Showing some spine, Congress blocks $200 million in aid to Palestinians

Showing some spine, Congress blocks $200 million in aid to
Palestinians

Rick Moran

Why reward Abbas for refusing to
negotiate and use the UN to end run the peace process?

The
Independent:

The United States Congress has
blocked nearly $200m in aid for the Palestinians, threatening projects such as
food aid, health care, and support for efforts to build a functioning
state.

The decision to delay the payments
runs counter to the wishes of the Obama administration and reflects
Congressional anger at Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s so far unrealised
pursuit of Fatah-Hamas reconciliation and statehood recognition at the UN.

The freezing of the funds, which were
to have been dispersed in the US fiscal year that ends today, is the most
tangible sign yet of the seriousness of Congressional leaders’ threats of an
even wider halt to funding in the coming year if Mr Abbas continues with his
actions at the UN. It was strongly condemned yesterday by the Palestinian
Authority.

There have been persistent demands in
Congress to withhold up to $600m – the average amount given by the US in
bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza every year since 2008 – in the
next financial year over the issue.

The administration remains, as does
Congress, opposed to the Palestinians’ application for full UN membership, which
Mr Abbas submitted last week. But it argues that assistance to the Palestinian
people is what a US official described as “an essential part of the US
commitment to a secure future and two-state solution for Palestinians”.

Nonsense. What will secure a future
two state solution is Hamas and Fatah recognizing Israel’s right to exist as a
Jewish state within secure borders. Accepting anything short of that would be
suicide for Israel. If the US Congress can pressure the Palestinians to
recognize reality and negotiate in good faith on those terms, they would have
advanced the peace process.

Also, the fact that the Palestinians
passionately hate America makes it a little odd that they would object to the
cut off. I would have thought they would be dancing in the streets – just like
they did after the towers fell on 9/11.

 

Don’t cry for me Palestine

Don’t cry for me Palestine

Ethel C. Fenig

The terrorists and their bigoted, smug enablers set sail from Turkey on a propaganda voyage to ostensibly deliver goods to the deprived residents of Gaza living under conditions Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton called

“unsustainable and unacceptable. Israel’s legitimate security needs must be met just as the Palestinians’ legitimate needs for sustained humanitarian assistance and regular access for reconstruction materials must also be assured.”

But is the situation “unsustainable and unacceptable”? Are the Gazans lacking “humanitarian assistance and regular access for reconstruction materials”? Let’s take a look at how the Gazans themselves are faring, courtesy of their own magazine, Palestine Today.

Just look at that bountiful supply of all kinds of healthy food, clothing, even electronic goodies and toys! Such fun in the sun.

Thanks to regular trade, deliveries of food and medicines from Israel and Egypt plus financial aid from a broke Europe and smuggling the objects of misguided international affection are doing very well–better than their imperialist saviors.

Meanwhile the humanitarian aid deprived Gazans fired several more of their endless supply of rockets into civilian areas, luckily causing no harm according to Reuters . The Israelis fired back, killing five terrorists. Does this meet Clinton’s standard of “legitimate security needs”? Condemnation of Israel for defending itself undoubtedly to follow.

So, will the next wave of the fascist flotilla change course to Kurdistan, Darfur or, for the truly courageous, North Korea? And will Turkey finally apologize to Armenia and somehow compensate its citizens for the Turk slaughter of Armenians nearly a century ago? Will the Palestinians share their good fortune and wealth with those truly deserving? Will the UN divert its attention from bashing Israel to the vital humanitarian issues of the day?

Because the true issue for all involved is demonizing Israel rather than aid the truly deserving, the answer is no. The Big Lie continues, devaluing all those who spout it.

