June 24th, 2011 by John Paul


[Link to Video]

Recently Messianic Jew, Ron Cantor, gave an importunate message on the foreign policy of the White House.  Cantor holds both Israeli and US citizenship allowing him to both admonish and redirect the aspirations of the State Department.  He ‘felt compelled’ to deviate from his normal Bible teaching and provide this necessary history lesson which he hopes will get out to the world.   Some highlights from the message are:

  • Quoting Jeremiah 31:8 and Ezekiel 36:24 the foundation of the modern State of Israel is the Lord’s promise to regather Israel and this is based on a ‘covenant of circumcision’.
  • The borders the US administration wants to start with for Israel are NOT borders of peace, or based on natural topography but are where two armies just happened to stop fighting, not a ‘holy grail’ to be assumed.
  • President Truman basically upstaged his own State Department and the US Ambassador to the UN in recognizing Israel as a nation ahead of the process to hand over the Palestine Mandate to the auspice of the UN.  (This took chutzpa on Truman’s part which in retrospect was very significant).
  • The goal of the PLO was to destroy Israel. It was founded in 1964 and at that time Israel did NOT have control of the Golan, Gaza, or Judea and Samaria.  These areas were under the control of Syria, Egypt, and Jordan and provided a great opportunity to make a Palestinian State.  So it is not about a state or borders.
  • Moshe Dayan had a media blackout that allowed the fictitious statements of Abdul Nasser to draw the Jordanian army to attack Israel and subsequently be defeated thus gaining control of Jerusalem and the West Bank.  Five nations were assembled against Israel, with 500,000 soldiers in the 1967 war,  while the total population of Israel was about 2.5 million Jews.
  • President Bush in 2004 understood that these borders were indefensible and would threaten the security of Israel.
  • The speech by the US President  on May 19, 2011 was to be about the support and celebration of democracy and peace in the Middle Eastern countries seeking freedom from despots, but de facto forces Israel to a position which emboldened her avowed enemies, thereby increasing the likelihood of another conflict.

 

John Paul is is an Associate Editor for Voice of Revolution, overseeing Jewish Issues.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

June 6th, 2011 by Michael L. Brown

Editor’s Note: Also published on Townhall.

My May 28th article, “Five Simple Truths about the Mideast Conflict,” elicited some passionate responses from those on both sides of the debate, with the first point in particular proving to be the most controversial: “There is no such thing as a historic ‘Palestinian people” living in the Middle East.’”

Let’s unpack two of the most common responses to that assertion, separating myth from fact. Of course, we know that there are several million people living in the West Bank and Gaza who identify as Palestinians today, and regardless of their historic pedigree, they are human beings with real needs. But when a misleading “history” is presented so as to delegitimize Jewish claims to the Land, the falsehoods must be exposed.

Myth #1. The modern Palestinians can trace their lineage back to the ancient Philistines, who were living in the land of Canaan (= Palestine) long before the Israelites had arrived on the scene.

This is completely false as to any lineal or ethnic connection between modern Palestinians and ancient Philistines.

First, the Philistines were Aegean (or Cypriot) sea peoples who migrated to the southern coast of Israel/Canaan in the 12th century BC. It is unclear what relationship they bear with the Philistines who are mentioned in Genesis, hundreds of years earlier. In short, they were not a Semitic people, as the Israelites and Arabs were. Second, from the 8th-5th centuries BC, they were crushed or ruled by the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians, ultimately being absorbed by these populations and entirely disappearing from history. In other words, there was a distinct, end of the line for the Philistines roughly 2,500 years ago.

Third, six hundred years after the extinction of the Philistines, and after putting down a Jewish revolt, the Romans changed the name of Judea to Palaestina (in Latin) in order to discourage Jewish patriotism. So, there is absolutely no lineal or ethnic connection between the (earlier) Philistine people and the (later) land called Palestine. In fact, the Philistines had previously lived in the western part of the country, on the Mediterranean coast, whereas Palestine originally referred to the eastern part of the country, on the West Bank of the Jordan river.

Fourth, some Muslim leaders have claimed that there was a continuous Arab presence in Palestine dating back to Muslim conquests in the 7th century AD. But this dubious claim, even if true , would still mean that the continuous Jewish presence in the land predated the first major Arab presence by at least 2,000 years, and it would also underscore the fact that there is no connection between the later Arabs and the earlier (extinct) Philistines.

Myth # 2. The whole argument about there being no historic, “Palestinian people” is meaningless, since there’s is no such thing as a historic Iraqi people either. Borders were artificially created after World War I.”

This is false, as to the overall argument and only partially true about the artificial borders.

Anyone who knows the history of the modern Middle East will recognize the names of nation-states that did not exist as such before (such as United Arab Emirates). But not all national identities in the Middle East are of recent origin.

There has certainly been an ancient, historic Egyptian people in the region, to the south of Israel, and an ancient, historic Syrian-Lebanese people, to the north of Israel, while the Iraqi people often traced their heritage back to the ancient kings of Babylon as well as to the golden age of Islam that flourished in their region 700 years ago. In contrast, the Arabs living in Palestine had no such national identity because they had no such ancient, historic roots, not to mention the fact that there were dozens of other (non-Arab) peoples living in Palestine, some of whom had ruled the region for centuries.

In the oft-quoted words of the celebrated Arab-American historian and Princeton University professor, Philip Hitti, testifying before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history, absolutely not.” And so, if there was no “Palestine” in the pre-1948 Arab consciousness, there was no Palestinian people. The only people living in Palestine who traced their pedigree back to ancient, biblical times and who awaited the restoration of their ancient homeland were the Jewish people.

But why bother with facts? The old myths and lies are so much more effective.

 

Dr. Michael Brown is the author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , ,

May 29th, 2011 by Michael L. Brown

Editor’s Note: Also published on Townhall.

Is there any subject more controversial than the question of the legitimacy of the modern State of Israel? Is it the eternal home of the Jewish people, promised to them by God Himself? Or is it the illegitimate home of violent Jewish occupiers, an apartheid state guilty of ethnic cleansing? Or is it something in between? In the midst of the often emotional arguments on both sides, it is helpful to review five simple truths about the Mideast conflict.

1. There is no such thing as a historic “Palestinian people” living in the Middle East. To be sure, there have been Arabs living in the land of Palestine for centuries. (The land of Israel was derisively renamed “Palestine” by the Romans in the second century A.D.). And it is true that some of these families have lived in Palestine without interruption for many generations. But at no time before 1967 did these Arabs identify themselves as “Palestinians,” nor did they seek to achieve any kind of statehood there. As expressed by former terrorist Walid Shoebat, “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”

Before 1967, there was no such thing as Arab, Palestinian nationalism and no attempt to develop the territory as a homeland for the Arabs who lived there, and in 1936, when the Palestine Orchestra was formed, it was a Jewish orchestra. In fact, the original name of the Jerusalem Post, the flagship Jewish newspaper, was the Palestine Post.

There is no question that there are several million people who identify themselves as Palestinians today, and many of these people have suffered great hardship in recent years. Nonetheless, the concept of a Palestinian people is a modern invention, and it is part of the anti-Israel propaganda machine without any basis in fact. The recent comments of Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, claiming a 9,000 year Palestinian pedigree, are purely fictional: “Oh, Netanyahu, you are incidental in history; we are the people of history. We are the owners of history.”

2. There were anti-Jewish intifadas in Palestine two decades before the founding of the State of Israel in 1948. We are often told that Jews and Arabs coexisted peacefully in Palestine prior to the formation of the Jewish state in 1948, or at least, prior to the rise of strong Jewish nationalism. In reality, as Jews began to return to their one and only ancestral homeland in the late 19th century, hostilities began to rise among their Arab neighbors, despite the fact that there was more than enough room for both.

By the 1920’s, radical Muslim leaders like Haj Amin Al-Husseini, later a confidant of Adolph Hitler, were organizing intifadas against the Jewish population, with many Jewish lives lost. And what helped fuel Al-Husseini’s Jew-hatred was the anti-Jewish sentiment found in the Koran and early Muslim traditions. Post-1948 Jew-hatred simply built on centuries of Islamic anti-Semitism.

3. Jewish refugees fleeing from Muslim and Arab countries were absorbed by Israel after 1948; Arab refugees fleeing from Israel after 1948 were not absorbed by Muslim and Arab countries. Despite the fact that the Muslim nations surrounding Israel are 650 times the size of this tiny state, they made no effort to absorb the approximately 600,000 Arab refugees who fled Israel in 1948 when war was declared on Israel by five neighboring Arab nations.

To this day, these refugees are not welcomed by other Arab states. As expressed more than 20 years ago by Ralph Galloway, former head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees, “The Arab States do want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel.” Yet Israel absorbed roughly 800,000 Jewish refugees that had to flee from Muslim nations after 1948.

4. Only one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is truly committed to peaceful co-existence. It is often stated that if the Palestinians put down their weapons, there would be no more war but if the Israelis put down their weapons, there would be no more Israel. This is not to say that all Palestinians are warmongers and all Israelis are doves. But the vast majority of Israelis are not driven by a radical ideology that calls for the extermination of their Arab neighbors, nor are they teaching their children songs about the virtues of religious martyrdom.

