John R. Houk
© November 14, 2013
A name you will not hear of in Obama’s America is Eden Atias. Atias is a 19 year old soldier of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Atias got onto a bus in Nazareth located in Judea-Samaria (West Bank to those determined to give away Jewish Land) and was stabbed repeatedly by the time the bus reached Afula in Northern Israel. Guess who stabbed the Jewish soldier? A 16 year old Palestinian Islamic terrorist whose name is Hussein Jawadra originally from Arab dominated Jenin in the Palestinian Authority (PA) controlled portion of Judea-Samaria. Jawadra was actually working illegally in Israel as an illegal alien from PA governed territory. These Muslim monsters that call themselves Palestinians need a work permit to work in Israel undoubtedly because of the ingrained brainwashing by the PA that Jews are apes and pigs and are deserving of death.
The sad irony about Israeli media is that most those outlets don’t name Hussein Jawadra undoubtedly because of the Western concept of a 16 year old being a minor rather than an adult. As of today most of the Israeli media I have only name Jawadra as a 16 year old Palestinian assailant. Some are bold enough to call a terrorist.
Hussein Jawadra is representative of the kind of people that Obama, Obama’s State Department, United Nations and European nations under the auspices of the European Union (EU) desire to force Israel to permit a sovereign nation called Palestine to come into existence. With this kind of brainwashing and breeding of Jew-hatred you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that a sovereign Palestine will only have one reason to exist; viz., the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews.
My fellow Americans, I don’t care what President Barack Hussein Obama tells you, America is a Christian nation in foundation and secular as a rule of laws Republic. Islam has not made any major contributions to American culture unless you count terrorism and murder of the non-Muslim American majority as a cultural contribution.
America’s lawmakers in all three branches of our Constitutional government have been slipping into the erroneous belief that providing land to a group of Arab Muslims that have adopted the name of Palestinian will bring peace between the Muslim world, Israel and the Western World. If you have seriously read the Quran then you realize that the book’s dualistic theology and the doctrine of abrogation means Muslims can pick and choose which suras to use to justify violence against non-Muslims.
The dualism of Islamic theology means two opposing principles are both valid if used in a way to magnify Islam. The abrogation doctrine (See HERE and HERE) contributes to dualism having suras that are newer nullifying suras that are older. For example, kill them wherever you find them is more valid than there is no compulsion of religion in Islam. The ‘kill them’ verse was written after the ‘no compulsion’ part. Even more difficult to discern which suras are newer and which suras are older is that the Quran is not put together in chronological order. Rather the Quran is written from the longest sura to the shortest sura without any linear chronology.
Those Muslims the Western World has labeled as radical as opposed to moderate are merely applying the traditional interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Sira. The alleged majority moderate Muslims have chosen the abrogated Mecca suras of the Quran over the Medina theologically superior suras. One of the reasons the so-called moderate Muslims rarely condemn the radical because of the Islamic belief that everything in Quran is perfect. If the so-called minority radical Muslims gain the ascendency in any government the moderates simply go along with the theologically pure radicals. YOU ARE SEEING THIS AMONG THE ARABS CALLING THEMSELVES PALESTINIANS!
America cannot trust the dominating radical Islam of the PLO terrorist controlled PA, Hamas, Shi’ite Hezbollah or even more alarmingly Twelver Shi’ite Iran. For the West radical is radical regardless if it is Sunni or Shi’ite.
As American voters how can we support Obama’s destructive call to create a Palestinian State that teaches their citizens to hate Jews so much that in a whim of shahid hatred kills a Jew like Eden Atias?
Blood stained bus seat
Murdered Soldier: Pvt. Eden Atias, 19
By Gil Ronen
11/13/2013, 9:02 AM
IDF Private Eden Atias, 19, of Natzrat Illit, has died after an Arab terrorist stabbed him in the neck and upper body in the Central Bus Station at Afula, in northern Israel, Wednesday. The attack took place inside a bus. Pvt. Atias was on his way to the military base in which he served.
“The Israeli soldier who was stabbed this morning by a Palestinian on a bus at the Afula bus station has died of his wounds in hospital,” police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld told AFP.
The attacker has been identified as an Arab aged 16 from the Palestinian Authority city of Jenin, who is reportedly staying illegally in Israel. He attacked the soldier at about 8:45 a.m., and stabbed him repeatedly. Civilians who were present at the scene neutralized him and stopped the attack at a certain point.
The soldier received initial medical care on the spot and was taken to Haemek Hospital in very serious condition.
An eyewitness named Tal told IDF Radio that she was walking past the bus when people began shouting “terrorist!” and a large commotion ensued. “The terrorist tried to run away but the police managed to catch him,” she added.
Another eyewitness told Maariv that the soldier, who is about 18, got on the bus at Nazareth, together with the terrorist. The soldier fell asleep on the way to Afula and at a certain point, the Arab began stabbing him over and over again, until other passengers grabbed hold of him and alerted security forces.
IDF Radio said that the attacker confessed that he left his home and got on the bus at Nazareth, with the intent of stabbing civilians, supposedly as revenge for the fact that his uncles are being held in Israeli jails.
The attack appears typical of the terror strikes that the Palestinian Authority (PA) under Mahmoud Abbas encourages through incitement, in a way that allows the PA to maintain that it is innocent of actually planning and organizing attacks, and that it did not send the terrorists on their missions.
PA residents are routinely exposed to television, radio and printed media content that glorifies murderers of Jews and encourages violence against Israel. When a PA youth seeks to attack Jews, he does so knowing that he has the full moral backing and encouragement of the PA, which will then glorify him, pay him a salary when he is jailed, and demand to free him in an Israeli “gesture.”
Palestinian Jew-Hater Kills Young IDF Soldier on Bus
John R. Houk
© November 14, 2013
Murdered Soldier: Pvt. Eden Atias, 19
© Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved
John R. Houk
© November 5, 2013
Hard evidence has emerged that shows that President Barack Hussein Obama blatantly lied about the ease in which Obamacare (aka Affordable Care Act – ACA) would be implemented. Of course you know that he and his Administration have been lying about other scandals as well: e.g. Fast and Furious, Benghazigate, IRS targeting Tea Party and Conservatives, NSA watches all Americans not just potential terrorists and probably a few others that slip my mind at the moment.
This brings me to the point about Obama and Israel. Obama has been pushing for the formation of a Palestinian State on part of the Jewish heritage known today as Judea-Samaria (West Bank to Israel-haters) and the eastern half of Jerusalem which is also known as the Old City because of how far back the history of that section goes back. Obama has been downright rude to the Israeli government about the lack of progress in forcing this issue upon Israel and the Jewish citizens.
Since the 1967 victory that brought back the territory robbed by Jordan in 1948, Israel has gone out of its way to accommodate the Jew-Hating Arab-Muslims in providing autonomous self-rule. I bet you don’t know that Prime Minister Ehud Barak (2000) and Ehud Olmert (2009) was willing to negotiate away all the land demanded by the terrorist dominated Palestinian Authority including Eastern Jerusalem. The Islamic Supremacist Palestinians refused (thankfully) each time.
Even though Obama has promised current Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that America will always have Israel’s back, the President has snubbed and berated Netanyahu many times. Since Obama is now a proven liar. Do you think the Obama Administration really has Israel’s back?
Stabbing Israel in the Back
By Alan Caruba
November 4, 2013 at 7:30am
If Barack Obama told me “I have your back”, I would spend a lot of time looking over my shoulder. His promises to Israel are dirt, worthless, and duplicitous in the extreme. Taken together, they have ensured that Israel will attack some of Iran’s facilities that are striving to make it a nuclear power with nuclear weapons.
An article in the October 31 edition of The Jerusalem Post, “White House official confirms Israeli attack on Syrian missile site” is just one example of the steps the Obama administration has taken to seriously undermine Israel’s security and hasten Iran’s ability to make good on its promise to “wipe it from the map.”
According to the article, an “anonymous US administration official” responded to a CNN inquiry that Israel had conducted air raids against a Syrian missile base near the port city of Latakia where “missiles and related equipment” were stored “out of concern that they would be transferred to Hezbollah.” Tellingly, the reporter noted that “It is unclear why the U.S. would leak such information as it could increase the pressure on Syria to retaliate against Israel.”
Monday, November 4th, marks the 34th anniversary of Iran’s seizure of U.S. diplomats in 1979. To this day Iran’s slogan has been “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”
Little noted by most Americans, the Obama administration is feverishly trying to establish diplomatic relations with Iran despite the fact that it has technically been at war with us ever since our diplomats were seized from the U.S. embassy in Tehran, holding them for 444 days until their release the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated.
One of the best, most reliable sources of news from and about Israel is the Debka File and the same day the US blew the whistle on the Syrian attacks, they posted an article, “Braced for imminent nuclear accord with Iran, US pulls away from military option, IDF stays on the ready.”
The article bluntly stated that Israel “plans to keep in place advanced preparations for a unilateral military strike on Iran’s nuclear program in 2014.” On November 1st, Debka File reported on a “Mystery explosion at Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor” that has been under construction. It is the second time the facility has had an explosion.
The Obama administration has taken a very hard line against Israel’s warnings regarding the decades-long efforts of Iran to become a nuclear power. Flitting around the Middle East these days, Secretary of State, John Kerry, said “Some of suggested that somehow there’s something wrong with giving diplomacy a chance. We will not succumb to those fear tactics and forces that suggest otherwise.”
Kerry seems oblivious to the fact that the administration’s diplomatic efforts in the Middle East has managed to seriously harm U.S. relations with virtually all the nations in the region, not the least of which is Saudi Arabia that has as much to fear from a nuclear Iran as Israel. The Gulf States are all fearful of Iranian progress toward nuclear power.
Observers have concluded that Kerry’s efforts are aimed at “lifting decision-making on sanctions out of the hands of Congress and transferring it to this secret negotiation mechanism. By this means, President Obama hopes not only to thwart Congressional calls for tighter sanctions against Iran, but also to forestall Netanyahu’s efforts to this end.”
Indeed, all of Obama’s Middle East policies have come to a bad end at this point. The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq has resulted in that nation becoming a bloodbath as al Qaeda, the Sunnis, and the Shiites wage a war of subversion against the present government there, in which the casualties are mounting weekly. The U.S. is also in the process of withdrawing from Afghanistan.
The tilt toward the Muslim Brotherhood that took over Egypt after an election, resulted in the then-president Muhammad Morsi’s efforts to impose harsh sharia law on the nation. Egyptians rallied against him and the military arrested him and has cracked down on the Brotherhood. There are reports that Egypt, a longtime U.S. ally, is now discussing the purchase of weapons from Russia. U.S. aid to Egypt has apparently ended.
One cannot overlook the disastrous decisions that followed the overthrow of Muamar Gaddafi, Libya’s former dictator that resulted in the December 11, 2012 attack in Benghazi that cost the life of the U.S. ambassador and three security personnel.
Israel knows that Obama is no friend and, therefore, the protection and support of every previous administration since the days of Truman are at an end until the current administration is replaced. It will, as it has in the past, do what it must to defend itself against Iran and the threats posed by Hezbollah and Hamas. It has no other option.
Obama is increasing the threat of war and he knows it.
Palestinians Hate Jews and Obama Lies
John R. Houk
© November 5, 2013
Stabbing Israel in the Back
© Alan Caruba, 2013
Professor James M. Rubenstein
Justin takes Professor James M. Rubenstein to task for writing a book that is plush with revisionist history that leaves an anti-Jewish footprint and a pro-Arab footprint when it comes to Israel’s existence as a Jewish-State.
The Jews’ Valid Claim/ or Beneath Islamic Propaganda
By Justin O. Smith
August 1, 2013 at 10:01am
The following text is anti-Jewish more than it is anti-Semitic, but it is still anti-Semitic from both a historical and a moral viewpoint concerning the controversial issues surrounding Israel and the “Palestinian state”. Professor James M. Rubenstein, author of ‘The Cultural Landscape: An Introduction to Human Geography” is either knowingly advancing the islamofascists’ propaganda and agenda, or, possibly, his own education indoctrinated him to such a point that he received a Ph.D. despite his ignorance in the field; whatever the case, Mrs. Laurie Cardoza-Moore and the Jewish community are rightfully concerned and should be quite angry with the Williamson County School Board, especially when one understands the false premise and assumptions associated with the text.
From the text: Distinguishing terrorism from other acts of political violence can be difficult. For example, if a Palestinian suicide bomber kills several dozen Israeli teenagers in a Jerusalem restaurant, is it an act of terrorism or wartime retaliation against Israeli government policies and army actions? Competing arguments are made: Israel’s sympathizers denounce the act as a terrorist threat to the country’s existence, whereas advocates to the Palestinian cause argue that longstanding injustices and Israeli army attacks on ordinary Palestinian civilians provoked the act.
The word “Palestine” does not occur in the Old or New Testament at all; after the Jewish revolt of Bar-Kokhba in 135 AD, the Romans renamed Judea to be “Palestine” or “Syria Palestina”, with the intention of obliterating its Jewish identity. The earlier name never disappeared, and as late as the 4th century, Christian author Epiphanus referred to “Palestine, that is Judea”.
The “Arab Palestinian” was never a serious age-old or even century-old national identity. The term was introduced as a tool after the 1967 Six Day War, and, according to the British Palestine Royal Commission Report, “In the twelve centuries or more that have passed since the Arab conquest… In the realm of thought, in science or in letters, it (Palestine) made no contribution to modern civilization”.
As Rosemary Sayigh wrote in the ‘Journal of Palestine Studies’, “a strongly defined Palestinian identity did not emerge until 1968, two decades after expulsion”. It had taken twenty years to establish the “myth” prescribed by Muslim activist Musa Alami.
Upon the emergence of the Sovereign Jewish State of Israel in 1948, there were no more than 430,000 genuine Arab refugees, although the UN asserted 500,000 officially. 750,000 Jews were dispossessed and forcibly expelled during this same period.
President Truman’s International Development Advisory Board, March 7, 1951, and the Arab sponsored Institute for Palestine Studies in Beirut agreed that 68% of the Arab refugees left in 1948 at the urging of Arab leaders and Islamic imams, rather than any expulsion by the Israeli military. As some Arab leaders demanded the “return” of the “expelled” refugees, Emile Ghoury, Secretary of the Arab Higher Command, told the ‘Beirut Telegraph’ on August 6, 1948: “It is inconceivable that the refugees should be sent back to their homes while they are occupied by Jews… It would serve as a first step toward Arab recognition of the state of Israel and Partition”.
From Khaled Al-Azym’s 1972 memoirs (Syrian Prime Minister 1948): “Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees…while it is we who made them leave… We brought disaster upon…Arab refugees by…bringing pressure upon them to leave…We have rendered them dispossessed…Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson and throwing bombs upon…men, women and children – all this in the service of political purposes”.
In 1958, former director of the UN Relief and Work Agency, Ralph Galloway declared emphatically that “the Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore… a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die!”
During the 1950s, a population exchange occurred between India and Pakistan, as 8.5 million Sikhs and Hindus from Pakistan fled to India, and approximately 6.5 million Muslims moved from India to Pakistan; a precedent for such population transfers was set by Turkey and Bulgaria in 1913, and in 1923, Turkey and Greece exchanged 1.25 million Greeks and 3.55 million Turks.
Why wouldn’t such a population exchange have worked with the Jews and the Muslims?
A mutual repatriation obviously could not be demanded if one side of an exchange had fled from intolerable conditions and could not return. Hence, the Arab lie emerged that the “alien” Jews had lived harmoniously among the “native” Arab Muslims before Israel became a state and the mythical “Palestinian” was created.
In Egypt after the Sinai Campaign of 1956, thousands of Jews were interned without trial, while still others were served with deportation papers and ordered to leave within days; their property was confiscated, their assets frozen.
In Iraq, Zionism became a capital crime, and Jews were hanged in the center of Baghdad, in front of cheering crowds of Muslims. Although no laws authorized the confiscation of Jewish property in Iraq before 1950, the Jews were stripped of millions of dollars through economic discrimination and government extortion.
Anti-Jewish broadcasts from Egypt in response to the partition of Palestine resulted in the December 2, 1947 pogrom in Aden. Eighty-two Jews were murdered, scores more were wounded, while 111 Jewish stores were robbed bare and over 200 Jewish homes and four synagogues were burned to the ground; Aden’s 1958 riots directed violence and murder at the Jewish community once again; after the 1967 Six Day War, it became apparent that the islamofascists were preparing to massacre what remained of the Jewish community, and the British evacuated them. And this scene was repeated time and again across the entire Arab Muslim world!
Reverend James Parkes observed in 1949: It was only politically that the Jews lost their land. They never abandoned it physically, nor did they renounce their claim to their nation… the only continuous claim that exists. The Jews never submitted to assimilation into various victorious populations even after successive conquerors had devastated the Jewish organizational structure.
Buried beneath the propaganda of the Arab nations, the Organization for Islamic Cooperation and the islamofascists, one finds that more than 40 Jewish communities survived and could be traced in the 6th century, despite physical violence against the Jews by the post-Roman Christians and Muslims. Twelve of these towns are on the coast, in the Negev, and east of Jordan (Transjordan and the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”), and thirty-one villages are in Galilee and the Jordan Valley.
After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Albert Memmi, a Tunisian-born writer, responded to a Libyan official’s invitation to Libyan Jews to return to Libya:
“Is it true that you have said that the Jews have always lived at peace in the Arab countries? And that you have nothing against Jews, only Zionists?…The error which may have been made at Deir Yassine (Palestinian Jewish Irgun and Stern troops inadvertently killed 250 Arab civilians in 1948) is constantly thrown in our faces. Ah, but we have undergone a hundred Deir Yassines, a thousand Deir Yassines! And not only in Russia, Germany or Poland, but also at the hand of the Arab people; yet the world has never been upset over it!… if you really wanted to avoid having us come together on this particular bit of land,… Israel…, then why did you hound us and expel us from the regions over which your power extends?”
Today and despite John Kerry’s new “peace-talk” initiative between Israel and the “Palestinians”/Arab Muslims, the islamofascists in Gaza and the West Bank, especially Hamas, perpetuate this false national identity, and in so doing, they sacrifice the wellbeing and lives of the “Arab refugees”; they hope only to accomplish, politically and through continued, if sporadic, terrorism, the destruction of an unacceptable sovereign Jewish state… dhimmi Jews from Islamic lands now acting as their equals… as it represents an affront to all Islamic nations.
Muslim propaganda has effectively hidden the fact that Arab/Islamic nations have virtually purged their Jews, as the European Union, the United States and the rest of the world ignores the plight Arab-born Jews have faced historically – the camps, squalor, displacement, theft of property and a loss of security and murdered kinsmen; raise the question of “Middle East refugees” with any number of academics, such as Professor Rubenstein, professionals or just regular workers, and they refer to the Arab “Palestinians”. It is as though the painful and horrifically sad story of the Arab-born Jewish refugees had been erased: the revisionist history of the anti-Jewish Leftists and islamofascists must be rejected and corrected!
Justin O. Smith
© Justin O. Smith
Editing John R. Houk
John R. Houk
© July 17, 2013
You know the Mainstream Media is primarily Leftist in its worldview, right? You know that the Democratic Party is not even close to the projected image of a reputation as the Party of the People, right? You know that Leftists blame Israel’s existence for all the violence projected toward the West, right? You know that Left influenced Western nations – including the USA’s Left Wing government – have joined together to force Israel to give up more of their ancestral land to placate a group of Arabs that were self-proclaimed as Palestinians ONLY in the 1960s under the influence of Jew-Hating Muslim Arab nations under the guise of theopolitical Islamic Supremacism. These Arab nations had no intention of creating a “Palestinian State,” you know that right? From 1948 through 1967 the goal of Arab nations surrounding the rebirthed nation Israel was to destroy it and divvy up the land between the biggest Arab military dogs bordering Israel; viz. Egypt, Jordan and Syria, you know that right?
Under the illusion of “land for peace” the UN, the EU, the USA and Russia are placing unreported (in America anyway) diplomatic arm twisting to force Israel to give up Judea-Samaria (aka West Bank) and the eastern half of the Holy City Jerusalem – which by the way contains the huge wall remnants of the ancient Jewish Temple – to a group of Arabs that really have no ancestral ties to the ancient land of Israel. There are NO Palestinians. There are Arabs that are descendants of refugees that awaited invading Arab armies to kill the Jews and claim the land as conquest in the same way Islam has done for over 1500 years.
Therein lies the real Middle Eastern problem: Islamic holy writings call for Jihad to expel any infidel that has retaken land once conquered by Muslim armies. God help us! That includes that miniscule amount of land that is only a fraction of Israel’s ancestry. Islam must destroy Israel because its existence is an effrontery and insult to Allah and the false-deity’s prophet Mohammed. And if you watch the news YOU KNOW how Muslims react when they believe their deity and prophet have been maligned by non-Muslims. Muslims go hog-wild in rampages of destruction and death against the closest symbols of the West or the unfortunate non-Muslims (mostly Christians) living in Muslim dominated lands.
I am on the Prophecy Update email list. Prophecy Update delivers current events to your inbox relating to the End Times. Below I am posting a couple of news articles in the 7/17/13 email update. Just as an aside there is more to Prophecy Update than just current events. There is also eschatological articles and Biblical tools to purchase. You may not agree with all the End Times outlook that Prophecy Update ministers; nonetheless there is enough there that should wet the whistle of every Christian looking for the Return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Excerpted from Prophecy Update
Sent: July 17, 2013 11:47 AM
Obama uses EU to confront Israel with tough interlinked choices: borders or nuclear-armed Iran -http://www.debka.com/article/23124/Obama-uses-EU-to-confront-Israel-with-tough-interlinked-choices-borders-or-nuclear-armed-Iran-
It doesn’t take a political genius to see how US Secretary of State John Kerry’s arrival in Amman Tuesday, July 16, for his sixth bid to bring Israelis and the Palestinians to the table, ties in with the new EU anti-Israel funding guidelines published on the same day. To avoid a head-on clash with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, the US president has loosed the Europeans in full cry against Jerusalem and its policies. European Union foreign affairs executive Catherine Ashton chairs the international negotiating forum with Iran. And so, the EU has given Tehran a broad wink that it is worth its while to come to a fresh round of nuclear diplomacy while Israel is kept on the run in the settlements-cum-borders dispute.
Israel is further weakened by its own internal political difficulties.
The third Netanyahu cabinet is painfully shorthanded of ministers for dealing with foreign diplomacy and national security affairs. In the absence of a foreign minister, shackled with a new cabinet which took office in February, and beset with a reshuffle of his close aides, the prime minister is obliged to carry himself most of the burden for key decisions on the essential business of state.
