Friday, April 14, 2017
Gail WinstonWinston@winstonglobal.orgGaza War Diary 1 Wed-Thu. April12-13, 2017 1 Day 1319-1320 Mo’adim L’Simcha 1 am Dear Family & Friends,
As absorbing & exciting as the successive stories are, the most important, crucial & sea-change, game-changing article is the brilliant legal & historical analysis Legality Of Israeli Sovereignty Over Judea & Samaria According To International Lawby Karen Stahl-Don, LLM, MA.
I watched the live streaming from the Kotel (the Western Wall) of the Birkat HaKohanim: Blessing of the Kohamim at 9:30 & 10:30 this morning. It was beautiful & spiritually uplifting. Then I watched the celebrations of Pesach in Hebron at Ma’arat HaMachpela (the Burial Cave of our Patriarchs & Matriarchs: Avraham, Isaac, Jacob & Sara, Rivka & Leah). See it tomorrow here, I hope.
Still a bit of an almost full moon. Today we had sun & showers. Gorgeous flowers!
All the very best, Gail/Geula/Savta/Savta Raba x 2/Mom
Our Website is quite fascinating: WinstonIsraelInsight.org
1.Legality Of Israeli Sovereignty Over Judea & Samaria Acc. To International Law
4.Hotovely: The settlement enterprise is forever
5.White House spokesman: I made a mistake
7.Dershowitz: Don’t politicize Sean Spicer’s Hitler faux pas
9.’Ha’aretz newspaper surprises with new low’
10.Netanyahu: Shameful & contemptible Ha’aretz article
12.Transfer of Fake Palestinians is Legal. by Steven Shamrak
1.Legality Of Israeli Sovereignty Over Judea & Samaria Acc. To International Law by Karen Stahl-Don, LLM, MA
T. Belman.This is very well written and very clear. Even so it is a summary of a larger article which may be found at the link.
Summary: The Legality of Israeli Sovereignty over Judea & Samaria According to International Law
I. Introduction
The purpose of this report is to explain that international law supports Israel’s claim to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and to debunk the claim that Israel is illegally occupying that land. This report demonstrates that the international community’s pervasive belief that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law contradicts the simplest and most logical reading of the documents through which international law has traditionally been construed. The basic legal historical documents speak the truth to all who choose to read them.
It is common to analyze the issue of sovereignty & legality of the settlements by either attempting to simply ignore history & deal with the present situation today. Many begin in 1947 with the UN General Assembly Resolution 181 “partition plan”, or with the Six-Day War in 1967. Any such analysis is a mistake to Israel’s great detriment as any starting point that omits the World War I era obscures the period when the international community established the modern foundations of Israel’s sovereignty in Judea & Samaria. Failure to evaluate historical events & documents from this era will inevitably result in the improper application of international law & inaccurate conclusions.
Moreover, any narrative that circumvents the legal and historic events of the WWI era lends itself to the persistent misconception that modern Israel was created as a guilt response to the Holocaust. In fact, the Balfour Declaration & relevant documents preceded the Holocaust by almost three decades. These international documents clearly predate the Holocaust & acknowledge the Jewish nation’s perpetual physical & spiritual connection to Israel. Moreover, a post-WWI starting point facilitates glossing over the historically documented fact that although expelled & exiled, a Jewish presence nevertheless continuously remained in Israel from time immemorial.1 In fact, since 1830 Jews have constituted a majority of the population in Jerusalem.
This report develops the following analysis of international law:
1. Beginning with the Balfour Declaration in 1917, the international community supported the return of the Jewish people to reconstitute their national home in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration was incorporated into the British Mandate for Palestine (the “Palestine Mandate,” “the British Mandate,” or “the Mandate”). The International Court of Justice recognized the international Mandate as an international agreement with the status of a treaty.
2. The international community committed to creating a Jewish State in the entire territory designated in the Palestine Mandate, which included Judea & Samaria. Article 6 of the Mandate explicitly encourages Jewish settlement on this land.
3. Israel’s recognition as an independent state triggered the termination of the Palestine Mandate.
4. The Mandate, an offspring of the law of Trusts, was always intended to be temporary and to terminate when its mission was accomplished.
5. The explicitly stated mission was to facilitate the return of a sufficient number of Jews to their historic homeland in Palestine in order to create a Jewish National home with the ability to stand on its own.
6. Upon international recognition that this mission was accomplished, the Mandate terminated &, in accordance with the terms set forth within, the Jewish people acquired sovereignty over all of Israel—including Judea & Samaria.
7. Furthermore, the fact that Israel acquired sovereignty rights in this territory upon termination of the British Mandate—& subsequently liberated this territory from illegal Jordanian occupation during the Six-Day War—establishes the inapplicability of ‘de jure’ (official, obligatory) application of the Hague & Geneva Conventions to Judea & Samaria.
8. To date, no binding international agreement or event has altered the inclusion of Judea & Samaria within the borders of the Mandate. No valid binding agreement or negotiation (including the “partition plan” UN Resolution 181 of 1947, Resolution 242, the Oslo Accords, the 2003 “Road Map for Peace”) has altered the borders of Judea & Samaria that were set down in the Mandate. The Israeli government has not altered or relinquished the sovereignty acquired upon termination of the Mandate.
II. International Acceptance & Support of the Balfour Declaration
Historical documents demonstrate a continuous Jewish presence in Israel since Biblical times. However, modern international recognition of the Jewish right to return to Israel began with the Balfour Declaration in 1917. In that Declaration, the British government stated that it favorably viewed the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and would use its best effort to facilitate its creation. Numerous countries approved the Balfour Declaration itself, which was then prominently included in multiple international documents, including the 1920 Sévres Peace Treaty between Turkey and the Allies, which was signed by the Ottoman Sultan.2 Most important for the purpose of tracing relevant international law, the Principal Allied Powers explicitly defined the realization of the Balfour Declaration as the purpose of the Palestine Mandate. Specifically, on April 25, 1920, at the San Remo Conference, representatives of the four Allied powers of World War I—Britain, France, Italy, and Japan—distributed the Mandate for Palestine to Great Britain, stating that Mandatory (trustee) would be responsible for putting the Balfour Declaration into effect. It should also be emphasized that President Woodrow Wilson approved the Balfour Declaration before it was published, and the French and Italian governments also publicly endorsed the Declaration. Similarly, President Truman expressed approval of the Balfour Declaration, “explaining that it was in keeping with former President Woodrow Wilson’s principle of ‘self-determination.’”
III. The Creation of the Mandate System
It is essential to understand the history and function of the Mandate system. The victorious Allies found themselves in control of, inter alia, the former Ottoman and German territories at the end of World War I. Some Allied powers wanted to annex that land. Others, however, wanted to provide the inhabitants with self-determination. The Mandate system was a novel compromise between those two philosophies. The League of Nations Covenant, which created the Mandate system, forms the preamble of the Peace Treaty of Versailles and the other WWI peace treaties. Article 22 defined the Mandate system as a “principle of guardianship over certain undeveloped peoples.” Under the supervision of the League of Nations, the enlightened nations would act as guardians to these less advanced peoples temporarily until they could adapt to the “strenuous conditions of the modern world” and independently stand on their own. The Mandate system was viewed as a fairly radical institution at the time because this innovative “trust system” was designed to step up decolonization and promote self-determination in the region.
