Combing the Jewish archives for Christian attitudes

Israel’s Right to Life

Paul Merkley (Christianity Today)

The literature which serves the historian of the relations between the churches and the State of Israel is sparse and for the most part lightweight. Most of the books that actually get read on this theme, those that are put out by publishers of religious literature and which are available in “Christian bookstores,” are polemical, dedicated to either denigrating or exalting Israel’s performance as the civil host of all the Christians who live and work in Israel.

Two things need to happen before serious scholarly histories of this story begin to appear. The first is that academic historians must come to recognize the centrality of this theme (the relations between the churches of the Holy Land and the Jewish State) in the overall story of the relations of State of Israel with the whole world. The second is that archives held by the principal participants in this story must be opened for disinterested investigation. The unwillingness of the Vatican to allow outsiders into its archives is well-known, but other Christian bodies*including the Orthodox churches, the Anglicans, the Lutherans, and still more who have played a part in the religious life of the Holy Land*have been every bit as reluctant to let strangers into their basement archives, and have accordingly paid the price of being mistrusted by scholars and misrepresented in the scholarly histories.

Read more …

January 31, 2007 | 1 Comments » | 180 views

Ayatollahs feeling the heat over nukes


Amir Taheri, NY POST

January 31, 2007 — IS the Khomeinist leadership preparing to retreat from confrontation over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions?

Until recently, the answer was an emphatic “No.” According to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, such retreat would limit Islamic sovereignty by giving the United Nations a veto on Iran’s energy policy.

But now Tehran is trying to forestall the passage of a second, and presumably tougher, resolution by the Security Council in March.

Several versions of the presumed Iranian initiative are in circulation. Former President Muhammad Khatami presented one to American and European personalities on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos last week.

In this scheme, Tehran is prepared to comply with the Security Council demand to suspend uranium enrichment – as part of a diplomatic package. In this plan, an arbitration group would inspect and assess Iran’s nuclear program, reporting back after six months. The group would include the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, and India on behalf of the nonaligned movement. During the six months in question, the Islamic Republic would suspend enrichment of uranium.

Read more …

January 31, 2007 | 1 Comments » | 161 views

Israeli Terrorism Victims Win Major Victory In Landmark Arab Bank Case

Case Expected to Proceed to Trial After – Judge Rejects Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

NEW YORK, January 30 – In a stunning victory for more than 1,600 survivors and family members of those killed by terrorism in Israel, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued a major ruling that is expected to lead to a trial for their landmark civil action against Arab Bank.

Judge Gershon rejected the bulk of a defense motion to dismiss the case, ruling instead that suicide bombing attacks and other forms of violence directed against civilians in Israel violate customary international law, that “plaintiffs have successfully stated claims for genocide and crimes against humanity,” and that plaintiffs have established a cause of action under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Antiterrorism Act.

She found that the plaintiffs had pled sufficient evidence that “Arab Bank’s provision of banking services facilitated money laundering and also facilitated the payments from [a Saudi Arabian] Committee to the suicide bombers’ beneficiaries,” creating “an incentive for suicide bombings.”

    “This is a remarkable, precedent-setting ruling that makes clear that no matter where they are located, any organization or individual that aids and abets genocide and crimes against humanity cannot evade accountability in the U.S. Courts,” said Ron Motley, lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “It not only means that our clients will have the opportunity to win justice; it also strikes a major blow against the financial networks that make terrorism possible.”

Read more …

January 31, 2007 | 2 Comments » | 150 views

Premeditated merger. Part of the New World Order

How leaders are stealthily transforming USA into North American Union

© 2007

Can it really be possible that Americans are witnessing a governmental program designed to merge – slowly but surely – the United States, Mexico and Canada?

That question is generating a major amount of below-the-media-radar buzz. In recent months, e-mails and telephone calls have poured into radio talk shows and congressional offices asking: Is there a plan to create a “North American Union”? Will a new currency, the “amero,” replace the dollar? Is it true that Mexicans will now get Social Security?

Yet Congress (except for a few representatives like Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul) as well as the establishment press (with notable exceptions like CNN’s Lou Dobbs) turn a blind eye – despite major evidence mounting daily.

[This is in line with the New World Order we have been discussing lately.]

