Anyone who knows about Haaretz' political orientation (leftwing and against Jewish residency in Yehuda and Shomron), should not be surprised, that its coverage about an incident in Shomron about Jewish worshippers was the opposite to INN and Ynetnews.
While these reported about the desecretation of the tombs of Joshua and Calev by ARABS, Haaretz reported about complaints from Arabs concerning desecration of an Arab graveyard by those worshippers.
This is hypocrisy, pure and simple!
Friday, December 17, 2010
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
What about Jewish rights?
Arab Israelis bitterly complained last week that the IDF forbids them from entering the Jewish street in Hebron. Despite the security motive behind the ban (security alone and nothing else,) this is a bothersome phenomenon. It’s somewhat reminiscent of the old South Africa, and it doesn’t only hurt Arabs – many roads in Judea and Samaria are closed off to Jews.
We should note that in Hebron there is one street that is partly closed to Arabs and hundreds of streets that are completely closed off to Jews. If a Jew insists on getting there, he will risk being lynched. Should such Jew be able to get out of there, he will immediately be detained by the police for entering a zone that was closed off via an order signed by a general.
Officially speaking, this order refers to “Israelis,” yet it unequivocally addresses Jews. Arabs possessing an Israeli ID are allowed to enter Ramallah or Nablus as often as they want. Yet Jews are not allowed to do so. Isn’t that apartheid? And what’s the reason for the silence displayed by Breaking the Silence members in the face of ethnic discrimination against Jews?
Up until 10 years ago, Jewish motorists could drive from the community of Dolev to Jerusalem in half an hour. Today, they are forced to drive for an hour and a half, because the High Court of Justice endorsed the IDF’s recommendation to close off a shortcut that passes through the Palestinian village of Ein Arik. Arab motorists are allowed to drive through the village, but Jews are not.
Not too long ago, High Court judges forces the IDF to open Highway 443 to Arab traffic, yet they accepted the military explanation for keeping the Ein Arik road closed off to Jews.
Military rule
Yet beyond the roads, the major harm to Jewish freedom of movement beyond the Green Line is only a tiny part of the overall harm to their basic rights. In fact, the Jews in Judea and Samaria are the only population group in the area still wholly subordinated to a military administration.
Since Oslo, most Palestinians enjoy civilian self-rule, yet 300,000 settlers cannot build a balcony without getting an IDF permit. Only recently, a military court ruled that Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom does not apply to a Yitzhar resident who was slapped with a restraining order from his home. The same is true for the law on freedom of occupation.
In order to complete the grim picture of the situation of Jewish human rights in the territories, we should mention the words of Professor Yedidia Stern, a member of the commission of inquiry into the handling of Gush Katif evacuees. Last week he characterized the injustice caused to the uprooted residents as “the gravest blow to human rights in the State of Israel’s history.”
For some reason, Stern’s words elicited almost no public response. Yet next week, tempers will flare again around here because of an Arab who underwent a humiliating security screening at Ben-Gurion Airport.
We should note that in Hebron there is one street that is partly closed to Arabs and hundreds of streets that are completely closed off to Jews. If a Jew insists on getting there, he will risk being lynched. Should such Jew be able to get out of there, he will immediately be detained by the police for entering a zone that was closed off via an order signed by a general.
Officially speaking, this order refers to “Israelis,” yet it unequivocally addresses Jews. Arabs possessing an Israeli ID are allowed to enter Ramallah or Nablus as often as they want. Yet Jews are not allowed to do so. Isn’t that apartheid? And what’s the reason for the silence displayed by Breaking the Silence members in the face of ethnic discrimination against Jews?
Up until 10 years ago, Jewish motorists could drive from the community of Dolev to Jerusalem in half an hour. Today, they are forced to drive for an hour and a half, because the High Court of Justice endorsed the IDF’s recommendation to close off a shortcut that passes through the Palestinian village of Ein Arik. Arab motorists are allowed to drive through the village, but Jews are not.
Not too long ago, High Court judges forces the IDF to open Highway 443 to Arab traffic, yet they accepted the military explanation for keeping the Ein Arik road closed off to Jews.
Military rule
Yet beyond the roads, the major harm to Jewish freedom of movement beyond the Green Line is only a tiny part of the overall harm to their basic rights. In fact, the Jews in Judea and Samaria are the only population group in the area still wholly subordinated to a military administration.
Since Oslo, most Palestinians enjoy civilian self-rule, yet 300,000 settlers cannot build a balcony without getting an IDF permit. Only recently, a military court ruled that Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom does not apply to a Yitzhar resident who was slapped with a restraining order from his home. The same is true for the law on freedom of occupation.
In order to complete the grim picture of the situation of Jewish human rights in the territories, we should mention the words of Professor Yedidia Stern, a member of the commission of inquiry into the handling of Gush Katif evacuees. Last week he characterized the injustice caused to the uprooted residents as “the gravest blow to human rights in the State of Israel’s history.”
For some reason, Stern’s words elicited almost no public response. Yet next week, tempers will flare again around here because of an Arab who underwent a humiliating security screening at Ben-Gurion Airport.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Our World: Alternatives to surrender
To the roaring cheers of the local media, on Sunday the Schalit family embarked on a cross-country march to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s residence. They set out two days after the fourth anniversary of IDF Sgt. Gilad Schalit’s captivity.
Outside their home on Sunday, Gilad’s father Noam Schalit pledged not to return home without his son. The Schalit family intends to camp out outside of Netanyahu’s home until the government reunites them with Gilad.
For weeks the local media – and especially Ma’ariv and Yediot Aharonot – have portrayed the Schalit family’s trek to Netanyahu as a reenactment of Moses’ journey to Pharaoh.
Like Pharaoh, the media insinuates that Netanyahu is evil because he refuses to free Gilad from bondage.
The only drawback to this dramatic, newspaper- selling story is that it is wrong. Gilad Schalit is not a hostage in Jerusalem. He is a hostage in Gaza. His captor is not Netanyahu. His captor is Hamas.
