The Land of the Jews is NON-Discriminatory!


John R. Houk

© August 2, 2018

On July 19, 2018 the Israel Knesset (Israel’s form of Parliament/Congress) passed the Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State of the Jewish People. As an American this might be understood as an Amendment process with the force of constitutional law. In essence the law defines the Land of Israel as a Jewish State. A fact the Israeli government has maintained since the 1948 independence from the British Mandate for Palestine and the ensuing war to fight for a national existence against roughly six invading Arab armies intent on Israel’s destruction and the genocide of repatriated Jews determined to free their land from foreign control. A freedom desired by faithful Jews ever since the Jewish exile executed by the Roman Empire in the early 100s AD (Common Era [CE] to non-Christian and secularist academic world). This exile was termed the Jewish Diaspora for nearly 2,000 years.

 

Despite the idiocy of Leftist Multiculturalist and self-loathing Jewish Leftists who are screaming Apartheid racism, this Basic Law changes nothing to the legal Rights of non-Jewish Israeli citizens. I should add Jew-hating Muslims to the list of misinformed whiners spreading and listening to the propaganda.

 

Below are articles explaining the truth of how the Basic Law of Israel the Nation State of the Jewish People actually affects individual rights of ALL Israeli citizens. There is NOT even a hint of Apartheid racism making non-Jews second class discriminated people as Black people were in old South Africa, the Jim Crow laws of pre-Civil Rights USA or even as non-Muslims are treated TODAY in Muslim dominated nations!

 

JRH 8/2/18

Please Support NCCR

*************************

This Year in Jerusalem – explaining the new Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State

 

By Phyllis Singer 

August 2, 2018

The American Israelite

 

The following information from AICE (American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise) explains the new Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State. There has been much controversy about the new law, and I think this information from AICE helps to clarify it. Israel has no constitution; instead a series of Basic Laws determines the legal aspects of the country.

 

On July 19, 2018, Israel adopted a new Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State of the Jewish People. The law provoked controversy inside and outside of Israel. After the vote, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said:

 

“This is a defining moment in the annals of Zionism and in the history of the State of Israel. Today, 122 years after [Theodor] Herzl shared his vision, we have established into law the basic principles of our existence. Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people. A nation state that respects the individual rights of all its citizens and, in the Middle East, only Israel respects these rights. This is our state, the state of the Jews. In recent years there have been some who have attempted to cast doubt on this, and so to undercut the foundations of our existence and our rights. Today we etched in the stone of law: This is our state, this is our language, this is our anthem, and this is our flag (extracted from multiple news sources with slightly different translations).”

 

As Netanyahu said, this law codifies Israel’s status as the “national home of the Jewish people.” The law also declares Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, sets the Hebrew calendar as the state’s official calendar and confirms Shabbat and Jewish holidays as official days of rest while allowing non-Jews to determine their own rest days and holidays. It recognizes the current national flag as the official one, the menorah as the state’s symbol and “Hatikvah” as the national anthem. It also states that Israel will endeavor to ensure the safety of all Jews and “preserve the cultural, historical and religious legacy of the Jewish people among the Jewish diaspora.”

 

Some critics have suggested the law should have included the word equality. For example, Amir Fuchs, head of the Defending Democratic Values Program at the Israel Democracy Institute, said, “It is difficult to understand why the authors of this bill insist not to include this important value.” Supporters of the law counter the existing Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty defines Israel’s democratic character, but the new law was needed because Israel’s Jewish character was not embedded in constitutional law.

 

The law also enshrines the Zionist idea upon which the nation was founded, namely that Israel is a country established to fulfill the Jewish people’s “right to national self-determination.” Legal scholar Eugene Kontorovich notes that seven European states have similar “nationhood” constitutional provisions. … Furthermore, no nation grants a right to self-determination to a minority within its borders; otherwise the Basques in Spain and Kurds in Turkey or Iraq would have their own states. This clause is also a response to Israel’s detractors, such as advocates of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, who assert this right belongs to the Palestinians and not the Jewish people.

 

Much of the criticism of the law focused on the establishment of Hebrew as Israel’s sole official language. Formerly Arabic was also an official state language (as was English). Any alteration of a long-established status quo is jarring; however, the recognition of Hebrew is consistent with the policies of other countries which give official status only to the majority language. The previous recognition of Arabic was a remnant of the British Mandatory period and does not reflect today’s reality in which 80 [percent] of Israelis, including most Arabs, speak Hebrew. The law specifically states that it “does not change the status given to the Arabic language before the basic law was created” in any other way. Hence, Arabic speakers are no more discriminated against than minorities in more than 100 countries that have a single national language. …

 

Another clause that sparked controversy states that Israel will “encourage and promote” Jewish settlement around the country. The language was deliberately altered so as not to suggest this would lead to the creation of Jewish-only towns, however, some critics feared it would be interpreted as if that was the intention. Indeed, Israel’s enemies interpreted it that way, arguing the law promotes segregation.

 

David Hazony, executive director of the Israel Innovation Fund, noted that some critics have interpreted this clause as promoting Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. While that may be the political goal of some of its supporters, Hazony said the “word being translated as settlement is hityashvut, which to any Israeli ear refers more to the Galilee and the Negev and the history of building new Jewish communities a century ago across the country than it does to the West Bank.”

 

Kontorovich adds that this clause is consistent with the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which sought to “encourage … close settlement by Jews.” More important, he says it does not “prescribe or authorize any particular policies” unlike, for example, the state constitution of Hawaii, which Kontorovich notes “authorizes land policies to promote homesteading by ethnic Hawaiians, and provides preferential land policies for them.” Kontorovich adds that Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled that Arabs have a right to create residential communities in Israel that exclude Jews, but Jews do not have the same right to exclude Arabs.

 

One indication of the double standard applied to Israel is that no international uproar followed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ declaration that not “a single Israeli” would be permitted to live in a Palestinian state. …

 

The law did provoke negative reactions around the world and angered many non-Jews in Israel. This does not make it either undemocratic or discriminatory. Kontorovich explained:

 

“In reality, Israel’s Basic Law would not be out of place among the liberal democratic constitutions of Europe – which include similar provisions that have not aroused controversy. The law does not infringe on the individual rights of any Israeli citizen, including Arabs; nor does it create individual privileges. The illiberalism here lies with the law’s critics, who would deny the Jewish state the freedom to legislate like a normal country.”

 

In the case of the Nation State Law, members of Knesset voted by a 62-55 majority to approve the legislation. This is democracy in action. Still, like Americans, Israelis can challenge laws in court, and three Knesset members have already done so, one sign of the health of Israel’s democracy. … Another indication is the ability of Israelis to vote for new representatives who could revoke or alter the law if they can convince a majority of all Knesset members a change is warranted.

 

Even a critic of the law, IDI President Yohanan Plesner, admitted the practical impact of the bill was currently merely “symbolic and educational.” He said it “won’t have immediate concrete implications.” IDI vice president Yuval Shani added, “It is not a game changer and has very little problematic implications. … It won’t change how the country is run.”

 

[**Blog Editor: Source links added by blog Editor.]

++++++++++++++++++++

Excerpt of Times of Israel post: “Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People”

 

1 — Basic principles

A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.

B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.

C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

 

2 — The symbols of the state

A. The name of the state is “Israel.”

B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.

C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.

D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”

E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.

 

3 — The capital of the state

Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.

 

4 — Language

A. The state’s language is Hebrew.

B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.

C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.

 

5 — Ingathering of the exiles

The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles

 

6 — Connection to the Jewish people

A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.

B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.

C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.

 

7 — Jewish settlement

A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.

 

8 — Official calendar

The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.

 

9 — Independence Day and memorial days

A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.

B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.

 

10 — Days of rest and sabbath

The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.

 

11 — Immutability

 

This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.

 

(From: Final text of Jewish nation-state law, approved by the Knesset early on July 19; By RAOUL WOOTLIFF; Times of Israel; 7/18/18 2:45 pm – Updated 7/19/18 3:27 am)

++++++++++++++++++++

Bogus Apartheid Claims Follow Passage of Israel Nation-State Law

 

By Ariel Behar

Aug 1, 2018 1:45 pm

Investigative Project on Terrorism

 

Anti-Israel groups in the United States are using a recently passed Israeli law to ramp up false claims of apartheid. The “nation-state” bill defines Israel as “the national home of the Jewish people” with Jerusalem as its capital.

 

“Israel arrogantly enshrines Jim Crow laws,” the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter at New York’s New School blasted on Facebook.

 

“Apartheid is a legal term, not an insult. It’s the most suitable label to describe Israel’s treatment of millions of Palestinians over the last seven decades,” read a graphic shared via Facebook by Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP).

 

SJP and JVP are known for their animosity towards Israel. The groups normalize hatepromote anti-Semitism, and previously hosted convicted-terrorist Rasmieh Odeh at a national conference in 2017.

 

“What this law really does is it enshrines racisms and discrimination and like you said apartheid into the foundational constitutional law of the state of Israel,” JVP Executive Director Rebecca Vilkomerson said in an interview with MSNBC’s Ayman Mohyeldin. “So that means the 20 percent of Israeli citizens who are not Jewish are being told, and the state is actually now obligated with this law to treat them unequally.”

 

“Formalizing de facto apartheid, the Israeli Knesset passes the racist nation-state law, which officially designates Palestinian citizens of Israel…along with all other Palestinians living in historic Palestine under Israeli sovereign power—as second-class citizens,” claimed Columbia University’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter.

 

Apartheid is a term used by anti-Israel activists and groups to smear and delegitimize Israel. And unlike apartheid South Africa, both Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis receive full voting rights, hold elected office, serve in the military and prominently on Israeli courts.

 

The nation-state bill passed the Knesset in a 62-55 vote. Israel’s Druze community voiced concern over the bill. But President Reuven Rivlin assured a delegation “that is the basis of the state we founded – the Zionist movement in full partnership with all who live here in this good land, which is good for all of us and where we can exist in equality without any problem.”

 

Still, the bill’s passage prompted Stanford University SJP member Hamzeh Daoud, a residential assistant, to threaten to “physically fight” pro-Israel students. He later changed the wording in his Facebook post from “physically” to “intellectually” and noted that “I edited this post because I realize intellectually beating Zionists is the only way to go. Physical fighting is never an answer to when trying to prove people wrong.”

 

Both Daoud’s Facebook and Twitter accounts have been deactivated.

 

Most analyses conclude the law is more symbolic than substantial. It does nothing to change the rights of Israeli Arabs, although many are displeased at its recognition of Hebrew as the country’s official language, seeing it as downgrading Arabic.

 

People are free to criticize Israel and the bill. But it’s clear that groups like SJP and JVP will do anything to bash Israel and delegitimize its existence.

++++++++++++++++++

Understanding “Israel – the Nation State” Basic Law

 

By Mida

19 Av 5778 – July 31, 2018

Jewish Press

 

{Originally posted to the MIDA website}

 

Feelings are running high on the latest addition to Israel’s Basic Laws or “constitution on the installment plan”, but I would like to try and shed a bit more light on the subject and a little less heat.

 

The Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State of the Jewish People, passed by the Israeli Knesset this week, declares that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people and determines specific matters which demonstrate the Jewish character of the nation. These include the county’s official language, the national anthem, the national flag, the state emblem, as well as the calendar along with holidays and days of rest. This is normal and appears in law in many democracies.

 

The special situation of the Jewish diaspora means that it also takes notice of the State’s connection to Jews abroad as well as policies on immigration and settlement.

 

It is important to stress that the law offers no privileges of any kind, nor does it reserve any particular rights, for individual Jews. It certainly does not deny any rights or privileges to individual non-Jews. All Israelis, regardless of the religion they follow or ethnic background, continue to enjoy all the human and civil rights customarily accorded to citizens of free countries. Those rights have not been diminished in any way by the passing of this law.

 

This new law seeks to codify the rights laid down in a much older document. The Mandate for Palestine, the international legal instrument, recognized the national rights of the Jewish people in our ancient homeland. The text of the Mandate includes, by reference, the Balfour declaration. That document reads:

 

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

 

A few points arising from this text:

 

1. The only people recognized as having “national” rights in the Land of Israel are the Jews.

2. Non Jews in the Land of Israel are to enjoy protection of their civil and religious rights.

3. Jews throughout the Diaspora are to continue to enjoy the rights and political status of citizens of the countries they live in.

4. In addition, the Mandate also requires the facilitation of Jewish immigration and the close settlement by Jews on the land (Article 6).

 

The new law is clearly an application of the principles of the Mandate to the sovereign Jewish state:

 

1. It specifies how the state will express the national rights of the Jews.

2. It draws attention to the special role the State has to play in safeguarding the rights of Jews abroad.

3. It accepts the obligation of settling Jews on the Land as now falling on the Israeli state.

There are those who argue that the provisions of the Mandate and the Balfour declaration are irrelevant to the state created in Israel’s Declaration of Independence in 1948. It seems that the framers of Israel’s Declaration may have felt otherwise.

 

1. The Declaration references the recognition of Jewish national rights included in the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.

2. It also refers to UNGA Resolution 181. Specifically that it, “required the inhabitants of Eretz-Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation of that resolution”.

3. The Declaration implies (rather strongly) that this “requirement” was binding on the Jews.

4. Resolution 181 explicitly positions itself to be the culmination of the Mandate.

What links the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate, UNGA Resolution 181 and the Declaration of Independence is that they all draw their legitimacy from the actualization of the rights of the Jews. I would go as far as to say that the legitimacy of the State of Israel itself is dependent on it fulfilling the national rights of the Jews.

 

I am finding it hard to understand how anyone who accepts the Mandate and the Balfour declaration that is contained in it, could have a problem with any of these points.

 

Of course, there are those who have never accepted the Declaration nor the Mandate and I would expect them to oppose the law simply because they oppose Israel’s basic legitimacy. Unfortunately, many people who do recognize the legitimacy of Jewish national rights in the Land of Israel seem to be troubled by the law, something which I find puzzling.

 

It is clear that the law does not contain a clause explicitly guaranteeing the rights of non-Jews and I can understand why some might see that as presenting potential problems for the future. In terms of the here and now though, the only mention of non-Jews in the law is to guarantee that the new law will not damage the status that the Arabic language has enjoyed up till now, despite no longer being an official language of the state.

 

(Interesting point to note is that the English language was also one of the three official languages of the State of Israel and the new law offers no guarantees for its status, but for some reason I don’t see Anglos up in arms about that!)

 

Why is there no formal minority rights clause in the law? One might hypothesize dark ulterior motives, but I think that it is quite as plausible to suggest that equality is already so entrenched in Israeli jurisprudence, that there is no need for it.

 

This new law does not stand on its own, but is part of the entire group of Basic Laws, each of which is supposed to be a chapter in the eventual constitution. The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom along with The Basic Law: the Freedom of Occupation, lay out many (some would say too many!) individual rights and offers the necessary protection of the rights of individuals in Israel. Although all this is true, none of the Basic Laws explicitly addresses the issue of minority rights, i.e. of minority communities. Although Israeli Arabs are guaranteed the right to an Arabic language school system in which Arabic culture is taught, this promise is made only in “regular” legislation, not in any Basic Law.