Just recently, for example, confirmation surfaced that the U.S. government is indeed planning on providing full Social Security benefits to Mexicans – which critics predict will bankrupt the already-shaky system. And a report by the powerful Council on Foreign Relations, regarded by many as something of a “shadow government,” has called for a massive transfer of wealth from the U.S. to Mexico and the establishment of a “security perimeter” around North America – rather than securing America’s borders with Mexico and Canada. CONTINUE

January 30, 2007 | 9 Comments » | 203 views

Poll: Likud back in lead 32 mandates vs Kadima 9 Labor 9 Yisrael Beiteinu 10


While Kadima is collapsing in public opinion, favor is returning for the Likud party. According to the poll, Likud would triumph in hypothetical elections with a full 32 mandates.

Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu was perceived as the person best suited to serve as prime minister, earning 34 percent support and beating out his competitors by a large margin.

After Netanyahu, those surveyed favored Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Labor Knesset Member Ami Ayalon, who each earned the support of 16 percent, then Ehud Barak with 8 percent. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert trailed with only 3 percent of the vote.

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 0 Comments » | 86 views

Played like a fiddle

By Ted Belman

I promised Francisco Gil-White that I would actually read his article, What really happened in Bosnia? And so I did.

The comparisons of the destruction of Yugoslavia with the destruction of Israel are chilling and instructive.

The sub-title “Were the Serbs the criminal aggressors, as the official story claims, or were they the victims?” could equally be asked regarding Israel, “Are the Jews the criminal aggressors, as the world claims, or are they the victims?”

He conclusively proves that

    “ Alija Izetbegovic, the leader of a minority Bosnian Muslim faction, the one that NATO supported, who wrote a book calling for the slaughter of infidels so that a Muslim takeover could install an Islamist theocracy in Bosnia.”

was the villain of the piece. Yet western leaders, academics, UN, and media all supported him as a moderate (Shades of Mahmoud Abbas having a long history of terrorism to his credit yet the entire world claims him as a moderate.) and accused Milosovec as the “new Hitler” and prosecuted him of war crimes which they couldn’t prove. They may even have killed him to end their embarrassment.”

(Compare to the world claiming Israel committed war crimes and its attempts to prosecute Israel’s politicians and officers for same.).

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 8 Comments » | 277 views

The State Department has always been against Israel

Smythe Telegram – Israel is an Unviable Client State (June 1, 1967)

By Ami Isserof

Gamal Abdul Nasser and his fellow officers had taken power in Egypt in order they claimed, to modernize the country and undo the shame of the lost 1948 war. However, in 1956, after Nasser closed the straits of Tiran and Suez canal to Israeli shipping and moved terror squads into the Sinai peninsula, Israel, Egypt and France attacked Egypt. Israel captured the entire Sinai peninsula in 100 hours. Before agreeing to withdraw, Israel got a commitment from the US in the form of an Aide de Memoire, stating that it would support Israel’s right to unrestricted access to the straits of Tiran, in accordance with international law, and the UN agreed to station an emergency force in Sinai (UNEF).

Subsequent clarifications by the US apparently confirmed that the US supported the right of Israel to use force to enforce freedom of navigation. Israeli passage in Aqaba became a sore point for Nasser, and he was taunted by other Arab states for permitting it. The Aide de Memoire and U.S. position became an issue in 1967 when prior to the Six day war Israel insisted that closure of the straits was an act of war. The U.S. agreed but asked Israel to allow the US to open the canal. However it became apparent that the US was not able or willing to fulfill its commitment.

A circular telegram from Ambassador Smythe in Damascus summarized the views of State Department Middle East hands, that support for Israel was detrimental to US interests and that Israel was an “unviable client state.” Smythe’s conclusion read:

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 1 Comments » | 106 views

Is this holocaust resolution in good faith?

Holocaust deniers and their allies

By Ariel Cohen, Washington Times

Jan. 27 was the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz (1945). It was also U.N.-sponsored International Holocaust Commemoration Day.

Poland, as well as other European countries joined in support of a U.N. resolution, initiated by the United States, which “condemns without reservation any denial of the Holocaust” and urges U.N. member states “unreservedly to reject any denial of the Holocaust as an historical event.”

The U.S. Acting Ambassador to the United Nations Alejandro D. Wolff said “those who would deny the Holocaust — and, sadly, there are some who do — reveal not only their ignorance, but their moral failure as well.”

