RUTHFULLY YOURS

On Friday, two Israeli policemen were murdered on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The same day, Seth Siegel wrote in The New York Times, “A Good Story about Israel and the Palestinians,” detailing how Israeli and Palestinians sat on a dais to announce an update on the Red Sea-Dead Sea project. Siegel, author of Let There be Water, is probably Israel’s greatest water expert, and his understanding of the challenges of water use and distribution in Israel and with its neighbors is unsurpassed. But what he passes off as a “good story” is simply the old story of Israel giving something to the Palestinians (and Jordan) in exchange for a phony smile.

The agreement includes no change in the Palestinian Authority’s nasty attitude or incitement to violence against Israel. No decision to stop paying terrorists for killing Jews. There was condemnation of Israeli security measures after the murders from P.A. strongman Mahmoud Abbas, King Abdullah of Jordan, and the Arab League – not a positive comment from any of them about the water project. The extent of the good news appears to be that Palestinian water officials were permitted to accept Israeli-generated improvements in Palestinian life.

Reviewing Siegel’s excellent book a year ago, I wrote:

Rawabi, a planned Palestinian community, is a case in point. Existing Palestinian-Israeli protocols require the two sides to meet to discuss new pipelines for the town, but for years the PA refused to convene a meeting on principle. After the developer was nearly bankrupt and the PA was telling the world Israel was withholding water from thirsty Palestinians, Israel finally just turned on the water. The PA called it a win, but for the Palestinians who invested in the construction of the town and the Palestinians who hoped to live and work there, the delay was no win at all.

Siegel acknowledges precisely that in the Times:

Beginning in 2008, the Palestinian leadership decided to turn water into a political tool to bludgeon Israel. The claim, which gained currency among some in the human rights community and the news media, was that Israel was starving Palestinians of water to oppress them and to break their economy. Never mind that Israel was scrupulously adhering to the Oslo Agreement and providing more than half of all of all of the water used by Palestinians in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority and its supporters began to speak of Israel’s “water apartheid.”

In short form: Palestinian leadership subjects its people to limited dirty water or no water so it can blame Israel for the limited dirty water or no water.

It did the same in Gaza, as I wrote then in covering Siegel’s book:

Gaza is a disaster ready to happen – happening already, in fact – between illegal wells draining the aquifer, salt water running in to fill the space, and lack of sewage treatment. When Israel had farms inside Gaza, the deal was to supply an amount of water to Gaza authorities equal to the amount used by the farms. When, in 2005, Israel left Gaza, the government continued providing the water – and later doubled the amount. But that doesn’t address the underlying issues.

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” observed Albert Einstein. His observation comes to mind after hearing that the Trump administration has urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to limit building in Judea and Samaria, issue permits for thousands of Palestinian Arab homes in portions of Area C (areas under complete Israeli security and civilian control) adjacent to Palestinian Arab cities, and provide other “good will gestures” that will potentially aid the Palestinian Arab economy. 2

These are not concessions to the Palestinian Authority (PA). They are acts of appeasement, distressing signs of naiveté and a failure to learn the lessons of the past. The PA is being rewarded once again for intransigence; ongoing incitement against Israeli citizens; and for not being held accountable for continuing to provide financial support to families of convicted terrorists who are either incarcerated in Israeli prisons or who have died while murdering Israelis.

Incitement

Incitement to violence against Israel and glorification of Palestinian Arab terrorists are ubiquitous in the Arab media and school curricula. Daily examples are so pervasive, it is incomprehensible how anyone can realistically discuss a peace process until this demonization and unrelenting determination to destroy Israel ceases entirely.

Stopping the incessant provocation must begin in the educational system, yet the opposite is happening. This is the conclusion reached by IMPACT-SE 3 in an April 2017 report evaluating the recently released Palestinian Arab curriculum for grades 1-4 and 11-12. 4

“The new PA school textbooks for grades 1–4,” the report warned “points to a further radicalization of the Palestinian national identity. This curriculum is now educating …children to engage in active conflict. Children are mentally prepared to jump into action and sacrifice their lives when the opportunity arises; they grow up with the disposition to fight against Israel, either from the current status quo or from an imagined future Palestinian state serving as a springboard for anti-Israeli activities.” 5

IMPACT-SE’s analysis of the PA’s upper-grade textbooks found “a commitment to the PLO’s [Palestine Liberation Organization] path that combines diplomacy and violence with a commitment to the full liberation of Palestine.” In other words, “The PA educational system has created a Palestinian nationalism that is incompatible with Israel’s existence” 6

Master Sgt. Haiel Sitawe, the father of a newborn baby, and Kamil Shnaan, who was newly engaged, were murdered in an Islamic terrorist attack in Jerusalem. The two Israeli police officers were members of the Druze community in Israel. The terrorists who shot them were killed by other police officers.

While Israel will compensate the families of the dead police officers, the Palestinian Authority will compensate the families of the terrorists. And American taxpayers will compensate both.

This is typical of a foreign policy in which we fund both the terrorists and the terrorized.

Sooner or later, we are going to have to choose a side.

This mad policy is facing its biggest threat with the Taylor Force Act. The bill, named after a murdered Afghanistan and Iraq War veteran stabbed to death in Tel Aviv, would strip funding from the Palestinian Authority unless the terror state stops giving money to terrorists and their families for their crimes.

The Taylor Force Act has plenty of support in Congress. But the Palestinian Authority has made it abundantly clear that it will not stop paying terrorists to kill Israelis. PA terror boss Abbas is gambling that our politicians will blink first rather than stop sending him hundreds of millions of dollars.

And the tragedy of it is that he appears to be right.

Everyone condemns the Palestinian Authority’s policy of funding terrorists. Typical adjectives include “abhorrent” and “abominable”. But don’t expect them to actually cut off the cash.

Senators are scurrying to neuter the Taylor Force Act. There are dire warnings that if we stop funding the biggest Islamic terrorist group in Israel, it will collapse and make way for more terrorism.

If we don’t stop giving Islamic terrorists money to commit terrorism… the terrorists will win.

This sums up the insanity of our foreign policy in which we fund terrorism to fight terrorism, and in which the “moderate” Islamic terrorists of the Palestinian Authority and the Muslim Brotherhood are our best hope for restraining the really scary “extremist” Islamic terrorists of ISIS and Al Qaeda.

Senators have been complaining about the act’s “All or nothing” approach. All or nothing means that the Palestinian Authority would have to stop funding terror or lose funding. And since the Palestinian Authority won’t stop funding terror and they don’t want to cut its funding, they hate all or nothing.

AIPAC hasn’t gotten behind the Taylor Force Act. Instead it’s holding out for some “revised” version that would make it meaningless while attracting bipartisan support. Meaningless pro-Israel measures that pass with huge majorities are AIPAC’s bread and butter. They’re its political Potemkin villages.

The ideal Taylor Force Act, according to AIPAC, most Democrats and some Republicans, would condemn terrorism without cutting a cent in foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority. It would contain a national security waiver and plenty of gimmicks that would actually increase funding for terror.

Early Friday morning, three Arab citizens of Israel attacked Israeli police on the Temple Mount, killing two. This led Israeli security forces to close Jerusalem’s holiest site for Jews and Muslims, sparking outrage as Muslims intended to worship there on their holy day, Friday.

“We cannot allow for agents of murder, who desecrate the name of God, to drag us into a bloody war, and we will deal with a heavy hand against all the arms of terror, and its perpetrators,” Israeli President Reuven Rivlin said in a statement. “The state of Israel will defend its sovereignty and its citizens with a strong hand, and will not allow anyone to provoke the region into a bloody war.”

A video of the scene captured an assailant yelling “Allahu Akbar!”

Israeli police said the armed attackers had been spotted around 7 a.m. local time approaching the gateway from within the sacred compound which Jews revere as the Temple Mount and Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary, The New York Times reported. Police pursued the assailants inside the compound and both groups opened fire, killing two police and three assailants.

Police identified the slain officers as Hayil Satawi, 30, from the northern Israeli Arab town of Maghar, and Kamil Shnaan, 22, from another northern town, Hurfeish. Officials said both officers were Druze, members of an Islamic sect which most Muslims consider outside of Islam.

Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, identified the attackers as Muhammad Ahmed Jabarin, 29; Muhammad Hamid Jabarin, 19; and Muhammad Ahmed Mufdal Jabarin, 19. All three were residents of Umm el-Fahm, a large Arab town near the border of Israel and the West Bank. It was not known if they were related, but their names indicate membership in the same large clan.

Martin Luther, in his criticism of Catholic pilgrimages, once said, “There are 12 apostles, and 18 of them are buried in Spain.” He probably would not be pleased that Protestants have resumed journeying on the Camino (Road) to Santiago (Saint James) de Compostela. But, the Camino to Santiago will not start a war. The Temple Mount will.

A new $5 million Anglican Centre is to be built in Spain in Santiago de Compostela, the end of the world-famous Catholic pilgrimage route the Way of St James. — Christianity Today

Putting aside all arguments about whether Israel should be in Judea and Samaria, whether Israel should be in Jerusalem, or even whether Israel should be in the land itself, one thing is clear: Mohammed never set foot in Jerusalem. That is incontestable. Absolutely beyond debate, even from accepted Muslim history.

Mohammed died in 632 A.D. Arab forces did not besiege Jerusalem until 636 A.D. They did not enter the city until 637 A.D. No one doubts this. No one denies this.

It follows that if Arab forces did not enter Jerusalem until 637 A.D., then Jerusalem did not have a mosque before that date. The present structure for Al Aqsa — the Furthest (Mosque) — was built around 690 A.D., possibly using materials from an earlier destroyed church. There is a possibility that an earlier mosque had been built soon after the Arab conquest.

But all of this, whenever or if ever it occurred, took place after Mohammed died.

Therefore, whenever Mohammed made his supposed night journey – the miraj – it could not have been to a mosque in Jerusalem that did not exist. The whole Islamic claim to Al-Aqsa is a historic fraud.

One can argue whether Muslims originally faced Mecca in their prayers (as Muslim tradition demands), or whether Muslims originally faced Petra, as new scholarship shows; but even that does not affect the very real fact that Mohammed never set foot in a mosque in Jerusalem.

The present crisis over Al-Aqsa – two Israeli Druze policemen were killed last Friday by Muslim terrorists– is based on an absolute lie. The Muslims are fighting for a mosque that is a demonstrable fraud, and that can be shown so in five minutes.

Returning to Spain for some insight: even Catholic scholars now admit that the Saint James – of Santiago de Compostela fame – is probably not buried in Spain. James seems to have been buried in Jerusalem. Luther was right after all.

Numerous scholars suggest that the cult of St James in Spain has not been around longer than the 9th century A.D. this suggests that it is unlikely that the remains belong to the apostle from the times of Jesus. There is also no record connected with his grave from a period before early medieval times. — Ancient Origins

While the Jewish community in some quarters has lately been divided on Israel issues, some 5,000 evangelical Christians will gather in Washington, DC July 17-18 as a granite-like block of support to defend the Jewish State. They will be attending the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) policy conference held each year. Boasting more than 3 million members, CUFI is America’s largest pro-Israel group. A host of political luminaries, led by Vice President Mike Pence and Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), will appear at this year’s conference, sited in the Washington Convention Center. Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu will appear via live satellite feed.

The domestic political importance of CUFI’s zealous members is not lost on anyone in Washington. In response to a question, CUFI founding Executive Director David Brog stated, “CUFI represents a base of voters that helped deliver the White House and both houses of Congress to Republicans. Now our members are coming to town to remind these leaders that Israel is and always has been a top priority for them. We’re expecting a warmer welcome — and greater impact — than ever before.”

It is no wonder that the line-up of legislators, led by Rep. Trent Franks, who acts of co-chair of the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus, also includes Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), and Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-KS).

Rep. Franks is a pivotal factor in supporting Israel’s defense systems, especially its tri-level missile shields. He sits on two key subcommittees of the House Armed Services Committee, vice-chairing the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, and as a majority member of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities. Franks also leads the Missile Defense Caucus. The Arizona representative is at the pinnacle of support for the Jewish State and its military and defense superiority. Likewise, Rep. Lamborn joins Franks on two of those key subcommittees, Strategic Forces as well as Emerging Threats and Capabilities. On the Senate side, Sen. Ernst chairs the analogous Emerging Threats Subcommittee under the Armed Forces Committee.

In response to a question about his CUFI appearance, Franks asserted, “Israel is on the front lines in a battle to protect all humanity from an evil ideology that has no respect for innocent life anywhere on earth. Adherents of this ideology hate Israel’s existence – more than that, they hate Western Civilization. Israel deserves our support and respect. As co-chair of the Congressional Israel Allies Caucus, I am happy to stand with Israel at the upcoming Christians United For Israel Summit.”

“We shall . . . prevent any theocratic tendencies from coming to the fore on the part of our priesthood. We shall keep our priests [by which is meant Rabbis] within the confines of their temples.” – Theodor Herzl, Der Judenstaat

Tough love may be an appropriate response in family matters, but boycotting a troubled nation which has become a pariah among the hard-left is not the appropriate response to the Israeli government’s recent decisions regarding religion. The answer is not disengagement, but rather greater engagement….

To do otherwise is to engage in a form of BDS – the tactic currently employed by Israel’s enemies to delegitimate the Nation state of the Jewish people. Supporters of BDS will point to these benign boycotts as a way of justifying their malignant ones…. The role of American Jews is limited to persuasion, not coercion.