For this reason, it is ironic that the Mandate system, introduced as a vehicle to affect self-determination, is today attacked as being colonialist. It should be noted that those who argue against the legitimacy of the Palestine Mandate should also be questioning the legitimacy of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, all of which were created through the same Mandate system. Indeed, the entire modern Middle East is comprised of nations that were created under a system of primarily French and British protectorates, redrawn borders, and colonies. Moreover, the principle of intertemporal law requires that acts be evaluated through the lens of the international law and mores of their own time.
According to those standards, the Mandate system was progressive & enlightened in striving to achieve autonomy of the territories. Commentators at the time, such as D. Campbell Lee in 1921, lauded the Mandate system as a “Charter of Freedom” and took “special pride” that Britain would faithfully apply the principles of trusteeship & thus fulfill the “sacred trust reposed in them.”
Although Mandates generally attempted to advance the autonomy of populations residing in the newly-acquired territories, the Palestine Mandate was unique. This Mandate was intended to develop the self-determination of the Jewish people, who did not constitute a majority in Palestine at the time of the Mandate’s formation. The Palestine Mandate specifically recognized “the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine [and] the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country”. Thus, the international community was acknowledging the unique status of this displaced indigenous population returning to the land from which it had been expelled. Multiple provisions in the Mandate explicitly reflect the objective of creating a Jewish majority in what was recognized as the Jewish national homeland.
In short, the League of Nations and the international community viewed the Jewish people as a displaced nation worthy of international support in their return to the homeland from which they had been exiled. The Peel Commission confirmed the fairness inherent in granting self-determination to the Jewish nation, as “all other civilized peoples had a homeland somewhere in which they were the overwhelming majority, a country they could call their own, a State which gave those of them who lived as a minority in other States a more equal footing…[for the Jews], that land could only be Palestine.”
It is worth noting that the Mandate system applied Arab self-determination throughout the Middle East with Palestine as the solitary Ottoman territory in which the international community decided not to recognize Arab political autonomy. Moreover, it is often omitted from the narrative that the Palestine Mandate originally included the entire area of Jordan, the latter having been effectively severed from the Jewish area in 1922. Thus, the territory originally defined in the Palestine Mandate has already been divided once to allow for even greater Arab self-determination. This historic fact, often ignored, clarifies to an even greater extent that the final amended version of the Mandate for Palestine designated all of the remaining territory west of the Jordan River as the Jewish National Home – including Judea & Samaria.
IV. The Jurisprudence of the Mandate System – International Mandate as a “Trust”
While the juridical nature of a Mandate has been a continuing topic of legal discussion, the most prominent legal consensus defines the institution of the international mandate as analogous to a trust. This analogy is derived from four major points:
First, Article 22 defines the Mandate system as a “sacred trust of civilization,” & designates that “securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.” Second, the designated mandated territories were never considered to be in possession of the Mandatory trustee or part of the Mandatory’s country. Rather, the Mandatory power was granted authority to act solely within the dictates of the Mandate on behalf of the international community, equivalent to a guardianship for the benefit of a minor, designed from the onset to be temporary and to terminate when the infant reaches the age of majority. Hence, the designated peoples of a Mandate are compared to the beneficiaries of a trust. Third, jurists have considered sovereignty of the Mandated territory to be like the res (property) of a trust – that is, sovereignty was suspended until the beneficiaries demonstrated the ability to “stand on their own.”
Thus, the Mandate system introduced a modified concept of sovereignty. The Mandatory power, like a trustee, “obtains the guardianship of a people, and not the ownership and dominion of a territory; and the sovereignty is suspended or held in trust” for the eventual benefit of the Mandate’s designated population. Once the intended goal of a Mandate has been achieved—that is, the designated peoples are deemed able to govern on their own—the Mandate terminates, at which point sovereignty, which has been suspended or held in trust, vests in the newly independent state. Termination of the international mandate results in the accrual of sovereignty to the government of the designated beneficiaries.
It is worth noting that the obligation to facilitate a Jewish National Home in Palestine constituted a binding international agreement. Fifty-one countries comprising the League of Nations in 1922 unanimously ratified the language of the Mandate, contained in the Treaty of Versailles and the other international WWI peace treaties. Under Article 20 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, all nations “solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms [of this Covenant],” & if any member has “undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.”
As a result, it can be stated that all League member nations voted for and adopted the Mandate for Palestine in 1922 and obligated themselves to facilitate the creation of a Jewish National Home in all of the territory, including Judea and Samaria. In addition, on two separate occasions, the United States government formally supported the Mandate’s goal of establishing a homeland for the Jews in Palestine, despite the fact that America never became a member of the League of Nations.
Thus, the Mandate for Palestine created a binding international treaty—committing all members of the League of Nations, and also, by consent, the United States—to expedite the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in all of the territory west of the Jordan River. Hence, under the terms of the Mandate – and in line with the legal concept of a trust as reflected in the language in Article 22 of the Covenant – the Jewish people were slated to receive sovereignty over all of Mandatory Palestine when they were deemed able to “stand by themselves.”
v. The Legal Invalidity of UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (The “Partition Plan”)
The League of Nations ceased to exist as a legal entity on April 20, 1946. The League transferred virtually all of its duties as an international institution to the United Nations, established on October 24, 1945. Crucially, as the International Court of Justice has ruled, the Mandates survived and did not terminate upon the League’s demise. The Palestine Mandate had created an international status, “valid in rem,” (a right that is valid ‘against all of the world’) designating the borders of the Mandate territory as the national home of the Jewish people, while guaranteeing the rights of the non-Jewish population specifically as a protected minority within the Jewish state. This status and these rights survived the demise of the League of Nations.
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 181, which proposed the termination of the British Mandate and the partitioning of Palestine into two states – one Jewish and one Arab. The Jews accepted this plan and the Arabs did not. Nor did the Arabs declare a separate Palestinian state. Instead, they launched a war. In addition, although the Resolution requested the Security Council to execute the plan, the Security Council never did so. As a result, with no agreement and no implementation, Resolution 181, never took root and thus, could not affect the borders set forth in the Mandate.
Despite the fact that Resolution 181 is void, some entities continue to promote this proposal as a valid and recognized partition plan. This interpretation is wrong on multiple levels.
First, Articles 10 and 14 of the United Nations Charter clearly indicate that the General Assembly can only make non-binding recommendations.
Second, the name of the recommendation was “Plan of Partition With Economic Union“(our emphasis) – with partition being only one aspect of the lengthy, elaborate, and multi-point resolution, premised upon extensive economic cooperation and peaceful co-existence.
Third, the Jewish acceptance of Resolution 181 in 1947 was an agreement of its time, one that assumed Arab cooperation with the entire Partition Plan. It is, therefore, absurd to argue that the partition portion of the resolution remains on the table today, with Jewish acceptance in 1947 constituting consent to division today. Any such conclusion flies in the face of logic and the most basic principles of general and international law. As a void & non-binding document, Resolution 181 failed to alter the legal status of any mandated territory & lacks legal significance.
VI. Termination of the Mandate Resulted in Israeli Sovereignty Over Judea and Samaria
On May 15, Britain withdrew as Mandatory. Importantly, a Mandate does not terminate simply because a Mandatory chooses to renounce its authority prior to the fulfillment of its purpose and does not affect the existence or essence of already created rights. Moreover, the Mandatory trustee never possessed the authority to decide on the termination of the Mandate or unilaterally alter its terms, any more than a trustee assigned with administrating a guardianship, estate or res (property) would have authority to affect the legal rights of the beneficiaries.
At midnight on May 15, 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence – and 7 Arab armies immediately invaded. In the midst of this war, Jordan seized control of Judea & Samaria. The fighting ended following a series of Armistice (ceasefire or truce) agreements, each containing explicit signed provisions that there be no international ramifications or political conclusions adduced from these lines. These ceasefire lines became known as “the Green Line.”3 Jordan proceeded to annex Judea & Samaria, the legality of which was recognized only by Britain & Pakistan.
In accordance with the well-recognized concept of ‘ex injuria jus non oritur—illegal acts cannot create law or produce legal rights’—Jordan’s illegal seizure of Judea & Samaria did not affect the sovereignty of the territory. As a result, neither Jordan’s illegal annexation of Judea & Samaria, nor the subsequent Armistice Agreements affected the legal status of the Mandate territory west of the Jordan River.
However, international recognition of Israel’s declared independence did alter the legal status of the Mandate territory. This validation terminated the Mandate and granted the Jewish people the sovereignty that had been previously held “in abeyance.” The purpose of the Palestine Mandate was realized when the Jewish population was a majority—or at least large enough to be internationally recognized as capable of building a country that could “stand on its own.” As Campbell Lee stated in 1921,“The sovereignty of a Mandate area is ‘in suspense’ pending the creation of a new state, pending the time when the people are able to stand alone.” Once this occurred, the Jewish people accrued the res (object) of the Mandate-trust—i.e. sovereignty—in all of the territory west of the Jordan River, with the Mandate constituting the only legal and internationally recognized boundary.
Thus, the British Mandate terminated—and the Jewish people received sovereignty over Palestine in accordance with the terms dictated in the Mandate—the moment that the State of Israel received international recognition as an independent state. This recognition was documented on May 11, 1949, when the United Nations decided that “Israel is a peace-loving State” and voted to admit Israel as a full member.
The conclusion that Jewish sovereignty took effect within the borders of the Mandate is inescapable when tracing relevant international law & analyzing the jurisprudence and case law of the era, as documented & described in more detail in the report. Jewish sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is also the logical application of the principle of ‘uti possidetis juris’, a critical concept in international law that “defines borders of newly sovereign states on the basis of their previous administrative frontiers.”
VII. The Inapplicability of The Hague and Geneva Conventions
On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a war of self-defense against the Egyptian army, triggering the Six-Day War. In the midst of this war, the Israeli army liberated Judea & Samaria from Jordan’s illegal rule & its legal sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. Instead, the government chose to ‘de facto’ (for practical purposes) apply the “humanitarian Recognizing the delicate and political nature of Israeli administration of these territories—and in hopeful anticipation of a possible and imminent peace agreement—Israel refrained from exercising provisions” of the international conventions designed for “belligerent occupation of foreign territory”: the 1907 Hague Regulations & the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Moreover, as per Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, the government chose to leave in place most of the (primarily Ottoman & Jordanian) civil law that was in effect at the time [Gail sez: including ‘Land Laws’].
It must be stressed that Israel’s ‘de facto’ (practical & pragmatic) application of these provisions implies neither consent that these rules have ‘de jure’ (obligatory, legal) applicability nor concession on any level. Furthermore, the argument that these regulations apply ‘de jure’ is invalid.
Israel received sovereignty rights in these areas upon termination of the British Mandate. Thus, labeling Israel’s presence as “belligerent occupation” is faulty. Nor does the fact that Israel has thus far decided to exercise its sovereignty only in certain areas of Judea & Samaria indicate that Israel has forfeited or acquiesced its legitimate right to apply sovereignty within the entirety of its legal borders.
VIII. Conclusion: The Mandate – A Basis for Sovereignty Under International Law
The British Mandate for Palestine terminated over sixty years ago. Upon termination, sovereignty vested in the Jewish state. Thus, this basic document—first set forth & agreed upon by the Principal Allied Powers in 1922—established the modern-day legal status of Judea & Samaria, & remains decisive today. In fact, the purpose of the Mandate has been fully executed & realized. Israel has become a Jewish homeland, civil & religious rights of the non-Jewish minority are protected & access to the holy places in Jerusalem is guaranteed to all religions.
An international agreement, constituting a binding international treaty “in fact & in law,” designated Palestine as the intended national home of the Jewish people & recognized the territory of “Palestine” as including the area of Judea & Samaria. No valid treaty, document, or resolution has altered this reality. All discussion can be premised upon the knowledge that Israel retains legal sovereignty over Judea & Samaria & thus, a Jewish presence & Jewish communities in the area are legal according to international law.
1. Jews saw Israel as their home throughout their exile, central in Jewish prayers and liturgy, expressing their connection & striving to return: “When the Lord brings about the return to Zion, we will be like dreamers. Our mouths will be filled with laughter & our tongues with songs of joy…” (Psalm 126, recited after meals every Sabbath and holiday.) Return to Israel & Jerusalem have remained central in Jewish prayer, blessings, poetry, songs & longing throughout the exile.
2. In the Treaty of Sévres, Turkey relinquished ownership of most of the territories of the former Ottoman Empire—including Palestine—to the League of Nations. The Treaty was not formally ratified due to the overthrow of the Ottoman Sultan during the revolution led by Kamal Ataturk. Ataturk negotiated the Lausanne Treaty in 1923, which was signed and ratified.
3. These demarcation or armistice lines, drawn in green ink, continue to carry great impact, despite the lack of any rational or legal basis whatsoever for such prominence or status as a political border.
PM says he was moved by speech given by 14 year old terror victim at European Parliament yesterday. By Arutz Sheva Staff,29/03/17 20:38
https://youtu.be/WMw3kZBPgb8
Please note that the European Parliament has created a new group: Friends of Judea & Samaria, so the people in the EU can know the people of Judea/Samaria & stop sending their funds to NGO’s that fund terrorism against these people! Click on the YouTube link above to hear & see this game-changing announcement & Ayala Shapira’s brave & inspiring speech.
e 
Netanyahu contacts Ayala by phone – Moshe Lev Ran
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was moved by the words of 14 year old Ayala Shapira, who delivered a speechat the European Parliament pro-Judea & Samarialobby on Tuesday after having been severely burned in a terrorist attack in 2011.
Ayala was riding [home from a Math class for superior students] with her father on a Samaria highway when terrorists through a Molotov Cocktail through their window. Ayelet suffered severe burns & was hospitalized for 8 months. [She must wear a skin-protecting mask 24/7: Gail Sez]
She spoke of the tragedy that one of her attackers was a 16 year old teenager who carried out the attack because he knew that the PA would provide money to his family if he was arrested while attacking Jews.
Prime Minister Netanyahu met with Samaria Regional Council head Yossi Dagan Wednesday, & afterwards he told Ayala how moved he was by her speech.
“We all heard you,” Netanyahu told Ayelet. “You have moved me, because you said the simple truth in such a convincing & true manner, because it derives from your experiences, from your pain & from the truth we all [face].”
“I want to thank you in the name of all of us, the entire people of Israel. Thank you Ayala. There should be only good [for you] & it was well done – tremendous respect,” Netanyahu added.
Dagan thanked the PM for his kind words. “I can tell you, Prime Minister, Ayala was [is] a real hero in spite of the pain & I’m proud we have such a resident & a girl like her in Judea & Samaria.”
Wednesday, April 12, 2017 by Noah Beck
[Gail Sez: Since imitation is said to be the sincerest form of flattery, it’s ‘nice’ to see other organizations admitting these truths & their dangers. For some 29 years, my friend & colleague, David Bedein, Founder & Director of the Center for Near East Policy Research Ltd & Israel Behind the News <ctrforneareastpolicyresearch@gmail.com has been investigating, documenting & now filming the UNRWA schools & military style summer camps as well as buying & studying all Palestinian Authority’s textbooks used in Gaza & the PA. David has filmed the Arab/Muslim children from nursery school through high school being brainwashed, indoctrinated & incited to hate & kill Jews. Bedein is bringing these films to all the Parliaments of the world to help them see these dangers so as to un-fund their countries’ financial contributions to UNRWA & the other indoctrinators. NOTE THE STORY ABOVE ABOUT THE EU CREATING A NEW GROUP: FRIENDS OF JUDEA & SAMARIA. David’s efforts helped bring that to fruition!
