31 May 2022

Itamar News May 27 2022 – With Surprise Guest

 Read to the end for a special notice

Friends of Itamar send our deep condolences to Miriam, her family, and Beit Ami in the passing of our longtime friend and supporter Charles Stalsworth of blessed memory. Charles loved with all his heart and soul the town of Itamar and always prayed to see us grow to an important city of Israel.  The pictures of the flora and fauna from Itamar are dedicated to his memory





Unfortunately, the security situation on Itamar has greatly declined over last couple of months. Things have gotten really bad this week when children were injured by rock throwing terrorists on our major route leading to the community. There have been a number of attempts to infiltrate our town and we are in high alert. Our response to terrorism has always been to continue to build and strengthen our community.


Here is a list of some of our present projects that are in the making and need funding to complete.


Visitors center: we need around sixty thousand more dollars to finish it

Basketball court reconstruction with seating for 150 children made out of stone:  we need around 40 thousand dollars to finish it

Mikvah – we are adding to the community mikvah and need around 25 thousand dollars to complete it

Security fence:  We are fixing up our security fence and – each kilometer and a half is around 30 thousand dollars we have 13 kilometers of fencing and are starting with the most sensitive areas.

Completion of High school Bet Midrash upper floor – we need another 70 thousand dollars – for 25 thousand dollars there are room dedications available – these rooms will be used for children’s therapy via music and other areas.

We need to add on to our Clothing Gmach caravan by building out a closed porch deck out of wood. It is around 30 thousand dollars

Every summer we help sponsor the Itamar children’s and adult summer program which comes out to around 20 thousand dollars.

Any assistance towards any one of these projects or general assistance would be greatly appreciated! Every donation gets us closer in completing our goals!!!


Despite the great turmoil it did not prevent visitors from abroad to visit Itamar after a two-year disruption caused by the Corona Virus. We greatly enjoyed the visit of our dear friends Jeff Schwartz ESQ.  who serves on the Friends of Itamar board, Anita and Enrico from Switzerland and friends from Florida. In addition, we are happy to welcome Rachel Greene know as the “Patriot Nurse”, and Brandee Stacy who are both dear of Friends of Itamar as well.







A huge thank you to YAD LEAH and Keess Tinekeh and NNA for thinking awesomely of us again in sending more boxes of quality clothing and furniture to strengthen the town of Itamar.


Baruch Hashem Itamar continues to grow shortly we will be completing an important housing project of 18 new houses. We have been blessed with a steady stream of new residents to our community.



____________________________________________

FROM REB DOV’S BLOG:  Yehonatan Pollard travels all over Eretz Yisrael. Here at the Itamar Yeshivah, they are playing his song. LISTEN

screenshot from twitter




Rabbi Asour – Ivrit – Why the State of Israel was established and where did the anti-Semitism of the Arabs come from?

 הרב דניאל עשור

Commenters:

dothefivכבוד הרבאיפה הזכרת ונוכחות שם שמיים בדבריך?!  דיבור על השגחה. שאין דבר נעשה, אין אדם נוקף אצבע.. עד שמכריזים עליו מלמעלה. זה צריך להיות מרכז דבריך. דהיינו: לפתוח ב ה מלך   באמצע  ה מלך  ולסיים  ב ה ימלוךכל השאר, טפל למאורעות וילדי הזמן. כמו שכותב הרמח"ל:  ".. אמנם הינה זה הוא מחוקו של הייחוד העליון להראות עוצם ממשלתו... שכל זמן שהוא רוצה מניח העולם להיות סוער והולך בילדי הזמן עת אשר שלט הרע בעולם ולא עוד, אלא שאינו מעכב הרע הזה מעשות את אשר בכוחו לעשות....  אפס כי לא מפני זה יאבד עולמו כי הממשלה לו לבדו והוא עשה והוא סובל והוא מחץ והוא ירפא ו  א י ן  ע ו ד  מ ל ב ד ו. והינה זה יתד חזק לאמונת בני ישראל אשר לא ירך ליבם מאורך הגלות …."