And because the story is wrong, the media organized cavalcade of ten thousand well-intentioned Israelis is moving in the wrong direction. And not only is it going in the wrong direction, it is doing so at Gilad Schalit’s expense.
The truth that Yediot and Ma’ariv’s marketing departments ignore is that Schalit’s continued captivity is a function of Hamas’s growing strength. To bring him home, Israel shouldn’t release a thousand terrorists from prison.
To bring Gilad Schalit home a free man, Israel must weaken Hamas. And this is an eminently achievable goal. Noam Schalit knows it is an achievable goal. That is why last week he was the most outspoken critic of Netanyahu’s decision to abandon Israel’s economic sanctions against Hamas-controlled Gaza. That is why over the past four years, the Schalit family has staged countless protests against Israel’s massive and continuous assistance to Hamas-controlled Gaza. If anything positive is to come from this march, then when the Schalit family arrives in Jerusalem they should abandon the newspapers’ demand that Israel surrender to all of Hamas’s demands. They should acknowledge that doing so will only guarantee that more Israelis will be kidnapped and murdered by Hamas and its allies.
If the Schalits wish to criticize the government, they should criticize Netanyahu and his coalition for the steps they have taken to strengthen Hamas. The Schalits should demand that the government reinstate and tighten Israel’s economic sanctions against Gaza. They should demand that Israel end its supply of electricity and gasoline to Gaza and take more effective action to block smuggling through the tunnels along the Gaza-Egypt border.
All of these actions will weaken Hamas, and so contribute to the prospect of it being forced by the Gazans themselves to release Schalit to his family.
ONE OF the important truths ignored by Israel’s pathological media is that Hamas and its Iranian sponsor are not all powerful. They are vulnerable to criticism from their own publics. And Israel is capable of fomenting such criticism.
For example, the imprisoned terrorists whose release Hamas demands in exchange for releasing Schalit have consistently responded rationally to Israeli threats. The Knesset is slowly debating a bill that would worsen prison conditions of terrorists. And the terrorists are worried.
Their worry provoked them to demand that Hamas be more forthcoming with Schalit.
By the same token, were Israel to cut off electricity to Gaza – an act that is not merely lawful, but arguably required by international law – we could expect residents of Gaza to express a similarly rational demand to Hamas. That is, were Israel to weaken public support for Hamas, Hamas would be more likely to bow to Israel’s will.
And if Hamas is vulnerable to public criticism, the Iranian regime is downright terrified of public criticism. Take the regime’s behavior in the wake of the Turkish-Hamas flotilla campaign.
In the days that followed Israel’s bungled May 31 takeover of the Mavi Marmara, Iran announced it was sending two of its own ships to Gaza. Israel responded rationally and forthrightly. The government warned that any Iranian ship would be viewed as an enemy ship and Israel would respond in accordance with the rules of war.
As Iran expert Michael Ledeen has argued repeatedly, the Iranian regime is terrified of getting the Iranian people angry over its radical foreign policy. In light of its precarious standing with its own public, Israel’s forthright threat of war brought the regime to its knees.
Last Thursday, Hossein Sheikholdslam, the Iranian regime functionary responsible for the Gaza-bound ships, told the Iranian news service IRNA that plans to send the ships were scrapped because Israel “sent a letter to the United Nations saying that the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on [Israel] and it will confront it.”
During the war with Iran’s Hizbullah proxy in 2006, thousands of Iranians demonstrated against Hizbullah. They demanded that the regime invest its money in the local economy and not in Hizbullah and the Palestinians.
Were Israel to present Schalit as an Israeli victim of the Iranian regime, it could provoke a similar popular outcry against Iran’s support for Hamas. The media-manipulated Schalits are not the only ones acting precisely against their own interests. The government is acting with similar madness in its relations with the Obama administration. Indeed, Netanyahu ended Israel’s lawful economic sanctions against Hamas-controlled Gaza (sanctions that served, among other things as a bargaining chip for freeing Schalit), because the Obama administration placed overwhelming pressure on him to do so.
Not wishing to let the Mavi Marmara crisis go to waste, US President Barack Obama had used it as a means to weaken Israel against Hamas. Obama announced that he was giving Hamas-controlled Gaza $400 million in US aid. He forced Netanyahu to end Israel’s economic sanctions against the illegal Hamas regime.
Moreover, according to remarks by a senior Hamas terrorist to the London-based Al- Quds al-Arabi newspaper on Friday, the Obama administration maintains direct ties to the Hamas leadership in Syria.
WHEN NETANYAHU entered office last spring his desire to appease Obama was understandable. At the time, he was operating under the hope that perhaps Obama could be appeased into ending his onslaught against the Jewish state. But the events of the past year have made clear that Obama is unappeasable. Every concession Israel has made to Obama has merely whetted the US president’s appetite for more.
The policy implications of this state of affairs are clear. First, Israel must strive to weaken Obama. Since Israeli concessions to Obama strengthen him, Israel must first and foremost stop giving him concessions.
Weakening Obama does not involve openly attacking him. It means Israel should act in a way that advances its interests and forces Obama to reconsider the desirability of his current foreign policy.
Regionally, Israel should make common cause with the Kurds of Iran, Iraq and Syria who are now being assaulted by Iran, Turkey and Syria. Doing so is not simply the moral thing to do. It weakens Iran, Syria and Turkey and demonstrates that Obama’s appeasement policies are harming those who love freedom and empowering those who hate it.
By the same token, Israel should do everything it can to strengthen the Iranian Green movement. Every anti-regime action in Iran – regardless of its size – harms the regime and therefore helps Israel. And every anti-regime action in Iran exposes the moral depravity and strategic idiocy of Obama’s policy of appeasing the mullocracy.
AS FOR the US domestic political realm, in Ambassador Michael Oren’s all but schizophrenic recent statements about the Obama administration’s policy towards Israel, we may at last be witnessing an embrace of political sanity on the part of the government.
For the past several months, Oren has acted as the Obama administration’s most energetic cheerleader to the US Jewish community.
He has repeatedly and wrongly reassured US Jewish audiences that Obama is a great friend of Israel, that his Democratic Party remains loyal to the US-Israel alliance and that the Republicans are wrong to claim that there is a difference between the two major US political parties when it comes to supporting Israel.
The pinnacle of Oren’s pro-Obama campaign came with his interview last week with The Jerusalem Post. There he brought all of these false and counter-productive claims into the public realm. Apparently Oren’s decision to make his adulation of the Obama administration public finally forced his bosses in Jerusalem to order him to cease, desist and do an about face.
And so, last week, Oren told a closed audience of Israeli diplomats the truth. Under Obama, Oren whispered, there has been a “tectonic rift” in US relations with Israel. While some of Obama’s advisers are sympathetic to Israel, these advisers have no influence on Obama’s positions on Israel.
No doubt recognizing how silly his about face made him look, Oren tried to deny his statements at the Foreign Ministry. But it is hard to imagine anyone will take him seriously.
During his visit to the White House next week, Netanyahu should follow the path set by Oren’s quickly leaked remarks. Netanyahu should abstain from praising Obama for his friendship and speak instead about the fact that the US-Israel alliance is vital for both countries’ national security.
Netanyahu should insist on the right to call on questioners at his joint appearance with Obama. And he should use those questions and those appearances to discuss why Israel’s actions are not only legal and necessary for Israel, but vital for US national security. During his stay in the US, Netanyahu should discuss the global jihad, Islamic terrorism, the freedom-loving Kurds and the freedom-loving Iranian people every chance he gets.
Indeed, he should create opportunities to discuss them.
Here we see a crucial point of convergence between the Schalit family march to Jerusalem and Netanyahu’s trip to Washington. To increase the effectiveness of their efforts on behalf of Gilad, ahead of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, the marchers should split into two groups.
The first group should continue to Jerusalem and demand that Israel take a firmer stand against Hamas. The second group should walk to Tel Aviv and camp out outside the US Embassy. There they should demand that the administration end its contacts with Hamas, end its pressure on the Israeli government to strengthen Hamas, cancel Obama’s plan to give an additional $400 million dollars in aid to Hamas and use the US’s position on the UN Security Council to condemn Turkey for its material support for Hamas.
For too long, by allowing themselves to be led by our deranged media, Israeli citizens and governments alike have ignored the basic fact that the answer to every question is not more Israeli concessions. Contrary to what our tabloids would have us believe, surrender is only one option among many. It is time we try out some alternatives.
caroline@carolineglick.com
Outside their home on Sunday, Gilad’s father Noam Schalit pledged not to return home without his son. The Schalit family intends to camp out outside of Netanyahu’s home until the government reunites them with Gilad.
For weeks the local media – and especially Ma’ariv and Yediot Aharonot – have portrayed the Schalit family’s trek to Netanyahu as a reenactment of Moses’ journey to Pharaoh.
Like Pharaoh, the media insinuates that Netanyahu is evil because he refuses to free Gilad from bondage.
The only drawback to this dramatic, newspaper- selling story is that it is wrong. Gilad Schalit is not a hostage in Jerusalem. He is a hostage in Gaza. His captor is not Netanyahu. His captor is Hamas.
And because the story is wrong, the media organized cavalcade of ten thousand well-intentioned Israelis is moving in the wrong direction. And not only is it going in the wrong direction, it is doing so at Gilad Schalit’s expense.
The truth that Yediot and Ma’ariv’s marketing departments ignore is that Schalit’s continued captivity is a function of Hamas’s growing strength. To bring him home, Israel shouldn’t release a thousand terrorists from prison.
To bring Gilad Schalit home a free man, Israel must weaken Hamas. And this is an eminently achievable goal. Noam Schalit knows it is an achievable goal. That is why last week he was the most outspoken critic of Netanyahu’s decision to abandon Israel’s economic sanctions against Hamas-controlled Gaza. That is why over the past four years, the Schalit family has staged countless protests against Israel’s massive and continuous assistance to Hamas-controlled Gaza. If anything positive is to come from this march, then when the Schalit family arrives in Jerusalem they should abandon the newspapers’ demand that Israel surrender to all of Hamas’s demands. They should acknowledge that doing so will only guarantee that more Israelis will be kidnapped and murdered by Hamas and its allies.
If the Schalits wish to criticize the government, they should criticize Netanyahu and his coalition for the steps they have taken to strengthen Hamas. The Schalits should demand that the government reinstate and tighten Israel’s economic sanctions against Gaza. They should demand that Israel end its supply of electricity and gasoline to Gaza and take more effective action to block smuggling through the tunnels along the Gaza-Egypt border.
All of these actions will weaken Hamas, and so contribute to the prospect of it being forced by the Gazans themselves to release Schalit to his family.
ONE OF the important truths ignored by Israel’s pathological media is that Hamas and its Iranian sponsor are not all powerful. They are vulnerable to criticism from their own publics. And Israel is capable of fomenting such criticism.
For example, the imprisoned terrorists whose release Hamas demands in exchange for releasing Schalit have consistently responded rationally to Israeli threats. The Knesset is slowly debating a bill that would worsen prison conditions of terrorists. And the terrorists are worried.
Their worry provoked them to demand that Hamas be more forthcoming with Schalit.
By the same token, were Israel to cut off electricity to Gaza – an act that is not merely lawful, but arguably required by international law – we could expect residents of Gaza to express a similarly rational demand to Hamas. That is, were Israel to weaken public support for Hamas, Hamas would be more likely to bow to Israel’s will.
And if Hamas is vulnerable to public criticism, the Iranian regime is downright terrified of public criticism. Take the regime’s behavior in the wake of the Turkish-Hamas flotilla campaign.
In the days that followed Israel’s bungled May 31 takeover of the Mavi Marmara, Iran announced it was sending two of its own ships to Gaza. Israel responded rationally and forthrightly. The government warned that any Iranian ship would be viewed as an enemy ship and Israel would respond in accordance with the rules of war.
As Iran expert Michael Ledeen has argued repeatedly, the Iranian regime is terrified of getting the Iranian people angry over its radical foreign policy. In light of its precarious standing with its own public, Israel’s forthright threat of war brought the regime to its knees.
Last Thursday, Hossein Sheikholdslam, the Iranian regime functionary responsible for the Gaza-bound ships, told the Iranian news service IRNA that plans to send the ships were scrapped because Israel “sent a letter to the United Nations saying that the presence of Iranian and Lebanese ships in the Gaza area will be considered a declaration of war on [Israel] and it will confront it.”
During the war with Iran’s Hizbullah proxy in 2006, thousands of Iranians demonstrated against Hizbullah. They demanded that the regime invest its money in the local economy and not in Hizbullah and the Palestinians.
Were Israel to present Schalit as an Israeli victim of the Iranian regime, it could provoke a similar popular outcry against Iran’s support for Hamas. The media-manipulated Schalits are not the only ones acting precisely against their own interests. The government is acting with similar madness in its relations with the Obama administration. Indeed, Netanyahu ended Israel’s lawful economic sanctions against Hamas-controlled Gaza (sanctions that served, among other things as a bargaining chip for freeing Schalit), because the Obama administration placed overwhelming pressure on him to do so.
Not wishing to let the Mavi Marmara crisis go to waste, US President Barack Obama had used it as a means to weaken Israel against Hamas. Obama announced that he was giving Hamas-controlled Gaza $400 million in US aid. He forced Netanyahu to end Israel’s economic sanctions against the illegal Hamas regime.
Moreover, according to remarks by a senior Hamas terrorist to the London-based Al- Quds al-Arabi newspaper on Friday, the Obama administration maintains direct ties to the Hamas leadership in Syria.
WHEN NETANYAHU entered office last spring his desire to appease Obama was understandable. At the time, he was operating under the hope that perhaps Obama could be appeased into ending his onslaught against the Jewish state. But the events of the past year have made clear that Obama is unappeasable. Every concession Israel has made to Obama has merely whetted the US president’s appetite for more.
The policy implications of this state of affairs are clear. First, Israel must strive to weaken Obama. Since Israeli concessions to Obama strengthen him, Israel must first and foremost stop giving him concessions.
Weakening Obama does not involve openly attacking him. It means Israel should act in a way that advances its interests and forces Obama to reconsider the desirability of his current foreign policy.
Regionally, Israel should make common cause with the Kurds of Iran, Iraq and Syria who are now being assaulted by Iran, Turkey and Syria. Doing so is not simply the moral thing to do. It weakens Iran, Syria and Turkey and demonstrates that Obama’s appeasement policies are harming those who love freedom and empowering those who hate it.
By the same token, Israel should do everything it can to strengthen the Iranian Green movement. Every anti-regime action in Iran – regardless of its size – harms the regime and therefore helps Israel. And every anti-regime action in Iran exposes the moral depravity and strategic idiocy of Obama’s policy of appeasing the mullocracy.
AS FOR the US domestic political realm, in Ambassador Michael Oren’s all but schizophrenic recent statements about the Obama administration’s policy towards Israel, we may at last be witnessing an embrace of political sanity on the part of the government.
For the past several months, Oren has acted as the Obama administration’s most energetic cheerleader to the US Jewish community.
He has repeatedly and wrongly reassured US Jewish audiences that Obama is a great friend of Israel, that his Democratic Party remains loyal to the US-Israel alliance and that the Republicans are wrong to claim that there is a difference between the two major US political parties when it comes to supporting Israel.
The pinnacle of Oren’s pro-Obama campaign came with his interview last week with The Jerusalem Post. There he brought all of these false and counter-productive claims into the public realm. Apparently Oren’s decision to make his adulation of the Obama administration public finally forced his bosses in Jerusalem to order him to cease, desist and do an about face.
And so, last week, Oren told a closed audience of Israeli diplomats the truth. Under Obama, Oren whispered, there has been a “tectonic rift” in US relations with Israel. While some of Obama’s advisers are sympathetic to Israel, these advisers have no influence on Obama’s positions on Israel.
No doubt recognizing how silly his about face made him look, Oren tried to deny his statements at the Foreign Ministry. But it is hard to imagine anyone will take him seriously.
During his visit to the White House next week, Netanyahu should follow the path set by Oren’s quickly leaked remarks. Netanyahu should abstain from praising Obama for his friendship and speak instead about the fact that the US-Israel alliance is vital for both countries’ national security.
Netanyahu should insist on the right to call on questioners at his joint appearance with Obama. And he should use those questions and those appearances to discuss why Israel’s actions are not only legal and necessary for Israel, but vital for US national security. During his stay in the US, Netanyahu should discuss the global jihad, Islamic terrorism, the freedom-loving Kurds and the freedom-loving Iranian people every chance he gets.
Indeed, he should create opportunities to discuss them.
Here we see a crucial point of convergence between the Schalit family march to Jerusalem and Netanyahu’s trip to Washington. To increase the effectiveness of their efforts on behalf of Gilad, ahead of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, the marchers should split into two groups.
The first group should continue to Jerusalem and demand that Israel take a firmer stand against Hamas. The second group should walk to Tel Aviv and camp out outside the US Embassy. There they should demand that the administration end its contacts with Hamas, end its pressure on the Israeli government to strengthen Hamas, cancel Obama’s plan to give an additional $400 million dollars in aid to Hamas and use the US’s position on the UN Security Council to condemn Turkey for its material support for Hamas.
For too long, by allowing themselves to be led by our deranged media, Israeli citizens and governments alike have ignored the basic fact that the answer to every question is not more Israeli concessions. Contrary to what our tabloids would have us believe, surrender is only one option among many. It is time we try out some alternatives.
caroline@carolineglick.com
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
A few things to remember when hearing about the Gaza Blockade and the Flotilla incident in Israel
Dear reader,
Yesterday we were glued to the television and radio all day as we watched the story unfold of the heroic Israeli operation to board and stop the flotilla to Gaza. Of course, the entire world seems to be set against Israel now, even more than before, basing their opinions on lies and distortions of the truth. As you follow the news in your own countries, please keep this in mind:
1. Israel has been blockading Gaza since the seizure of our soldier Gilad Shalit by the Hamas, an act of war, accompanied by ongoing missile and rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza. Shalit is being held against international law, without access to the International Red Cross. Blockade in this situation is legitimate and acceptable under international law.
2. Israel has been providing some 15,000 tons of food and medicines to Gaza throughout, via recognized international aid organizations. There is no hunger or other humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
3. Israel repeatedly offered the flotilla the opportunity to dock in Israel and have the contents of the ships transferred to Gaza after inspection to insure no weapons or other dangerous items were concealed among the cargo. The flotilla organizers refused repeatedly, even minutes before the IDF's operation.
4. The flotilla organizers defined themselves as peace activists. In fact, they were terrorists. As the IDF soldiers were lowered onto the Marmara ship by helicopter, in what they expected to be a riot-quelling and arrest operation, they were met with unexpected violence -- clubs, knives, metal objects, and even guns were used to attack and injure our soldiers. When it became clear that their lives were threatened, they shot live fire.
5. Arab and other hostile media were quick to announce that 15 were killed. In fact, only nine were killed. Six IDF soldiers were injured, two of them seriously. All of the injured have been hospitalized in Israeli hospitals where they are receiving the finest care.
6. Close to 500 were detained and placed in a detention facility in Beersheva, where they are able to make phone calls, receive visitors, and have excellent conditions, all at the expense of the Israeli government.
7. About 50 agreed to voluntarily leave Israel and were escorted to Ben Gurion Airport where they were flown to their countries, at the expense of Israel.
Yesterday we were glued to the television and radio all day as we watched the story unfold of the heroic Israeli operation to board and stop the flotilla to Gaza. Of course, the entire world seems to be set against Israel now, even more than before, basing their opinions on lies and distortions of the truth. As you follow the news in your own countries, please keep this in mind:
1. Israel has been blockading Gaza since the seizure of our soldier Gilad Shalit by the Hamas, an act of war, accompanied by ongoing missile and rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza. Shalit is being held against international law, without access to the International Red Cross. Blockade in this situation is legitimate and acceptable under international law.
2. Israel has been providing some 15,000 tons of food and medicines to Gaza throughout, via recognized international aid organizations. There is no hunger or other humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
3. Israel repeatedly offered the flotilla the opportunity to dock in Israel and have the contents of the ships transferred to Gaza after inspection to insure no weapons or other dangerous items were concealed among the cargo. The flotilla organizers refused repeatedly, even minutes before the IDF's operation.
4. The flotilla organizers defined themselves as peace activists. In fact, they were terrorists. As the IDF soldiers were lowered onto the Marmara ship by helicopter, in what they expected to be a riot-quelling and arrest operation, they were met with unexpected violence -- clubs, knives, metal objects, and even guns were used to attack and injure our soldiers. When it became clear that their lives were threatened, they shot live fire.
5. Arab and other hostile media were quick to announce that 15 were killed. In fact, only nine were killed. Six IDF soldiers were injured, two of them seriously. All of the injured have been hospitalized in Israeli hospitals where they are receiving the finest care.
6. Close to 500 were detained and placed in a detention facility in Beersheva, where they are able to make phone calls, receive visitors, and have excellent conditions, all at the expense of the Israeli government.
7. About 50 agreed to voluntarily leave Israel and were escorted to Ben Gurion Airport where they were flown to their countries, at the expense of Israel.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
A word to the nations
by Gary Cristofaro
I've had the privilege to lead many tours to Israel with both Christians and Jews. Naturally everyone has his or her own reasons for going to Israel. When accompanying Christian pilgrims it's common for some to express excitement about walking where Jesus walked. An expression also echoed by the Ministry of Tourism when enticing Christians to visit Israel. I agree this is among the many great reasons for Christians to experience the land. But it is also one more reason Christians should be horrified by the prospect of Israel giving up more land.
As Christians we must bear in mind that the descendants of Jacob were called out of Egypt to be a light to the nations. And it was at Jacob's well that Jesus declared; "salvation is of the Jews."(John 4:22) "He left Judea and departed again to Galilee. But He needed to go through Samaria. So he came to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus, therefore being wearied from His journey, sat by the well." (John 4:3-6)
The location of Jacob's well is not in doubt. It is one of the best-attested sites in Israel. It lies in the plain between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Jesus and His disciples arrived at Jacob's well in the midst of the little plain just east of the two mountains. They had probably followed the main road from Jerusalem, thirty-five miles to the south. It is known as the Road of the Patriarchs.
These hills have hosted many weary travelers for thousands of years. Long before Jesus and His disciples walked this land, God had chosen it for His divine purposes. In fact, He chose this land even before the calling of Abraham.
But following the call of Abraham, the land takes on renewed purpose. God said to Abraham "Get out of your country, from your father's house, to a land that I will show you." (Gen.12:1) ..."and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Gen. 12:3b) The plan of God was to bless the earth through Abraham and this great drama needed an earthly stage.
Abraham dwelt in the mountains of Israel. As this holy narrative unfolds we read of places like Shechem, Elon Moreh, Bethel and Hebron. One can stand in the mountains of Israel and almost hear the voice of God saying to Abraham; "for all the land which you can see I give to you and your descendants forever." (Gen. 13:15)
My fellow Christians, consider the significance of these sites to your faith. Now consider the possibility of never being able to walk these mountains again. Consider the possibility of never sharing these experiences with your children. Preservation of these sites should not be just a Jewish problem. It should be a priority of every Christian throughout the world.