Israel does not relish spending a major portion of its budget on defense, nor does it relish sending its sons and daughters into military service. It simply will not surrender Jerusalem, its historic and religious capital, and it will not commit regional suicide by retreating to indefensible borders. In return it simply asks the Palestinians to say, “We embrace your right to exist.”

5. The current uprisings throughout the Muslim and Arab world today remind us that Israel cannot fairly be blamed for all the tension and conflicts in the region. The nation of Israel is obviously not faultless in the current conflict, but it is ludicrous to think that without the presence of this supposed evil nation in the Middle East, all would be well. There have been constant disputes between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, and in 1980, Abd Alhalim Khaddam, then Syria’s Foreign Minister, admitted, “If we look at a map of the Arab Homeland, we can hardly find two countries without conflict. . . . We can hardly find two countries which are not either in a state of war or on the road to war.”

Certainly, there are many obstacles that stand in the way of a true peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, and the road ahead is fraught with uncertainty, but it would be a good starting point if we replaced myths and emotional arguments with facts.

 

Dr. Michael Brown is the author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

April 7th, 2011 by Guest Writer

By Daniel C. Juster | www.tikkunministries.org | Originally published in Israel’s Restoration Newsletter

Euphoric Media

Most media leaders have been euphoric over the revolutions taking place in the Middle-Eastern Arab world. Dictatorships are being swept away; power is now in the hands of the people! Or at least this is the officially perceived wisdom of the day. Many are the editorials in the conservative and moderate newspapers in Israel warning of the great dangers ahead. Few are such reports in the Western press!

Many political leaders in the West are not in touch with reality. The head of national intelligence in the U. S. declared that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is a mostly secular organization. The head of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has returned to Egypt from exile, is said to be a moderate according to many Western politicians. In such a context, the word moderate is stretched beyond any reasonable definition. This particular leader is an anti-Semite, vilifies the Jewish state, and calls for a world Islamic Caliphate! It is said that he (that is the Brotherhood) is almost assured a great electoral influence because his views are considered absolutely mainstream in Egyptian society. By some estimates, two million people turned out to welcome his return. Is this not uncomfortably frightening?

The revolutions are fraught with danger for Israel and the West, but most do not want to face the danger. The word democracy seems more important than the content of the democracy. Democracy is not an automatic force for justice.

Arab Dictatorships

Am I defending the dictatorships of the Arab world? No. These dictators are getting their just deserts because they did not train their people in the moral and civic virtues that could have led to a true republican form of government. That training should have fostered values that have been a key in free societies. They could have moved their societies toward greater freedom, while still banning parties and individuals who professed Islamic radicalism, just as Germany continues to ban the Nazis. In their hearts, these dictators were simply not committed to the values of human rights, dignity, and political empowerment for groups affirming true human rights.

Wisdom from the Founding Fathers of the United States

The founding fathers of the United States were very clear on several crucial axioms for government. First, the vote is only one part of a republican form of government. They were careful to note that they did not believe in democracy and associated it with mob rule. They actually wanted only educated voters. After all, the 51% could vote to destroy the 49% in a pure democracy. True democracy is mob rule. This is why the idea of true democracy horrified the founders. Constitutional checks and balances, the separation of powers into three branches of government (legislative, judicial and executive), defined rights and freedoms, representative government and more were seen as crucial to a republic. In addition, they understood the character of the people as foundational. For John Adams, this character was formed by Christianity, and without that character formation, there could be no lasting free society. Adams said that the form of government he supported would only work for the kind of biblically rooted people that populated the colonies.

Alarming Tales of Democracy

So let’s look at a few cautionary tales in regard to the call for democracy: Iran, Gaza, Lebanon and Germany. Many Western leaders backed the removal of the Shah of Iran, who was slowly westernizing his country. They welcomed the return of the Ayatollah Komaini. Within a short period, he overthrew the moderates and, years later, had one of the early prime ministries, Shapuar Baktiar, a man who stood for human rights, murdered in France. In the Palestinian territories, free elections put Hamas, a terrorist group, in power. In Lebanon, democracy has given Hezbollah, another terrorist organization, enough votes to veto the rest of the Parliament and to essentially control the government. We should never forget that Hitler was elected. Why Western leaders and media deny that this is a likely but not certain scenario is amazing. It is either denial and blindness or incredible ignorance! Few reported that some of the revolutionaries chanted that they would march on Israel – all the while shouting, “Death to the Jews.”

The Danger of Our Times

We are now entering a very dangerous time in the Middle East. If Egypt falls to an Islamic controlled government, in the pattern of Turkey (it took some years) or Iran, it will be very bad for Israel. Can we be confident in a people where the majority of women are still forced to undergo genital mutilation? The backwards nature of many of the people should not give us confidence in their readiness for democratic government. People have to first be trained or discipled in human rights.

Justice, Israel and the Arabs

This leads to the issue of justice in the Middle East. Some focus on the microcosm. They get all worked up over Jewish injustices to innocent Palestinians. Sometimes the issues are valid and sometimes they are trumped up. However, if one focuses on the macrocosm, we note that there are 21 Arab nations and only one Jewish nation in the whole world. Jordan is predominantly Palestinian, and if a Palestinian state is created in the West Bank and Gaza there will be two Palestinian majority Arab states. Whatever one’s view of forming such a new state, the macrocosm justice issue is very clear in the whole light of Jewish history. The Jewish state must be supported as a foundational issue of justice.

My view echoes that of John Adams. I do not really even trust the long term prospects in the West for freedom, justice and respect for human rights because the West has drifted, and is now drifting further, from its Biblical roots. I certainly do not trust the long term prospects in countries that profess Islam. I believe that the answer is always and only in the Gospel. Only coming to Yeshua and embracing His teaching in the Sermon on the Mount can deliver Arabs from violence, hate and tyranny. We say that the Gospel is to the Jew first, but there is no greater second focus for prayer and witness than the Gospel to the Islamic world and especially the Arab world. This is why our related ministries support, in large ways, Arab Gospel witness.

I wish I could be more optimistic, but until we see a change in the hearts of peoples, we will have to support a balance of power arrangement between blocks of nations and a judicious navigation of foreign policy that is not given to fantasy. Many of Islam’s top scholars say that democracy is only a temporary expedient since Allah should rule through a council of top religious leaders who enforce Shariah law. That law is a disaster for minorities and for women. Only a balance of power arrangement can limit the potential damage of the dangerous Islamic Arab and Islamic Iranian expansionism. Containment and eventually defeat have to be the order of the day. As followers in Yeshua, we need to also face the fact that the relativistic and multi-cultural West may not have either the will or the means for a strong stand. We may not see victory until the return of Yeshua.

Let us pray for our political leaders in the U. S. and the West. Some do have open eyes and some are speaking out, but they are the minority. May we yet see these many peoples under the bondage of Islam delivered and come into the glorious liberty of being children of God in Yeshua.

 

Dan Juster, a Messianic Jew living in Jerusalem, is Director of Tikkun Ministries.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 30th, 2011 by Christine Colbert

Hussein “Steve” Mashni is a Palestinian Arab who has published the website jesusdied4mohamed2.com, as well as authoring books and other content.

Mashni grew up in America in a home with a Muslim father and a Catholic mother. He says that his mother wasn’t religious, so the Muslim culture was emphasized in his home. He was devout even as a child, and as he grew older he pleaded with “Allah” to show up in a way that he could comprehend. Nothing happened, and this was of great concern to Mashni.

In a recent interview he said that as a teenager he was watching an Oral Roberts event on television. He said that suddenly he knew beyond a doubt that Jesus was right in the same room with him, “that He is the Son of God, and that He is Messiah.” These perceptions are in direct opposition to tenets of his Muslim upbringing.

Like other former Muslims who are finding the courage to “come out” with their stories of finding Christ — or more accurately, as in Mashni’s case — with their accounts of Jesus’ coming or appearing to them, Mashni’s conversion was not without difficulty. His life was never the same after his conversion experience.

As we listened to him describe his experiences and perceptions about Arab nations, we were increasingly convinced of his sincerity and devotion.

We visited Israel last year. It is an exceedingly precious Land. Our guide talked with us about the antagonistic graffiti we saw in some of the Palestinian Arab communities. Antagonistic toward Israel, of course.

He said that it’s all about “a kind of one-upmanship” or rivalry.

As we read Scripture with its prophecy about the nations that will “come against Israel” in latter days that is being fulfilled before our eyes, the ugliness of this rivalry and its most appalling manifestation in acts of suicidal terror, often on the parts of young men — and even women — came to mind.

But Mashni has opened our eyes to a new perspective on the Arab experience.

Most of us know the remarkable ancient story of Abraham and Sarah, Hagar, Ishmael, and Isaac.

Mashni says that the pain of Ishmael — of being sent out of his father’s house — is still the source of deep “woundedness” in Ishmael’s Arab descendants today.

