What Jews have done for the whole world

What Jews have done for the whole world.. These are a few para... to commemorate the Jewish achievements so far this year while Arab and Muslim countries are burning


http://www.israpundit.com/archives/63590694


Funding Jihadists while Denying Military Benefits
By Andrew McCarthy, NRO

Here is where we’re at: The Republican establishment — the guys who told us that for a trillion dollars and several thousand American casualties, we could build “Islamic democracies” that would be reliable U.S. allies in the War on Terror — say it is Ted Cruz who is “delusional” and the effort to stave off Obamacare that is “unattainable.”

These self-appointed sages are, of course, the same guys who told us the way to “stabilize” and “democratize” Libya was to help jihadists topple and kill the resident dictator — who, at the time, was a U.S. ally, providing intelligence about the jihadists using his eastern badlands as a springboard for the anti-American terror insurgency in Iraq. That’s probably worth remembering this week, during which some of our new “allies” abducted Libya’s president while others car-bombed Sweden’s consulate in Benghazi — site of the still unavenged terrorist massacre of American ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. officials 13 months ago.
(Read more…)



Very Good News Israel
www.verygoodnewsisrael.blogspot.com


In the 13th Oct 2013 edition of Israel’s good news, the highlights include:



· Israeli hospital restores speech to student electrocuted in Romania.
· Two Israeli citizens won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry.
· Apple has bought a 21-year-old Israeli’s personal assistant application for $40 million.
· Israel has produced a record date crop using less water.
· A pro-Israel video called “Boycott Israel” has gone viral.
· Archaeologists have unearthed a 2000-year-old Jewish village in the Galilee.
(Read more…)



When Islam recognized Jerusalem as Jewish
This article points out the current attempts to wipe out Jewish history from Jerusalem but then shows it wasn’t always so. Ted Belman

The Latest in Islamic Revisionism

By Joe Herring & Dr. Mark Christian, AMERICAN THINKER


While the concept of a historically non-Jewish Jerusalem is increasing in popularity among the anti-Semitic left, it remains curious that Arabs continue to demand control over Jerusalem, when it’s abundantly clear from the Koran itself that neither Allah nor Mohammed ever intended it for Muslims in the first place. As far as the Koran is concerned, Muslims have no more claim to Jerusalem than Jews have to Medina.


Jewish authority over Jerusalem should come as no surprise to Islamic scholars. In Surah 2:144-147, the Koran describes Allah’s gift of Mecca to Mohammed. In this passage, we find Mohammed pouting that he had been mocked by the Jews for making use of their city, Jerusalem, as a focus of worship. He didn’t deny Jewish authority over Jerusalem; he simply fumed that Islam had no place of its own — an unfortunate situation that Mohammed (er…I mean Allah!) moved to remedy posthaste.
(Read more…)



Dangerous Times: Obama Bows to the Mullahs
By James Lewis, AMERICAN THINKER

It looks like the fix is in. The mullahs will certainly get their nukes and ICBMs, and neither Israel nor the Saudis (who are scared to death of the mullahs) will rely on American protection as long as Obama is in office. Obama just put out the welcome mat for Mullah Rouhani, the killer of 245 U.S. Marines in Beirut in 1984, and the ultraleft UK Guardian just claimed that its readers voted for Great Humanitarian Rouhani to be the next winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The post-StalinistGuardian is not known for telling the truth too often, and nobody knows if that “survey” is real or not. But the Guardian and the BBC are the two biggest hard-left organs of propaganda in Europe, and they have long promoted a kind of Hitler-Stalin Pact between European socialists in the EU and radical Muslims of both stripes in the Middle East. These are politically powerful signals, and they will be read as such around the world.
(Read more…)



Israeli-Saudi Alliance Slips into View
Exclusive: The Israeli-Saudi détente is slowly emerging from the shadows, with a media report on a secret Jerusalem meeting and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s oblique reference in his UN speech. But this powerhouse collaboration could mean trouble for U.S. diplomacy in the Mideast, reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry, Consortium News, October 12, 2013

On Aug. 29, when I published an article entitled “The Saudi-Israeli Superpower” describing an emerging odd-couple alliance between those two traditional enemies, the story was met with skepticism in some quarters. But, increasingly, this secret alliance is going public.

On Oct. 2, Israel’s Channel 2 TV news reportedthat senior Israeli security officials met with a high-level Gulf state counterpart in Jerusalem, believed to be Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the former Saudi ambassador to the United States and now head of Saudi intelligence.
(Read more…)



How the nuclear deal was done
DEBKA

Sergei Kiriyenko, director of the Russian Atomic Agency Rosatom and the builder of Iran’s first nuclear reactor at Bushehr, is one of the live wires behind the secret deal on Iran’s nuclear program worked out between the White House in Washington, the Kremlin in Moscow and the Tehran office of Iran’s leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This is revealed by DEBKAfile’s sources in Washington, Moscow and Tehran.

Kiryenko, one of Putin’s most trusted adviser on nuclear affairs, divided his time in July and August between Tehran, Moscow and the southern Iranian town of Bushehr. There, he set up a team of Farsi-speaking Russian nuclear scientists for start-ups of joint Russian-Iranian nuclear projects.
(Read more…)



“living with” a nuclear Iran
Netanyahu’s show of muscle comes too late to deter a nuclear Tehran

However, the truth which every Middle East and Western leaders knows by now, is that the battle against a nuclear Iran is lost.


President Obama has wound up his secret negotiations with Iran and instructed US delegates to put on the table of the Geneva negotiations on Oct. 15 the understandings or deals he has reached with Iranian leaders.
Those understandings are about to be endorsed by the P5+1 (the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany) for implementation in stages. They will leave Iran with the capacity, reduced but intact, to continue to enrich uranium along with its ability to use clandestine sites to house the nuclear weapons they are able to produce.

After Years of Delay, What Can Israel Do About Iran?
By Prof. Louis René Beres and Lt. Gen. Thomas McInemey USAF (ret.)
(Read more…)



Can Israel be both Jewish and democratic
By Ted Belman

PM Netanyahu has made it clearer than ever, that the PA must recognize “Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish People.” But Israel must decide how Jewish it wants to be.

Most Israeli Jews embrace the mantra that Israel should be both democratic and Jewish but pay little attention to whether the two ideas are compatible. The left in Israel say that being democratic should not be compromised and Israel’s High Court agrees with it. The Right in Israel think otherwise, that being Jewish should take precedence over being democratic where the two are in conflict and they want the Knesset to pass the necessary laws to make it so.

Israel’s Justice Minister, Tziporah Livni, recently said to “those who want to claim that the power of the majority in the Knesset is greater than the power ?of the courts,” that “ Knesset operates according to the principle of the majority, but the job of the Supreme Court is to ensure that the Knesset abides by the values of justice, and therefore, one needs to defend it.”
(Read more…)

 

9-11.

Attack on USS Liberty.

Lavon Affair.

Jonathan Pollard.

 

Gad.. 20 years have passed and Israel is till claiming Iran is gong to attack them.

 

Being refereed to as the "enemy of Islam" and the "little Satan" and then things began to get a bit more exact in intent with "the fake Zionist (regime) will disappear from the landscape of geography." and other such sabre rattling one tends to take their thwarting of the NPT and UNSC rather seriously given a single weapon would wreak havoc in Israel and, consequently, across the ME and, consequently the entire world.

I certainly wouldn't bet everything I have on a hunch that they don't allow inspections simply because they have peaceful designs. I'd like to see some proof but, they won't allow proof of their peaceful intent to see the light of day which makes one believe they are not as peaceful as their face man states.

 

Quite true Drew...
I was reading something a couple of days ago about the same subject, I went to my delete file to retrieve it and here it is in all its splendor...

A Jewish State, Nothing Else
~By Dror Eydar ISRAEL HAYOM

President Shimon Peres’ remarks at the opening of the Knesset’s winter session this week outlined the credo of the Israeli Left: peace at any cost.

Yes, it is difficult and there are obstacles, but it is a “supreme moral directive,” and as president, he has a duty to support the peace talks. Throughout the world (including in Israel), his remarks were interpreted as opposing those of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The tunes that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his representatives sang this week about the “breakdown” of talks and a “dead end” are being backed up by both U.S. President Obama’s policy and Peres’ encouraging words.

Read more here

http://www.israpundit.com/archives/63590853#more-63590853

 

Yes, you can condemn Iran just as soon as Israel signs the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and allows inspections of its own nuclear weapons facilities. What's good for the goose, etc...

 

No, I can condemn Iran now as they have violated an agreement they have made and Israel has not. Further, NPT is not compulsory to sign and certainly it is quite understandable that a nation in the midst of war and threatened feels that they need not at this time.