 

Professor Moshe Koppel of Bar Ilan University has an interesting explanation which he presented in a Facebook post: “Since 1993, Israel’s Supreme Court has used the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom to rule on the constitutionality of a variety of statutes and government policies involving Israel’s Jewish character, including laws regarding allocation of JNF land, the primacy of Hebrew as Israel’s language, rights to residency and citizenship, draft deferments and stipends of yeshiva students, and commerce on Shabbat. In principle, these cases called for delicate balance between Israel’s democratic character and its Jewish character, but in fact no such balance was achieved, precisely because Israel’s Jewish character, unlike its democratic character, is not anchored in any basic law. The proposed law is intended to address this asymmetry and to encourage a more sophisticated legal discourse regarding the tension between universal and national considerations.”

 

Whether one feels that the rights of non-Jews in Israel are already afforded sufficient protection in law or not, the new law only defines Israel’s Jewish character. If someone feels that there is a gap there that needs to be filled, then they should campaign for a Basic Law that adds the protections that they think necessary. Doing so is more likely to build a consensus than seemingly attacking the Jewish nature of the Jewish state.

 

(David Olesker is the Founder and Director of the Jerusalem Center for Communication and Advocacy Training)

Mida is a news and intellectual daily magazine, which aims to present the public with information and opinions not common in the Israeli media.

____________________

The Land of the Jews is NON-Discriminatory!

John R. Houk

© August 2, 2018

___________________

This Year in Jerusalem – explaining the new Basic Law: Israel – The Nation State

 

The American Israelite Homepage

__________________

Final text of Jewish nation-state law, approved by the Knesset early on July 19

 

© 2018 THE TIMES OF ISRAEL, All Rights Reserved

 

About The Times of Israel

____________________

Bogus Apartheid Claims Follow Passage of Israel Nation-State Law

 

Investigative Project on Terrorism Homepage

 

About The Investigative Project on Terrorism

___________________

Understanding “Israel – the Nation State” Basic Law

 

© The Jewish Press 2018. All Rights Reserved. 

 

About The Jewish Press

 

Attaching Global Domination to Jews – Tragic Fallacy


John 4: 22; Romans 1: 16 NKJV:

 

22 You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews.

 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,[a] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

 

John R. Houk

© March 12, 2018

 

On 1/30/18 I cross posted Dr. Lively’s call for Christian Clergy of all Denominations to rise up and confront the American Left’s (Deep State) assault on President Trump’s to Make America Great Again. Dr. Lively brought the imagery of the Revolutionary War’s Black-Robed Regiment involvement of using the pulpit to support Liberty from British tyranny.

 

On the NCCR version of this cross post, my Christian Brother Jyrki made several comments that began as Christian thoughts but trending toward a bit more of Conspiracy Theory.

 

Jyrki quotes from a Texe Marrs post that lumps all Jews with Communists who desire the destruction of our U.S. Constitution and Christianity in general. And to emphasize the anti-Jew thoughts, Marrs names the evil Jews such as Zionists, Israel and (OH MY GOD) the entire Rothschilds banking family (Jewish family highly connected to international banking spanning nations and centuries).

 

(I’m not posting Jyrki’s comment here but you can read the 3/11/18 comment HERE. Below this point are my thoughts inspired by Jyrki. Jyrki is a good guy, so I hope my disagreement with the concept of the Jews wanting to rule world doesn’t irritate him too much.)

 

I’ve always had a problem with people (especially Christians) that group the entirety of Jews as a group of evil because Left Wing people with a Jewish heritage gravitate toward New World Order godless Marxist totalitarianism. The reality is Jews are divided between Observant Jews (Orthodox, Conservative and probably even some Reform Jews) and Left-Wing Secularist Jews who too often reject the Jewish traditions of faith in God (an Observant Jew would write “G-d” out of reverent respect) and moral ethics involved in that faith.

 

Jyrki the thoughts you found above is supportive of the Un-Biblical Replacement Theology doctrine (a Christion Zionist perspective) and castigating all Jews because self-loathing godless Jews looking for Leftist utopianism largely along the Marxist paradigm.

 

Any association of Jewish Rabbis to global domination is simply counter-Judaic. Nine/Tenths of Observant Jews simply desire to worship without persecution which is the centrality of Zionism. The Jewish Left embraced Zionism because they want place to live where Jew-haters can’t persecute them as most recently (but not limited to) the Nazi Holocaust. Ergo, even secular Zionists do not desire global domination. Secular Zionists are merely people of Jewish heritage supportive of Israel – the Land of the Jews – to live out a counter-productive Leftist ideology.

 

Then there are those of Jewish heritage that have adopted a Marxist point of view. These guys are NOT Zionists. They are globalist Communists (Marx-Lenin-Stalin-Mao violent revolution or Gramsci cultural subversion) that are in a club that contains way more non-Jews than Jews. Communism has zero to do with Zionism if one defines Zionism as a movement for Jews to return to the land of their Biblical heritage. I have no doubt there a Jews that are Communists living Israel just as there are non-Jewish Communists (unfortunately) living in America or elsewhere.

 

The Communist (Marxist) goal is global revolution to destroy national heritages and transform/replace the old with a State acceptable transnational (aka globalist) culture devoid of religious morality. Any Communist who calls himself a Zionist is either self-deceived, outwardly deceptive or delusional.

 

JRH 3/12/18

Please Support NCCR

 

Further Reading:

 

Communism, Anti-Semitism & the Jews; By JERRY Z. MULLER; Commentary Magazine; 8/1/1988

 

The Gospel of Jerusalem – Last but not Least (First Christian Media Summit) Part 2


This is the second post on Ari Bussel’s experience at the first Christian Media Summit in Jerusalem October 15-18, 2017. Note though this is Ari’s third submission. I did not post the second submission. This first post can be read HERE.

 

JRH 10/30/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

The Gospel of Jerusalem – Last but not Least (First Christian Media Summit) Part 2 (on this blog)

 

By Ari Bussel

Sent 10/28/2017 10:55 AM

 

Dear Friends of Zion and Jerusalem,

 

Dear Colleagues in the Christian Media,

 

 

It is said, that we save the best for last.

 

Indeed, take a peek, and see some of us seated at the President’s welcoming room.

 

The staff person who granted us permission and stayed to supervise us explained, that the President sits on the right, the other head of state on the left.

 

So we took turns taking pictures, and ever since, I was trying to identify this very room in press pictures of visitors of dignitaries.

 

It turns out that Israel is a hub on the global map, and numerous world leaders arrive here regularly, possibly more than to any other destination around the world.  No wonder we were only granted an hour, and were requested to put our phones away (the President does not like it apparently).

 

None of the pictures from press releases of the last few days is from this room, which leads me to believe that “we have seen nothing yet,” and that there are numerous other receiving halls under different names and guises in the President’s Mansion.

 

One thing I would greatly urge the organizers for future summits is the following request:

 

If only the President had spent some time greeting us individually, the representatives of the various Christian media outlets from more than three dozen countries around the world.

 

The President could have taken a few minutes to pass through the center and side aisles and say individual “SHALOM” to us.  Here Frank who gave him a book, there Susan with her Children’s book – Why is Great-Grandma so Sad? (both books about the Holocaust).  And we all wanted a picture – a picture with the President of the Jewish State of Israel!

 

This would have been more memorable likely than the entire speech, that was disseminated to the foreign press about an hour after it took place.  The speech we could read, but to meet the Tenth President of the Jewish State of Israel is a different story altogether!

 

It is the personal touch – Israel saying “THANK YOU, DEAR FRIEND.

 

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO!

THANK YOU FOR WALKING IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF THE ALMIGHTY

THANK YOU FOR SPENDING THE TIME AND EFFORT TO COME HERE – MANY ON THEIR VERY FIRST VISIT

 

MAKE IT A HABIT – COME AGAIN AND AGAIN

WE VALUE YOUR SUPPORT

WE CHERISH YOUR FRIENDSHIP

 

WE MIGHT LOOK ROUGH ON THE OUTSIDE, VOCAL, OPINIONATED,

BUT OUR HEART IS THAT OF GOLD, WARM AND CARING

AND WE ARE “THE APPLE OF GOD’S EYE”

 

IT IS A GREAT RESPONSIBILITY

AND WE CANNOT DO IT ALONE

THUS WE COUNT AND DEPEND ON YOUR SUPPORT

IN BAD DAYS AND IN WORSE

IN DAYS OF JOY AND GREAT HAPPINESS

 

WE – THE SATURDAY AND SUNDAY PEOPLE –

ARE A FAMILY

FOR WE ALL SERVE THE SAME GOD THE ALMIGHTY,

YES, THE GOD OF ISRAEL

 

AND WHEN WE SOUND THE CRY OF “HEAR O ISRAEL”

IT IS DESIGNED TO THE EARS OF THE JEWS

OF OUR BRETHREN THE CHRISTIANS

AND TO THE EXCLUSIVE ATTENTION OF GOD THE ALMIGHTY

 

YOU HAVE DONE WELL

FAITHFUL SERVANTS OF THE LORD

CONTINUE

FOR THE WORK HAS ONLY BEGUN

AND FAITH WITHOUT ACTION, AS YOU KNOW, IS OF NO VALUE

 

PRAY

STAND IN UNISON

STAND TOGETHER

AS ONE

 

AND WE ARE HERE TO SAY

HALLELUJAH!

(YOU SEE, YOU ALL DO SPEAK HEBREW,

FOR HALLEJUJAH MEANS “PRAISE THE LORD!”)

 

SHALOM

COME BACK

AND REMEMBER – YOU ARE ALWAYS IN OUR HEARTS!

 

 

 

SHALOM, dear friends, from Zion Jerusalem!

 

 

Always,

Ari Bussel

bussel@me.com
USA +1 (310) 339-6686

 

[Blog Editor: Not all emailed are displayed due to repetitiveness. Sorry Ari.]

 

At the President’s Mansion, Jerusalem, Israel

 

Note the official symbol of the State of Israel – in the center the Menorah with seven lamps, on either side an olive branch and the word Israel underneath (chosen and entered into law in 1949)

Working on the Israeli-Syrian border, extending help to the real refugees and needy of the Syrian civil-war:

Israel’s First President, Chaim Weizmann

 

Israel’s Ninth President, Shimon Peres, a dreamer

 

Mike Evans and the Dutch contingency

 

“We knew President Navon”

 

Dreaming, thinking big and doing what no one has done before

Now looking into the future

For – as my father says – it is always the “repeat order,” not the initial placement of a product that counts!

“A Blessing, I will lead us in a blessing!”

 

“Cousins” from across the Pond – US and UK

 

The artworks adorning the walls are indeed “museum quality:”  They are on loan from the Israel Museum

Line up, please, quickly, get ready:

Note the nine-lamp Chanukah Menorah on the right, and compare with the Menorah on the State emblem (seven-lamp – as was inside the Temple and whose work was considered more important than the sacrifices)

 

Zechariah Chapter 4 זְכַרְיָה

 

א  וַיָּשָׁב, הַמַּלְאָךְ הַדֹּבֵר בִּי; וַיְעִירֵנִי, כְּאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-יֵעוֹר מִשְּׁנָתוֹ.

1 And the angel that spoke with me returned, and waked me, as a man that is wakened out of his sleep.

ב  וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי, מָה אַתָּה רֹאֶה; ויאמר (וָאֹמַר) רָאִיתִי וְהִנֵּה מְנוֹרַת זָהָב כֻּלָּהּ וְגֻלָּהּ עַל-רֹאשָׁהּ, וְשִׁבְעָה נֵרֹתֶיהָ עָלֶיהָ–שִׁבְעָה וְשִׁבְעָה מוּצָקוֹת, לַנֵּרוֹת אֲשֶׁר עַל-רֹאשָׁהּ.

2 And he said unto me: ‘What seest thou?’ And I said: ‘I have seen, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and its seven lamps thereon; there are seven pipes, yea, seven, to the lamps, which are upon the top thereof;

ג  וּשְׁנַיִם זֵיתִים, עָלֶיהָ:  אֶחָד מִימִין הַגֻּלָּה, וְאֶחָד עַל-שְׂמֹאלָהּ.

3 and two olive-trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.’

 

(to be continued … [Ari Bussel])

_______________

Blog Editor: Ari wrote “to be continued”. That is a maybe if the next email submission is as erudite as this one rather than repetitive. Just in case, you can email Ari and I am confident he will send you all the updates related to his experience at the First Christian Media Summit: bussel@me.com

 

Edited by John R. Houk

Text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Ari Bussel

 

Ari Bussel Bio via Saybrex International

 

Ari Bussel is Vice President of Operations at Saybrex International, a privately held family business specializing in the distribution of fine wines and spirits. He is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the company and has held various positions in the company since 1993.

 

Prior to joining Saybrex, Mr. Bussel served as First Lieutenant in the Center for Systems Analysis at General Headquarters of the Israel Defense Forces, where he led the implementation of the Logistics War Doctrine in the Computerized Wargame Program.

 

Mr. Bussel is involved in a variety of philanthropic and civic activities. Mr. Bussel completed the Team Beverly Hills Leadership Program and served on the Environmental Sustainability Topic Committee of the City of Beverly Hills. He was a member of the Steering Committees of former Beverly Hills Mayor MeraLee Goldman and the current Beverly Hills City Treasurer, the Hon. Eliot Finkel. Mr. Bussel also completed and participated in the Community Emergency Response Training Program of the City of Beverly Hills as well as the Crisis Response Team of the Maple Counseling Center.

 

Mr. Bussel was among the founding members and served on the boards of Gen. Shimon Erem’s Israel Christian Nexus, the Western Region of Friends of Israel Firefighters and the Israel Institute for Alternative Energy Advancement. He completed the Salvin Leadership Program of the Anti-Defamation League.

 

Mr. Bussel writes regularly. For the past decade, his weekly columns appeared in print in Israel Jewish Life, Shalom LA, Muslim World Today and Israeli Week. Mr. Bussel’s articles appear on numerous websites, including Canada Free Press, Free Republic, NewsBlaze, SlantRight and OpEdNews. He is a member of the Los Angeles Press Club.

 

Mr. Bussel received a Master of Science in Operations Research from Stanford  READ THE REST

 

Help Pseudo-Palestinians Emigrate


John R. Houk

© June 13, 2017

 

It has always been my opinion that a Two-State Solution would NEVER be a harbinger for peace between Israel and the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. A Palestinian State would merely be a launching ground for Islamic terrorist attacks against Israel. The result would be Israeli military incursions to punish an independent Palestine for allowing the terrorist launching pads. Or an independent Palestine might have the hutzpah claim the terrorism is military incursions for whatever fake/false reason given.

 

The only raison d’être for a Palestinian State existence would be to end Israel’s existence and to kill Jews. Because of Muslim animus against Israel, a One-State Solution is the best solution.

 

The best One-State Solution is to find a way to move Jew-hating Muslims out of any area that is a part of ancient Jewish heritage.

 

Dr. Martin Sherman has written a two-part essay touching on the logistics and feasibility of an ethical fashion to aid Jew-hating Muslims to emigrate to another Arab-Muslim nation. I found out about Dr. Sherman’s from the Facebook Group “No Palestinian State!” (If you are a Pro-Israel kind of person you should go there and request to be a member and add to the discussion.)

 

The title is “INTO THE FRAY: The Humanitarian Paradigm – Answering FAQs”. You can read the 6/2/17 Part One HERE. Part Two is cross posted below.

 

JRH 6/13/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

INTO THE FRAY: The Humanitarian Paradigm – Answering FAQs (Part 2)

 

Sequel to the dispelling of doubts regarding the feasibility – and morality – of largescale, financially incentivized emigration as the only non-kinetic approach for resolution of the Israel-Palestinian impasse.

 

By Dr. Martin Sherman

June 9, 2017 06:48

Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7

 

The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty. -attributed to Winston Churchill

 

Readers will recall that last week I began a two part response to FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) relating to the practical feasibility/moral acceptability of my proposed Humanitarian Paradigm (HP), which prescribes, among other measures, large-scale financially incentivized emigration of the Palestinian-Arabs, living across the pre-1967 lines as the only route to attain long-term survivability for Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

 

To recap briefly

 

In last week’s column, I addressed the question of the overall cost of the funded emigration project, and showed that, given the political will to implement it, it would be eminently affordable – even if Israel had to shoulder the burden alone. If other industrial nations could be induced to participate, the total cost would be an imperceptible percentage of their GDP.

 

I then went on to demonstrate that there is ample evidence indicating a wide-spread desire in large sections of the Palestinian-Arab population to emigrate permanently in search of more secure and prosperous live elsewhere. This point was underscored by a recent Haaretz article, describing how thousands of Gazans had fled their home to Greece, undertaking perilous risk to extricate themselves from the harrowing hardships imposed on them by the ill-conceived endeavor to foist statehood on the Palestinian-Arabs.  Significantly, according to the Haaretz report, none of them blamed Israel for their plight—but rather the ruling Hamas-regime, which, it will be recalled, was elected by popular vote to replace the rival Fatah faction, ousted because of its corruption and poor governance.

 

Finally, I dealt with the question of the prospective host nations, pointing out that the funded Palestinian-Arab émigrés would not arrive as an uncontrolled deluge of destitute humanity, but as an orderly regulated stream of relatively affluent immigrants spread over about a decade-and-a-half, whose absorption would entail significant capital inflows for the host nation’s economy.  Moreover, given the fact that, globally, migrants total almost a quarter billion, Palestinian-Arab migration of several hundred thousand a year would comprise a small fraction of one percent of the overall number—hardly an inconceivable prospect.

 

Following this short summary of previously addressed FAQs, we can now move on to tackle several additional ones.

FAQ 4: Won’t fear of fratricide deter recipients?

 

One of the most commonly raised reservations as to the practical applicability of the HP is that potential recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants would be deterred from accepting them because of threats of retribution from their kin-folk who allegedly would view such action as perfidious betrayal of the Palestinian-Arabs’ national aspirations.

 

In contending with this question, it is necessary to distinguish between two possible scenarios, in which such internecine intimidation will be either a phenomenon whose scope is (a) limited; or (b) wide-spread and pervasive.

 

Clearly, if the former is true, it is unlikely to have any significant inhibiting impact on the conduct of prospective recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants.

 

If, however, the assumption is that the latter is the case, several points need to be made:

– If this objection to the HP is to have any credence, its proponents must present evidence (as opposed to unproven supposition) that potential violent opponents of the HP program have the ability not only to inflict harm on prospective recipients (as opposed to issuing empty threats), but that they can sustain such ability over time.

– In this regard, it should be kept in mind that implementation of the HP entails the disarming, dismantling and disbanding —if need be, coercively—of the ruling Palestinian regime, and reinstating Israeli governance over all territory under Palestinian-Arab control.

Inhibiting internecine intimidation

 

The HP is hardly unique with regard to this latter point. All other proffered policy alternatives for the failed, foolhardy two-state formula entail such measures—either by explicit stipulation, or implicit inference—since preserving the current Palestinian regime intact would clearly preclude their implementation.  Indeed, they are even endorsed by some pundits who do not discount the eventual emergence of a Palestinian state, such as Middle East Forum president, Daniel Pipes.

 

Clearly, the dispersal of the central Palestinian governing body, together with the defanging of its armed organs and the deployment of Israeli forces in their stead, will greatly curtail (although not entirely eliminate) the scope for internecine intimidation and the capacity to dissuade potential recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants from availing themselves of the funds.

 

In addition, Israel should task its own formidable military and intelligence services to protect prospective recipients of these grants by identifying, intervening and thwarting attempts to intimidate those seeking to enhance their lives by extricating themselves from the control of the disastrously dysfunctional regime under which they live.

 

Moreover, the international community should be called upon to cooperate with and participate in this principled endeavor to prevent fratricidal elements within Palestinian society from depriving their brethren of the opportunity of better, safer lives. After all, violence against Palestinian-Arabs, who choose to reside within any given host nation, would comprise an intolerable violation of that country’s national sovereignty.

 

Appalling indictment of “Palestinian” society?

  

Of course invoking the specter of large-scale fratricide as an impediment to the acceptance of the HP is an appalling indictment of Palestinian-Arab society.

 

After all, the inescapable implication of such an objection to the HP’s practical applicability is that its acceptance by otherwise willing recipients, wishing to avail themselves of opportunity to seek security and prosperity elsewhere, can only be impeded by violent extortion of their kin-folk.

 

Accordingly, if the concern over large-scale fratricide is serious, it is in fact, at once, both the strongest argument in favor of the HP and against the establishment of a Palestinian state.  After all, two unavoidable conclusions necessarily flow from it: (a) any predicted reluctance to accept the relocation/rehabilitating grants would not be a reflection of the free will of Palestinian-Arabs, but rather a coerced outcome that came about despite the fact that it is not; (b) Similarly, the endeavor for a Palestinian state is not one that manifests any authentic desire of the “Palestinian people” but rather one imposed on them, despite the fact that it does not.

 

As a result, any Palestinian-Arab state established under the pervasive threat of lethal retribution against any dissenter will not be an expression of genuine national aspirations but of extortion and coercion of large segments of Palestinian-Arab society, who would otherwise opt for an alternative outcome.

 

In summation then, if the fear of fratricide can be shown to be a tangible threat, it should not be considered a reason to abandon the HP formula. Quite the opposite! It should be considered an unacceptable phenomenon to be resolutely suppressed –by both Israel and the international community—in order to permit the Palestinian-Arab public the freedom of choice to determine their future.

 

FAQ 5: Would funded emigration not be considered unethical “ethnic cleansing”?

I have addressed the question of the moral merits of the HP extensively elsewhere (see “Palestine”: Who Has Moral High Ground?), where I demonstrate that the HP blueprint will be the most humane of all options if it succeeds, and the least inhumane if it does not.

 

I shall therefore refrain from repeating much of the arguments presented previously and focus on one crucial issue: The comparative moral merits of the widely endorsed two-state paradigm (TSS) and those of my proposed Humanitarian Paradigm (HP).

 

Since there is very little doubt (or dispute) as to the domestic nature of any prospective Palestinian state, anyone seeking to disqualify the HP because of its alleged moral shortcomings must be forced to contend with the following question: Who has the moral high-ground?

 

(a) The TSS-proponents, who advocate establishing (yet another) homophobic, misogynistic Muslim-majority tyranny, whose hallmarks would be: gender discrimination, gay persecution, religious intolerance, and political oppression of dissidents? ; or

 

(b) The HP-proponents who advocate providing non-belligerent Palestinian individuals with the opportunity of building a better life for themselves elsewhere, out of harm’s way, free from the recurring cycles of death, destruction and destitution, brought down on them by the cruel, corrupt cliques that have led them astray for decades.

 

Furthermore, TSS advocates should be compelled to clarify why they consider it morally acceptable to offer financial inducements to Jews in Judea-Samaria to evacuate their homes to facilitate the establishment of said homophobic, misogynistic tyranny, which, almost certainly, will become a bastion for Islamist terror; yet they consider it morally reprehensible to offer financial inducements to Arabs in Judea-Samaria to evacuate their homes to prevent the establishment of such an entity?

 

FAQ 6: What about those who remain?

 

This is, of course, a serious question and a detailed response would depend on, among other things, the size of the residual Palestinian-Arab population who refuse any material compensation as an inducement to emigrate.

 

The acuteness of the problem would undoubtedly be a function of its scale. Clearly, the smaller this residual population, the less pressing the need will be to deal with it. For example it seems plausible that if, say, only a hundred thousand Palestinians remain, consideration may well be given to the possibility of offering them Israeli citizenship – subject to stringent security vetting and sworn acceptance of Jewish sovereignty as the sole legitimate source of authority in the land – without endangering the Jewish character of the country.

 

However, it should be remembered that, unlike the two-state approach which advocates perilous concessions, and the one-state prescription which calls for incorporating the Palestinian-Arabs resident across the pre-1967 lines into Israel’s permanent population, the HP does not involve any cataclysmic irreversible measures.

 

At the heart of the HP program is a comprehensive system of material inducements to foster Palestinian emigration, which includes generous incentives for leaving and harsh disincentives for staying. As detailed elsewhere, such incentives would entail substantial monetary grants, up to 100 years GDP per capita per family in Palestinian terms; while the latter entail phased withdrawal of services (including provision of water, electricity, fuel, port facilities and so on) that Israel currently provides to the Palestinian-Arabs across the pre-1967 lines.

 

Accordingly, should it be found that the initial proposed inducements are ineffective, the former can be made more enticing, and/or the latter more daunting, until the proffered package is acceptable.

 

Seen in this context, it is difficult to envisage that many non-belligerent Palestinian-Arabs would prefer to endure the rigors of discontinued provision of services rather than avail themselves of the generous relocation/rehabilitation funds—especially given the dispersal of the Palestinian regime as an alternative source of such services.

 

 FAQ 7 What if the same kind of offer were made to induce Jewish emigration?

 

In addressing this question several points should be borne in mind:

 

The offer would clearly not be made by an Israeli government. After all, the HP is intended as a measure to: (a) Ensure – not undermine – the survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews, and (b) Relieve the genuine humanitarian predicament of the Palestinian-Arabs—precipitated by the dysfunctional administration they have been subjected to since the 1993 Oslo process—not Jewish disgruntlement with the imperfect functioning of the Israeli government.

 

Of course, it would be impossible to prevent Arab elements from offering Jews financial inducement to emigrate from Israel, but in this regard it should be recalled that: (a) As a sovereign nation Israel can control the financial flows into the country and impede money from hostile sources reaching Israeli citizens, considerably complicating the transfer and receipt of funds. (b) Arab governments have been singularly reticent in providing large sums  to advance the “Palestinian cause” and there is little chance (or evidence) that they would advance the hundreds of billions required to finance large scale Jewish emigration;  (c) The overwhelming majority of Israelis enjoy living standards of an advanced post-industrial nation with a GDP per capita around 20 times higher than that in the Palestinian-administered territories; (d) Accordingly, it would be commensurately more difficult to tempt them to leave. Indeed, sums offered would have to be considerably higher to create a comparable incentive, running into millions rather than hundreds of thousands per family. (e) Moreover, a slew of recent polls show the large majority of Israelis are satisfied with their lives – thus the prospect of material incentives to induce large-scale emigration seems remote.

Urgent Zionist imperative.

 

The HP is the only Zionist-compliant policy prescription that can save Israel from the perilous dangers of the two-state formula and the specter of Lebanonization/Balkanization inherent in other proffered alternatives. Embarking on its implementation is a Zionist imperative that is both urgent and feasible.

_________________

Martin Sherman is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

Dr. Martin Sherman

The writer served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli Defense establishment, was ministerial adviser to Yitzhak Shamir’s government and lectured for 20 years at Tel Aviv University in Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies. He has a B.Sc. (Physics and Geology), MBA (Finance), and PhD in political science and international relations, was the first academic director of the Herzliya Conference and is the author of two books and numerous articles and policy papers on a wide range of political, diplomatic and security issues. He is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategicisrael.org).

 

 Born in South Africa, he has lived in Israel since 1971. More from the author

 

© Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved

 

Erroneous Vilification of Neocons & Zionists


John R. Houk

© April 28, 2017

 

Futuret left a comment to my post “Trump Profits, Deep State, Jews Run America & Neocons” with only a link: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/26/the-satanists-who-destroyed-the-middle-east-are-back-in-washington/

 

The link’s title: “The Satanists who destroyed the Middle East are back in Washington”. The article is a hit piece against Neocons and Israel. Why? Prominent Neocons got caught passing classified info to Israel pertaining to the USA’s plans toward Iran’s nuclear program under the Bush Administration.

 

Jonas E. Alexis caption for Wolfowitz: Satanist Paul Wolfowitz

 

I do not find too much to condemn since I am a Christian Zionist as far as motive goes. President Bush took zero action to hamper Iran nuke aspirations in his lame duck year before the end of his second term in Office. And hindsight tells us that President Obama did nothing either other than a fake deal that enabled Iran to weaponize nukes after a period of time long after Obama would be gone from the geopolitical scene.

 

The Neocon accused had pure motives yet broke the law and were prosecuted. The accused received light sentences obviously because there was little damage to American National Security. The largest damage was knowing how Bush was going to deal with Iran which was do NOTHING. And Israel still withheld military action against Iran similar to their actions against Saddam Hussein’s nuclear plant at Osirak.

 

Paul Wolfowitz was not even prosecuted and went on to lead the World Bank until lust busted him for nepotism toward his girlfriend. Wolfowitz resigned from the World Bank and again not prosecuted. (See HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.)

 

Being a Neocon and a Zionist Jew are not crimes, particularly when the politics is Conservative rather than Marxist. Sadly, many Jewish Zionists are secular and Marxist oriented abandoning the faith of their fathers. Abandoning the Jewish faith is what has troubled Jews since Moses first led the Hebrew tribes out of Egyptian captivity. Jews have paid a price for abandoning God every time. But that is a different blog post.

 

Vilifying Wolfowitz for being a Neocon and a pro-Israel Zionist smacks of the kind of Antisemitism that falsely accuses all Jews of world domination ala the fake Protocols of Zion.

 

It is a little rough to call Wolfowitz a Satanist just because of being a Neocon that put America first and desired to attack Iraq out of protecting U.S. National Interests.

 

Dems, Republicans, Conservatives & Leftists all read the America (& foreign) Intelligence reports that concluded crazy Saddam Hussein was developing nukes and chem weapons. The Intelligence proved exaggerated (not completely wrong).

 

After the Iraq war about 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium were secretly removed by the U.S. from Iraq and transported to Canada. Most Leftist pundits and fact checkers will tell you that the yellowcake had been sitting around in containers since before 1991 and the 1st Gulf War. Ergo, Saddam Hussein’s massive amount of yellowcake had not been weaponized.

 

The Leftist denial largely came forth because they didn’t want on their face over the anti-Bush slogan: “Bush lied, people died.”

 

Check this out the process to weaponize yellowcake:

 

The power of the atomic nucleus can be harnessed in one of two ways: Fusion, when two hydrogen atoms fuse together, and fission, when the nuclei of larger atoms are split open. Both release tremendous amounts of energy, and both are used in nuclear weapons. In nuclear energy plants, scientists rely on nuclear fission. Plants split open molecules of highly enriched Uranium. Uranium ore is found in the Earth’s crust and mined in Canada, Australia, Niger, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Namibia. In order to get it to become “highly enriched”, it has to be processed, and this is where complicated chemistry and physics come into play. First it’s made into “yellow cake” uranium through a number of chemical reactions, and then it’s centrifuged until the final fuel is at least 5 percent U235 and 95 percent U238. This highly radioactive combination of the two uranium isotopes is extruded into tiny ceramic pellets which are embedded into metal rods.

 

The rods are placed into the core of a nuclear reactor, which is where the fission takes place within a highly controlled containment structure. … (How Uranium Becomes Nuclear Fuel; By TRACE DOMINGUEZ; Seeker.com; 5/2/15)

 

Here is a simpler example of weaponizing yellowcake:

 

1 Uranium ore The mildly radioactive ore is mined from underground or open cast deposits. Iran has mines at Gchine on the Persian Gulf and at Saghand, in the middle of the country.

 

2 Yellowcake When ore comes out of the ground it can be less than 1% uranium oxide. Uranium oxide is leached out of the ore with strong acids or alkaline solutions and dried to ‘yellowcake’, which is more than 80% uranium oxide. Iran has mastered this process.

 

3 Conversion Yellowcake is processed into a gas, uranium hexafluoride. Iran’s conversion plant is at Isfahan.

 

4 Enrichment Uranium hexafluoride can be fed into centrifuges which separate out the most fissile uranium isotope U-235. Low enriched uranium for civilian reactors has a 3%-4% concentration of U-235. ‘Weapons-grade’ uranium is 90% enriched.

 

5 Fuel fabrication The uranium hexafluoride can be converted back to uranium oxide, which is pressed and baked into pellets. The pellets are put in metal rods, which are used in a reactor. Iran has yet to master this stage.

 

6 Reactor The fission of U-235 produces energy which heats water into steam that drives turbines. Iran has a research reactor in Tehran and an industrial-scale one at Bushehr.

 

7 Reprocessing Uranium and plutonium can be removed from the spent fuel, and reused. The plutonium can also be used to make weapons. (Weapons-grade uranium process explained; By Julian Borger; The Guardian; 12/5/10)

 

Saddam Hussein the means to weaponize nukes but appears not the patience for the complicated process to take place. The world can thank Israel for hampering that process. Israel bombed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear plant:

 

Thirty-five years after Operation Opera – the Israeli air attack that destroyed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor at Osirak, retired IAF officers and Mossad agents revealed hitherto unknown details of the operation on Friday.

 

In an exposé aired on Channel 10, Col. (Ret.) Ze’ev Raz, who led the June 7, 1981 raid, said that … (35 years on, IAF pilots recall daring mission to bomb Saddam’s nuke reactor; By TIMES OF ISRAEL STAFF; Times of Israel; 6/4/16 6:34 am)

 

The only way for Saddam Hussein to weaponize his yellowcake is with a little help from a potential ally – hmm … like Russia.

 

Speaking of Russia and Iraq. It was a proven fact that Saddam Hussein has a very active chemical weapons program.

 

Discover The Networks (DTN) has a detailed account of the mystery of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons ranging from the exaggerated intelligence reports that inspired President G.W. Bush to invade Iraq through about 2006 when actual chemical weapon cache was located in Iraq. Again, the Left has downplayed chemical weapons discovery as old or defective, but I do not completely buy it. Here are the last few paragraphs of the DTN report:

 

Eventually, Wurmser said, Sunni insurgent groups did gain access to the shells in 2005. “There were to my memory at least two attacks on our soldiers using chemical weapons-rigged shells as [improvised explosive devices]. Fortunately, they were ineffectively weaponized and soldiers were wounded but not killed.”

Wurmser, however, grew more frustrated over time. “After waiting a year—during which we asked that the source of the batches be traced and followed to the location where the shells were being retrieved—we continued to see the trickle, but then discovered nobody was making any effort to track the source to the location of retrieval,” he said. “Instead, we were continuing to try to buy up some of the stuff in the market.”

After the U.S. found thousands of the old chemical-weapons shells, Wurmser and others at one point argued that they had an obligation to declare the stocks of chemical weapons under the Chemical Weapons Convention and destroy them. The United States was, after all, the occupier of Iraq and had assumed the country’s sovereign responsibilities as a signatory to the convention.

“It was all for nothing; Rove wanted the issue buried,” Wurmser said. (WMD: PRE- AND POST-INVASION INTELLIGENCE; DTN)

 

At least pertaining to Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons, I find this Conspiracy Theory very credible:

 

Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein’s weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.

 

John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, “almost certainly” removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad.

 

“The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units,” Mr. Shaw said. “Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units.”

 

Mr. Shaw, who was in charge of cataloging the tons of conventional arms provided to Iraq by foreign suppliers, said he recently obtained reliable information on the arms-dispersal program from two European intelligence services that have detailed knowledge of the Russian-Iraqi weapons collaboration.

 

Most of Saddam’s most powerful arms were systematically separated from other arms like mortars, bombs and rockets, and sent to Syria and Lebanon, and possibly to Iran, he said.

 

The Russian involvement in helping disperse Saddam’s weapons, including some 380 tons of RDX and HMX, is still being investigated, Mr. Shaw said.

 

The RDX and HMX, which are used to manufacture high-explosive and nuclear weapons, are probably of Russian origin, he said.

 

Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita could not be reached for comment.

 

The disappearance of the material was reported in a letter Oct. 10 from the Iraqi government to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

 

 

A second defense official said documents on the Russian support to Iraq reveal that Saddam’s government paid the Kremlin for the special forces to provide security for Iraq’s Russian arms and to conduct counterintelligence activities designed to prevent U.S. and Western intelligence services from learning about the arms pipeline through Syria.

 

The Russian arms-removal program was initiated after Yevgeny Primakov, the former Russian intelligence chief, could not persuade Saddam to give in to U.S. and Western demands, this official said.

 

 

The Russian weapons were then sent out of the country to Syria, and possibly Lebanon in Russian trucks, Mr. Shaw said.

 

Mr. Shaw said he believes that the withdrawal of Russian-made weapons and explosives from Iraq was part of plan by Saddam to set up a “redoubt” in Syria that could be used as a base for launching pro-Saddam insurgency operations in Iraq.

 

The Russian units were dispatched beginning in January 2003 and by March had destroyed hundreds of pages of documents on Russian arms supplies to Iraq while dispersing arms to Syria, the second official said.

 

Besides their own weapons, the Russians were supplying Saddam with arms made in Ukraine, Belarus, Bulgaria and other Eastern European nations, he said.

 

“Whatever was not buried was put on lorries and sent to the Syrian border,” the defense official said.

 

Documents reviewed by the official included itineraries of military units involved in the truck shipments to Syria. The materials outlined in the documents included missile components, MiG jet parts, tank parts and chemicals used to make chemical weapons, the official said.

 

 

Also, an Arabic-language report obtained by U.S. intelligence disclosed the extent of Russian armaments. The 26-page report was written by Abdul Tawab Mullah al Huwaysh, Saddam’s minister of military industrialization, who was captured by U.S. forces May 2, 2003.

 

The Russian “spetsnaz” or special-operations forces were under the GRU military intelligence service and organized large commercial truck convoys for the weapons removal, the official said.

 

Regarding the explosives, the new Iraqi government reported that 194.7 metric tons of HMX, or high-melting-point explosive, and 141.2 metric tons of RDX, or rapid-detonation explosive, and 5.8 metric tons of PETN, or pentaerythritol tetranitrate, were missing.

 

The material is used in nuclear weapons and also in making military “plastic” high explosive.

 

… (Russia tied to Iraq’s missing arms; By The Washington Times; 10/28/04)

 

See also: “Are Syria’s Chemical Weapons Iraq’s Missing WMD? Obama’s Director of Intelligence Thought So.” (By MARK HEMINGWAY; Weekly Standard; 4/10/17 11:45 AM)

 

Under the failed Neocon paradigm of nation-building to transform a despotic nation into a nation of laws, in which citizens were able to choose between war or the prosperity of a Western economy, would benefit U.S. National Interests.

 

The reason the paradigm failed in Iraq (& for the most part Afghanistan), is Islam. Islamic theopolitical brainwashing has existed for several centuries. Islamic brainwashing washed the Christian ethics that dominated the Middle East prior to Islamic imperialism that began in the late 600s AD.

 

Such brainwashing would take another several centuries of deprogramming to eliminate the violent and intolerant social structure of Islam. Iraq was a learning experience. Only nations amenable to Western principles would ever successfully be molded (Germany & Japan).

 

Calling Neocons evil merely because nation-building among Muslim nations is quite erroneous! Equally erroneous is vilifying Neocons for being pro-Israel as if being a Conservative Zionist is evil.

 

I am not pleased with Zionist that have a Marxist slant. Those Zionists are leading Israel to destruction much like the American Left is leading America to destruction. The curse is Marxist-Communism and not Neoconservatism or Zionism.

 

JRH 4/28/17

Please Support NCCR

Introducing Israel – a Jewish State


US Stand & Bless Israel

A Christian Zionist Perspective

 

John R. Houk

© June 19, 2016

 

I am proud to proclaim I am a Christian Zionist. It is my whole hearted belief that the Land of Israel is the God-given land of the Jews. God declared this the land promised to the Twelve Hebrew Tribes named roughly after the sons of Jacob.

 

Jacob had his name changed in the period of time he was travelling with his wives and (at that time) eleven sons to throw himself on the mercy of his twin brother Esau from whom Jacob stole his birthright by deception. So Jacob was alone and for theological reasons I am not qualified to extemporize got into a wrestling match a “Man”. Note that the “M” is capitalized:

 

Genesis 32:22-30 NKJV

 

22 And he arose that night and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven sons, and crossed over the ford of Jabbok. 23 He took them, sent them over the brook, and sent over what he had.24 Then Jacob was left alone; and a Man wrestled with him until the breaking of day. 25 Now when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the socket of his hip; and the socket of Jacob’s hip was out of joint as He wrestled with him. 26 And He said, “Let Me go, for the day breaks.”

 

But he said, “I will not let You go unless You bless me!”

 

27 So He said to him, “What is your name?”

 

He said, “Jacob.”

 

28 And He said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel;[a Literally Prince with God]for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed.”

 

29 Then Jacob asked, saying, “Tell me Your name, I pray.”

 

And He said, “Why is it that you ask about My name?” And He blessed him there.

30 So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel:[b Literally Face of God] “For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”

 

God Almighty blessed Jacob as the father of a nation that would be named after him – Israel.

 

It is true that I am a devoted Christian rather than Jewish. That too often means Observant Jews do not trust my Christian motives. This is largely due to Antisemitic persecution conducted by Christians at the behest of Christian rulers and clergy willing to make the Jewish people a vilified scapegoat for Jesus’ death on the Cross. Even it is true to hold all Jews accountable due to the jealous actions of the Sanhedrin leadership of the day, then we should hold all Jews accountable that the Father raised His Son from death to life glorified in the same glory he possessed after emptying Himself of His Divine attributes at His incarnated birth in Mary. Incidentally the “Man” who wrestled with Jacob is thought by many Bible believing Christians to be the pre-incarnated Jesus.

 

I have shared these introductory thoughts because of an awesome article by Vic Rosenthal that I found at Israpundit which is operated by Ted Belman. The title is the best introduction to the Rosenthal essay: “I am a nationalist, Zionist, tribalist and hawk.”

 

The thing is while I was reading this essay I began to think the same definitions and details he was applying to himself, could also to me as well. Although I absolutely concur that Israel is for the Jews, the reasoning can apply to my thoughts about the USA. In the case of Zionist – I am a Christian Zionist. Rosenthal applies “tribalism” to protecting the borders of Israel as a Jewish State non-Jews (and Muslim haters of Jews and Israel in particular) and Israel culture is Jewish in faith, history and language. I apply tribalism to protect U.S. borders from immigrants hating the “out of many, one” melting pot that has made America a nation and to protect our culture based on the Christian faith (ALL Denominations), Western heritage and the English language.

 

JRH 6/19/16

Please Support NCCR

******************

I am a nationalist, Zionist, tribalist and hawk.

 

By Vic Rosenthal

June 19, 2016

Israpundit

 

Here are ten things I believe:

 

  • ‘Israel is the Jewish state’ has a concrete meaning: the owners of the land of Israel are the Jewish people, not all its citizens.

 

  • Arabs who live in Israel should have full civil rights, but they should understand that they are living in someone else’s homeland. It’s natural and correct that the flag, national anthem, primary language and other symbols are those of the Jewish people.

 

  • It is not a civil right to call for the destruction of the state or the murder of its people.

 

  • Israel should not welcome non-Jewish migrants.

 

  • Everyone in Israel should have freedom of religious worship and be able to visit their holy places. But the government of Israel should be sovereign over every inch of the land of Israel, in particular the Temple Mount.

 

  • Everyone should be able to follow their own religion or lack thereof without coercion. But the official religion of the state of Israel should be Judaism.

 

  • Israel and the Jewish people have an absolute right to defend themselves.

 

  • Collective guilt justifies collective punishment.

 

  • Nobody has the right to try to kill Jews or Israelis, even if their means are ineffective.

 

  • There should be a death penalty for murderous terrorism.

 

***

These ten propositions mark me as anti-democratic, even racist and fascist to many, doubtless including the two former Defense Ministers who recently made speeches decrying what they believe is decay in Israel’s collective morality and accusing the Netanyahu government of being responsible for it.

 

Their judgments would be even harsher if I told them that I understand and identify with the act of Sgt. Elor Azaria, who shot and killed a wounded Arab stabber who (despite Azaria’s legal defense) probably posed no danger to him or others, as well as the idea that no terrorist should survive his attempted act of terrorism.

 

It wouldn’t help if I admitted that I agree with the decision of Culture and Sport Minister Miri Regev to deny government funding to an Arab theater group that produced a play presenting a terrorist murderer in a positive light. Or that I think there needs to be a Basic Law (the Israeli equivalent of a constitutional amendment) that defines and protects the concept of a Jewish state, just as there is one for the idea of a democratic one. Or that I view ‘settlers’ as people with the same rights as any other citizens, including the right to not be kicked out of their homes.