Mashni says this deep cultural wound “creates anger and jealousy,” — and that we see this borne out in Arab cultures.

But Mashni reminds us that just as in the old scriptural story God continued to care for and about Ishmael and his mother — Jesus is appearing to many Muslims today and working to heal this woundedness of the Arab people, whose forefather Ishmael was so painfully close to those who were “chosen” to be the forebears of the Messiah — even living under the same roof with them! — yet he, and through him the Arab people — were not the chosen!

Increasingly reports are coming in about people throughout the Arab world having dreams and visions of One they often describe as “the man in white.”

As we come to more fully understand a primary cause of the longstanding strife in this area from Mashni’s personal experience and perceptions, this fuller understanding motivates us to continue praying and working for the end of all division between the Arab and Israeli cultures and the increasing presence of the “one new man” (or humanity) in Messiah that Ephesians 2:15 foretells.

 

Christine Colbert is a writer and editorial consultant, and is part of Or HaOlam Messianic Congregation in Overland Park.

Posted in Featured Articles, Islam & The Middle East Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

March 16th, 2011 by John Paul

Editor’s note: For a brief look at some false assumptions related to this issue please see http://walloflies.org/ . For an expose’ of what is happening on the university campuses please see http://campusintifada.com/?p=viewing_guide .

For seven years now in various universities across the globe, there have been meetings and conferences linking Israel to the actions and policies of Apartheid South Africa (usually held the first two weeks of March).  For a succinct description please note CAMERA’s portrayal of these events.

They come as part of “Israeli Apartheid Week,” a series of lectures, exhibits and events that single out Israel for fierce attack. Students are told the Jewish state is, by nature, a racist, colonial and oppressive state. They are told Israel should be boycotted, and even destroyed. They are told this by ideologues who distort facts about the country while ignoring genuine oppression in the Middle East and across the world.

Often the focus of attention is on Israel’s SECURITY FENCE and how this symbolizes a ‘wall of oppression’ when in reality it is a barrier that has led to a 90% reduction in terror attacks. The film “With God on Our Side” tried to use this argument but never made apparent the primary use of the fence.  In the film a comment was made by one observer from South Africa.  This individual was contacted by the writer for further clarification and made the disclaimer that he was not speaking from a professional perspective, but only as an observer, that he felt the limitation of movement, the check points, and restrictions of personal choice of employment made ‘the West Bank … like Apartheid’.  Israel does not govern Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Palestinian Authority does.  The Palestinians suffer from their own failed government.  This is an important distinctive that often gets lost in the conversation.

Now for a viewpoint from another native South African.  Stan Goodenough has presented a clear and forceful argument to the contrary.

I am a South African who was born into, and lived through nearly half of, the apartheid era. During my childhood and teenage years my family relocated repeatedly, living in every corner of that country. I changed schools 13 times, and in three years as a member of the South African Defense Forces I was stationed in five different military bases across the land. I know South Africa well.  I know apartheid well. I know Israel well.

And believe me, no factual or accurate comparisons can be drawn between that South Africa and this Israel.

None whatsoever.

Let me tell you what Israel would have to do to qualify as an apartheid state. But first, a couple of clarifications:

The charge is that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian Arabs is similar to White South Africa’s treatment of South African black citizens (which included full-blood “Africans,” mixed-race “coloreds” and the descendants of immigrant Asian laborers).

The whole argument collapses right there, because the Palestinian Arabs have never been Israeli citizens. Nor did/do they have any national history as “Palestinians” – neither in Israel nor anywhere else. They are Arabs – their country of origin is Arabia.

For starters, then, it is fallacious to compare Israel’s relationship with the Palestinian Arabs in any area to the apartheid governments’ relationships with their black South African citizens.

Next Goodenough makes the statement that Israeli-Arabs who comprise 20% of Israel’s population and that they “live in 15 towns and cities, mostly in and around the Galilee. They have full voting rights. Five Arab political parties are represented in the Knesset; there are 14 Arab members of Knesset, one has attained to a ministerial portfolio, one is a former and another is a current deputy Knesset Speaker.”

According to Goodenough:

Israeli Arabs enjoy complete freedom in their country. They can live, study, work and travel where they please. They have national health coverage and enjoy the same benefits as their fellow, Jewish, citizens.

What they do not have to do, is serve in the IDF (although some Druze and some Bedouin choose to do so and have served with distinction; even laying down their lives.)

He continues by describing 18 separate South African Apartheid laws and what they would look like IF in fact Israel was acting in concert with the same type of oppression.  Here are a few examples

– Arabs would be required to be classified and registered in accordance with a racial classification (Population Registration Act).