Iran is not threatened and has violated the terms of NPT, not Israel and, I'd like to point out that the two issues are as non relevant as India, Pakistan and North Korea also not being signatories, none of which are surrounded by enemies who desire to destroy them.

 

Utter Rubbish / - BS -

India + Pakistan regard each other as enemies + prepared to destroy each other , SAME as North Korea who've won their independence in a bloody war against South Korea + America , who they regard as enemies who're threatening their existence.


....

 

None are 'surrounded' by enemies as israel is.

 

For the obvious reason that Zionist Jews have deliberately chosen to steal/carve out a
chunk of land right out of the heart of the Arab World, instead of Madagascar/Patagonia/Uganda etc , as once seriously considered/preferred by the Theodor Herzl and other non-observent Jews early Zionists .

...

 

Hate to beak this too you but not only are Jews from this region but, the UN approved as well as laid out the groundwork for the nation of Israel.

 

Wrong Again -

UN did not approve the creation of a Jewish state - it was a Non-binding UNGA REs 181 a PROPOSAL - subject to negotiation/settlement - for which UNGA appointed Count Bernadotte who the Jews promptly murdered when they realized Bernadotte' s report meant that they weren't getting as much as they expected.

The "partition plan " did not go to UN Security Council -therefore non-binding = not legal in International Law.

..,,

 

The UN laid out the groundwork in 181 and since then Israel has become a recognized member of the UN and a recognized nation of the UN and world - recognized as a legal country by all but a handful of hateful dictatorships and some anti semetic Holocaust deniers on the internet.

 

Marlowe, et al,

This is not truly accurate.

(COMMENT)

First, GA/RES/181(II) did go to the UN Security Council for implementation. The UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) was created as the action arm for on-site implementation. As the UK, as Mandatory, began its withdrawal, the Mandatory Powers held by the UK were gradually transferred to the UNPC.

I often hear or read pro-Palestinian commentators make this very claim, when, in fact, even the Palestinian hierarchy knows better.

I hope that this is of some help to you. All the Part I - Section B. STEPS PREPARATORY TO INDEPENDENCE for Israel (the Jewish Agency accepting), had been completed for the implementation of A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947 had been completed. The UN Palestine Commission reported it was unable to implement the portion of A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947 due to rejection of the terms and conditions by the Arab Higher Committee.

Most Respectfully,
R

Note: All sited sources come from the official archive of the UN.

 

Hmmm. you're creating a gross distortion of Al-Ridwa's letter by cutting -posting only a section of his letter :

Here's the letter IN FULL :
GENERAL ASSEMBLY SECURITY COUNCIL
Fifty-third session Fifty-fourth year
Agenda items 39, 40 and 84
QUESTION OF PALESTINE
THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO
INVESTIGATE ISRAELI PRACTICES
AFFECTING THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF
THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE AND OTHER
ARABS OF THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES

Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer
of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the
Secretary-General

Yesterday, the Israeli representative to the United Nations made some comments to the media on the issue of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, as well as on a statement previously made by President Arafat on the subject. The Israeli representative repeated what the Israeli Foreign Minister said a few days ago, namely that resolution 181 (II) was "null and void". These are pathetic statements involving illegal positions with far-reaching and serious consequences.

For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.

Israel must comply with United Nations resolutions. It has no power to unilaterally annul any of those resolutions, particularly such a historic resolution as 181 (II). Israel's claim that the resolution is "null and void" is illegal, and it is also inadmissible given the history of the matter.

Prior to its admission to United Nations membership, Israel made clear pledges to the members of the United Nations that it would implement resolution 181 (II) and resolution 194 (III) of 1949, related inter alia to the rights of Palestine refugees. In actuality, resolution 273 (III) of 11 May 1949, admitting Israel to membership in the United Nations, recalled in its preamble both of those resolutions and took note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee with respect to the implementation of the said resolutions.


Furthermore, in the "Declaration of the State of Israel", it is clearly stated that Israel is prepared to cooperate with the agencies and representatives of the United Nations in implementing the resolution of the General Assembly of 29 November 1947. In fact, the declaration, at least in part, was made on "the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly".

Thus, while we are not sure whether or not the officials of the Israeli Foreign Ministry understand what they are stating and its implications, the international community should nevertheless take it seriously. Moreover, we believe that Israel must still explain to the international community the measures it took illegally to extend its laws and regulations to the territory it occupied in the war of 1948, beyond the territory allocated to the Jewish State in resolution 181 (II). Such a situation has not been accepted by the international community.

I should be grateful if you would arrange to have the text of the present letter distributed as a document of the General Assembly, under agenda items 39, 40 and 84, and of the Security Council.

(Signed) Nasser AL-KIDWA
Ambassador
Permanent Observer of
Palestine to the United Nations

======

I'm a bit busy this afternoon - but shall when I get time examine the rest of your post later for any more dishonest cherry picking distortions, creating false impressions . .


N.B> Al-Kidwa was referring to UN 181 part 11

 

RoccoR - UN Res.181 Part 11 which Al-Kidwa was referring to was the boundaries of the Arab state :

===============================

"PART II


Boundaries 5/


A. THE ARAB STATE


The area of the Arab State in Western Galilee is bounded on the west by the Mediterranean and on the north by the frontier of the Lebanon from Ras en Naqura to a point north of Saliha. From there the boundary proceeds southwards, leaving the built-up area of Saliha in the Arab State, to join the southernmost point of this village. Thence it follows the western boundary line of the villages of `Alma, Rihaniya and Teitaba, thence following the northern boundary line of Meirun village to join the Acre-Safad sub-district boundary line. It follows this line to a point west of Es Sammu'i village and joins it again at the northernmost point of Farradiya. Thence it follows the sub-district boundary line to the Acre-Safad main road. From here it follows the western boundary of Kafr I'nan village until it reaches the Tiberias-Acre sub-district boundary line, passing to the west of the junction of the Acre-Safad and Lubiya-Kafr I'nan roads. From south-west corner of Kafr I'nan village the boundary line follows the western boundary of the Tiberias sub-district to a point close to the boundary line between the villages of Maghar and Eilabun, thence bulging out to the west to include as much of the eastern part of the plain of Battuf as is necessary for the reservoir proposed by the Jewish Agency for the irrigation of lands to the south and east.

The boundary rejoins the Tiberias sub-district boundary at a point on the Nazareth-Tiberias road south-east of the built-up area of Tur'an; thence it runs southwards, at first following the sub-district boundary and then passing between the Kadoorie Agricultural School and Mount Tabor, to a point due south at the base of Mount Tabor. From here it runs due west, parallel to the horizontal grid line 230, to the north-east corner of the village lands of Tel Adashim. It then runs to the north-west corner of these lands, whence it turns south and west so as to include in the Arab State the sources of the Nazareth water supply in Yafa village. On reaching Ginneiger it follows the eastern, northern and western boundaries of the lands of .......

(its long - read more here :http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253 )


........................................

 

Marlowe, et al,

The reference to PART II is being confused here. While there is a Part II within GA/RES/181(II), the ("II") in the name is the version of the resolution. It is not specific to a PART within the Resolution.

(COMMENT)

You need to understand how Resolutions are designated:

• A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947
• Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine

It is a standard part of the document symbol protocol and the naming convention.​

Second, the Declaration of Independence (Israel or Palestine), were not referring at all to "Boundaries" Part and Section. They both refer to Part I, Section B, STEPS PREPARATORY TO INDEPENDENCE.

Third, while Letter of the Permanent Observer was answering in direct response to the Occupied Territories concerning the Boundaries, the point being that Israel controlled more territory now then originally apportioned in GA/RES/181(II), both the unequivocally state that the Resolution TITLED: Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine has "international legitimacy." In fact, it was the basis for the 1988 move to declare Palestine independent; that and Part I, Chapter 4, Section F - ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS.

There is no question about this, and it is not subject to the subterfuge you imply by suggesting I "cherry picked" the references. I took the applicable paragraph which demonstrated the point under discussion [that Resolution 181(II) did go to the UNSC and was implemented]. And I did the courtesy of giving the complete name, reference number, date, and link to each document. The was no intention of "cherry picking" or any attempt to alter the facts. And I take exception to any suggestion that there was.

On the other hand, your commentary is misleading. You were trying to suggest that there was no "implementation" and that GA/RES/181(II) was not recognized as having "international legitimacy" under the Palestinians. While I understand that this is consistent with the Hostile Fedayeen position stated in Article 19 of the Palestine National Charter of 1968 (The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.) and the Jihadist position stated in Article 11, Hamas Covenant 1988 (There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.); this is merely one side of the equation with little substantiation. It supports the original Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) "solemn declaration" made in 1948 (below), but is not accurate to the point under discussion (UNSC involvement and implementation).

I hope this helps in the clarification of my position.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

By devious characteristic methods of skullduggery.

..



...
....

 

Indeed, the nations of the world are characteristically tricky.