The Truth About Israel – What Americans Need to Know

by Connie Cook Smith

The American people are confused about the morality of modern-day Israel, because our schools and churches leave out essential Jewish history.

The European people who were shipped in to occupy Palestine as a Jewish homeland in 1948 are not related to the biblical Hebrews of Jesus’ time.

The biblical Hebrews are symbolized by the Cain and Abel story, brothers who fell out with each other and whose lineage became the two factions we know as Jews and Arabs. But Jews and Arabs are both biologically Semitic people – they are cousins — and despite their “family feud, they are anciently related by blood and culture.

Later on, Jews and Arabs became even more seemingly disparate due to the introduction of Islam.  One tribe kept their Judaism, while the other became Muslim, and there is what we’ve perceived as the warring factions of today.

But what has been purposely obscured is a third element that entered and has inflamed the Middle East ever since.  It was European Jewish people who were brought in after WWII for the purpose of occupying much of Palestine and resurrecting the ancient name of Israel. This was a political agenda, not a humanitarian intention.

These Europeans had long ago emerged from Khazaria (southern Russia), where their king – for the purpose of greater, unified control – converted them to the Babylonian schools of Judaism in the 8th century. Thus, not only their DNA, but their perspectives are a different reality from the Judean teachings in Jesus’ world.

What we have in modern Israel, then, is an artificially created state dominated by Jews who have no geographic, genetic, nor spiritual connections to biblical Israel or the time of Jesus.

Once this is known — and churches and schools ought to be honest about it — then it’s much easier to understand what many world voices have long cried out: That today’s Israelis who came in from Europe in 1948 did not really have a right to occupy the Palestinian area and re-name it as ancient-days Israel – especially since the Palestinian residents’ families and lands – and even some of their homes that might be still standing – go back over a thousand years.

Modern Israelis simply have no actual connection to the land, to regional traditions, or to the time of Christ. And Christians and Jews who are properly informed – and who are ethical – need to join in the heartfelt objection to the 1948 (and ongoing) usurpation of the Palestinians’ land.

Most especially what is morally required is the cessation of all the cruelties against the Palestinians that have inevitably followed.  As President Harry Truman observed right from the beginning of the creation of this modern, artificial Israel:

August 23, 1947, letter to Eleanor Roosevelt –

“I fear very much that the Jews are like all underdogs. When they get on top, they are just as intolerant and cruel as the people were to them when they were underneath. I regret this situation very much because my sympathy was always on their side.”

Hamas of Palestine and Hezbollah of Lebanon try to defend against Israel’s agenda of taking over more and more of their territory. But this defense against Israeli aggression is mis-portrayed in America as “terrorism.” The bad guys are good, and the good guys are bad!  The Palestinians are like a woman who has been raped, and then is told by the world she has no right to be angry.

This unjust situation goes back at least to the Balfour Declaration of 1917, whereby Britain announced that Palestine must be given to the Jews and be re-born as Israel.  But wait — they did not refer to the Jews that were already there – they did not mean the 20% of the Jewish population in Palestine who are descended from Jesus’ time and place.

They meant that Palestine should be given to members of the other 80% of the world’s Jews, to those who were belated converts originally in Russia, shipped in in 1948, and have no historical connection with either the land of Israel or the Hebrews.

Many were connected, however, to British/American banking and oil interests – who, by whatever it takes to get themselves a foothold in the rich Middle East – have been and continue to wreak havoc and commit mayhem on our planet.

This plan, their policy, is called Zionism. It is not the Jewish religion.  It is not Judaism. Zionism is a political strategy to use Jewish issues as a club to beat people over the head with, in order to enable the criminal occupation going on in Palestine – an occupation which is always criminally trying to expand – and which is conducted by usurpers who have no right to be there.

So there was this open Zionist/Israel agenda, by that name even – Zionism — in 1917. But haven’t we all been told that the justification for taking Palestine from the Palestinians was the noble purpose of compensation for the horrors of the Holocaust in WWII? Then how is it that the British plan for doing this, with America signing on, appeared nearly 30 years earlier?

The plan stated that the Palestinians whose specific lands were targeted to re-emerge as the old Israel would be treated justly whenever the takeover could be engineered. But of course, the moment it actually occurred, the occupied ones found themselves ghetto-ized, disenfranchised, and grotesquely abused.

President Truman was infuriated by this, as expressed above in his letter to Mrs. Roosevelt. Also,on July 21, 1947, he wrote in his diary:

“These Jews I find are very, very selfish… when they have power, physical, financial or political, neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the underdog….”

It would be absurd to label Truman’s words as “anti-Semitic,” just as it is absurd to label today’s world-wide, anti-Israel sentiments as “anti-Semitic.” It should be clear by now that the Israelis who rule there have no Semitic heritage whatsoever. They are European/British/American conquerors.  They are not the small percentage of ancient Judean Jews – who find themselves just as occupied as the Palestinians.

For example, if a Middle-Eastern-descended Jew in Israel (a native, the Sephardim minority) gets lucky, and marries into the imported European (Ashkenazim) majority — that is, marries into the Jewish class that rules – the couple is nevertheless demoted lower down on the housing waiting-lists. Housing priority is reserved for the “pure couples,” for those mates who are both of European descent – or from European/British/American backgrounds.