Western Wall In Israel. (Photo from PublicDomainPictures.net)

Several prominent American Zionists – including long-time supporters of Israel – are so outraged at the Israeli government’s recent decision regarding the Western Wall and non-orthodox conversion, that they are urging American Jews to reduce or even eliminate their support for Israel. According to an article by Elliott Abrams in Mosaic, Ike Fisher a prominent member of the AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] board, threatened to “suspend” all further financial support for Israel. Daniel Gordis, a leading voice for Conservative Judaism, urged American Jews to cancel their El Al tickets and fly Delta or United. He also proposed “withholding donations to Israeli hospitals, so that ‘They start running out of money’ and ‘begin to falter.'” This sort of emotional response is reminiscent of the temper tantrum outgoing President Barak Obama engaged in when he refused to veto the UN’s recent anti-Israel resolution.

I strongly disagree both with the Israeli government’s capitulation to the minority of ultra-Orthodox Jews, who wield far too much influence in Israeli politics, and with the proposals to cut back on support for Israel by some of my fellow critics of the Israeli government’s recent decisions with regard to religion.

I strongly support greater separation between religion and state in Israel, as Theodor Herzl outlined in his plan for the nation-state of the Jewish People in Der Judenstaat 120 years ago: “We shall . . . prevent any theocratic tendencies from coming to the fore on the part of our priesthood. We shall keep our priests [by which is meant Rabbis] within the confines of their temples.” It was David Ben Gurion, Israel’s founding Prime Minister, who made the deal with the Orthodox Rabbinate that violated Herzl’s mandate and knocked down the wall of separation between religion and state. He allocated to the Chief Rabbinate authority over many secular matters, such as marriage, divorce and child custody. He also laid the groundwork for the creation of religious parties that have been a necessary part of most Israeli coalitions for many years.

So, do not blame Israel’s current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, for the recent capitulation. His government’s survival depends on his unholy alliance with allegedly holy parties that threaten to leave the coalition and bring down his government unless he capitulated. The alternative to a Netanyahu government might well be far to the right of the current government, both on religious matters and on prospects for peace. Reasonable people may disagree as to whether Netanyahu did the right thing, but I believe that given the choice between the current government and what may well replace it, PM Netanyahu acted on acceptable priorities.

The issue of government subsidies for Palestinian terrorist salaries is again in the international spotlight. What began in November 2013, as a barely believable revelation — that taxpayers in Great Britain, the US, and other Western nations were bankrolling terrorist salaries — has now become a universally-acknowledged, impossible-to-deny, and impossible-to-defend embarrassment for governments.

For years, officials dissembled and dodged when the question came up. After a period of silent disbelief, the mainstream media now openly confirms the salaries and routinely refers to the program with ipso factuality. Political challengers on both sides of the Atlantic stridently demand that incumbents terminate foreign aid that amounts to taxpayer-incentivized terrorism. A recent in-depth study in Israel calculates that all terror incentives and rewards paid by the Palestinian Authority over the past four years total a mind-numbing one billion dollars.

As more citizens are victimized in Great Britain, Europe, the U.S. and elsewhere, Western donor governments find their financial involvement with the Palestinian Authority terrorist salary program increasingly indefensible.

Whether things might be changing is anyone’s guess.

Intense public pushback and the spread of terrorism, from “something over in Israel” to atrocities in leading European and American cities, have cracked entrenched governmental refusals to stop the financing. But it has been a long road.

In November 2013, revelations first leapt into global headlines that convicted Palestinian terrorists were receiving monthly salaries paid by the Palestinian Authority using foreign donor funds. The Palestinian “Law of the Prisoner” openly rewards those convicted of even the most heinous attacks with generous monthly “salaries” and phantom jobs with automatic advancement in the PA government.

The salaries increase on a sliding scale. The more carnage inflicted, the longer the prisoner sentence, the higher the salary. Terrorists receiving a five-year sentence are granted just a few hundred dollars each month. The bloodiest murderers are paid as much $3,000 monthly. Checks are sent directly to the prisoner, who appoints a power of attorney to distribute the funds.

In 2013, the first spotlighted salary program operated by the Ministry of Prisoners was estimated to consume some $5 to $8 million monthly, with other benefit programs doubling that sum. In all, some 8 percent of the PA budget was diverted to terror. But that money was the tip of the cash pile.

The chronically bankrupt PA relies upon foreign aid to pay the salaries. and prioritizes the monies received into the salary program before any civic expenditures on health, welfare, education, or infrastructure programs. In every Western country, financial support for terrorism makes such funding illegal. Yet, the UK, EU, and the US, through their fungible aid, effectively act as the chief bankers of the terrorist salaries. Thin attempts by government paymasters in various countries sought to portray the monies not as “salaries” but as “welfare.” Ironically, the PA itself vigorously refuted that claim, bragging that such payments are proud rewards to its cherished fighters, including the type of terrorist that would slash the throat of children in their kibbutz beds. Indeed, the term for the payments is rawatib, which in Arabic does not mean “welfare” — it means “salaries.”