– Arabs would be forced by law to live in Arabs-only residential areas and work in Arabs-only business areas (Group Areas Act).

– Arabs would have their names systematically removed from the voters’ roll until they were all deprived of their voting rights (Separate Representation of Voters Act).

– By law, Arabs would be deported from wherever they lived in Israel and forcefully settled in designated Arab-only areas (Bantu Authorities Act).

– Arabs would be evicted and have their homes destroyed if they tried to remain in “Jews-only” areas (Prevention of Illegal Squatters Act).

The detractors of Israel who participate in these events have as one of their goals to ultimately render the nation an ‘illegal’ entity.  Do those in the Church who subscribe to this flawed logic (Israel is an Apartheid state) realize the outcome of their positions?  Will these Christians be able to stop the momentum of hatred that seeks to justify terror against the State of Israel, even its annihilation?   What kind of slippery slope is this?  Granted as followers of Jesus we do not agree with all the actions of the government of Israel or any nation, especially America.  However, if God’s hand is upon Israel for his ultimate purpose at this time in history, whose side are they really on?

 

John Paul is is an Associate Editor for Voice of Revolution, overseeing Jewish Issues.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,

February 25th, 2011 by Guest Writer

By Shira Sorko-Ram | www.maozisrael.org | Originally published May 2010

“America has embarked on the European path of economic stagnation and declining influence. Since 1945, Europe has depended on America to defend it, while spending ever smaller percentages of its Gross National Product on defense. The huge budget deficits resulting from Obamacare will push America in the same direction.”

So wrote Jonathan Rosenblum, director of Jewish Media Resources and columnist for the Jerusalem Post. (2Apr10)

Rosenblum reiterates what most other conservative journalists write: “Every major government entitlement program has ended up costing many times more than initially projected, and the proponent’s cost projections on Obamacare do not meet even minimal levels of credibility.”

He adds, “World War II cost Britain its empire, and the huge budget deficits racked up by Obamacare will likely force America to abandon its role as global policeman.” This will leave nations like Iran to take the lead and push the surrounding Islamic nations into making a head-long rush to develop their own nukes.

The “retreat of the Great Satan will only whet the appetite of radical Islam.” One thing is certain: The UN will never protect Israel against the Islamists. And now it appears that America is turning its back on its only democratic ally in the Middle East.

0510 - Obama, Netanyahu, Abbas

Body language seems to be very strong with President Obama. Here he is obviously in command, ordering Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority Head Mahmoud Abbas to pose for a nice photo op.

OBAMA’S PLAN

Just what is Obama’s agenda for the future? What else does he want to accomplish during his first term in office? Of course, he would love to pass his Cap and Trade bill, but Rosenblum believes he can only commit suicide once (with Obamacare) and he does not think the president has enough political capital left to get another massively controversial bill through congress.

Therefore, says Rosenblum, he will turn to foreign policy – which, for the most part, is out of reach of congress. He has publicly stated that he will deliver a Palestinian state within two years. (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/jonathan/rosenblum

Most Israelis have come to the conclusion that the Jewish state has no choice but to offer the several million Arabs in the West Bank their own state. Nevertheless, Israel is fearful of the way it appears Obama will make it happen.

From Israel’s perspective, Obama is not really interested in a peace treaty between Arabs and Israel. As Rosenblum notes, “No confidence-building measures are ever requested from the Palestinians. At every stage, new demands are placed on Israel to placate [the Palestinians] and convince them that the U.S. has the power to deliver a state on terms even they cannot refuse.” (Ibid.)

He has asked nothing of the Palestinians – such as recognizing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish nation or renouncing terrorism. He has not countered the demands of the Palestinians who plan to send millions of Muslim “refugees” to live in Israel proper and to take Jerusalem away from Israel and make it their Muslim capital.

HUMILIATING NETANYAHU

When Netanyahu visited the White House in late March, Obama demanded that he sign an agreement to stop all building in East Jerusalem’s Jewish areas and consent to 12 other demands. When Netanyahu stalled, according to many press reports, Obama stood up and said, “I’m going to have dinner with Michelle and the girls.” He added, “I’m around. Let me know if there’s anything new.”

“It was awful,” a U.S. congressman who spoke to the Prime Minister said. One Israeli newspaper called the meeting “a hazing in stages,” poisoned by such mistrust that the Israeli delegation eventually left rather than risk being eavesdropped on a White House telephone line. He left with no official statement from either side, an unheard of treatment of a close ally. (www.timesonline.co.uk, 26Mar10)

0510 - Haaretz Story

0510 - Haaretz Story This headline expresses the mood in Israel – the awareness of the indifference of the world to threats against Israel’s existence.

Ironically, the Israeli people, after decades of “negotiations,” are convinced that the Palestinians do not really want a Palestinian state – that is, a state living in peace beside Israel. They do not want that. They want one state and one state only – which would extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River – in other words, they want the land of Israel as part of their state. They say it this way: One state for both Arabs and Jews with each citizen having a vote.

To gain such a state, they would be ready to submit (at least temporarily) to being the first democratic Arab Muslim state in history because then their Muslim voters would, within a very short time, vote in a Muslim Palestinian prime minister and dominate the Knesset. And that would be the end of the Jewish state.

But that is not all. Israel is falling behind in military capabilities. “According to the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, every Israeli request for upgraded weapons systems has been denied, while the Arab states, most notably Egypt, have been provided with numerous advanced systems on par with Israel’s.” Most recently, bunker busters necessary for any attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities were denied. (Ibid.)

We must remember that Obama sat comfortably under Jeremiah Wright’s anti-Israel and anti-Semitic invective – including honoring Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam – for nearly 20 years. He is comfortable with Islamic principles and ambitions.

Israel’s only hope is God. As the nations turn increasingly antagonistic toward Israel, Christians and Messianic Jews who know how God feels about the land He promised to the Jewish people must pray for Israel and for their own nation. The promise is still true today. I will bless those that bless you and curse those who curse you.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 22nd, 2011 by John Paul

The UN Security Council last week was one vote short of “rendering” all Israeli settlements illegal.  The US stood in the way and vetoed the resolution, opting however to agree to the settlement’s “illegitimacy.”  Ynet news stated:

US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told council members that the veto “should not be misunderstood to mean we support settlement activity.” She added that the US view is that Israeli settlements lack legitimacy.

The Ambassador continued on to indicate that settlements and other issues ought to be resolved through negotiations. The Jerusalem Post added that:

The resolution risks “undermining US-led efforts to pursue a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.” Rice said that the settlements have, for “four decades” undermined Israel’s security situation and hindered the peace process in the Middle East.

At the same time the Palestinian official said this veto actually threatens the peace process.  Again from Ynet:

The Americans have very clearly demonstrated to Palestinians, to Arab public opinion, and to world public opinion that they are biased to the point of destruction.

If they keep trying to manipulate and water down a resolution to become a statement, and they start selling us used goods again it’s not going to work

Israel’s position on this is that settlements and for that matter the entire peace process is to be through negotiations and not via UN resolutions.  A statement from Benjamin Netanyahu’s Office reads:

“We seek a solution that will integrate the legitimate Palestinian aspirations with Israeli requirement of security and recognition,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “The US decision makes it clear that the only way to peace is through negotiations. We are ready to vigorously advance negotiations and are interested in beginning the process of achieving secure peace and hope that the Palestinians will join the process.”

Was the US Administration trying to play both sides of the aisle?  The settlements were always part of the peace negotiations going all the way back to President Carter’s Camp David Accord.  For some reason, a non-issue became an ISSUE.  I am not willing to speculate here on why this seems to be the case, but the settlements are not only legitimate, they are in fact legal.  This can be traced all the way back to the League of Nations’ partitioning of Palestine and the British Mandate.  To make the settlements illegal, one would have to make the judgments of The League of Nations in 1922 and the UN in 1947 in establishing a home land for Jews void.  For a primer on the settlement issue please see Jewish Virtual Library, Myths and Facts, Settlements.

 

John Paul is is an Associate Editor for Voice of Revolution, overseeing Jewish Issues.

Posted in Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 18th, 2011 by John Paul

In the wake of Hosni Mubarak leaving his office as leader of Egypt, one would think that there should be a ‘wait and see’ attitude for any changes in the security threat to Israel. However, the instability which already exists on the 240km Israel-Sinai border heightens the concerns of the confusion surrounding a regime change, and the potential problems a government less friendly toward Israel could pose to Israel’s security. Jerusalem Post article points out that Egyptian police stations in the Sinai have already been abandoned when attacked by Bedouins who hold no loyalty to Egypt. Referring to the peninsula as a ‘lawless land,’ a senior defense official indicated,

There is real concern that if the Egyptians don’t get the Sinai back under their control, it could develop into a major threat to Israel. 

Hamas has used the region to launch multiple attacks against Israel over the past several years, so they may use the governmental upheaval to their advantage. According to an Arutz-7 news brief, the police in the Sinai region have been attacked, beaten and kidnapped by militants in the region, prompting Israel to approve the deployment of Egyptian forces to the Sinai for the first time since Egypt signed their peace treaty with Israel, to address the increase in violence.

Believers who are concerned for Israel’s safety are having mixed reactions toward these developments in the Sinai and the potential for greater freedom for the Christians in Egypt if the new government is one that will embrace religious liberty. However, with the election of the Hamas in Gaza and the ‘tactical coup’ by Hezbollah in Lebanon, the region is not trending towards freedom and democracy. Let us be diligent in our prayers for the entire region for God’s purposes, the protection of believers and Israel.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

May 16th, 2010 by Guest Writer

Editor’s Note: A guest article from N. Scott Rabinowitz.

On May 14 the nation of Israel celebrates its sixty-second birthday. Despite insurmountable odds, Israel has not only survived, it has prospered.

The United States has played an enormous part in that prosperity—at least until now. President Obama has demanded that Israel reset the Middle East history button.

On March 10, Obama dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to demand that Israel halt renewed building in East Jerusalem. The trip resulted in what Israeli ambassador Michael Oren called the “most serious crisis since 1975″ for U.S. and Israel relations.

That assertion was dramatically confirmed on March 23 when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington to meet with the President. Failing to acquire concessions from the Prime Minister, Obama – in a breach of protocol, left Netanyahu to dine alone.

Despite extraordinary pressure from the White House, Netanyahu remains resolute regarding Israel’s right to build in East Jerusalem.

There are two reasons for this. First, Israel has a historical claim to the territory, a fact recognized by the international community. Second, Israel fought a series of defensive wars over the territory and the current borders are legitimate under the rules of international law.

Obama and other opponents of Israel’s sovereignty need to acquaint themselves with the history of Jerusalem and international law regarding the annexation of territory captured during a defensive war. If they did, they would discover the following:

The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine recognized Jewish national rights to the entire territory in 1922. While recognizing the need to protect the rights of the territories’ Arab inhabitants, the Mandate declared that “recognition has been to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to reconstituting their Jewish national home in that country.” When the UN replaced the League of Nations in 1946, its charter specifically stated that the UN must uphold the terms of all existing international instruments ratified by the League of Nations. In other words, the UN—and President Obama—are obligated to recognize Israel’s legitimate claims on Jerusalem.

That obligation would be less clear, however, had the Palestinians agreed to UN Resolution 181—the Partition Plan of 1947. Conceding that the creation of a single Jewish state was impossible, the resolution was a non-binding recommendation that called for the partition of “Palestine” into two separate states, with Jerusalem existing temporarily under the administration of the UN.

For over half a century, the Palestinians rejected a two-state solution. They did so because they were confident that their Arab neighbors would intervene and destroy Israel militarily. That never occurred and Palestinian dreams of statehood never materialized.

Resolution 181 was a non-binding resolution and more importantly, it was one that the Palestinians rejected. Moreover, the Arab aggression that ignited the 1967 war irreversibly changed the territorial landscape and made a return to borders that existed nineteen year earlier impossible. In 2004 President George W. Bush acknowledged this fact in a letter to Prime Minister Arial Sharon. “In light of new realities on the ground,” Bush wrote, a return to the armistice lines of 1949 is “unrealistic.”

The Palestinians discarded UN Resolution 181 more than sixty years ago but they now wish to resurrect it to legitimatize their claim to Jerusalem.

President Obama also wishes to hit the reset button. He chooses to ignore Israel’s legal claim to Jerusalem, the fact that the Palestinians rejected UN Resolution 181, and that the U.S. has acknowledged current geo-political realties make a return to previous borders impossible.

Despite adamant claims to the contrary, East Jerusalem does not meet the criteria of an occupied territory. Following the 1948 war, Jordan occupied East Jerusalem and expelled its Jewish community. By the standards of international law, Jordan’s nineteen year occupation of Jerusalem — not Israel’s — was illegal.

Israel’s capture of East Jerusalem in a war of self-defense makes it the legitimate claimant to the territory. Former Chief Judge of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations, Stephen Schwebel wrote in 1970 regarding the matter: “Where the prior holder of the territory had seized the territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense, has against the prior holder, better claim.”

Why has the President turned on America’s staunchest ally in the Middle East and embraced the revisionist history of Israel’s enemies? As long as the U.S supports Israel’s claim to Jerusalem, Israel’s enemies will remain our enemies. President Obama has chosen to appease our enemies rather than stand by our ally.


About the Author: Noel Rabinowitz is Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at The King’s College in New York City. You can contact Noel via his faculty profile located here.

Posted in Featured Articles, Israel & The Jewish People, News Tagged with: , , , , , , ,