Doc's Talk: "CELEBRATE YERUSHALAYIM"

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

"CELEBRATE YERUSHALAYIM"

Arlene Kushner

Tonight begins Yom Yerushalayim -- Jerusalem Day -- a time for honoring and celebrating our holy city. In 1967, we liberated the eastern part of the City, with its place of greatest sanctity, the Temple Mount. United Jerusalem, ours, for all time.

~~~~~~~~~~

In the spirit of the day, I share some links.

From Aish, a lovely short video with great shots of Jerusalem liberated, and "Yerushalayim Shel Zahav" -- "Jerusalem of Gold" -- as background:

http://www.aish.com/v/90565359.html

~~~~~~~~~~

From the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, a very nice quiz, to see how much you know about Jerusalem, and perhaps to learn:

http://www.jcpa.org/quiz/jerusalemquiz.html

~~~~~~~~~~

Before I go on to news, I share one more link. This is to an article of mine that went up on YNet today. It contains important facts. Please, share widely.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3887685,00.html

~~~~~~~~~~

Forty-three rabbis ascended the Temple Mount yesterday, to mark our victory in recovering it 43 years ago. Lovely.

The statement from the Temple Mount Heritage Foundation said that this ascent was meant to "express the deep bond with the holy site.

"It is also significant in terms of public awareness. The presence of rabbis visiting the site together shows...the value and importance of visiting the Temple Mount in holiness and in purity."

Very often, the Kotel (the Western Wall) is alluded to as Judaism's holiest site. It is not: the Mount is.

The Wall is a retaining wall that closed in the Mount, upon which our Temples were built. It's important to understand this, for any notion that we should have the Kotel and the Arabs should have the Mount -- where they have a mosque and the Dome of the Rock -- is completely and totally unacceptable. It would be to relinquish the heart of our sacred heritage. We had Temples on that Mount before there was an Islam.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat -- a good guy in my book -- said yesterday, in response to the news about Ramat Shlomo, that construction would continue in all parts of the city. And, most significantly, he says, "The real test is the test of action." Indeed. My sentiments yesterday.

Accompanying the JPost article about this is a picture of a crane in the Har Homa neighborhood, where a new development is being established. The establishment of Har Homa a few years ago, which is in the south east of Jerusalem, caused a huge furor, which has since dissipated. If the caption of this picture is accurate (and I'm trying to check it) it means construction is going on in Jerusalem past the Green Line, as I write.

Har Homa

~~~~~~~~~~

Meanwhile, Shalom Achshav (Peace Now), which misses no opportunity to cause trouble, reports that this week initial construction began on 14 housing units in Ma'aleh David, a planned housing complex inside of the Ras el-Amud neighborhood that is slated to become the largest Jewish residential complex past the Green Line.

The property in question is privately owned by the Bukharian Community Committee. Headquarters for the Judea and Samaria police had been on that site, but the police have now relocated. According to the Peace Now charge, the renovation currently being done required no permits because it was taking place inside this private compound.

But larger plans, which were submitted by the Bukharian Committee to the municipality last summer, call for the complete razing of the police building in that compound and construction of seven buildings that would house 104 apartments. In light of this, the charge that the current building was being renovated is confusing. The plans that were submitted have not been approved, reportedly because they do not conform to "city planning policy for that area." This may be legit, as the mayor has laid out a plan for the city.

I rather like the Peace Now description of Mayor Barkat: "he has emerged as one of the most faithful allies the east Jerusalem settlers (sic) could have." May the mayor go from strength to strength as he recognizes the right of Jews to be resident in all parts of our city.

~~~~~~~~~~

As we work to keep our city united -- in the face of pressure from Obama, who frowns on our building in Jerusalem anywhere past the Green Line -- it is important to remain vigilant and not be too quickly mollified.

Of late, the president has been doing a full court campaign to woo the Jewish community -- to which I give next to no credence. Actions, in the end, are what he must be judged by. And what I'm seeing of late is action such as the new US push to get Israel to sign on to the NPT, which is to Israel's severe detriment.

Why do I mention this now? Because Elie Wiesel -- who wrote an open letter to Obama in the Wall Street Journal last month, in which he referred to Jerusalem as "heart of our heart" -- was invited to lunch at the White House. Emerging from this auspicious kosher luncheon, Wiesel told journalists, that "The tension [between Jerusalem and Washington] I think is gone." Now, he said, the ties between Israel and the Obama administration were "good."

Well, it would be hard to prove this. The insistence by Obama that we should not build in Jerusalem, even in solidly Jewish neighborhoods past the Green Line, has not changed.

I am certain that Wiesel intends well, and equally certain that the president charmed him thoroughly. Please, do not use the considered opinion of Elie Wiesel on this matter as a gauge of the situation.