In case that doesn’t give you Hitlerian chills, then maybe this will. The darker-skinned, original Jews are regarded as the n-word by the lighter skinned, blond-haired, often blue-eyed Israeli ruling class.

(The situation over there is not these movie stars’ fault, but remember Adam Sandler’s hilarious song?  “Goldie Hawn, and Paul Newman, too.  I find myself thinkin’ – What a good-lookin’ Jew!”)

But it’s been nothing but displacement, ghetto conditions, and even outright murder for the Palestinians (Arabs) and their also dark-skinned cousins, the native Jews.  This is how it’s been over there since the “glorious” creation of the State of Israel, with the American people bleeding out $3 billion in aid every year for Israel’s “defense,” and being fed daily hogwash about who’s doing what to whom.

And to those who are manipulated into thinking all this is “biblical” and therefore “meant to be by God,” please note that’s exactly what the occupation planners – long before the Holocaust – knew they could count on.

Please also recall that slavery and forced polygamy and other inhumane institutions, once vociferously defended by Bible-believers, are now understood as totally morally wrong.

It ought to be clear that in Israel and America, the scum on top of both ponds has risen – especially since 2001 — and they are ruining our whole world. They do want, and they are trying to ignite, an Armageddon so that their world dictatorship will be accepted – to “solve the problems.”

And they are counting on those who believe in Armageddon – just like those who believed in slavery and polygamy because they were biblical – to help the evil plans along, via constant and deeply misguided support for Israel.

Whatever a person’s religious beliefs, there should be no question that the daily brutality towards the Palestinians is wrong, as the theft of Palestinians’ lands and destruction of their homes has always been wrong.

If we don’t want to end up deeply ashamed – and ALL totally enslaved – we need to pull the plug on the criminals who have been secretly running both America and Israel now for decades.

 Source

Israel’s right or not to exist – The facts and truth

On Monday 12 October, Prime Minister Netanyahu opened the Knesset’s winter session by blasting the Goldstone Report that accuses Israel of committing war crimes and vowing that he would never allow Israelis be tried for them. But that was not his main message. It was an appeal, delivered I thought with a measure of desperation, to the “Palestinian leadership”, presumably the leadership of “President” Abbas and his Fatah cronies, leaders who are regarded by very many if not most Palestinians as American-and-Israeli stooges at best and traitors at worst.


Netanyahu again called on this leadership to agree to recognise Israel as a Jewish state, saying this was, and remains, the key to peace. And he went on and on and on about it.

“For 62 years the Palestinians have been saying ‘No’ to the Jewish state. I am once again calling upon our Palestinian neighbours – say ‘Yes’ to the Jewish state. Without recognition of the Israel as the state of the Jews we shall not be able to attain peace… Such recognition is a step which requires courage and the Palestinian leadership should tell its people the truth – that without this recognition there can be no peace… There is no alternative to Palestinian leaders showing courage by recognising the Jewish state. This has been and remains the true key to peace.”

As Ha’aretz noted in its report, Netanyahu’s demand for Palestinian acceptance of Israel as a Jewish state is for him “a way on ensuring recognition of Israel’s right to exist as opposed to merely recognising Israel” (my emphasis). This, as Ha’aretz added, is the recognition which Netanyahu and many other Israelis see as the real core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In the name of pragmatism, willingness to “merely to recognise” Israel – meaning to accept and live in peace with an Israel inside its pre-June ’67 borders – has long been the formal Palestinian and all-Arab position. Why does it stop short of recognising Israel’s “right to exist”, and why, really, does it matter so much to Zionism that Palestinians recognise this right?
The answer is in the following.

According to history as written by the winner, Zionism, Israel was given its birth certificate and thus legitimacy by the UN Partition Resolution of 29 November 1947. This is propaganda nonsense.

• In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.
•  
• Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become policy, unless approved by the Security Council.
•  
• The truth is that the General Assembly’s partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the U.S. knew that, if approved, it could only be implemented by force given the extent of Arab and other Muslim opposition to it; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.
•  
• So the partition plan was vitiated (became invalid) and the question of what the hell to do about Palestine – after Britain had made a mess of it and walked away, effectively surrendering to Zionist terrorism – was taken back to the General Assembly for more discussion. The option favoured and proposed by the U.S. was temporary UN Trusteeship. It was while the General Assembly was debating what do that Israel unilaterally declared itself to be in existence – actually in defiance of the will of the organised international community, including the Truman administration.

The truth of the time was that the Zionist state, which came into being mainly as a consequence of pre-planned ethnic cleansing, had no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to exist UNLESS … Unless it was recognised and legitimized by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights during the creation of the Zionist state. In international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the legitimacy it craved. 

And that legitimacy was the only thing the Zionists could not and cannot take from the Palestinians by force.

No wonder Prime Minister Netanyahu is more than a little concerned on this account.

Israel’s leaders have always known the truth summarised above. It’s time for the rest of the world to know it.

Source

Netanyahu: “Israel Will Always Maintain Sovereignty On Settlements, New ‘Jewish Neighborhoods”

Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, stated during his recent meeting with UN General-Secretary, Ban Ki-moon, that Israel will continue to build and expand settlements in occupied East Jerusalem, and that settlements, and what he labeled as “new neighborhoods”, and settlement blocs will always remain under Israeli sovereignty.

During his meeting with Ki-moon two days ago, Netanyahu said that there is nothing to discuss or negotiate on regarding Israel’s settlements.

“Everybody knows new Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem, all settlement blocs, will always remain under Israeli control”, he said, “There is nothing to talk about, there will be no discussion on the issue”.

The Israeli Prime Minister also claimed that “it is clear everybody known that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not the core source of tension in the Middle East”, and alleged that “the fundamental issue, the core problem in the region, is not recognizing Israel is a state for the Jewish people”.

He further claimed that the Education System in the Gaza Strip “is based on incitement against Israel”, and demanded the United Nations to examine “how summer camps run by the UNRWA, are used to foster hatred and violence in the minds of Palestinian children”, according to Netanyahu.

Israel’s illegal settlement activities, built in direct violation of International Law, are amongst the core issue that obstruct direct peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

Israel refuses to recognize most of the core issues on the conflict, and the Palestinian legitimate rights, including the Right of Return of all refugees, the right to a fully independent and continuous state with East Jerusalem as its capital, borders and natural resources.

Source

Israel Charny, director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem and former editor of the Encyclopedia of Genocide, acknowledges that Zionists committed genocidal massacres and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians

The Jewish Daily Forward article copied below reports on a disagreement between two scholars of genocide, in which one scholar, a man named Israel Charny, denounced another scholar as "delusional" for suggesting that what Zionists did to Palestinians in 1948 constituted genocide. What makes this article interesting is that Charny, while ardently defending Israel from the charge of genocide nonetheless admitted that Zionists carried out genocidal massacres and ethnic cleansing. He just didn't think the word "genocide" is appropriate to describe the Zionists' intentions. I have bolded the most relevant passages below. --John Spritzler

http://forward.com/articles/135484/
 

The Jewish Daily Forward

 Genocide? Palestinians evacuate the village of Zenin in 1948. Some scholars say that what is now called ‘ethnic cleansing’ constitutes a form of genocide.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/135484/#ixzz1EMM2LDRp

By Gal Beckerman

Published February 16, 2011, issue of February 25, 2011.

Did Jews commit genocide in 1948?

The question is provocative, and the answer for most people is an unequivocal no. But a debate over this idea has formed the crux of a heated argument among the most eminent genocide scholars in the world, and led recently to the censure of an Israeli professor by the field’s leading academic association.

It’s also one more reminder of the growing divide between European scholars and their American and Israeli counterparts when it comes to how they view Israel, both historically and in the present moment.

The debate began in the pages of a scholarly publication, the Winter 2010 issue of the Journal of Genocide Research. Two specialists in genocide, Omer Bartov of Brown University and Martin Shaw of Roehampton University, in London, engaged in a back-and-forth exchange about whether the word “genocide” could be applied to the expulsion and killing of Arabs in Palestine during Israel’s War of Independence. During the course of the war, more than 700,000 Palestinians fled or were forced out of their homes and were later prevented from returning, creating what would become one of the world’s most enduring refugee crises.

Both Bartov and Shaw agreed that some form of what is now called “ethnic cleansing” did occur. But where Bartov was not willing to think of this as genocide, Shaw confidently argued that any policies meant to destroy a group, even if not outright murder, should be seen as genocide.

With this more expansive reading, he sees genocide victims everywhere, from the Aborigines in Australia to the Albanians uprooted from Kosovo. And Shaw goes further, claiming that the entire Zionist enterprise had “an incipiently genocidal mentality” toward the Arabs. Due to what he views as Israel’s original sin, Shaw argues that the state’s policies toward Palestinians and its Arab citizens since “can be seen as a ‘slow-motion’ extension and consolidation of the genocide of 1948.”

In the exchange, Bartov described Shaw’s ultimate purpose as “delegitimizing” Israel, and offered plenty of evidence for why calling what Jews did in 1948 “genocide” would only serve to render the term “meaningless.”

But it didn’t end there. Israel Charny, an American-born scholar who immigrated to Israel and who directs the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem and edited the Encyclopedia of Genocide, was offended by the exchange. He wrote a response that was posted on the discussion board of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, a 16-year-old organization that is considered the pre-eminent association of its kind.

Charny did not mince words. He referred to Shaw’s argument as the “delusional projection of an angry soul,” and accused Shaw of attacks on Israel and Zionism that were “blind and rampaging.”

Shaw complained that Charny’s criticism amounted to an ad hominem assault, and the president of IAGS, William Schabas, apologized to Shaw, admitting that the offending message shouldn’t have been posted. Schabas then took the unprecedented step of formally censuring Charny.

“My only concern is that we have a debate in which the tone is between civilized academics, discussing things in an appropriate way,” Schabas, a professor of international law at the National University of Ireland in Galway, told the Forward. “Charny’s comments were too intemperate. So we apologized to Shaw and let the debate continue.”

But to Charny, this was one more sign that a field that was started as “a civilizational response to the horror of the Holocaust” has been turned against the Jewish state. “This is ultimately a story of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, including among genocide scholars,” Charny told the Forward.

Charny makes it clear that he does think Jews committed what he calls “genocidal massacres” during the war of 1948, like the infamous shooting of civilians in the village of Deir Yassin, in which more than 100 unarmed people were killed in a brutal raid. But he does not consider the “ethnic cleansing” that took place as constituting genocide, nor does he think, as Shaw contends, that the Zionists had any genocidal objective.

