Email from Zionist Organization of America   ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA IN THE MEDIA     Former J Post Editor and Elite Liberal Journalist Yaakov Katz and Israel Hayom: We Should Apologize for Supporting Gaza Withdrawal Which Caused Oct. 7 Massacre 20 years later - Lessons from Gaza Disengagement and Tisha B'Av All of the major Jewish organizations supported and refused to oppose the forced Gaza withdrawal removing 10,000 Jews and all IDF troops from Gaza and Northern Samaria. These groups supporting the Gaza withdrawal include but not limited to: AJC, ADL, AIPAC, Conference of Presidents, HIAS, Peace Now, Ameinu, Bnai Brith, Reform, Conservative and Reconstruction Jewish movements, and many more. As the former Jerusalem Post editor recommends, it’s time for a public apology and ZOA believes that it is high time that these groups be held accountable and publicly apologize for their tragic mistake and recognize that this led to the Oct. 7 massacres, rape and torture of 1,200 Jews and the loss of 1,000 soldiers in our necessary Gaza war. They should also recognize that, as PM Netanyahu stated, giving Jewish land away becomes terrorist enclaves endangering more Jews and the Jewish State. SECURITY FORCES are on the scene as residents of Kfar Darom in Gush Katif resist eviction in August 2005. The writer asks: Knowing what we know now, shouldn’t we, at the very least, acknowledge the possibility that some of those protesters were right? (credit: FLASH90) There was speculation – and even open accusations – that prime minister Ariel Sharon had conceived of the initiative to deflect criminal investigations and avoid indictment. Knowing what we know now, shouldn’t we, at the very least, acknowledge the possibility that some of those protesters [opposing the Gaza withdrawal] were right? Shouldn’t we, perhaps, apologize? By Yaakov Katz (Auugst 1, 2025 / J Post) Twenty years ago this Sunday, I got into my little Mazda sedan and drove down to the border with the Gaza Strip. It was Tisha B’Av, the annual day of mourning for the destruction of the First and Second Temples in Jerusalem, and that night, the IDF began entering the Gaza Strip to distribute eviction orders ahead of the planned, forceful withdrawal of Israeli residents from the Gush Katif settlement bloc in what was known as the “Disengagement Plan.” At the time, most Israelis supported the move. There was speculation – and even open accusations – that prime minister Ariel Sharon had conceived of the initiative to deflect criminal investigations and avoid indictment. But for the most part, there was a prevailing sense in the country that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had hit a dead end, the status quo was untenable, and that something bold was needed. Disengagement from Gaza was framed as that step. It had the support of the Bush administration in Washington, was welcomed in European capitals, and was backed by much of Israel’s security and political establishment. The thinking was clear: Evacuating Israeli civilians and soldiers from a territory long plagued by ambushes, funerals, and unending violence would reduce friction and maybe – just maybe – create space for a new peace process. In the lead-up to the disengagement, a series of deadly attacks seared themselves into the national conscience. One stood out in particular. In May 2004, Tali Hatuel – eight months pregnant – and her four daughters, residents of the Katif settlement, were murdered in cold blood as they drove near the Kissufim crossing. The image of their car riddled with bullets became a defining moment in the national debate. Still, not everyone agreed with the plan. Protests erupted across the country. Activists opposed to the pullout blocked roads, marched in orange shirts, and warned of disaster. They were labeled “messianic,” “delusional,” and “dangerous.” The mainstream media often dismissed them. Senior officials in the IDF and Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) warned of a fringe “messianic militancy” that could turn violent. Continue Reading     It's That Simple: Gaza Disengagement Opponents Were Right Gaza withdrawal critics predicted every disaster while supporters promised prosperity that never came. An IDF soldier and a Gush Katif resident cry against the backdrop of the disengagement in 2005 | Archives: Miri Tzachi Without the disengagement, Hamas would never have had two commando divisions to storm our border. Without the Oslo Accords...Hamas lacked Gaza as a capital for manufacturing Qassams and raid teams that murdered Gush Katif inhabitants. By Amit Segal (August 1, 2025 / Israel Hayom) During my final exit from the Israeli moshav Ganei Tal, where I served as a correspondent for the Galei Tzahal radio station, after every tear had been wept, every Psalm recited in the synagogue, every evacuee had spoken all their words to the soldiers, a Gush Katif resident took his stand. He raised a modest sign, A4-sized, bearing the inscription "Terror won." That sign occupied my thoughts until reaching the Reim base in southern Israel, where the evacuation forces and numerous journalists with sparkling eyes had positioned themselves. This protester, undoubtedly expelled from his home the following day, identified the most elemental issue in the uprooting of Gush Katif. Before this evolved into legal violence ("preparing for dictatorship," Uri Orbach termed it then). Before becoming the narrative of sectarian and religious division. Before the unprecedented political promise-breaking story in Israeli history, before everything else – this remained a straightforward question of whether disengagement would enhance Israel's position against terrorism, or deteriorate it. Gaza's battle was waged on security grounds, not religious or moral ones, and there the verdict was rendered. One protester along the Ganei Tal-Katif route declared conditions would worsen, yet he stood essentially isolated. Complete security and political leadership rallied to proclaim improvement was coming. Before the Likud functionaries' referendum, Israel's Channel 2 hosted a compelling debate between opposing Benny Begin and supporting former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. "Fighting in Gaza requires no dozens of communities lacking any chance or future for survival. This applies equally to Nablus and everywhere," Olmert declared. Begin countered, "Gush Katif's synagogue could transform into a mosque, continuing incitement and terror operation planning against Israel." Olmert responded, "You guarantee functionaries eternal terror, we guarantee opportunities for change." Then-Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz pronounced on referendum day, "I forecast terror levels will decline." Regarding the Qassams, then possessing merely five-kilometer range, Mofaz explained, "Through IDF preparations before, during and following disengagement, IDF flexibility against Gaza Strip threats will expand, including enhanced missile response capabilities should they emerge. Our plan targets Gaza's terror infrastructure, emphasizing leaders, operatives and Hamas capabilities." Continue Reading   Share This Email Share This Email Share This Email   DONATE   www.zoa.org   Copyright © Zionist Organization of America 2025. All rights reserved. Zionist Organization of America | 633 Third Ave 31 B | New York, NY 10017 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice