Exposing the Christian falsehoods in the New Testament which have led to the persecution and death of millions of Jews – and the theft of their wealth.

June 11th, 2014

There can be no argument that Jew hatred and modern anti-Semitism began as a result of the death of Jesus which gospel writers falsely attributed to the Jews. The consequences of this untrue narrative led to unceasing Christian hatred of the Jewish nation and the maltreatment of millions of our people for the past 2,000 years.

Germans murder 6,000,000 Jews

Christians in various parts of the world have hounded and persecuted Jews, robbing, wounding and killing them in every shameful way. Leading finally, to the plunder and murder of more than 6,000,000 Jews at the hands of the German people in Europe during the Second World War.

Given the intense hatred of the Jews by the Christian world, it is not surprising that Christians in other European countries voluntarily and even eagerly lent their bloody hands to the inhuman Germans in murdering our people in the Second World War.

Kosher laws forbid imbibing blood

All decent countries prevent their courts from trying someone merely for being the relative of a criminal. Yet this moral doctrine has never prevented Christian communities in Europe and Russia from setting fire to synagogues packed with men, women and children for no other “crime” than being born Jewish.

Especially pernicious was the entirely fictitious accusation that Jews needed the blood of a Christian child to bake matzos for Passover! This horrendous lie highlights the total ignorance of Christians to the fact that Jewish kosher laws actually prevented Jews from ever imbibing a single drop of blood! And that means human or animal.

Deicide – the impossible crime

The anti-Semitic hatred which the trumped-up crimes Christianity inflicted on Jews over the centuries reached a peak in the plunder and murder of over six million Jews by the Germans and their willing Christian cohorts in the 1940’s. Nor can we overlook the fact that Christians still find it necessary to punish Jews for the impossible crime of deicide! (How can mere mortals kill God?)

Tragically, Christian anti-Semitism continues to persecute Jews to this day for the crime our ancestors were alleged to have committed 2,000 years ago, namely responsibility for the Romans killing Jesus.

Roman guilt for death of Jesus

Sadly, Christian anti-Semitism alleges Jews killed Jesus. This allegation is manifestly untrue despite its appearance in the New Testament. It was the Romans who clearly tried Jesus for the so called crime of being king of the Jews. And for which Pontius Pilate, the Roman Prefect, tried and sentenced Jesus to be crucified.

The New Testament avers that the Sanhedrin, the supreme court of the Jews, had Jesus arrested on Thursday evening, the first night of Passover, for claiming to be the messiah. And that the Sanhedrin handed him over to the Romans for trial which took place Friday morning (Good Friday), the first day of Passover.

However the Sanhedrin had nothing whatever to do with the arrest of Jesus since this was the job of the police and/or the prosecution. The job of the Sanhedrin’s 71 judges only required them to judge suspected persons brought to them for trial and sentencing. Here are the four specific reasons we can be quite certain the Sanhedrin had absolutely nothing to do with the trial and death of Jesus, as alleged in the New Testament.

The four reasons

First, in those historic times Jews simply expected that their true messiah would free them from the yoke of their oppressors. Nevertheless, although Jesus believed he was the messiah, the fact that he did not free his fellow Jews from the Roman yoke was not a crime. Certainly not one which deserved the death penalty.

Second, neither the Sanhedrin nor the Temple police would have been involved in work of any kind on Thursday evening and the first two days of Passover. This was because work of any kind was strictly forbidden to Jews from the beginning of Passover on Thursday evening, nor on Friday and Saturday, the first two days of Passover.

Third, the Sanhedrin never held trials in the evening.

Fourth, the Sanhedrin never passed sentence on anyone until 24 hours after the conclusion of a trial.

Thus we have proof positive the Sanhedrin had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus on Thursday evening nor on Friday of that bitter week.

Yet regardless of these incontrovertible facts the New Testament blames the Sanhedrin for arresting Jesus on Thursday evening and handing him over to the Romans on Friday.

Clearly no such episode was necessary – nor could it have taken place. For we can be certain that all 71 august judges of the Sanhedrin were, without doubt, at prayer on the Thursday evening and Friday, the next day of Passover.

Did Judas betray Jesus for 30 pieces of silver?

Absolute nonsense.

The New Testament alleges that Judas betrayed Jesus to the Sanhedrin by identifying him with a kiss. However, this also makes no sense because the Sanhedrin and Temple authorities knew Jesus rather well – as a result of the consternation he caused by overthrowing the tables of the moneychangers and also by chasing them out of the temple!

Indeed, the Sanhedrin not only knew who Jesus was but also where to find him – if they wanted him. They knew where he prayed and where he preached, as Jesus reminds us in Matthew 26:55, where he says: “I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.”

It follows as day follows night that the Sanhedrin had no need to hire Judas to betray Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. They knew exactly where to find him if they wanted him. No such contract was therefore needed nor is it conceivable that the nation’s supreme court of 71 august judges would have entered into such a demeaning arrangement. Unfortunately, this shameful, untrue story became a successful device for Christians to pin the death of Jesus onto the Jews of those days.

The Barabbas Deception

The New Testament also relates that Pilate offered to invoke a Passover tradition whereby someone under sentence of death would be freed. And that Pilate offered to free Jesus or Barabbas – whomever the Jews chose. Barabbas was a criminal worthy of his death sentence; Jesus was not. The gospels allege that a motley chorus of Jews shouted for Barabbas to be freed.

Two problems face Christians here: first is the fact that this motley of Jews were in the temple saying their Passover prayers. Second is the fact that no such Passover custom ever existed! For although vigorously investigated by historians over hundreds of years, not a scintilla of evidence regarding this alleged Passover custom has ever been found!

Truth and common sense force us to accept that no such tradition ever existed. Unfortunately, the invention of Pilates’ imaginary custom became the Christ Killer justification for Jewish persecution. Resulting in the death of millions of Jews.

Nor can one forget the theft of Jewish wealth over the past 2,000 years.

Trial and crucifixion

What undoubtedly happened was that Pilate had Jesus arrested and tried for being the messiah – which Pilate interpreted as Jesus claiming to be king of the Jews.

King of the Jews

When the Jews saw Pilate had crowned Jesus with a band of thorns on which was written: “King of the Jews” they protested that Jesus was not their king – only that he claimed to be. They asked Pilate to correct his title but Pilate curtly responded: “What I have written I have written”. (John 19:22). The Jews understood they’d better not argue with this Roman Prefect.

Rome had no desire to face yet another insurrection by the vexatious Jews. Finding Jesus guilty of being an enemy of Rome, Pilate hurried to have him crucified. Tragically the gospel writers shifted responsibility for the death of Jesus at the hands of the Romans onto the Jews – resulting in over 2,000 years of Christian anti-Semitism. Sadly, this “Christ Killer” lie is still going strong to this day.

Jesus begged God to spare him

Before the trial, the New Testament relates that Jesus had a premonition of his coming death. While in the garden of Gethsemane Jesus prayed to God to spare him, saying: “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.” (Matthew 26:39).

Jesus appeals once more

Jesus beseeched God a second time, saying: “O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from me unless I drink it, your will be done.” (Mathew 26:42).

“Why have you forsaken me?”

On the cross about three that (Good) Friday afternoon when Jesus feels he is about to die, he cries in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”. This translates as “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46).

Did Jesus blame the Jews?

No. Jesus never blamed the Jews for his impending death. He believed unwaveringly that his life was in God’s hands and hoped God, his father, would save him. Sadly God did not grant his wish and, submitting to his father’s will, Jesus died on the cross. It bears emphasizing that God held the fate of Jesus in His hands. God could have saved him but He did not.

How remarkable then that the gospel writers succeeded in pinning the blame for the death of Jesus, not on God, not on the Romans who arrested, tried, sentenced and crucified him, but on the Jews who did absolutely nothing to bring about his death. And not only on the Jews of Jesus’ day but, incredibly, on all Jews, in all lands, for all time as the New Testament alleges.

The world’s greatest lie

The power of the world’s greatest lie has been responsible for 2,000 years of anti-Semitic persecution and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jews over the centuries in Europe and Russia. Finally resulting in the plunder and murder of over 6 million innocent, defenseless Jews by the Germans during the Hitler regime.

To their eternal shame, hordes of Christians in other European countries voluntarily and willingly assisted the Germans in carrying out their uncivilized barbaric crusade of murdering the Jews of Europe.

Foisting responsibility for the death of Jesus upon the Jews must unarguably and shamefully be the greatest lie ever told!

{ } { } { }

Pollard’s 10,000 days

May 24th, 2013

By Jock L. Falkson

On April 13, 2013 the Jerusalem Post published a strong call for the release of Jonathan Pollard headlined under the heart wrenching title of “Pollard’s 10,000 days”. The Post’s editor urged Israel to demand Pollard’s freedom in return for further cooperation with the US.

Mincing no words, the editor wrote: “Before any American request, suggestion or recommendation geared to restart talks with the Palestinians is addressed, Pollard must be home. Nothing moves until Pollard is released. No gestures. No concessions. No deals.” This is nothing short of excellent and I hope our Prime Minister has been apprised and approves of it.

That the US has been monstrously unfair to Pollard is perhaps best understood when compared to the same sentence received by Aldrich Ames, an American, who was also charged with spying for the Soviet Union.

I quote from Wikipedia: “Ames could have faced the death penalty because his betrayal had resulted in the deaths of a number of CIA agents. He pleaded guilty and received a sentence of life imprisonment.”

“In court, Ames admitted that he had compromised ‘virtually all Soviet agents of the CIA and other American and foreign services known to me’ and had provided the USSR and Russia with a ‘huge quantity of information on United States foreign, defense and security policies’.”

“It is estimated that information Ames provided to the Soviets compromised at least 100 US intelligence operations, and to the execution at least ten U.S. agents.”

Nothing Pollard did compares with the harm which Aldrich inflicted on the US:

• Aldrich spied for Russia, America’s worst enemy. Pollard spied for Israel, a friendly country.

• Aldrich was responsible for the deaths of at least 10 US spies. Pollard was not responsible for the death of any US spies.

• Aldrich sold information which compromised American foreign, defense, and security policies. Pollard sold information to Israel which compromised Israel’s Islamic enemies exclusively. (He believed the US had agreed to share such information with Israel and was not doing so.)

• Aldrich exposed at least 100 US secret operations. Pollard exposed none.

• Aldrich was given life but no solitary confinement. Pollard was given life plus 7 years in solitary confinement.

Following his trial, Israel was pressured to publicly state it would never again spy on the US. However, the US has not agreed to stop spying on Israel. It employs scores of intelligence officers in its multi-storied office building in Tel Aviv – far more than the number needed for the simple clerical tasks of dealing with passport, visa and green card applications.

If Israel is reluctant to carry out the Post’s editor’s excellent recommendation to exert pressure for a Presidential pardon to gain Pollard’s freedom, shouldn’t we humbly – but publicly – ask the US to publicly state whether she has stopped spying on Israel?

{ } { } { }

Pollard Betrayed

March 27th, 2013

By Giulio Meotti

March 24, 2013

I stand ashamed that my friends betrayed Pollard.

Bret Stephens is one of the best columnists the Wall Street Journal has ever had. He is also one of the most brave Jewish journalists in the United States and in general.

I also consider him a friend. But Stephens’ latest column, titled “Don’t free Jonathan Pollard”, left me with no words, simply speechless. I stand ashamed that even my friends forsake and slander Pollard in this way.

Bret Stephens’ attack on the Israeli spy, who for a good part of that time has been held in conditions worse than those in which Gilad Schalit was held, is based on two blood libels: that Pollard was a “wacko” and that he was a “mercenary” who betrayed the United States for money. Stephens also implies that Pollard’s character, not his deeds, are on trial.

It is very hard to understand why so many US Jews work on themselves to hate Jonathan Pollard. The French essayist René Girard used to call it “the scapegoat”. Pollard reminds one of the Chinese dissident who, during Mao’s Cultural Revolution, were publicly indicted with a sign calling them “traitor”.

Seymour Hersh of The New Yorker has been putting forward the idea that Pollard was a “cocaine addict” and an “alcoholic”, deep in debt and that is why he succumbed to the Israeli offer of money for passing along secret documents (I happen to know real drug-addicted journalists who don’t deserve to sit in the same jail as Jonathan Pollard).

Bret Stephens embraced this version, while the truth is somewhere else entirely: Pollard sought out the Israelis and volunteered to give, not sell, secrets to Israel about nuclear, chemical and biological weapons under construction by Iraq and other Arab states for use against the Jewish people. Pollard worked for six months without receiving any payment from the Israelis, and never did ask for any money in exchange for his services.

The lies against Pollard have been purposely disseminated to undermine his credibility, to demonize him, to defame him, as a witness to the undeclared Intelligence embargo instituted against Israel by Caspar Weinberger. Otherwise, Bret, how can you explain that Shimon Peres and the late Yitzhak Rabin approved Pollard’s work? Pollard’s ideological bona fides have been proven many times. Even the sentencing judge, Aubrey Robinson, acknowledged that Pollard was an ideologue and not a mercenary.

And yet, in spite of this, virtually all of the most influential Jewish voices in America remain silent. How long is the list of respected writers, opinion makers and journalists who routinely have a great deal to say about Jewish issues, but nothing about Jonathan Pollard, or worse, ask Barack Obama not to grant him clemency?

It would be easier to list those who fought and wrote for Pollard’s liberation. They are very few. Incredibly, the Jewish spokesmen claim to be “pro-Israel”, but their actions and words betray their claim. Pollard is the latest of a long list of Jews and their helpers betrayed by the so called “Jewish establishment”, including the ghetto fighters, Yair Stern, the lost Yemenite children, the Lebanese Christians, Gush Katif’s pioneers.

For years, only brave Arutz Sheva fought for the safety and liberation of Jonathan Pollard, while the Israeli media establishment demolished any chance of his liberation.

Jonathan was put away for life not because he endangered the US, but because he irritated US Arab allies who felt that Israel had been too much strengthened; and second, because he made Israel impervious to American pressure. What Pollard endangered was the US administration’s pro-Arab political agenda, not the intelligence community.

The recently released CIA documents clearly show that Pollard focused on “Arab (and Pakistani) nuclear intelligence; Arab weaponry, including chemical weapons; Soviet aircraft; Soviet air defenses; Soviet air-to-air missiles and air-to-surface missiles; and Arab order-of-battle, deployments, readiness”.

Pollard passed Israel photos of the PLO headquarters in Tunis, secret information about Libya’s air defenses, Syrian chemical weapons, Egyptian ballistic missile capabilities, and the Pakistani atomic program.

Is that a crime worthy of a life sentence, Bret? Not being allowed to attend your father’s funeral?

Pollard obtained the most exact U.S.-gathered information about Iraqi chemical warfare capabilities, including satellite pictures and maps showing the location of factories and storage facilities. The United States did not want to make such specific information available to Israel, fearing a preemptive strike.

Why did Israel stockpile several million gas masks for the protection of the entire population in 1991 and 2003? Because of Pollard. And the United States, which didn’t bomb Auschwitz, is now letting Pollard die in jail.

“It would have been an outright betrayal of my heritage, my personal integrity and an entire family lost in the ovens of the Holocaust if I had simply taken the safe route and closed my eyes to what had to be done”, once declared Pollard. Is this the “wacko Jew” whom many wealthy, “in” US Jews desperately want to keep behind bars?

I stand ashamed that even my friends betrayed Pollard, who should be not only freed but also rehabilitated as a savior of the Israeli people. If they don’t consider his liberation a cause worth of fighting for, it means that all the rambling speeches of these Jewish commentators, with their expensive houses in Chevy Chase and on Park Avenue, are good for nothing but wrapping fish in the market.

Copyright by the author and The Jerusalem Post.

{ } { } { }

I Support Jerusalem Post’s
Call For Pollard’s Release

March 27th, 2013

21March 2013
The Letters Editor,
The Jerusalem Post.
letters@jpost.com

Dear Sir,

Re: Your Editorial on Releasing Pollard

Your truly excellent editorial (“The buck stops here”, Mar.21) in support of Israel’s favorite cause – calling for the release of Jonathon Pollard, was certainly well timed. Our hapless spy has now been in solitary confinement for nearly 10,000 days.

Whether President Obama will read your editorial or be informed about it, is unlikely. His recent comments on Pollard give us no cause for optimism. Nevertheless Israel must not stop appealing for Pollard’s release because it is the right thing to do. So do it we must. I suggest however, that a daily based PR campaign be added.

A series of “Release Pollard” advertisements should be prepared by a top ranking US advertizing agency and placed daily, on the front page of the most influential American newspapers. Ad size should be about 5-8 inches, double column, in papers like the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Daily News New York, Chicago Tribune and USA Today, to name a few.

The ads should be financed by Jewish organizations like AIPAC and or Jewish philanthropists like Adelson. Copy should give reasons why Pollard should be released – as presented in your editorial. There are of course additional valid arguments.

The Speaker of Israel’s Knesset should open each session with Pollard’s daily count. And synagogue cantors worldwide should also be asked to announce the Pollard count at the beginning of all services.

The bullheaded Russians gave up on Sharansky after a concerted PR campaign for his release. And finally allowed well over a million Jews to leave after an unremitting “Let my people go” campaign.

I believe Obama will fold a lot sooner than the obdurate Russians – why would anyone want to be the object of daily, never ending, valid criticism?

Yours truly

Jock L. Falkson

Note: Above letter was not published.

Reply to M.P. David Ward the anti-Semite

February 9th, 2013

Jock L. Falkson

To commemorate Holocaust Memorial Day LibDem MP David Ward is reported to have said:

“Having visited Auschwitz twice – once with my family and once with local schools – I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.”

While I am sure that you accept the maxim that punishment should fit the crime, you obviously except Jews from this morally correct standard. Allow me to explain my umbrage:

I was not in Auschwitz.
I did not suffer unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust.
I was not liberated from the death camps.
I emigrated from South Africa to Israel in 1993.
I have never met a Palestinian.
I have never committed an atrocity on a Palestinian on a daily basis in the West Bank or in Gaza. Nor elsewhere at any time.

You don’t provide a scintilla of evidence to prove your vile allegation that I, as an Israeli Jew, have inflicted and continue to inflict, atrocities on Palestinians.
Can you be so ignorant as to believe that all Jews think alike and act alike?

Are you so unintelligent as to tar all Jews in Israel with the same brush?

I marvel at your indifference to truth which permits you to extrapolate the alleged sins of some Jews on “the Jews”. You clearly believe it is right to punish “the Jews” for the alleged behavior of some. Such thinking is anti-Semitic by definition.

In the past it has lead directly to cries of “Kill the Jews”, “Don’t buy from the Jews”, “Don’t associate with the Jews”. These days it re-emerged under the anti-Israel BDS slogan: Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

Whatever, blaming the many for the sins of the few is immoral, unjust, even uncivilized. That Sir is what correctly defines you as an anti-Semite.

{ } { } { }

“Proportionality in war
is not a Jewish notion”

December 23rd, 2012

says Peter Jenkins, former British Diplomat.

By Jock L. Falkson

The allegation by Peter Jenkins, that “proportionality in war is not a Jewish notion” is nonsense. (Jerusalem Post 11,2, 2012”)

Expanding on his theme he claims that “Israelis don’t practice an eye for an eye … they practice 10 eyes for an eye …” Moreover he avows “that a just war requires the use of force to be proportionate seems to be a Christian notion, not a Jewish notion”. Wow!

Having made his point so forcefully, it is surely amazing he cannot see that it is only because Israel’s response has been too moderate that Gazan Arabs continued to rain down thousands of missiles and mortar fire on us for so long.

Had Israel used Jenkins’ 10 to 1 formula, the Arabs today would have been peacefully tending their flocks, farms and businesses. Instead they were content to absorb Israel’s low level response and to continue their missile attacks.

Except in instances of surprise attack, victory as a rule always requires disproportionate force. Proportionate force only leads to stalemate.

That’s how come the Arabs continued to ratchet up the number of missiles and mortars they fired on us. Clear proof that Israel’s response was far too muted.

Jenkins seems to have forgotten that it was only the disproportionate Allied war campaign which finally ground Germany into the dust in the last year of WW11.

He certainly overlooks the fact that USA only overpowered Japan by responding tens of thousands to one when it dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. How about that for Christian compassion?

Allow me also to remind Jenkins of the US led war on the Iraqis in 2003. You’ll recall the “Shock and Awe” tactic which the US and its Christian allies unleashed on the Iraqis from the air. Their strategy was to totally defeat the Iraqis and to crush their ability to respond by unleashing crushing, unexpected force that would grind them into the dust. Christian compassion played no part whatever in their war plan as evidenced by the casualty figures: the Iraqis lost 100,000 killed; the Americans some 4,500. There ever been any compassion in any war in which Christians have been involved.

I wonder how Jenkins would respond to a reminder that compassionate Christians have a bitter history of Jewish massacre that makes the word disproportionate totally inadequate if not totally ridiculous.

He cannot be unaware of the church initiated inquisitions in Europe, the Crusades, the pogroms in Russia at Easter time, the massacres in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Surely he must know about some of the many episodes where Jews were herded into their synagogues like animals – and burned to death? Can he be unaware of the horrific German genocide of six million defenseless Jews during and after the Second World War, of whom one and a half million were children for God’s sake?

But back to the present. Can Jenkins be ignorant of the fact that Israel’s defense force does not practice disproportionate warfare at all. Unlike the Arab enemy whose aim is to kill as many Jewish civilians as possible, Israel goes out its way to warn enemy civilians to flee areas containing military targets they intend to bomb.

How does Israel do this? By dropping warning leaflets and making mass phone calls (would you believe), to urge the civilians to move to safe areas because its air force intends to bomb specific targets near where they live? And that they could get hurt if they remained. I have no wish to rub this in but if Jenkins the diplomat is ignorant of Israel’s policy, he must represent a huge number of people who also don’t know that Israel’s air force is the most considerate the world has ever known.

I ask him: how many Jews did Christian Europe kill in the last 1,000 years? How many Christians did Jews kill?

Jenkins has shown himself to be a bigoted ignoramus in matters of Israel’s culture and history. He denies he’s an anti-Semite. C’mon, of course he is – as low down as they come!

{} {} {}

America’s best investment

October 28th, 2012

By Michael Harris

President of TorchPAC, the Pro-Israel Political Organization at New York University.

Published by The Jerusalem Post, 10.23.12
Copyright by the author and /or Jerusalem Post

Despite the polarizing partisanship that dominates US political discourse, military aid to Israel is one of the few programs that has virtual universal support among US lawmakers. Why is this one of the few programs that receives widespread bipartisan support?

This 30 billion dollars of aid, provided to Israel over the course of 10 years, requires that the US spend a mere fraction of its annual budget (well under one percent of total spending). In return, the American people receive unquestionably large benefits.

Israel is America’s best ally in the Middle East, and this aid has been used to improve the strength of the IDF. A strong Israel has helped to support US national security interests without sending US soldiers into combat. In other words, America has kept many of its troops out of harms way and simultaneously secured its strategic interests.

Israel’s ongoing fight against Islamic terrorist groups, which actively target US civilians, is one of the most impressing success stories of US security assistance to Israel. Between 2008-2009 the IDF launched Operation Cast Lead against Hamas, and a similar operation in 2006 was initiated against Hezbollah. If Israel does not have the necessary resources to combat Islamic terrorism, then the effects could be devastating for the United States. It may even drag America into another war.

In the cases of Hamas and Hezbollah, the US could be forced to deploy troops into both the Gaza Strip and Lebanon to safeguard American national security. However, if US military aid to Israel is maintained, then the likelihood of such a scenario dramatically decreases.

The costs of another Middle Eastern war, which would be a disaster for the United States, should be enough of a reason to keep the security assistance. Both Democrats and Republicans are trying to achieve economic recovery, yet multiple wars against various terrorist groups would increase defense spending, widen the budget deficit, and hurt economic growth.

Furthermore, a militarily weaker Israel may increase the likelihood of war between the US and various enemy states in the region. For instance, states like Iran have been deterred until now to close the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway where large amounts of the world’s petroleum is traded. However, a weakening of America’s best ally in the region may lead Iran to change its mind and to close the strait.

This would leave the United States with a unbearable choice; should it initiate a war against Iran and spend hundreds of billions of dollars, or should it allow the closure of the strait and deal with a massive surge in oil prices? Both of these scenarios could bring America back into a recession, and possibly reopen old economic wounds that had originally induced the financial crisis.

The possibility of a nuclear armed Iran also shows the necessity of US-Israel security cooperation. The most recent round of negotiations between western powers and Tehran had shown that a possible Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with crippling sanctions, had nearly forged a diplomatic compromise that almost brought a peaceful end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

If the US continues to transfer weapons to Israel to pressure Tehran, then Iran may calculate that the costs of attaining a nuclear weapon are greater than the benefits and renounce its program altogether.

Additionally, approximately 75% of this aid must be spent within the United States, so countless Americans have a job because of this international transfer of military equipment. An elimination, or even a reduction in this aid, would raise the unemployment rate among one of the most skilled sectors in the American workforce.

This aid’s contribution to American national security and economic growth is compelling, yet these benefits are also justified by a moral imperative. Unlike other recipients of US aid, which are often autocratic and dictatorial regimes, Israel shares common values with the United States. Israel continues to be the only democracy in the Middle East, and the ethos of the country is based on the key values of gender equality, religious tolerance, and freedom of expression.

If bipartisanship is dead, then US security cooperation with Israel is a clear exception to the rule. As America navigates through a recovering economy and a tumultuous Middle East, it is becoming clear that this aid will stay in place for a very long time. It may be America’s best investment to date.

{} {} {}

.

How to foil the Iranian Hitler

September 30th, 2012

By Jock L. Falkson

“Jerusalem puzzled by Dempsey comment fearing ‘complicity” is a headline in The Jerusalem Post, Sept. 2.12. It is but one of a plethora of similar reports being aired in the media these days.

Israel’s leaders are without doubt seriously seeking solutions to prevent the promised fate that is concomitant with the Iranian threat to wipe the Jewish state off the world map.

The Iranian Hitler has not bothered to deliver his threat in any confusion of words. His promise to genocide the Jewish people in the State of Israel has been clearly enunciated time and again. Neither the U.S. nor any major state in the west has publicly responded with an equal promise to guarantee this will not be allowed to happen.

The likely scenario then is that the Iranian Hitler will bomb Israel with his first successfully tested nuclear bomb. He has not been put off by the threat of a second strike whether by Israel or the U.S. He has boasted that the death of 10 million Iranians would be an acceptable price to pay for the death of 6 million Israeli Jews.

I have two suggestions for Israel that might prevent such unbelievable slaughter. If not, it might at least extend Iranian’s D Day for a while longer during which time the U.S. and other democratic nations might coalesce their powers to stop any further nuclear progress by Iran.