hat tip: Phyllis Dreazin

Hillary Gives the Palestinians a Free Pass

Hillary Gives the Palestinians a Free Pass

Michael Margolies

Given Hillary Clinton’s attempted slap down of Prime Minister Netanyahu, here are some
serious questions that demand answers from the Secretary of State.
  • Why did Secretary Clinton lambaste Israel for announcing it will add 1600 housing units in the Jewish neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo in northeast Jerusalem, but have nothing to say about Palestinian plans to dedicate a town square in El-Bireh, (twin city to Ramallah) in the West Bank for a murderess named Dalal Mughrabi who led the infamous Coastal Attack Massacre 32 years ago, when Mugrhabi and her cohorts commandeered a civilian
    bus.*
  • Why did Secretary Clinton lecture PM Netanyahu for 43 minutes over Israel’s
    announcement about the new housing, a call figuratively heard around the world, but never utter one word publicly to Palestinian President Abbas about the “honor” being bestowed on a woman who was a part of a group that slaughtered 37 unarmed Israelis, men, women, and children, including Liat Gal-On, age 6, and Illan Hohman, age 3, Galit Ankwa, age 2, Moti Zit, age 9, and six other children, while wounding 73 other civilians.** An attack incidentally that remains the deadliest of all the terror attacks in Israel’s history.
  • Why was there a decision to delay the ceremony for the dedication of the town square in Dalal Mughrabi honor made? Was Adman Dumairi, a senior Palestinian security official who announced the ceremony was “only” delayed “for technical reasons” telling the truth, or was he just covering up what would be a sticky situation for not only the Palestinians, but for Secretary Clinton, and Vice President Biden as well?
  • Was the delay a decision that came from President Abbas so that Ms. Clinton and Vice President Biden wouldn’t be put in the embarrassing position of being forced to comment on a serious and ongoing breach of Palestinian pledges not to “honor […] individuals who commit or have committed acts of terrorism.”***
  • Does Secretary Clinton believe that the 2008 Foreign Operations Bill, Section 6578 B – C1, which states “None of the United States assistance under the West Bank and its aid program may be made available for the purpose of recognizing or honoring individuals who commit or have committed acts of terrorism,” should be honored? If she doesn’t believe this law should be honored, why not? Or does she think this law can and should be gotten around with a wink and a nod?
  • Does Secretary Clinton believe President Abbas that the Palestinian Authority has nothing to do with naming the town square in El-Bireh, since that was a separate Fatah decision?
  • Will Mrs. Clinton vigorously and publicly condemn the ceremony “when the technical reasons” are cleared up, and withhold any appropriate funding for this and other breaches of the 2008 Foreign Operations Bill, Section 6578 B – C1 if (or more likely when) the ceremony takes place?****
  • And finally, does Secretary Clinton think that it is as important for the Palestinians to build the confidence of the Israelis in the search for peace, as it is for the Israelis to build the confidence of the Palestinians? If so, what does she think the Palestinians can do to build that confidence and trust? And if there is anything she can think of how would she propose monitoring those things?

*The story of the Coastal Attack Massacre ran in March 12 issue of the Jerusalem
Post, and should have been known to Mrs. Clinton and her aides whether the story ran or not.      
**Some people may remember the one American who was also murdered, nature
photographer Gail Rubin, age 40, who was taking pictures near the highway when
approached by members of Ms. Mughrabi group, and shot to death.
***(2008 Foreign Operations Bill, Section 6578 B – C1.
****There were several other instances when the Palestinians had previously “honored” Mughrabi.  One was the Palestinian Authority sponsored football championship for kids, and another was for a summer camp named after her. 

Why Palestinians Riot Over Jewish Heritage Sites

Why Palestinians Riot Over Jewish Heritage Sites

Posted By Moshe Dann On March 3, 2010 @ 12:00 am In FrontPage | 9 Comments

Last week saw an upsurge in Palestinian riots and attacks [1] against Israeli vehicles in Gaza and the West Bank. What crime did Israel commit to invite the wave of violence? Israel’s government simply announced [2] that it intended to honor the country’s heritage by including the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem in a list of Israeli national “heritage” sites.

The violence-fueled Palestinian reaction may seem entirely disproportionate to Israel’s offense. But a look at the historical background shows that it is not without grim precedent.

For several decades, Palestinians have been attacking Jewish worshipers at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the Tomb of Rachel near Bethlehem, and the Tomb of Patriarchs and Matriarchs, Machpelah, in Hebron. After the Oslo and Hebron Agreements in the 1990’s, attacks intensified.

To protect visitors to Rachel’s Tomb, a fortified building was built around the tiny, 19th century building that had been built over the tomb. That wasn’t enough, since getting to the building from the closest Israeli checkpoint, a few hundred meters away, exposed Jews to sniper fire and bombs from adjacent buildings along the road. A new road was built, therefore, surrounded by high cement walls.

Palestinian riots against the rights of Jews to visit holy and historic sites are nothing new. In Jericho and Gaza,  ancient Jewish synagogues from the Talmudic period have been destroyed and are off limits to Jews.

In Shechem, Nablus , the site of Joseph’s Tomb, was attacked by Palestinian mobs in 2000, fire-bombed and destroyed. A wounded Israeli soldier inside bled to death while Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and his Defense Minister, Shaul Mofaz, negotiated with the Palestinian Authority.

On the Temple Mount , the Palestinians have been systematically destroying Jewish artifacts and antiquities from the Second Temple period.

Why is attacking and destroying Jewish heritage sites so popular among Palestinians?

Arabs claim their own heritage sites. Their claims go back about 1,300 years, when the Al-Aksa mosque and golden Dome of the Rock were built on the Temple Mount. These buildings exist today under Muslim authority (Wakf); Jews are prohibited by Israeli police from praying, carrying holy books, or ritual objects on the Temple Mount, in deference to Muslim restrictions.

During the Muslim occupation of Israel, with the exception of about two centuries of Christian Crusader occupation, various public buildings, palaces, mosques and bridges were built. Remains of Crusader fortresses are popular tourist sites, along with Nabatean (pagan) sites in the Negev, many of which are UNESCO-designated.