[Pardon me for being skeptical, but the passing of this resolution is so out of character with the usual anti-Israel resolutions, that I wonder what promises the US had to make in order to get it passed? Ted Belman]

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 4 Comments » | 161 views

No demographic time bomb should mean no two-state solution

By Bill Narvey

Caroline Glick recently wrote in the JP about the the work done by Ettinger and Wise that revealed the notion of a demographic time bomb has been a fiction created by the Palestinians and swallowed whole by Israelis. It would be a good thing that other Israeli media wrote on this matter as well, though I am not aware that they have yet picked up on the story and run with it.

The fear of a demographic time bomb has certainly been one significant factor that has channelled Israeli thinking towards believing in the inevitablility of a two state solution. It is important that the results of this demographic study become widely known within and outside of Israel. People will need some time to digest and wrap their minds around this reality. They will need some time to appreciate how the fear of a demographic time bomb constrained thinking and just what significance there is to this new reality.

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 3 Comments » | 174 views

D’Souza gets it ass backwards.

The D’Souza Follies
By Robert Spencer, | January 30, 2007

Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, is not all bad. He is absolutely right that Osama bin Laden’s perception that Bill Clinton was weak in the 1990s led to the stepping-up of global jihad efforts. But the central point of the book is that “the cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11,” not only by fostering a view that America was weak, but by spreading around the world “a decadent American culture that angers and repulses traditional societies, especially those in the Islamic world that are being overwhelmed with this culture. In addition, the left is waging an aggressive global campaign to undermine the traditional patriarchal family and to promote secular values in non-Western cultures. This campaign has provoked a violent reaction from Muslims who believe that their most cherished beliefs and institutions are under assault.” Therefore, “without the cultural left, 9/11 would not have happened.”

[Jihad is not about who we are or what we do but about who they are and what they want. Ted Belman]

In response, D’Souza calls for the American right to build a traditional values coalition with what he calls “traditional Muslims,” who abhor both bin Laden and Britney Spears. “Admittedly,” he acknowledges, “some on the right may feel uncomfortable about teaming up with Muslims. Yes, I would rather go to a baseball game or have a drink with Michael Moore than with the grand mufti of Egypt . But when it comes to core beliefs, I’d have to confess that I’m closer to the dignified fellow in the long robe and prayer beads than to the slovenly fellow with the baseball cap.” Which core beliefs? D’Souza doesn’t say, but the grand mufti of Egypt has declared sculpture un-Islamic, so perhaps he and D’Souza could get together for a fun evening of statue-smashing. Of course, that is one of the core beliefs of the mufti that no doubt D’Souza does not share. But this is just one example of D’Souza’s propensity to make statements without apparently having examined their implications. CONTINUE

[To suggest that fundamentalist Christians and Muslims share values because they are both religious is a calumny.]

January 30, 2007 | 2 Comments » | 136 views

Propaganda at its best

‘Judgment!’ Exposes Fraudulent Death Camp Pictures that Fooled the World!

[to order the film ‘Judgment!’ from Emporer’s Clothes]

In August 1992, millions of people were shocked to see photographs of a supposed Bosnian Serb death camp.

You may recall those pictures. Taken by the British news station, ITN, they focused on Fikret Alic, the emaciated-looking man on the left. The mass media broadcast these pictures as supposed proof that Alic and the other Muslim men in the pictures were imprisoned behind barbed wire in a Serbian death camp.

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 15 Comments » | 301 views

Jews and Israel beware.

By Ted Belman

Now that I have embraced the work of Francisco Gil-White with regard to Serbia, I thought I knew enough to convince my son of the truth. He called me a holocaust denier because I attempted to whitewash the Serbs and Milosevic and deny the “massacres” they were alleged to have perpetrated.

So I started to look for evidence that would debunk the “massacres” and found the Conclusions of Srebrenica Research Group in their study of Srebrenica, The Politics of War Crimes.

Bottom Line

    “Both the scale of the casualties at Srebrenica and the context of events have been misrepresented in official reports from governmental and non-governmental organizations as well as news organizations.

    “Both US and US-appointed ICTY officials acknowledged political considerations in issuing genocide indictments, which were announced prior to an investigation of events surrounding the capture of Srebrenica.

    “Muslim leaders from Srebrenica claim that the town was deliberately “sacrificed” by the Presidency of the Bosnia and the Military High Command in order to encourage NATO intervention.

    “Ethnic cleansing evokes condemnation only when it is committed by Serbs, not against them.

    “Media treatment of the Srebrenica and Krajina cases followed the same pattern and illustrates well how the media make some victims worthy and others unworthy in accord with a political agenda.