However, if the Obama administration and most of the nations on earth had their way these sacred sitess would be lost. To justify this fear, one only has to recall the desecration of Joseph's tomb at the hands of fanatic Islamists. The Oslo Accords put this site under Israeli jurisdiction, but on Oct. 7, 2000, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak ordered a unilateral retreat, based on a Palestinian agreement to protect the site.
But within hours, smoke was billowing from the tomb as a crowd burned Jewish prayer books and other articles. Then with pickaxes and hammers they began to tear apart the stone building. Within two days the dome of the tomb had been painted green and bulldozers were clearing the area. Israeli authority had to restore the site during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, but worshippers are only allowed to visit when guarded by the Israeli Defense Forces.
There is no question that the best stewards of these holy sites are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In other words these sites should be kept in the family. Christians should realize the implications if Israel were to give up sovereignty over this region.
Likewise all the land of Judea and Samaria should be kept in the family. This is the land of their inheritance. The families of Judea and Samaria have more to lose than the holy sites. They stand to lose their homes, their livelihood and their very way of life.
Christian Friends of Israeli Communities is comprised of Jews and Christians who understand the shared significance of Judea and Samaria. It is the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and it is the land of Jesus. We also understand that Israel of today remains a living testimony to the faithfulness of the creator.
Our creator is the Holy One of Israel and He will remain faithful to His promises. Yet I also believe He is watching His children. Will we remain faithful to His purposes? Together I believe we have been called to be a light to the nations. The prophet Jeremiah said; "For there shall be a day when the watchmen will cry on Mount Ephraim, arise, and let us go up to Zion, to the Lord our God." (Jer. 31:6) Be faithful till the end and I believe we will experience together the day that the prophet Jeremiah spoke of.
I've had the privilege to lead many tours to Israel with both Christians and Jews. Naturally everyone has his or her own reasons for going to Israel. When accompanying Christian pilgrims it's common for some to express excitement about walking where Jesus walked. An expression also echoed by the Ministry of Tourism when enticing Christians to visit Israel. I agree this is among the many great reasons for Christians to experience the land. But it is also one more reason Christians should be horrified by the prospect of Israel giving up more land.
As Christians we must bear in mind that the descendants of Jacob were called out of Egypt to be a light to the nations. And it was at Jacob's well that Jesus declared; "salvation is of the Jews."(John 4:22) "He left Judea and departed again to Galilee. But He needed to go through Samaria. So he came to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph. Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus, therefore being wearied from His journey, sat by the well." (John 4:3-6)
The location of Jacob's well is not in doubt. It is one of the best-attested sites in Israel. It lies in the plain between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Jesus and His disciples arrived at Jacob's well in the midst of the little plain just east of the two mountains. They had probably followed the main road from Jerusalem, thirty-five miles to the south. It is known as the Road of the Patriarchs.
These hills have hosted many weary travelers for thousands of years. Long before Jesus and His disciples walked this land, God had chosen it for His divine purposes. In fact, He chose this land even before the calling of Abraham.
But following the call of Abraham, the land takes on renewed purpose. God said to Abraham "Get out of your country, from your father's house, to a land that I will show you." (Gen.12:1) ..."and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Gen. 12:3b) The plan of God was to bless the earth through Abraham and this great drama needed an earthly stage.
Abraham dwelt in the mountains of Israel. As this holy narrative unfolds we read of places like Shechem, Elon Moreh, Bethel and Hebron. One can stand in the mountains of Israel and almost hear the voice of God saying to Abraham; "for all the land which you can see I give to you and your descendants forever." (Gen. 13:15)
My fellow Christians, consider the significance of these sites to your faith. Now consider the possibility of never being able to walk these mountains again. Consider the possibility of never sharing these experiences with your children. Preservation of these sites should not be just a Jewish problem. It should be a priority of every Christian throughout the world.
However, if the Obama administration and most of the nations on earth had their way these sacred sitess would be lost. To justify this fear, one only has to recall the desecration of Joseph's tomb at the hands of fanatic Islamists. The Oslo Accords put this site under Israeli jurisdiction, but on Oct. 7, 2000, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak ordered a unilateral retreat, based on a Palestinian agreement to protect the site.
But within hours, smoke was billowing from the tomb as a crowd burned Jewish prayer books and other articles. Then with pickaxes and hammers they began to tear apart the stone building. Within two days the dome of the tomb had been painted green and bulldozers were clearing the area. Israeli authority had to restore the site during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, but worshippers are only allowed to visit when guarded by the Israeli Defense Forces.
There is no question that the best stewards of these holy sites are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In other words these sites should be kept in the family. Christians should realize the implications if Israel were to give up sovereignty over this region.
Likewise all the land of Judea and Samaria should be kept in the family. This is the land of their inheritance. The families of Judea and Samaria have more to lose than the holy sites. They stand to lose their homes, their livelihood and their very way of life.
Christian Friends of Israeli Communities is comprised of Jews and Christians who understand the shared significance of Judea and Samaria. It is the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and it is the land of Jesus. We also understand that Israel of today remains a living testimony to the faithfulness of the creator.
Our creator is the Holy One of Israel and He will remain faithful to His promises. Yet I also believe He is watching His children. Will we remain faithful to His purposes? Together I believe we have been called to be a light to the nations. The prophet Jeremiah said; "For there shall be a day when the watchmen will cry on Mount Ephraim, arise, and let us go up to Zion, to the Lord our God." (Jer. 31:6) Be faithful till the end and I believe we will experience together the day that the prophet Jeremiah spoke of.
Friday, March 26, 2010
There's no such thing as a 'Palestinian people'!
A provocative headline? It's more than that. It's the truth.
Truth does not change. Truth is truth. If something was true 50 years ago, 40 years ago, 30 years ago, it is still true today.
And the truth is that only 30 years ago, there was very little confusion on this issue of Palestine.
You might remember the late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir making the bold political statement: "There is no such thing as a Palestinian people."
The statement has been a source of ridicule and derision by Arab propagandists ever since. They love to talk about Golda Meir's "racism." They love to suggest she was in historical denial. They love to say her statement is patently false – an intentional lie, a strategic deception.