All are part of the history and heritage of the Land of Israel. Except for their buildings on the Temple Mount, however, Muslims do not consider the Land of Israel, Judea and Samaria, Palestine, sacred in any way. During most of the Muslim occupation, these sites were neglected because they held little significance. The main focus, for Muslims, was Mecca and Medina, in Saudi Arabia. Muslims do not make aliyah to Palestine.

Christians and Muslims venerated holy sites in the Land of Israel, Palestine, but after visiting, or conquering, they went home. Their heritage was local, tribal, and familial. The Land of Israel was not part of their heritage. It was a heritage for Jews.

This explains why Palestinians are opposed to the designation of Jewish heritage sites. If it is important to Jews, what does that mean for Muslims? Indeed, what is their heritage?

Heritage is a legacy that connects generations; it’s not politics, but history. For Palestinians, however, the two are entangled – which chokes off rationality.

It’s not the Muslim significance of historical sites that inspires Palestinian riots; it’s that Jews claim it at all. Equal access to historical and holy sites is considered an affront by Muslims, as it questions their exclusivity and authenticity.

Under Muslim rule, for example, Jews were denied entrance to Machpelah, since, if Muslims don’t have exclusive control of the site, then no one else should, or will. Any attachment of Jews diminishes that of Muslims.

This deadly Arab zero-sum game is exacerbated by President Obama, whose opposition to the right of Jews to live beyond the 1949 Armistice Lines fueled Palestinian riots in eastern Jerusalem. Recently, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said “the administration viewed Israel ’s move as provocative and unhelpful.”  He did not deplore Palestinian riots.

If you agree with President Obama and Mark Toner, no need to do anything. If you disagree, however, let your voices be heard. Silence is acquiescence.

The author is a writer and journalist living in Israel.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2010/03/03/why-palestinians-riot-over-jewish-heritage-sites/

URLs in this post:

[1] upsurge in Palestinian riots and attacks: http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e074.htm

[2] announced: http://frontpagemag.com../2010/03/01/israel%E2%80%99s-latest-sin%E2%80%94honoring-its-heritage/

Muslims Furious Over Israeli Decision to Highlight Ancient Link===(CNSNews.com) – A decision by the Israeli government to include a location with an almost 4,000 year-old link to the origins of Judaism in a list of 150 national heritage sites has sparked an uproar among Muslims – and drawn the disapproval of the Obama administration.

Muslims Furious Over Israeli Decision to Highlight Ancient Link
Friday, February 26, 2010
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor


A Palestinian protester throws rocks at Israeli soldiers during clashes in Hebron on Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2010. (AP Photo/Nasser Shiyoukhi)
(CNSNews.com) – A decision by the Israeli government to include a location with an almost 4,000 year-old link to the origins of Judaism in a list of 150 national heritage sites has sparked an uproar among Muslims – and drawn the disapproval of the Obama administration.
 
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu insisted Thursday that the decision to include the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron on the list would not in any way change the status quo at the site, which has long been shared by Jews and Muslims.
 
He called accusations being made by Palestinians and others “an artificial attempt to distort reality and sow discord.”
 
Two days after Palestinian Authority (P.A.) chairman Mahmoud Abbas warned during a visit to Brussels that it could ignite a “religious war,” Palestinians clashed Thursday with Israeli soldiers in Hebron. The radical Palestinian group Islamic Jihad has called for a “day of anger” on Friday.
 
State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the administration regarded the move as “provocative,” and that U.S. diplomats had conveyed that message to Israeli officials.
 
On Thursday the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) weighed in, demanding that the United Nations act against “this Israeli unilateral aggression.”
 
Earlier, a spokesman for U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said he raised with visiting Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak his concerns about “the inclusion of holy sites in the occupied West Bank on an Israeli heritage list.”
 
In announcing the expansion of an existing list of sites with religious and national significance to ancient and modern Israel, Netanyahu on Sunday mentioned that they would include the Cave of the Patriarchs and another site in territory claimed by the Palestinians – Rachel’s Tomb between Jerusalem and nearby Bethlehem, the traditional burial site of Rachel, the wife of the biblical patriarch, Jacob.

 


Hebron’s Cave of the Patriarchs is at the center of a storm after the Israeli government said it would be included on a list of national heritage sites. (Photo courtesy of Cave of Machpela Web site)
It is the site in Hebron, about 20 miles south of Jerusalem, that is causing the most unhappiness.
 
Although a predominantly Arab city today, Hebron’s importance to Jews goes back to the foundation of their faith. According to the Old Testament (Genesis 49), Abraham bought a cave known as Machpela at the site to bury his wife, Sarah and was himself also buried there, along with Isaac and Jacob, as well as Isaac’s wife Rebecca, and Jacob’s first wife, Leah.
 