When he decides not to decide on any issue, that issue is shuffled into the pending tray to await his attention – and of late, this is happening too often.
Netanyahu is taxed currently with keeping tabs on the conflict close to Israel’s borders in Egyptian Sinai, the threatened spillover of the Syrian war – only part of which reaches the public – and the approach of a nuclear Iran, which he admits is dangerously close to consummation. Every few weeks, he is put on the spot for fast decisions by US Secretary of State Kerry’s peace drive.
It is no wonder that Netanyahu drops some of the balls he is juggling.
The last ball to slip out of his hands was the new European Commission’s new guideline for the alliance to distinguish between the state of Israel and territories outside the 1967 Green Line for the purpose of co-funding projects and grants.
This guideline is grounded in the EU’s fixed determination that East Jerusalem, Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan were illegally occupied by Israel after the 1967 Arab-Israel war. The “settlements” housing more than a half a million Jews are likewise deemed illegal. Therefore, from Jan. 1, 2014, any Israeli entity seeking European project funding or grants will be obliged to declare it has no connection, direct or indirect, with a “settlement.”
There is nothing new about this determination. The European Union has for years boycotted goods manufactured in settlements and demanded that Israel exporters label their products with the source of manufacture. Ever since 1967, the UK has withheld pensions and allowances from British expatriates living outside the Green Line until they relocate to addresses London deems kosher.
And that is only one of many examples.
However, the new guidelines have exacerbated the rift between Brussels and Jerusalem and signal a further deterioration. If in future every Israeli firm is required before every financial or business transaction with Europe to disassociate from EU-proscribed Jewish communities, then bilateral trade, whose volume has climbed to 40 billion euros, will gradually decline, with as much economic fallout for Europe as for Israel.
Israel’s prime minister responded fast and hard to the new EU guidelines with a bitter broadside for what he sees as outside interference in the definition of Israel’s borders, in a manner which compromises direct Israel negotiations with the Palestinians. Direct negotiations are the only way to define those borders, he stressed, and the EU measure had the effect of tilting them in the Palestinians’ favor.
Netanyahu was particularly incensed by the EU dropping its bombshell on the day John Kerry arrived in Amman to pick up his mission for reviving the peace track, which he interrupted empty-handed earlier this month.
Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon greeted Kerry’s arrival by eulogizing his mission, accusing the Palestinians of burying it by sheer obstructionism. Ya’alon no doubt followed the line set by the prime minister.
Kerry spent five hours talking to Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas Tuesday night, in yet another effort to melt his insistence on Israel meeting his preconditions for a meeting.
By Wednesday morning, the US Secretary had not yet arranged to meet Israeli officials this time round.
Israeli policy-makers understand that Washington is dodging a showdown with Netanyahu by using the Europeans to clobber his policies at a moment of internal weakness in Jerusalem. Now they realize they must brace urgently for the next chapter in the Obama campaign: Ashton will build on the EU steps to get a fresh round of world power-Iranian nuclear negotiations underway by persuading Tehran that Brussels, with Washington’s backing, is in full flight of a diplomatic campaign for cutting Israel down to size.
By pulling the wires behind the European campaign, the Obama administration is after three goals:
1. Persuading Tehran to return to international diplomacy on its nuclear program by diminishing Israel’s leverage.
2. Confronting Israel with diplomatic isolation on an issue of prime importance to its security, i.e., the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, unless the Netanyahu government agrees to concessions to the Palestinians on final borders.
3. Warning Netanyahu that his failure to toe the Obama line on the Syrian conflict and the Egyptian army coup will cost Israel dear. Instead of lining up with what is seen in the region as an ineffectual Washington, Israel struck out on its own to play ball with regional forces on the move, the Arab rulers of the Gulf and the Egyptian army. The US president has used the European Union to make sure Jerusalem understands that he too will pursue his own game – and it will be at the expense of Israel’s interests.
EU Redraws Israel Borders to 1949 Lines – http://the-end-time.blogspot.com/2013/07/eu-redraws-israel-borders-to-1949-lines.html
The title above is from Israel National News this evening. The recent re-attention to Israel by the US in its attempts to re-start the peace talks, Israel’s hints to engage in a military option very soon regarding Iran, and this bold and highly non-biblical, non-God approved move to re-draw Israel’s lines heats the prophetic landscape up to a very prophetic degree.
For the first time, the EU formally forbids trade with bodies located beyond 1949 Armistice lines, including Golan
“The European Union has issued orders forbidding its member states from cooperating, transferring funds, giving scholarships or research grants to bodies in Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, and even the Golan Heights, Haaretz wrote Tuesday. The new instruction, promulgated by the European Commission, which is the operative arm of the EU, sets parameters for cooperation between the EU and its members states, on the one hand, and Israeli governmental and private elements on the other. The instructions are for the years 2014 – 2020 and will go into force on Friday, July 18. The decision also states that any future agreement signed with Israel must include a section that says the “settlements” are not part of sovereign Israel and therefore not included in the agreement. A senior source in the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that the new EU decision is dramatic, and can be called “a true earthquake.”
I agree, it is huge.
How dare they say what Israel’s sovereign borders are! Israel is its own nation, and sets its own borders. Going even higher, the LORD takes a personal and intimate interest in His nation and His Land.
“Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3)
Israel Condemns EU Move to Limit Funds Beyond 1967 Border
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would accept “no external dictates” on its borders after a European Union decision to restrict subsidies to organizations operating beyond its 1967 borders.” I would expect that anyone for whom stability and peace in the region is really important to find time to discuss this issue after resolving more urgent problems such as the civil war in Syria and Iran’s race to achieve nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said in a text message.”
“The European Commission, the union’s executive arm, said it will soon publish “guidelines” making good on a December pledge to deny EU funding to Israeli organizations in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.” All Israeli entities whose place of establishment is within the green line will be considered eligible,” EU spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told reporters in Brussels today. The green line refers to Israel’s pre-1967 borders. The guidelines will cover central EU funding and won’t affect contracts between individual European governments and Israel, Kocijancic said. She said the result could be funding restrictions in “a very small number of cases.”
“Israeli captured the three areas during the 1967 Middle East War with its Arab neighbors. It has since withdrawn troops and evacuated settlements in Gaza and annexed the Golan in a move that has not been recognized internationally. Israel says the fate of settlements in the West Bank must be resolved in peace negotiations.”
“The EU decision shows “once again how disconnected Europe is, and why it can’t play a real partnership role in negotiations” between Israel and the Palestinians, Minister of Regional Development Silvan Shalom said today on Army Radio. Hanan Ashrawi, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee, welcomed what she called a “significant move.” “The EU has moved from the level of statements, declarations and denunciations to effective policy decisions and concrete steps which constitute a qualitative shift that will have positive impact on the chances of peace,” she said. The decision comes before a visit to the region this week by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who is trying to revive peace talks that have been suspended since 2010.”
Isolating Israel…it’s prophesied. Though the fulfillment will occur at Armageddon, the unbroken line of prophetic history hurtling us down the timeline to that moment is speeding ever closer.
“The burden of the word of the Lord concerning Israel: Thus declares the Lord, who stretched out the heavens and founded the earth and formed the spirit of man within him: “Behold, I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of staggering to all the surrounding peoples. The siege of Jerusalem will also be against Judah. “On that day I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples. All who lift it will surely hurt themselves. And all the nations of the earth will gather against it.” (Zechariah 12:1-3)
Netanyahu’s quote about stability and peace… yes…it’s all about peace and security.
“While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” (1 Thessalonians 5:3)
War drums beating again. We’ve had a little ‘time off’ from the near misses, brinksmanship and vitriolic rhetoric, but now it’s (sic) back. This time with action, not just words. It is widely believed that Israel is behind the strike on Syria’s Russian-anti ship missiles
U.S. Officials: Israel Behind Recent Syria Airstrike
“A series of explosions last week at a critical Syrian port was the result of airstrikes by Israeli warplanes, multiple U.S. officials told CNN on Friday. Regional media widely reported the predawn explosions at Latakia on July 5, but no one had officially claimed responsibility. Three U.S. officials told CNN the target of the airstrikes were Russian-made Yakhont anti-ship missiles that Israel believes posed a threat to its naval forces. The officials declined to be named because of the sensitive nature of the information. So far, the Israeli government has also declined to comment to CNN. The Syrian rebels said on Tuesday that “foreign forces” had destroyed advanced Russian anti-ship missiles in Latakia, hinting that Israel may have been behind the attack.”
But then later the US said for sure that Israel did the deed.
Russia did not take that lightly, or even lying down. “Coincidentally” Russia just ordered 160,000 troops to combat readiness in a “surprise drill” and said to be ready by July 13.
‘Russia stages large-scale military drills’
“Russia has staged large-scale military exercises in the country’s Eastern military district aimed at enhancing the defense capabilities of its armed forces, Defense Ministry says. The drills, which are the largest surprise check of combat readiness of the Russian military in the post-Soviet period, started on Saturday. The surprise training exercise involves over 80,000 troops, some 1,000 tanks and armored vehicles, 130 aircraft and helicopters 70 warships and will continue until July 20. “The main goal of the drills is to check the readiness of units to carry out their missions, and to assess the quality of their training and technical preparedness,” Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement. On Friday, during a meeting with Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu Russian, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an unexpected military drill, urging all forces to enter a state of full combat readiness on the night of July 13.”
Remember, there is a prophecy regarding a yet-unfulfilled battle of Psalm 83 involving a surprise attack on Israel by all of Israel’s abutting neighbors (which Israel wins, claiming the lands). There is also prophesied a surprise attack led by Russia along with Turkey and Israel’s further neighbors that is also yet unfulfilled (Ezekiel 38-39). Both of those are widely believed to be end of last day’s prophecies or prophecies to be fulfilled during the Tribulation. No one is quite sure of the order, as in which comes first or maybe they are nearly simultaneous, but many believe that Psalm 83 would be fulfilled first because Israel is said to be dwelling in the center of the Land in Ezekiel 37:12 and had accumulated much goods. Israel is prophesied to in the Psalm 83 battle and it is supposed that she spreads out and occupies her abutting, by then defeated neighbors. None of these neighbors make another murmur, and are not listed in the Gog-Magog coalition, so it seems that they would be set aside or nullified first. Many believe that a defeat in Psalm 83 does the trick.
Isaiah 17:1 and onward prophesies the complete destruction of Damascus, Syria and its environs. This also has never been fulfilled.
“On that day I will make the clans of Judah like a blazing pot in the midst of wood, like a flaming torch among sheaves. And they shall devour to the right and to the left all the surrounding peoples, while Jerusalem shall again be inhabited in its place, in Jerusalem.” (Zechariah 12:6)
Iranian Nukes on the Horizon – Noah Beck -http://frontpagemag.com/2013/noah-beck/iranian-nukes-on-the-horizon/
President Obama’s Middle East policy has been an ever-worsening train wreck because it lacks credibility and strategy, as Egypt, Libya, and particularly Syria, have shown. And the region is about to get much worse, unless Obama exercises resolute leadership on the most important global security issue of this generation: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
In a commerce-critical region where “might makes right” and only the strong survive, Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons could have catastrophic consequences for the Middle East and beyond. The resulting dangers potentially include: (i) nuclear proliferation, as other Mideast countries feel threatened into pursuing their own nuclear programs; (ii) the transfer of nuclear materials from Iran – the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism – to terrorist organizations and/or rogue states; (iii) bolder attacks by Iranian terror proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc.) protected by Iran’s nuclear umbrella; and (iv) an even more belligerent Iran that flexes its nuclear arsenal to: export its radical Islamic ideology, acquire disputed territories and resources from neighboring countries, and/or undertake actions like blocking the Strait of Hormuz to increase the price of oil.
As Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, recently told CBS News’s Face the Nation, the Islamic Republic is now dangerously close to a nuclear capability. Because Iran has stockpiled about 190 pounds of 20% enriched uranium, Iran is just 60 kilograms – potentially just weeks – short of crossing the nuclear “red line” that Netanyahu set in his speech before the UN last September.
Unfortunately, Obama has signaled no urgency over Iranian nukes. Perhaps he hopes for a negotiated settlement to the issue, now that Hassan Rouhani, a so-called “moderate,” was elected to assume Iran’s presidency next month. But hope is not a strategy with the Iranian regime. Rouhani has been linked to the 1994 terrorist bombing of an Argentine Jewish community center that killed 85 people, and has boasted about how he manipulated nuclear talks with the West about a decade ago to expand Iran’s nuclear program. More importantly, Iran’s foreign policy is set by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has banned concessions to the West. Indeed, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, the head of Iran’s atomic energy agency, made it clear last Friday that Rouhani’s election will have no impact on Iran’s nuclear enrichment activities.
Obama must also recognize that the sanctions against Iran have demonstrably failed. The Islamic Republic has skillfully outmaneuvered them, as shown in a leaked U.N. report detailing 11 instances of Iran violating sanctions, including attempts to acquire materials for its atomic program. Reuters published an expose outlining how Iran exploits sanctions loopholes to import ore from Germany and France that could be used for making armor and missiles. More importantly, the Iranian nuclear weapons program has never once stopped because of sanctions. The only time that Iran ever suspended its nuclear program was after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when Iran briefly feared that a U.S. attack was imminent.
Obama’s Iran policy has thus far failed to produce any credible deterrent. It’s time for Obama to build on the lead of Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird, who warned last month that Iran only has only a few months to demonstrate to the West that it is serious about a negotiated solution to the standoff.
Israel doesn’t have the luxury of treating its red lines the way Obama has treated the one he set for Syria’s use of chemical weapons; that means that the volatile Middle East of today could become far more engulfed in war and instability. Netanyahu’s latest message may be the canary in the coalmine giving its final warning, so Obama should provide bold leadership on this critical issue before it’s too late. New Jersey-sized Israel survives only by the strength of the military force that it projects. Critical to that deterrent is making good on its threats, as Israel did with its destruction of the Iraqi and Syrian nuclear programs, in 1981 and 2007, respectively, and its ongoing surgical airstrikes to prevent Syria from transferring game-changing weapons to Hezbollah.
Given such exploits, isolationists might wonder why the U.S. should bother; let Israel bear all of the costs and risks of eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat for us, goes the thinking. But the nuclear program in Iran is far more dispersed, hardened, and distant than what Israel neutralized in Iraq and Syria. Iranian nukes are truly vulnerable only to U.S. military capabilities. Expecting Israel to do the job is like a heavyweight-boxing champion asking his featherweight friend to defend him against the approaching middleweight champion. Such cowardly tactics needlessly endanger the featherweight ally, but – more importantly – there is a good chance that the middleweight won’t be fully neutralized and will feel far more emboldened to attack the heavyweight after he concludes (alongside the rest of the world) that the heavyweight is just a paper tiger.
Iran can already attack U.S. interests across the Middle East and Europe. And as early as 2015, Iran could develop and test ballistic missiles that could strike the continental U.S., according to a Pentagon report released last week (“2013 Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat Assessment”). Obama can wait for the U.S. to be drawn into war with a nuclear-armed Iran, or he can proactively address the threat before Iran acquires nukes. But he cannot hide from the threat or hope it away. Obama must lead – before Iran’s nuclear recalcitrance forces Israel’s hand, with potentially apocalyptic consequences.
YOU KNOW the USA and EU Work AGAINST Israel, Right?
John R. Houk
© July 17, 2013
Excerpted from Prophecy Update
Sent: July 17, 2013 11:47 AM
Moral relativism and jihad
John R. Houk
© April 16, 2013
Caroline Glick wrote a scathing yet appropriate exposé on the ignorance of Jewish-American organizations when it comes to Israel and Jew-hating Muslims. It is not surprising that that Left Wing self-loathing Jews moronically support anti-Israel agendas but I find it particularly loathing that Jewish organizations that are considered respectable Right leaning on issues and decidedly pro-Israel remained silent in the face of anti-Israel support given to Radical Islamic governments by the Obama Administration. Glick goes further in criticizing Orthodox Jews for supporting a musician that is virulently involved in anti-Israel Boycott Divest and Sanction (BDS) activities that support Palestinian Statehood while Synagogues that invite Counterjihad speakers like Pamela Geller cave in to American Radical Islamic organizations to cancel exposés of Muslim hatred by actually accusing Geller-like speakers of racist bigotry.
John R. Houk
© March 11, 2013
This video was posted in February 2012 to briefly let people know that Antisemitism is alive and well on U.S. university campuses. Unfortunately I am a little late with this post which is a condemnation of a pro-Palestinian/Anti-Israel propaganda seminar accusing Israel of human rights violations and completely letting Islamic terrorists off the hook for their murder and mayhem of Jews in Israel. That propaganda seminar is called Israel Apartheid Week.
Below is an email from David Horowitz that tells what really happens in Israel and on American College Campuses pertaining to Jews. Tragically Jews are persecuted by Islamic terrorists in Israel with blood and mayhem and Jews and supporters of Israel are vilified by Islamic racists often connected to either Palestinian (Islamic) terrorists or from organizations affiliated with the Jew-Hating Muslim Brotherhood. This week of Antisemitic lies is allow to occur on college campuses that have bought into the propaganda disseminated by Islamic terrorist connected organizations operating with near impunity in the USA.
I am cross posting the Horowitz email but first You should take the time to view this video exposing the lies of Jew-Haters that are the supporters of Israel Apartheid Week:
Must Read Article
[Islamic Apartheid Week]
Sent by David Horowitz
Sent: March 8, 2013 9:03 AM
Sent from David Horowitz Freedom Center
Earlier this week, I sent you an email about the advertisement the Freedom Center will be running in campus newspapers at Colleges and Universities around the country. Today, I wanted to share with you an article, written by the Center’s Daniel Greenfield, which illustrates why getting this ad distributed as far and wide as possible is so critical.
I hope you’ll take a moment to read this article, and if you haven’t already, make a generous, tax-deductible donation to support our efforts.
A Double Standard on Hate
By Daniel Greenfield
Every year college campuses across the country hold a festival of hatred aimed at Jews and the Jewish State. Israeli Apartheid Week has become notorious for the targeted harassment of Jewish students, support for Hamas and even physical violence.
This year the David Horowitz Freedom Center has responded to Israeli Apartheid Week with Islamic Apartheid Week. Unlike Israeli Apartheid Week, which is based on a lie, Islamic Apartheid Week addresses the sexism, homophobia and religious bigotry threatening minorities in the Muslim world. To promote Islamic Apartheid Week, the Freedom Center attempted to place an ad in forty college papers.
The ad called “Faces of Islamic Apartheid” drew attention to the victims of Islamic sexism, homophobia and theocracy by briefly telling the stories of gay men hanged in Iran, women and girls murdered by their governments and their families for the crime of falling in love and the Christian Minister for Minorities Affairs in Pakistan’s cabinet who was murdered for trying to reform his country’s theocratic blasphemy laws.
These four women, three men and one little girl were the victims of Islamic Apartheid. Five of them have been murdered. Their memory lives on only when they are remembered. One has been on death row for six years. Telling her story may help save her life. The remaining two live under threat of death.
Instead of listening to their stories, the campus culture of political correctness drowned out their voices and apologized for even allowing their stories to be told.
Nine college papers turned the ad down, five of them in the University of California system which has been criticized for tolerating anti-Semitism. When the California State Assembly passed a resolution condemning anti-Semitism on campus and warned that no public resources should be used for anti-Semitic hate, the University of California objected on free speech grounds. However free speech for Israeli Apartheid Week did not translate into free speech for Islamic Apartheid Week.
Seven college papers took the advertisement. Of those papers, Tufts University’s Tufts Daily and Austin’s Daily Texan both ran apologies from their editors for even printing the ad.
Tufts Daily editor Martha Shanahan called the decision to run the ad an “editorial oversight.” Daily Texan editor Susannah Jacob denounced the attempt to tell the stories of victimized women and children as “hateful” and “an unspoken incitement to violence.”
Martha Shanahan spent two pages apologizing for the existence of the “Islamophobic and violently offensive” advertisement, the existence of Tufts Daily, its staff and her own existence. At no point during her long series of apologies, did Martha acknowledge that her paper had run four editorials in a single week from Students for Justice in Palestine attacking Israel and promoting hatred for the Jewish State. And in an unequal response to this, it also ran a brief letter from Tufts Friends of Israel distancing itself from the ad and politely suggesting that apartheid shouldn’t be used to refer to Israel.
Anthony Monaco, the President of Tufts University, took to Twitter to denounce the advertisement for vilifying Islam, but made no such denunciation of the Tufts Daily’s op-ed, “The Case for Israeli Apartheid” which (not coincidentally) appeared on the same day as the ad. At Tufts, no one apologizes for accusing democratic Israel of apartheid. There are only apologies when theocratic Iran and Pakistan are accused of practicing Islamic Apartheid.
When anti-Israel voices are outweighed 4-to-1 and the editor apologizes for publishing another perspective that would have made it 4-to-2 then the freedom of debate at Tufts University is in a very sad state. When that same editor prints editorials describing Israel as an apartheid state, but promises to put in place an entire system of oversight to make certain that no advertisement challenging Islamic Apartheid is ever printed again, then a system of censorship has been put into place silencing the voices of victims and encouraging their persecutors.
The Daily Texan’s Susannah Jacob claimed that the crosshairs over the faces of the victims were an incitement to violence when they were actually a way of bringing urgency to the violence that had been committed against them. And making it clear that she never even saw the advertisement that she was denouncing, Susannah described the ad as depicting six women, when it included two gay men, one Christian man and one little girl.
Susannah further distorted the truth about Islamic Apartheid when she described the pervasive sexism, homophobia and theocracy that these people fell victim to as “discrete incidents of violence by Muslims” being used “to implicate all Muslims” while ignoring the fact that five of the victims in the ad had been targeted by their governments or with government backing.
Can the Daily Texan’s editor honestly claim that Iran’s persecution of women and gay men or Pakistan’s persecution of Christians are “discrete incidents of violence”, rather than state policy? Could she find a single human rights organization that would agree with such a dishonest whitewashing of the terror under which millions live?
The responses to the advertisement have established once again that some forms of apartheid are privileged on campus and that some forms of persecution cannot be talked about. Demonizing the Israeli victims of Islamic terror is within the realm of campus free speech, but speaking about the vulnerable minorities in the Muslim world is not.
If the advertisement was wrong, then there would have been no need to censor it. False claims can easily be disproven. Five minutes with Google would have told every reader and editor whether there was any truth to the Faces of Islamic Apartheid.