Firstly, Israel should pressure the German Government to recall all its scientists working to complete the Iranian nuclear weapon designated for the extermination of the Jewish people in Israel. I believe Prime Minister Merkel will understand that Germany owes this much to Israel. Indeed, it is incredible this has not already happened. What is she waiting for?

Secondly, Israel should publicly announce that every scientist, Iranian, German or other, including their adult families (they all know what these scientists are doing and why) working to realize the Iranian Hitler’s genocide intention, will immediately become Mossad death targets. No matter how long it may take to find and execute each one of them.

Many will undoubtedly recall how a Mossad squad hunted down all 11 Germans who took part in the massacre of the Israel’s athletes during the ill-fated 1972 Olympic Games in Munich. Israel’s new threat will therefore get the respect it deserves. Most scientists are likely to flee Iran – they know we can and will make it happen.

The death of a few hundred of our deadly enemies cannot stand comparison to the genocide another six million of our people – the publicly announced intention of the satanic Iranian Hitler.

German court decides circumcision is a crime

September 1st, 2012

The Letters Editor,
The Jerusalem Post
letters@jpost.com

Sir,

So a German court has decided that circumcision is a crime and that the perpetrators must be punished. German interference with our God given Jewish laws and traditions is totally unacceptable.

The justice system of the mass murdering German nation perpetrated the world’s greatest genocide. They should still be dispensing justice to the millions of their citizens and military who killed over 6,000,000 hapless Jewish innocents, robbing them of their lives, their future, their families, their money, property, insurance, jewelry, furniture, clothes, hair, false teeth, spectacles – everything.

All by permission of the German justice system which has never imposed justice on their millions of thieves and murderers.

Jock L. Falkson

Pressure mounting on Obama to free Pollard

July 17th, 2012

By Wolf Blitzer
Ex BLITZER’S BLOG
Copyright by the Author

June 13, 2012

Israeli President Shimon Peres says he will ask Obama to give clemency to the former U.S. naval intelligence analyst who pleaded guilty to providing Israel with classified documents in 1987.

Peres is in Washington to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Obama.

Two congressmen, Reps. Christopher Smith, R-New Jersey, and Eliot Engel, D-New York, are circulating a letter on Capitol Hill asking the president to commute Pollard’s sentence to time served.

“What Mr. Pollard did was wrong,” the two lawmakers wrote. “He broke the law and deserved to be punished for his crime.”

But they say 25 years is a long enough sentence.

But there’s also enormous pressure from inside the U.S. law enforcement and intelligence community to keep Pollard in jail.

When asked Wednesday what the administration’s stance on the issue is, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “Our position has not changed and will not change today. I would simply remind you that Mr. Pollard was convicted of extremely serious crimes.”

This is not the first time this issue has come up.

Under similar pressure from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Former President Bill Clinton was close to freeing Pollard near the end of his second term. Clinton was trying to negotiate an interim Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. But then-CIA Director George Tenet said he would resign if Pollard were freed.

As part of his plea agreement in 1987, Pollard pleaded guilty. Because there was no trial, the Reagan administration did not need to release any sensitive or classified information as evidence.

In exchange, Joseph E. diGenova, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, worked out an arrangement with Pollard’s defense attorneys that he would receive a substantial sentence but not the maximum sentence – life.

Yet in an extraordinary move, Judge Aubrey Robinson rejected the plea agreement and sentenced Pollard to life, citing the enormous damage to U.S. national security that then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger outlined in a classified memo to the court.

So the pressure is now once again on Obama. Let’s see what he does.

Editor’s note: Wolf Blitzer interviewed Pollard in a federal prison while he was awaiting his sentence. Blitzer wrote a book on the case, “Territory of Lies,” published by Harper & Row in 1989. The New York Times Book Review cited it as one of the most notable books of that year.

Treading through the baloney

May 30th, 2012

By Prof. BARRY RUBIN

There is so much silliness and misinformation published about the Middle East nowadays that the debris is obscuring reality. Four examples demonstrate this: First, Thomas L. Friedman’s latest gimmick is “The real Palestinian revolution.”

A real Palestinian revolution would take place when Fatah, the PA and Palestinian public opinion really changed toward accepting a two-state solution.

Instead, the “real revolution” of Friedman and PA leader Mahmoud Abbas is merely a matter of image, as in the following paragraph: “It is a revolution based on building Palestinian capacity and institutions not just resisting Israeli occupation, on the theory that if the Palestinians can build a real economy, a professional security force and an effective, transparent government bureaucracy, it will eventually become impossible for Israel to deny the Palestinians a state in the West Bank and Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem.”

It would be a good thing, of course, if the PA did succeed in accomplishing these goals. Yet a number of cogent questions can be raised about Friedman’s model.

Let’s suppose the PA failed to do these things. Nothing much actually seems to be changing and even if it did the PA’s modest progress to date might well collapse in a new round of extremism and violence.

So what if the PA failed? Would conventional wisdom in Washington switch to saying that Israel had no real alternative for peace and thus US policy should back Israel or would the PA merely find some new gimmick? Even if it succeeded in creating a marvelous stable, prosperous, democratic (does that mean elections that Hamas might win?) entity, would that mean it was ready to make a real and lasting peace with Israel? Not necessarily. Because the issue is not whether there is more money or less corruption but whether there is a Palestinian readiness to end the conflict, teach their people to give up their dream of getting all of Israel, provide security guarantees and be willing to resettle refugees in the state of Palestine.