(With a nod to Reisa S here.)

~~~~~~~~~~

Moving away from the subject of Jerusalem, to New York City:

I ask with bewilderment and horror what is going on. For the news has reached me that a mosque is to be built a stone's throw from Ground Zero. Precisely how far can political correctness be taken?

Writes Gadi Adelman, in his article,"Spitting in the Face of Everyone Murdered on 9/11" :

"I read about this last December, plans for a mosque at Ground Zero, but like a fool, I assumed that New Yorkers would never let this come to pass. A mosque just 600 feet from where the World Trade Center towers once stood. I thought to myself; no way will New York or anyone with a heart or soul, not to mention just plain common sense, ever allow a mosque to be built anywhere near Ground Zero. But, as I said, I am a fool.
"The project of a community center /mosque is being proposed by two organizations, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA) and their sister organization, the Cordoba Initiative. [On May 5] they made their presentation to the Community Board of lower Manhattan (CB1). Twelve people sit on the board and would you like to guess what the final vote was? Get ready to grab a barf bag … the 12 members voted unanimously to support the project. Yes, it’s not a typo, it was unanimous, all were in favor and, to give you an idea of how excited the board members were, they applauded during the presentation."
Concludes Adelman: "...it’s official, we have all lost our minds."
~~~~~~~~~~
And more:
"As Youssef M. Ibrahim wrote in his article 'It is an established fact that a significant percentage of the mosques built in the USA in the past two decades are receiving a disproportionate amount of their funds not only from the Saudis, but also the UAE, Qatar and Iran -- all problematic Islamists activist nations.'
"Does anyone have the sense to connect the dots and follow the money trail? Is it not enough that the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11 are from the same country that is funding mosques all over our country, that we have to allow them to fund the building of a mosque in the very location where they committed the most heinous act in American history?
"...Currently, in the U.S. there are over 1200 mosques, with at least one in each state. I don’t see the need to build a new mosque at the same location where nearly 3000 people were murdered by terrorists who followed an Islamic ideology that will be preached inside this new one."
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6177/pub_detail.asp
~~~~~~~~~~
The same sort of garbled thinking was apparent with regard to Faisal Shahzad, who is charged with attempting to blow up Times Square. Evidence has emerged that he was working with the Taliban in Pakistan. Yet, somehow no one seems panicked by this. People don't want to see it.
Daniel Pipes argued recently, with solid reason, that, "When news comes of Muslims engaging in violence..., the triad of politicians, law enforcement, and media...should begin with a presumption of jihadi intent. That is, the default expectation should be ideological passion."
But this is not the case. Pipes documented some of the outlandish speculations that were offered -- by journalists, politicians and the like -- to explain the explosives in the SUV:
[] "somebody with a political agenda who doesn't like the health care bill or something. It could be anything."
[] "likely to me [he] was either a lone nut job or a member of some squirrely branch of the Tea Party, anti-government far right." (a libel on Tea Party members and anti-government people)
[] "...you of course don't want to speculate on why someone 'really' did something. The hearts of men are opaque, and motives are complex."
~~~~~~~~~~
Fouad Ajami, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, writing in the Wall Street Journal, has this to say about the situation:

"'A Muslim has no nationality except his belief,' the intellectual godfather of the Islamists, Egyptian Sayyid Qutb, wrote decades ago. Qutb's 'children' are everywhere now; they carry the nationalities of foreign lands and plot against them. The Pakistani born Faisal Shahzad is a devotee of Sayyid Qutb's doctrine, and Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, was another.

"...What can we make of a young man like Shahzad working for Elizabeth Arden, receiving that all-American degree, the MBA, jogging in the evening in Bridgeport, then plotting mass mayhem in Times Square?

"The Islamists are now within the gates. They fled the fires and the failures of the Islamic world but brought the ruin with them. They mock national borders and identities."

"...This is a long twilight war, the struggle against radical Islamism. We can't wish it away. No strategy of winning 'hearts and minds,' no great outreach, will bring this struggle to an end. America can't conciliate these furies. These men of nowhere—Faisal Shahzad, Nidal Malik Hasan, the American-born renegade cleric Anwar Awlaki now holed up in Yemen and their likes—are a deadly breed of combatants in this new kind of war. Modernity both attracts and unsettles them. America is at once the object of their dreams and the scapegoat onto which they project their deepest malignancies."
http://online.wsj.com:80/article/SB10001424052748703338004575230142684329162.html
Who hears this in America? "The Islamists are now within the gates."
~~~~~~~~~~
see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

1 comment:

RomKri said...: My photos, that was stalen :(; 3:47 AM

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO 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."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, 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."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk