this may well be true. But such an explanation is hardly encouraging. How will Palestinian society ever end terror when moderates are too frightened to speak out?

As we continue to mourn the dead in Mumbai, let us call evil by its name. The people who carried out this attack were acting on their interpretation of Islam. But let us also give credit where it is due. There are Muslims who reject such actions in the name of their faith and are fighting to deny these violent men the banner of that faith. And, finally, let us pray that those who reject terror in the name of Islam will grow in strength and courage. They will need both.

Through Your Continued Building - December 1, 2008
It has happened again. Militant Islam has once again spilled the blood of innocents. This time, the victims were approximately two hundred Hindus, Muslims, Jews and Christians in Mumbai, India.

The one terrorist captured alive has told investigators that he was sent on his deadly mission by a terrorist organization named Lashkar-e-Taiba. This group was founded to confront India over the disputed Kashmir region on the India/Pakistan border. But like so many other Islamist groups, it has expanded its enemies list to include America and Israel, Christians and Jews. These terrorists certainly knew that their attacks would kill innocent Muslims as well, but such deaths clearly did not concern them.

Mumbai is a teeming city with millions of Hindus and Muslims, and a tiny Jewish population of four thousand. It was of course no coincidence that these terrorists found and attacked one of the city's few Jewish institutions, the Chabad Jewish center.

Chabad is an ultra-Orthodox Jewish organization based in New York which seeks to bring secular Jews back to their faith.   This center was not an Israeli target -- it was a Jewish target. To the jihadis, of course, there is no real difference.

How do we respond to such a tragedy? How do we react to such pointless bloodshed? There are many wrong ways to react. To excuse this violence as somehow justified because of "US policy" -- as some have suggested -- would sanction murder. To indict innocent Muslims who have condemned such violence -- as many have -- would perpetuate injustice. To give in to despair would grant victory to the terrorists.

The answer comes to us in the poignant words of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, the spiritual giant of the Chabad movement known affectionately as "The Rebbe." The Rebbe's words were not spoken in response to the current attack -- Rabbi Schneerson passed away many years ago. But during his lifetime Rabbi Schneerson had to confront a similar tragedy. This was not the first time that terrorists have targeted a Chabad institution.

In 1956, terrorists attacked the village of Kfar Chabad which the Rebbe's followers were building near Israel's airport. The gunmen entered the synagogue of the village's agricultural school while the students were in the middle of their evening prayers. They opened fire with automatic weapons, killing five students along with one of their teachers. In the depths of their mourning, the village waited for comfort and direction from their beloved Rebbe in New York.

But word did not come right away. Three dark days passed without a statement from the Rebbe. It was later revealed that upon hearing of the tragedy, Rabbi Schneerson sank in his chair and locked himself alone in his study. When he finally emerged three days later, he dictated a telegram to be sent to his followers in Israel.

The telegram contained three Hebrew words: "B'hemshech habinyan tinacheimu." In English, these words mean: "Through your continued building, you will be comforted." That was the Rabbi's answer, the product of his days of soul searching and wrestling with despair.

The very night they received the telegram, the residents of Kfar Chabad began building a new school. According to an Israeli reporter on the scene, "The joy was back in their eyes."

In his three-word telegram, the Rebbe set forth the Judeo-Christian answer to violence and tragedy. The answer is to respond to a negative with a positive, to respond to hate with love, to respond to destruction with construction.

So at this troubling moment, let us heed the Rebbe's advice. Let us build. Let us build bridges of love and solidarity to the Jewish people who have once again been the target of hate. Let us build alliances with Hindus, Muslims and all who firmly renounce such terror. Let us build a strong organization that can stand up for Israel, America and all others who must confront such attacks. Let us build Christians United for Israel.

To build -- it is the only appropriate response.

President-Elect Obama- November 10, 2008
The elections are over. Now comes part of our democratic process that is equally important and even more impressive. Now is the time when all Americans of good will, no matter who we voted for, recognize and lift up the winner. Barack Obama is not just going to be the president. He is going to be our president. He deserves our well wishes and our prayers.

I know that many of our members did not vote for Obama. And I know that some are worried about how he will deal with Israel. A few points are worth noting.

First of all, when it comes to Israel, candidate Obama made some significant commitments. Yes, he did say he would talk to Iran without preconditions, and this statement has raised some serious concerns. But he also said a lot of other things about the Middle East that we can embrace. Candidate Obama said that "Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable." He pledged that "as president I will never compromise when it comes to Israel's security." He has refused to negotiate with Hamas until they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel's right to exist.

When it comes to Iran, candidate Obama pledged that, "I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon." Indeed, as a senator he actively supported divestment from Iran. He also stated in connection to Iran that "I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel." If we in CUFI said these words, there are those in the media who would label us "Iran hawks" and "extremists."

Even after his election, President-elect Obama has continued to say the right things. At a press conference on Friday, he called for an international effort to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb and called a nuclear Iran "unacceptable." The Iranian government has already criticized our president elect for his comments. We should welcome them.

Finally, in choosing Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff, President-elect Obama has elevated someone with deep ties to Israel. Emanuel's father is an Israeli who fought for Israel's independence in Menachem Begin's Irgun. During the 1991 Gulf War, when Iraqi scud missiles were raining down on Israel, Emmanuel flew to Israel and served as a civilian volunteer in the Israeli Defense Forces. This is not a man who takes Israel's security lightly.

Of course, just because someone says the right things does not mean that they will do the right things. The actions of a President Obama will quickly eclipse the words of candidate Obama. When it comes to his performance, we will treat President Obama the same way that we have treated President Bush. We will watch closely and judge fairly. When we agree with the president, we will congratulate him and do what we can to help him. And when we disagree, we will speak out and do what we can to persuade him to change course.

In the meantime, we should all wish our president elect well. He will be entering office at a difficult juncture for our country and for Israel. Let us all pray that he has the wisdom and the courage to do the right thing. And let us pray that he will continue to keep the important promises that he has made.

Vote and Sign- November 3, 2008
In a democracy, we have many rights and many responsibilities. Voting is both. If you haven't already done so, please be sure to vote tomorrow.

But we need to remember that in our democracy, our ability to influence our government does not end on election day. No -- election day is merely the beginning of the process. Once we have a new president and a new Congress, we need not sit silently for four years and passively observe what they do. We can and must work to influence what they do.

One simple way we all can make our voices heard is by signing The Israel Pledge and getting our families and firends to do likewise. It is imperative that whoever wins the election undertand that they govern a country deeply commmitted to our alliance with the State of Israel. The more people who sign the pledge, the louder and clearer this message will be. Please click here to sign the Israel Pledge.

Finally, we need to remember that elections are merely snapshots of the country's mood and culture at a particular juncture. Whoever wins tomorrow will have appealed best to the nation's current mood. But moods change. The culture changes. Ultimately, these larger trends are what determine our nation's direction and policy.

The most important work we do in CUFI is educating Christians about Israel's cause and fight. Our most significant accomplishments are the bridges of love and trust we build between Christians and Jews. Ultimately, these achievements will be of far greater import than whatever the press is hyping today.

Let's vote. Let's sign the pledge. And let's keep building a movement of deep and lasting significance.

Iran Is Not Just Israel's Problem - October 20, 2008
The Times reported on Sunday that recently declassified US intelligence documents confirm the existence of an Iranian program to train the Iraqi Shiite insurgents who have been attacking our troops in Iraq. According to these intelligence reports -- largely summaries of accounts given by captured insurgents -- the Iraqi recruits are actually being brought to camps deep inside Iran to receive their training.

The reports describe busy days at these Iranian camps. The Iraqi recruits rise before dawn, and spend long days filled with weapons training, prayer, and religious instruction. They are given evenings off to enjoy ping pong and television. The "smarter" Iraqi recruits are given extra training in how to prepare and lay roadside bombs. Such roadside bombs have killed and maimed thousands of our troops in Iraq.

According to these reports, Iran is currently providing such training on Iranian soil -- and not in Iraq proper -- to make it harder for America to uncover direct evidence of this program. One trainee is quoted as saying that the Iranians are wary of provoking America into a war in which we could inflict great damage on them. Such worries and such restraint would likely end as soon as Iran possesses nuclear weapons.

Most of us understand that those who hate Israel don't much love us. And we recognize that this contempt for America and the West preceded the birth of Israel. Yet it is rare that we get such a window into concrete efforts to target us and do violence to our troops. Looking through this window, the sight is neither pretty nor encouraging.

As we continue to pursue diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran to stop their effort to build nuclear weapons, let us remember the threat that a nuclear Iran would pose to our ally, Israel. Let us also remember the threat that a nuclear Iran would pose to our other allies in the region. But let us never forget the threat that an Iran so emboldened would pose to America and American troops. When it comes to Iran, America and Israel are most definitely in this together.

In response to these targeted killings, hundreds of Christian families in Mosul have fled their homes for the safety of Christian villages in the countryside.

The Reverend Canon Andrew White, an Englishman who serves as the vicar of St. George's Church in Baghdad, believes that Al Qaeda in Iraq is responsible for the recent violence.

Canon White knows well the suffering of Iraq's Christian community. He estimates that within the last year, 89 of his Baghdad congregants have been murdered. Canon White further estimates that our of a pre-war community of 800,000, only 100,000 Christians remain in Iraq. The rest have fled for their lives.

This does not mean that Iraq's Muslim majority is to blame -- far from it. In fact the government of Nuri al-Maliki has ordered national police to Mosul to protect the Christians and secure their churches.

Those responsible for the persecution of Iraq's Christian community are the same extremists -- both Shiite and Sunni -- who are responsible for the tragic toll of civilian deaths in Iraq in recent years. These extremists have murdered multiple thousands of their fellow Muslims. No one suffers more from militant Islam than the Muslims themselves.

Yet these murders are yet another reminder of militant Islam's radical agenda. The extremists reject a multi-cultural Middle East. They reject a world in which the followers of the three Abrahamic faiths -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- can live together as neighbors. They view the mere existence of Christians in their midst as an intolerable affront to their faith.

It is little wonder that extremists who cannot accept a small Christian minority in Baghdad or Mosul also cannot stand a small Jewish state anywhere in the Middle East. It is the same agenda, and the same hate.

Iraq's Christian community is 2,000 years old. They have thrived in times of tolerance and survived past persecutions. Whether they can survive the current reign of terror remains to be seen. If things don't change, the day may come when the language of Jesus is heard in Iraq no more.

We will continue to monitor the situation of the Iraqi Christians and speak out on behalf of these brothers in harm's way. They, like the Israelis, are living next door to our most determined enemies. It is a dangerous place to be.

Realism on Iran- July 14, 2008
In recent months, many commentators have been talking about the inevitability of Iran getting a nuclear weapon. Others have been discussing the inevitability of an Israeli or American military strike against Iran. Yet neither of these supposedly "inevitable" options bodes well for the peace and security of Israel or her neighbors. Before accepting either such outcome as inevitable, it is time to redouble our efforts to stop Iran from enriching uranium through the most effective tools at our disposal: economic sanctions, divestment and diplomacy.

On two occasions now -- in Iraq in 1981 and recently in Syria -- Israel has attacked its enemy's nuclear reactors and stopped them from developing nuclear weapons. In each case, a bold military operation eliminated a threat to Israel with few repercussions or casualties. By all indications, an operation in Iran would bear no resemblance to these operations. Iran has the ability to hit back hard against Israeli population centers and American troops. And in all likelihood such an attack would strengthen President Ahmadinejad, a man who is otherwise facing challenges at home. Anyone who still harbors the illusion of a painless, lightning strike against Iran must banish that image from their minds. It is clouding your judgement.

It is true that the window is closing. It is true that Iran could soon have enough enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb. It is true that thus far sanctions have not slowed Iran's march towards nuclear weapons. But these facts should not lead us to desperation or despair. These facts should instead create a sense of urgency to secure the kind of sanctions and divestment which can make a difference before it is too late.