It is never necessary to censor lies. It is only necessary to censor truth.
That is why the majority of campus papers – ten so far, including Harvard whose editors said they would not print it under any circumstances — refused to run this paid advertisement. It is why those few who did have begun making ritual apologies while lying about its contents. It is why the attacks on the advertisement have taken refuge in vague platitudes about offensiveness, without a single attempt at a factual rebuttal. It is why every response to the advertisement has consisted of claiming that speaking about Islamic bigotry is the real bigotry.
There were eight faces and eight names in the censored advertisement that the President of Tufts, the editors of Tufts Daily, the Daily Texan and the editors of ten college papers that turned down the ad, did not want their students to see or know about because it might disturb the manufactured campus consensus that they have constructed with great effort around Israel and Islamic terrorism.
These are the names. Amina Said. Sarah Said. Afshan Azad. Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Shahbas Bhatti. Rimsha Masih. Mahmoud Asgari. Ayaz Marhoni.
They were repressed as individuals. Now their story is being repressed on the American campus.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Horowitz
Date: March 5, 2013 11:05 AM EST
Subject: Expose the lies on our campuses
Dear Freedom Center Supporter,
Anti Semitism on America’s campuses—nonstop bashing of Israel and glorification of Hamas and other jihad groups, and even physical intimidation of Jewish students—is worse than ever. Administrators and faculty accepts all this as part of the university’s standard operating procedure. But the Freedom Center calls it for what it is—an intellectual reign of terror.
And we’re fighting back!
Think of what is allowed to take place these days as part of our universities’ business as usual:
These unrelenting attacks against Israel and Jewish students are shameful and disgusting. Will you help the Freedom fight back today with a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more?
While the truth about the Middle East is systematically turned upside-down and inside-out, no one is stepping forward to defend Israel and remind her enemies that:
There’s only one organization willing to go onto our campuses to tell our students the truth about this brutal discrimination that occurs under Islamic Sharia Law—and that’s the Freedom Center.
This year the Freedom Center is sponsoring “Islamic Apartheid Weeks” on over 50 campuses across the country. These events will provide a truth-telling, in your face response to the Big Lies that are at the foundation of the leftist “Israel Apartheid Weeks.” They will explain and explore the many forms of Islamic apartheid—racism, ethnic cleansing, gender discrimination, political oppression and slavery—that have been part of the Middle East for over a millennium and are now spreading into Africa and other regions of the world.
One of the main components of the Freedom Center’s campaign is to insert full-page ads like this one in campus newspapers across the country. Under the headline “Faces of Islamic Apartheid,” the advertisement will features victims of Sharia law abroad and in the U.S. such as Amina and Sarah Said, murdered in Texas by their father for dating non-Muslims, and Shahbas Bhatti, the sole Christian minister in Pakistan’s cabinet who was murdered by members of the Taliban for advocating reform of Pakistan’s strict blasphemy laws.
While our college students hear the Big Lie about Israel every day, they never hear the truth about the body count, even in the U.S., that results from the teachings of radical Islam. And we need them to! So will you support our efforts with an immediate tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more?
We are currently submitting this ad to 50 campus papers around the country to coincide with March’s “Israel Apartheid Week” events. We have already received confirmations that the ad will run in the papers at the following Colleges and Universities,
We are targeting at least another 40 campuses this week. But the cost of running ads in just these newspapers is about $75,000! So please follow this link right now to make a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more to support our efforts.
These ads do what nothing else can do—highlight the true sources of “apartheid” in the Middle East put the campus Islamists attacking Israel on the defensive. The Freedom Center is on the front lines in the war on campus between the Big Lie and the truth in the Middle East. Your support is critical to making this effort a success.
Thank you for everything you do to help me and the Freedom Center.
President & Founder
P.S. We need your help to place this ad in campus newspapers at Colleges and Universities across the country. Will you make a tax-deductible donation of $25, $50, $100 or more to the Freedom Center right away? We must raise $75,000 by midnight tomorrow, so I’m counting on you. Thanks—David
Israel Apartheid Week is Hate Jews and Lie about Israel Week
John R. Houk
© March 11, 2013
Must Read Article
The David Horowitz Freedom Center
P.O. Box 55089
Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964
About David Horowitz Freedom Center
OUR MISSION: The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad…. READ THE REST
The haters and liars of Israel are having their annual Israel Apartheid Week. The Wall of Truth tears down ten myths negatively aimed at Israel and Jews.
MYTH 1: ISRAEL OCCUPIES ARAB PALESTINE
This is a genocidal claim made by the Muslim Students Association and other pro-Arab groups. It is genocidal because it obliterates the Jewish state. If Israel is actually “Occupied Palestine” then there is no legitimate Jewish state in the middle east.
Since Roman times when the Philistines inhabited the region around the Jordan (hence the name “Palestine”) there has never been a political entity – neither a province nor a state – called “Palestine” and no one claimed there was until well after the United Nations created Israel in 1948. The land on which Israel was created by the U.N. was also used by the colonial powers to create Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Jordan. It was land that had belonged to Turkey for 400 years. The Turks are not “Palestinians” and are not even arabs.
There never was an Arab country called “Palestine” or inhabited by “Palestinians.” Before the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964, which was sixteen years after the birth of Israel, no Arab political entity was called by that name.
MYTH 2: ISRAEL IS AN APARTHEID STATE
The term Apartheid refers to the segregation of groups on the basis of ethnicity or race, and the denial of basic civil rights to the segregated group. There is no such segregation in Israel. Arabs are granted full civil rights under Israeli law, which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, creed, or sex. Arabs take part fully in Israeli society and government. Arab citizens of Israel vote in national elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on the Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court benches, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the Arabs of any Arab state.
MYTH 3: THE ARABS WANT PEACE AND A STATE ON THE WEST BANK
The Arab nations rejected peace and a state on the West Bank first in 1948 when it was offered to them by the U.N. and then in 2000 when it was offered by Presidents Clinton and Barak. In 1949, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which the U.N. had designated as a homeland for the Arabs, were annexed respectively by Jordan and Egypt. When the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was formed in 1964 its covenant made no mention of liberating the West Bank or Gaza from Jordan and Egypt. The PLO leadership stated that its goal was to “push the Jews into the sea.” Today the “liberation” of Palestine “from the river to the sea” is still the goal of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA). The war in the Middle East is about the desire of the Arab nations and Muslims to destroy Israel; it is not about the desire for a Palestinian state.
There are 1.4 million Arabs living in Israel with civil rights that are the envy of the Arab world. Israeli Arabs vote in Israel’s elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the inhabitants of any Arab or Muslim state.
MYTH 4: THE HOLOCAUST IS EUROPE’S PROBLEM; PALESTINIANS HAD NO ROLE IN IT
The father of Palestinian nationalism, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, planned death camps for the Jews in the Middle East. Haj Amin Al-Husseini, was a devoted follower of Hitler who spent the war in Berlin, recruited an Arab legion to the Nazi cause and planned a “Final Solution” for the Jews of the Arab world. The Muslim Brotherhood, which created Hamas, the government of Gaza, translated Mein Kampf into Arabic in the 1930s and called for the destruction of the Jewish state at its birth.
MYTH 5: ISRAEL’S SECURITY FENCE IS AN “APARTHEID” WALL
This is two myths in one. The West Bank fence is a fence, not a wall. About 97% of the fence is made of chain-link material. The remaining 3% is concrete, designed to repel sniper fire in particular areas. The fence was built in 2003 in response to thousands of suicide bombings and rocket attacks on Israeli citizens by Palestinian terrorists, sponsored and armed by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. The fence was built to keep out terrorists, not Arabs.
In the years since the construction of the fence, terrorist attacks have declined by more than 90%. The fence is Israel’s legitimate defense against a ruthless and amoral terrorist aggressor.
MYTH 6: ISRAEL IS THE CAUSE OF THE REFUGEE PROBLEM
The Palestinians claim there are 5 million Palestinian refugees who fled Israel during the 1948 war. This is false. There were only 500,000 Arab refugees from the 1948 war – an unprovoked war that Egypt and four other Arab states had launched against the newly created state of Israel. In the aftermath of the war, 500,000 Jewish refugees were driven out of the Arab states in the Middle East. There are no Jewish refugees today, sixty years later, because Israel resettled them. Why are there still Arab refugees? The Arab regimes have been given billions of dollars by Israel and the United States to relocate their refugees. But the Arabs are still in refugee camps. While Israel resettled Jewish refugees, no Arab country would take in the “Palestinians” who were forced into camps and were kept there by the Arab regimes to stir up hatred against the Jews. The refugee “issue” has been created by the Arab regimes as a weapon in their war against the Jews. It should be resolved by resettling the inhabitants of the refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza where almost all of them have lived all their lives.
MYTH 7: ISRAEL COMMITS WAR CRIMES BY KILLING CIVILIANS
This is the Big Lie, coming as it does from some Palestinians who have made terrorist attacks on civilians a weapon of choice, and who make martyrs and national heroes out of suicide bombers.
The Gaza strip was a base for 7,000 rocket attacks against schoolyards and townships in Israel before the Israelis responded in 2007. During Israel’s airstrikes on Gaza rocket sites there was one civilian death for every 30 terrorists. By contrast, a 2001 study by the International Committee of the Red Cross found that the civilian-to-military death ratio in wars fought since the middle of the 20th Century has been 10:1 – ten civilian deaths for every soldier death. In other words, the Israelis protect civilians at a rate 300 times greater than any other national army. As Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz observes, “No army in history has ever had a better ratio of combatants to civilians killed in a comparable setting.”
MYTH 8: JEWS HAVE LITTLE HISTORICAL CONNECTION TO ISRAEL
Jews have lived continuously in the land of Israel for over 3000 years; the Arabs arrived through multiple invasions, beginning in the 7th Century AD. In the year 70 AD, when the Jewish civilization was already over 1000 years old, the Romans forced most of the Jews of Judea and Samaria (now the West Bank) into exile. By the end of the 19th Century, the majority population of Jerusalem was Jewish.
MYTH 9: THE KORAN DESCRIBES JERUSALEM AS HOLY TO ISLAM
The Koran does not mention Jerusalem because Mohammed never set foot in the city. Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies in 636 after the death of Mohammed. Muslim jihadists claim that the Koran mentions “The Furthest Mosque” — Al-Aqsa in Arabic – and that this is a Koranic reference to Jerusalem. This is a lie. The Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem had not been built when the Koran was written, so the reference is to some other (or any other) “furthest mosque.” In contrast, Jerusalem is and has always been a holy city to Jews. The daily prayers of the Jews are focused on Jerusalem. The Hebrew Bible mentions Zion and Jerusalem a total of 809 times.
MYTH 10: THE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON IS NOT JEWISH
This myth is one of many designed to steal the history of the Jews in order to justify erasing them from the Middle East. When the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994, it immediately began a campaign to delegitimize Israel by rewriting history with the intention of denying Israel’s right to exist. Among its false claims is that the remains of the Temple of Solomon – the Western Wall – are in fact the remnants of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The Al-Aqsa Mosque was deliberately built on top of the Temple after the Muslim conquest to humiliate the conquered.
Wall of Faith Links & Video
Israel is a very small nation established in part because of thousands of years of gross persecution culminating with Hitler’s Holocaust which murdered around SIX MILLION Jews. More importantly from a religious Jewish and Biblical Christian perspective, Israel’s reestablishment is prophetic. I can’t speak for Jews but Biblical Christians believe Israel’s return as a Jewish homeland is a prophetic precursor to the Return of King Jesus to sit on the Throne of David to rule the nations of the world.
AISH.com has a video on their website showing how the United Nations goes out of its way to publish Palestinian propaganda about Israel human rights violations while totally ignoring the brutal butchery of Islamic terrorists upon Jews attempting to terminate the Jewish State. Also the video points out the HUGE human rights violations in other larger nations than Israel ARE NOT APPROACHED nearly as much as the UN comes after Israel that is merely trying to defend its existence surrounded by a sea of hostile Muslim States.
Below is the video:
JRH 3/4/13 (Hat Tip: Nora Mitchell – World News & Events Dissected)
The UN vs. Israel
The UN is obsessed with one country’s human rights record, and it’s not North Korea, Iran or Syria.
March 2, 2013
Youtube version: Prager University: The UN vs. Israel
Posted by: Prager University
Published on Feb 24, 2013
In the last few decades the United Nations has been obsessed with one country. Is it North Korea, Zimbabwe, Iran, Syria, China or some other nation with a reprehensible human rights record? Those would all be fair guesses and they would all be wrong. Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro Human Rights Institute, answers this riddle and explains the upside down moral universe in which the United Nations resides.
© 2013 Aish.com
Since its launch in February 2000, Aish.com has become the world’s largest Jewish content website, logging over a million monthly user sessions with 380,000 unique email subscribers.
We’ve published over 10,000 articles — on career, dating, parenting, spirituality, Israel events — offering “wisdom for living” for the modern world.
Aish.com’s goal is to give every Jew the opportunity to discover his or her heritage in an atmosphere of open inquiry and mutual respect.
Aish.com, a 3-time winner of USA Today’s Hot Site award, has been heralded for its technical sophistication and sleek graphic design. James Besser, the New York Jewish Week columnist, writes: “The supersite, Aish.com, reacting to … READ THE REST
Here is an alternative Bible Prophecy thought for you. The USA will remain the most powerful military on Earth and will enhance its military position by embracing nationalism to a greater degree. Turkey will supersede Iran as the Islamic regional power. Hamas will look to Turkey as an arbiter of destiny. Israel and Hamas will reconcile with Hamas becoming the dominant organization over Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. Turkey’s Islamic domination will lead Muslims away from Arab nationalism to a kind of Islamic Universalism leading to the reestablishment of the Caliphate under Turkish auspices.
These are just some of the predictions from Walid Shoebat that seems to be the prophetic theme of a new book “The Case for Islamophobia: America’s Final Warning.”
I am guessing the prophetic essay “Prophecy: What Lies Ahead” is a preview of what is in Walid’s book. The essay goes against the grain of recent Biblical prophecy pundits and theologians with an emphasis that the book series “Left Behind” has it wrong.
I am certain Walid’s predictions will be criticized by both geopolitists and Biblical oriented prophetic writers. Nevertheless, the case is well presented and the only real critic will be the progression of time.
Intro to ‘What Occupation?’
John R. Houk
© February 8, 2013
Westerners are beginning a resurgence of Jew-hatred which is being expressed today in the support of Islamic nations because most of the oil producing nations of the world is Muslim. The narrative of Muslim dominated nations is that Israel existence came to be at the expense of Muslim Arabs that lived there before European Jews began to immigrate back to the Land of their God-given heritage.
Thus Westerners – especially Europeans – are believing the lie that all economic woe is due to Muslim Jew-hatred thus the petroleum economy is a dagger to oil-blood that ultimately fuels the global economy. Muslims have been winning the propaganda war making the nation Israel – you have to use a magnifying glass to view Israel on a global map – the villain of all that ails the world. The most common lie today is that the Israeli government is on par with Hitler’s Nazi Germany. Hitler successfully murdered twelve million people in a racist attempt to cleanse German dominated area of the gene pool that pollutes the so-called Aryan race of Germans. Nearly SIX MILLION of those ethnically cleansed people were European Jews. The propaganda is this miniscule Israel does not have the right to exist coupled with the bad logic that the Land Israel won back in 1967 is occupied land with those Muslims being treated like Hitler’s Jews.
The propaganda is a load pig oil and Efraim Karsh writing for Think-Israel has the factual statistics to prove it.
By Efraim Karsh
Alert sent: Feb 4, 2013 at 4:58 PM
Few subjects have been falsified so thoroughly as the recent history of the West Bank and Gaza.
No term has dominated the discourse of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict more than “occupation.” For decades now, hardly a day has passed without some mention in the international media of Israel’s supposedly illegitimate presence on Palestinian lands. This presence is invoked to explain the origins and persistence of the conflict between the parties, to show Israel’s allegedly brutal and repressive nature, and to justify the worst anti-Israel terrorist atrocities. The occupation, in short, has become a catchphrase, and like many catchphrases it means different things to different people.
For most Western observers, the term “occupation” describes Israel’s control of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, areas that it conquered during the Six-Day war of June 1967. But for many Palestinians and Arabs, the Israeli presence in these territories represents only the latest chapter in an uninterrupted story of “occupations” dating back to the very creation of Israel on “stolen” land. If you go looking for a book about Israel in the foremost Arab bookstore on London’s Charing Cross Road, you will find it in the section labeled “Occupied Palestine.” That this is the prevailing view not only among Arab residents of the West Bank and Gaza but among Palestinians living within Israel itself as well as elsewhere around the world is shown by the routine insistence on a Palestinian “right of return” that is meant to reverse the effects of the “1948 occupation” — i.e., the establishment of the state of Israel itself.
Palestinian intellectuals routinely blur any distinction between Israel’s actions before and after 1967. Writing recently in the Israeli daily Ha’aretz, the prominent Palestinian cultural figure Jacques Persiqian told his Jewish readers that today’s terrorist attacks were “what you have brought upon yourselves after 54 years of systematic oppression of another people” — a historical accounting that, going back to 1948, calls into question not Israel’s presence in the West Bank and Gaza but its very legitimacy as a state.
Hanan Ashrawi, the most articulate exponent of the Palestinian cause, has been even more forthright in erasing the line between post-1967 and pre-1967 “occupations.” “I come to you today with a heavy heart,” she told the now-infamous World Conference Against Racism in Durban last summer, “leaving behind a nation in captivity held hostage to an ongoing naqba [catastrophe].”
“In 1948, we became subject to a grave historical injustice manifested in a dual victimization: on the one hand, the injustice of dispossession, dispersion, and exile forcibly enacted on the population … On the other hand, those who remained were subjected to the systematic oppression and brutality of an inhuman occupation that robbed them of all their rights and liberties.”
This original “occupation” — that is, again, the creation and existence of the state of Israel — was later extended, in Ashrawi’s narrative, as a result of the Six-Day war:
“Those of us who came under Israeli occupation in 1967 have languished in the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip under a unique combination of military occupation, settler colonization, and systematic oppression. Rarely has the human mind devised such varied, diverse, and comprehensive means of wholesale brutalization and persecution.”
Taken together, the charges against Israel’s various “occupations” represent — and are plainly intended to be — a damning indictment of the entire Zionist enterprise. In almost every particular, they are also grossly false.
In 1948, no Palestinian state was invaded or destroyed to make way for the establishment of Israel. From biblical times, when this territory was the state of the Jews, to its occupation by the British army at the end of World War I, Palestine had never existed as a distinct political entity but was rather part of one empire after another, from the Romans, to the Arabs, to the Ottomans. When the British arrived in 1917, the immediate loyalties of the area’s inhabitants were parochial-to clan, tribe, village, town, or religious sect-and coexisted with their fealty to the Ottoman sultan-caliph as the religious and temporal head of the world Muslim community.
Under a League of Nations mandate explicitly meant to pave the way for the creation of a Jewish national home, the British established the notion of an independent Palestine for the first time and delineated its boundaries. In 1947, confronted with a determined Jewish struggle for independence, Britain returned the mandate to the League’s successor, the United Nations, which in turn decided on November 29, 1947, to partition mandatory Palestine into two states: one Jewish, the other Arab.
The state of Israel was thus created by an internationally recognized act of national self-determination — an act, moreover, undertaken by an ancient people in its own homeland. In accordance with common democratic practice, the Arab population in the new state’s midst was immediately recognized as a legitimate ethnic and religious minority. As for the prospective Arab state, its designated territory was slated to include, among other areas, the two regions under contest today — namely, Gaza and the West Bank (with the exception of Jerusalem, which was to be placed under international control).
As is well known, the implementation of the UN’s partition plan was aborted by the effort of the Palestinians and of the surrounding Arab states to destroy the Jewish state at birth. What is less well known is that even if the Jews had lost the war, their territory would not have been handed over to the Palestinians. Rather, it would have been divided among the invading Arab forces, for the simple reason that none of the region’s Arab regimes viewed the Palestinians as a distinct nation. As the eminent Arab-American historian Philip Hitti described the common Arab view to an Anglo-American commission of inquiry in 1946, “There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not.”
This fact was keenly recognized by the British authorities on the eve of their departure. As one official observed in mid-December 1947, “it does not appear that Arab Palestine will be an entity, but rather that the Arab countries will each claim a portion in return for their assistance [in the war against Israel], unless [Transjordan's] King Abdallah takes rapid and firm action as soon as the British withdrawal is completed.” A couple of months later, the British high commissioner for Palestine, General Sir Alan Cunningham, informed the colonial secretary, Arthur Creech Jones, that “the most likely arrangement seems to be Eastern Galilee to Syria, Samaria and Hebron to Abdallah, and the south to Egypt.”
The British proved to be prescient. Neither Egypt nor Jordan ever allowed Palestinian self-determination in Gaza and the West Bank — which were, respectively, the parts of Palestine conquered by them during the 1948-49 war. Indeed, even UN Security Council Resolution 242, which after the Six-Day war of 1967 established the principle of “land for peace” as the cornerstone of future Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, did not envisage the creation of a Palestinian state. To the contrary: since the Palestinians were still not viewed as a distinct nation, it was assumed that any territories evacuated by Israel, would be returned to their pre-1967 Arab occupiers — Gaza to Egypt, and the West Bank to Jordan. The resolution did not even mention the Palestinians by name, affirming instead the necessity “for achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem” — a clause that applied not just to the Palestinians but to the hundreds of thousands of Jews expelled from the Arab states following the 1948 war.
At this time — we are speaking of the late 1960′s — Palestinian nationhood was rejected by the entire international community, including the Western democracies, the Soviet Union (the foremost supporter of radical Arabism), and the Arab world itself. “Moderate” Arab rulers like the Hashemites in Jordan viewed an independent Palestinian state as a mortal threat to their own kingdom, while the Saudis saw it as a potential source of extremism and instability. Pan-Arab nationalists were no less adamantly opposed, having their own purposes in mind for the region. As late as 1974, Syrian President Hafez al Assad openly referred to Palestine as “not only a part of the Arab homeland but a basic part of southern Syria”; there is no reason to think he had changed his mind by the time of his death in 2000.
Nor, for that matter, did the populace of the West Bank and Gaza regard itself as a distinct nation. The collapse and dispersion of Palestinian society following the 1948 defeat had shattered an always fragile communal fabric, and the subsequent physical separation of the various parts of the Palestinian diaspora prevented the crystallization of a national identity. Host Arab regimes actively colluded in discouraging any such sense from arising. Upon occupying the West Bank during the 1948 war, King Abdallah had moved quickly to erase all traces of corporate Palestinian identity. On April 4, 1950, the territory was formally annexed to Jordan, its residents became Jordanian citizens, and they were increasingly integrated into the kingdom’s economic, political, and social structures.
For its part, the Egyptian government showed no desire to annex the Gaza Strip but had instead ruled the newly acquired area as an occupied military zone. This did not imply support of Palestinian nationalism, however, or of any sort of collective political awareness among the Palestinians. The local population was kept under tight control, was denied Egyptian citizenship, and was subjected to severe restrictions on travel.
What, then, of the period after 1967, when these territories passed into the hands of Israel? Is it the case that Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have been the victims of the most “varied, diverse, and comprehensive means of wholesale brutalization and persecution” ever devised by the human mind?
At the very least, such a characterization would require a rather drastic downgrading of certain other well-documented 20th-century phenomena, from the slaughter of Armenians during World War I and onward through a grisly chronicle of tens upon tens of millions murdered, driven out, crushed under the heels of despots. By stark contrast, during the three decades of Israel’s control, far fewer Palestinians were killed at Jewish hands than by King Hussein of Jordan in the single month of September 1970 when, fighting off an attempt by Yasir Arafat’s PLO to destroy his monarchy, he dispatched (according to the Palestinian scholar Yezid Sayigh) between 3,000 and 5,000 Palestinians, among them anywhere from 1,500 to 3,500 civilians. Similarly, the number of innocent Palestinians killed by their Kuwaiti hosts in the winter of 1991, in revenge for the PLO’s support for Saddam Hussein’s brutal occupation of Kuwait, far exceeds the number of Palestinian rioters and terrorists who lost their lives in the first intifada against Israel during the late 1980′s.
Such crude comparisons aside, to present the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as “systematic oppression” is itself the inverse of the truth. It should be recalled, first of all, that this “occupation” did not come about as a consequence of some grand expansionist design, but rather was incidental to Israel’s success against a pan-Arab attempt to destroy it. Upon the outbreak of Israeli-Egyptian hostilities on June 5, 1967, the Israeli government secretly pleaded with King Hussein of Jordan, the de-facto ruler of the West Bank, to forgo any military action; the plea was rebuffed by the Jordanian monarch, who was loathe to lose the anticipated spoils of what was to be the Arabs’ “final round” with Israel.
Thus it happened that, at the end of the conflict, Israel unexpectedly found itself in control of some one million Palestinians, with no definite idea about their future status and lacking any concrete policy for their administration. In the wake of the war, the only objective adopted by then-Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan was to preserve normalcy in the territories through a mixture of economic inducements and a minimum of Israeli intervention. The idea was that the local populace would be given the freedom to administer itself as it wished, and would be able to maintain regular contact with the Arab world via the Jordan River bridges. In sharp contrast with, for example, the U.S. occupation of postwar Japan, which saw a general censorship of all Japanese media and a comprehensive revision of school curricula, Israel made no attempt to reshape Palestinian culture. It limited its oversight of the Arabic press in the territories to military and security matters, and allowed the continued use in local schools of Jordanian textbooks filled with vile anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda.
Israel’s restraint in this sphere — which turned out to be desperately misguided — is only part of the story. The larger part, still untold in all its detail, is of the astounding social and economic progress made by the Palestinian Arabs under Israeli “oppression.” At the inception of the occupation, conditions in the territories were quite dire. Life expectancy was low; malnutrition, infectious diseases, and child mortality were rife; and the level of education was very poor. Prior to the 1967 war, fewer than 60 percent of all male adults had been employed, with unemployment among refugees running as high as 83 percent. Within a brief period after the war, Israeli occupation had led to dramatic improvements in general well-being, placing the population of the territories ahead of most of their Arab neighbors.
In the economic sphere, most of this progress was the result of access to the far larger and more advanced Israeli economy: the number of Palestinians working in Israel rose from zero in 1967 to 66,000 in 1975 and 109,000 by 1986, accounting for 35 percent of the employed population of the West Bank and 45 percent in Gaza. Close to 2,000 industrial plants, employing almost half of the work force, were established in the territories under Israeli rule.
During the 1970′s, the West Bank and Gaza constituted the fourth fastest-growing economy in the world — ahead of such “wonders” as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Korea, and substantially ahead of Israel itself. Although GNP per capita grew somewhat more slowly, the rate was still high by international standards, with per-capita GNP expanding tenfold between 1968 and 1991 from $165 to $1,715 (compared with Jordan’s $1,050, Egypt’s $600, Turkey’s $1,630, and Tunisia’s $1,440). By 1999, Palestinian per-capita income was nearly double Syria’s, more than four times Yemen’s, and 10 percent higher than Jordan’s (one of the better off Arab states). Only the oil-rich Gulf states and Lebanon were more affluent.
Under Israeli rule, the Palestinians also made vast progress in social welfare. Perhaps most significantly, mortality rates in the West Bank and Gaza fell by more than two-thirds between 1970 and 1990, while life expectancy rose from 48 years in 1967 to 72 in 2000 (compared with an average of 68 years for all the countries of the Middle East and North Africa). Israeli medical programs reduced the infant-mortality rate of 60 per 1,000 live births in 1968 to 15 per 1,000 in 2000 (in Iraq the rate is 64, in Egypt 40, in Jordan 23, in Syria 22). And under a systematic program of inoculation, childhood diseases like polio, whooping cough, tetanus, and measles were eradicated.
No less remarkable were advances in the Palestinians’ standard of living. By 1986, 92.8 percent of the population in the West Bank and Gaza had electricity around the clock, as compared to 20.5 percent in 1967; 85 percent had running water in dwellings, as compared to 16 percent in 1967; 83.5 percent had electric or gas ranges for cooking, as compared to 4 percent in 1967; and so on for refrigerators, televisions, and cars.
Finally, and perhaps most strikingly, during the two decades preceding the intifada of the late 1980′s, the number of schoolchildren in the territories grew by 102 percent, and the number of classes by 99 percent, though the population itself had grown by only 28 percent. Even more dramatic was the progress in higher education. At the time of the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, not a single university existed in these territories. By the early 1990′s, there were seven such institutions, boasting some 16,500 students. Illiteracy rates dropped to 14 percent of adults over age 15, compared with 69 percent in Morocco, 61 percent in Egypt, 45 percent in Tunisia, and 44 percent in Syria.
All this, as I have noted, took place against the backdrop of Israel’s hands-off policy in the political and administrative spheres. Indeed, even as the PLO (until 1982 headquartered in Lebanon and thereafter in Tunisia) proclaimed its ongoing commitment to the destruction of the Jewish state, the Israelis did surprisingly little to limit its political influence in the territories. The publication of pro-PLO editorials was permitted in the local press, and anti-Israel activities by PLO supporters were tolerated so long as they did not involve overt incitements to violence. Israel also allowed the free flow of PLO-controlled funds, a policy justified by Minister of Defense Ezer Weizmann in 1978 in these (deluded) words: “It does not matter that they get money from the PLO, as long as they don’t build arms factories with it.” Nor, with very few exceptions, did Israel encourage the formation of Palestinian political institutions that might serve as a counterweight to the PLO. As a result, the PLO gradually established itself as the predominant force in the territories, relegating the pragmatic traditional leadership to the fringes of the political system.
Given the extreme and even self-destructive leniency of Israel’s administrative policies, what seems remarkable is that it took as long as it did for the PLO to entice the residents of the West Bank and Gaza into a popular struggle against the Jewish state. Here Israel’s counterinsurgency measures must be given their due, as well as the low level of national consciousness among the Palestinians and the sheer rapidity and scope of the improvements in their standard of living. The fact remains, however, that during the two-and-a-half decades from the occupation of the territories to the onset of the Oslo peace process in 1993, there was very little “armed resistance,” and most terrorist attacks emanated from outside-from Jordan in the late 1960′s, then from Lebanon.
In an effort to cover up this embarrassing circumstance, Fatah, the PLO’s largest constituent organization, adopted the slogan that “there is no difference between inside and outside.” But there was a difference, and a rather fundamental one. By and large, the residents of the territories wished to get on with their lives and take advantage of the opportunities afforded by Israeli rule. Had the West Bank eventually been returned to Jordan, its residents, all of whom had been Jordanian citizens before 1967, might well have reverted to that status. Alternatively, had Israel prevented the spread of the PLO’s influence in the territories, a local leadership, better attuned to the real interests and desires of the people and more amenable to peaceful coexistence with Israel, might have emerged.
But these things were not to be. By the mid1970′s, the PLO had made itself into the “sole representative of the Palestinian people,” and in short order Jordan and Egypt washed their hands of the West Bank and Gaza. Whatever the desires of the people living in the territories, the PLO had vowed from the moment of its founding in the mid1960′s — well before the Six-Day war — to pursue its “revolution until victory,” that is, until the destruction of the Jewish state. Once its position was secure, it proceeded to do precisely that.
By the mid-1990′s, thanks to Oslo, the PLO had achieved a firm foothold in the West Bank and Gaza. Its announced purpose was to lay the groundwork for Palestinian statehood but its real purpose was to do what it knew best-namely, create an extensive terrorist infrastructure and use it against its Israeli “peace partner.” At first it did this tacitly, giving a green light to other terrorist organizations like Hamas and Islamic Jihad; then it operated openly and directly.
But what did all this have to do with Israel’s “occupation”? The declaration signed on the White House lawn in 1993 by the PLO and the Israeli government provided for Palestinian self-rule in the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip for a transitional period not to exceed five years, during which Israel and the Palestinians would negotiate a permanent peace settlement. During this interim period the territories would be administered by a Palestinian Council, to be freely and democratically elected after the withdrawal of Israeli military forces both from the Gaza Strip and from the populated areas of the West Bank.
By May 1994, Israel had completed its withdrawal from the Gaza Strip (apart from a small stretch of territory containing Israeli settlements) and the Jericho area of the West Bank. On July 1, Yasir Arafat made his triumphant entry into Gaza. On September 28, 1995, despite Arafat’s abysmal failure to clamp down on terrorist activities in the territories now under his control, the two parties signed an interim agreement, and by the end of the year Israeli forces had been withdrawn from the West Bank’s populated areas with the exception of Hebron (where redeployment was completed in early 1997). On January 20, 1996, elections to the Palestinian Council were held, and shortly afterward both the Israeli civil administration and military government were dissolved.
The geographical scope of these Israeli withdrawals was relatively limited; the surrendered land amounted to some 30 percent of the West Bank’s overall territory. But its impact on the Palestinian population was nothing short of revolutionary. At one fell swoop, Israel relinquished control over virtually all of the West Bank’s 1.4 million residents. Since that time, nearly 60 percent of them-in the Jericho area and in the seven main cities of Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm, Qalqilya, Ramallah, Bethlehem, and Hebron-have lived entirely under Palestinian jurisdiction. Another 40 percent live in towns, villages, refugee camps, and hamlets where the Palestinian Authority exercises civil authority but, in line with the Oslo accords, Israel has maintained “overriding responsibility for security.” Some two percent of the West Bank’s population-tens of thousands of Palestinians-continue to live in areas where Israel has complete control, but even there the Palestinian Authority maintains “functional jurisdiction.”