The Old Testament also records that Hebron was the capital of the kingdom of Israel for seven years before King David moved to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 5). Rabbis consider the Cave of the Patriarchs the second holiest site in Judaism, after the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Hebron as a city is also one of Judaism’s four holy cities, the others being Jerusalem, Tiberias and Tzfat.
 
Historians say Hebron had a small, almost continuous Jewish presence for thousands of years until 1929, when it ended abruptly after 67 members of the then 800-strong Jewish community were killed during three days of Arab riots.
 
Shortly after Israel captured the West Bank during the 1967 Six Day War Jews began to return to Hebron in small numbers and today some 500 are reported to live in the historic Jewish Quarter, amid tight security.
 
In 1994 a deranged Israeli opened fire on Muslims in a mosque at the site, killing at least 29 people before he was overpowered and killed.
 
The Muslim claim to the Cave of the Patriarchs is based on the Islamic precept that major biblical figures, from Adam to Jesus, were Muslim prophets. Thus the mosque at the site is known as Ibrahimi (Abraham) mosque.
 
Novel claims
 
In recent days, new claims about the Islamic significance of the site have appeared in Palestinian media.
 
In a press report Thursday, the Palestinian Ma’an news agency described the Ibrahimi mosque as Islam’s “fourth holiest” site.
 
The P.A. news agency WAFA cited a London-based organization called the Palestine Return Center as describing the Ibrahimi mosque as “a mosque that Abraham built and is buried in.”
 
According to the Encyclopedia Judaica, The structure surrounding the cave and still standing today was built by King Herod some 2,000 years ago. Islam reached Hebron with the Muslim conquests in the 7th century AD.
 
According to the left-wing Middle East scholar Juan Cole, the five holiest sites in Islam are, in order, in Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem, Najaf and Karbala (although the city of Kairouan in northern Tunisia also holds claim to the position of fourth holiest in Islam.) An online list of the 15 “holiest sites in Islam” does not include Hebron.
 
At a press conference in Ramallah Wednesday, veteran PLO activist Hanan Ashrawi called Netanyahu’s decision a “direct attack on Palestinian heritage and a crime against Palestinian culture.”
 
The Cave of the Patriarchs is divided into Jewish and Muslim sections, and for most of the year, Jews and Muslims have free access to their designated spaces. For two 10-day periods each year, each group has access to the entire site while the other is barred from entering.
 
“We know that it is also a holy place for Muslims,” Netanyahu said Thursday. “We honor both.”
 
“We are not changing the status quo at the site and we will not, in any way, harm freedom of worship for Muslims, just as we will preserve freedom of worship for Jews.”
 
The U.N. body known as the Bureau of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People slammed the Israeli move.
 
“Laying official claims to religious and historical places throughout the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem and attempts by the Government of Israel purporting itself to be the sole custodian of those sites is yet another measure aimed at consolidating Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands,” it said in a statement.

Joyce Kaufman. The 7 Reasons to Support Israel.

Video) Wish we had been at this rally, where a fellow infidel tells it like it is. (Question: Ever wonder why Muslims don’t talk about what ‘Palestine’ looked like before Israel?)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmV1ffKP0ms

Blinded by Hate

Blinded by Hate

Posted By P. David Hornik On February 10, 2010 @ 12:05 am In FrontPage | 27 Comments

[1]

For anyone wishing to understand the lack of progress in the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process,” as well as the persistence of extremist and anti-Semitic views in that part of the world, the latest Pew Research Center report on attitudes in the Arab and Muslim world makes for must-reading. (A summary [2] of the report can be found here and the full report here [3].)

The report is based on a survey that the Pew Center’s Global Attitudes Project conducted from May 18 to June 16 last year. It begins by saying that “across predominantly Muslim nations, there is little enthusiasm for the extremist Islamic organizations Hamas and Hezbollah, although there are pockets of support for both groups, especially in the Middle East.” What the Pew Center calls “little enthusiasm,” however, is in most cases quite considerable enthusiasm.

True, in Turkey Hamas gets only a 5% “favorable” rating and Hezbollah only 3%. But the next-lowest ratings are in Lebanon, where 30% approve of Hamas and 35% of Hezbollah—substantial proportions considering that both are terrorist organizations. And regarding Hezbollah, Lebanese Shiites and Sunnis are, not surprisingly, sharply split, with 97% of Shiites seeing the Shiite terror group favorably and only 2% of Sunnis.

As for the Palestinians, when it comes to the most extreme organizations and leaders, only in the case of Hamas—paradoxically—do they trail behind some other nationalities. Some 44% of Palestinians view Hamas favorably; the group does better both in Jordan (56%) and Egypt (52%). That this has something to do with Palestinians’ direct experience of Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, is suggested by the fact that Hamas actually came in less popular in Gaza (37%) than in the West Bank (47%).

When it comes to Hezbollah, though, the overwhelmingly Sunni Palestinians are ahead of the pack with a 61% approval rating for this Shiite outfit; the next highest are in Jordan (51%) and Egypt (43%). It is no secret that Hezbollah has many admirers, cutting across Sunni-Shiite divides, for its perceived military successes against Israel; that its cachet is particularly strong for the Palestinians, though, is consistent with other findings of the survey.

The survey not only gauged attitudes toward organizations but also toward various leaders, including six Arab and Muslim leaders among whom the most extreme were Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Osama bin Laden. Nasrallah – who has said that “If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide” – scored highest among the Palestinians with 65% expressing confidence in him; next came the Jordanians (a majority of whom, it should be noted, are also Palestinians) at 56%, with Nasrallah’s own Lebanese compatriots a fairly distant third at 37%.

As for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president who has said Israel “must be wiped off the map,” he, too, did best among the Palestinians at 45%, edging out Indonesia at 43%, with the next highest scores in Arab countries being Jordan and Lebanon both at 32%.

And as for Osama bin Laden himself, here the Palestinians were almost his greatest fans at 51%, far ahead of the next group—again the Jordanians—at 28%; only among Nigerian Muslims (excluding Nigerian Christians) did the Al Qaeda leader do a bit better at 54%.

The survey also gauged Muslims’ attitude toward religious groups, including Jews. Here, at least, the Palestinians can’t be accused of being ahead of the rest. Ninety-five percent of Egyptians, 97% of Jordanians, 98% of Lebanese, and 97% of Palestinians registered an unfavorable view of Jews; among non-Arab Muslims—Turkey 73%, Indonesia 74%, Pakistan 78%—the rates were only somewhat lower.

Although the findings on Palestinian attitudes and general Arab anti-Semitism are not much different from previous Pew Center surveys, perhaps it is time to take more note of them—especially as hands are being wrung about the hiatus in the “peace process” with the Palestinians. In that connection Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, is quoted [4] as saying that “Since there are no prospects of talks on the horizon, and in many ways what their efforts wrought was a wasted year without any negotiations, I believe the [U.S.] administration deserves an ‘F’ for failure to deliver on results.”

It is odd that Foxman, head of an organization devoted to fighting anti-Jewish and other forms of bigotry, apparently sees “peace with the Palestinians” as such a feasible goal. But there is no need to single Foxman out, as his fallacy is widespread.

It is true that Israel has a limited but valuable peace with Egypt and Jordan, no less monolithically anti-Semitic than the Palestinians. That the Palestinians, however, show such high enthusiasm for the likes of Hezbollah, Nasrallah, Ahmadinejad, and Bin Laden gives a better clue as to why “peace” keeps running aground than all the anguished analyses of supposedly failed diplomacy.

Who are the Palestinians and who is occupying what?

Palestines, Philistines, Romans, Greeks, Arabs, Jews, Muslims

Who are the Palestinians and who is occupying what?

 By David Rushton   Sunday, January 24, 2010

Muslims constantly scream and whine about Israel occupying Muslim lands in Israel. Newspapers and T.V. newscasts talk about Judea and Samaria being “occupied” by Israel. The U.S. State Department and other government entities refer to parts of Israel as “Israeli Settlements.” So the question must be, “Is Israel occupying part of Palestine or are the Muslims occupying part of Israel”?

The Torah portion for last week included the following passage (A Torah Portion is a weekly section of the Torah studied by Jews which enables them to read and understand all of the first five books of the Bible in one year. Marcia and I study it every week along with the commentaries).

Exodus 6

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh: Because of my mighty hand he will let them go; because of my mighty hand he will drive them out of his country.”

2 God also said to Moses, “I am the LORD. 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them. 4 I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, where they lived as aliens. 5 Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are enslaving, and I have remembered my covenant.

6 “Therefore, say to the Israelites: ‘I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. 7 I will take you as my own people, and I will be your God. Then you will know that I am the LORD your God, who brought you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you to the land I swore with uplifted hand to give to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob. I will give it to you as a possession. I am the LORD.’ “

The Bible proves that God gave the Land of Canaan to His Chosen People Israel. The above is, of course, only one of many references to this historical and biblical fact.

Historical Proof that Israel is Jewish

About six years ago Marcia and I visited the community of Gush Etzion near Hevron (Hebron). As part of our tour we went along an old road and saw several Mikvot (plural for Mikva, the ceremonial pool used for ritual cleansing) that dated back about 2,500 years. This is just one of the thousands of proofs that Israel was continually inhabited by Jews for more than 3000 years.

A recent discovery in Israel sheds new light on the period of King David and proves once again (as if more proof were needed) that Israel existed as a nation more than 3000 years ago.

In an article on the Arutz Sheva website, Avi Yellin reports that a pottery shard was discovered a little over a year ago at excavations that were carried out near the Elah valley, south of Jerusalem. But until recently, archeologists were unable to confirm that the language on the shard was actually Hebrew rather than some other Semitic language.

Now a professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa has deciphered the inscription and proved that it is the earliest known example of Hebrew writing and that it was written during the reign of King David.

You can read more about professor Galil’s research elsewhere, but two examples should be enough to show why he authenticated this discovery. The verb “asah” used in the text means to do and the verb “avad” means to work and each of these verbs are used only in Hebrew. In modern day Hebrew and Arabic there are many similarities because they both come from Semitic language roots. But 3000 years ago there were no other languages that used the same verb forms as are found on this piece of Hebrew inscribed pottery. The Arabs were not there. They were in Arabia.

It is also interesting to note that other cultures at the time referred to multiple gods while the Hebrews were the only people who believed in the One God. This fragment of text on the pottery parallels passages in the Bible in which Jews are called upon to support the weaker members of society including widows and those who are strangers living in the Commonwealth of Israel at the time.

This new evidence proves once again that the Biblical account is true. Israel existed as a State over 3000 years ago. Those who claim that Israel is occupying Arab lands haven’t a leg to stand on. Muslims have absolutely no reason to be in the Land of Israel other than that the Israelis tolerate them and allow them to live there.

Where did the name Palestine come from?

To cut a long story short, the name Palestine is derived from Philistine which is a translation of the Biblical “Plesheth”. Translations and mis-translations cause much confusion. An amusing example of this occurred when President Carter in a speech said that he loved the Polish people. The interpreter translated it as “I lust after the Polish people.” I hear that the translator is now working as a dishwasher in Warsaw and so should some of those who translated the Bible into English.

The word plesheth meant migratory referring to the migration of the Philistines into the sea coast of Israel. So the Palestinians of 3000 years ago were, in fact, the Philistines. The Philistines were not native to Israel, in fact, as their name implies, they came from somewhere else. Most scholars agree that they came from the Greek Islands, most likely Crete. Obviously, they did not speak Arabic and they were not Semitic like the Jews and Arabs. The Arabs came from guess where?—Arabia.

From the fifth century BCE, the Greeks called the eastern coast of the Mediterranean “Philistine Syria” using the Greek language form of the name. In the year135, after putting down the Bar Kochba revolt, the second major Jewish revolt against Rome, the Emperor Hadrian wanted to wipe out the name of the Roman “Provincia Judaea” and so renamed it “Provincia Syria Palaestina”,

The name “Falastin” is the Arab pronunciation of the Roman “Palaestina”.  Golda Meir the Chicago schoolteacher who became the Prime Minister of Israel said,

“The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation’s supposed ancient name, though they couldn’t even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin.”

So the Philistines occupied part of the Land of Canaan at one time and they came into conflict with Israel. But there are no Philistines left today. The so-called Palestinian people have absolutely no connection to the Philistines and, therefore, no connection to the Land. Yet the world continues to call the area “Palestine” because the rulers of this world have no regard for God.

At the end of the first essay in this series I remarked that I was ready for an onslaught of hateful mail from Muslims and others who do not believe in God. Well, there were no letters from Muslims and, I think, only one from an atheist. The overwhelming majority of the comments came from people who agreed with and applauded the article. Many were thankful to me for explaining the truth about Israel. One of those readers, however, went a step further and commented on the second, as yet not published, article in the series. He reminded me of a little know fact from World War II that is quite interesting.

Kenneth Tremble from Australia said that During WW II there was a Jewish Brigade fighting alongside the British Forces against the Germans. They were known as The Palestinian Brigade. He correctly accuses the U.S. State Department, with Hilary Clinton in charge, of being corrupt in refusing to acknowledge that the Jews are the Palestinians, NOT anybody else. He also states that Hilary will be accountable to God for her treatment of Israel.

Right on Kenneth, thanks for the contribution.

And let us not forget that the Germans had their allies too. They were the Muslims who wore German Uniforms and fought against the allies.

So where did these so called “Palestinians” come from?

At one time, before Yasi Arafat came on the scene, I had many Arab friends in Israel. That was before Arafat infected so many of them with such a hatred for the Israelis. I remember on one occasion asking one of them where the Palestinians came from. He told me that his father was from Syria and his mother from Saudi Arabia. Curious, I asked another of my friends and he told me his family was from Iraq. Another said his mother was Lebanese and his father was Egyptian. Not one of their families was native to Israel. Incredulous, I asked if they knew any families who had lived in Israel for a long time. They mentioned the Kourie family who had lived in Jerusalem for three of four generations. But it did not amount to much more than that. So, how is it possible that the United States government has been fooled into thinking that Israel has occupied Palestinian lands if there has never been a country called Palestine with an Arab government, parliament, flag and official borders and there are only a handful of families who have actually lived there for more than a few generations?