There have been signs all along that Tehran's leaders actually do respond to sanctions. When sanctions have hurt the Iranian economy, they have helped to fuel political protest and domestic unrest on Iran's streets. The mullahs who wield ultimate power in Iran have then reigned in extremists like President Ahmadinejad. The problem with sanctions has not been that they have been ignored. The problem has been that they have not been tough enough.

The only way that sanctions can work is if they are supported by a broad international consensus. Given the morally challenged diplomacy of China and Russia, international consensus can be difficult to achieve. But at the end of the day, neither of these nations wants to see Iran get nuclear weapons. There is a shared mutual interest at work which can and has served as the basis for a broad coalition. When the United States has led, there has been progress. We need to keep leading.

It is easy to get frustrated. We have been pursuing sanctions and diplomacy for a long time. Yet Iran has only accelerated its uranium enrichment program. It is easy to succumb to a fatalism that says that the only thing a thug like Ahmadinejad understands is force. Yet while such fatalism may be the easy option, it is not the practical one. Any practical approach will recognize the hazards of a nuclear Iran as well as the hazards of a military conflict with Iran. The realist will not give up on sanctions and diplomacy; he will double down.

Next week, we will be gathering in Washington for our third annual Christians United for Israel Washington, DC Summit. While we're in town, we will be asking our leaders to continue to pursue sanctions, divestment and diplomacy aimed at persuading Iran to abandon its uranium enrichment program. We will stress the seriousness of the threat. We will stress the limited time. We will do everything we can to persuade our leaders to pass tough sanctions legislation before they leave town this fall. It is not clear that these measure will ultimately work. But it is crystal clear that we have not tried hard enough to make them work.

The Miracle and the Tragedy - July 7, 2008
Last week, an Arab resident of East Jerusalem drove a bulldozer off a Jerusalem construction site and into oncoming traffic. He used this powerful machine to crush cars with their drivers still inside and to overturn a bus filled with passengers. He acted with a determined homicidal intent. While this attack may not have been coordinated or even premeditated, it was an act of terror by any definition I know.

By the time he was finally killed, this terrorist had killed three Israelis and injured dozens more.

The details are still sketchy. But it appears that there was an interval of time between when a police officer first climbed onto the bulldozer and when he finally shot the terrorist dead. In this brief interval, the police officer tried to pull the terrorist out of the driver's seat. In other words, he tried to spare the terrorist's life.

While this struggle was ongoing, the terrorist was focused on crushing one last car. Here too, it appears that there was an interval of time between the terrorist's first strike to the car and his second, final blow. In this brief interval, the injured driver of the car was able to unlock the baby seat in which her little daughter was sitting and pass her to rescuers outside the car. Then 33-year-old Bat Sheva Unterman was crushed to death. Six-month-old Efrat will grow up without ever again knowing the intense motherly love that saved her life that day.

Two intervals of time. Two efforts to save lives. A moment in Israel, 2008, that provides eloquent testimony to the Israeli tragedy and the Israeli miracle.

Bat Sheva Unterman used her interval of time to save her baby. Her reaction was one of love. She never thought to free herself, but only to save her child. In her success, some of this heroic woman will live on in her daughter.

The policeman used his interval of time to try to spare the terrorist's life. This reaction was also one of love. Israelis are a loud, sometimes pushy, and often imperfect people. But they are raised to respect human life, and to use lethal force as a last resort. This policeman tried to end the attack without ending a life. He did not want parents to have to bury their son.

In retrospect, if these reports are accurate, the policeman made a terrible mistake. His humane reaction cost an innocent life. And this is the true tragedy of the situation in which the Israelis are forced to live. Only in a world haunted by terror can the humane reaction be such a horribly wrong reaction. If the policeman is true to the nature he demonstrated that day, it is doubtful that he will ever completely forgive himself his compassion.

There are many wonders about Israel. Jews have returned home from every corner of the world. They have revived the Hebrew language. They are building a cutting-edge technology-based economy in the middle of constant attacks. Yet the greatest wonder of all is the way in which most Israelis are able to cling to their humanity in the middle of such hate and violence. Israel is a modern, secular society which nevertheless lives the commandments of love at the heart of the Bible. This humanity, above all, is the true miracle of Israel. It is a miracle I pray the Israelis continue to preserve and cherish. And it is an example, I pray, that the rest of us will seek to follow.

Dreams and Nightmares- June 30, 2008
Yesterday, Israel's cabinet approved a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah. In order to secure the return of two captured Israeli soldiers -- Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev -- or their remains (they are feared dead), Israel has agreed to release a handful of Lebanese prisoners.

The deal is of course controversial. It involves the clash of two core Israeli principles. Israel believes that it must never reward or negotiate with terrorists. But at the same time, Israelis have always agreed that the same army which sends their sons off to war must stop at nothing to bring the boys back home. Israel's government has always honored this unwritten agreement with Israel's parents, even if all that can be recovered are their children's remains. When these two principles clash, the choices are excruciating.

Among the Lebanese to be released under the deal is a man named Samir Kuntar. Kuntar's deed's were so heinous that even the New York Times refuses to call him a "militant." Instead, the paper calls him what he is: a murderer. According to the Times, Kuntar was part of a terror cell that raided the northern Israeli town of Nahariya in 1979. Kuntar shot and killed a civilian, Danny Harran, while his four-year-old daughter Einat watched. He then smashed Einat's head, killing her. While her family was being murdered, Mr. Haran's wife, Smadar, was hiding with the couple's two-year-old daughter. In her desperation to keep the little girl from crying out and alerting the terrorists to their location, Smadar accidentally smothered her baby to death.

This story immediately calls to mind the darkest days of the Holocaust, when Jews were forced into hiding. As Nazi soldiers searched door-to-door for hidden Jews, mothers sometimes smothered their babies to death in their terrified efforts to keep them from crying. That such a nightmare took place in Israel, in 1979, breaks the heart.

If the deal holds and the exchange takes place, the murderer Samir Kuntar will return to his home in Lebanon. No doubt the Israelis and all of us who care about them will be watching closely to see how Kuntar is greeted upon his return. Will he be shunned by his horrified neighbors? Or will he receive a hero's welcome? The fact the Hezbollah has made it a priority to secure Kuntar's release and reports of preparations for a massive celebration prepare us to expect the worst.

The people who would celebrate a man like Kuntar are hardly alone. They have brothers throughout the region. These are the people who danced with joy when America was attacked on 9/11. These are the people who hand out candy on their streets to celebrate when suicide bombers kill Israelis. These are the people who tell pollsters that they support terror attacks against Israeli civilians by large majorities.

Let's stay tuned and see what happens if and when Kuntar returns home. We all dream of peace. And we must continue to do so. But as we dream, we dare not ignore the nightmares. They were real. They happened. They are part of what Israel must always guard against. And when we wake up and wipe our eyes, these nightmares may be playing out on our TV screens in the form of a hero's welcome.

The Uri Test- June 23, 2008
So far it is holding. Neither Hamas nor Israel has violated the cease fire between them that went into effect last week. For the first time in months, the people of Sderot and Ashkelon can go about their lives without having to fear the sirens warning that they have fifteen seconds to run for cover from incoming missiles.

And yet it is difficult to get too excited about the cease fire. There is, haunting the quiet, a sense of great danger beyond the horizon. It is one thing to reach a cease fire with people who share a desire for peace. In such a case, a cease fire can be seen as a first step, a step that might lead to a next step. In such a case, a cease fire brings hope.

But Hamas does not seek peace. By its own proud admission, it seeks to destroy the State of Israel. Thus the cease fire feels far more like a break in between rounds than an end to the fight. And this is a break that Hamas will most certainly use to build up its weapons stockpiles so it can do even greater damage when the fighting resumes.

Yes, it is hard to be optimistic about this cease fire. And yet it is also hard to question it. As Israel weighed launching a massive military operation in Gaza in recent months, a question always loomed: How will a Gaza, 2008 be different from Lebanon, 2006? In July, 2006, Israel mounted a major operation to confront Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel was justified in pursuing these terrorists and seeking to deal them a knock-out blow, and we supported Israel's right to do so.

Yet after intensive fighting and significant casualties, the results were inconclusive. There was no knock-out. Hezbollah not only survived, but it has thrived. Israel had hoped to at least reduce Hezbollah's dangerous stockpiles of missiles. But today Hezbollah has more missiles, and more sophisticated missiles, then it did before the 2006 operation began.

As talk of a major Gaza operation intensified, my thoughts kept going back to David Grossman. Mr. Grossman is a leading Israeli novelist who pens truly wonderful, insightful novels. And like so many other Israeli novelists, he has been an outspoken peace activist. During the 2006 war with Hezbollah, Grossman and his colleagues called a press conference to ask Israel's leaders to bring the troops home. Grossman argued that Israel's efforts were not changing the reality of Hezbollah power in Southern Lebanon, and that the operation would not produce any lasting gains. Israeli boys are dying, he warned, for no good reason.

A few day later, after a few final operations that changed little, Israel did bring its troops home. But in one of those final battles, David Grossman's son Uri was killed in combat. He was twenty years old.

Any Israeli operation in Gaza must pass the Uri test. Any such operation will come at a very high price. Israeli soldiers will die. And both Israeli and Palestinian civilians will die. Before paying this price, Israel's leaders need to have a real reason to believe that these losses will not be in vain. Israel's leaders must be confident that the outcome in Gaza will be different from the outcome in Lebanon. They need to be able to give grieving Israeli parents something more than a flag and regrets and a return to the status quo ante. They need to give them an accomplishment worthy of the price.

In 1967, Israel defeated three Arab armies in six days. It was a lightning victory. But there will be no such victories in Israel's current war on terror. It will be a much tougher slog. We would certainly understand if Israel chooses to confront those who seek her destruction. But we must also understand when Israel chooses a different path. Yes, we are suspicious of the current cease fire. But do any of us know enough about the facts on the ground to know if a Gaza operation would pass the Uri test? I, for one, do not.

The Rising Generation- June 16, 2008
For pro-Israel students, college campuses can be a very lonely place. Many of their professors teach them that Israel is the great monster of our times. Many of their fellow students protest an Israel they claim is the new South Africa at best, and a modern Nazi Germany at worst.   All of the genocides and massacres and tyrannies of our day are often ignored. But Israel's every action is protested with an outrage out of all proportion to reality.

Earlier this year, we in CUFI decided that we needed to do something to help change the climate on our campuses. This led to the launch of our college initiative -- CUFI on Campus -- a few short months ago. Our goal is expand the number of Christian college students standing up for Israel and to support them in their efforts. And our hope is that these Christian friends will, in turn, be a source of encouragement and support for the Jewish pro-Israel students who too often find themselves standing for Israel all alone.

Under the leadership of CUFI on Campus Director Andrew Summey, this program is already bearing much fruit. In fact, at our DC Summit next month we are going to be joined by over 200 CUFI on Campus student delegates.   These delegates are a spirited, dedicated and impressive bunch. Many of them are leaders on their campuses. Some run the campus Republicans, while others lead the campus Democrats. Our student delegates have been active in supporting McCain, Obama and Clinton. They are diverse in their views of American politics and the world. But they are united in their support for Israel in her battle for existence.

As we stand for Israel today, we must begin investing in the next generation. Now is our time to make sure that Israel remains central in the hearts and minds of America's future leaders.

If you will be joining us in Washington this July, take some time to meet these impressive young men and women. Encourage them in what they do. And learn from them about the challenges they face. Unfortunately, the views they confront on their campuses will one day be the views we confront in the country at large.

If you cannot join us in Washington in July, please consider sponsoring a student. We are providing scholarships to enable students to be with us for these life-changing 3 days. The more scholarships we can offer, the more students we can reach, encourage and lift up.

You can sponsor a student for $650. This will cover their registration, hotel, and up to $250 of their travel. You can sponsor half a student scholarship for $325. You can contribute a quarter of a student scholarship $162.50. At your request, your donation will be applied towards CUFI on Campus Program. In addition to helping sponsor students to attend the Summit you will also receive your CUFI membership benefits. You can make your contribution by contacting the CUFI office at (210) 477-4714.