In short, since the beginning of 1996, and certainly following the completion of the redeployment from Hebron in January 1997, 99 percent of the Palestinian population of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have not lived under Israeli occupation. By no conceivable stretching of words can the anti-Israel violence emanating from the territories during these years be made to qualify as resistance to foreign occupation. In these years there has been no such occupation.
If the stubborn persistence of Palestinian terrorism is not attributable to the continuing occupation, many of the worst outrages against Israeli civilians likewise occurred-contrary to the mantra of Palestinian spokesmen and their apologists-not at moments of breakdown in the Oslo “peace process” but at its high points, when the prospect of Israeli withdrawal appeared brightest and most imminent.
Suicide bombings, for example, were introduced in the atmosphere of euphoria only a few months after the historic Rabin-Arafat handshake on the White House lawn: eight people were murdered in April 1994 while riding a bus in the town of Afula. Six months later, 21 Israelis were murdered on a bus in Tel Aviv. In the following year, five bombings took the lives of a further 38 Israelis. During the short-lived government of the dovish Shimon Peres (November 1995-May 1996), after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, 58 Israelis were murdered within the span of one week in three suicide bombings in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
Further disproving the standard view is the fact that terrorism was largely curtailed following Benjamin Netanyahu’s election in May 1996 and the consequent slowdown in the Oslo process. During Netanyahu’s three years in power, some 50 Israelis were murdered in terrorist attacks-a third of the casualty rate during the Rabin government and a sixth of the casualty rate during Peres’s term.
There was a material side to this downturn in terrorism as well. Between 1994 and 1996, the Rabin and Peres governments had imposed repeated closures on the territories in order to stem the tidal wave of terrorism in the wake of the Oslo accords. This had led to a steep drop in the Palestinian economy. With workers unable to get into Israel, unemployment rose sharply, reaching as high as 50 percent in Gaza. The movement of goods between Israel and the territories, as well as between the West Bank and Gaza, was seriously disrupted, slowing exports and discouraging potential private investment.
The economic situation in the territories began to improve during the term of the Netanyahu government, as the steep fall in terrorist attacks led to a corresponding decrease in closures. Real GNP per capita grew by 3.5 percent in 1997, 7.7 percent in 1998, and 3.5 percent in 1999, while unemployment was more than halved. By the beginning of 1999, according to the World Bank, the West Bank and Gaza had fully recovered from the economic decline of the previous years.
Then, in still another turnabout, came Ehud Barak, who in the course of a dizzying six months in late 2000 and early 2001 offered Yasir Arafat a complete end to the Israeli presence, ceding virtually the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip to the nascent Palestinian state together with some Israeli territory, and making breathtaking concessions over Israel’s capital city of Jerusalem. To this, however, Arafat’s response was war. Since its launch, the Palestinian campaign has inflicted thousands of brutal attacks on Israeli civilians-suicide bombings, drive-by shootings, stabbings, lynching, stonings — murdering more than 500 and wounding some 4,000.
In the entire two decades of Israeli occupation preceding the Oslo accords, some 400 Israelis were murdered; since the conclusion of that “peace” agreement, twice as many have lost their lives in terrorist attacks. If the occupation was the cause of terrorism, why was terrorism sparse during the years of actual occupation, why did it increase dramatically with the prospect of the end of the occupation, and why did it escalate into open war upon Israel’s most far-reaching concessions ever? To the contrary, one might argue with far greater plausibility that the absence of occupation-that is, the withdrawal of close Israeli surveillance-is precisely what facilitated the launching of the terrorist war in the first place.
There are limits to Israel’s ability to transform a virulent enemy into a peace partner, and those limits have long since been reached. To borrow from Baruch Spinoza, peace is not the absence of war but rather a state of mind: a disposition to benevolence, confidence, and justice. From the birth of the Zionist movement until today, that disposition has remained conspicuously absent from the mind of the Palestinian leadership.
It is not the 1967 occupation that led to the Palestinians’ rejection of peaceful coexistence and their pursuit of violence. Palestinian terrorism started well before 1967, and continued-and intensified-after the occupation ended in all but name. Rather, what is at fault is the perduring (sic) Arab view that the creation of the Jewish state was itself an original act of “inhuman occupation” with which compromise of any final kind is beyond the realm of the possible. Until that disposition changes, which is to say until a different leadership arises, the idea of peace in the context of the Arab Middle East will continue to mean little more than the continuation of war by other means.
Efraim Karsh is a professor of Middle East and Mediterranean Studies at King’s College London, and editor of the Middle East Quarterly published by the Middle East Forum. This article was published in the 114 No. 1 July-August 2002 issue of Commentary Magazine (www.commentary.com). The present reprint is taken from the Aish.com reprinting of August 2002, which is archived at http://www.aish.com/jw/me/48898917.html
SlantRight Editor: Here are some excerpts from the Think-Israel homepage. I am not sure how often Think-Israel updates its homepage so I am posting some of the info here for posterity.
We are told that there is a difference between extremist Islam and peaceloving normal Islam.
Judging by their behavior, Muslims are anti-West, anti-Democracy, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, anti-Buddhist, and anti-Hindu. Muslims are involved in 25 of some 30 conflicts going on in the world: in Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cyprus, East Timor, India, Indonesia (2 provinces), Kashmir, Kazakastan, Kosovo, Kurdistan, Macedonia, the Middle East, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, Russia-Chechnya, Tajikistan, Thailand, Uganda and Uzbekistan.
Doesn’t this mean that extremist Islam is the norm and normal Islam is extremely rare?
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.
“For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa. While as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.” (PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, March 31, 1977, interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw.) The Palestinian leadership, including Ahmed Shukar and Yasir Arafat, has openly admitted Palestinian “peoplehood” is a fraud; Read This (PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, March 31, 1977, interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw).
“It should be remembered that in 1918, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were handed more than 5,000,000 square miles to divvy up and 99% was given to the Arabs to create countries that did not exist previously. Less than 1% was given as a Mandate for the re-establishment of a state for the Jews on both banks of the Jordan River. In 1921, to appease the Arabs once again, another three quarters of that less than 1% was given to a fictitious state called Trans-Jordan.” (Jack Berger, May 31, 2004.)
The total for all the 22 Arab League countries is 6,145,389 square miles (SM). By comparison, all 50 states of the United States have a total of 3,787,318 SM. Israel has 8,463 SM, about one-sixth of that of the State of Michigan. Iran, Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan are Muslim but not Arab and are not included.
World Arab population: 300 million; World Jewish population: 13.6 million; Israel’s Jewish population: 5.4 million. (Dr. Wilbert Simkovitz)
http://dehai.org/archives/dehai_news_archive/ apr04/0223.htmldehai.org/archives/ dehai_news_archive/apr04/0223.html [SlantRight Editor: I could not find a combination in which this link works. If you wish to play with it perhaps you can start HERE]
“… during the late 1940s, more than 40 million refuges around the world were resettled, except for one people. They [Palestinian arabs] remain defined as refugees, wallowing 60 years later in 59 UNRWA refugee camps, financed by $400 million contributed annually by nations of the world to nurture the promise of the “right of return” to Arab neighborhoods and Arab villages from 1948 that no longer exist.” (Noam Bedein, Jerusalem Post, January 6, 2009.)
Some 900,000 Jews left behind $300 billion in assets when they were forced to flee for their lives from the Arab countries in the 1940s. They hold deeds for five times Israel’s size. (Independent Media Centre, Winnipeg)
Re Israel’s irrevocable ownership of Israel, Golan, Samaria, Judea and Gaza: “Nothing that Israel’s legal system says can change the facts that: (1) the legal binding document is the Mandate of the League of Nations and (2) the obligations of the Mandate are valid in perpetuity.” (Professor Julius Stone)
“By 1920 the Ottoman Empire had exercised undisputed sovereignty over Palestine for 400 years. In Article 95 of the treaty of Sevres, that sovereignty was transferred to England in trust for a national homeland for the jews. The local Arabs had never exercised sovereignty over Palestine and so they lost nothing. Their rights were fully protected by a provisio in the grant: ‘…it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine…’ The proviso has been fully observed by the Israelis. Since 1950 the Arabs have built some 261 new settlements in Judea and Samaria — more than twice as many as the Jews, but you never hear of them. They fill them with Arabs from Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan and by the grace of God they become Palestinians. Allahu Akbar! The Arabs call Judea “the West Bank’ because they would look silly claiming that Jews are illegally living in Judea.” (Comment by Wallace Brand on Martin Peretz “Narrative Dissonance” The New Republic, July 1, 2009)
Read More Quotes Here
STEPS TO CARRY OUT THE MANDATE FOR PALESTINE
Allowing the Arabs and their European friends to set the agenda, Israel has pursued a useless peace policy, bending over backwards to persuade the Arabs to become genuine peace partners. It has brought them nothing but grief, ever more dead Israelis and more acts of terror against more of their citizens. The world hasn’t appreciated that Israel has jeopardized the safety of its own citizens to reduce harm to the Arabs. Instead, the world demands Israel do more “for peace” while asking nothing of the Arabs. How does Israel get back on the right track of making the safety of its own citizens its priority?
§ The first step is to understand that ALL of Mandated Palestine belongs to Israel and was authorized by the same international authority that gave the other 99.99% of the Middle East to the Arabs.
§ The second step is to recognize that the peace process is a scam to deprive Israel of its land. As Efraim Karsh points out, “Few subjects have been falsified so thoroughly as the recent history of the West Bank and Gaza.”
§ The third is to stop going down the wrong road and, as Caroline Glick recommends, change current Israeli policy. Israel needs to stop being an enabler that gives the Arabs immunity while they work to destroy Israel.
§ More and more Israelis are considering annexing Samaria and Judea officially and putting all of the Territories under Israeli law. See “On Reclaiming Jewish Land” here, including Hausman’s article, “Reclaim Jewish Land; Reject The Two-State Solution” here.
§ Others, Think-Israel included, believe annexation is insufficient. Israel will sooner or later be confronted by a choice that can be simply stated this way: Keep The Land And Expel The Arabs — OR — Keep The Arabs And Lose The Land. Phrased thus, the solution becomes obvious. Just as the Jews were forced from the Arab countries, it is time for the second phase of this population exchange, moving the local Arabs to some part of the vast land area controlled by the Arabs. This would be an upgrade. They would have more space while living in the same environment, life style and culture they are accustomed to having. It would allow them — and this includes all the Arab refugees now scattered in the different Arab countries — the ability to govern themselves. Or carry on their way of death, but only against each other. Their choice.
This set of papers lay out the first steps of a policy based on reality. At the very least, it protects the character of the Jewish state.
This is Additional Material on San Remo and Israel’s ownership of Mandated Palestine:
“The San Remo Mandate” here.
Interview with Howard Grief in Norway March 21, 2011 on “The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under international Law.”
Part 1 is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zkjC7tNOrI
Part 2 is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF4_hM8kbfc
Another set of videos interviewing Howard Grief are at:
Yoram Shifftan has written a series of articles on Israel’s ownership of Mandated Palestine by an irrevocable trust to the Jewish people. See e.g., here, here, and here. See also inter alia: Wallace Edward Brand, “Israeli Sovereignty over Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria,” here; “A Landmark Work” by William Mehlman here; Michael C. Duke, “Jerusalem: Our Redeemable Right” here; Ted Belman, “Summary Of Israel’s Legal Rights To Judea And Samaria,” here.
In the box above, google san remo, league of nations, irrevocable trust, mandated palestine, Israel’s legal right for a more complete selection of relevant articles on Think-Israel.