So why is this so important? It teaches us to not trust what governments, the media and the “victims” say. Also it teaches that Governments obscure their true agendas.

Jews and Israel beware.

January 30, 2007 | 21 Comments » | 263 views

Welcome to Palestine


In the world of international diplomacy few issues receive more wall-to-wall support than the notion that it is essential to establish a Palestinian state. Leaders worldwide are so busy speaking of how essential it is for a State of Palestine to be founded that none of them seems to have noticed that it already exists.

This state was officially founded in the summer of 2005, when Israel removed its military forces and civilian population from the Gaza Strip and so established the first wholly independent Palestinian state in history. Israel’s destruction of four Israeli communities in Northern Samaria and curtailment of its military operations in the area set the conditions for statehood in that area as well.

And so it is that as statesmen and activists worldwide loudly proclaim their commitment to establishing the sovereign State of Palestine, they miss the fact that Palestine exists. And it is a nightmare.

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 25 Comments » | 253 views

Britain’s Muslim Generation X


A new poll suggests that a generation of religious extremists is growing up in Britain. According to the report published by think tank Policy Exchange, over a third of British muslims aged between 16 and 24 would prefer to live under Sharia law than British law. Just under a third of this age group believes that converting from Islam to another religion should be punishable by death, while 74 percent of the age group preferred women to wear the veil or Muslim headscarf.

The youngsters interviewed for the poll are radically more extreme than their elders: Among over 55s, only 28 percent would prefer women covered.

Figures for other issues in which the large groups of young Muslims took extremist positions also show that more moderates exist among older generations.

Support for terror groups ready to take on the west, including al-Qaeda, runs at 7 percent in the British Muslim community as a whole: Among young people, the figure rises to 13 percent (only 3 percent of elders claim to admire al-Qaeda).

Read more …

January 30, 2007 | 2 Comments » | 167 views

The New World Order: Bilderbergs


[Just as we were discussing the reality of a “conspiracy” to rule the world and for what purpose, I came upon this blueprint just posted today.]

The Bilderbergs – who are they and what do they do? An aura of mystique surrounds the name, casting shades of reflections of the power elite who supposedly rule the world. Presidents, royalty, prime ministers, global industrialists, and financial leaders from around the world are said to be members of the secrete organization that meets once a year to set the direction and course of international affairs, world events, and global policies.

The first Bilderberg conference was held at the Bilderberg Hotel in Osterbeek Holland in May 1954, from which it derives its name. Created as a secret and supportive adjunct of NATO and the Marshall plan of the 1940s, the raison d’etre behind the group was to promote post war trans-Atlantic cooperation between America and Europe. It has since evolved into much more.

Certain leading power-brokers on both sides of the Atlantic were of the opinion that Europe and America were not united in their global policies, and that a meeting of both the mind and spirit was needed to forge a more powerful international union whose final goal was world governance.

Unofficial and hence unreported discussions were deemed most prudent to foster a better understanding of the complex global forces affecting Western Civilization since the end of the war. From these meetings came forth the seeds that eventually grew into the geopolitical policies of the North Atlantic States (NAS). CONTINUE

January 29, 2007 | 5 Comments » | 187 views

Understanding Unrestricted War: From 9/11 to 1/11


China is practicing a form of low-intensity “Unrestricted Warfare” against the United States, as shown by its alarming anti-satellite test of January 11.

Unrestricted Warfare is the English title of an influential 1999 book on military strategy authored by two Colonels in the People’s Liberation Army, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui. The book argues that countries can defeat technologically superior foes through deployment of an unlimited array of unconventional means rather than through direct military confrontation. Methods include terrorism–the book predicted the use of hijacked airplanes as flying bombs–propaganda, international law, or “lawfare,” and information warfare.

“To cripple or destroy the enemy’s information system would drastically degrade the enemy’s combat capabilities by making it blind, deaf or paralyzed,” the authors assert.

Read more …

January 29, 2007 | 0 Comments » | 79 views

When treason becomes national policy

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg, IsraelInsider

Article III, Section 3 of the American Constitution includes, in its definition of treason against the United States, “adhering to their Enemies” and “giving them Aid and Comfort.”

Israel’s Penal Law on treason is more complex: it defines treason in terms of four kinds of acts:

    1. the category of acts which “impair the sovereignty” of the State of Israel — section 97(a);

    2. the category of acts which “impair the integrity” of the State of Israel — section 97(b);

    3. the category of acts under section 99 which give assistance to an “enemy” in war against Israel, which the Law specifically states includes a terrorist organization;

    4. the category of acts in section 100 which evince an intention or resolve to commit one of the acts prohibited by sections 97 and 99.