“I do not believe the war was undertaken by us with a genocidal intent at all — it was in self-defense for the establishment of Israel per the U.N. mandate and our cherished Zionist dream,” Charny said. “And I do not at all believe that we had any grand genocidal plan in our warfare or in the collective mind-culture in which the Yishuv [pre-state government] was operating.”

According to the United Nations’ Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted at the end of 1948, genocide is legally defined as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” Nowhere does it specifically mention what we would think of today as ethnic cleansing, but there are those scholars, like Shaw, who believe that ethnic cleansing does indeed fall within the convention’s initial meaning.

Shaw thinks Charny’s reaction is indicative of those scholars he calls “pro-Israel,” those who he thinks are incapable of applying the same critical eye to Israel and its past that they do to other peoples’ histories.

“He’s an American Jew who’s gone to Israel, and he has invested a lot of his identity in Israel — whereas criticisms of the recent attack on Gaza don’t necessarily bring the whole existence of the state into question, this seems to him as an argument that strikes at the foundations,” Shaw said, speaking of Charny. “The other issue is that there is a problem with the language of genocide with anything having to do with Jews. For some Israeli and pro-Israeli scholars, genocide is something that happened to the Jews; it’s not something that Jews could ever really be involved in.”

This current conflict between the scholars in some ways cements what was already an ideological rift.

In 2005, a group of genocide researchers, many of whom had been part of IAGS, decided to start their own rival organization, calling it the International Network of Genocide Scholars. The reason they say they broke away was twofold: They felt that IAGS had become too American in its perspective, and that it had become too politically activist. Unofficially, according to Shaw, the feeling was that the association was “overtly pro-Israel.” Shaw cites the example of a resolution that the association issued in reaction to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s comments about destroying Israel. The resolution condemned this as a threat of genocide. Shaw did not believe it was the place of genocide scholars to make such a pronouncement.

The two groups have continued independently — though they share many of the same members — until this past year, when there was talk of a merger, initiated by Schabas. Recently, after a few meetings to negotiate what would have been a new organization, the INoGS leadership said it was no longer interested. Schabas thinks the timing was not coincidental.

“If you would ask them who would be representative of the things they don’t like in the association, probably Israel Charny would be at the top of the list,” Schabas said. “I suspect that the recent explosion between Charny and Shaw may have contributed to the fact that the discussions about merging the two associations have melted down.”

INoGS is led by Juergen Zimmerer, a professor at the University of Sheffield, in the United Kingdon. Zimmerer said that the decision not to merge had nothing to do with the flare-up between the two scholars.

“We simply felt that IAGS was too divided internally to proceed with the merger at the moment,” Zimmerer wrote in an e-mail to the Forward.

According to Charny, the crux of the problem is the issue of Israel. In a reversal of the criticism that the breakaway INoGS scholars had of IAGS, he thinks that hatred of the Jewish state has undermined their scholarship.

“While saying that they don’t take any political position, they are slowly but surely, insidiously, under a smokescreen of their good English manners and their supposedly dispassionate point of view, becoming a hotbed of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish sentiment, which they will of course deny vociferously,” Charny said.

For now, the two organizations seem to remain deeply divided. Schabas, who is nearing the end of his tenure, looked back at the volatility of presiding over an association of genocide scholars.

“It’s like riding a bucking bronco,” he said.

Contact Gal Beckerman at beckerman@forward.com or on Twitter @galbeckerman


The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.


Read more: http://forward.com/articles/135484/#ixzz1EMMHXlTM

Source

Top American General Cites Israel as Unsustainable and Apartheid

By Gordon Duff and Press TV

The story “hangs there,” a week now, no one will touch it other than the Times of Israel, their answer to Veterans Today, a publication run by former spies.

American reporting of the talk carefully edited out General Mattis’ references to Israeli settlements and his use of the word “apartheid state.”

This wasn’t just any general, not one of the kooks and malcontents who have sold a colorless military career for a payoff from the Israel lobby, “hot running girls or boys” and a condominium on a top rated PGA golf course.

This is James Mattis, former commander of CentCom, a Marine general with 41 years’ experience, the most respected combat leader of the last two American generations.

So, when “Mad Dog Mattis” addressed the Aspen Security Forum and called Israel “unsustainable,” even Israel listened.

Many people “talk the talk” and Mattis talks that “talk” better than anyone.  He also “walks the walk” as well.  Below are selected quotes from Mattis, some of the few that can be published as most contain language only Marines use, a bit “too specific” for civilians:

“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”

“The most important six inches on the battlefield is between your ears.”

“You are part of the world’s most feared and trusted force. Engage your brain before you engage your weapon.”

“There are hunters and there are victims. By your discipline, cunning,

obedience and alertness, you will decide if you are a hunter or a victim.”

“No war is over until the enemy says it’s over. We may think it over, we may declare it over, but in fact, the enemy gets a vote.”

“You cannot allow any of your people to avoid the brutal facts. If they start living in a dream world, it’s going to be bad.”

It was this last quote that may well have pushed the Times of Israel to note, finally, that Israel’s “dream world” may be coming to an end.

____________________________________

THE “APARTHEID BOMB”

Censored from news around the world, edited from broadcasts, the July 25, 2013, Times of Israel drops the “Apartheid Bomb,” the first time this term has been used with authority.  On the dais with Mattis was CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, coined “the voice of the Mossad” by author Jeff Gates.  From the Times of Israel:

“Mattis then described a hypothetical in which 500 Jewish settlers live among 10,000 Arabs, and the implications of where Israel draws the border. He called it a choice between giving up the idea of a Jewish state or becoming an apartheid state.”

The message of the destructive role of Israel’s illegal settlements, not just in territories occupied after the 1967 war but in violation of the 1949 Armistice Demarcation Lines as well, territory guaranteed as “Arab only,” making up nearly one third of Israel’s legally accepted borders.

Over 95% of that territory has been seized and its Palestinian population “ethnically cleansed.”

Thus, Mattis’s statement on “apartheid” when place in the context of his strong support of Secretary of State John Kerry’s current initiatives, places additional pressure on Israel, pressure not seen since the Carter presidency.

When taken with European Union moves in July, a vote authorizing broad trade sanctions against Israeli entities located on Arab land, not just those termed “occupied territories,” Mattis use of “unsustainable” to describe Israel’s future is meant to be a “wake up call” for a nation Mattis clearly believes has been living in a “dream world.”

_____________________________________

ISRAEL’S “LONE WOLF” POLICY AGAINST SYRIA

It has become increasingly obvious that the US and European Union see the fall of the Assad government in Syria as unlikely.

Moreover, forces dedicated to the war on Syria are finding “greener pastures” in Iraq with over 600 killed last month alone by terrorists under Israeli backed Al Qaeda groups moving back and forth between Iraq, Jordan and Syria.

Increasingly, despite broad financial and military aid from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Assad’s forces are consolidating gains across Syria and inflicting devastating casualties.

Israel’s response, one that has frightened some military leaders there, has been to commit to direct military intervention.  Israel has already lost one Dolphin submarine and at least one combat aircraft and crew.

____________________________________

CONFRONTATION WITH RUSSIA

Military analysts failed to note something very important about Russian weapons deliveries to Syria.  One key point was the S300 system, 250 missiles delivered by April 1, 2013, confirmed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

More missiles with mobile launchers and command modules have been delivered since, estimated at nearly 400 by mid-July.

Israel has fewer than 400 first line combat aircraft in its entire air force. The number of air defense interceptor missiles allocated to Syria, missiles that represent an addition to their current embedded inventory, is highly asymmetrical.

There is no remote hope of Israel every gaining air supremacy over Syria should the conflict widen yet it is obvious that these are Israel’s plans.

With a Russian naval force off Syria’s coast, continued missile attacks, cited by Jane’s as using Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from Israel’s remaining German donated Dolphin nuclear-armed submarines, put Israel at risk of military confrontation with Russia.

We may well have not only supported General Mattis’s use of the word “unsustainable” but have shown it to be an understatement.

 a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/08/04/top-american-general-cites-israel-as-unsustainable-and-apartheid/">Source

Dome of the Rock Virtually Destroyed

 

And burned the house of the LORD, and the king’s house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire-Jeremiah 52:13

Dome of the Rock

 Roi Tov

Few holidays are more confused than the fast day of Tisha B’Av (“the ninth of Av”) in Israel. Formally, it commemorates the destruction of the First and Second Temples in Jerusalem. Contradicting its source, it reintroduced idolatry by its date having become a magic number.

Jewish religious communities commemorate a plethora of other events that they define as disasters. It is claimed that on this date SS commander Heinrich Himmler received approval from the Nazi Party for The Final Solution. On this day started the mass deportation of Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto, Ariel Sharon’s Gaza Disengagement Plan and many more. On this day, hungry Israel becomes an astrologist’s Utopia.

Don’t laugh, it kills. A Pulsa diNura^* and a little help from good friends destroyed the life of the perpetrator of the Gaza Disengagement Plan.

From time to time, I report on the slow advances Israel makes in its plan to construct the Third Temple on the Temple Mount, where today is the Dome of the Rock. Last October in Israel gets closer to Third Temple, and afterwards in Israel Expands Western Wall.

Some of the preparations relate to the ground; others to the artifacts and ceremonies prepared by dedicated colleges. The latter are purposely changing the Biblical texts. The best known example of manipulation is the Menorah, the seven branches lampstand which was adopted by the State of Israel as its symbol. The reproduction publicly displayed these days is not the one described in the Bible, but the Roman pagan version (see Un-Branding Israel).

On Tisha B’Av 2013 (July 15), Israel inaugurated a new step in the preparations, virtually exploding the Dome of the Rock.

Har Kodesh Snapshot

A Graffiti of the Third Temple Appears over a Picture of the Dome of the Rock

Related: Israel gets closer to Third Temple

Did you know? Military Rabbinate Plans Third Temple

 

Holy Mount Unholy Deeds

On the evening before the fast, a press release was published by Har Kodesh, announcing its 3D virtual tour of the Temple Mount. The company’s name means “Holy Mount.”

                                                Third Temple in the Har Kodesh Website
              Jewish Fundamentalism and the Temple Mount: Who Will Build the Third Temple?


Out of respect to Muslim readers I won’t quote the Hebrew reports except one that shows the trend: “In the tour, you will be able to tour Har HaBait (“Mount of the House,” the Hebrew name of the Temple Mount) from nearby and see what those evil Muslims have done to our beautiful place, and what we can do to them now.” A superb example of the charming Jewish interpretation ofthou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Lev 19:18).

The address of the company identifies it as a commercial enterprise. It is owned by “Lev HaUma” (Heart of the Nation), an NGO. The tour uses various virtual guides, three dimensional renderings of real people and their real voices. The one in the snapshot below is Abshalom Kor, a well-known linguist. Another one belongs to Minister of Housing and Construction Uri Ariel, from the settler party The Jewish Home. To the say the least, a formal part of the Israeli Government was aware of the initiative and cooperated with it.

                                            Dome of the Rock in the Har Kodesh Website
                     Jewish Fundamentalism and the Temple Mount: Who Will Build the Third

The press release states that the minister wants to create a museum on the Mount. The only way of doing that is by removing the Dome of the Rock and the adjacent al-Aqsa mosques. The company doesn’t explain how this would be achieved except for saying “quickly, in our days, amen.” The NGO had made the Third Temple experience available for those unable to visit the relevant sites.
Emphasizing this point “at any moment with a click on the mouse, the Dome of the Rock vanishes.” At that moment, it is replaced by the Third Temple.

Hey, Brute Samson, Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?⁺. The real Temple is in our heart; invariably, you violate it by raping others at any opportunity you have in the best fashion of the indefatigable conspirators.^**“What we can do to them now,” you obscurely threat. Let me dare you. Show us! You know that if you dare, you’ll die with the Philistines.⁺⁺
———

^* Pulsa diNura (“lashes of fire” in Aramaic) is Jewish ceremony calling the angels of destruction to block heavenly forgiveness of one’s sins, causing all Biblical curses to befall the victim.
Two cases became infamous.

On October 6, 1995, at midnight, Avigdor Eskin, a prominent member of the Settler Gush Emunim movement recited (it was made public by the media): “Angels of destruction will hit him. He is damned wherever he goes. His soul will instantly leave his body… and he will not survive a month. Dark will be his path and God’s angel will chase him. A disaster he has never experienced will befall him and all curses known in the Torah will apply to him. I deliver to you, the angels of wrath and ire, Yitzhak, the son of Rosa Rabin, that you may smother him and the specter of him, and cast him into hell, and dry up his wealth, and plague his thoughts, and scatter his mind that he may be steadily diminished until he reaches his death. Put to death the cursed Yitzhak. May he be damned, damned, damned!” Later, in Court, it was proved that the Shin Beth secret police had been involved in the subsequent assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Another published event is related to the odd stroke of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. After the abovementioned Eskin faced troubles for his public course, the perpetrators of this one were careful not to identify themselves. In July 2005, opponents of the Gaza pullout plan recited the Pulsa diNura in the old cemetery of Rosh Pina, asking the Angel of Death to kill Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Seven months later, he was clumsily taken in ambulance to the hospital during Jerusalem’s rush hour, instead of being taken with the standby helicopter available to Prime Ministers. Along the way—oops!—he was given the wrong drug. Since then he is in a coma. Shin Beth agents refuse to comment.

Israel’s Prosecutor refused to charge them, claiming that their prayers were aimed at God and not to specific persons, thus they were not instigating violence. Oddly, Shin Beth agent Avishai Raviv (a.k.a. “Agent Champagne” as disclosed by the Shin Beth during the Rabin’s assassiantion trial) instigated the assassin but was absolved by Court. He just followed orders.

⁺ 1 Corinthians 3:16-17

⁺⁺ The Samson Option is the common name for Israel’s nuclear option. It originates in Judges 16:30And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life. It is now an idion for a suicidal attack.

^** ”Indefatigable conspirator” is an indirect method of referring to the Shin Beth secret police and its agents. Four catchy phrases ruined Shimon Peres political life, relegating him to the simple formalities of Israel’s Presidency. “Yes and No” was coined by Sefy Rivlin, and cost Peres the 1981 and 1984 elections. A Peres puppet was shown answering “yes and no” to every question asked. Before that, in 1977, Yitzhak Rabin called Peres an “indefatigable conspirator.” Since this article is in English, I won’t analyze the brilliance of the Hebrew saying; in the feat of his lifetime, Rabin ruined Peres with three words. The other two phrases are related to Shimon Peres’ attempt in 1990 to replace Shamir’s government—of which he was Minister of Finances—by a narrow government led by Labor and supported by ultra-Orthodox parties. Peres failed, and Rabin hit again. He called the affair the “Dirty Trick” (literally “The Stinking Exercise”). In the popular protests that followed, the fourth slogan appeared: “Mush’hatim, nim’astem!” (roughly “corrupt people, we’re fed up with you!”). Rabin used it as the Labor slogan for the 1992 election, which he won. It was obvious that he included Peres in the culprits at whom the slogan was aimed.

 Source

UK MP and Israel Critic David Ward is Suspended From Party

Israel lobby draws the ‘red lines’ and dictates ‘precise terms’ for future Liberal Democrat debate, apparently.

by Stuart Littlewood

Back in January the Liberal Democrat leadership threw a mighty wobbly when MP David Ward made this remark on his website: “I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.”

Goaded by the Holocaust Educational Trust and the Board of Deputies of British Jews, who complained that Ward’s remarks “deliberately abused the memory of the Holocaust” and were “sickening” and “offensive”, the party’s Chief Whip, Alistair Carmichael, agreed they were “wholly inappropriate” and that singling out ‘the Jews’ in that way crossed a red line.

Ward was treated like a delinquent. According to the Jewish Chronicle http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/102865/clegg-response-david-ward-%EF%AC%81g-leaf party leader Nick Clegg ordered him to work alongside Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel “to identify and agree language that will be proportionate and precise” in future debate. Disciplinary steps would then be reviewed.

The story went quiet for a few months. Then this week, just as Parliament broke up for the long summer holiday, Ward received a letter from Carmichael ‘withdrawing the whip’ (suspending him from the parliamentary party), until 13 September. This is hardly a severe punishment considering MPs are away until 2 September.

As reported by Sky News http://news.sky.com/story/1117439/david-ward-in-row-after-zionist-tweet Carmichael wrote: “As we have sought to impress upon you repeatedly, we are having to decide on whether language you chose to use in January and February, and now this month, is language which brings the party into disrepute or harms the interests of the Party.

“We put it to you that your most recent statement – which specifically questions the continuing existence of the State of Israel – is neither proportionate nor precise. Unfortunately, we considered your explanation to be unconvincing and it did not satisfy us that you understood the importance of conducting the debate on this issue at all times and in all places in terms that are proportionate and precise.

“You will know that Nick [Clegg], Simon [Hughes] and I have a consistent track record of being outspoken about illegal settlement activities of Israeli governments and the threat this poses to the two-state solution for which the party has long argued.

“It is also immensely frustrating for us to find ourselves constantly responding to questions about disproportionate and imprecise language from you. These interventions cause considerable offence rather than addressing questions of political substance about the plight of the Palestinian people and the right of Israel’s citizens to live a life free of violence. It is extraordinarily difficult to gain traction in that debate at an effective political level if the expression of our concerns is undermined by the way your language misrepresents the view of our party.

“Whilst we understand you have your own views about this process, which has been long and complicated, we also hope you recognise that we have given you every opportunity to reconcile the expression of your views with the party’s policy on a two-state solution. Unfortunately, you have not been able to do that.

He won’t apologise for calling Israel an apartheid state

Only a couple of days earlier David Ward had tweeted: “Am I wrong or are am I right? At long last the Zionists are losing the battle – how long can the apartheid State of Israel last?”

As the punishment, Ward condemned it as “disproportionate” saying his views were widely shared http://uk.news.yahoo.com/israel-tweet-lib-dem-mp-suspended-135700994.html#IXktdLc. “I will not apologise for describing the state of Israel as an apartheid state. I don’t know how you can describe it as anything else,” he said. “I am genuinely quite shocked at the reaction to the kind of thing many people say.”

The Israel lobby, no doubt hoping to see much more blood on the carpet, was disappointed with the ruling. Holocaust Educational Trust chief executive Karen Pollock said: “David Ward has never fully apologised for his comments… It is about time the whip was withdrawn but the timing allows Mr Ward to repeat his unacceptable views when Parliament returns in the autumn.”

Board of Deputies vice-president Jonathan Arkush said the suspension was too little, too late and an empty gesture.

In one sense the LibDem action blows a raspberry at the outside meddlers. But this show of defiance is overshadowed by the general gutlessness that’s evident in the way the party caves in to Pro-Israel pressure.

Some of the remarks in the Carmichael letter are really quite silly…

• “We have given you every opportunity to reconcile the expression of your views with the party’s policy on a two-state solution… the two-state solution for which the party has long argued.”

The party is sadly out of date. I strongly advise Clegg and Co to watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaxAckFCuQ . Miko Peled is an Israeli Jew, the son of an Israeli general and a former soldier in the Israeli army. You couldn’t find a more authentic insider source. He confirms in the bluntest words what many have known and been saying for years. Here is a flavour.

“The name of the game: erasing Palestine, getting rid of the people and de-Arabizing the country…

“When people talk about the possibility of Israel soArticle – mehow giving up the West Bank for a Palestinian state, if it wasn’t so sad it would be funny. It shows a complete misunderstanding of the objective of Zionism and the Zionist state.

“By 1993 the Israelis had achieved their mission to make the conquest of the West Bank irreversible. By 1993 the Israeli government knew for certain that a Palestinian state could not be established in the West Bank – the settlements were there, $billions were invested, the entire Jordan River valley was settled… there was no place any more for a Palestinian state to be established. That is when Israel said, OK, we’ll begin negotiations…”

Peled also describes the Israeli army, in which he served, as “one of the best trained and best equipped and best fed terrorist organisations in the world.”

• “It is immensely frustrating for us to constantly respond to questions about disproportionate and imprecise language from you. These interventions cause considerable offence rather than addressing questions of political substance about the plight of the Palestinian people.”

I can’t recall the LibDem leadership ever confronting the plight of the Palestinians in a robust way. Anyone who tries to – Baroness Jenny Tonge for example – gets slapped down and sacked. The political substance is Israel’s lawless and hideous conduct and the international community’s lack of backbone to deal with it.

• “We are not satisfied that you understand the importance of conducting the debate on this issue at all times and in all places in terms that are proportionate and precise.”

Anyone who attempts to debate any matter relating to Israel’s criminality is howled down by the Israel lobby while party bosses put the boot in. Nothing, it now seems, can be said unless it is “proportionate and precise” in Tel Aviv’s terms.

• “Nick, Simon and I have a consistent track record of being outspoken about illegal settlement activities of Israeli governments.”

Israel’s settlements are so illegal – a war crime, in fact – that our tremulous trio can hardly escape speaking up. The settlement building programme began with the Allon Plan in 1967 and still goes on. What effect has their so-called outspokenness had all these years? Words are plainly not enough. What real hard-edged action have the LibDems taken?

Clegg did himself and his party no favours when he came out with this lopsided statement http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/41015/nick-clegg-we-got-it-wrong-israel : “Israel’s right to thrive in peace and security is non-negotiable for Liberal Democrats. No other country so continually has its right to exist called into question as does Israel, and that is intolerable. There can be no solution to the problems of the Middle East that does not include a full and proper recognition of Israel by all parties to the conflict.”

You’d be forgiven for thinking it was written by Mark Regev’s hasbara office. Why on earth would anyone recognise a state founded on terror, grand theft and ethnic cleansing at gunpoint?

Why would anyone recognise a state that is contemptuous of international and humanitarian law?

Why would anyone recognise a state that’s bristling with nukes and other WMDs but refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty or place them under international inspection and safeguards, then foams at the mouth at the thought of a neighbouring country having a nuclear weapons programme?

Why would anyone recognise a state that itself does not recognise the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and still prevents refugees from returning home in defiance of UN Resolution 194 (re-affirmed every year since 1949)… a state that applies a brutal, illegal yet seemingly permanent military occupation and severely restricts movement of people, essential supplies and normal trade goods in the Palestinian homeland?

And why would anyone recognise a state that refuses to declare its borders so that it can continue to pursue its expansionist plans? In any case, which Israel does Clegg suggest we recognise – Israel within the 1947 UN Partition borders? Israel within the 1949 Armistice borders? Or Israel as now, in full occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Old City, and part of Syria, and not forgetting its vicious blockade on Gaza and repeated violation of Lebanese borders?

Why aren’t Clegg, Carmichael and Hughes saying, loudly and clearly, “No recognition until the occupation ends, international law is fully respected and implemented, and the Palestinians’ self-determination, security and freedoms are guaranteed.”?

Quite simply, there can be no peace until all that happens.

“You cannot criticize Israel in this country and survive”
Helen Thomas

Source

 

Israeli soldiers have depraved “fun” making “Rachel Corrie pancakes”

by Ali Abunimah

Israeli soldiers had a “fun” time making what they called “Rachel Corrie pancakes.”
Photos of the event were posted on the Facebook page of the “Heritage House,” a settlement in occupied East Jerusalem that houses so-called “lone soldiers,” men recruited from overseas to join the Israeli occupation forces.

Above the photos of young men, some in Israeli army fatigues or apparently carrying guns, is the caption “Afternoon of ‘rachel corrie’ Pancakes and fun!”

Rachel Corrie is the young American woman murdered by an Israeli soldier who crushed her to death with a bulldozer as she tried to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian family home in the occupied Gaza Strip on 16 March 2003.

The depraved joke that these men were presumably making is a play on the English idiom “flat as a pancake.” Their celebration and joking about Rachel Corrie’s death is utterly vile and reflects the culture of dehumanization inculcated into Israeli soldiers.

Ben Packer, the director and rabbi of “Heritage House,” hit back at some negative comments about the images, posting this response:

In honor of the all the hate messages from the anti-Israel/Jewish crowd, one of our supporters has pledged $5 towards Israeli settlements (maybe for additional bulldozers) for each additional comment. keep’em coming anti-semites! We love our Israeli soldiers and will not back down in the face of those who attempt to endanger them!

Packer added, “Anti-Israel activists are all in a tizzy about these pictures! makes them even funnier!!!”

The page also appeals for donations “to support our guests and ‘lone soldiers.’” Residents of the “Heritage House” settlement also take part in colonization activities in other parts of the occupied West Bank, including Hebron.

Alex Winston is the “den mother” of The Heritage House men’s dormitory. Alex Winston is a member of the Israeli army’s Givati Brigade.

Nesim Pasarel (right with weapon) and Jonathan Leibovits (seated)

Update: The gallery was removed shortly after the publication of this post.)

The true face of the “IDF”

In recent months, The Electronic Intifada has highlighted incidents of Israeli soldiers using social media to advocate brutal violence, and acts of sadistic torture and murder of children.

The Electronic Intifada also revealed images soldiers posted on the photo-sharing site Instagram of nudity, drug use and violence and most notoriously of a Palestinian child seen through the scope of a sniper’s rifle.

This week, the army began investigating a video posted online of Israeli soldiers frying a small bird alive, an act that had no purpose but gratuitous animal cruelty.

Israeli army attempts to halt social media scandals

 

The “Rachel Corrie pancakes” photos provide yet another window into the Israeli army’s culture of violence and come just as the occupation forces have tried to staunch the flow of embarrassing incidents on social media that have hurt its propaganda efforts.

The campaign, which includes this YouTube video, urges soldiers to “improve their image online.”

The voiceover in the video commands:

Soldier! Improve your appearance! Always remember: You are the face of the IDF. So improve your appearance - online!

The IDF is glad to invite you to get connected, share, love, tweet, respond, and show the pretty face of the IDF

So go into the official pages and send us pictures, videoclips, and stories. The IDF on the Internet. One army, everybody’s face.

The “lone soldiers” at the Heritage House settler-colony have clearly not got the message.
With thanks to Dena Shunra for assistance with research and translation and Benjamin Doherty for assistance with research

Source