What they don't like to talk about, however, are the very similar statements made by Yasser Arafat and his inner circle of political leadership years after Meir had told the truth – that there is no distinct Palestinian cultural or national identity.
So, despite the fact that conventional wisdom has now proclaimed that there is such a thing as the Palestinian people, I'm going to raise those uncomfortable quotations made by Arafat and his henchmen when their public-relations guard was down.
Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what 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.
That's pretty clear, isn't it? It's even more specific than Golda Meir's statement. It reaffirms what I have written on this subject. And it is hardly the only such statement of its kind. Arafat himself made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along these lines as late as 1993. It demonstrates conclusively that the Palestinian nationhood argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel.
In fact, on the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here's what he said: "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."
No matter how many people convince themselves that the aspirations for Palestinian statehood are genuine and the key to peace in the Middle East, they are still deceiving themselves.
I've said it before and I will say it again, in the history of the world, Palestine has never existed as a nation. The region known as Palestine was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their ancestral homeland. It was never ruled by Arabs as a separate nation.
Why now has it become such a critical priority?
The answer is because of a massive deception campaign and relentless terrorism over 40 years.
Golda Meir was right. Her statement is validated by the truth of history and by the candid, but not widely circulated, pronouncements of Arafat and his lieutenants.
Israel and the West must not surrender to terrorism by granting the killers just what they want – a public relations triumph and a strategic victory. It's not too late to say no to terrorism. It's not too late to say no to another Arab terror state. It's not too late to tell the truth about Palestine.
Truth does not change. Truth is truth. If something was true 50 years ago, 40 years ago, 30 years ago, it is still true today.
And the truth is that only 30 years ago, there was very little confusion on this issue of Palestine.
You might remember the late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir making the bold political statement: "There is no such thing as a Palestinian people."
The statement has been a source of ridicule and derision by Arab propagandists ever since. They love to talk about Golda Meir's "racism." They love to suggest she was in historical denial. They love to say her statement is patently false – an intentional lie, a strategic deception.
What they don't like to talk about, however, are the very similar statements made by Yasser Arafat and his inner circle of political leadership years after Meir had told the truth – that there is no distinct Palestinian cultural or national identity.
So, despite the fact that conventional wisdom has now proclaimed that there is such a thing as the Palestinian people, I'm going to raise those uncomfortable quotations made by Arafat and his henchmen when their public-relations guard was down.
Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what 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.
That's pretty clear, isn't it? It's even more specific than Golda Meir's statement. It reaffirms what I have written on this subject. And it is hardly the only such statement of its kind. Arafat himself made a very definitive and unequivocal statement along these lines as late as 1993. It demonstrates conclusively that the Palestinian nationhood argument is the real strategic deception – one geared to set up the destruction of Israel.
In fact, on the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here's what he said: "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."
No matter how many people convince themselves that the aspirations for Palestinian statehood are genuine and the key to peace in the Middle East, they are still deceiving themselves.
I've said it before and I will say it again, in the history of the world, Palestine has never existed as a nation. The region known as Palestine was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their ancestral homeland. It was never ruled by Arabs as a separate nation.
Why now has it become such a critical priority?
The answer is because of a massive deception campaign and relentless terrorism over 40 years.
Golda Meir was right. Her statement is validated by the truth of history and by the candid, but not widely circulated, pronouncements of Arafat and his lieutenants.
Israel and the West must not surrender to terrorism by granting the killers just what they want – a public relations triumph and a strategic victory. It's not too late to say no to terrorism. It's not too late to say no to another Arab terror state. It's not too late to tell the truth about Palestine.
Thursday, March 04, 2010
Where are our roots?
By Moshe Dann
Bowing to pressure from Prime Minister Netanyahu, US State Department and the international community, Nir Barkat, Mayor of Jerusalem, has cut back on plans to remove 88 illegal Arab buildings from a rich archeological park in the Kidron Valley adjacent to the City of David, the ancient city of Jerusalem.
According to plans announced Tuesday, Barkat proposed relocating only about 20 families in the disputed area, while giving legal status retroactively to the rest. The entire area would be renovated and restored as a garden and world-class tourist site, with an Arab residential neighborhood, shops and restaurants, including sports and healthcare centers. Arabs claim that these plans threaten their property and their way of life.
The city claims it will improve the quality of life; Arabs are opposed, saying it is "Judaizing" the area.
The city contends that Arabs have built on public land in an archeological area and they are enforcing "the rule of law;" Arabs decry the lack of building permits.
There are an estimated 10,000-20,000 illegal Arab buildings in Jerusalem alone.
Arabs claim they own the land, but are unable to provide any proof. Assisted by a number of Israeli NGOs, like Peace Now, Ir Amim and Bimkom - recipients of funds from the New Israel Fund, European governments and the EU - they have protested archeological work in the area, insisting that the entire area is "Palestinian."
City Attorney, Yossi Havillo, and State Prosecutor Moshe Lador oppose the destruction of Arab homes; they insist that a nearby Jewish-owned home built without permits be demolished.
According to aerial photographs, the area was uninhabited until the early 1990s, when archeological excavations in the City of David began to attract millions of tourists, and artifacts could be found scattered throughout the area. Under Mayor Barkat's predecessors, Ehud Olmert and Uri Lupolianski, Arabs built extensively throughout the area.
Bedrock of Zionist ethos
The King's Garden, or al-Bustan (The Garden in Arabic), a reference to Biblical times when it was a source of spices used in perfumes and incense, is located just below the City of David, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys meet. Water flowed to this area from the Gihon Spring, the ancient city's sole water source, mentioned in Kings I, 1:39, where King Solomon was anointed.
The prophet Isaiah called this "…the waters of Shiloah that flow softly" (VIII,6), which were channeled into a pool, then into the King's Garden, and from there down the Kidron Valley into the Judean Desert.