אמת לאמיתה


Rabbi Kessin – Weekly Hashkafa Shiur #97

 

The Tikun Process of Passover - Part 6 | Removing Zohama in Modern Times

Very Refreshing

 


https://nutritionrefined.com/grape-sorbet/

Refreshing Summer Recipe

 A Shavuos Treat

 


Have you ever eaten frozen grapes? Yes? Ok, have you wondered why they taste sweeter when frozen? 

Freezing grapes doesn’t make them sweeter, but it does intensify their flavor. If the grapes are sweet to begin with, their flavor becomes sweeter. If the grapes are sour, their flavor becomes even sourer after freezing. This is actually true for almost all fruit. The reason is that fruit contains a lot of water. When fruit, such as grapes, are frozen, the water inside crystallizes and expands. This expansion breaks the cellular structure of the grapes (i.e., destroys their cell walls). This process affects the taste of the grapes as our tastebuds are now better able to access the sweet (or sour) taste. 

 Sweet grapes are excellent for making grape sorbet for another reason – they don’t freeze rock-hard like an ice cube. The inside of the grape tastes actually just like a sorbet. When the water in the grapes starts to freeze, the sugar stays in the liquid. When you freeze grapes in a regular freezer, you end up with some ice and some very sugary liquid, not a rock-solid mass of ice.

30 May 2022

Jerusalem – im eshkachech yerushalayim . . .

Our Nation's Capital Through History – Jerusalem
Islamists artificially inflate Islam's link to the city, but Arab terrorism turned Jerusalem, literally the City of Peace, into a bloody battleground and has thus forfeited any claim to share in the city's destiny. Op-ed. By Eli E Hertz

Jerusalem and the Jewish people are so intertwined that telling the history of one is telling the history of the other. For more than 3,000 years, Jerusalem has played a central role in the history of the Jews, culturally, politically, and spiritually, a role first documented in the Scriptures. All through the 2,000 years of the diaspora, Jews have called Jerusalem their ancestral home. This sharply contrasts the relationship between Jerusalem and the new Islamists who artificially inflate Islam's links to Jerusalem.


The Arab rulers who controlled Jerusalem through the 1950s and 1960s demonstrated no religious tolerance in a city that gave birth to two major Western religions. That changed after the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel regained control of the whole city. Symbolically, one of Israel's first steps was to officially recognize and respect all religious interests in Jerusalem. But the war for control of Jerusalem and its religious sites is not over. 


Palestinian Arab terrorism has targeted Jerusalem particularly in an attempt to regain control of the city from Israel. The result is that they have turned Jerusalem, literally the City of Peace, into a bloody battleground and have thus forfeited their claim to share in the city's destiny. 


Jerusalem’s Jewish Link: Historic, Religious, and Political

Jerusalem, wrote historian Sir Martin Gilbert, is not a ‘mere’ city. “It holds the central spiritual and physical place in the history of the Jews as a people.” For more than 3,000 years, the Jewish people have looked to Jerusalem as their spiritual, political, and historical capital, even when they did not physically rule over the city. Throughout its long history, Jerusalem has served, and still serves, as the political capital of only one nation – the one belonging to the Jews. 


Its prominence in Jewish history began in 1004 BCE, when King David declared the city the capital of the first Jewish kingdom. David’s successor and son, King Solomon, built the First Temple there, according to the Bible, as a holy place to worship the Almighty. Unfortunately, history would not be kind to the Jewish people. Four hundred and ten years after King Solomon completed construction of Jerusalem, the Babylonians (early ancestors to today’s Iraqis) seized and destroyed the city, forcing the Jews into exile. Fifty years later, the Jews, or Israelites as they were called, were permitted to return after Persia (present-day Iran) conquered Babylon. The Jews’ first order of business was to reclaim Jerusalem as their capital and rebuild the Holy Temple, recorded in history as the Second Temple.


Jerusalem was more than the Jewish kingdom’s political capital. It was a spiritual beacon. During the First and Second Temple periods, Jews throughout the kingdom would travel to Jerusalem three times yearly for the pilgrimages of the Jewish holy days of Sukkot, Passover, and Shavuot, until the Roman Empire destroyed the Second Temple in 70 CE and ended Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem for the next 2,000 years. Despite that fate, Jews never relinquished their bond to Jerusalem or, for that matter, to Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel.


No matter where Jews lived throughout the world for those two millennia, their thoughts and prayers were directed toward Jerusalem. Even today, whether in Israel, the United States or anywhere else, Jewish ritual practice, holy day celebration and lifecycle events include recognition of Jerusalem as a core element of the Jewish experience. 


Consider that:

  • Jews in prayer always turn toward Jerusalem. 
  • Arks (the sacred chests) that hold Torah scrolls in synagogues throughout the world face Jerusalem. 
  • Jews end Passover Seders each year with the words: “Next year in Jerusalem”; the same words are pronounced at the end of Yom Kippur, the most solemn day of the Jewish year.
  • Three-week moratorium on weddings in the summer recalls the breaching of the walls of Jerusalem by the Babylonian army in 586 BCE. That period culminates in a special day of mourning – Tisha B’Av (the 9th day of the Hebrew month Av) – commemorating the destruction of both the First and Second Temples.
  • Jewish wedding ceremonies – joyous occasions, are marked by sorrow over the loss of Jerusalem. The groom recites a biblical verse from the Babylonian Exile: “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning,” and breaks a glass in commemoration of the destruction of the Temples.

Even body language, often said to tell volumes about a person, reflects the importance of Jerusalem to Jews as a people and, arguably, the lower priority the city holds for Muslims:

  • When Jews pray they face Jerusalem; in Jerusalem Israelis pray facing the Temple Mount.
  • When Muslims pray, they face Mecca; in Jerusalem Muslims pray with their backs to the city.
  • Even at burial, Muslims face toward Mecca.
  • Finally, consider the number of times Jerusalem is mentioned in the two religions' holy books:
  • The Old Testament mentions ‘Jerusalem’ 349 times. Zion, another name for ‘Jerusalem,’ is mentioned 108 times.
  • The Quran never mentions Jerusalem – not even once.

Even when others controlled Jerusalem, Jews maintained a physical presence in the city, despite being persecuted and impoverished. Before the advent of modern Zionism in the 1880s, Jews were moved by a form of religious Zionism to live in the Holy Land, settling particularly in four holy cities: Safed, Tiberias, Hebron, and most importantly – Jerusalem. Consequently, Jews constituted a majority of the city’s population for generations. 


In 1898, “In this City of the Jews, where the Jewish population outnumbers all others three to one …” Jews constituted 75 percent of the Old City population in what Secretary-General Kofi Annan called ‘East Jerusalem.’ In 1914, when the Ottoman Turks ruled the city, 45,000 Jews made up a majority of the 65,000 residents. And at the time of Israeli statehood in 1948, 100,000 Jews lived in the city, compared to only 65,000 Arabs. Prior to unification, Jordanian-controlled ‘East Jerusalem’ was a mere 6 square kilometers, compared to 38 square kilometers on the ‘Jewish side.’


Islam’s Tenuous Connection

Despite 1,300 years of Muslim Arab rule, Jerusalem was never the capital of an Arab entity, nor was it ever mentioned in the Palestine Liberation Organization’s covenant until Israel regained control of East Jerusalem in the Six-Day War of 1967.


Overall, the role of Jerusalem in Islam is best understood as the outcome of political exigencies impacting on religious belief.


Mohammed, who founded Islam in 622 CE, was born and raised in present-day Saudi Arabia; he never set foot in Jerusalem. His connection to the city came years after his death when the Dome of the Rock shrine and the al-Aqsa mosque were built in 688 and 691, respectively, their construction spurred by political and religious rivalries. In 638 CE, the Caliph (or successor to Mohammed) Omar and his invading armies captured Jerusalem from the Byzantine Empire. One reason they wanted to erect a holy structure in Jerusalem was to proclaim Islam’s supremacy over Christianity and its most important shrine, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.


More important was the power struggle within Islam itself. The Damascus-based Umayyad Caliphs who controlled Jerusalem wanted to establish an alternative holy site if their rivals blocked access to Mecca. That was important because the Hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca was (and remains today) one of the Five Pillars of Islam. As a result, they built what became known as the Dome of the Rock shrine and the adjacent mosque.