Too bad these other organizations who discovered Bedein’s major research into Arab/Muslim incitement & exploitation of children (which is cruel child abuse) did not give David Bedein credit for his years of dedicated work which seems to have inspired others to copy him.]
·
·
·
RELATED STORIES
§ PLO Wishes Israelis Happy Passover, Infuriating Palestinians
§ VIDEO: Palestinian Leadership ‘Enthusiastically’ Supported Nazis
§ Abbas Rejects Responsibility for Captive Israeli Teens
Originally written for theInvestigative Project on Terrorism
The new Palestinian curriculum for grades 1 to 4 “is significantly more radical than previous curricula,” concludesa new studyby Hebrew University’s Institute for Monitoring Peace & Cultural Tolerance in School Education (IMPACT-se). It “teaches students to be martyrs, demonizes & denies the existence of Israel, & focuses on a ‘return’ to an exclusively Palestinian homeland.”
In response to pressure from President Trump,Israel reportedly is preparinga series of concessions to Palestinians in a bid to re-launch peace talks. Trump may want to consider pressuring the Palestinians for parallel gestures, including correcting educational policies that are antithetical to peace.
Indeed, the IMPACT-se studywarnsthat the “educational system has created a Palestinian nationalism that absolutely rejects the Other & is therefore incompatible with Israel’s existence.” Even more alarming, the report notes that the “Struggle against Israel & its disappearance is the main theme,” & “The 1974 PLO’s Phased Plan for the conquest of the Land of Israel/Palestine is taught. The curriculum reflects a strategy of violence & pressure in place of peaceful negotiations.”
The “Palestinian school curricula are inspected by the international donors who finance the Palestinian Authority &, by extension, its public education system,” theTimes of Israel reported.
That includes huge investment from Britain, theDaily Mail reported, money that goes “into Palestinian schools named after mass murderers & Islamist militants, which openly promote terrorism & encourage pupils to see child killers as role models.”
Incredibly, European countries pressure Israel to freeze settlement growth & take other steps towards peace, while funding pro-war messages targeted at future generations of Palestinians. Islam is not used as a radical political tool in grades 1–4, but the educational message “includes biases towards non-Muslims,” the IMPACT-se studysays. In grades 11-12, “Religion is clearly abused…to foment hate amid calls for eternal war in the Levant.”
The Palestinian curriculum of violence & hate highlighted by the IMPACT-se study is just one of the many ways in which Palestinian leaders have forced their violent agendas onto children.
Islamists have a particularly robust history of weaponizing children in their war against Israel. Last summer, a Gaza kindergarten graduation ceremony sponsored by Islamic Jihad, featured children dressed in military fatigues, holding toy weapons,acting out attackson an Israeli army base, firing mortar shells, planting explosive devices, kidnapping soldiers & even delivering mosque sermons that praise martyrdom.
Absurdly, one of the senior Islamic Jihad members present at the event, which the terror group filmed in high definition & broadcast on YouTube, declares to spectators that the show was meant to spread a message of peace and love. “We are a life-loving people,” affirms Hader Habib, a senior member of Islamic Jihad. “We honor & appreciate mankind…The message of Palestine’s children today is a message of love to the whole world.”
In 2012, senior Hamas commander Zaher JabarintoldHamas’ Al-Quds TV that Hamas labors “day and night” to educate Palestinian children in Gaza to become suicide bombers. In 2013, Gaza’s Hamas-run al-Aqsa TV showed childrensinging the virtues of suicide attacksand wishing to blow themselves up to liberate Jerusalem and Palestine, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).
“Jihad bestows pride and glory upon you when you become a martyrdom-seeker,” the elementary school-aged children sing. “Oh explosive device of glory – with her blood she created freedom.”
Islamist abuse of Palestinian children extends beyond the educational context. Tens of millions of foreign aid dollars intended to benefit injured children “was instead taken by families of Hamas members who falsely registered their children in the program,” theTimes of Israel reportedlast August.
The use and abuse of children by Islamists also occurs outside of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Islamic State uses child soldiers and brainwashes them to perform gruesome acts at an early age, includingmock beheadings of dolls.
In 2015, Boko Haram, an Islamic extremist group based in Nigeria,sent 44 children on suicide missionsin Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. The use of children as suicide bombers in Islamic countries isexplored in greater depthby Lawrence A. Franklin, a former Defense Department Iran Desk officer.
But radical Islam isn’t always the main factor in Palestinian terrorism committed by children. Last month, a report by Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) found that children from troubled backgrounds wereoften ripefor radicalization because they viewed attacks as a way to commit suicide with glory. Child terrorists might be further motivated to die trying to kill Israelis because the Palestinian Authority often rewards such deaths by paying the bereaved families a monthly stipend.
According to COGAT, non-ideological reasons for lone-wolf attacks include “domestic violence within the household … social criticism for an immoral act such as adultery, lack of respect for the family, matriculation failure and more; and serious psychological issues stemming from depression, despair, and mental illness.”
Reforming the anti-Israel indoctrination of Palestinian children will not be easy. Palestinians reportedlyresponded with threatsover reports that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) is considering curricular changes that might curtail incitement.
Nevertheless, if world powers are serious about promoting a genuine Israeli-Palestinian peace, they must pressure Palestinian leaders to start preparing future generations for peace by replacing anti-Israel incitement and “martyrdom” adulation with messages of peaceful coexistence, including maps & history that acknowledge Jewish claims to Israel proper and territories in dispute.
Noah Beck is the author ofThe Last Israelis, an apocalyptic novel about Iranian nukes and other geopolitical issues in the Middle East.
4.Hotovely: The settlement enterprise is foreverShare Deputy Foreign Minister sees Trump era as ‘a real window of opportunity for new political thinking – also for thinking about sovereignty.’ By Shimon Cohen,Arutz Sheva 4/4/17
Tzipi Hotovely – Yonatan Sindel/Flash 90
In an interview withArutz Sheva, Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely addressed her disagreement with Education Minister Naftali Bennett over the government’s conduct during the Trump administration in the US.
Yesterday, Hotovely characterizedBennett’s conduct as not befitting leadership as he came out criticizing the very same policy he had supported previously at the cabinet meeting. Likewise, she hinted political & other interests were dictating his statements.
“It is important that the nationalist camp know the facts,” Hotovely said, establishing that not only was a strategic opportunity not missed as Bennett had suggested, but that a “great political gateway” had been opened through which “all the good forces can speak to the American administration, which is consolidating new policy.”
Hotovely continued to explain her words in light of her last visit to the US State Department. “They are at a new stage of assessments, also as pertains to the issue of two states. They are completely open. The gates of political thinking have not been closed,” she said, bringing up the fact that only at the end of April will US Ambassador David Friedman arrive in Israel as further indication Washington is in a period of preparation & learning.
According to Hotovely, Israel must “take advantage of the opportunity & not cry, because nothing is lost.” When asked why, if so, the Prime Minister does not find it fitting to announce clearly that the Bar Ilan Speech is dead & that Israel is opening a completely new political process, she said that “exactly for this reason the PM travelled to Washington, in order to erase the Palestinian state.”