During King Hezekiah's reign (727-698 B.C.E.), a tunnel was cut from the Gihon Spring, through the mountain, beneath the city, to bring water into the city. (II Kings XX, 20).
The King's Garden is mentioned as the escape route for King Zedekiah (Jeremiah XXXIX,4); in Nehemiah (II,14); in Song of Songs (IV, 15); in Ecclesiastes (II,5) and many other Biblical and Talmudic sources.
The modern Arab village of Silwan (an Arabized version of the Hebrew, Shiloah) is located in and around what was the ancient Jewish cemetery of Mt of Olives, on the eastern side of the Kidron Valley, opposite the City of David.
Across from the Gihon Spring is the tomb of Rabbi Ovadiah Ben Avraham, from the Italian city of Bartinoro, known as "The Bartenura," who died in Jerusalem in about 1500. He traveled extensively in the Land of Israel, wrote letters about Jewish communities in Bethlehem, Hebron, and Gaza, wrote a famous commentary on the Mishna, and was the spiritual and communal leader of Jews in Jerusalem, many of whom had escaped the expulsion from Spain in 1492.
A few hundred meters north in the Kidron Valley, at the foot of the Mount of Olives cemetery, are monumental tombs from the Second Temple Period. This is called the Valley of Jehoshaphat (God has judged) where, according to Joel IV,2,12, Jewish and Christian tradition, the nations of the world will be judged.
Arab riots and international condemnations of Israel, led by the US administration, over the designation of Jewish heritage sites, archeological excavations and environmental restoration bring basic question into sharp focus: Where are our roots?
The struggle over who can build in the King's Garden is not only about physical location, and civil rights, but the protection of archeological sites, the meaning of sovereignty and Jewish historical claims to the Land of Israel. That is, after all, the bedrock of Zionist ethos and purpose, and our collective consciousness.
The author, a licensed tour guide and former assistant professor of History, is a writer and journalist
Bowing to pressure from Prime Minister Netanyahu, US State Department and the international community, Nir Barkat, Mayor of Jerusalem, has cut back on plans to remove 88 illegal Arab buildings from a rich archeological park in the Kidron Valley adjacent to the City of David, the ancient city of Jerusalem.
According to plans announced Tuesday, Barkat proposed relocating only about 20 families in the disputed area, while giving legal status retroactively to the rest. The entire area would be renovated and restored as a garden and world-class tourist site, with an Arab residential neighborhood, shops and restaurants, including sports and healthcare centers. Arabs claim that these plans threaten their property and their way of life.
The city claims it will improve the quality of life; Arabs are opposed, saying it is "Judaizing" the area.
The city contends that Arabs have built on public land in an archeological area and they are enforcing "the rule of law;" Arabs decry the lack of building permits.
There are an estimated 10,000-20,000 illegal Arab buildings in Jerusalem alone.
Arabs claim they own the land, but are unable to provide any proof. Assisted by a number of Israeli NGOs, like Peace Now, Ir Amim and Bimkom - recipients of funds from the New Israel Fund, European governments and the EU - they have protested archeological work in the area, insisting that the entire area is "Palestinian."
City Attorney, Yossi Havillo, and State Prosecutor Moshe Lador oppose the destruction of Arab homes; they insist that a nearby Jewish-owned home built without permits be demolished.
According to aerial photographs, the area was uninhabited until the early 1990s, when archeological excavations in the City of David began to attract millions of tourists, and artifacts could be found scattered throughout the area. Under Mayor Barkat's predecessors, Ehud Olmert and Uri Lupolianski, Arabs built extensively throughout the area.
Bedrock of Zionist ethos
The King's Garden, or al-Bustan (The Garden in Arabic), a reference to Biblical times when it was a source of spices used in perfumes and incense, is located just below the City of David, where the Kidron and Hinnom Valleys meet. Water flowed to this area from the Gihon Spring, the ancient city's sole water source, mentioned in Kings I, 1:39, where King Solomon was anointed.
The prophet Isaiah called this "…the waters of Shiloah that flow softly" (VIII,6), which were channeled into a pool, then into the King's Garden, and from there down the Kidron Valley into the Judean Desert.
During King Hezekiah's reign (727-698 B.C.E.), a tunnel was cut from the Gihon Spring, through the mountain, beneath the city, to bring water into the city. (II Kings XX, 20).
The King's Garden is mentioned as the escape route for King Zedekiah (Jeremiah XXXIX,4); in Nehemiah (II,14); in Song of Songs (IV, 15); in Ecclesiastes (II,5) and many other Biblical and Talmudic sources.
The modern Arab village of Silwan (an Arabized version of the Hebrew, Shiloah) is located in and around what was the ancient Jewish cemetery of Mt of Olives, on the eastern side of the Kidron Valley, opposite the City of David.
Across from the Gihon Spring is the tomb of Rabbi Ovadiah Ben Avraham, from the Italian city of Bartinoro, known as "The Bartenura," who died in Jerusalem in about 1500. He traveled extensively in the Land of Israel, wrote letters about Jewish communities in Bethlehem, Hebron, and Gaza, wrote a famous commentary on the Mishna, and was the spiritual and communal leader of Jews in Jerusalem, many of whom had escaped the expulsion from Spain in 1492.
A few hundred meters north in the Kidron Valley, at the foot of the Mount of Olives cemetery, are monumental tombs from the Second Temple Period. This is called the Valley of Jehoshaphat (God has judged) where, according to Joel IV,2,12, Jewish and Christian tradition, the nations of the world will be judged.
Arab riots and international condemnations of Israel, led by the US administration, over the designation of Jewish heritage sites, archeological excavations and environmental restoration bring basic question into sharp focus: Where are our roots?
The struggle over who can build in the King's Garden is not only about physical location, and civil rights, but the protection of archeological sites, the meaning of sovereignty and Jewish historical claims to the Land of Israel. That is, after all, the bedrock of Zionist ethos and purpose, and our collective consciousness.
The author, a licensed tour guide and former assistant professor of History, is a writer and journalist
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)