Perhaps we should ask a member of the P.L.O about this. After all, it was the P.L.O. who first championed the so called Palestinian rights and brought these people to the attention of the world by hijacking aircraft and murdering passengers.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with P.L.O. executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. In which he said he said:

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”

It is true that some Muslims have lived in Israel ever since the Muslim invasion of the seventh century but, most of the time; it was only a handful of them. Frankly, they did not want the land because it was largely barren after the Romans sought to purge the Land of Jews between 70 and 73 following the destruction of the Temple in the year 70. Some Jews escaped and stayed in Jerusalem and nearby towns guarding their God-given right to the Holy Land and the Holy City.

A few Arab nomadic shepherds and traders crossed the land moving in and out with their sheep and camels and trading with the Jews. Some of the Arabs actually settled in the Jewish villages and were welcomed as a part of the community. But there were always Jews living in the Land and there was always a steady stream of Jews coming back from the Diaspora drawn by the magnet of Jerusalem.

Those of you who would like more detail of the continuous Jewish presence in the Land can see a wonderful essay with many maps on the website

What does the Khoran say about the Land?

Well, believe it or not the Khoran states emphatically that the Land belongs to the Jews.

The Khoran is actually a collection of writings by many people and the teachings of Mohammed. It also includes some works of science and parts of the mystic writings of eastern religions known in the seventh century. Many people would be surprised to learn that it also contains verses from the Bible and reveres some biblical prophets as prophets of Islam. However the following verses will come as a real shocker to most people.

Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: ‘Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel].”

There is an amazing Imam living in Italy and actually he is head of the Italian Islamic Union. I say he is amazing because he fully believes in and teaches Zionism and absolutely believes that the Jews are the rightful heirs to the Promised Land. The only mystery is how he has lived this long with such profoundly pro-Jewish statements. To see his thesis on “What the Qur’an really says” (Qur’an is just another translation of Khoran or Koran)  please go to this website because he can say it far better than I.

And to see a video of him in Hevron visit

Can the Muslims claim the land through Ishmael?

Some people including many Muslims stake a claim for the Arabs through the line of Ishmael, the son of Abraham and his wife’s Egyptian servant Hagaar. The thinking is that if God promised Abraham that his family would be a blessing to the whole earth and that anyone who blessed them would be blessed and those who cursed them would be cursed, that must include the children of Ishmael who in fact was Abraham’s first son. That theory does make sense using man’s logic. The truth is that God made an executive decision to separate the children of Yitsak (Isaac) from the Children of Ishmael. It doesn’t sound fair does it? But who are we to question the Wisdom of the Almighty? Take a look at Genesis Chapter 17.

18And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!

19And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.

20And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.

21But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.

So God, Himself, refused to give the Abrahamic Blessing to Ishmael and the Arabs. Instead they received all the oil in the deserts of Arabia. Well, of course, the Muslims have their own story of this covenant. They believe that Ishmael received the Covenant. They also claim that it was Ishmael who was taken and almost sacrificed by Abraham on Mount Moriah, later to be called the Temple Mount, in Jerusalem. But remember one thing, the Bible was written hundreds of years before Mohammed was born and he and the other Muslims scribes took the parts of the Bible and other books that they liked and changed the parts they did not like in the seventh and eighth centuries.

If you want to call any group of people “Palestinians” it should be the Israelis.

Presbyterians Urged To Side With Palestinians

Presbyterians Urged To Side With Palestinians

By JOSH GERSTEIN, Staff Reporter of the Sun
June 25, 2008
http://www.nysun.com/national/presbyterians-urged-to-side-with-palestinians/80623/

SAN JOSE, Calif. — The Presbyterian Church is hearing impassioned pleas to declare its solidarity with the Palestinian Arabs by adopting a series of anti-Israel measures, including proposals for divestment and for backing a suspension of American military aid to the Jewish state.

RELATED: Presbyterian Church Proposals Could Reopen Wounds With Jews.

Click to enlarge image >

KAREN BLEIER/AFP/Getty

The New York Avenue Presbyterian Church at Washington, DC in April 2005.

 

At a session that began yesterday afternoon and stretched into the night, a church committee on peacemaking heard a range of public testimony on the measures, which may be referred on to the American church’s general assembly holding its biannual meeting here this week.

“The situation in Palestine is dire. The call from our Palestinian brothers and sisters has fallen on deaf ears,” a Presbyterian minister, Reverend William McGarvey of San Francisco, told the committee. “The American Christian church has largely watched this catastrophe continue as if we did not care.”

In the first round of votes, the Presbyterian committee seemed to signal a reluctance to trigger a new round of recriminations by re-embracing a divestment initiative that the church adopted in 2004, but shied away from two years later. Last night, the peacemaking panel voted, 32-23, to strike language that would authorize a council of church leaders to carry out divestment without further approval from the general assembly.