She said that the political discourse now deals with living conditions and economic projects for Palestinians & is no longer about the political discourse of the Obama years which centered around the vision of a Palestinian state. She did praise the desire on the Right to see change, but said that that change is indeed happening.
As to the death of the Bar Ilan Speech, she said that was effectively the significance of the PM’s words in Washington, when he emphasized the changes underway in the Middle East & the new conditions that exist in the field along with the election of a US President who emphasizes it is not his intention to enforce policy on Israel but to see the entire region as a unit that must be addressed & not to simply focus on the Palestinian issue. “That is good news for Israel.”
“In Washington I heard the Speaker of the House, Nikki Haley & the Vice President. Nobody talked about two states or a Palestinian state, rather they are concerned about the security of Israel, that Israel needs to be strong and that they will do whatever they can to stop the discriminatory discourse against Israel. This is a new tune in Washington. I don’t know why Israelis are deaf to hearing this. There is a dulling of senses here about the fact that it’s a new game and not just “a new sheriff,” as the US UN Ambassador said.
She said that this period, during which the new US administration is forming its plans “is the time to work quietly, to ensure the fact that initiatives that are on the table are advanced by the administration as acceptable developments for all parties. As long as the US leads the processes it will be possible to attach additional regional policies to them. This is the time to work in groups with the Americans & prove the failure of the approach of the two-state solution due to the Palestinian refusal to accept an Israeli presence here & emphasize that we’re talking about a regional problem. The Palestinians have Arab neighbors & it’s their problem, too.”
“Above all,” added Hotovely, “We need to talk about the fact that the settlement enterprise is here forever. We cannot talk about withdrawals. Fortunately, in the past 8 years with all its difficulties there was still no withdrawal program on the table. At the moment, the settlement enterprise needs to advance & become accepted as a legitimate legal tool. This is the land of the Jewish people & it was not stolen suddenly. Fortunately, we are starting to hear a different tune in places like Britain & the US, that the settlements are not an obstacle to peace & are not the main problem in the Middle East.”
Later, Hotovely addressed wonder at Minister Bennett’s conduct, after he voted for the plan presented by the Prime Minister – but later tweeted that he wanted a different policy. She didn’t accept his explanation, that he voted for the limitations on building in Judea & Samaria but simultaneously opposes the political situation whereby a strategic opportunity was missed to apply sovereignty in Judea & Samaria. “There is a real window of opportunity for new political thinking, also for thinking about sovereignty. Everything is on the table. We need to do things in coordination with the American administration. The more we leverage the support of the administration for Israeli interests, we can better achieve historic results, such as a recognition of Jerusalem as the capital and the transfer of the embassy.”
Regarding reports from the meeting between Trump & Al-Sisi about theadvancement of a regional peace summit, Hotovely said that the matter is being coordinated with the Israeli government which is aware that Washington finds itself in a new reality with Egypt and also wants to strengthen Jordan. “The PM understands the approach is that relations with our neighbors will contribute to a solution to the problem & not the opposite.”
Towards the end of the interview, Hotovely was asked to address thereturn of former Minister Gideon Saarto politics and the ranks of the Likud. She said that she accepts Saar warmly. “The return of every important political player to the scene is a good thing. We need all our good forces back, and I wish that the Finance Minister would also come back to the Likud. At the end of the day, the Likud is a strong movement which needs all its top players united around our march to the next elections.”
As to the assertion that Saar is returning because he sees the tenure of Netanyahu’s rule coming to an end and he seeks to fill the space instead, Hotovely said, “since I have been in the Likud – already 8 years – they’ve been talking about the end of the Netanyahu era, but the Netanyahu era is continuing. I tell all the commentators that many more years of Netanyahu are awaiting them.”
Sean Spicer apologizes for comments about Assad that ‘not even Hitler used chemical weapons.’ By Ido ben Porat, Arutz Sheva 12/04/17 07:38
Sean Spicer – Reuters
White House Spokesperson Sean Spicer apologized on Wednesday forcomments he made yesterday at a press briefing, during which he told journalists that “Hitler […] didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons” as Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had.
“I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust for which, frankly, there is no comparison. For that I apologize, it was a mistake to do that,” Spicer toldCNN.
“I’m not looking to quantify this in any way. I should have stayed focused on the Assad regime and the dangers they’ve brought to their own people and the terrible atrocities they did, and to drag any other comparison into this was not appropriate.”
Yesterday, Spicer had attacked Russia for backing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime in Syria. “We didn’t use chemical weapons in WWII. We had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,”
When asked about Zyklon B, Spicer had clarified that he was not speaking about the Holocaust.
“He was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing,” Spicer explained.
“When it comes to Sarin gas, [Hitler] was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing,” he said. “I understand your point. Thank you. I appreciate that. He brought them into the Holocaust centres, I understand that. I was saying in the way that Assad used them where he went into town, dropped them into the middle of town. I appreciate the clarification. That was not the intent.”
White House spokesman: I made a mistake
Sean Spicer apologizes again for saying Hitler did not use chemical weapons, says he “let the President down.”
ByGary Willig, Arutz Sheva 12/04/17 18:52 Share 
White House spokesman Sean Spicer apologized again for saying thatAdolf Hitler did not use chemical weapons.
Spicer made the offensive comments during the daily White House press briefing Tuesday,
“It really is painful to myself to know that I did something like that,” Spicer told a forum at the Newseum in Washington. “To know when you screwed up that you offended a lot of people, I would ask…for folks’ forgiveness, to understand that I should not have made the comparison. There is no comparing atrocities.”
He said that he was also disappointed in himself on a professional level.
“Your job as the spokesperson is to help amplify the President’s actions and accomplishments,” he said. “And when you’re distracting from that message of accomplishment, and your job is to be the exact opposite, on a professional level it’s disappointing because I feel that I’ve let the president down.”
He said that he has not spoken to President Donald Trump since making the unintended offensive comments.
7.Dershowitz: Don’t politicize Sean Spicer’s Hitler faux pasBy David Rosenberg, Arutz Sheva ShareLeading US jurist slams left-wing efforts to politicize Trump spokesman’s misstatements on the Holocaust, calls Democrats ‘hypocritical’. 13/04/17 08:17| updated:08:16
Alan Dershowitz on CNN While many on the left slammed White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s recent misstatement regarding the Nazi regime’s use of poison gas during World War II as a form of Holocaust denial and called for his ouster, senior US jurist Alan Dershowitzwarned Democrats not to politicizewhat he described as an honest mistake.
During a press conference on Tuesday, Spicer addressed the last week’s strikes against the Assad regime in Syria and American policy towards Syria and the Russian government following the use of sarin gas in achemical weapon attack on Idlib last week.
At one point,Spicer assertedthat the use of chemical weapons was unprecedented, claiming that even the Nazi regime did not employ unconventional weapons during the Holocaust.
“We didn’t use chemical weapons in WWII. We had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,” Spicer declared.
Spicer’s comments, which ignored the Nazi regime’s horrific use of poison cyanide-based Zyklon B gas at concentration camps to murder millions of Jews throughout the war, sparked an immediate uproar.
On WednesdaySpicer offered an apologyfor his “inappropriate and insensitive” comments.
“I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust for which, frankly, there is no comparison. For that I apologize, it was a mistake to do that,” Spicer toldCNN.
Congressional Democrats and the Democratic National Committee demanded Spicer’s ouster, accusing him of “downplaying the horror of the Holocaust.”