To enhance the prestige of the ‘substitute Mecca,’ the Jerusalem mosque was named al-Aqsa. It means ‘the furthest mosque’ in Arabic, but has far broader implications, since it is the same phrase used in a key passage of the Quran called “The Night Journey.” In that passage, Mohammed arrives at ‘al-Aqsa’ on a winged steed accompanied by the Archangel Gabriel; from there they ascend into heaven for a divine meeting with Allah, after which Mohammed returns to Mecca. Naming the Jerusalem mosque al-Aqsa was an attempt to say the Dome of the Rock was the very spot from which Mohammed ascended to heaven, thus tying Jerusalem to divine revelation in Islamic belief.


Jerusalem never replaced the importance of Mecca in the Islamic world. When the Umayyad dynasty fell in 750, Jerusalem also fell into near obscurity for 350 years, until the Crusades. During those centuries, many Islamic sites in Jerusalem fell into disrepair and in 1016 the Dome of the Rock collapsed. 


Still, for 1,300 years, various Islamic dynasties (Syrian, Egyptian, and Turkish) continued to govern Jerusalem as part of their overall control of the Land of Israel, disrupted only by the Crusaders. What is amazing is that over that period, not one Islamic dynasty ever made Jerusalem its capital. By the 19th century, Jerusalem had been so neglected by Islamic rulers that several prominent Western writers who visited Jerusalem were moved to write about it. French writer Gustav Flaubert, for example, found “ruins everywhere” during his visit in 1850 when it was part of the Turkish Empire (1516-1917). Seventeen years later Mark Twain wrote that Jerusalem had “become a pauper village.”


Indeed, Jerusalem’s importance in the Islamic world only appears evident when non-Muslims (including the Crusaders, the British, and the Jews) control or capture the city. Only at those points in history did Islamic leaders claim Jerusalem as their third most holy city after Mecca and Medina. That was again the case in 1967, when Israel captured Jordanian-controlled East Jerusalem (and the Old City) during the 1967 Six-Day War. Oddly, the PLO’s National Covenant, written in 1964, never mentioned Jerusalem. Only after Israel regained control of the entire city did the PLO updated its Covenant to include Jerusalem.


For 19 years, Jews and Christians residing in Israel (and even Israeli Muslims) were barred from their holy places, despite Jordan’s pledge to allow free access. Jews, for example, were unable to pray at the Western Wall; Christian Arabs living in Israel were denied access to churches and other religious sites in the Old City and nearby Bethlehem, also under Jordanian control During Jordan’s reign over eastern Jerusalem, its restrictive laws on Christian institutions led to a dramatic decline in the holy city’s Christian population by more than half – from 25,000 to 11,000, a pattern that characterized Christian Arabs in other Arab countries throughout the Middle East where religious freedom is not honored.


It was only after the Six-Day War that the Jewish Quarter was rebuilt and free access to holy places was reestablished. It is worth noting that after Jordan annexed the West Bank in the 1950s, it too failed to make Jerusalem – a city that Arabs now claim as ‘the third most holy site of Islam’ – its capital.


When Israel reunited Jerusalem after the 1967 Six-Day War, one of its first acts was to grant unprecedented freedom to all religions


Israel reunited Jerusalem as one city in 1967, after Jordan joined the Egyptian and Syrian war offensive and shelled the Jewish part of Jerusalem. Israeli leaders vowed the city would never again be divided.

Despite the disgraceful treatment of the Jewish Quarter and the Mount of Olives under the Jordanians and despite the Arabs’ violation of their pledges to make all holy sites accessible to Jews and Christians, one of the first acts Israel undertook after reuniting the city was to guarantee and safeguard the rights of all citizens of Jerusalem. This included not only free access to holy sites for all faiths but also represented an unprecedented act of religious tolerance. Israel granted Muslim and Christian religious authorities responsibility for managing their respective holy sites-– including Muslim administration of Judaism’s holiest site, the Temple Mount. Eventually, however, the Waqf, which holds administrative responsibility over the Temple Mount, violated the trust with which it was invested to respect and protect the holiness of the Temple Mount for both Muslims and Jews.


Jerusalem was never an Arab City

Arab leaders continue to insist that Jerusalem is an Arab city. That myth is used to implement a strategy to wrest partial control of Jerusalem from Israel and to make Jerusalem the capital of a Palestinian state. It is also part of a long-range strategy to destroy the Jewish state. This is one reason PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat rejected the unprecedented now-or-never Israeli proposal at peace talks in 2000 at Camp David. The proposal sought to solve the impasse over the status of Jerusalem by offering Arabs a share in the administration of parts of the city. Afterwards, Arafat revealed his real position in a post-summit statement that declared the PLO’s demand for sovereignty over Jerusalem included the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the he Temple Mount mosques, the Armenian Quarter, “and Jerusalem in its entirety, entirety, entirety.” 


The ‘Two Jerusalems’ Myth

Palestinians have nurtured a myth that historically there were two Jerusalems – an Arab ‘East Jerusalem’ and a Jewish ‘West Jerusalem.’


Jerusalem was never an Arab city; Jews have held a majority in Jerusalem since 1870, and ‘east-west’ is a geographic, not political designation. It is no different than claiming the Eastern shore of Maryland should be a separate political entity from the rest of that state.


In 1880, Jews constituted 52 percent of the Old City population in East Jerusalem and were still inhabiting 42 percent of the Old City in 1914. In 1948, there were 100,000 Jews in Jerusalem, with 60,000 Arabs. A joint Jordanian-Israeli census reported that 67.7 percent of the city’s population in 1961 was Jewish. A 1967 aerial photo reveals the truth about the area called ‘East Jerusalem’: it was no more than an overcrowded walled city with a few scattered neighborhoods surrounded by villages. Prior to unification, Jordanian-controlled East Jerusalem was a mere 6 square kilometers, compared to 38 square kilometers on the Jewish side.


Although uniting the city transformed all of Jerusalem into the largest city in Israel and a bustling metropolis, even moderate Palestinian leaders reject the idea of a united city. Their minimal demand for ‘just East Jerusalem’ really means the Jewish holy sites (including the Jewish Quarter and the Western Wall), which Arabs have failed to protect, and the return of neighborhoods that house a significant percentage of Jerusalem’s present-day Jewish population. Most of that city is built on rock-strewn empty land around the city that was in the public domain for the past 40 years. With an overall population of 591,400 today, separating East Jerusalem and West Jerusalem is as viable and acceptable as the notion of splitting Berlin into two cities again, or separating East Harlem from the rest of Manhattan.


Arab claims to Jerusalem, a Jewish city by all definitions, reflect the “what’s-mine-is-mine, what’s-yours-is-mine” mentality underlying Palestinian Arab concepts of how to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. That concept is also expressed in the demand for the ‘Right of Return,’ not just in Jerusalem - Israel’s capital, but ‘inside the Green Line.’


Arab Fantasies, Destroying History

Arabs deny the bond between Jews and Jerusalem; they sabotage and destroy archaeological evidence, even at the holiest place in Judaism – the Temple Mount.


Arabs continually denied the legitimacy of the Jewish people’s connection to Jerusalem. Arafat and other Arab leaders insisted that there never were Jewish temples on the Temple Mount. They also claim the Western Wall was really an Islamic holy site to which Muslims have historical rights. Putting rhetoric into action, Islamic clerics who manage the Temple Mount have demonstrated flagrant disrespect and contempt for the archaeological evidence of a Jewish presence.


Between 1999 and 2001, the Muslim Waqf removed and dumped more than 13,000 tons of what it termed rubble from the Mount and its substructure, including archaeological remains from the First and Second Temple periods, which Israelis found at dumping sites. During construction of a new underground mosque in a subterranean hall believed to date back to the time of Herod, and the paving of an ‘open air’ mosque elsewhere on the Temple Mount, the Waqf barred the Israel Antiquities Authority from supervising, or even observing, work. When archaeological finds from any period – Jewish or otherwise – are uncovered in the course of construction work, the Authority is mandated by law to supervise and observe everywhere in Israel – legislation that dates back to 1922 and documented in the international accord of the League of Nation’s - the “Mandate for Palestine.”


Such gross disregard for the pre-Islamic Jewish heritage of Jerusalem – particularly on Judaism’s holiest historic site - is a far more insidious form of the same Islamic intolerance that motivated the Taliban to demolish two gigantic pre-Islamic statues of Buddha carved into a cliff in Afghanistan.


The Holy Places and Jerusalem

Jerusalem, it seems, is at the physical center of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, two distinct issues exist: the issue of Jerusalem and the issue of the Holy Places. Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, a former judge ad hoc on the bench of the International Court of Justice and a renowned and respected scholar of international law at Cambridge University, has said:


"Not only are the two problems separate; they are also quite distinct in nature from one another. So far as the Holy Places are concerned, the question is for the most part one of assuring respect for the existing interests of the three religions and of providing the necessary guarantees of freedom of access, worship, and religious administration. Questions of this nature are only marginally an issue between Israel and her neighbors and their solution should not complicate the peace negotiations. As far as the City of Jerusalem itself is concerned, the question is one of establishing an effective administration of the City which can protect the rights of the various elements of its permanent population - Christian, Arab and Jewish - and ensure the governmental stability and physical security which are essential requirements for the city of the Holy Places.”


Internationalization of Jerusalem

Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht underscored in his investigation of the legal issues surrounding the status of Jerusalem and the Holy Places that the notion of internationalizing Jerusalem was not part of the original international mandate:


“Nothing was said in the Mandate about the internationalization of Jerusalem. Indeed Jerusalem as such is not mentioned, – though the Holy Places are. And this in itself is a fact of relevance now. For it shows that in 1922 there was no inclination to identify the question of the Holy Places with that of the internationalization of Jerusalem


Arab leaders, including Palestinians, have sought to justify their right to Jerusalem by distorting the meaning of United Nations resolutions that apply to the city. UN Resolution 181, for example, adopted by the General Assembly in 1947, recommended turning Jerusalem and its environs into an international city, or corpus separatum. However, Arab spokesmen conveniently ignore the fact that Resolution 181 was a non-binding recommendation.


Professor Julius Stone, one of the 20th century's best-known authorities in Jurisprudence and international law, notes that Resolution 181 “lacked binding force” from the outset, since it required acceptance by all parties concerned:

  • “While the State of Israel did for her part express willingness to accept it, the other states concerned both rejected it and took up arms unlawfully against it.”
  • Judge Lauterpacht wrote in 1968 about the new conditions that had arisen since 1948 with regard to the original thoughts of internationalization of Jerusalem:
  • “The Arab States rejected the Partition Plan and the proposal for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
  • “The Arab States physically opposed the implementation of the General Assembly Resolution. They sought by force of arms to expel the Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem and to achieve sole occupation of the City.
  • “In the event, Jordan obtained control only of the Eastern part of the City, including the Walled City.
  • “While Jordan permitted reasonably free access to Christian Holy Places, it denied the Jews any access to the Jewish Holy Places. This was a fundamental departure from the tradition of freedom of religious worship in the Holy Land, which had evolved over centuries. It was also a clear violation of the undertaking given by Jordan in the Armistice Agreement concluded with Israel on 3rd April, 1949. Article VIII of this Agreement called for the establishment of a Special Committee of Israeli and Jordanian representatives to formulate agreed plans on certain matters “which, in any case, shall include the following, on which agreement in principle already exists... free access to the Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the Cemetery on the Mount of Olives.
  • “The U.N. displayed no concern over the discrimination thus practiced against persons of the Jewish faith.
  • “The U.N. accepted as tolerable the unsupervised control of the Old City of Jerusalem by Jordanian forces - notwithstanding the fact that the presence of Jordanian forces west of the Jordan River was entirely lacking in any legal justification.
  • “During the period 1948-1952 the General Assembly gradually came to accept that the plan for the territorial internationalization of Jerusalem had been quite overtaken by events. From 1952 to the present time virtually nothing more has been heard of the idea in the General Assembly.
  • “On 5th June, 1967, Jordan deliberately overthrew the Armistice Agreement by attacking the Israeli-held part of Jerusalem. There was no question of this Jordanian action being a reaction to any Israeli attack. It took place notwithstanding explicit Israeli assurances, conveyed to King Hussein through the U.N. Commander, that if Jordan did not attack Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan. 
  • Although the charge of aggression is freely made against Israel in relation to the Six-Day War the fact remains that the two attempts made in the General Assembly in June-July 1967 to secure the condemnation of Israel as an aggressor failed. A clear and striking majority of the members of the U.N. voted against the proposition that Israel was an aggressor. Today, more than 55 years later, Israel has reunited Jerusalem and provided unrestricted freedom of religion. Access of all faiths to the Holy Places in the unified City of Peace is assured. Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpracht confirm this: “Moslems have enjoyed, under Israeli control, the very freedom which Jews were denied during Jordanian occupation.”


Lastly, it should be noted: If UN Resolution 181 was valid today (which it is not), then so is the provision in Part III-D that stipulates that after 10 years, the city’s international status could be subject to a referendum of all Jerusalemites regarding a change in the status of the city – a decision that today, as in the past, would have been made by the city’s decisive Jewish majority. 


The UN and Jerusalem

Both the General Assembly and the Security Council have limited influence on the future of Jerusalem.

Judge Sir Lauterpacht explained in 1968:


The General Assembly has no power of disposition over Jerusalem and no right to lay down regulations for the Holy Places. The Security Council, of course, retains its powers under Chapter VII of the Charter in relation to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, but these powers do not extend to the adoption of any general position regarding the future of Jerusalem and the Holy Places.”


Originally, internationalization of Jerusalem was part of a much broader proposal that the Arab states rejected – both at the UN and ‘on the ground,’ by:


a rejection underlined by armed invasion of Palestine by the forces of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia … aimed at destroying Israel.”


The outcome of consistent Arab aggression was best described by Professor, Judge Schwebel:


“As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.” [italics by author]


Arab leaders point to UN Resolution 242 as a basis for their claim to Jerusalem.

Resolution 242 was adopted after the 1967 War, when Israel captured territory from Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, after they attacked Israel. However, the resolution never mentions Jerusalem, nor does UN Resolution 242 call for a full withdrawal from territory captured but merely a withdrawal to “secure and recognized boundaries” that are to be negotiated by the parties concerned. Arab Palestinians were not a party to the resolution.


Arthur Goldberg, the former U.S. Ambassador to the UN (in 1967) who helped draft the resolution, testified in regard to the omission of Jerusalem from Resolution 242:


"I never described Jerusalem as occupied territory. Resolution 242 in no way refers to Jerusalem and this omission was deliberate.”


In conclusion of the role the UN and international law may play in determining the future of Jerusalem, one may again quote Judge Lauterpacht:


“(i) Israel's governmental measures in relation to Jerusalem - both New and Old - are lawful and valid.

“(ii) The future regulation of the Holy Places is a matter to be determined quite separately from the political administration of Jerusalem. Territorial internationalization of Jerusalem is dead - but the possibility of functional internationalization is not. The latter means, in effect, the recognition of the universal interest in the Holy Places situated in Jerusalem and the adoption of links between Israel and the world community to give formal expression to that interest.”


Palestinian Terror in the City of Peace

Palestinian Arabs have concentrated many of their terrorist attacks on Jews in Jerusalem, hoping to win the city by an onslaught of suicide bombers who will make life in the City of Peace unbearable. But this is not a new tactic. Arab strategy to turn Jerusalem into a battleground began in 1920.


Unfortunately, Arab leaders often turn to violence to gain what they were unable to achieve at the negotiating table. When talks broke down at Camp David in 2000, Palestinian Arab leaders unleashed the al-Aqsa Intifada, which has amounted to a full-blown guerrilla war against Israel.


It began the day before Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, when Arab mobs hurled rocks from the Temple Mount onto Jewish worshipers praying at the Western Wall below. That rock attack turned into a steady campaign of terrorist attacks. As the priming powder for the Intifada, Palestinian leaders incited Palestinians and Muslims throughout the world with fables that falsely suggested that Jews began an assault on al-Aqsa when Ariel Sharon made a half-hour visit to the Temple Mount during tourist hours. The truth is that Palestinians’ plans for warfare had begun immediately after Arafat walked out of the Camp David talks.