However, moments later, the committee voted, 38-26, to endorse the Amman Call, a peace proposal that includes a Palestinian Arab “right of return,” a guarantee that Jewish leaders contend would lead to the demise of Israel as a Jewish state.

Some Presbyterian leaders spoke out yesterday against the anti-Israel proposals and offered alternatives calling for a “nonpartisan” approach to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

“We have to try to do the impossible that is to try to say both sides in this conflict, ‘We want to be an agent of reconciliation.’ If we choose one side over the other, we have lost that opportunity,” a minister from Idaho, Reverend Robert Henley, said.

“Whether it is our mission network, our staff, or our leadership, we are overinvested and have been for some time in the Palestinian narrative,” a Presbyterian who leads an anti-divestment group, James Roberts, said.

A Palestinian religious leader, Archbishop Elias Chacour of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church in Haifa, told the Presbyterians that they should not adopt measures calling for further study and a more balanced approach.

“If the good Samaritan would not have cared, the Jew would have been killed. If he went on fact-finding, the Jew would have been killed. But he got his hands dirty. And I urge you to get your hands dirty, to take sides,” the prelate said.

Although Father Chacour was designated to speak in favor of several of the anti-Israel proposals, he stopped short of endorsing the one calling for divestment against two American firms whose equipment is used by the Israeli Army. “Instead of being cornered with divestment, why don’t you take a proactive initiative, a kind of reinvestment?” he asked. “We would welcome a positive action rather than continue criticism of one side against the other.”

Jewish leaders have warned that passage of some of the “overtures” could lead to a rupture similar to what occurred in 2004, when a church convention voted “to initiate a process of phased selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel.”

Last month, six senators who are Presbyterians urged the church not to endorse the proposal to cut off defense help to Israel. “We are adamantly opposed to the call for the U.S. government to temporarily suspend military aid to Israel,” senators Kyl of Arizona, Bond of Missouri, DeMint of South Carolina, Carper of Delaware, Shelby of Alabama, and Inhofe of Oklahoma wrote. “We ask that you take no action that would make a case for moral equivalency between the Israeli military, which is fighting to keep Israel safe, and Palestinian terrorists, who seek to destroy it.”

A former American negotiator in the Middle East, Dennis Ross, also warned against taking the Palestinian side in the long-running dispute. “If your church is going to adopt a position that is one-sided in favor of the Palestinians, it takes no account of what the Israelis have done,” Mr. Ross said in a videotaped message to delegates. “I find the resolution on divestment from companies doing business with Israel and the others that criticize Israel to be divorced from reality. They don’t take into account the price the Israelis have paid or the concessions they made or the many times the Israelis in negotiations have been prepared to go very far and not found responsiveness on the other side.”

 


<!–

The peaceniks won’t give up – scary

The peaceniks won’t give up – scary

MKs’ proposal would hand control of Gaza Strip to Arab League
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz

[..] Livni has also expressed interest in stationing a multi-national force in the Gaza Strip.

The call to the Arab League to take responsibility for the Gaza Strip is part of “a package deal,” which would begin with negotiations between Arab and Israeli representatives on the Arab Peace Initiative. The next stage will include the exchange of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit for Palestinian prisoners, including Hamas ministers and parliamentarians. Then, a mutual cease-fire will be declared and the Quartet – the U.S., Russia, EU and UN – will propose a multi-national force deployment in front of the UN Security Council.

The multi-national force would be deployed for two to five years, with the agreement of both Israel and the Palestinians. The force would have security and economic roles.

In terms of security, the force would be deployed along the Philadelphi Route to prevent smuggling from Sinai, and along the border with Israel to prevent Qassam rocket attacks.

Its economic role would be in rebuilding the infrastructure in the Gaza Strip, assisting the population, rehabilitating Palestinian Authority institutions, and preventing the collapse of social services.

The initiative was prepared with the help of a team of experts, including senior legal specialists with experience in the defense establishment. Team members met with Livni several months ago to discuss the idea of a multi-national force.

During the most recent cabinet meeting, Livni presented some of the ideas discussed at the Foreign Ministry regarding the deployment of a multi-national force along the Philadelphi Route.

The two Meretz MKs presented their proposal to senior Palestinians, including Finance Minister Salam Fayad, and Gaza-based businessmen.

They also met with the ambassadors to Israel from Egypt, Jordan, European Union countries and the U.S. In coming weeks, they are scheduled to continue presenting their plan in Israel and abroad, including to Saudi Arabian figures.

“So far we have had relatively positive responses,” Vilan told Haaretz. “Everyone has stressed that it is very important to have PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ support. The risk is that tomorrow Abbas will say he is fed up and then we will be stuck with Hamas, and the anarchy will spread to the West Bank and we will be drawn back in there,” he added.

Posted by Ted Belman @ 11:27 am |