“Sean Spicer must be fired, and the president must immediately disavow his spokesman’s statements. Either he is speaking for the president, or the president should have known better than to hire him,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
But Dershowitz, himself a Democrat, pushed back on the politicization of Spicer’s gaffe, and accused the Democratic Party of hypocrisy.
Spicer, Dershowitz toldCNNanchor Don Lemon, simply misspoke, and had no intention of diminishing the horror of the Holocaust.
“What happened here is the guy [Spicer] screwed up. He apologized, and he apologized from his heart. And I’m prepared to give him a pass on this.”
Dershowitz then went on to accuse the DNC of opportunism in attempting to exploit the faux pas, and hypocrisy by ignoring its own co-chairman’s ties to the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam.
“I’ll tell you who I am not prepared to give a pass on: the Democratic National Committee that has immediately decided to politicize this and send out immediate tweets saying, ‘We can’t tolerate anti-Semitism or even a whiff of anti-Semitism.’ This is the Democratic National Committee, who has as its co-chairman Keith Ellison, who didn’t recognize the fact that he was working for an anti-Semite, Farrakhan. This is just hypocrisy, and I think we should not make politics out of this.”
Veteran Israeli journalist and Holocaust survivor Noah Klieger calls rush to label Trump administration anti-Semitic ‘hypocritical’.
By Arutz Sheva Staff, 13/04/17 12:56 Share
Sean Spicer – Reuters
Amid the uproar sparked by White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s comments Tuesday denying the Nazi regime’s use of chemical weapons during World War II, some opponents of the Trump administration predictably accused Spicer & Trump by proxy, of harboring anti-Semitic sentiments.
But at least one prominent Democrat, jurist Alan Dershowitz,pushed back against the claim, arguing that Spicer’s comments at the Tuesday press conference were a verbal blunder, not an intentional dismissal of the Holocaust.
“What happened here is the guy [Spicer] screwed up. He apologized, and he apologized from his heart. And I’m prepared to give him a pass on this.”
Since then, one of Israel’s most prominent journalists has also rejected the allegation that malice towards Jews was behind Spicer’s faux pas.
Noah Klieger, himself a survivor of the Holocaust, now a veteran Israeli journalist, argued in a piece published byYediot Aharonotlate Wednesday night Spicer’s comments reflect a troubling pattern of ignorance among public figures today, not anti-Semitism.
“Often times people in the government & politicians don’t really know the history,” wrote Klieger. “Even if Spicer’s comments deserve to be condemned & criticized, there needs to be a limit to the accusations against him. It’s totally obvious that he didn’t mean to diminish the Holocaust or Hitler’s crimes.”
The race to condemn Spicer & the calls for his dismissal, added Klieger, stem not from a serious desire to combat anti-Semitism, but from distaste Trump’s political opponents have with everything & anyone associated with his campaign & subsequent presidency.
“More than anything else, the calls for Trump to fire his spokesperson are just an expression of hypocrisy. The same is true of those recently demanding Prime Minister Netanyahu pressure the American president to fire Spicer.”
Trump’s critics, Klieger said, “leapt upon Spicer’s comment as if it were some newly unearthed treasure chest, and labelled it as anti-Semitism, and then added that this kind of anti-Semitism apparently represents the positions of the president and his whole administration. But Trump obviously isn’t anti-Semitic, and not just because his daughter converted [to Judaism] & keeps Shabbat.”
9.’Ha’aretz newspaper surprises with new low’
Minister of Education Naftali Bennett responds to article condemning national religious public as ‘more dangerous than Hezb’Allah’. By Mordechai Sones,12/04/17 22:40
Naftali Bennett – ?????: Yonatan Sindel/Flash90
Education Minister Naftali Bennett responded Wednesday to an article published in the Ha’aretz newspaper in which writer Yossi Klein criticizes the national-religious public.
“When you think that Ha’aretz has reached its peak of humiliation, it always manages to surprise with a new low,” Bennett tweeted in his Twitter account.
Minister Ayelet Shaked also responded to the article and wrote, “Yossi Klein, I pity you and the Ha’aretz newspaper for providing such a platform.”
In an article entitled “More Dangerous than Hezb’Allah,” Klein writes that “the national religious are dangerous, more dangerous than Hezb’Allah, more than drivers ramming their cars into people & girls with scissors. The Arabs can be killed, they can not.”
He continues with his blunt words and says, “What do they want? To take control of the state and cleanse it of Arabs, if asked, they will deny it … They know that it is too early to be so obvious. Do not believe their denials. Their religious nationalism is extreme nationalism, enveloped in a pious reverence. It permeates the education system, is getting stronger in the army and affects the Supreme Court. They are already on their way to us, another moment and they break down the door.
“I have more in common with the Eskimo of Alaska than with all the [national-religious leaders] and everything they represent. What do I have to do with Smotrich? What have I got to do with Israel Harel? What do I have to do with those who want to achieve freedom for themselves at the expense of someone else’s freedom? He did not mean us, but we are the ones who will have to get used to it,” adds Klein.
“We are the champions of the world when it comes to ‘getting used to it,’ & so we have become accustomed to the deprivation of Palestinian’s freedom. So why should we not be used to the deprivation of our own freedom? We have to do to ‘freedom’ what they did to ‘peace.’ Say from now on not ‘from slavery to freedom’, but from ‘freedom to dominance.'”
‘Ha’aretz newspaper surprises with new low’
10.Netanyahu: Shameful & contemptible article
Prime Minister attacks Ha’aretz which published article against national religious public with headline ‘More dangerous than Hezb’Allah’.
By Mordechai Sones, Arutz Sheva 12/04/17 23:28 re
Netanyahu – ?????: ???? ?????, ???? 90ked o pa
“The article in Ha’aretz is disgraceful, and they have lost it completely: The national religious public is the salt of the earth, its sons and daughters serve in the IDF and the National Service for the State of Israel and for Israel’s security. I am proud of them like most of the citizens of the country,” Netanyahu wrote. “Ha’aretz should apologize.”
In an article entitled “More Dangerous than Hezb’Allah,” Klein writes that “the national religious are dangerous, more dangerous than Hezb’Allah, more than drivers ramming their cars into people & girls with scissors. The Arabs can be killed, they can not.”
He continues with his blunt words and says, “What do they want? To take control of the state and cleanse it of Arabs, if asked, they will deny it … They know that it is too early to be so obvious. Do not believe their denials. Their religious nationalism is extreme nationalism, enveloped in a pious reverence. It permeates the education system, is getting stronger in the army and affects the Supreme Court. They are already on their way to us, another moment and they break down the door.
“I have more in common with the Eskimo of Alaska than with all the [national-religious leaders] and everything they represent. What do I have to do with Smotrich? What have I got to do with Israel Harel? What do I have to do with those who want to achieve freedom for themselves at the expense of someone else’s freedom? He did not mean us, but we are the ones who will have to get used to it,” adds Klein.
“We are the champions of the world when it comes to ‘getting used to it,’ and so we have become accustomed to the deprivation of Palestinian’s freedom. So why should we not be used to the deprivation of our own freedom? We have to do to ‘freedom’ what they did to ‘peace.’ Say from now on not ‘from slavery to freedom’, but from ‘freedom to dominance.'”
Education Minister Naftali Bennett responded Wednesday to an article published in the Ha’aretz newspaper in which writer Yossi Klein criticizes the national-religious public.
“When you think that Ha’aretz has reached its peak of humiliation, it always manages to surprise with a new low,” Bennett tweeted in his Twitter account.
Minister Ayelet Shaked also responded to the article and wrote, “Yossi Klein, I pity you and the Ha’aretz newspaper for providing such a platform.”