The New Inquisition- June 2, 2008
The recent controversy over Pastor John Hagee is about much more than one man and his "crazy" (John McCain's word) comments. The nature of the attacks on Pastor Hagee and the rapidity with which they spread and hardened into the ugliest of conclusions revealed something far deeper and far more disturbing about our public discourse on faith in America.

What was most breathtaking about the debate over Pastor Hagee's statements on the Holocaust was the complete absence of one. This was not a case where thoughtful arbiters discussed his words in the context of a rich Judeo-Christian tradition of theodicy. There was no respect given to a quite common worldview. There was no trial. We skipped right to the auto da fe.

Breathe in deeply and you can still smell the embers smoldering around Pastor Hagee's public persona.

With an ever-increasing ferocity, large swaths of the media and the blogosphere are enforcing a new orthodoxy of post-modern contempt for literal religious faith. The heresy they hunt is the belief in an omnipotent God who intervenes in history. And the punishment they impose is public death, banishment from the public square. Their power is sufficient to give pause to even the secular-minded among us.

The treatment of Pastor Hagee last week demonstrates the danger. Pastor Hagee's "offense" was to apply his belief in an omnipotent God to the greatest of tragedies: the Holocaust. After all, an all powerful God by definition could have prevented the Holocaust. So why didn't he? In the search for an answer, Pastor Hagee quoted the book of Jeremiah to suggest that God permitted the Holocaust to bring the Jewish people back to Israel.

Far from representing anything new or shocking, this belief that God sanctions the bad as well as good has deep roots in the Judeo-Christian tradition. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus teaches that not even a sparrow falls from the sky unless God wills it. If one sparrow cannot die without God's consent, then it is certainly reasonable to conclude that the same is true of six million human beings created in God's image.

The Jewish tradition likewise sees an omnipotent God behind human events. To cite just one example, the Talmud teaches that the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed because of the baseless hatred that the Jews had for one another at that time. In other worlds, according to the Talmud, God sent the Romans to destroy the Temple because of the sins of the Jews.

I am hard pressed to find a difference between Pastor Hagee's explanation for the Holocaust and the Talmud's explanation for the destruction of the Temple.

Let's be clear: Pastor Hagee's crime was not the specifics of his explanation for the Holocaust. The talking heads were not outraged that he found his answer in the book of Jeremiah instead of the book of Isaiah. His real crime was the fact that he dared to suggest any explanation for the Holocaust that involved a consenting God. To so many arbiters poised over their keyboards, it is simply a heresy to see the hand of God in our tragedies. If this view contradicts your faith in a sovereign God, then you've got a big problem.

Once you've been found guilty of a faith too literal, your public death will be imposed by a thousand cuts. Your life's work will be ignored. Your perfidy will be repeated on YouTube and in blogs where people who know nothing about you, and who've never read a complete transcript of anything you've said, will condemn you with an ever-escalating certitude. Cymbals will ceaselessly clang.

Who among us is safe in an environment where John Hagee can be labeled an anti-Semite? Few Christians have done more than John Hagee to combat anti-Semitism and support the State of Israel. But then he dared to contradict the prevailing orthodoxy. With an absurdity that would make Stalin proud, this lifelong Zionist is now convicted of attacking the very people he has devoted his life to comforting and supporting.

All of us who embrace or respect a more traditional Judeo-Christian worldview need to recognize that Pastor Hagee's problem is our problem. Every Orthodox Jew, Orthodox Catholic and evangelical Christian in America has particular cause for concern. Your views of God and how he interacts in the world are no longer acceptable in the public square. Close the curtains and turn the television volume high before confessing your literal interpretation of the Bible. That large whooshing sound you heard last week was a shot across your bow.

Jimmy Carter Crosses The Line - April 21, 2008
My reservoir of good will for Jimmy Carter is now bone dry. Carter has now crossed a bright red line. He has taken actions that no reasonable interlocutor can take. He has met with and literally embraced the leaders of Hamas.

We and he all know what Hamas is. Hamas is an organization that has never renounced terrorism but which actively promotes and celebrates it. Hamas is an organization that does not recognize Israel but loudly calls for her destruction. Hamas does not participate in the peace process because Hamas rejects the foundational principle of the peace process: mutual recognition. While Israel, the United States and the European Union work to isolate Hamas, Carter has now chosen to end this isolation with his warm embrace.

The double standard implicit in this meeting shocks the conscience. Would Carter hug Osama bin Laden? I don't think so. But what is the difference between Hamas and al Qaeda? They both embrace terror, and they have both amassed grisly body counts to demonstrate the depth of their depravity. As far as I can tell, they differ only in their choice of target. Bin Laden targets Americans, among others. Hamas targets Israelis. And when the victims are Israelis, Carter seems much quicker to forgive and forget.

Beyond his moral blindness, Carter's naivete is quite shocking. Upon leaving his meeting with Hamas' leader Khalid Meshal, Carter announced that Hamas would support any peace deal reached between Israel and the Palestinians so long as it was approved by a referendum of the Palestinian people. Poor Jimmy Carter. Did it not occur to him that people who are so callous with thier bombs and missiles might not be so careful with their words? By the end of the day, a Hamas spokesman clarified that Hamas would not be bound by any such referendum. By word and deed, Hamas remains an enemy of peace.

So much for Jimmy Carter. He's worn out his credibility and his welcome. It's time to move on to more relevant topics.

Standing with CUFI- April 14, 2008
As we all know, there are still many in the Jewish community who are suspicious of CUFI and who are slow to grasp the hand that we've extended to them in friendship. Given the long and bitter legacy of Christian anti-Semitism, we're not at all surprised or offended by this reaction. We just keep doing our work and hope to demonstrate through our deeds that such suspicion is no longer warranted.

Yet earlier this month an attack was made against Pastor Hagee and CUFI that was unusual both in the severity of its tone and the falsehood of its claims. The President of the Union for Reform Judaism, a man named Eric Yoffie, called Pastor Hagee and CUFI "extremists" and urged the Jewish community to stop working with us on behalf of Israel. Yoffie not only misrepresented CUFI's clear positions on the issues, but he repeated verbatim the false allegations made against Pastor Hagee by the Catholic League. It was a most unfortunate display.

I am happy to report that the Jewish community has responded to Rabbi Yoffie's attack with an overwhelming and unprecedented show of support for CUFI. Pastor Hagee and I and many of our leaders have been literally inundated with phone calls and e-mails from Jewish friends, including many Reform Jews, who want us to know that they are angered and embarrassed by Yoffie's words. So many Jewish friends have written op-ed's, blogs, and letters to the editor defending CUFI that I have simply lost count.

This outpouring of support reached its height last week, when seven past chairmen of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations signed a joint letter to the New York Times stating that:

"Pastor John Hagee has been a true friend of Israel for many years. Christians United for Israel is among the strongest supporters of Israel in the United States.... We appreciate and respect Pastor Hagee's dedicated efforts and those of Christians United for Israel."

If you're not familiar with the Jewish community, you may not understand just how significant this letter was. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations is exactly what its name indicates -- there is not a significant Jewish organization that is not a member of the Conference of Presidents. In fact, the Union of Reform Judaism is itself a member of the Conference of Presidents.

Secondly, the past chairmen of this organization are a most elite and diverse group. It is rare that they have come together as a group around any one issue. For these seven past chairmen to stand with CUFI and Pastor Hagee like this is the closest thing to a seal of approval that the American Jewish community can provide.

The decision by these past chairmen to stand with Pastor Hagee and CUFI and to reject the attacks against us was an act of great decency and love. It says to us that our work is not being taken for granted. It reminds us that our efforts for Israel are making a difference. It bolsters our faith that we are, together, writing a new and hopeful chapter in Jewish-Christian relations.

Encouraged by our friends, never hating those who oppose us, we will continue to do what is right. We will never grow weary in well doing. We will continue to humbly walk with our Jewish brothers. And we will continue to work hand-in-hand with them to build a future of peace and security for Israel.

This comparison is weak in so many ways. The most glaring flaw in this logic is that it rests on a false premise: Pastor Hagee is not anti-Catholic and has never called the Catholic Church the ugly names that people claim.

This assertion will certainly come as a surprise to many. After all, many prominent media outlets have been reporting for weeks now that John Hagee called the Catholic Church a “Great Whore,” a “false cult system,” and an “apostate church.” Strong words these. And if Pastor Hagee used them in reference to the Catholic Church then the criticism he’s received would be warranted. But stop the presses and the lynch mobs Pastor Hagee never called the Catholic Church these names. When it comes to Pastor Hagee’s views on Catholics, the press has gotten it terribly wrong.

Let’s take a step back. This whole “Hagee hates Catholics” thing started barely a month ago. That’s when an organization called the Catholic League drowned the media in press releases denouncing Hagee as “anti-Catholic.” Their core allegation was that Hagee had called the Catholic Church these three nasty names. To support this claim, they sent out a link to a video which allegedly catches Pastor Hagee in the act of name calling.

The few bold souls who actually watched the video tended to question the assertion for which it was supplied as proof. The video does indeed show Pastor Hagee using these three terms. But he doesn’t use them to describe the Catholic Church. Instead, he mentions them in an effort to teach on the very murky Book of Revelation. It is actually Revelation that supplies us with the term “Great Whore.” Pastor Hagee merely explains that this will be an “apostate church” made up of all those who abandon the teachings of Christ and embrace false doctrines such as anti-Semitism. Pastor Hagee believes that the “Great Whore” will be comprised of people from all Christian denominations and churches, including his own Cornerstone Church in San Antonio.

This probably explains why we see the video of Jeremiah Wright in an “endless loop” but no one ever bothers to play the Hagee video. One video incriminates. The other vindicates.

If pressed on this discrepancy, critics would likely respond that Hagee was using code words which other evangelicals have employed to denigrate the Catholic Church. But certainly such misuse by others cannot render key concepts from the Book of Revelation off limits to all Christians. Especially not when they employ these terms, as Hagee does, to elaborate their disagreement with those who claim that this “Great Whore” is somehow synonymous with Catholicism.

Besides, Pastor Hagee is not a man who uses code words he’s as blunt as they come. In fact Hagee does have a problem with the Catholic Church of which he has spoken quite often and quite bluntly: it’s past anti-Semitism. Although he enthusiastically praises Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict for their role in reconciling with the Jewish people, Hagee has often criticized those Catholics who brought us the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades. But he has just as often and just as bluntly criticized Protestants for their long history of anti-Semitism. When it comes to the Holocaust, he has blamed both Protestant and Catholic anti-Semitism for helping create a climate in which Nazi racial anti-Semitism could flourish. These comments are made by a Christian in the spirit of self criticism and repentance, not attack.

I typically applaud the work of the Catholic League. They defend Americans from one of the last tolerated prejudices: anti-Catholicism. But they got this one wrong. And too many who should have known better followed their lead. Al Qaeda’s recent accusations against the Pope and threats against Americans and Jews everywhere should be a sober reminder that now more than ever people of faith need to join hands, not bicker.

- March 24, 2008
Newsweek magazine recently ran an intriguing interview with a woman named Shifa al-Qudsi. Six years ago, Shifa entered Israel with an explosive belt attached to her body on her way to carry out a suicide bombing. Luckily for her and the innocents she would have murdered, Shifa was caught. After serving a six-year sentence in an Israeli prison, she is now back home in the West Bank.

Yet, somehow, her time in an Israeli prison transformed her. Now that she knows Israelis, she recognizes their humanity. She has renounced terror, and is telling her fellow Palestinians that “words are more powerful than weapons.” She no longer admires terrorists, but has studied and embraced the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi.

This story is exceptional. Literally exceptional. Last week also brought news that while this brave young woman has embarked down the path to peace, most of her fellow Palestinians have been traveling in the opposite direction. Palestinian pollster Khalil Shikaki released a new poll which, he says, shows greater Palestinian support for violence against Israelis than any of the surveys he’s conducted over the past fifteen years. A full 84% of Palestinians support the March 6 attack at the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem in which a terrorist shot eight high school students to death. 64% now support the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israeli towns and cities.

