THROWING JEWS OUT OF THEIR HOMES GETS HARDER: The Astute Bloggers write that Peretz wants them out, but forgot to get the OK from AG Mazuz, who said petitions would have to be filed first.

Peretz apparently did not see this coming.
Darn binoculars!

Technorati Tag: Amir Peretz.

Everything That Is Wrong With Olmert's Government

...is basically summed up by this article from IMRA by Aaron Lerner:

The danger of self imposed moderation in Gaza Strip operation

When PM Olmert, DM Peretz and COS Halutz snap back at their critics that the
IDF is already doing everything it can to stop the Qassams from the Gaza
Strip, there are some huge caveats attached to the claim.

- The IDF's mission includes destroying weapons stores, but if the weapons
are stored in a residential area the IDF gives the Palestinians thirty
minutes warning before attacking the location to either relocate the weapons
or bring in even more human shields to protect it from attack.

- Weapons stored in "sensitive" locations such as mosques are off limits to
IDF operations and Palestinian combatants can shield themselves with
cooperative civilians.

- No operation within the Gaza Strip can be open ended - even in the
Philadelphi Corridor that separates between Egyptian Sinai and Gaza.

And so, having set rules that make it next to impossible to succeed, it is
hardly surprising that this team is so keen on finding a way to make a deal
with the Palestinians according to which the various Palestinian groups can
continue smuggling in weapons and manufacturing ever more effective Qassam
rockets as long as they don't shoot.

For a while.

Until they decide to start shooting again.

When they can shoot even more powerful and more numerous rockets prepared
during the Israeli hiatus in security operations.

If the above rules reflect some notion of morality then it's a sick one
which gives preference to the lives of Palestinian human shields over those
of Israeli victims.

If these rules are for public relations they indicate a profound
misunderstanding of how the world sees the story.

The world doesn't praise Israel for respecting human shields - they either
don't believe it or they think Israel is stupid. And there is no reward for
stupidity.

And the world certainly isn't impressed by the restraint Israel has shown so
far. That's because even restrained operations can make a headline or get a
few seconds on the evening news on a slow news day

The truth is that the PR costs of a massive brutally effective operation are
barely more than the costs of a mediocre one.

That's because you get almost the same coverage for an operation taking
place simultaneously in ten locations as in only one. The same goes for
casualties.

The Olmert-Peretz-Halutz approach is wrong. Dead wrong.

The last thing Israel can afford to do today is continue policies that could
ultimately corner it into accepting a timeout for a Palestinians arms build
up.

For if Israel accepts such a timeout, the Jewish State may find itself in
the same situation as the proverbial frog in pot of water being slowly
heated to a boil.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Peretz .

Olmert Will Begin Targeted Assassinations

I was actually wondering about whatever happened to Israel's policy of targeted assassination of terrorist leaders and whether there had actually been any while Olmert has been Prime Minister. Whether that have been or not, it looks like there may be some now:

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert instructed the heads of the defense establishment to target members of the Hamas leadership. This was reported by British newspaper The Sunday Times. Israeli security sources reported to the newspaper that the decision was made in cooperation with Defense Minister Amir Peretz.

According to the report, the decision was made on the background of the fatal Qassam rocket that landed Wednesday in Sderot that killed Faina Slotzker and robbed one of Peretz's bodyguards of his legs. After the incident, the newspaper writes, Israel decided in a desperate attempt to stop the Qassam rockets, not to allow Hamas political leadership in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and abroad to "escape responsibility" any longer.

The Sunday Times reported that Peretz was the one who advocated the change in tactics against Hamas.

I suppose the story might carry more weight if instead of quoting a British newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth could have reported it based on their own sources.

It's also odd that the same Peretz who was reported to have claimed about the Kassam attacks on Sderot:

while the current situation is unacceptable, he does not believe he will achieve total success, signaling a"limited" number of attacks will be an acceptable reality.

is the same one who has decided to restart targeted assassinations. The YNet News article above about the new policy mentions Peretz's decision to change tactics in the same paragraph about his tears at news that one of his bodyguards had his leg amputated as a result of the blast--let's hope his new change in policy is based on more than an emotional reaction.

That brings us to the key question. Assuming that the story is true, is it a well thought-out plan or a reaction to bad poll numbers and growing discontent?

For that matter, is Olmert up to the job of seeing through such an operation successfully and then dealing with the inevitable backlash from world opinion? Considering Olmert's reflexive apologizing in the past--he apologized to Egypt when Egyptians were killed after infiltrating into Israel and shooting at the IDF; he apologized about the Gaza Beach incident--will he stand firm and defend a targeted assassination or wither under the inevitable condemnations?

Place your bets.

My bet is that instead of being seen as a sign of strength, Olmert's decision will come across as an act of desperation--and he will act (read: apologize) accordingly.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Peretz and Hamas.

Is There Hope For Peres?

Shiloh Musings has thoughts on war and politics.

Besides an analysis of the war with Hezbollah by Shmuel Katz, who co-founded the Herut Party with Menachem Begin and was a member of the first Knesset, she also has thoughts on Shimon Peres, who seems to have caught on to the idea, finally, of the absence of a peace partner.

I hope Shiloh Musings is right about Peretz, but when Peretz says:

It's not the case that Israel has rejected partners for peace. It's more correct to understand that every time Israel sought a partner over the past year, there wasn't one available."

just who did he think his peace partner was till then?

Update: Mere Rhetoric emailed me that I confused Peres with Peretz.

There _IS_ an article out today about Peres saying that there's no peace
partner (in the context of Syria, actually). The Shilo post you link to
is actually about Peretz, not Peres, though.

That's me...wrong on the facts, but ahead of the curve!

Technorati Tag: Israel and Amir Peretz.

Peace In Our Time?

Defense Minister announced a possible breakthrough--but not in Operation Summer Rains:

Defense Minister Amir Peretz revealed on Thursday that a "surprising diplomatic breakthrough" was possible in the attempts to release kidnapped Cpl. Gilad Shalit, but did not elaborate on the development.

"We are in one of the most crucial stages of establishing the rules of conduct between us and the Palestinian terror organizations, he asserted.

Still, he approved the continuation of IDF operations in Gaza that have been taking place since Tuesday night. He urged the forces to be aware of the Palestinian population's distress, Army Radio reported.

Of course it is good news that Shalit may be rescued, but there is something disturbing about

establishing the rules of conduct between us and the Palestinian terror organizations, he asserted.

I saw Charlie Rose last night and the discussion was about the kidnapping and Israel's response. Among the guests on the show were people representing both the Israeli and Palestinian side. The whole discussion was marked by polite discourse between opposing views.

I am tired of polite discourse.

I have heard more animation--and animus--between people talking about the theory of evolution.

And now this morning Israel announces that she sees the possibility of establishing the rules of conduct between herself and terrorists? How and since when do terrorists abide by rules of conduct?

Come to think of it, who is negotiating these rules of conduct? Is Israel directly negotiating with Hamas?

Arutz Sheva quotes Dennis Ross:

Former US mediator Dennis Ross says that Israel must not negotiate with Hamas for the release of the soldier, as "this will merely invite further kidnappings... As someone who believes in the value of negotiations, I say that negotiations are not the proper response in every situation."

Sounds like good advice.

But if it is only France and other countries doing the negotiating, is Israel going to allow other countries to dictate how Israel is going to deal with the Palestinian terrorists in the future?

No details of what Peretz is talking about are out yet, and it may be that what will be announced may be a genuine breakthrough--but there is something about this that is deeply unsettling.

Maybe that is part of the problem.

We already know that Olmert is intent on actions that are very 'unsettling' indeed--and the same thinking may go into establishing 'rules of conduct' with terrorists.

Technorati Tags: Israel and Hamas and Palestinians and Operation Summer Rains.

Jerusalem Post: Al-Aksa claims biological, chemical capabilities

Either this is another empty boast or we have just turned a corner, sharply. It puts the ball simultaneously in both Israel's and Abbas' court.

Al-Aksa claims biological, chemical capabilities
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

The Aksa Martyrs' Brigades group announced on Sunday that it its members have succeeded in manufacturing chemical and biological weapons to be used against Israel.

In a leaflet distributed in the Gaza Strip, the group, which belongs to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah party, said the weapons were the result of an effort that has lasted for three years.

The statment was a response to an Israeli Security Cabinet decision to give the IDF the green light to prepare all the forces necessary for a military operation against Gaza terror cells.

As of 9:00 p.m. a large contingency of Golani and Givati Brigade infantry troops, along with elite units, were amassing on the Israeli side of the Gaza security fence for a possible ground operation there to rescue kidnapped soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit.

According to the statement, the first of its kind, the group managed to manufacture and develop at least 20 different types of biological and chemical weapons.

The group said its members would not hesitate to add the new weapons to long-range rockets that are being fired at Israeli communities almost every day. It also threatened to use the weapons against IDF soldiers if Israel carried out its threats to invade the Gaza Strip.

"We want to tell [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert and [Defense Minister Amir] Peretz that your threats don't frighten us," the leaflet said. "We will surprise you with our new weapons the moment the first soldier sets his foot in the Gaza Strip."

Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestinians and Al-Aksa and WMD and Weapons of Mass Destruction

See also: Real Freedom Fighters Don't Use WMD

More Palestinian Civilians Killed: You`d Think There Was A War Or Something

Haaretz reports: IDF: Not enough time to stop second missile

Nine Palestinians were killed and dozens wounded on Tuesday in an Israel Air Force strike on a Katyusha-launching cell in Gaza City. Seven of those killed were civilians, including two children and three medical personnel.

The incident began shortly after noon, when IAF planes fired a brace of missiles at a van containing four or five Islamic Jihad operatives. According to the Israel Defense Forces, the van also contained GRAD Katyusha rockets; this was confirmed by television footage from the scene of the strike, in which the rockets were visible. The Jihad operatives were apparently en route to launch the rockets at Israel.

Coming so soon after the Gaza Beach incident--even granting the proof that Hamas mines were to blame--another wave of criticism both internally and abroad is on its way. This time, there may be a valid issue of error and preventable casualties. According to Haaretz there were 2 braces of missiles fired. The Palestinian Arabs claim there was a 4 minute lull that allowed people to collect around the wreckage, before the second brace of missiles fell. The IDF says only a minute elapsed and afte the the second brace was fired there was only a 7-second warning of civilians at the site before the missiles hit--not enough time to divert the missiles without possibly increasing casualties.

Haaretz is making an issue of the fact that the IDF is not releasing the video they have of the attack to back up their claim and notes that the presence of medical pesonnel indicates there was more than just a one minute lull.

By the same token, the article also notes what happened after the first missiles hit:

The missiles landed near the van, causing only minor damage, and the Jihad operatives quickly abandoned it, apparently unharmed. Some of them then went to a nearby house, while others, aided by the numerous bystanders who had gathered at the site, surrounded the van and apparently tried to extract the Katyushas.

Palestinian civilians who decide to get involved in an attack are no longer innocent bystanders--while it is a tragedy that true bystanders were killed, as long as the attempt was made to save the the Katyushas for another strike, the threat still remained.

Statements by Minister of Defense Peretz may indicate a change in attitude towards dealing with the threat of the missiles:

Shortly before the missile strike, Defense Minister Amir Peretz told reporters that Israel's restraint had ended. "We've displayed the necessary restraint in light of the international storm, but that's over," he said, while observing a military exercise in the north. "No consideration will replace our obligation to defend Israel's citizens ... There are no guarantees for anyone, regardless of his title, his affiliation, or the name and status of his organization."

Following the attack, Peretz and IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz expressed regret over the civilian deaths but justified the decision to strike at the Jihad cell. Halutz explained that Israel "cannot accept" Katyusha launches at its territory. Added Peretz: "Unfortunately, these organizations launch attacks from populated areas in order to hurt our citizens."

It's a good start--the question is whether the apparent determination can be sustained in the face of the inevitable public outcry by the left in Israel and the media abroad.

In the meantime, Israel lives in a situation where Haaretz can report:

The missile strikes followed a relatively quiet night, in which only six Qassam rockets were fired at Israel [emphasis added]

Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestinians and Kassam and Katyusha and Amir Peretz.

Findings Indicate: Hamas Bomb Killed Arab Family

From Arutz Sheva:

Findings Indicate: Hamas Bomb Killed Arab Family
by Hillel Fendel

Despite hasty condemnation of Israel, IDF finds that the Arab family decimated on a Gaza beach was not hit by IDF artillery. The only other option: A Hamas mine placed there against Israel.

When seven members of one family were killed in an explosion on a Gaza beach this past Friday afternoon, the world, including many Israelis, was quick to condemn Israel. Israel's policy of firing artillery shells at generally empty areas, in response to ongoing Kassam rocket attacks at Israeli towns and kibbutzim, was immediately blamed.

Both Defense Minister Amir Peretz and IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz were quick to express sorrow over the incident. Though Halutz said this was not an acceptance of responsibility, that was precisely how it was understood.

"We are not accepting responsibility as long as the investigation has not been completed," Halutz said over the weekend, "and we will be happy to cooperate with the Palestinians in the investigation."

This cooperation did not materialize, however, and in fact the Arabs quickly removed all evidence from the scene - thus raising suspicions that they knew more than they wanted Israel to know.

The IDF investigation quickly ruled out the possibility of air or naval attack, and concentrated only on the option that artillery fire had been responsible. The following findings were then found over the course of the ensuing days:
* The characteristic hole, or "crater," that would have been made by an artillery shell was not found on the scene.
* The timing was off: PA sources claimed the explosion occurred at approximately 16:40 Friday afternoon. However, IDF artillery stopped firing in the vicinity at 16:51, and throughout that time and until at least 16:58, no unusual activity was noticed on the beach.
* Two or three of the wounded were treated in an Israeli hospital, and the shrapnel that wounded at least one of them was not of the type used in Israeli ammunition.

Probably most significantly of all, Israeli intelligence shows that Hamas had placed explosives and mines on the beach against Israeli naval commandos who might try to ambush terrorists using the beach to fire Kassam rockets. It was likely a Hamas-placed bomb of this type that killed the Arab family.

The seven victims included Ali Ghaliya, one of his two wives, and five of his eleven or more children. The film clip of one survivor, 12-year-old Huda, whose mother survived as well, was screened repeatedly around the world, showing her shrieking in agony as she ran among the bodies. All the news reports attributed the deaths to Israeli shelling.

Huda was quickly "adopted" by PA politicians and publicists who seized upon the tragedy for their own purposes. Within hours after seeing her family largely erased, she starred in a press conference, flanked by Palestinian Authority officials who made lengthy speeches. She was also brought to the office of PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), and Ismail Haniya, his Hamas rival and PA prime minister, visited the family home.

The findings of the IDF investigation are not yet final, and were reported last night on Channel Two television. The official report will be presented to Defense Minister Peretz tonight.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Hamas and Gaza and Terrorism.

Having to Defend Yourself Against Kassam Rockets Means Never Having To Say You`re Sorry

While that is a little bit extreme, the fact is that Olmert just cannot seem to apologize enough. After apologizing to Mubarak after the IDF killed 2 of 3 Egyptians who had infiltrated into Israel and started shooting at the IDF, Olmert is at it again.

Now, following the beach incident in Gaza:

• Olmert apologized for the incident
  
  
• Hamas has declared "We have decided to turn Sderot into a ghost town. We won't stop firing the rockets until they all leave."
  
  
• Defense Minister Amir Peretz said that all Israeli artillery fire at Kassam launching cells would be suspended until the army's investigation into the deadly incident was completed.

The same Arutz Sheva article reports that despite Peretz's statement, today Israel Air Force aircraft attacked two rocket launching cells as they were about to fire at Israel. During the attack, 3 terrorists - two of Hamas and one of Islamic Jihad - were killed, and 7 were injured.

Meanwhile, another Arutz Sheva article casts strong doubts that Israel is responsible.

This after the incident has brought all kinds of accusers out of the woodwork:

• Arab Knesset Member Ahmed Tibi and extreme left-wing MK Zahava Gal'on (Meretz): Defense Minister Amir Peretz is responsible for the murder of the seven Arab members of the one family
  
  
• Arab MK Muhammed Barakeh said that Peretz could wear the medallion of "war criminal."
  
  
• Meretz leader MK Yossi Beilin said that Peretz should resign if the only way he knows how to deal with Kassams involves killing innocent people.
  
  
• Several dozen left-wing protestors - including Olmert's daughter Dana - stood outside the home of IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz last night and called for him and others to be tried for "war crimes."

Now it appears the deaths were due to a Palestinian rocket--and the Palestinian Arabs are not cooperating in the investigation.

Arutz Sheva reports:

• There are indications that the incident on the beach occurred 15 minutes after Israel stopped firing shells.
  
  
• None of the shells fired at the northern Gaza Strip were directed at the area in which the members of the Arab family were killed.
  
  
• There is a possibility that a misfired Kassam rocket was responsible, since a significant percentage of the Kassam rockets fired by the Palestinian terrorists land in Gaza or just miss their mark. Yesterday afternoon, one Kassam landed in a Gaza refugee camp, wounding several Arabs.

Government press spokesman Raanan Gissin drew an interesting parallel:

"Unfortunately, we are repeating the same mistakes we made in the past, in the way in which we deal with incidents like this, such as that of Muhammed Al-Dura."

He also noted that a basic question that should be asked is why the Palestinians who control the area were so quick to remove all evidence from the scene.

But without conclusive proof, just having enough evidence to cast significant doubt on Israel's responsibility in the incident is unlikely to be enough to cause the media to retract what they have written about Israel so far.

The fact remains, as Gissin points out:

I think that there should have been lessons learned from previous incidents...The highest levels should immediately have made it publicly clear that it wasn't at all sure that we did it, and that other scenarios were likely.

See also The Gaza Beach Attack: 2 Points Not Mentioned...Ever

Technorati Tag: Israel and Gaza and Hamas and Palestinians and Kassam.

What Good Is A Roadmap If They Change The Terrain?

I've quoted this before, and I'm quoting it again--Amir Taheri's basic but apparently unachievable point:

For a war to be won, it is not enough for one side to claim victory. It is also necessary for one side to admit defeat. Yet in the Arab-Israeli wars, the side that had won every time was not allowed to claim victory, while the side that had lost was prevented from admitting defeat. Why? Because each time the United Nations had intervened to put the victor and the vanquished on an equal basis and lock them into a problematic situation in the name of a mythical quest for an impossible peace.

It may be unachievable, but the logic is surely not so hard to grasp.

Or is it?

In Bush's Oslo Syndrome, I wrote that Israel just does not talk about a definitive military victory against the Palestinian Arabs. But don't just take my word for it. Daniel Pipes, in an article for the NY Sun entitled Israel Shuns Victory, notes that not one of the leading parties in the March 28 election offered the option of winning the war against the Palestinian Arabs. He also gives a historical context to Taheri's point, where there have been countries that were beaten up, but not beaten:

Wars are won, the historical record shows, when one side feels compelled to give up on its goals. This is only logical, for so long as both sides hope to achieve their war ambitions, fighting either continues or potentially can resume. For example, although defeated in World War I, the Germans did not give up their goal of dominating Europe and soon again turned to Hitler to try again. The Korean War ended more than a half century ago, but neither North nor South having given up its aspirations means fighting could flare up at any time. Similarly, through the many rounds of the Arab-Israeli conflict (wars in 1948-49, 1956, 1967, 1973, and 1982) both sides retained their goals.

The problem seems to be that Israel has totally bought into the idea of giving up on the idea of a real victory, and instead looking elsewhere for ways to 'manage' the conflict:

o Unilateralism (building a wall, partial withdrawals): the current policy, as espoused by Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, and the Kadima Party.

o Lease for 99 years the land under Israeli towns on the West Bank: the Labor Party of Amir Peretz

o Palestinian Arab economic development: Shimon Peres.

o Territorial compromise: The premise of Oslo diplomacy, as initiated by Yitzhak Rabin.

o Outside funding for the Palestinian Arabs (on the Marshall Plan model): U.S. Representative Henry Hyde.

o Retreat to the 1967 borders: Israel's far left.

o Push the Palestinian Arabs to develop good government: Natan Sharansky (and President Bush).

o Insist that Jordan is Palestine: Israel's right.

o Transfer the Palestinian Arabs out of the West Bank: Israel's far right.

Pipes of course rejects these approaches as being valid. However, he does not address what approach Israel should be taking. After all, it is all well and good to say that Israel should be aiming for a decisive victory over the Palestinian Arabs--but considering the pressure from the West in general and the US in particular, let alone the left-wing in Israel itself, it is not as if Israel go declare war and bring the whole issue to an end.

Pipes does address the issue in a follow-up article in the New York Sun, entitle How Israel Can Win, laying down some basic guidelines and advice:

o Israel hardly enjoys freedom of action to pursue victory; in particular, it is hemmed in by the wishes of its primary ally, the American government. That is why I, an American analyst, address this issue with the intention of influencing policy in the United States and other Western countries.

o Israel should be urged to convince the Palestinian Arabs that they have lost, to influence their psychology.

o An aggressive step like "transferring" Palestinian Arabs out of the West Bank would be counterproductive for Israel, prompting greater outrage, increasing the number of enemies, and perpetuating the conflict.

o Contrarily, perceptions of Israel's weakness lessen the possibility of Palestinian Arab defeat; thus did Israeli missteps during the Oslo years (1993-2000) and the Gaza withdrawal inspire Palestinian Arab exhilaration and more war.

o Israel needs only to defeat the Palestinian Arabs, not the whole Arab or Muslim populations, who eventually will follow the Palestinian Arab lead.

I agree with Pipes on the first four of his points, but on his last point, I think the rules have changed. I think that at this point there are elements in the Arab world that have gone beyond merely using the Palestinian Arabs to keep tensions going and distract the populace from making waves. To just let them be defeated by Israel would allow for the possibility for the Arab world to seriously note how well off those Palestinians are in comparison. Also, groups like Al Qaeda are just getting started in Gaza and are not going to go quietly. And then there is Hamas.

In U.S. Policy at a Crossroads: The Relevance of the Roadmap in the Aftermath of the Hamas Victory, Yechiel M. Leiter, Benjamin Netanyahu's former Chief of Staff at the Ministry of Finance:

A Palestinian state is not the goal of Hamas, the goal is Islam. Nowhere in the Hamas Charter is there mention of a Palestinian state. This point is crucial. The new Hamas foreign minister, Dr. Mahmud al-Zahar, has explicitly stated in this regard: "The Islamists' view, which Hamas adheres to, is that a great Muslim state must be established, with Palestine being a part of it." Thus, any attempt to satisfy Palestinian nationalist hunger through sovereignty in "Palestine," or part of it, is pure folly to Hamas. Statehood as offered by the Roadmap is irrelevant.

One practical difference between having the goal of a Palestinian State on the one hand and establishing one big Moslem state with 'Palestine' as a part of it, on the other is that--while the Arab world at large does not really care about the former not coming to pass, it will come together to defend against the possibilty of the latter being defeated.

If Leiter is right, then the Arabs are on the verge of once again redefining the terms and the battleground, just as it did in creating the concept of Palestine, Palestinians, the Palestinians refugee problem, and the occupation.

Besides, the Arab world has always seen the Palestinian Arabs as a means to an end. When have they followed the Palestinians' lead in anything?

The Sunken Synagogue also discusses Pipes' analysis, and will be coming out with even more.

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tags: Israel and Road Map and Hamas and Terrorism and Islam.

Oy Vey Amir...

The Jerusalem Post reports on Labor's new slogan:

The Labor Party unveiled its new campaign slogan on Thursday at a motivational meeting for Labor's Knesset candidates: "Amir Peretz, because the time has come."

Labor strategists said the party would not use negative campaigning or mudslinging, because Party Chairman Amir Peretz did not want it. The goal, they said, was to strengthen the brand and raise party pride.

Israel Perspectives gives his...perspective:

Perhaps this is the cynical side of me coming out, but this slogan seems to be extremely depressing.

Have things gotten so bad that it's time for Amir Peretz? Have we given up on all else that we have decided that perhaps Socialism isn't so bad, after all?

It does seem as if the current political scene in Israel was hand written for Sharon. Likud is a shadow of its former self, and as for Labor...

A poll released on Thursday morning conducted by the Geocartographic Institute pointed to a drastic drop in Labor support, with only 17 mandates, while Kadima, projected to receive 42 mandates, maintained its high level of support.

To see why Labor's support is dropping, take a look at Israel Perspective's suggested ad for Peretz.

Also, take a look at the winning slogans and themes that Biur Chametz has come up with.

Meanwhile, for Israel the choice is among Sharon, Peretz, and Netanyahu.

Oh My.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Zionism and Peretz.