Yesh Atid Chairman Yair Lapid said in response, “Roi Klein, of blessed memory, is dangerous? Elazar Stern and Aliza Lavie are more dangerous than Hezbollah, and Rabbi Shimon Piron is more dangerous than the traffic accidents. And Imaunel Morano, hero of Israel, is ‘falsehood a way of life’ also by him? What is now published in Ha’aretz against religious Zionism is purely an anti-Semitic text.”
Netanyahu: Shameful & contemptible article
Member of Knesset Yehuda Glick (Likud) has rejected calls on Thursday for the boycott of the Ha’aretz newspaper following Yossi Klein’sarticle on Wednesday condemning Religious Zionists. Comparing Ha’aretz to religious papers, Glick said, “Ha’aretz does not hide its views. The first Makor Rishon newspaper does not hide its views, as does Yated Ne’eman & Hamodia.”
“It is very important to make sure that there are many different voices in Israel & there are excellent professional reporters at Ha’aretz & it is really not worthwhile to include a whole newspaper because of a few irresponsible journalists & members of the fringe. Well done to the public on the Right & the Left, religious and secular, who saw fit to condemn the words of hatred.”
12.Transfer of Fake Palestinians is Legal. by Steven Shamrak
After long and careful consideration Israel has made a decision to transfer some members of suicide bombers’ families to Gaza. It did not come as a surprise when UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan immediately voiced his opposition to the decision. I have made an effort to find out details of an international agreement he has referred to. As usual, it is open to interpretations. And, as usual, “friends” are taking an anti-Israel point of view:
Geneva Convention Protection of Civilian Persons – Article 49 “Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive. Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population in question or imperative military reasons do demand.”
The following is my interpretation of the document:
1.First of all, even according to UN legal definition Judea, Samaria and Gaza are disputed not occupied territories.
2.Families of suicide bombers will be transferred from one “protected” territory to another.
3.By encouraging their sons and daughters to commit terror acts, accepting the admiration from their neighbors and “blood money” the Arabs’ terror network, families of suicide/homicide bombers became an integrated part of the terror machinery.
4.More than 75% of the Arab population in the PA controlled territories support terror acts against Israel. Therefore, they can hardly be classified as an innocent civilian population. Israel has enough military and security reasons to conduct a population transfer.
Why was ‘Population Transfer’ a good conflict resolution tool & was widely used, but made ‘illegal’ as soon as Jews won the War of Independence, in 1948?
In 1922, 1.8 million were transferred b/w Greece and Turkey.
In 1947, over 12 million were transferred when the Indian peninsula was divided between India and Pakistan.
There are many more examples when millions of people were transferred in order to resolve conflicts since 1948!
Even now, many millions have been transferred from Southern Sudan, Eretria, Iraq, Syria and other countries, labeled as “refugees”. Only one group of ‘professional refugees’ is unmovable – the fake Palestinians!
CHAG PESSACH SAMEACH V’KASHER
Wishing you all a Happy Passover!
Support Shamrak Report
ViaPayPal– $10,$18, $36, $72, $100, $180, $260
FOOD for THOUGHTby Steven Shamrak
Thanks G-d that Arabs rejected the UN Partition plan in 1947! Now they have no legal claim, under international law, to the land of Israel – Judea, Samaria & Gaza! Arabs were so sure that unarmed Jews who had not recovered yet from the trauma of the Holocaust, would not be able to defend the little scrap of landthat the UN (the Ugly Nazi) so ‘generously’ given to them. Seven Arab & Muslim states arrogantly attacked the newly created Jewish state, which had no army or real weapons, thanks to the blockade imposed by the Western countries! The rest of the world eagerly anticipated the completion of the Holocaust!
No Negotiation with Terrorists
Abbas advocates genocide of Israeli Jews. Palestinian Authority website boasts of attacks against Israelis by releasing data draped in pride that 93 terrorist attacks against Israelis were carried out just during the month of March. The recent wave of violent attacks against Israelis began in October of 2015.(Israel must remove ALL enemy population from Jewish land!)
They were Silent when Jewish Homes were Destroyed
Twenty eight EU Ambassadors attack Israel over demolition of Illegal Arab outpost. Israel plans to demolish 42 illegal structures & evict Bedouin squatters from an outpost between Ma’ale Adumim & Jerusalem in Area E1.
David’s Sling Becoming Operational
Israel unveiled the latest addition to its multilevel missile defense system with David’s Sling. The two-stage radar and electro-optic guided system’s range is three times that of Iron Dome. The system is designed to shoot down incoming rockets with ranges of 25 to 190 miles (40-300 kilometers), targeting mostly the missiles that were fired by the Lebanese Hezb’Allah organization toward Israel in recent years. It will make up the middle tier of Israel’s multi-layer missile defense capabilities.
EU to Cut Gas dependency on Russia
Israel & several EU nations have pledged to move forward with a Mediterranean gas project, aiming to pump natural gas from Israel to Europe. The planned pipeline – stretching about 2,000 kilometers (1,248 miles) on the bed of the Mediterranean Sea – aims to link gas fields off the coasts of Israel & Cyprus with Greece & possibly Italy, at a cost of up to 6 billion euros ($6.4B).
A draft of a new Hamas charter offers contradictory views regarding the terrorist group’s embracing a 1967-border Palestinian State while concurrently calling for a war on Israel. The same document that seeks a recognized state ostensibly alongside 1948 Israel, also vows that Hamas “will not relinquish any part of the land of Palestine, no matter what the reasons, circumstances, and pressures could be, and no matter how long occupation may continue.”
Israelis Prefer Zionist Government
An overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews, 70 percent, hope their next government will be right or center-right. Among Arab Israelis, 58 percent said they want a left-wing government, but only 10 percent predicted this would happen if elections were held in the near future. (This is good news, but in order to make progress Bibi must leave politics!)
Quote of the Week:
“MOST Americans and Europeans are IGNORANT of why these people (Third World Muslim “refugees”) are moving to the West, frequently crossing many SAFE countries to get there, but what it is CRITICAL to realise is that 75% of these people are young men between the ages of 18 & 30. There are VERY few women and children & NO elderly folks. Unlike traditional refugees from war-torn countries that are largely women, children & the elderly, these young men have ABANDONED their families on a “Migration Jihad” that is called “HIJRAH’. It is a HOLY jihad, moving to a foreign country – invading, breeding, proliferating – Subjugating Infidels in all & every way possible! Robbing, raping of women & girls is also part of that holy work – Colonisation & spreading Islam & eventually making “All the World of Allah!” The example was set by Mohammed & it is ordained as a most holy work by Allah. Muslims that undergo HIJRAH bypass Judgment Day according to the Qur’an &, just like the jihadist “suicide” bombers, they go straight to Heaven (JANNA) when they die, getting their 72 virgins of course. That is why the HIJRAH to the Western world must be STOPPED!”– FaceBook posting.
Ethnicity of the Fake Palestinians.
Extracts from: “Bosnia – Motherland of “Palestinians” by Manfred R. Lehmann & “Palestinians ‘Peoplehood’ Based on a Big Lie” byEli E. Hertz.
Arab Palestinian nationality(which was officially forged in 1964)is an entity defined by its opposition to Zionism(the Jewish national liberation movement) & not by its national aspirations.
Like a mantra, Arabs repeatedly claim that the Palestinians are a native people of Israel. The concept of a ‘Stateless Palestinian people’ is not based on fact. It is a fabrication! The following is a chronology of an ethnic make-up of so-called Palestinians and their origin.