The punishment prescribed in the Penal Law for the first three categories of acts of treason is death or imprisonment for life. The harshness of the punishment emphasizes the seriousness with which the State of Israel originally viewed the crime of treason. This is no longer the case. Treason has become permissible in Israel.

Read more …

January 29, 2007 | 0 Comments » | 99 views

Beyond the Politics of Stagnation

By Prof Paul Eidelberg

A. Introduction

1. Unless Prime Minister Olmert is indicted for alleged crimes, he’s going to hold on to his job as if it were a life raft. Nevertheless, suppose the government falls in a few months. What then?

2. Many feel that the only eligible prime minister is Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is certainly preferable to Olmert. He’s articulate, well-informed, and appears like a statesman. But remember these facts:

    First, Netanyahu voted for disengagement in the Sharon cabinet.

    Second, he signed the Wye Memorandum which yielded 40% of Judea and Samaria to Yasser Arafat; Third, he surrendered 80% of Hebron. Fourth, he supplied arms to the terrorists. Fifth, he voted against abrogating the Oslo Accords despite their constant violation by the PLO. Sixth, he is willing to negotiate with the PA and surrender of more of Judea and Samaria under the label of “reciprocity.”

Read more …

January 29, 2007 | 8 Comments » | 178 views

Are You Ready? Here’s The Plan…

by Gerald A. Honigman

Saddam needed to be overthrown, for lots of reasons.

It’s better for Iraq and Iraq’s neighbors that he and his genocidal crew are no longer running the show.

It would also have been better if his hanging had come after his trial for the massacre and gassing of hundreds of thousands of Kurds…But it didn’t. And I wouldn’t be too surprised if the enemies of the Kurds–James Baker and the American State Department included–had a hand in the timing to avoid showcasing the plight of the Kurds at the hands of their Arab buddies.

Think of it…a Road Map for the Arabs’ 22nd state is deemed a must, but none is still on the Foggy Folks ‘ agenda for tens of millions of victimized, truly stateless Kurds.

Now, again, while Saddam’s departure is a plus, keep in mind that the vast majority of those who have lived in his region have never really known indigenous democracy. The all-powerful father figure and/or cruel tyrant has been the norm for leadership for millennia. That, since the rise of Islam, they have had to sometimes butt heads with a powerful religious leadership, the ulema, seeking the same control for itself under a religious guise has also become a fact of life.

Read more …

January 28, 2007 | 0 Comments » | 252 views

What drives the Jews?

By Ted Belman

Historical Investigative Research (Francisco Gil-White) has just added a part five to a series on The Problem of Jewish Self-Defense

Part 5 – How Jewish piety sabotages Jewish self-defense

A well rounded social scientific explanation for why so many innocent Jews have been murdered throughout history, and continue to be murdered today, requires an understanding of the forces that cause non-Jews to kill, naturally, but also an understanding of those forces within the Jewish community that make their self-defense less effective than it could be.

This series is concerned with the second set of questions. In Part 1, 2, 3, and 4 of this series I examine the ways in which a good many Jewish leaders sabotage Jewish self-defense. In this installment and the next I will address certain disadvantages of ordinary Jews themselves when it comes to dealing with anti-Jewish terrorist attacks.

Given that there are many significant differences between religious and secular Jews, it has seemed useful to me to examine them separately, so in this piece I will consider certain negative consequences of Jewish religious piety to an effective Jewish self-defense. In the next piece I will consider how certain ideologies common among secular Jews also have negative consequences to the same. It must be kept in mind, however, that some of what I say here is applicable to secular Jews and vice-versa, to different degrees. After all, the center of gravity of Jewish culture is the Jewish religion, and therefore it affects many Jews who profess no allegiance or interest in the Torah. Conversely, though secular Jews are more easily influenced by the ideologies of the Gentile world, religious Jews are surrounded by this world too, and especially through their exposure to secular Jews, and therefore they are not entirely immune to some of the forces that affect secular Jews more strongly.

What a fascinating introduction. I can’t wait to read the rest.

While the socio-economic status of Jews suggests they should vote conservative, they don’t. Overwhelmingly they vote for liberal causes. Why? Is this a function of their religion or their experience as the disenfrancised?

January 28, 2007 | 4 Comments » | 135 views