So here is the question: How does Israel produce more men and women like Shifa? What can Israel do to encourage more Palestinians to abandon the path of Arafat for the path of Gandhi? Shikaki the pollster believes that Palestinian support for violence has spiked because of anger at Israel’s recent raid into Gaza in which 130 people were killed. So perhaps Israel should stop such raids? Perhaps Israel should absorb waves of rockets until the Palestinians finally stop firing them?

Unfortunately, history does not provide much evidence that such unilateral steps will work. Israel went so far as to withdraw all of its troops and settlers from Gaza in 2005, yet Hamas and other militants still found plenty of provocation to fire missiles into Israel -- that’s what terrorists do. And of course the Gaza raid was necessitated in the first place by the rocket fire which a majority of Palestinians now support.

In the final analysis, Israel cannot produce Gandhis in the West Bank. Only the Palestinians and their leaders can do so. They will need to stumble upon the humanity of the Israelis on their own. A good starting point might be to stop teaching that the Jews are the descendants of monkeys and pigs in the militant mosques. A solid second step might be to stop glorifying suicide bombings on children’s television.

In the meantime, Israel can try its best to help this process from the outside. While defending herself, Israel must continue to recognize the tragedy of every civilian casualty. Such casualties may be inevitable, especially when militants operate in civilian areas, but they are never acceptable. And Israel can ensure that those who do embrace words over weapons have a serious partner with whom to talk. No, Israel can’t withdraw from the West Bank because there is one Shifa al-Qudsi -- not while there are 84% who still support the cold-blooded murder of Israelis. But by continuing to embrace talks and reconciliation as the ultimate goal, Israel can hold out the promise of peace to all who would seek it.

Fortress Israel- February 4, 2008
The circle will soon be complete. The isolation will be total. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has called for the immediate construction of a security fence along Israel's long southern border with Egypt. Once this fence is complete, Israel will no longer have even one inch of border that is not surrounded by a complex of fences and sensors. The Israelis will, quite literally, be penned in.

Since they signed a peace treaty in 1979, Israel and Egypt have had a quiet border without any significant physical demarcation. But last month Hamas blew up the barrier separating Gaza from Egypt. Thousands of Gazans have since streamed into Egypt to buy food and supplies. At the same time, an unknown number of Palestinian terrorists have crossed into Egypt with the goal of exploiting this open border to enter and attack Israel. Last week, Egyptian security forces arrested two separate Hamas cells carrying explosive belts.

And now this morning comes the sad news that the Egyptians missed at least one such cell. Today, a suicide bomber blew himself up in the southern Israeli town of Dimona killing one woman and wounding over eleven other people. A second suicide bomber was killed seconds before he could detonate his explosive belt. The terrorists had entered Israel through Egypt. The Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, a terrorist group allied with Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party, has claimed responsibility for the attack. A southern fence isn't just a good idea -- it's an urgent necessity.

Back when I was in college, a well-meaning professor warned me that Israel needed to make peace with her neighbors because she could not long survive as "Fortress Israel," fenced in and surrounded on all sides. He argued that Israel must end its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in order to end her isolation. At the time, this was reasonable advice. But times have changed. Israel did withdraw from Gaza. But withdrawal from such territory does not satisfy a new generation of extremists. They will seek and find any opening to strike at Jews living in Israel proper.

Soon Israeli tractors and bulldozers will get to work building this new fence in the southern desert and completing Israel's physical isolation. As they do so, we too have work to do. We need to build a bridge of solidarity that spans this fence. We need to build a freeway of support that crashes through this fence. We need to grow large enough, and loud enough, that the extended hand of Christians United for Israel can eclipse any physical barriers off on the horizon. CUFI must ensure that physical isolation is overcome with spiritual solidarity.

Yes, dear friends. We too have work to do.

As I walked through a college campus yesterday, I saw flyers posted all over calling for students to attend an upcoming protest at the Israeli Embassy. What were they protesting? Israel's "siege" of Gaza. The picture of the Palestinian women climbing over what was once a border fence to buy supplies in Egypt told the tale.

Some stories can be told with a picture. Other stories are longer in the telling. Very often it is the true story that is more difficult to tell. The truth can be complex, nuanced, and involve long fact patterns. The picture skips all of this and speaks directly to our emotions.

If I had a chance to speak with a student thinking of attending this protest, what would I say? The only way I could respond to this one disturbing picture would be with a veritable slide show. I'd have to show at least five pictures to explain the one.

The first picture I'd show would be of tens of thousands of Gazans crossing the border into Israel to work. This was the scene every morning for decades. Wages in Israel were far higher than those paid in Gaza or in any neighboring Arab country. While there was deep disagreement on politics, Palestinians and Israelis had learned to transcend the conflict when it came to the mundane tasks of running businesses and feeding families.

But then we get to picture number two: bombed buses and cafes. Israel was forced to close the border to such workers after the second intifada began in 2000. With Palestinian suicide bombers blowing themselves up in Israel's cities, it was simply too risky to allow so many thousands of Palestinians into Israel.

Then comes picture three: Israeli troops removing Israeli settlers from Gaza in 2005. In an effort to eliminate most of the irritants that Palestinians claimed made their lives so difficult, Israel removed every last settler, soldier and checkpoint from inside Gaza in 2000. This was meant to be part of a larger "disengagement" from the Palestinians that could have built momentum for a final peace agreement.

But then come pictures four and five: supplies being shipped from Israel into Gaza and rockets being launched from Gaza into Israel. These pictures must be shown together because they occurred simultaneously. That's right, as Gaza was being used as a launching pad for thousands of missile and mortar attacks on Southern Israel, Israel continued to fully supply Gaza with all of the food and fuel it needed. Supplies in, missiles out.

After these rocket attacks escalated in recent weeks, Israel finally decided to send a message to Gazans that it was not obligated to continue this losing exchange of supplies for missiles forever. The measures were intended to send a message while curbing actual suffering: they were limited, temporary, and designed to stop short of creating a humanitarian crisis. They have already been lifted.

That is a long explanation. Too long. But reality has a way of being far more complex than propaganda. Israelis hate this conflict. They are tired of patrolling Palestinian towns and manning checkpoints in Palestinian villages. They continue to do so because the failure to do so has opened the door to bloody terrorist attacks against them. We can all see the effect. Our job is to remind the American public of the cause.

The CUFI DC Summit - January 21, 2008
Last week, we kicked off registration for our 2008 Washington, DC Summit. The 2008 Summit promises to be our biggest and most important event yet. If you take one concrete action for Israel this year, I hope it will be to join us in DC.

Our 2008 summit will take place in the closing months of the Bush Adminisration. This means that we will be in Washington during a crucial juncture for Israel and America. Think about the following:

1) President Bush is committed to completing a Middle East peace agreement by the time he leaves office. Our Summit will likely provide a final opportunity to influence this process in what may well be its final, fateful days.

2). We'll be meeting in Washington less than four months before the 2008 Presidential election. Our Summit will be a last opportunity to impact the debate before this campaign hits the home stretch.

3). When we go up to Capitol Hill to visit with our representatives, there will be only a few working months left in this session of Congress. Once Congress adjourns, every bill before Congress that has not received a final up-or-down vote will die and we will need to start from scratch in the new Congress that is sworn in during January, 2009. Our Summit will be a final opportunity to secure passage of important pro-Israel legislation currently before Congress.

We've put together an excellent event where you'll be able to hear directly from the most important leaders and experts in Washington. It will be a busy, educational, inspirational 3-days. And by being in our nation's Capital during this pivotal time, we can change the course of rapidly developing events.

Blackie Gonzalez, RIP- January 7, 2008
From the start, Christians United for Israel has been blessed in our friends and leaders. And one of the greatest of these blessings was our New Mexico State Director, Blackie Gonzalez. It was with great sadness that we learned last week that Blackie went home to his Savior.

One of CUFI's themes is that for too long Christianity has not demonstrated the love that is at the core of its powerful message. It is perhaps for this reason that God sent Blackie Gonzalez into the world. Simply put, Blackie was love. It is often said of good men such as Blackie that they "never said a bad word about anybody." In Blackie's case this wasn't only true, it was effortless. Blackie never said a bad word about anyone because he never thought a bad thought about anyone. He was a heart. He loved. He didn't know any other way to relate to his fellow creatures.

Blackie did love. He loved his wife, Joanna. He loved his children and their spouses, Ted and Pamela, Mary Kay, Vickie and Anthony, Annette and Jim, Jhett and Jo, Lance and Melissa. He loved his sixteen grandchildren and one great grandchild. He loved his native New Mexico. And he loved Israel.

Blackie identified with Israel the way he identified with Santa Fe. It was a central part of his life and only natural that he work for its betterment. Over the years, Blackie traveled to Israel many times and raised funds for a number of important Israeli causes. Last year, Blackie organized and ran a national telethon for Israel which was aired on Christian stations across the country. When asked to serve as CUFI's New Mexico State Director, Blackie jumped in with both feet. He found city directors for every town in the state. His Night to Honor Israel in Albuquerque was among our largest. I suspect many of the people who came that night actually showed up to honor Blackie. But they ended up honoring Israel too.

It is very sad to contemplate future CUFI events and know that we'll no longer get to look forward to seeing Blackie's smiling face and being lifted up by Blackie's positive take on just about everything under the sun. To so many of us who've had the privilege of knowing this wonderful man, one thought keeps recurring -- Blackie, we miss you!

We extend our deepest condolences to Blackie's family. We pray that God will give them the strength to appreciate how blessed they were to have Blackie in their lives while they mourn the fact that they have him no longer.

For information about Blackie, his memorial service, or to write a tribute please go to http://www.blackiegonzalez.com/.

Full Steam Ahead- December 31, 2007
As 2007 recedes into history, we have much to be thankful for. This has been a phenomenal year for Christians United for Israel. We've seen our organization grow, our message spread, and our activism achieve results. In a very short period of time we've become a strong voice for Israel that can and has made a difference.

We could not have achieved this growth without the love and dedication of our friends. CUFI supporters have responded quickly and enthusiastically when Israel has needed their help. It is an honor to work with so many wonderful and devoted friends of the Jewish State and people.

Yet as we turn our thoughts from the past to the new year approaching, we know that there is much work to do. It is already apparent that 2008 is going to be a challenging year for Israel. We're going to need to hit the ground running.

In 2008, Iran will continue enriching uranium at breakneck speed. Those of us who don't shrink from reality understand that Iran has no possible use for enriched uranium other than for a nuclear weapon. Yet so many in Washington and Europe appear desperate to ignore this threat. In the year to come, CUFI will need to work harder than ever to support economic sanctions against Iran.

In 2008, Hezbollah and Hamas will continue to build their missile and arms stockpiles and prepare for the next war with Israel. Israel may need to strike at these enemies to disrupt their preparations for war or defend herself from attack. Yet if and when Israel takes such steps, we know that she will be severely criticized. In the year to come, CUFI will need to be ready to defend Israel when she chooses to defend herself.

In 2008, the Middle East peace process begun in Annapolis will continue. At any moment, Israel may face American and international pressure to cede strategic land to the Palestinians. Those applying this pressure will likely ignore the inability of the Palestinians to prevent terrorist attacks and missile launches from this land. In the year to come, CUFI will need to monitor the peace process and speak up for Israel when the arm twisting begins.

Israel will need our support in 2008 like never before. In the year to come, let's show the Israelis and the American Jewish Community that their Christian friends are not growing weary, but will continue to stand by their side with unquenchable vigor, dogged determination and great love.

May the God of Israel bless you and your families with a happy and healthy New Year.

A Setback on Iran- December 10, 2007
As I listened to the news last Monday, I heard something spectacular. The reporter stated that a new National Intelligence Estimate (“NIE”) has concluded that Iran abandoned its nuclear arms program back in 2003. My heart almost burst with joy. Finally, this horrible, genocidal threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb had been lifted. It sounded too good to be true.

And it was too good to be true. The actual facts of the story had little relation to the headline. The NIE claims that Iran has abandoned its weaponization program. But weaponization is to a nuclear bomb what icing is to a cake. It’s simply the finishing touch. Even if the icing has been put aside, the dough is already in the oven, and it’s rising.

When it comes to building a nuclear bomb, the hard part is obtaining a sufficient supply of enriched uranium. The enrichment process takes years of very complex, technical work. The far faster, easier part is “weaponization” -- building a nuclear bomb from that uranium. UN experts have estimated that once Iran has a sufficient supply of enriched uranium, the weaponization process would take only a few months.

Thus even if the NIE is correct and there are many reasons to doubt that it is it doesn’t mean that Iran has stopped its march towards a nuclear bomb. It simply means that Iran has decided to save the last step in the process for last.

No matter what the status of the weaponization program, all observers agree that Iran is continuing its uranium enrichment program at a furious pace. The Iranians recently announced that they have 3,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges up and running. If the Iranians can keep these centrifuges running continuously, they could have enough enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon within a year. This enrichment program is in clear violation of binding UN resolutions.

Might the Iranians simply be enriching uranium for a peaceful nuclear energy program? There is no logical reason for them to do so. Russia has already agreed to supply Iran with all the fuel it needs for civilian nuclear energy. And the whole idea that Iran is interested in nuclear energy is absurd when you remember that it sits on one of the largest supplies of oil in the world.

The most tragic aspect of this NIE is that it actually recognizes the value of international pressure in getting Iran to change its behavior. The NIE claims that Iran was responding to just such pressure when it abandoned the weaponization part of its program in 2003. Yet this report will make it far more difficult to organize effective international pressure in the future. Russia and China have always been reluctant to sanction Iran, and we’ve now handed them an excellent excuse to block the next round of economic sanctions.

Rest assured that we in CUFI will not be fooled or deterred by the headlines about the NIE. We’ve read the rest of the story. And we’re more worried now than ever. We intend to redouble our efforts to secure economic sanctions on Iran. This remains the only way short of war to avert a tragedy.

click here to send an e-mail to the White House telling them not to pressure Israel to make territorial concessions at Annapolis. Click here to share this opportunity to e-mail the White House with a friend.

That's right, CNN. The same network that embraces the "cycle of violence" theory of Middle East conflict and brought us the insult of Christiane Amanpour's God's Warriors. Since I've criticized their failures, it seems only fair to applaud their triumph. Back in August, CNN aired a documentary called The Anvil of God, about the 2004 Battle for Falluja, Iraq. I missed the program then, but I caught it when it was re-aired last week. I'm glad I did.

Watching The Anvil of God is like a trip to the Holocaust Museum. It's hard. It's emotionally wrenching. And it is extremely important.

Most of us try to honor our men and women in uniform. We thank them for their service when our paths cross. We pray for their families when we see their names among those killed in battle. But with the exception of those with a loved one in the service, the war is simply too far from us. We don't feel it in any ongoing, personal way. Life intervenes. We have work, plans, and problems. The world is always pushing us to narrow our focus.

The Anvil of God helped to bring the war home better than most of the coverage I've seen. Here the statistics and names take on flesh. They become individuals we meet and quickly grow to admire.

The documentary follows a company of Marines as they fought house-to-house to take the insurgent stronghold of Falluja back in 2004. As you watch, you see acts of courage and selflessness that amaze. You meet young men with profound love for their fellow soldiers, their families and their country. And, as the story progresses, you see many of these young men die. One by one, death by death, this Chinese water torture of loss penetrates the shell of distraction and reverberates loudly in the soul. This show is a heartbreaker.

America and Israel continue to face challenges that demand that our young men and theirs take up arms. As they do so, we must find a way to bring their sacrifice closer. Whatever our positions on the issues of the day, we all have an obligation to feel and internalize the worlds that are lost with each fallen soldier. Unless someone has suffered such a loss, it is of course impossible to understand the pain of families and loved ones. But this does not excuse us, however feebly, from trying.

No Banana Republic- November 5, 2007
President Reagan was a great friend of Israel. But even he disagreed with Israeli policy from time to time. When Israel annexed the Golan Heights in 1981, Reagan objected and decided to "punish" Israel by withdrawing an offer to establish a new strategic relationship between the two countries. Israel's Prime Minister Begin responded by asking the US Ambassador: "What kind of expression is this - 'punishing Israel'? Are we a vassal state of yours? Are we a banana republic? Are we youths of fourteen who, if they don't behave properly, are slapped across the fingers?"

Prime Minister Begin was reminding the American Ambassador of an important fact. Yes, the United States is Israel's best friend in the world. And yes, Israel owes an enormous debt of gratitude to the United States for the military aid and diplomatic protection that America so generously provides. But Israel is an independent country which won a brutal War of Independence and a miraculous Six Day War without any support from the United States. And Israel is a thriving democracy in which her citizen soldiers and their families get to decide the issues of war and peace, life and death.

I was reminded of Begin's words while reading the newspaper this morning. The New York Times is reporting that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has issued his "strongest and most vocal support yet" for the Annapolis Summit being pushed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Olmert said that "If we and the Palestinians act with determination, there is a chance that we can achieve real accomplishments -- perhaps even before the end of President Bush's term in office."

Sounds pretty positive. But then the article goes on to note that among those in the front row nodding in agreement with Olmert's statement was none other than..... Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Secretary Rice is back in the Mid East trying to get the parties to embrace the summit and the principles that underlie it. This little fact raises a simple question: Might Secretary Rice have had something to do with Prime Minister Olmert's newfound enthusiasm for Annapolis? Was Prime Minister Olmert's smile concealing a very sorely twisted arm?

The Times article confirms such suspicions when it later notes that, "A senior Israeli official said that there remained deep concern in Israel that Ms. Rice was pushing Israelis too hard and too fast...."

Such reports about American pressure and arm-twisting are too numerous to ignore. And they are troubling. Many critics of Annapolis are questioning Secretary Rice's motives in pushing Israel to the table. I will not do so. She is my Secretary of State and I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she is doing what she believes is best for America and our ally, Israel.

It's not Secretary Rice's motives I question, but her logic. The Gaza withdrawal which she supported has been a disaster. Palestinian President Abbas was unable to stop terror attacks on Israel from Gaza, and when he tried to assert greater authority Hamas militants drove him from Gaza within three days. Gaza is now little more than a terrorist base from which thousands of rockets have been fired into Southern Israel. What makes Secretary Rice so certain that this experiment should be repeated in the far more strategically significant West Bank?

When our government is pressuring Israel to take steps that we believe to be unwise, we have the right to speak up and ask our government to stop. This is how we can make an important difference. We can remind our leaders that Israel is not a banana republic.

Last Wednesday, we issued a CUFI Action Alert asking you to e-mail or call the White House and tell President Bush not to pressure Israel into making territorial concessions at Annapolis. So far, over 10,500 CUFI activists have e-mailed this message to the White House, and thousands more have called. There are very few groups in America which can generate this volume of communications to our leaders. Many older and more established organizations are happy when they can drive a few hundred e-mails to the White House.

We are off to a good start, but we need to do even better. If anyone reading this has not yet done so, please click here to e-mail the White House and tell President Bush to stop pressuring Israel. Please click here to call the White House. And if you have sent an e-mail already, please help us get more people to do so. Click here to forward this request to your family and friends and let them make their voices heard as well.

No Picnics in Gaza- October 29, 2007
When Yitzhak Rabin shook Yassir Arafat's hand on the White House lawn in September, 1993, a brief but sunny period of optimism dawned in Israel. Israelis finally let themselves believe that peace was at hand. And Israelis finally let themselves dream dreams of peace.

Fathers dreamt that their children would never know the horror of military combat. Mothers dreamt that one day soon the military draft might be eliminated altogether. But most of all, Israelis dreamt very simple, very sweet dreams of coexistence with their neighbors. In the post-Oslo euphoria, many embattled, suffocated Israelis shouted out the greatest desires of their hearts. "When we have peace," a friend exclaimed, "we'll go down to Gaza to buy sandwiches and then picnic on the beach." "One day soon," another exclaimed" we'll be able to drive to Damascus for lunch."

Reality can be heartbreaking. Israeli officials announced Sunday that Israel has begun reducing fuel shipments to Gaza and has closed down one of the two crossings through which food and other supplies pass into the Strip. These are the first steps towards implementing the Israeli Cabinet's September decision to restrict the flow of fuel, supplies and electricity to Gaza.

The goal of these restrictions is very simple. Israel's leaders believe that the time has come to use every means at their disposal to stop Gazans from firing missiles at Israel. More than a thousand rockets and mortar shells have been launched from Gaza into Israel in the past four months. In the past week alone, several rockets landed in and around the Israeli border town of Sderot. Luckily, no one was killed. At least not last week.

While Gazans are sending their rockets into Israel, Israel has been sending food, electricity and fuel into Gaza. Israel actually supplies two thirds of Gaza’s electricity needs. That's right -- Israel supplies Gaza with the very fuel and electricity that Islamic Jihad and others use to build, transport and fire rockets back into Israel.

Rest assured, the proposed supply cut-offs will be very "Israeli." Israel will ensure that Palestinian hospitals and ambulances have all of the power and fuel they need. The electricity cut offs will be symbolic -- fifteen minutes or so -- rather actual. But it has been difficult for Israel to take even these limited steps given their impact on the broader population.

One wonders how Israel's enemies would handle the situation were the roles reversed -- if the Palestinians supplied Israel with its electricity and fuel. Does anyone doubt that Israel would have been plunged into total darkness long ago? But Israel is not going to lower herself to the level of her enemies. She never has.

Yet even if justified, such measures are not pleasant for a people as sensitive to human needs as the Israelis. Israel never wanted this. It was the dream of peace -- too strong, too powerful -- that led Israel to leave the Gaza Strip in the first place, hoping that the better angels of Palestinian nature would somehow arise and transform a population. But dreams of peace are no match for dreams of martyrdom. And humanitarian gestures will never appease a people committed to your destruction.

No, there will be no picnics in Gaza. There will be no lunch in Damascus. Israeli children will continue to learn war. And as Israelis continue to confront endless conflict, we continue to hear that the only shred of good news they receive is the fact that -- finally -- they are not alone. Israelis are deeply heartened to know that they have so many Christian friends in America and around the globe who are standing by them during these difficult days of conflict.

So Israelis will continue their long wait to realize their dream of easy coexistence with their Arab neighbors. But they take great comfort from the fact that the dream of a reconciliation with a large segment of the Christian community is being realized in city after city across this great nation. We are offering Israelis the desire of their hearts, an escape from their long and lonely isolation. Our warm embrace is every bit as important as the educational and policy work we do in America. Let's keep up this good work.

In order for any such peace overture to work, Israel needs a real partner for peace. To qualify as such, this partner must embrace two central principles. First, they must accept Israel’s right to exist and renounce terrorism against Israel. Second, they must be willing and able to prevent terror against Israel by third parties from the territories that Israel transfers to their control. The widespread skepticism of Annapolis stems from the simple fact that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas satisfies neither of these two prerequisites.

Has Abbas renounced terror against Israel? Well, he has made a number of statements to that effect. So has his impressive new Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad. Such statements are certainly welcome steps in the right direction. But Fayyad is a technocrat with no independent power base. And Abbas is the leader of a movement Fatah -- whose behavior is sadly at odds with Abbas’ words.

To this day Fatah continues to embrace and practice terror against Israel. In case we needed a reminder of this reality, today’s newspapers supplied one. It has now been disclosed that Israeli intelligence foiled a plot to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Olmert this past June. Every single one of the plotters was a Fatah member in good standing. When Israel warned Abbas’ government about this plot, the Palestinians arrested the plotters. But even though these men confessed to their plans to kill Olmert, they were released from prison a mere three months later.

Of course this and the many other recent examples of Fatah-sponsored terror don’t necessarily mean that Abbas is a liar when he renounces terror. It’s possible that he is sincere and simply powerless to control his own movement. But neither explanation lies or incompetence qualifies Abbas to be a real partner for peace. And if Fatah itself still engages in terror, it’s difficult to see how Fatah could effectively prevent other even more militant groups from doing the same.

For an example of what happens when Israel trades land for peace in the absence of a partner who meets the basic prerequisites, we need only look back to 2005. That summer, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip and entrusted to Fatah the job of stopping terror attacks against Israel from this territory. Fatah failed miserably. In fact, when Fatah finally tried to assert some control over the more militant Hamas movement, Hamas routed Fatah’s forces and took over the Gaza Strip. As a result, Hamas a terrorist organization openly dedicated to destroying Israel is now in full control of Gaza. Since 2005, militants have fired hundreds of Kassam rockets from Gaza into the nearby Israeli town of Sderot, making life in that city close to impossible.

While the prospects of success have not gotten any greater since 2005, the price of failure has skyrocketed. Since Israel has already left Gaza, the Annapolis summit will focus on the details of an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank. But the West Bank is far more strategically significant than Gaza. The only major Israeli town within Kassam range of Gaza is Sderot, with a population of 20,000. But Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and most of Israel’s remaining population centers are well within Kassam range of the West Bank. In other words, if Hamas is able to repeat in the West Bank what it so easily accomplished in Gaza, the vast majority of Israelis will find themselves living under Palestinian rocket fire.

Given Fatah’s record and these supremely high stakes, it is difficult to view the upcoming Annapolis summit with anything other than trepidation. Since the Israelis are the ones who will pay the price for any unwise concessions at Annapolis, we believe that America must stop pressuring Israel to make such concessions. CUFI will be issuing an action alert on the Annapolis summit in the coming days. We pray you’ll respond when you get it.

The decline of the Christian population of Bethlehem is not an isolated phenomenon. Christians who have the means are fleeing countries throughout the Middle East. In fact, there is only one country in the Middle East where the Christian population is growing. That country, of course, is Israel.

As CUFI stands with Israel, we cannot and will not be silent about the persecution of Christians by the same militants who have been at the forefront of the effort to destroy Israel. We express our deep regrets to the Ayyad family. We will keep you posted on the state of Christian Arabs and what we can do to help.

Slander - October 8, 2007
When I first moved to Washington to work in government, I was given some advice about the press. Journalists, I was warned, are lazy. If they have a choice between regurgitating the conventional wisdom or doing hours of original research, the regurgitation will typically win out. In over a dozen years in Washington, I've found this advice to be too often true.

Sadly, such journalistic laziness was on parade Friday night when PBS aired a Bill Moyers Journal story about Christians United for Israel. Moyers' show was a long and loud regurgitation of the current conventional wisdom about Christian Zionism. According to Moyers and his guests, Pastor Hagee and the members of Christians United for Israel support the Jewish State merely to speed Armageddon and the Second Coming of Jesus. What seems on the surface like love for our ally Israel is, they assert, merely a nefarious plot to kill and convert the Jews at the End of Days.

I welcome the criticism of all who disagree with CUFI's policies. We're not perfect, and I'm certain that in our zeal to defend Israel we'll make mistakes. But to skip past these policy differences and claim that CUFI's motive is not to defend Israel but to destroy her is an evasion of a rational discourse. When the conventional wisdom is so horribly mistaken, repeating it like this amounts to slander, pure and simple.

Most of you reading this -- those of you who are Christian Zionists -- know why you support Israel and know that your support has nothing to do with End Times theology. In fact, those of you now being exposed to this slander for the first time are no doubt shocked to learn about your "real motives" for supporting Israel.

But since all of us must operate in a world which so often misunderstands us, it's important that we be able to explain to our critics the flaws in their analysis.   This necessitates clarifying a basic principle of logic -- the difference between a belief and a motive. While we may have many beliefs about a particular subject, not all of these beliefs actually motivate our actions in relation to this subject. For example, I believe that red meat is bad for me. Yet I eat a lot of steak. Clearly this particular belief about red meat does not motivate my steak consumption. Quite to the contrary.

Do evangelical Christians believe that there is a connection between the State of Israel and the Second Coming of Jesus? They absolutely and enthusiastically do. Most evangelicals believe that Israel's rebirth and the ingathering of the Jewish exiles is nothing less than a Sign of the Times -- a sign that the Second Coming and the End of Days may be drawing near. These beliefs are hardly a secret; Pastor Hagee and others have written extensively about them.

But does this End Times belief happen to be the motive behind evangelical support for Israel? In other words, do evangelicals support Israel to try to speed up the end of the world? Absolutely not.

First of all, Christian theology is crystal clear about the fact that humans are powerless to speed up the End of Days. The Bible states unequivocally that God has set the day and hour for his Second Coming and that man is powerless to alter this appointed hour by so much as a nanosecond. Thus the very theology which nurtures evangelical beliefs about Armageddon eliminates any possibility that such beliefs will motivate evangelicals to seek to spark Armageddon.

Secondly, Christians have a set of compelling motives for supporting Israel that have nothing whatsoever to do with the End Times. Christian Zionists fervently believe in the biblical promises of Genesis, especially that they will be blessed if they bless Israel (Genesis 12:3). Christian Zionists believe that Jewish history dramatically demonstrates the need for a Jewish homeland. And Christian supporters of Israel believe that Israel's modern history clearly establishes the justice of her cause.

Why do Christians support Israel? It turns out they do so for a set of motives that are almost identical to the motives behind Jewish support for Israel.

Such slanders of evangelical Christians are hardly new. During the Cold War, liberal critics claimed that Jerry Falwell and other Christian conservatives supported Ronald Reagan's defense build up because they wanted to start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union that would usher in Armageddon. With the benefit of hindsight, we can see just how ridiculous this accusation was. Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority supported President Reagan's defense build up because like President Reagan they believed that this policy was the best way to keep the peace. History has vindicated their approach to the Cold War. And history will vindicate CUFI's approach to Israel's troubles in the Middle East.

We always knew that this day would come. We always knew that as we grew more powerful our critics would grow more strident. And here we are. While the barbs may sting, we can actually take encouragement from them. So let's go forward in the knowledge that our influence is growing and our work is paying off. Let us at all times be quick to listen to every reasonable critique of our work. And let us see the slanders as nothing more than mirrors reflecting our rapidly growing strength.

Constant Vigilance- September 24, 2007
Israel's survival is purchased with the constant vigilance of her citizens. This difficult fact has been on dramatic display this month. On September 6, Israeli warplanes crossed into Syrian airspace on a secret mission. While the details remain classified, leaks have revealed that the strike was aimed at a Syrian military installation which had recently received a large shipment from North Korea. Most sources now believe that this shipment was connected to the development of nuclear weapons. In short, it appears that Syria was beginning a nuclear weapons program. Israel obliterated it.

Last week, Israeli troops conducted a four-day operation in the West Bank city of Nablus to disrupt and capture a cell of terrorists from Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The cell was planning a suicide bombing in Israel during the Yom Kippur holiday. The suicide bomber and an explosive belt for the attack were later found in a Tel Aviv apartment inhabited by illegal Palestinian workers. Suicide bombers always look for the largest crowds in order to maximize the number of people they can kill. On Yom Kippur, when the streets and cafes of Tel Aviv are relatively empty, the target may well have been a synagogue.

Attacking Israel on the holiest day of the Jewish year is hardly a new outrage in the repertoire of Israel's enemies. In 1973, the armies of Egypt and Syria attacked Israel on Yom Kippur. Most of Israel's citizen soldiers were at home, worshipping with their families. While Israel mobilized its reserves, a skeleton Israeli force guarding the borders was all that stood between the Jewish State and two massive, mechanized armies. This small contingent held the line, but few would make it back to the homes that they so valiantly defended.

Israel allowed her vigilance to lapse for a day -- one brief day -- and 2,688 Israeli soldiers paid with their lives. An equivalent loss for the United States army would be approximately 150,000 American dead.

Even when Israel's soldiers do make it home from these wars, raids and missions, the battle is far from over. Failing to defeat Israel on the military front, her enemies seek to vanquish her on the diplomatic front. Israel's destruction of Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981 was followed by severe condemnation from the world's capitals, including Washington. Israel's more recent efforts to strike first at terrorists in the West Bank, Gaza and Lebanon have sparked similar outrage.

Such attacks employ words, not bullets. They issue from armchairs and lecterns, not from planes and tanks. But these attacks can, quite literally, be deadly. Again the Yom Kippur War is instructive. In the days leading up to the War, Israel's leaders feared that an Arab attack was imminent. They considered mobilizing the reserves. They debated launching a preemptive strike similar to the one which clinched Israel's lighting victory in the 1967 Six Day War. But Prime Minister Golda Meir rejected these options and decided that the safest course was to leave her soldiers and nation vulnerable to attack.

What would possess a leader make such a decision? The answer, quite simply, is weakness. Prime Minister Meir was afraid that Israel was too weak to win the war. Not the military war -- but the diplomatic war. She decided that if she launched a preemptive strike, the world in general, and America in particular, would condemn Israel as an aggressor and withhold vital arms and aid. In short, Israeli soldiers died by the thousands on lonely border outposts because Israel feared it lacked the diplomatic muscle to take the offensive.

This is where CUFI can make a difference. We can be powerful allies of Israel on this diplomatic front. We can help ensure that never again will an Israeli soldier or citizen die because Israel feared to undertake legitimate acts of self defense. It is our dream that we can one day report to our friends in Israel that all is quiet on the diplomatic front, that America will stand firmly behind them as they seek to defend themselves. But we're not there yet. We can make no such guarantee today. As the pace quickens in the Middle East, it becomes increasingly clear to us all how much work we have to do, and how urgently we have to do it.

We pray that Israel will never again have to send her sons into Palestinian refugee camps under cover of darkness. We dream that Israeli warplanes will never again have to penetrate enemy airspace and quickly slip beneath their radars. But we recognize that these prayers may not soon be answered. In the meantime, those of us who love Israel must be as vigilant as her own citizens. We have an important role to play in the fight for Israel's survival. Her sons man the physical borders and streets of the nation. We must patrol the halls of power and the corridors and public opinion here in America and abroad. Our burden is far lighter than that of our Israeli brothers, and our risks far fewer. But our contributions can still be valuable -- even invaluable.

- September 17, 2007
On Monday, September 24th, the face of evil in the modern world will be coming to America. On that day, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to arrive in New York to address the United Nations General Assembly. This monster must not be permitted to enjoy the dignity that will accompany the visits of other world leaders. We must show Ahmadinejad that we do not forget his persistent denials of the Nazi Holocaust and his repeated threats to perpetrate a second Holocaust by wiping Israel off the map. We must show him that we do not forgive his energetic support of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists. And we must demonstrate to him that we will not permit him to achieve his dream of developing nuclear weapons.

So next Monday the 24th, as Ahmadinejad speaks at the UN, there will be a massive protest rally across the street. The rally will be from 12:00 noon until 2:00 pm at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza on 47th Street between 1st and 2nd Avenue in Manhattan. CUFI is co-sponsoring this event under the leadership of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish organizations. We urge everyone who can make it to join us there.

A similar rally was held when Ahmadinejad visited the UN last year. Diana Hagee was one of the featured speakers and, thanks to the hard work of CUFI Regional Director Robert Stearns, the audience was a sea of Christians United for Israel signs and banners. To this day our Jewish friends in New York talk about how much it meant to them to see that they were not alone in confronting this modern Hitler.

Ahmadinejad is coming back next Monday. So must we. For more information about the rally click here.

It was in this spirit that Senator Rick Santorum hosted a meeting last week to discuss America’s perceptions of the “gathering storm”—Santorum’s appropriately urgent name for the rise of militant Islam.

The presentation focused on the results of a recent poll which included some surprisingly good news. By large margins, Americans understand that we are living in dangerous times. A solid majority of Americans understand that Islamic terror poses a serious threat to America. And a majority of these respondents consider the danger from militant Islam to be even greater than the dangers America faced from Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. When it comes to recognizing the severity of the threat, the American public is clearly far ahead of our leaders.

There was, however, one very troubling statistic included among the encouraging ones. When asked why the Islamic terrorists hate us, the answer given most frequently- by over 30% of respondents- is that they hate us because we support Israel.