Why should Israel give up territory and security to the PA merely because it prosecutes corrupt leaders (don’t hold your breath) and is more prosperous? What it needs to know is that the conflict won’t continue, that there won’t be cross-border raids, that Hamas won’t take over and that Palestine won’t invite in Syrian or Iranian military forces, to cite some examples.

But Friedman’s formula reveals the PA’s strategy: Forget about making peace with Israel, just get international support for declaring independence on its own terms.

Second, The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times seem to have a policy of running as many op-eds as possible by apologists for terrorism and advocates of engaging terrorist groups. Here’s another one from the NYT, trotting out all the misrepresentative arguments by people who never say a word about the specificity of groups like Hamas and Hizbullah, their goals, ideology and personnel: “Why we talk to terrorists” published on June 29 is the kind of article that claims that since the South African group, the African National Congress (ANC), became moderate, why not Hamas or Hizbullah? While it is true that the ANC had a military wing and engaged in some terrorism, that violence was very limited. The ANC was always led by a philosophy of peace and conciliation not—as in the case of its Middle Eastern counterparts—totalitarian dictatorship and genocide. There is no sign that the revolutionary Islamist Hamas is or wishes to become more moderate and there are good reasons why that is so.

BY COINCIDENCE, I revisited the terrorism museum in Israel recently. There were some new features, including the cigarette lighter made in China and sold in the West Bank that shows the World Trade Center on fire when clicked. There is massive documentation on the involvement of Hamas and Hizbullah in terrorism, anti- Semitism, anti-Americanism and would-be genocide. One can see videos of kids in the Hamas schools carrying out military exercises.

Watch their videos and then ask whether Hamas is intending to produce a generation of moderates.

Revolutionary Islamism and terrorism, hatred for the US and the desire to wipe out Israel (and Jews generally) are not some minor side issues for these groups but are absolutely central to their existence.

It is amazing to think of these naïve people who think they are going to talk revolutionary Islamists into being moderates, or buy them off with money (there’s that idea of prosperity solving all problems again) or concessions.

Third, members of the official US delegation to Syria made fools of themselves by twittering about the good time they were having. Syria is a repressive dictatorship.

While these American ninnies were having nice cups of coffee, a few minutes away prisoners were being tortured because they had criticized the regime.

When a US official from the delegation says: “We made it clear that we want assurances that technologies sold to Syria won’t be… used in ways to harm Syrian citizens,” does he have any idea how ridiculous this sounds? Indeed, the more American delegations show up, the more peaceful dissidents get arrested.

FINALLY, HAMAS officials are now claiming that the Obama administration is secretly contacting their regime. What is probably happening is that the US government thought itself very clever to send some well-connected but not official figures to hang out with Hamas and explore getting along with a group that happens to be backed by Iran, revolutionary Islamist, anti-Semitic, intent on genocide, repressive toward women and intolerant toward Christians, among other things.

Of course, they should understand that all this does is convince Hamas that the Obama administration is ready to make a deal so there is no reason for it to change policy. All some Hamas leaders have to do is mumble a few words into the easily deceived Americans’ ears and the fools will rush off to shout how these people are moderates in an op-ed piece.

And of course the US government makes itself subject to blackmail from Hamas, which only has to reveal whatever conversations have taken place, with some creative additions and distortions. Thus, the title of the article about this issue, “Hamas says asked by US to keep silent on talks,” illustrates that point.

Let’s be clear here. If you deal with Hamas, Hizbullah and Syria, you are dealing with thugs and murderers. Sometimes you do have to deal with thugs and murderers, but never forget that reality. And one thing you have to remember is that such people aren’t going to make deals with you, keep their promises, become moderate or respect your interests no matter how much you bribe or bow to them.

At the terrorism museum there’s a Hizbullah poster that shows people giving money to Islamist charities, that money being turned into bullets and those bullets being fired at Israel. That’s also an accurate picture of the diplomatic “charity” being given to the enemies not only of the West but also of the Middle Eastern peoples they murder and oppress.

{} {} {}

The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center and editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs and Turkish Studies. He blogs at www.rubinreports.blogspot.com

Published in The Jerusalem Post 04.07.10 Copyright by the author.

Misinformation about Gaza and the flotilla debacle

May 30th, 2012

By Maurice Ostroff

Copyright by the author.
June 7, 2010

Whether or not one considers the Gaza blockade justified, moral or wise, intellectual honesty demands that we base our conclusions on credible information. Unfortunately the majority of reports about the Gaza blockade are glaringly misleading.

Politicians, journalists and other pundits cannot reach rational conclusions, about Gaza while they continue to ignore the following indisputable FACTS.

1. The blockade of Gaza is a joint Egyptian-Israeli operation, supported by the Quartet.

The strident calls on Israel only, to lift the blockade create the false impression that only Israel has been blockading Gaza, whereas intellectual honesty requires that any reference to the blockade should describe it as the Egyptian-Israeli blockade.

The pundits need to be reminded that until now, the blockade has been supported by the Quartet as spelled out in a June 3 article in the Guardian “End the Gaza blockade? If only it were that simple”, as follows:

“Those who call on Israel to lift all restrictions on access to Gaza have not grasped the changed political reality… The policy of the Quartet and Israel since 2007 has been to isolate Hamas and strengthen the West Bank Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad. This is why most western diplomats refuse to have contact with Hamas officials, without Hamas first moderating its position by recognizing Israel, renouncing violence, and adhering to previous peace agreements.. Western policymakers must address the rights of the people of Gaza, but must also take account of the imperative not to strengthen those who reject the peace process, or their backers in Tehran and Damascus.”

Egypt’s recent partial opening of the Rafah crossing reminds us that the blockade of Gaza has been conducted equally by Egypt It has been actively destroying underground tunnels and last December it began constructing an underground steel wall. The world seems to have forgotten that British MP George Galloway was deported from Egypt when he arrived with activists who were prevented from taking 200 aid trucks into Gaza.

2. The blockade and boarding the ships are perfectly legal

Journalists and politicians who glibly talk of the blockade as illegal are displaying ignorance. Israel’s boarding of the ships is in full compliance with the Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality.

According to clause 5.2.10…a blockade, i.e. the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare.. Neutral vessels believed on reasonable and probable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be stopped and captured. If they, after prior warning, clearly resist capture, they may be attacked”.

Clause 5.1.2 provides that “…merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked if they are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search, capture or diversion”.

Gaza is controlled by a belligerent Hamas that has been declared a terrorist organization by the USA, Canada and the EU. The official, openly declared policy of Hamas is to destroy Israel completely and to replace it with an Islamic state. Hamas refuses all efforts at negotiating a peaceful solution and Iran continues to supply Hamas with rockets and other weapons. Hence a state of belligerence exists, as contemplated in the above rules, and the blockade is designed legally to prevent arms and support material from being supplied to Hamas.

3 Background to the blockade.

The blockade was initiated by Egypt and Israel in 2007 with the full support of the US and the Quartet when Hamas seized control from the Palestinian government in the bloody Battle of Gaza described by PA leader Hanan Ashrawi as “a situation of mutiny and armed insurrection challenging the institution of the PA”. (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=2921040n

We need to be reminded that before the Palestinian uprising, economic cooperation between the Palestinians and Israel was growing. Palestinian trucks moved freely on Israel’s roads facilitating the export of thousands of tons of agricultural products from Gaza to Jordan and beyond. Palestinian businessmen traveled freely and conducted their affairs in Israel and up to 100,000 Palestinians worked in Israel.

Unfortunately very little is known, even by experts on Palestine, about the many cooperative efforts established by Israel that were forced to close as a result of the intifadas. Before Hamas took control of Gaza, Israel and the Palestinian Authority cooperated in creating employment opportunities along the “seam-line”. A successful industrial zone was created at Erez which employed about 5,000 workers in some 200 businesses half of which were Palestinian-owned, producing everything from plastics to car parts. This was part of a larger Gaza Industrial Estate (GIE), slated to provide up to 50,000 jobs. Additional areas were planned for the Kerem Shalom area near Rafah in Gaza.

But the GIE zone became the target of deadly Palestinian attacks leading to its closure. Even the golden opportunity for a new prosperous Gaza created by Israel’s disengagement from the strip was rejected. The Gazans wantonly destroyed thousands of greenhouses and other projects left behind by the Jewish settlers that could have provided income for over 4,500 families.

4. “This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it’s about breaking Israel’s siege”

According to AFP, the above statement was made by Greta Berlin, an organizer of the flotilla on May 27, 2010.

Unfortunately, while many of the participants in the flotilla were genuinely motivated by humanitarian considerations, others were not so benign; they evidently planned a violent confrontation designed to break Israel’s alliance with Turkey. While five ships in the first convoy were peacefully diverted to Ashdod the sixth had 600 activists on board, sponsored by the “charitable” organization, Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), an organization that was described by the Danish Institute for International Studies as having maintained links with al-Qaida and a number of global jihad networks during the 1990s

On June 1 2010, the Jerusalem Post reported that in 1997 when the Turkish government launched a raid on the organization’s offices, they found weapons, explosives, and instructions for bomb-making.

Under the telling headline ‘Israel Has Fallen into the Radicals’ Trap’, Spiegel Online of June 1, commented:

“…It is telling that the fighting only broke out on one boat in the flotilla: the Mavi Marmara, the only passenger ship, which was commanded by the radical Islamic Insani Yardim Yakfi (IHH). It is a group that has, since the 1990s, been accused by the American and French secret services of maintaining ties to jihadist organizations under the guise of humanitarian aid. In recent years, they successfully collected donations for the terrorist Hamas organization, which they then smuggled into the Gaza Strip. It appears that there were radical Islamist elements aboard the IHH ship … who didn’t want to limit their actions to peaceful resistance.”

If the intention of the flotilla had been entirely humanitarian, the organizers would willingly have accepted the offers by Israel and Egypt to transport all humanitarian supplies to Gaza after offloading either at Ashdod or El Arish.

Opportunities rejected

Unfortunately very little is known, even by experts on Palestine, about the many cooperative efforts established by Israel that were forced to close as a result of the intifadas.

Before Hamas took control of Gaza, Israel and the Palestinian Authority cooperated in creating employment opportunities along the “seam-line”. A successful industrial zone was created at Erez which employed about 5,000 workers in some 200 businesses half of which were Palestinian-owned, producing everything from plastics to car parts. This was part of a larger Gaza Industrial Estate (GIE), slated to provide up to 50,000 jobs. Additional areas were planned for the Kerem Shalom area near Rafah in Gaza.

But the GIE zone became the target of deadly Palestinian attacks leading to its closure. Even the golden opportunity for a new prosperous Gaza created by Israel’s disengagement from the strip was rejected. The Gazans wantonly destroyed thousands of greenhouses and other projects left behind by the Jewish settlers that could have provided income for over 4,500 families.

{} {} {}