During Ottoman Empire.
Until the Jews began returning to the Land of Israel in increasing numbers from the late 19thcentury, the area called Palestine was a God-forsaken backwash that was controlled by the Ottoman Empire.
1880-84 Turkish government settles Muslim Cherkessians refugees in the Golan to ward off Bedouin robbers. Other settlers in the area include Sudanese, Algerians, Kurds and even Bosnians!
In 1878, an Ottoman law granted lands in Palestine to the Moslem refugees from Bosnia & Herzegovina in the Carmel region, in the Galilee & in the Plain of Sharon & in Caesarea. The refugees were further attracted by l2-year tax exemptions & exemption from military service.
The same colonization policy was also directed toward Moslem refugees from Russia – particularly from the Crimea & the Caucasus. They were Cherkessians & Turkmens – leading to their settling in Abu Gosh, near Jerusalem & in the Golan Heights. Refugees from Algeria & Egypt were also settled in Jaffa, Gaza, Jericho & the Golan.
British Mandate: 1917-1947
1923 Having discovered the Golan lacks oil but that the Mosul area in northern Syria is rich in oil, the British cede the Golan to France in exchange for Mosul. At the same time the Trans-Jordan was ceded from Palestinian mandate as well & Egypt was given control of Sinai. Britain & France gain control of Suez canal. (82% of Jewish land was sacrificed in the process!)
In 1934 alone, 30,000 Syrian Arabs from Hauran moved across the northern frontier into Mandate Palestine, attracted by work in & around the newly built British port & the construction of other infrastructure projects. They even dubbed HaifaUm el-Amal(‘the city of work’).
The Ottoman Turks’ census (1882) recorded only 141,000 Muslims in the Palestinian. The British census in 1922 reported 650,000 Muslims.(Even when many of the returned home to the Arab countries, most of them for several generations have been artificially kept as ‘refugees’ with the help of the international anti-Semites. The UN, the ‘Ugly Nazi’, even created a special refugee agency to accommodate Fake nation and Fake refugees!)
Recommend Reading: Modern History of Palestine in Maps, The Palestinian Mandate – Legalised Robbery, Who are so-called Palestinians?, Arab-Israel Conflict – Forgotten Facts!, Why Israel is Suspicious of United Nations, The War on Terror – Containment Plan, The Sinai Option: Road to Permanent Peace!
[Gail Sez: Add to Steve’s list: “Phantom Nation: Inventing the “Palestinians” as the Obstacle to Peace” by Sha’i ben-Tekoa Available from Amazon in 3 soft cover volumes or Kindle.]
Shamrak Report is independent weekly editorial letter.
It has been published since November 2001.
The aim of this weekly editorial letter is to promote Jewish point of view on Arab-Israel conflict; motivate Jewish people and our true friends to uphold ideals and inspirations of traditional Zionism – Jewish National independence movement! The editorial is not sponsored by or affiliated with any government, political party or organization.Presented by www.shamrak.com
Transfer of Fake Palestinians is Legal. by Steven Shamrak
13.Hope Starts To Bud For the New President By Conrad Black, NY SUN
[…]
No one expects that the attack last week will reform Mr. Assad’s behavior (it is only seven years since Hillary Clinton called him “a reformer”), but it has sent the message that the long night of delusional altruism and deliberate weakness in American foreign & security policy is over. It has also helped create the only circumstances in which relations between the United States & Russia can be put back on a sound foundation after the shambles of the Obama-Biden-Clinton “reset.”
I wrote here several weeks ago of the promisingmeetingof the chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, Russia & Turkey, on March 9 & the emerging policy of Turkey replacing Iran as a power in Syria & a division of government within Syria between Assad & the Western-sponsored secular moderates. For this to have any possibility of success, Russia will have to grasp the fact that the goodwill & cooperation of the United States is worth more to it than its obscene friendship with Iran, insofar as such a quarrel among thieves could be so described.
The basis of such an arrangement would likely be the joint effort against ISIS, expulsion of Iran from Syria, a partition between Assad-ruled areas and Western-sponsored government zones, resettlement of refugees, recognition of Russian occupation of Crimea, the end of sanctions on Russia, a complete end of Russian harassment of Ukraine, and a joint guarantee of Ukraine’s borders. Ukraine would refrain from entering NATO but would be able to join the European Union when its progress at self-government made it eligible.
Practically, the airstrike did not accomplish much, but psychologically & tactically it sent a uniformly clear message to all relevant centers of opinion, foreign & domestic. It did attract broad public & political support. Some of the highbrow conservative Never Trumpers, such as William Kristol, acknowledged the appropriateness of the measure. Some of the rabidly hostile press rallied admirably, such as Fareed Zakaria, a die-hard Obama enthusiast, who said that Mr. Trump had behaved like a president.
Of course the incorrigibles continued; Rachel Maddow on MSNBC found a guest to estimate at somewhere between 2% & 50% the chances that the entire raid was rigged up between Presidents Trump and Putin. I didn’t catch his name and shortly after his lips began moving I determined that I did not want to know his name. It is hard not to wonder where Ms. Maddow finds such people and what level of maladjustment she must have achieved in order to inflict such nonsense on the diminutive knot of her viewers.
The apparently civilized meeting with the president of China and the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, all on the same day, restored the impression of a determined president moving quickly. It is a distinct step forward to be done with the filibuster, an antediluvian invention of southern Democrats to prevent the passage of anti-lynching laws, and a procedural obstacle that has been terribly abused for decades.
All 52 Republicans held for Justice Gorsuch, three Democrats defected, and the new justice will ensure, among other things, the failure of the putsch the Democrats mounted — with the assistance of carefully shopped, flaky, left-wing West Coast judges — to emasculate the president’s powers in matters of immigration.
There cannot be much left of the campaigns to represent Mr. Trump as a sexist or racist or autocrat or isolationist, or as someone about whom the New York Times’ ineffable Nicholas Kristof detected “a whiff of treason” over the nonsensical Russian allegations. It is hard now to remember the march of angry women when President Trump was inaugurated or even to remember what they were angry about, or why Madonna wanted to “blow up the White House” or Representative Maxine Waters wanted to impeach Mr. Trump. The famous headgear for the mass women’s demonstrations, which sold for $20 at the time to the saps at the marches, is now being remaindered at 95 cents.
The discomfort of the Democrats over the cloudy but persistent evidence of surveillance of Trump Tower has seriously muted their previous affected militancy on the bogus issue of Trump–Russia collusion. It has all become absurd, as chairman Devin Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee has dutifully stepped aside to permit an inquiry into the propriety of his informing the public and the president of evidence of improper surveillance of the president’s campaign.
So there is now an investigation of Mr. Nunes’s investigation of the Obama investigation and surveillance of the Trump campaign’s fictitious collusion with Russia. These investigations, so fatuously hyped by most of the media, have been piled on top of each other even though there is no evidence to embarrass the president.
In the spirit of the season, I embrace the hope that the whole thunderhead of confected indignation will dissolve soon, that the Democrats will stop boycotting the administration and help to make the system work after these 20 lean years, and that Donald Trump will be able to enact the program that he promised, addressing decades of stagnation in many public-policy areas.
Taxes & whatever is feasible in health care should be next. The country & the world need to see the American system works after all. Perhaps I am intoxicated by the anticipated scent of the magnolias, but I dare to hope that even infected elements of the national press may rediscover the joys of professionalism & practicing their craft with integrity. This is now the American dream — effective government reported by a responsible press, after a prolonged agony of depressed sleeplessness.
Hope Starts To Bud For the New President By Conrad Black