This is a most dangerous belief. If the Islamists hate us because we support Israel, then it follows logically that they will cease hating us if we abandon Israel. When faced with the choice between our security and Israel’s, how many Americans would choose Israel’s? How many should?

This dangerous idea is only the most recent manifestation of the ancient reflex of blaming the Jews first. And, as has always been the case, this reflex doesn’t reflect any objective reality. The Jews did not cause the Bubonic Plague. And they do not cause Islamic terror.

It is not difficult to find the real roots of Islamic terror. Our enemies are not bashful -- they tell us why they hate us. They’ve told us repeatedly why they attacked us so viciously six years ago today. And Israel has nothing to do with it.

This point was eloquently demonstrated yet again last week, when Osama Bin Laden released his latest video to the world. Bin Laden complained about America at length. He wants us to get out of Iraq. He wants us to join the Kyoto treaty on global warming. He wants us to abandon democracy and capitalism. And he wants us all -- Christians and Jews -- to convert to Islam. Bin Laden does not mention Israel once in this long, anti-American tirade.

This latest pronouncement is hardly an aberration. If you read the Declarations of Jihad against America issued by Bin Laden in 1996 and again in 1998, you will be hard pressed to find a reference to Israel. Both Declarations focus instead on the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia. Referring to this US presence, Bin Laden wrote in his 1996 Declaration that, “the greatest disaster to befall the Muslims since the death of the Prophet Muhammad is the occupation of Saudi Arabia.”

This myth about the roots of Islamic terror is just one more example of why CUFI is so vital. Through our educational outreach, we can combat this misperception born of sheer ignorance. Through our outreach to our elected officials, we can counter the anti-Israel voices we’re hearing in the public debate.

But to accomplish these goals, we must continue to grow and grow rapidly. I fear the day is not far off when we will see a surge of anti-Israel sentiment in America. We must continue to work diligently and urgently so that we’ll be ready to mount the necessary defense when that dark day comes.

A Present for the Start of the New School Year- September 4, 2007
Summer is over and it's back to school. Not only here but in Israel, this week started with mothers dressing their children in new school clothes, packing their lunches, and nervously dropping them off at school.

But in the southern Israeli town of Sderot, the mothers were nervous about more than whether their children will make friends or drink their milk. Sderot is well within range of the Kassam rockets that Hamas and Islamic Jihad fire into Israel from Gaza on an almost weekly basis. During the summer, many mothers had threatened to keep their children home at the start of school because of fears that school buildings are inadequately protected.

In Israel paranoia is, too often, simply foresight. A rocket fired from Gaza on Monday morning landed in the courtyard between a day care center and an elementary school. Both buildings were full at the time -- yesterday was not a holiday in Israel. Yet miraculously no one was seriously injured in the attack. According to Sderot's police chief, the rocket hit a tree in its path, quite possibly preventing it from having a more deadly impact.

The terrorist group Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for firing this and six other missiles at Sderot yesterday. On their website, Islamic Jihad boasted that these missiles were "A present for the start of the new school year."

The barbarity of this comment is hardly surprising, yet it somehow still stings. Clearly, the people who wrote this were not shocked to learn that their missiles hit a school. They were not calling for inquiries into how the missiles could have strayed so far from military targets. They were, on the contrary, quite pleased with themselves.

But of course, hitting schools and other non-military targets is exactly what happens when you fire rockets indiscriminately into population centers. This is also exactly what happens when you blow yourself up in cafes and on buses. Killing innocents is the whole point. Terrorists derive their name from the fact that their goal and purpose is to strike terror into the heart of the general public. And if causing terror is your aim, then there is no better target than babies and school children.

CNN and the like would have us believe there is a "cycle of violence" in the Middle East. They would equate terror attacks such as this with the response from Israel and America to terror -- which is to stop the terrorists from perpetrating such attacks. Let this attack and the sick claim of responsibility that followed it serve as yet another clear reminder of the wide chasm which separates the terrorists from those who seek to defend us from them.

CNN's Dangerous Message- August 27, 2007
Last week, CNN ran a three-night, six-hour series hosted by Christiane Amanpour on the role of religious fundamentalism in world affairs. Each night was devoted to a different faith, featuring "Jewish Warriors" on the first night, "Muslim Warriors" on the second, and "Christian Warriors" on the third.

First the good news. Some months back, Amanpour traveled to San Antonio to interview Pastor Hagee for her segment on Christian Warriors. While we feared the worst from the less-than-objective Amanpour, we were pleasantly surprised. Unlike so many others in the mainstream media, Amanpour was fair. She did not edit the tapes to distort Pastor's words. She broadcast what Pastor actually said. As a result, Pastor and CUFI came across well.

Also on the positive side, Pastor Hagee was the only Christian Zionist that Amanpour interviewed, and CUFI was the only Christian Zionist organization that she mentioned. It seems that the mainstream media finally understands the lay of the land. For all intents and purposes, Christians United for Israel is the Christian Zionism movement in America.

But at a deeper level, this three-night spectacle was seriously flawed, and it served as a powerful megaphone for a dangerous idea. This series loudly trumpeted the old myth that all regions have their extremists, and that all religious extremists are equally dangerous.

This moral equivalency was built into the very structure of the series: each of the three two-hour segments was devoted to a specific religion and its "warriors." Nothing was said to dispel the impression that equal time meant equal importance. A rough equivalent would be a series about war which gave equal time to World War II and our 1983 liberation of Grenada without mentioning the very different duration, death toll or historical significance of these two conflicts. In Amanpour's world, a Jewish woman seeking to raise her children on Biblical land is as extreme, and as dangerous, as a Muslim woman who commits a suicide bombing that kills Israeli children.

A little context would have been helpful. Since Amanpour didn't provide it, I will. The sad truth is that in recent years there have been Jews who committed acts of terror in the name of Judaism. Likewise, there have been Christians who committed acts of terror in the name of Christianity. In the past 15 years, these Jewish and Christian terror attacks number less than a dozen, and they have claimed fewer than 50 lives. Why are these acts so few? Much of the answer lies in the response they received. Both the Jewish and the Christian communities have condemned such attacks in the clearest and most emphatic of terms. No Jewish or Christian spokesman of any authority took to the airwaves to try to justify these acts or ask us to understand their root causes. Judaism and Christianity have utterly rejected terror as a tactic. As a result, deaths from terrorism in the name of these two great faiths remain as rare as fatalities on roller coaster rides-- too numerous, but hardly a threat to civilization as we know it.

The contrast with Islamic terror could not be more stark. To cite just one statistic, in the month of July an average of over 110 Iraqis were killed each day in suicide bombings and other acts of Islamic terror. Thus Islamic terror claims more victims in one country in one day than Jewish and Christian terror have claimed worldwide in the course of the past 15 years. Why are acts of Islamic terror so common? Much of the answer lies in the response they receive. Yes, there are some brave Muslim moderates who condemn terror as anti-Islamic. But their noble voices are overwhelmed by the large number of Islamic leaders and spokesmen who applaud the terror or who excuse it, rationalize it, and ask us to understand its roots. Too many Muslim leaders embrace terror as a tactic. As the result, Islamic terror continues to grow and metastasize.

When we look at the world's ills today, it quickly becomes clear that the problem is not religion. The problem is one interpretation of one religion -- Islam. To engage in the moral equivocation that treats all faiths as equally guilty prevents us from recognizing and confronting the greatest threat to peace in our times. And it takes pressure off of Muslim leaders to do what humanity and decency demand -- condemn terror in the strongest, clearest and most unambiguous of terms.

Ms. Amanpour's series could have been a rallying call for good people -- Muslim and non-Muslim alike -- to bring an end to Islamic terror. I'm afraid the muddled message of her series will only strengthen those who seek to obfuscate, equivocate, and excuse Islamic terror. This is more than a wasted opportunity. It is a sin.

When Ehud Barak was appointed Defense Minister of Israel last June, most Israelis breathed a sigh of relief. In sharp contrast with the prior Defense Minister, who had no real military experience, Barak is one of the most respected military men in Israel. In the interests of full disclosure, he is also my cousin (he was born Ehud Brog, and later Hebraized his name to Barak).

Barak is the most decorated soldier in the history of the Israeli army. His exploits in Israel’s long war against terror are legendary. He eventually rose to be the chief of staff of the army. When he left the military, Barak entered politics and was elected Prime Minister of Israel in 1999.

During his tenure as Prime Minister, Barak made a bold gesture to the Palestinians in an effort to secure a lasting peace for both sides. He offered them 100% of Gaza, over 90% of the West Bank, and sufficient land from Israel's Negev Desert to compensate for every inch of the West Bank that would not be returned. Barak also offered the Palestinians control of the Muslim areas of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount. The Palestinians not only rejected the offer, but one month later they started a spree of suicide attacks on Israeli civilians that eventually claimed over one thousand Israeli lives.

Barak learned a lesson from this failed effort. And many of us learned that lesson together with him. We learned that despite our hopes and their words to the contrary, Yassir Arafat and the Palestinian leadership was not a serious partner for peace. Rather than take the tough steps necessary to close the deal, Arafat chose instead to compete with Hamas and Islamic Jihad over who could slaughter more Israelis. Arafat’s longtime deputy and the current Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, has thus far done little to demonstrate that he is better than his mentor. Hamas has done much to demonstrate that they are even worse.

In light of this lesson, Ehud Barak understands well that Israel must be very careful before ceding any additional land to the Palestinians. Today, the Palestinians are using the Gaza Strip as a base from which to fire hundreds of Kassam missiles into Southern Israel. If the Palestinians controlled the strategic West Bank, the situation would be infinitely worse. From the West Bank, all of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem would be within striking distance of the Kassams.

This hard strategic fact led Ehud Barak to declare last week that developing and deploying a missile defense system that could intercept such missiles must be a precondition to any Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank. This process is expected to take years. Later in the week, Barak reportedly verbalized the logical conclusion of his earlier remark, stating that any peace deal with the Palestinians in the near future is a “fantasy” (New York Times, August 11, 2007).

Like Ehud Barak, we in CUFI are also skeptical that land for peace can work right now. But, like Barak and most Israelis, we pray for the day when there will be a partner for peace who has both the desire and the strength to take the very difficult steps that will be necessary to end this conflict. Until that day comes, we need to be vigilant to distinguish between our dreams and our reality.

Are Holocaust Survivors Facing Another Holocaust? - August 6, 2007
Last week, an article in the New York Times cited a most troubling statistic. There are approximately 250,000 Holocaust survivors living in Israel today. About half of these survivors are living at or below the poverty level.

It was surprising to read that there are still so many Holocaust survivors living in Israel. With every passing day, we tend to think of the Holocaust more and more as a distant event; a terrible monster from the depths of a dark past which can no longer reach its bloody fingers into our bright modern world.

This view is clearly false from a purely demographic perspective. Hundreds of thousands of people who survived that tragedy are still alive and well and living in Israel as well as in our own communities. With their every breath they give testimony to the ever-present possibility of evil and barbarism in this world.

It is distressing to learn that these men and women who've suffered so much must now suffer the indignity and pain of living in poverty. Israel can and must take better care of her survivors - this is a basic obligation of the Jewish State. And we should help Israel to meet this obligation.

We will find out how we as an organization can help direct funds to the support of poor Holocaust survivors. We will supply this information to you so that those who wish can contribute a portion of their Night to Honor Israel proceeds towards this effort.

While it is unacceptable that Holocaust survivors live in poverty, this isn't even the worst of it. What is more repugnant is the fact that so many Jews who survived the horrors of the Holocaust must now live in fear of a second Holocaust. These people survived the death camps and the ghettos. They made their way to Israel and so many of them fought in Israel's wars of survival. They struggled to build an independent state so that their children and grandchildren could lead normal lives untouched by the horrors that had plagued their own.

Yet today, these survivors together with their children and grandchildren must once again face the threat of annihilation. Hitler has been replaced by Ahmadinejad. The gas chambers have been replaced by nuclear weapons. But to the survivors, the fear must be terribly familiar and terribly real.

Why do all of us work so hard to build and grow this organization? Why do we organize regional events and fly to Washington? What drives us? If we ever needed a more potent symbol of why we are standing with Israel it is this: the image of a Holocaust survivor looking into the eyes of his grandchildren and fearing that it's happening all over again.

May we work to speed the day when such a scene will never again play itself out. And, with God's help, may our success come soon and come in time.

CUFI Calls on President Bush Not to Pressure Israel- July 30, 2007
Last Friday, a group of over 30 evangelical Christians wrote a letter to President Bush to "correct a serious misperception among some people ... that all American evangelicals are opposed to a two-state solution and the creation of a new Palestinian state." They made reference to the "cycle of violence" in the region and the fact that "Israelis and Palestinians must both accept each other's right to exist."

It's no coincidence that this letter was sent barely a week after our second annual Washington, DC summit. As we grow, those who disagree with us, however few they may be, will be shouting at the top of their lungs in an effort to equal the sound of 4,500 Christians gathered in the DC Convention Center cheering our cause. They will not succeed.

This letter raises many questions. But the biggest question is this -- where have these people been for the past decade? Don't they realize that Israel not only accepted the Palestinian right to exist, but repeatedly sought to give the Palestinians land on which to build their state? At meetings in Camp David in 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians 100% of Gaza, over 90% of the West Bank, and sufficient land from Israel's Negev Desert to compensate for every inch of the West Bank that would not be returned. He also offered them control of the Muslim areas of Jerusalem. What was the Palestinian response to this unprecedented offer? Celebration? A counter offer? No -- sadly, the Palestinians chose this juncture to start the second intifada with a spree of bus bombings and killings.

In 2005, Israel actually did pull out of the Gaza Strip and left it to Palestinian rule. What did the Palestinians do? Did they take over the Israeli greenhouses left behind and begin to build their economy? Did they take this opportunity to demonstrate that they wanted to live side-by-side with Israel? No -- sadly, Hamas terrorists took over the Gaza Strip and now use it as a base from which to launch rocket attacks against Israel.

The letter's use of the term "cycle of violence" is particularly troubling. There is a fundamental difference between terrorists on the one hand and Israeli and American soldiers on the other. The goal of terrorists is to kill as many civilians as possible, and when they succeed in doing so they celebrate. Israeli and American soldiers seek to stop the terrorists from killing innocent civilians. When our soldiers kill civilians, however few, it is a tragic error. As both of our nations continue to fight terrorists around the world, we must never permit the morally callous equation of these opposite roles.

We all want peace. No one wants peace more than the Israelis who live on the front lines. But wishes don't always come true. To survive in this world, love is important. So is understanding. And so is realism. Sadly, given this track record, only a dreamer or a foe would press Israel for further concession at this juncture. I pray that those who signed this letter are the former.

Pastor Hagee immediately drafted and is circulating a letter to President Bush which will demonstrate the widespread support for CUFI's position that America not pressure Israel for further concessions at this time.

Beyond this, our best response is to continue our work. Let us continue to build and to grow. Let us demonstrate with results that we have the momentum and that we represent the future.

The People Who Cure You Will Kill You- July 9, 2007
Perhaps the most chilling detail to emerge from last week's foiled terrorist attacks in Britain was the cryptic warning an al Qaeda spokesman gave to an Anglican priest back in April. The al Qaeda spokesman warned that more attacks were on the way and that, "The people who cure you will kill you." The meaning of this message became quite clear after it emerged that all of the terrorists involved in last week's attacks were medical doctors.

It simply boggles our minds to think that a doctor, someone committed by training and profession to healing his fellow human beings, could actively seek to harm them. In our Judeo-Christian tradition, after all, doctors not only treat all peaceful citizens, but they treat our enemies wounded on the battlefield. Israeli doctors have likewise routinely treated Arab soldiers wounded in combat. But our enemies come from a very different tradition.

We really shouldn't be surprised to learn that doctors can be terrorists. For years, Osama Bin Laden's number two, the man considered to be the tactical mastermind of Al Qaeda, has been an Egyptian physician named Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri. Men who embrace radical jihadism, whatever their profession, have a much higher calling. And this calling is to kill infidels, whether Christian or Jew, soldier or civilian. Their radical ideology enables them to view us as something less than human, and thus open to attack.

Let us continue to cleave to the high road. Let us continue to offer mercy and healing wherever and whenever we can. But let us keep in mind that we live in a world with people who play by none of these quaint rules.

The Time is NOW- June 25, 2007
Israel needs us today more than ever. While there is currently no hot war with Hezbollah, the troubling reality is that ISRAEL FACES EVEN GREATER DANGER TODAY THAN IT DID LAST YEAR.

Today Hezbollah has more missiles, and more long-range missiles, than it did before last summer's war. Many of these missiles can reach Tel Aviv. Hezbollah has also rebuilt and expanded its complex of underground bunkers right under the noses of the UN peacekeepers.

And today, any war with Hezbollah would likely have a second front in the south. Last month, Hamas -- a terrorist organization openly committed to destroying Israel -- took control of Gaza. Like Hezbollah, Hamas is being armed by Iran with stockpiles of sophisticated missiles and other weaponry. In recent months, Hamas has fired hundreds of missiles into southern Israel.

Finally, just over the horizon, Iran itself is now one year closer to its goal of acquiring nuclear weapons. And Iran has made steady progress in expanding the capabilities of its long range missiles, which can deliver weapons of mass destruction to any city in Israel and most of Europe.

Given all of these troubling developments, this is hardly the time to sit back and act as if all is well. The fact is that Israel needs us, and Israel needs us now. The next time war actually breaks out may well be too late.

All Roads Lead to Jerusalem-- The True Legacy of Dr. Jerry Falwell- May 17, 2007
In the aftermath of Jerry Falwell’s death, there has been a wide ranging debate over both his accomplishments and his legacy. All observers agree on the accomplishments: Dr. Falwell was the man who led evangelical Christians from the sidelines back onto the political playing field. But this consensus breaks down over the question of his legacy and his successor.

Jerry Falwell carefully selected and discipled his successors at the two institutions most near and dear to his heart: his oldest son Jerry Jr. will take over the reins at Liberty University, and his younger son Jonathan will ascend to the post of senior pastor at the Thomas Road Baptist Church. But what about Falwell’s political successor? After creating the religious right, to whom did Dr. Falwell pass the baton?

While few pundits have recognized it, the correct answer to this question is becoming increasingly clear with every passing day. Falwell’s most prominent successor is Pastor John Hagee, the Texas preacher and television minister who is the most outspoken Christian defender of Israel in America today. Pastor Hagee’s organization, Christians United for Israel, is the most significant heir to the Moral Majority. And for evangelical Christians today, being pro-Israel occupies the place that being pro-life occupied in prior decades.

The social issues are, of course, still of the utmost importance to religious conservatives. They always will be. But September 11th shuffled the deck. In the religious conservative world, 9/11 catalyzed a subtle shift in priorities that has placed Israel at the forefront of a number of issues close to our hearts.

Before 9/11, it seemed to most religious conservatives that the greatest threat to our society came from secularists determined to narrow the role of faith in the public square and weaken the protections that our society provides to the most vulnerable among us. After 9/11, a growing contingent of religious conservatives now believes that the greatest threat to our society comes from militant Muslims who seek to destroy it.

To so many of us, it has become clear that we’re facing nothing less than a threat to the survival of Judeo-Christian civilization. And in this struggle Israel is a crucial outpost of our civilization that we dare not allow to fall. If militant Islam poses the greatest threat, then standing with our ally Israel as it fights our common enemies becomes our greatest priority. Once we ensure the survival of Judeo-Christian civilization, we can return our primary focus to the work of increasing the influence of our Judeo-Christian values within this civilization.

This shift in evangelical priorities is the only explanation for the explosive growth of Christians United for Israel. In the little over one year since its founding, CUFI has built a national grassroots organization that encompasses 48 states and over 90 cities. Last July, CUFI brought over 3,600 delegates to Washington, DC to meet with their Congressmen on this issue of Israel. CUFI expects even more delegates this July. Pastor John Hagee has assembled a leadership team which included Dr. Falwell, and includes many prominent Christian leaders including Dr. Michael Little, Gary Bauer, Pastor Rod Parsley, Dr. Kenneth Copeland, Pastor George Morrison, Pastor Mac Hammond and Bishop Keith Butler.

If this assertion that Israel is the highest priority of the evangelical Christian community strikes you as unlikely, then you simply haven’t been listening. From the start, supporting Israel was central to Jerry Falwell’s mission. When he created the Moral Majority in 1979, Dr. Falwell announced a fourfold platform for his new movement. One of these founding principles was to provide “support for Israel and Jewish people everywhere.”

When asked why he supported Israel so strongly, Dr. Falwell often mentioned Israel’s democracy and the fact that the Jewish State was a crucial American ally in both the Cold War and the War against Terror. Dr. Falwell was also fond of quoting Genesis 12:3, which promises blessings to those who bless Israel. As he once noted:

I firmly believe God has blessed America because America has blessed the Jew. If this nation wants her fields to remain white with grain, her scientific achievements to remain notable, and her freedom to remain intact, America must continue to stand with Israel.

But after 9/11, what had always been a priority for Dr. Falwell and evangelicals became the priority. Dr. Falwell expressed this shift in a 2002 interview for 60 Minutes. With all of the challenges facing Christians at that time, Dr. Falwell made his top priority crystal clear. He looked in the camera and declared:

There’s nothing that would bring the wrath of the Christian public in this country down on this government like abandoning or opposing Israel in a critical matter.

It would have been difficult for Dr. Falwell to be any clearer. When Pastor John Hagee founded Christians United for Israel with Dr. Falwell’s active assistance in February, 2006, he was taking Dr. Falwell’s theology and politics to their logical conclusion.

Florida Senate Passes “Protecting Florida Investments Act”- May 1, 2007
Christians United for Israel was instrumental in the Florida Senate passing the “Protecting Florida Investments Act” with a unanimous vote of 39 to 0 last Friday.

the vote, CUFI sent out an action alert to every CUFI member in Florida urging them to call their State senators and representatives to urge them to support this bill. Our CUFI activists responded immediately and generated a significant number of calls to Florida’s Senate.

The “Protecting Florida Investments Act” will require Florida’s State Pension Fund to review Florida’s public pension system and terminate all investments made in companies which do business in Iran’s oil and gas industry, or with the government of Sudan.

Iran’s energy industry is its primary source of income. Iran uses this income to fund its rapidly accelerating nuclear weapons program. Any cut in the flow of technology and investments to Iran will slow its march towards nuclear weapons. Given the threat Iran poses to America and Israel, there is simply no excuse for companies to continue to support Iran’s oil industry. And there is likewise no excuse for your state government to invest in such complicit companies. We are hopeful that what is starting in Florida will spread to every state in the Union.

Reflection on Israeli Memorial and Independence Days- April 23, 2007
Sunday night at sundown, a one-minute siren sounded in Israel and the entire country ceased from moving, talking, or driving. The television and radio stations were silent as Israelis commemorated Yom HaZikaron (Israeli Memorial Day). Israelis mourned the 22,305 soldiers who have been killed defending Israel since the War of Independence in 1948. 199 of these soldiers were killed in last summer’s Lebanon War. Those who have been killed by terrorists are also honored on Yom HaZikaron. Amongst those honored were the 1,121 Israeli men, women, and children who have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists since September 29, 2000.

On Monday night, Yom HaZikaron ends at sundown as Yom HaAtzma'ut (Israeli Independence Day) begins. Millions of Israelis will dance in the streets and celebrate Israel’s 59th birthday. Fireworks are set off across the country and Israelis gather in parks for free concerts. Israelis will watch the International Bible Contest for Jewish Youth on national television.

From mourning death to celebrating life. This is the cycle of life in Israel. And this is an inspiring example for all of us. As we join Israel in mourning the victims of terror and the fallen in just wars -- let us also remember to celebrate the miracle of a resurrected Jewish state celebrating its 59th birthday. And let us do everything in our power to ensure such celebrations continue for many, many years to come.