Anti-national unity

One of the results of media bias is the coining of Orwellianisms. Thus, for example, those remaining faithful to the Likud platform and ideology are called "rebels." The Jewish Leadership faction is dubbed "the Feiglins" in this derisive language and is accused of a "hostile takeover" of the Likud. A world turned upside down: Those who deserted the Likud platform and also lost, time after time, in the internal party votes are, according to the media, the legitimate Likud, while those faithful to the platform and who, thanks to this faith, even won a majority of votes in the essential forums are "the rebels."

This Orwellian lingo continues to entrench false concepts in our consciousness. How sad. The very people whose duty it is to preserve the purity of terminology and language, those who are supposed to be the emissaries and monitors of truth, are the ones mocking it.

Since the "rebels" have so far won all the internal party confrontations, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is the one left - to the deep sorrow of his new admirers in the minority - it is he and his supporters, not Uzi Landau and his followers, who are the rebels.

In the big referendum of registered party members, Sharon, who initiated the vote was defeated 60 percent to 40 percent, with a large majority of the Likud Central Committee voting just a few months ago against the Labor party's entry into the coalition.

The media, however, had its own say. The victorious majority, according to the media's arbitrary determination, is rebellious. And the epithet "rebels," with its negative connotation, penetrated the consciousness. Even people involved in the news, and I know some of them, believe that Landau and his friends are the minority rebelling against the majority.

When the media hated Sharon, this hatred was expressed boundlessly and without restraint. Today, when the media sees him as the only one who can uproot settlements, the media is on his side, again without restraint, and is removing every political or legal obstacle that could prevent him from continuing to serve as prime minister.

After all, only in that position can he realize his great uprooting vision. Many of his former acquaintances and cronies - not just Yesha supporters - are convinced that the warm bosom of this late-blooming love is the dominant force behind his steadfastness to the task.

Another term being distorted these days is "national unity." Molders of public opinion and politicians who dismiss as negative the participation of the ultra-Orthodox in the government are suddenly leading the supporters, despite the political-spiritual - and certainly economic - price of their joining the "national unity." That's how important these supporters feel the uprooting is. How did Matan Vilnai put it? "This is our lighthouse."

At the height of the war against terror, when the public morale was approaching rock bottom, those same politicians and public opinion makers did not call for national unity. But the struggle against the settlers is another matter entirely: In that battle Sharon must be aided at all cost. Against the settlers, "the cancer in the body of the nation" - not the words of Tnuva CEO Arik Reichman, but of Yitzhak Rabin in his published memoirs - the end must justify the means.

In order to overcome the opposition of the Likud Central Committee's delegates to the addition of Labor to the government - only with its participation can this cancer be uprooted - it is important to use the term "national unity." When a Likudnik hears "national unity," he is immediately overcome by patriotic sentiments. But it is not for the sake of fulfilling the Likud platform that Sharon wants to bring Shimon Peres and his cronies into the government, but just the opposite: in order to use them to root out the remnant of ideology that remains in the Likud.

Labor wants to enter the government for the very same reasons, so that with its mere 19 Knesset seats it can dictate policy - which the electorate was sick of and therefore defeated - to a party that has 40 Knesset seats because it offered voters a platform diametrically opposed to the uprooting policy.

Today, at the Likud convention, Sharon will also receive the support of those who understand that Labor is a Trojan horse but are afraid of elections. They, however, are making a mistake: The Israeli voter, who albeit has delayed reactions, will ultimately punish those who lead it falsely. It was not due to its economic policy that Labor was sidelined, but rather because Oslo proved false, because the importing of 40,000 armed men to the territories along with their spiritual leaders fanned the flames of terror.

Those who warned against the Oslo disaster, and were right by any measure of the results, are now saying that the uprooting of settlements will lead to disaster. This of course refers to the internal national-Zionist schism, but also - and for this Labor was sent packing - to national security.

The disengagement is a moral and ideological victory - in the Arab media, even in the "moderate" Arab states, the festivities are already in full swing - by terror over the Zionists, who are being forced to uproot settlements. The expected result, even if the Arabs offer a cease-fire for reorganizing, re-equipping and recharging their energies, is the continuation of the war of terror. Perhaps with even greater vigor. The uprooting proves after all that when the Jews are badgered they capitulate, and if the badgering continues, they will continue to capitulate. And the sea, if Allah wills it, is the limit.