 

Since the end of the Second World War, ‘enlightened’ people in the West have believed that nationalism was responsible for the horrors of the 20th century, and have created international institutions like the UN and the EU to counteract it. They believe further that tribalism, the belief that one ought to give a higher priority to the welfare of one’s own people than that of others, is racism and should always be condemned in the strongest terms. It is considered an overriding principle of universal morality that one is obligated to treat every other human equally, regardless of their relationship.

 

These principles are always justified by arguments about human rights and morality, although some cynics suggest that they were encouraged by the psychological warfare department of the Soviet KGB in order to weaken the enemies of the nationalistic and tribalist Russians.

 

Those who think they set the tone of moral discourse in Israel, like the former defense ministers and 99% of our journalists, writers, artists, lawyers, judges and academics are committed to this universalist morality.

 

There is nothing inherently more true about the universalist view than the tribalist one. Arguments for one or the other must depend on the expected outcomes. The Western argument against tribalism is that it leads to war and genocide, while universalism produces peace and cooperation.

 

But exactly the opposite is true in today’s world.

 

Let’s look at the European Union as an example of a universalist project. Because of its universalist stance toward the outside – liberal rules about granting asylum, for example – and the erasure of border controls inside it, European states are in the process being destroyed by uncontrolled hostile migration. Those that do not adopt a tribalist policy and close their borders will not survive.

 

This is because universalism is a form of unilateral moral disarmament. It is practical only if everyone practices it. And tribalist Muslims do not. So while the EU may be effective in preventing another war between France and Germany, it can’t protect its member states against subversion by those who spit on its moral principles.

 

Israel is another example. Surrounded by tribal societies which have been marinating in hate for the Jewish state for decades, it cannot afford to open its borders to Gaza. And it can’t accept the assurances of the PLO that a Palestinian state in highly strategic Judea and Samaria would be a peaceful neighbor.

 

But not only would it be counter to Israel’s survival to adopt universalist principles, it would violate the conception of a Jewish nation.

 

This idea of a people connected to a land – even when the land was ruled by others and Jews were a minority in it – has maintained the Jewish people as a nation since biblical times, a history as long or longer as any other distinct people on earth. Nothing is more fundamental to Judaism than the relationship between God, the Jewish people and the land of Israel.

 

I find it ironic that the same people who insist that “all religions must be respected” and who defend the aspirations of all kinds of ethnic groups – including ‘Palestinians’, who have one of the weakest claims of all to be considered a nation – object so strongly to Jewish nationalism.

 

I think that if there were to be a referendum today, the great majority of Israelis would agree with the ten propositions above.

 

Actually, we have such a referendum at least every four years. It is called an election, and I’m confident that the next one will result in a government that is even more nationalist, tribalistic and hawkish than the present one. And that will be a good, moral thing.

_____________________

Introducing Israel – a Jewish State

John R. Houk

© June 19, 2016

___________________

I am a nationalist, Zionist, tribalist and hawk.

 

© 2005-2016 by Ted Belman. Some Rights Reserved. All views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the site owner or the rest of its participants.

 

SUPPORT ISRAPUNDIT

 

Please send checks payable to Ted Belman, Hagdud Haivri #1, Jerusalem, 92344, ISRAEL

 

Or go to Israel Institute for Strategic Studies and use your credit card. Mention “Israpundit”.

 

Donators to IISS will get a US tax deductible receipt.

Join Ari Bussel on a Tour of Jerusalem, Israel


When the world around seems to be exploding, Israel is a safe haven. Let us work to protect and defend Israel as she is. Beautiful, although not perfect. Shy yet adventurous. Spontaneous yet thoughtful. Passionate and devoted. The only homeland of the Jewish people, in its ancient and eternal Zion Jerusalem! Ari Bussel

Ari Bussel gives us a tour of Jerusalem while attending the 37th Zionist Congress. You get an idea of the disgust for the terrorism committed by Arabs who call themselves Palestinians while noting there is a deep divide between the Jewish Leftist and Right delegates attending the Congress.

Ari sent a lot of photos to commemorate his down time from attending the Zionist Congress. Ari usually calls his email submissions Postcards from America Postcards from Israel, the postcard is big in this post. Also I added some background links embraced by brackets.

JRH 10/23/15

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Join Ari Bussel on a Tour of Jerusalem, Israel

By Ari Bussel

Sent: 10/22/2015 12:30 PM

Dear Friends,

Join me on a visit to Zion Jerusalem, where the 37th Zionist Congress of the World Zionist Organization [Jewish Virtual Library on WZO] is taking place. You need not even leave your seat, although the weather here in Israel is most inviting – unseasonably warm, even hot at times.

My friend Shalom, the publisher and editor of The Jewish Home LA, asked me to buy some pizzas to give the soldiers walking the streets of Jerusalem tasked to protect us from “innocent” terrorists. Little did Shalom know that many, oh so many, are women! They have shown their bravery time and again, at the most dangerous terrorist attacks. And Shalom is married and an Orthodox man!

I replied to Shalom, and I am taking this opportunity to tell you as well:

CONTINUE WHAT YOU ARE DOING, FOR YOU ARE THE SOLDIERS ON THE FRONT LINE TOO!

Disseminate the truth. Fight the lies. Stand up for Israel; so few do that. Continue what you are doing every day, for the future of Israel depends on it greatly.

But Shalom, as all Jewish people from time immemorial, is stubborn. Very stubborn indeed. He replied:

I was serious, if you see an opportunity to show a soldier [and/or soldiers] that us in America (and the world!) are thinking about them… please use it and I’ll paypal/put in your account/give you a check when you come back…

Agree?

Oh, the Jewish people, very stiff-necked and stubborn. Except, this is the type of “Stubbornness” I actually like and admire.

So let us go on our tour, for this is a different type of Postcard from Israel. It is one in which you join me on this day in Jerusalem.

Remember, it is warm, so drink plenty, bring your sun glasses and a hat. Wear light. You are up for a treat.

Sunny Day in Jerusalem

[Jerusalem’s Central Bus Station building; women soldiers patrolling across next to the Convention Center]

[Across from the main entrance of the Central Bus Station in Jerusalem, where a few days ago a terrorist attack took place, secular men putting Tfilin, women officers standing guard and the light rail keeps running on schedule (it is the target to stone throwing by some of the Arab residents who use it).]

 

The First Zionist Congress took place in Basel in 1897. It was followed each subsequent year until 1901, and then took place every other year. Except Herzls “Zionism” has nothing to do with today’s usage of the word. In fact, as we travel through the streets of Israel’s capital we are cognizant first and foremost we are in the united capital of Israel, a modern and free country of almost eight million citizens, and each can do as one wishes – worship whatever religion, walk freely without fear, argue, have an opinion, enjoy life.

We begin the day standing in line. Most delegates are foreign, so there is some semblance of a “line” (in the traditional definition, meaning one person standing after another); some but not much.

We are waiting for the security check for a keynote address by Prime Minister Netanyahu. It is slated to start at 10AM, and everyone is seated before the Prime Minister of Israel with his security entourage enters the hall.

The reception was lukewarm, somewhat surprising to me. After all, these are the delegates from countries around the world that need Israel, that one day – likely sooner – will see their communities seek refuge in this country.

The Prime Minister of the Jewish State. Once, this title alone made one’s heart race, made us stand taller, made us proud and excited. Apparently no longer. Disgust, loathing, criticism, complaints – these better characterize today’s “connection” between vast portions of the Diaspora to Israel; particular American Jewry’s.

Here is the text of the PM’s speech. He talks about ten lies Israel is fighting nowadays and refutes them one by one.

 

Most poignant and disturbing was the delegate (likely a Jew from the USA) who saw fit to should “LIAR!” at Netanyahu. It was the opening shot, for today’s “love” to Israel is a very strange love indeed.

Netanyahu told us of his grandfather emigrated to [British Mandate] Palestine in 1920, and the hatred toward the Jews when there was no Israel, no “Occupation” and no “Settlements.” But there were Jews.

Bloodshed happened then and continues to happen now. Thus, anyone believing that “two states for two people” can yield a lasting peace must be corrected. Our enemies will only be satisfied with one, and only one, Final Solution – a region and a world free of any Jews.

Not pleasant to the ears? Maybe. But this is the reality which Israel faces.

Benjamin Netanyahu – 37th Zionist Congress

 

Benjamin Netanyahu – 37th Zionist Congress

 

Benjamin Netanyahu – 37th Zionist Congress

Attending an address by the Prime Minister means a very tight security, and after his speech was over and he was whisked off to the next event on his calendar, and for the next two days will have to answer for his remarks about the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and his cooperation with Hitler. ***

[***Blog Editor: I can’t help it. I have to show you a 1942 photo of Grand Mufti Amin al Husseini meeting with Hitler in Berlin undoubtedly talking of the Final Solution for Jews]

Between this keynote address and a lunch to which I was invited to meet the delegates from the USA, I had two hours to spare. What does one do with this time? Go to the Western Wall of course!

From the Convention Center in Jerusalem (across from the Central Bus Station), one can walk straight to the Old City.

First, one would encounter a famous SHUK (market) Machane Yehuda (Judea Camp). Oh, just the name “Judea” immediately brings to mind “Judea and Samaria,” for we all forget that these “territories” are the place where the Tribe of Judea once called home, thus we cannot be “settlers” on our ancient homeland. Further, the word “Jew” (with as much spite as possible) or Jewish is derived from Judea. Lastly, the Tribe of Judea is the one to which King David belonged and from which the Messiah (“Son-of-David”) will come, “soon in these very days” we say.

[The Shuk, Machane Yehuda]

The Shuk

 

Machane Yehuda

The market was relatively empty, although I enjoyed the tourists buying fake sunglasses and pirated CDs. The merchant and the lady tourists did not speak any common language, but paper money exchanged hands and was apparently accepted and understood by both.

From there I hopped onto the tram, where I noticed a lot of people with guns or handguns. Visible. Ready. The Mayor of Jerusalem called any gun holder (a very special permit is required for it in Israel) to carry the gun with them at all times. [Blog Editor: Times of Israel on Mayor Nir Barkat and guns. I wonder if Israel has an American version of a Second Amendment guaranteeing right of self-protection.]

At City Hall one gets off, and the Old City is across the street. At each intersection, groups of security forces – soldiers, police officers and border police – stand together, teams there to protect the innocent passerby and themselves. Each day there is a terrorist attack. They act as the “guard of Jerusalem” and other major cities.

I walked alongside the outer walls of the Old City and entered into the Old City via Jaffa Gate, where two weeks earlier I vowed not to buy anything from the Arab shopkeepers. They – the Arabs of Israel – should stand up and proclaim that the terrorist attacks of the last three weeks must stop, but instead we hear either deafening silence or further incitement from them, particularly from their elected officials serving in the Israeli Parliament (Knesset). [Incitement example by Arab MK member]

Indeed, the Arabs of Israel are the main victims of the current “terror wave,” for they are about to lose all they have, and for the sake of what? The Arabs of Israel are much better off as Israeli citizens than anywhere else in the Arab world, and they know it. Except, them are tempted by the lure of Eve and the Apple, and soon they will be expelled from the Garden of Eden.

From Jaffa Gate I decided not to go via the main Arab walkway that leads eventually to the Jewish Quarter. It might be the shortest route, but in this covered walkway with stores on either side, I did not feel safe. The Arab shopkeepers are those who just a couple of weeks ago spat at a Jewish woman whose husband was stabbed to death, she had a knife in her shoulder, running, pleading for help for their young boy. One Arab shopkeeper beat her. Another said “may you die.” Yet another stood idly and watched, a Jewish family being stabbed to death, a reality TV. The scene reminded me the Europeans eighty years ago, at Strasses throughout Europe’s main capital cities, where Jews were stopped, beaten and humiliated to the cheers and enjoyment of the enlightened crowds.

[Two references to the incident: Arab Witnesses Laughed, Spat at Wounded Terror Victim (INN) and NIGHTMARE ON HA KOTEL STREET (The Zelman Partisans). Youtube video of surviving widow (Adelle Banita-Bennett) being visited by Benjamin Netanyahu:

VIDEO: Netanyahu Visits Wounded Mother and Son

Published by Arutz Sheva TV

Published on Oct 5, 2015]

So I turned toward the Tower of David and Christ Church across from it and walked via the Armenian Quarter. There, at least, I did not feel ill-at-ease. When I arrived at the Jewish Quarter, where dozens of young children were playing outside, free of any worries, in their homeland, I was elated.

I soon arrived at the steps overlooking the Temple Mount. Across from me a mountain of graves, Mount of Olives, from where one can look at the Temple Mount and the Golden Gate, the Gate of Mercy, which the Prophet Ezekiel describes (44:1-3):

1 Then he brought me back the way of the outer gate of the sanctuary, which looketh toward the east; and it was shut.

2 And the LORD said unto me: ‘This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, neither shall any man enter in by it, for the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it; therefore it shall be shut.

3 As for the prince, being a prince, he shall sit therein to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.’

[Blog Editor: Ari included the Hebrew version of the Scripture above]

א וישב אתי, דרך שער המקדש החיצון, הפנה, קדים; והוא, סגור.

ב ויאמר אלי יהוה, השער הזה סגור יהיה לא יפתח ואיש לא-יבא בו–כי יהוה אלהי-ישראל, בא בו; והיה, סגור.

ג את-הנשיא, נשיא הוא ישב-בו לאכול- (לאכל-) לחם–לפני יהוה; מדרך אולם השער יבוא, ומדרכו יצא.

My eyes wandered nearer to the Al Aqsa Mosque. To its left is the Western Wall and above it the Dome of the Rock. Leading from the Western Wall to the Temple Mount itself is a wooden bridge called Mughrabi. I asked a police officer if I may ascend, as Netanyahu said that the area is accessible during these hours, but the officer dismissed my question and said in no uncertain terms: NO. Likely it was my Middle Eastern look, or maybe my Israeli accent. Regardless, the “no” could not have been interpreted in any other way.

I went through the security check and was at the outskirts of the Western Wall plaza. I look with awe – the Western Wall is but a “window” to the actual western wall of the Temple Mount. Over the centuries one layer was built over another, and so the majority of the wall was covered, the ceiling of all these layers is what today is “ground level.”

[Outside the walls of the Old City, tourists are still here!]

[Walking down the stairs in the Jewish Quarter, toward the Temple Mount]

[Al Aqsa Mosque in the foreground, Mount Olives in the background]

[Al Aqsa Mosque; Israel is apparently working for years, decades, to topple it down….]

 

 

[Mughrabi Bridge – a connection between Jews and Muslims]

The Plaza was empty. The women’s section on the right was well attended, but in the main (men’s) section, there were hardly a handful of people.

I took a yarmulke and put it on my head, as does any man approaching the Western Wall. There, between its stones, were thousands of folded pieces of paper, wishes and hopes people have written and deposited. Personal communication between them and the Almighty above.

A religious Jew was praying, and I glanced at the top of the page, I found myself staring at Psalms 121:

1 A Song of Ascents. {N}

I will lift up mine eyes unto the mountains: from whence shall my help come?

2 My help cometh from the LORD, who made heaven and earth.

3 He will not suffer thy foot to be moved; He that keepeth thee will not slumber.

4 Behold, He that keepeth Israel doth neither slumber nor sleep.

5 The LORD is thy keeper; the LORD is thy shade upon thy right hand.

6 The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.

7 The LORD shall keep thee from all evil; He shall keep thy soul.

[Blog Editor: Ari included the Hebrew version of the Scripture above]

א שיר, למעלות:
אשא עיני, אל-ההרים– מאין, יבא עזרי.

ב עזרי, מעם יהוה– עשה, שמים וארץ.

ג אל-יתן למוט רגלך; אל-ינום, שמרך.

ד הנה לא-ינום, ולא יישן– שומר, ישראל.

ה יהוה שמרך; יהוה צלך, על-יד ימינך.

ו יומם, השמש לא-יככה; וירח בלילה.

ז יהוה, ישמרך מכל-רע: ישמר, את-נפשך.

ח יהוה, ישמר-צאתך ובואך– מעתה, ועד-עולם.

It was not a coincidence, I decided, and for the first time since I was Bar Mitzva’ed at this very place, I stopped at the booth of the “Chabad” people who usually do not let anyone without pestering him to put on Tfillin [The Free Dictionary Definition].

I complained: “You always stop me, and today, when there are not more than a handful of men in the plaza, you do not offer me to put Tfilin?!?” Putting Tfiling is a great Mitzvah and blessing, not only for the person putting them, but also for the one assisting.

Thus, after 36 years, I was again looking “ceremonial” at the Western Wall. Another reason for a Selfie (my first was in Bus #1, encircling the Old City, an hour after a terrorist attack, when I was the only person on the bus – such a rare occasion, it deserved a “selfie!”).

[The Western Wall plaza, women’s section on the left; UNESCO just determined it is an Islamic site – erasing Israel from the map, one step at a time, no connection between the Jewish people and their holiest site of thousands of years, long before Islam was birthed.]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For my return I decided on taking a bus, yes, Bus #1, and I still made it in time for the lunch.

At the lunch, I met delegates from the States. Unlike a group of Christians coming to Jerusalem, all praising the Almighty for this treat-of-a-lifetime and praying for the Peace of Jerusalem, when Jews gather for lunch, one can rest assured there will be trouble.

Indeed, we are a very strange people indeed. Everyone loves Israel to such a degree, that they cannot even agree on the most basic common denominator. These support BDS, others fight it. These try to force their own view of what Israel has to be, while those will defend Israel no-matter-what.

It was strange to see the heads of two organizations, ZOA [About] and Ameinu [Ameinu About Page – ZOA criticism of Ameinu], one on the right and one on the left, sitting at the same table and trying to be “civilized.”

[All smiles – for the camera only]

 

Slowly, the real feelings emerged to the surface, and it was clear there is no agreement, practically on anything. Entrust the future of the Jewish state in the hands of American Jewry, and you can rest assured there will not be an Israel in the Land of Israel within a very short period of time.

If I needed a proof that this “Zionist” Congress has nothing to do with “Zionism” of Benjamin Zeev Herzl [Jewish Virtual Library bio] a hundred and eighteen years ago, that was it.

Our hostess explained that the love of Israel is like a marriage of someone who fell in love with another – not the most exceptional in anything, looks, smarts, money, but still the subject of one’s love. Israel is not perfect, she said, but we are still in love. Well, I would not want her as a marriage counselor, and the marriage between Israel and American Jewry, post the euphoria of the 1967 Six Day War, has long passed the stage of divorce.

Lunch was followed by a panel discussion about BDS. Remember, there are elements within the American Jewish community actively pursuing Boycott, Divest and Sanction, while others are limiting their BDS support only toward whatever is “beyond the Green Line” (products like Soda Stream, Dead Sea Ahava beauty products, produce, wines, professors from Ariel University, etc.) and yet others who fight it with all their means.

BDS has become such a magic word, one everyone uses and so few understand [SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER understanding], that I had to attend the panel discussion.

There, too, I was told of a love story. One of the panelists, a young Israeli, told us about his friend, Tevye and one of his seven daughters that reached the age she was to be married. Interestingly, Shalom Aleichem started publishing this story in 1894 and continued throughout the years that the first 11 Zionists Congress meetings had convened.

Anyone who has grown up on Fiddler on the Roof recognizes immediately “Do You Love Me?” Here is an excerpt of the lyrics:

For twenty-five years, I’ve washed your clothes,

Cooked your meals, cleaned your house,

Given you children, milked the cow.

After twenty-five years, why talk about love right now?

Tevye: The first time I met you was on our wedding day. I was scared.

Golde: I was shy.

Tevye: I was nervous.

Golde: So was I.

Tevye: But my father and my father said we’d learn to love each other.

So, now I’m asking, Golde…

Tevye: Do you love me?

Golde: I’m your wife!

Tevye: I know. But do you love me?

Golde: Do I love him?

For twenty-five years, I’ve lived with him,

Fought with him, starved with him.

For twenty-five years, my bed is his.

If that’s not love, what is?

And I was almost caught in this honey trap, so fond I am of Fiddler on the Roof.

Jews, particularly those from America, love Israel so much, that their love threatens to choke this young (3,067 year old), modern country.

[A panel about BDS]

[So many empty rows – luckily other than the American delegates, most others cannot comprehend a Jew participating in any shade of BDS.]

Much like the lunch, where the participants just awaited a release valve, so here when the issue of “Settlements” and the “Occupation” came up, suddenly there was an awakening, hand clapping and renewed interest.

Just feed American Jews with these magic words, and their hearts will start pumping faster, their breathing will quicken and they will feel exhilarated – finally someone who understands their true love to Israel, love that forces them to do what is good for Israel, even if Israel does not think so. “One day,” they tell themselves, “Israel will thank us.”

Interestingly, there were very many empty seats during this panel discussion.

A keynote address. A short visit to the Wall. A lunch with American Jewish clergy and others. And a panel on BDS. For me, that was enough of “Zionism” for one day. I still need to write Ella Frumkin, whose husband Si Z”L was the co-leader (along with Zev Yaroslavsky) headed the fight from Los Angeles to “Let My People Go” at the height of the Soviet Union. I stood with Natan Sheransky [BIO — usually spelled “Sharansky” in American media] and remembered Si’s work and great friendship.

 

Natan Sheransky & Ari Bussel

Natan Sheransky & Ari Bussel

 

Hundred-year-old organizations often do not remember the reason for which they were formed in the first place.  They often look for things to do.  They are “too big to fail,” spending millions on salaries.  They have an amazing supporters’ network.  But what is the utility in their very existence?  Often negligible if any.

 

Will we survive without them?  Surely.  Will we be worse off?  Doubtfully.

 

The World Zionist Organization should cease to exist.  The “Zionist” Congress is a mockery of what Zionism was.  It is a cynical view of a dream once dreamt.  And those who call themselves ardent “Zionists” and do all in their power to bring Israel to her knees must be exposed, isolated and removed.

 

Zionism is alive and well.  It needs not the name of 118 years ago.  It is called the Modern State of Israel.  A miracle between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean (I will not quibble about the exact place one draws the line – to the east or the west).

 

When the world around seems to be exploding, Israel is a safe haven.  Let us work to protect and defend Israel as she is.  Beautiful, although not perfect.  Shy yet adventurous.  Spontaneous yet thoughtful.  Passionate and devoted.  The only homeland of the Jewish people, in its ancient and eternal Zion Jerusalem!

 

Always,

 

Ari Bussel

____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Except where Ari explains a photo, brackets enclosing links and text are by the Editor.

 

© Ari Bussel

Israel IS the Land of the Jews


Joshua 12 Hebrew Tribes

 

John R. Houk

© May 23, 2015

 

Not only am I a Christian Right Conservative I also a Christian Zionist. This means I am in the camp that stands with the Promise of God Almighty that the Land Promised to Abraham belongs to the Jews as descendants of Abraham through the descendant line of the Child of Promise – Isaac son of Abraham and Sarah.

 

Jewish Zionists (What is Zionism?ADL, About Zionism – Zionism-Israel & Zionism As JudaismRobert Wolfe-JewishMag.com) and Christian Zionists (CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS, PAST AND PRESENT – Think-Israel, CHRISTIAN ZIONISM 101 – ICEJ, What motivates Christian Zionists? – Jerusalem Post & Christian Zionism and Islamic Eschatology – John W. Swails III, Ph.D. ORU) are not united in matters of faith BUT the two are united in that Israel is the Land of the Jews promised by God Almighty.

 

Even among Pro-Israel advocates I am probably a bit controversial in my views. I reason controversy because I believe the borders of Israel should be closer to the Biblical scenario which would enlarge the Jewish State of Israel quite a bit further than the admirers of the fake-Palestinians who side with these Jew-hating Arabs.

 

In stating briefly my position of support for Israel I was quite gratified to read yesterday that the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely is advocating those under her charge to use the Torah (Jewish Bible) or as we Christians would call it – the Old Testament as a “reference point for the rights of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.” With that in mind allow me to share some Christian Zionist quotations of the Holy Bible:

 

Genesis

 

21 And the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and the Lord did for Sarah as He had spoken. 2 For Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him. 3 And Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him—whom Sarah bore to him—Isaac.

 

9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. 10 Therefore she said to Abraham, “Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac.”

 

12 But God said to Abraham, “Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called.

 

Galatians

 

22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the[a] two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—

 

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.”[a] 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free. (Genesis 21: 1-3, 9-10, 12; Galatians 4: 22-24, 28-31 NKJV)

 

After sharing God’s Word here is the United with Israel report on Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely.

 

JRH 5/23/15

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

Israel’s Deputy FM: Focus on Our God-Given Biblical Right to the Land of Israel!

Tzipi Hotovely. Israel Deputy FM

 

United With Israel

May 22, 2015

 

In a dramatic foreign policy development, Israel’s Deputy FM instructed Israeli envoys to invoke the Jews’ biblical right to the entire Land of Israel.

 

Israel’s newly appointed Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely told Israeli diplomats to use the Torah (Jewish bible) as a reference point for the rights of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.

 

In a video broadcast from Jerusalem, Hotovely addressed Israel’s foreign ministry envoys in over 100 foreign countries.

 

While the landmark speech was a bit shocking within Israel’s Foreign Ministry, there is strong support from many Israelis who believe that this approach has been long overdue.

 

“It is important to say that this land is ours, all of it is ours. We didn’t come here to apologize for this,” she said.

 

Hotovely is a strong proponent of complete Jewish sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, the biblical heartland of Israel.

 

“The international community deals with considerations of morality and justice. Facing this, we have to return to the basic truth of our right to this land,” Hotovely said.

 

She quoted the famous Jewish scholar Rashi (Rabbi ShlomoRabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi) Yitzchaki, circa 1040 CE) from his famous commentary to the biblical book of Genesis.

 

In one of Rashi’s most famous pieces, he explained that the bible begins with the creation of the world so that if foreign nations would ever accuse the Jews of stealing the Land of Israel, the Jews would have the following response.

 

‘Since the entire world belongs to God, only He can choose to whom the Land of Israel will be given. And God chose to give it to the Jewish people’.

 

Since billions of people around the world believe in the authenticity of the Hebrew bible, including Jews, Christians and Muslims, this approach may be Israel’s most effective tool to claim complete sovereignty in its ancient homeland.

 

By United with Israel staff with files from Israel National News

___________________________________

Israel IS the Land of the Jews

John R. Houk

© May 23, 2015

__________________________________

Israel’s Deputy FM: Focus on Our God-Given Biblical Right to the Land of Israel!

 

Do You Support Israel?

 

Want to do something great for Israel today? Make a donation to United with Israel, and help to educate and inspire millions around the world to support Israel too!

 

We are a grassroots movement that fosters unity and love for the People, Country and Land of Israel. Every day we publish stories about Israel to educate, inspire and empower Israel supporters around the world. We contribute to vital causes like building bomb shelters and helping the needy. Donations from true friends of Israel like you make this possible, so please show your support today!

 

CLICK HERE TO MAKE A DONATION

 

© United with Israel 2015

 

About United With Israel

 

United with Israel is a global, grassroots movement comprised of individuals who are deeply committed to the success and prosperity of Israel. Our primary mission is to build a massive network of pro-Israel activists and foster global unity with the People, Country and Land of Israel. In short, we seek to fight and win the battle of public opinion for Israel. We maximize the incredible power of social media to spread the truth about Israel to the entire world.

 

From incessant rocket attacks to threats of annihilation and fears of nuclear attack, Israel is alone in a big world of unfriendly nations. And for the first time, Israel is under intense pressure to divide Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Israel. This is a defining moment for the nation of Israel.

 

Now more than ever, Israel needs the support of its friends throughout the world. To bond with Israel by sharing its pain and lending a helping hand. To stand with Israel throughout these critical times. To affirm that throughout history, Israel has been a great blessing to the world and only those who blessed Israel were themselves blessed (Genesis 12:3). And those who READ THE REST

Responding Comment to ‘What Palestinians?’


Palestinians Never Existed

John R. Houk

© July 24, 2014

 

Two comments by raginman to the NCCR post of “What Palestinians?

 

July 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Palestinians aren’t Arab.

 

July 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Palestinians aren’t Arab. Genetic testing shows they’re an amalgamated people who are culturally Arab. They were there before the British Mandate, otherwise there would have been no existing city of Jerusalem prior to the Mandate. Your writing of the history makes it seem as though no one lived in the current land of Israel prior to that point. Clearly that is not the case.

 

I appreciate your statement about the ethnicity of the people that call themselves Palestinians; nonetheless these people consider themselves as Arab and as you pointed out their culture is Arabic. Hence I will continue to call them “Arabs who call themselves Palestinians”.

 

Raginman of course there was a majority Muslim population prior to the existence of the Jewish State, BUT the population of indigenous Muslims descended from generations of centuries was very small. Only as Western technology emptied swamps and properly made the land fit for agriculture then did the Muslim population grow larger. Note the Western technology was largely initiated by Jewish immigrants from Europe willing to do the hard work that the land looked profitable for Muslims to emigrate from other Muslim regions as a land of opportunity. Proximity and Islamic Supremacism made Muslim culturally Arab people immigrate faster to the Holy Land than the Jews were able to their own Homeland.

 

http://www.imninalu.net/myths-pals.htm

 

http://www.redstate.com/diary/imreontheissues/2014/07/19/demographics-disprove-fraudulent-palestinian-claims/

 

http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hireview/content.php?type=article&issue=spring01/&name=myth

 

Check out the above links. The last link is so relevant to your comment I’ll cross posting it.

 

JRH 7/24/14

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

The Myth of Jewish “Colonialism”: Demographics and Development in Palestine

 

By David Wollenberg

Spring 2001Issue 1

Harvard Israel Review

A Student Publication on Israeli History, Politics and History

 

One of the most powerful and widespread arguments against Zionism and the State of Israel has been the claim that Jewish settlement in Palestine led directly to the displacement and exploitation of the land’s long-established Arab population. In 1939, on the eve of the Holocaust and at the height of British attempts to divide the region into separate Arab and Jewish states, Jamal Husayni, spokesman for the effective government of Palestinian Arabs, forcefully raised this very argument against the Jewish national home:

 

Is it in any way just, that the Arabs, who have lived on this land uninterruptedly for 1300 years, and whose lives are rooted in its soil—should be dispossessed by force, should be pushed aside, and should be blackmailed to enable the Zionist Jews to fashion a Jewish National Home on this land? That’s the problem….1

 

This was also the claim made by five Arab states to justify war against the State of Israel in 1948, just one day after it had declared its independence. According to this view, Jews had been absent from the land of Israel for too long to claim their right to return. In their absence, another group of people had come to occupy the land, and thus the Zionist movement could succeed only at this people’s expense. The West, embarrassed by the horrors of the Holocaust, had founded the State of Israel to clear its conscience, and the Arab residents of Palestine were forced to pay the price. The creation of the Jewish State was thus an outrage, so the argument goes, because the very settlement of the land by Jews was illegitimate.

 

Yet this argument rests on an inaccurate description of the country’s history, namely, a mischaracterization of the demographics of Palestine before 1948. For a number of reasons, both political and environmental, the Arab population of Palestine had been in a constant state of flux for much of the region’s history. There was of course a small Arab population in Palestine that could trace its roots back for centuries. But overall, the Arab population, which had remained dormant for centuries, began to blossom only after the beginning of Jewish immigration and the subsequent improvements in economic conditions, infrastructure, and agricultural techniques. The idea of “uninterrupted settlement…rooted in its soil,” is thus inconsistent with history. It was put forward primarily in an attempt to delegitimize Jewish immigration.

 

This essay will explore the various reasons for the Arab population shifts over time, focusing mainly on the first half of the twentieth century. Such an examination demonstrates that Jewish settlement in Palestine did not amount to the sudden disruption that Husayni and others claim, since there was no continuous national history or uniform population to disrupt. It also suggests that Jewish settlement was in many ways beneficial to the land and all of its inhabitants. In this light, it is clear that the two main tenets of the myth of Jewish “colonialism”—that Zionism uprooted a long-established nation and led to its uniform exploitation—are ideologically motivated distortions.

 

Arab Demographics Prior to British Governance: Dramatic Underpopulation

 

From the period of the Crusades to the beginning of modern times, the population of Palestine remained at a near constant level.2This apparent stability is significant, as populations naturally tend to increase over time. It is estimated that there were 205,000 people living in Palestine in the mid 1500s.3By 1800, the population had only grown to 275,000, reflecting about a thousandth of a percent of average growth a year.4By 1890, still before any significant Jewish immigration, the population had made a slightly larger jump, to 532,000.5But even with this increase, the nineteenth century growth rate was still a small 0.7% per year.6By comparison, in the 1940s the Muslim growth rate in the Middle East was closer to 3.07%.7

 

A number of factors account for this dramatic underpopulation, one of which is environmental. Many people fled the area as early as the fourteenth century as a result of the Black Plague. Starting shortly thereafter, many areas became swamp-infested and malarial, especially in the northern valleys. There is much evidence to suggest that, by the mid-nineteenth century, the region had become nearly uninhabitable. Around this time, German Templars tried to settle the Kinrot Valley, where Jesus had lived, but were forced to leave due to the prevalence of malaria.8Jewish settlers in the 1880s attempted to inhabit the Hula valley, but in some places child mortality rates were nearly 100% because of disease.9The Talmud remarks, “If the Garden of Eden is in the Land of Israel, Beit-Shean is its gateway.”10But when the scholar H.B. Tristram visited the area in the 1860s, traveling in the footsteps of Jesus, he claimed, “We saw not a tree….It is scarcely conceivable how any human beings can inhabit such sites; but such is the contrast, nowhere more settling than here, between ancient civilization and modern degradation.”11 Mark Twain was disillusioned by his trip to the Holy Land. He wrote, “Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes…desolate and unlovely…it is dreamland.”12Even by 1931, after many early Zionist efforts to clear the land, only a third of the whole region was cultivable.13No doubt, the lack of fertile land and presence of disease contributed to the comparatively limited population growth.

 

The higher growth rate of the nineteenth century (relative to the previous rates) must be attributed to a different set of conditions, namely major demographic shifts stemming from emigration and immigration. In 1831, Muhammad Ali of Egypt invaded the region to obtain raw materials and a market for his country’s industrializing economy.14As a result of the violence, many fellaheen, or farmers, fled Palestine to neighboring regions. Yet these emigres were soon replaced by a new wave of farmers from Egypt seeking to escape their country’s military draft.15According to the French scholar M. Sabry, the Egyptian governor Ibrahim Pasha brought over six thousand people to settle empty stretches of land in Palestine.16Although his leadership brought a greater sense of law and order to the land than ever before, the conquest precipitated a half-century of intertribal warfare, especially among the Bedouin.17The British decided that this instability threatened their economic interests in the region and forced Ibrahim to retreat to Egypt.18The net result of this upheaval was a positive but minor population increase. It would not be until the end of the century that modernizing developments would cause major demographic changes.

 

British Control: Population Shifts and the Beginnings of Growth

 

With British control during the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries came greater material stability and economic growth. As a result of the construction of railroad lines that led to the sea, the population of Haifa tripled and that of Jaffa more than doubled from 1880 to 1910.19But while the population shifted toward these areas, the overall growth rates for the country stayed low. According to British investigations, there were 689,275 persons in Palestine in 1915, about 590,000 of whom were Arab.20 Given a population in 1890 of 532,000 (473,000 Arab), this still represents only a 0.8% per year growth rate.

 

Soon afterwards, during World War I, the Ottomans tried to muster troops from the region, prompting many of the upper classes to flee. It appears that the war prompted a massive flight, immediately followed by a huge influx. According to contemporary surveys, the Arab population declined by 35,000 during the years 1915 to 1919. While many Arabs may have fled to escape the draft, others were expelled by force. To defend against the British, the Ottomans, still nominally in control, expelled both Jews and Arabs from cities across the coast on the assumption that their nationalistic intentions could lead them to sympathize with the British invaders. This effort was massive: twenty-eight thousand Arabs were forced out of Gaza alone.21By 1922, however, just three years later, the Arab population had increased by 80,000 above the 1919 level.22After the War had ended and Britain had taken formal control of the area (with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire), Arab population rates recovered quickly and significantly. Many Arabs took advantage of the improved economic conditions that resulted from British administration; and by 1922, the population of Haifa—which had declined by 30% from 1915 to 1917 due to Ottoman expulsions23—had become greater than it was before the war.24 The Zionists, also eager to take advantage of this economic growth, had hoped that the British government, the country’s largest employer, would hire Jews in construction. But the British preferred cheaper foreign labor; and in the period leading up to 1922 they employed fifteen thousand foreigners (mostly from Egypt and Syria) and only five hundred Jews.25Despite this low employment rate, however, the Jewish population continued to grow through immigration. The increasing numbers of these two populations would soon lead to a significant clash.

 

Approaching 1948: Economic Growth and the Population Burst

 

After years of relative stagnation, the few decades leading up to 1948 saw significant growth in both Arab and Jewish populations. Had the Arab population remained at its pre-WWI growth rate (0.8%) after 1922, one would have expected a population of approximately 785,000 by 1947. But there were in fact between 1.2 and 1.3 million Arabs in all of Palestine by 1947.26What could have caused this sudden burst?

 

To investigate possible causes, it is important to examine where in the country the growth took place. Non-Jewish population growth rates were highest within modern-day sovereign Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip regions. These rates cannot be explained by higher birth rates alone.

 

One major factor accounting for the unexpected growth was the potential for upward mobility that existed in the western cities. The wages of western cities were more attractive, no doubt bringing many people from surrounding areas. Port cities also offered greater employment opportunities, which helps explain the fact that there was a dramatic influx into Haifa and Jaffa relative to cities like Beit-Shean and Jerusalem.

 

Another major reason for the population explosion was the revolution that took place in farming and thus in the ecosystem generally. Agriculture had been the main source of income of 90% of Muslims in 1931.29With the increase in Jewish immigration during this period, Arab farmers began to pressure the British to stop the Jewish influx, arguing that the land could not sustain any more inhabitants. The result was the Passfield White Paper of 1930, which claimed:

 

It can now be definitely stated that at the present time and with the present methods of Arab cultivation there remains no margin of land available for agricultural settlement by new immigrants, with the exception of such undeveloped land as the various Jewish agencies hold in reserve.30

 

Although this document would be repudiated only a year later, it reflects the widespread and strongly-held belief that the land’s resources could not be shared. Yet this belief was based on the assumption that the state of agriculture could not improve, an assumption that experience would soon prove false.

 

One major reason for this improvement was swamp drainage. The project, largely conceived and carried out by Jewish immigrants with some British help, was enormous in magnitude. It provided dramatic health benefits in addition to large increases in the amount of arable land.

 

Another development in farming took the form of improved agricultural techniques. Formerly, according to historian Kenneth Stein, “the cultivated land was not very fertile or sufficiently irrigated. The failure or inability to use modern agricultural techniques such as manuring and mechanization kept yields to a minimum. Crop rotation was rarely practiced.”32This would all change in a very short time.

 

Yet another reason for improvement was the growth of citriculture, the most profitable form of agriculture in the country.33From 1931 to 1937, land used for citriculture increased by almost 200%, with total citrus output rising 380%. During the same period, total wheat cultivation remained near constant, dropping about 4% in total area, but tripling in output. Arab agricultural techniques improved in other ways as well, resulting in increased production of produce, tobacco, watermelons, cattle, and fowl. With new farming techniques and more cultivable land, the naturally sustainable population increased exponentially.

 

Another Piece of the Puzzle: Property Ownership

 

One of the major obstacles faced by Jewish immigrants who tried to purchase land prior to 1948 was the unique system of property ownership established in much of the country. In 1932, 117,869 dunam of land was held by absentee landowners. In most cases, tenant farmers worked the land, creating a dilemma for land purchasers.34 Even after buying the land from the “real” owner, the tenant farmers would generally remain in place. In 1927, the British passed a law preventing the transfer of land without first securing new land for the tenant farmer or making a cash settlement.35Yet this had already been the policy of the Jewish Agency, which had explicitly sought to avoid controversy in its land purchases. The Shaw Commission reported:

 

We think that the Jewish Companies are not open to any criticism in respect of these transactions. In paying compensation, as they undoubtedly did, to many of the cultivators of land which they purchased in the Plain of Esdraelon [Jezreel Valley] those companies were making a payment which at the time of the transactions the law of Palestine did not require. Moreover, they were acting with the knowledge of the Government.36

 

Despite this careful attention to the tenant farmers’ reimbursement, Arab fellaheen often claimed that Jews had given them little or no compensation. In response, the British launched investigations into over 3000 claims, of which about 2500 were ultimately rejected.37For the 600 or so claims that were accepted, the Development Department was required to provide 60 dunam of irrigable land or a cash settlement that would presumably allow the farmer to move to a city.38 The immigration of Jews to Palestine was thus done both legally and ethically.

 

But the local Arab elite’s complaints about Jewish immigration were not about legality anyway. These leaders claimed that the presence of outsiders would destroy the Arab nature of the country, a claim that can still be heard among Palestinians and pro-Palestinian advocates today. Ironically, however, many of the strongest opponents of Jewish land purchases were also the people who profited most from them. A brief list of Arab leaders who sold land to Jews includes Fahmi el-Husayni, mayor of Gaza; Ragheb Nashashibi, mayor of Jerusalem and founder of the “National Defense Party”; Mussa el-‘Alami, Government Advocate of the Palestine Government and a member of the Arab Higher Committee; As’ad el-Shuqairi, father of Ahmed Shuqairi, the first chairman of the P.L.O.; and Jamal el-Husayni, who is quoted at the beginning of this essay.39 Of course, the Arab leadership attempted to suppress this information, but it was brought to public attention by Lewis French, the first director of the British Mandatory Government’s Department of Development.40The news of the Arab leadership’s hypocrisy eventually led to the collapse of the Arab Executive (the governing Arab body in the Mandate) in the early 1930s. It would not be until 1936 that another body of political leadership would come to exist, in the form of the Arab Higher Committee.41

 

Husayni’s claim of 1300 years of uninterrupted Arab presence in Palestine is clearly a convenient simplification. Any statements about the demographics of Palestine before 1948 must recognize the country’s dynamic history. The first half of the twentieth century was a period of sweeping changes for the land and all the people living on it—Arab and Jew. After remaining nearly stagnant for centuries, the population exploded in modern times due to improved infrastructure, agriculture, and immigration, both Jewish and Arab. As a result, from 1890 to 1947, in less than sixty years, the population grew from 532,000 to 1,845,560.42The Arab population of Palestine grew more from 1922 to 1947 than it had over the previous 400 years. But the population shift that would occur over the following three years, as a result of the U.N. partition plan and the Arab-Israeli war, would be so momentous that it almost makes this prior data seem irrelevant. Each side blames the other for the consequences of the war, including some who point to the war as proof of “Zionist aggression.” But even Benny Morris, the historian who argued that the Palestinian refugee problem was caused in part by Israeli military actions43points out that “the [refugee] problem was a direct consequence of the war that the Palestinians—and, in their wake, the surrounding Arab states—had launched.”44From the beginning, it was Arab intolerance of the Jewish presence that caused the widespread opposition to Israel, an intolerance that resulted in the war of 1948. Jews, of course, had not chosen arbitrarily to immigrate to this area of the world. Moreover, they did so legally and with positive effects. As evidenced by the massive growth in population, the improvement of agriculture, and increased wages, the claim against Jewish return to Palestine was not pragmatic but ideological. The idea of a Jewish State as such was, from the beginning, anathema to the Arabs living there, and they sought to discredit and defeat it by any means possible. It is in this context that the birth of the Arab-Israeli conflict must be considered.


David Wollenberg, Harvard Class of 2003, is from Short Hills, New Jersey.


Notes

1. Arieh Avneri, The Claim of Dispossession (Efal, Israel: Yad Tabenkin, 1982), p. 11.
2. Ibid, p. 12.
3. Ibid.
4. Including 246,000 Muslims and 22,000 Christians.
5. Including 432,000 Muslims and 57,000 Christians (total Arab population: 473,000). See Avneri, p.12.
6. Because only a total population statistic is available for 1800, and not a pure ‘Arab population’ statistic, this growth rate actually represents the total natural population increase. But given the overwhelming Arab majority at the time, it is a good approximation of the Arab growth statistic.
7. “A Survey of Palestine,” prepared in December 1945 and January 1946 for the Information of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, Vol. II p. 714, as cited in Avneri, p. 252.
8. Avneri, p. 42.
9. Ibid, p. 41.
10. Erub. 19a.
11. Avneri, pp. 43-44.
12. Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad, pp. 441-442.
13. Kenneth W. Stein, The Land Question in Palestine 1917-1939 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984), p. 4.
14. William L. Cleveland, A History of the Modern Middle East, p. 72.
15. Avneri, p. 13.
16. See Avneri p. 13.
17. Ibid, pp. 18-24.
18. Cleveland, p. 74.
19. Ibid, p. 27.
20. Ibid, p. 25.
21. Ibid, p. 28.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid, p. 30
25. Ibid.
26. Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem 1947-1949 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 8.
27. Notes compiled for U.N.S.C.O.P, pp. 12-13 (for data for December 31, 1946), as cited in Avneri, p. 255.
28. Avneri, p. 262.
29. Stein, p. 6.
30. Passfield White Paper, October 1930.
31. Avneri, p. 235.
32. Stein, p. 4.
33. Avneri, p. 259.
34. Stein, p. 179.
35. Avneri, p. 132
36. Ibid, p. 126.
37. Stein, p. 160.
38. Ibid, pp. 158-163.
39. Ibid, pp. 228-238.
40. Avneri, p. 233.
41. Ibid, p. 234.
42. Notes compiled for UNSCOP, p. 12, as cited in Avneri, p. 252.
43. Morris, p. 286.
44. Benny Morris, “Peace? No chance.” The Guardian (UK). February 21, 2002.

________________________________________

Responding Comment to ‘What Palestinians?’

John R. Houk

© July 24, 2014

______________________________________

The Myth of Jewish “Colonialism”: Demographics and Development in Palestine

 

Copyright © 2003 Harvard Israel Review. All Rights Reserved.

 

From the Editors

 

This issue of the Harvard Israel Review represents the hard work of many students over several months. The individuals who produced this issue share a common concern for the deteriorated political situation and abhorrent violence in the Middle East. They also share the hope that, one-day, Israel, living beside its neighbors in peace and security, will empower Jews around the world by creating communal self-reliance and protecting Jews from anti-Semitism.

 

The West once viewed the idea of the Jewish State with this same hope. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, when the world learned the extent of the horror visited upon the Jewish people, Jewish empowerment became a moral imperative to those in the West. World leaders and intelligentsia, especially in Europe and America, felt that Jewish self-reliance through the creation of a Jewish State was the only way to prevent another Holocaust.

 

Today, this hope is a reality and READ THE REST

 

I am Huge with Israel is the Land of the Jews


John R. Houk

© January 2012

Some might wonder the reasoning of a Christian Right Winger is so committed to the existence of Israel and Jews that internally and globally support the existence of a Jewish State. Then again as part of the Christian Right you might not wonder. In this day and age every Christian (authentic, Progressive or Emerging/Emergent) needs to search their conscience and contemplate their reasons for supporting or hating on Israel.

I am obviously a part of the Christian Right that wears the moniker of a Christian Zionist. Zionists lobbied heavily for the creation of a Jewish State and ultimately for that State to be in the homeland of the heritage that God provided to Jews (Hebrews) as a Promised Land. The British plugged into the Zionist movement during WWI in battling their enemies of Germany, Austro-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire (Turkey). In the case of the Jews that enemy that mattered was the Ottoman Empire which still held a multinational empire in the Middle East. Victory over the Ottoman’s meant that Europe controlled Middle Eastern land as victors in war. Essentially the British and the French took slices of the Middle East with the League of Nations validating that control under the idealism that a Mandatory System would give Middle Eastern people their own nation. Primarily the Middle Eastern people had not known personal sovereignty for centuries due to Ottoman rule. Indeed Middle Eastern Arabs rose up in revolt against the Ottomans under the dream of freedom and sovereignty.

Many Arabs became understandably nationalistic and dreamed of a Pan-Arab nation. Unfortunately for the Pan-Arabists the Brits and the French had no intention of allowing one huge Arab nation to exist in the Middle East. Hence the Mandatory system was utilized to play on the tribalistic thinking of Muslim Arabs and offered kingdoms to Sheiks; i.e. essentially to the Muslim families that were the most supportive of the British Army fighting the Ottomans in the Middle East. (It was mostly a British effort in the Middle East during WWI even though the French was given a Mandatory as well.) By playing on the greed for power Britain and France easily carved up the Middle East.

The British Mandate for Palestine’s original intention was for a Jewish State. The British bean to rethink their National Interest position when somebody realized that the Arabs – being good Muslims – were extremely hostile to a largely immigrant Jewish crowd that with the promise of leaving European persecution. So the British tried to slow down the Jewish promise for a return to their homeland to accommodate nationalistic Pan-Arabism.

Well that is the end of my incomplete thoughts on how modern Israel began to emerge.

The point is that Zionism prevailed and Israel came into existence. The irony of the 1948 survival to claim the independence of modern Israel is that a significant amount of Zionist Jews were Left leaning and not necessarily totally observant Jews. The one commonality between Israel’s Left and Right (with the Right largely being religious Jews) was to survive as a nation to avoid the extermination that Hitler’s Nazi Germany attempted to perpetuate on Jews that resulted in nearly SIX MILLION Jewish deaths.

Now let’s be clear that Israel is a Jewish State that also has Christians, Muslims and various Islamic offshoots such as the Druze syncretic religious population. Christians, Muslims and Muslim offshoots are completely free to practice their faith openly without threat of state sanctioned persecution. The drawback is that proselytization is not allowed in Israel.

For a Christian Right person such as me, evangelism is a preeminent part of being a Christian. So question is: Why are there evangelicals that are so supportive of the Jewish State of Israel? The answer is related to the term Christian Zionism.

Let’s look at some thoughts on Christian Zionism

Here is a Jewish perspective from the Jewish Virtual Library:

Christian Zionism can be defined as Christian support for the Zionist cause — the return of the Jewish people to its biblical homeland in Israel. It is a belief among some Christians that the return of Jews to Israel is in line with a biblical prophecy, and is necessary for Jesus to return to Earth as its king. These Christians are partly motivated by the writings of the Bible and the words of the prophets. However, they are also driven to support Israel because they wish to “repay the debt of gratitude to the Jewish people for providing Christ and the other fundamentals of their faith,” and to support a political ally, according to David Brog, author Standing With Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State.

Despite their support for Israel, many Jews however, are uncomfortable with Christian Zionists. This discomfort is fed by Christian anti-Semitism, Christian replacement theology, evangelical proselytizing, and disagreements over domestic and political issues.

Dispensationalist Christianity, an interpretive or narrative framework for understanding the overall flow of the Bible, teaches that Christianity did not replace Judaism, but that it restored lost elements of it. The dispensationalist view of the Bible is that the Old Testament is foreshadowing for what will occur in the New Testament and, at the end, Jesus returns to reign on Earth after an epic battle between good and evil. Israel plays a central role in the dispensationalist view of the end of the world. The establishment of Israel in 1948 was seen as a milestone to many dispensationalists on the path toward Jesus’ return. In their minds, now that the Jews again had regained their homeland, all Jews were able to return to Israel, just as had been prophesied in the Bible. As described in the Book of Revelation, there is an epic battle that will take place in Israel after it is reestablished — Armaggedon — in which it is prophesied that good will finally triumph over evil. However, in the process, two-thirds of the Jews in Israel die and the other third are converted to Christianity. Jesus then returns to Earth to rule for 1,000 years as king.

Although these Christians do hope for a Messianic age, the majority of them do not wish for the deaths of thousands of Jews during Armageddon. Dispensationalist Christians believe that the Jewish people, not Christians, are the ones who were promised Israel in the Bible. In their view, Christianity did not come into existence to replace Judaism, but to restore it. This view has surpassed replacement theology as the dominant form of Christian thought regarding Israel in America today. Jews who are suspicious of Christian Zionist motives are usually unaware that many Christian supporters of Israel have abandoned replacement theology.

Aside from anti-Semitism and Christian replacement theology, many Jews are wary of the fact that many evangelical Christians simply want to convert them to Christianity or speed up the Second Coming of Christ …

Christian Zionists say Jews have no reason to distrust their motives for supporting Israel because they do not believe they can speed up the Second Coming of Christ. In the Gospel of Matthew, it is written that Jesus said about his return, “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.”

Christian Zionists are also more conservative on Israel than many Jews. They favor Israel maintaining all of its settlements in the West Bank, and were opposed to the Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip. Some prominent Christian Zionists have been highly critical of Israeli government policy of giving over parts of Israel to the Palestinian people. Christian Zionists, like followers of the Israeli Right, believe that Israel should never cede any section of Israel to the Palestinians because Israel was given to the Jews by God. … (Read the entire JVL article)

It is important to understand that not all Jews are on board with Christian Zionism. The organized Christian Church has a long history of persecution against Jews. Jews are proud of their heritage whether Liberal or religious, have nearly no interest in listening to a proselytizing message from a Christian.

Part Two: Christian Zionism

 

In the previous segment we looked at the question “What is Zionism?” and simply defined it as the biblical promises and prophecies made by God to the Jewish patriarchs that their descendants would occupy the Promised Land, what the world today calls Palestine, forever. Today we are going to look at the question:

“What is Christian Zionism?”
You may never have heard of it before. Christian Zionism is a movement resulting from the Bible, mainly among Gentile Christians who share this interpretation and this vision of God being faithful to all His covenants; including the covenant He made with Abraham so long ago. We have been convinced by God to support this modern return, this latest and final return of the Jewish people to the Promised Land; by our prayers and fervent intercession and with our finances, actions and energies. (From webpage – Christian Zionism)

The above quote is from a very informative website.

I have got to post this article on Christian Zionism Defined by the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem which is re-posted at ZionismOnTheWeb.org.  This is a succinct explanation of Christian Zionism:

Christian Zionism Defined

By International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, 10/1/2006
Reproduced at
Zionism On The Web with permission from christian-zionism.org

Tens of thousands of churches, and literally tens of millions Christians in the USA have a committed belief in the importance of standing with Israel and blessing the Jewish people. The verse most often referred to as their biblical mandate is Genesis 12:3 in which God tells Abraham “I will bless those who bless you and I will curse those who curse you and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.”

Since the birth of the State of Israel in 1948 the theological error known as Replacement Theology has begun to decline and increasing is a theology of Christian Zionism that understands the importance of God’s everlasting covenant with Abraham and the nation he would birth.

However, just as the term “Zionism” has been turned into a negative word by Israel’s enemies, so “Christian Zionism” is under attack and often misrepresented in the media and in some public discourse. For this reason, the ICEJ’s articles and monographs defining and clarifying the beliefs of Christian supporters of Israel and placing their “love for Israel” within its proper biblical context are proving invaluable.

Christian Zionists

Zionism, [is] the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained. The term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum.” (Jewish Virtual Library).

If Zionism is the belief in the Jewish peoples right to return to their homeland, then a Christian Zionist should simply be defined as a Christian who supports the Jewish peoples right to return to their homeland. Under this broad and simple definition, many Christians would qualify no matter what their reasons are for this support. Just as Jews of all persuasions formed the Zionist movement then Christians of all persuasion can also fall within this broad definition of a Christian Zionist.

For this very reason, a myriad of answers may be given by a Christian when questioned about their support of Israel. Answers can include political, historical, and/or religious reasons. For example, see our article Why We Support Israel.

Theology of Christian Zionism

The actual theology of Christian Zionism, also known as Biblical Zionism, supports the right of the Jewish people to return to their homeland on scriptural grounds. The biblical foundation for Christian Zionism is found in Gods Covenant with Abraham. It was in this covenant that God chose Abraham to birth a nation through which He could redeem the world, and to do this He bequeathed them a land on which to exist as this chosen nation.

Christian Zionism is confirmed throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. The major and minor prophets consistently confirmed this national calling on Israel, promised her future restoration to the land after a period of exile, and spoke of her spiritual renewal and redemption bringing light to the world.

Christian Zionism differs with Replacement Theology which teaches that the special relationship that Israel had with her God in terms of her national destiny and her national homeland has been lost because of her rejection of Jesus as Messiah, and therefore the Church has become the new Israel. The Church has then inherited all the blessings promised to Israel but the judgments and curses still conveniently remain over the Jewish people.

Instead, Christian Zionism teaches from the scriptures that Gods covenant with Abraham is still valid today. There remains a national destiny over the Jewish people and her national homeland is her everlasting possession in fulfillment of Gods plans and purposes for her. The New Testament scriptures not only affirm the Abrahamic covenant, but they confirm the historical mission of Israel and that Israels gifts and calling are irrevocable.

Most Christian Zionists would agree that Israels reemergence on the worlds scene, in fulfillment of Gods promises to her, indicate that other biblically-predicted events will follow. However, Christian Zionism is not based on prophecy or end-time events. It is based on Gods promises and calling – which are irrevocable.  (The end of the article has several links to information on Christian Zionism)

Now here is my thing on being a Christian Zionist. If a Jewish person desires to know about Jesus I am more than willing to share the Gospel so that a Jewish person can KNOW Jesus – personally; however I believe evangelizing Jews is not a profitable action. The Jews – who are God’s Chosen People – will know Jesus by the Lord’s own Divine action. How that plays out, I do not have a clue.

Perhaps in the Last Days when Israel is in trouble of destruction without some kind supernatural help, the Lord Jesus Christ will reveal Himself as the King of the Jews of the line of David and as the Son of God.  Or perhaps at Christ’s return with his angels and Saints at the end of the Tribulation period when the Thousand Year Reign of King Jesus is established in which the remnant of living Gentiles and Jews who have not Believed will now know Jesus is King, the head of government of the true New World Order. Undoubtedly the power of the Lord’s return will create instant respect for the authority of Jesus to rule as the head of One World Government; however it will take a training period of One Thousand Years to allow a heart belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior.

It is after the 1000 year training period that Satan will be released from chains. Satan will work his temptation on the humans of planet earth and some will join Satan’s army. The end of the Book tells us Satan loses in that final battle and he is cast into the lake of fire with the anti-Christ and the False Prophet to exist in eternal burning with bodily consumption. Those humans committed to reject life in Christ before the Parousia and after will join Satan in the lake of fire.

By the time of the creation of the New Heavens and the New Earth with the New Jerusalem as the dwelling place of God’s presence all things will be new and there will be division of Jew and Gentile. The point being, from a Christian perspective, the Jews will discover their Messiah supernaturally and accept His Presence.

Now here is a little personal rumor history. When I was a teenager my Grandmother told me a Jewish ancestry existed in my heritage to go along with my German and English strains. Now she told me this in hush-hush terms as if she was embarrassed to share this with me. I thought it odd at the time that she spoke of my ancestors in such a hushed tone. At the time I could care less because my prime directive was to have fun and party in the small college town – Washington State – I grew up in.

As I grew older and became a Christian I thought on that day of my Grandmother’s hushed information Jewish blood in my veins. If it is true, I had a sense of pride rather than embarrassment. I understand my Grandmother’s close-to-the-vest attitude because she was a kid in the days in which a Jew was frowned upon even in America.

Whether my Jewish lineage is true or not, I could not say. I never pursued an ancestry chart, mostly because it has never been in my budget. I might try to get someone to work on that for me some day, but I don’t have time currently. At any rate the potential of a Jewish ancestry increases my position as a Christian Zionist.

JRH 1/1/12