Why do Palestinians focus terrorist attacks on the City of Peace? Because: Palestinians despite their rhetoric fully understand Jerusalem’s symbolic and spiritual significance to Jews.


Suicide attacks - on public buses and cafes, malls, and other crowded sites in the heart of the city - since the 1993 Oslo Accords are designed to make life hell for Jewish Jerusalemites. Atrocities like the February and March 1996 bombings of two #18 buses that killed 26 people and the August 2001 bombing of a Sbarro pizzeria that killed 15 (including five members of one family), are part of an ongoing 120-year-old battle for Jerusalem that Arabs have waged in opposition to Zionism.


In April 1920, a three-day rampage by religiously incited anti-Zionist Arab mobs left six dead and 200 injured in the Jewish Quarter. The attackers gutted synagogues and yeshivot and ransacked homes. Arabs planted time bombs in public places as far back as February 1947, when they blasted Ben-Yehuda Street, Jerusalem’s main thoroughfare, leaving 50 dead.


This was all done before the establishment of the State of Israel. In the 1950s, Jordanians periodically shot at Jewish neighborhoods from the walls of the Old City. And after the city was united in 1967, Arabs renewed their battle for the city by planting bombs in cinemas and supermarkets. The first terrorist attack in that renewed battle came with the 1968 bombing of Jerusalem’s Machane Yehuda, the open market that left 12 dead.


The plain facts about Palestinian Arab behavior clearly demonstrates that they have forfeited any claims – historical, religious or political – to the City of Peace.



Shalom Pollack: A Locker Room Lesson

 

I just returned from the sports center in Kibbutz Ramat Rachel near my house where

I have been a member since I moved to the Arnona neighborhood in 2006.

Like the city and the country in general I have been noticing a demographic and with it, a social-cultural change.

In a way, the sports club is a  reflection of a greater phenomenon.


Like everywhere you look today, Jews are increasingly afraid of Arabs. This kibbutz club is the perfect example. The kibbutz itself was the guardian of the southern boundary of Jerusalem and paid a dear price in that role over the years.

They bravely persevered and the Arabs understood that they lost and acted accordingly.

But that was a long time ago.

When I first joined the club I don't recall seeing Arabs using the facilities.

With time that changed.  First, there were a few families who came mostly in the summer or perhaps on Friday. There was no problem.

There were a few elderly men who I saw often. Again, no problem.

Eventually, almost overnight, one began to see many more and hear them loud and clear raising their voices in their own language. They were very comfortable.

On the surface, there should be no problem. What is wrong with multiculturalism? Ask any Liberal Jew anywhere. it simply  makes them "kvell"(as long as it is not felt where they actually live .)


The blue-collar staff are all Arabs and they are usually friendly. I ask myself if it would totally surprise their employers if one of them had a bad day and needed to kill some Jews as happens so often in similar circumstances.


Back to the guests.

I have noticed the same process of  Arabs feeling no longer like guests who need to mind their behavior. One feels it in their behavior and the atmosphere it creates.

Today  I was involved in an incident that is certainly the first-time event there and a significant milestone in the club.


My locker room neighbor was dealing with an unusual situation.

A few Arabs placed their bags on the bench in front of the small lockers lined up with one on the other.

In short, there was no room and he asked them to put their bags on top of the lockers so as to allow access to his locker. Just simple physics and neighborly requests. No doubt that in the past the Arabs would immediately and apologetically comply. Not today. The fact that there were a few of them certainly emboldened the young (loud) men as they puffed up their chests.  My neighbor did not want a confrontation. I noticed how he requested and then was frustrated when they told him that they have a right to put their bags where they want. It heated up. Voices were raised. He told them not to raise their voices at him. More of them appeared and the air was pregnant with expectation and hostile energy.


Suddenly a very big one appeared and in a booming voice with eyes of hate bulging out of his sockets he demanded threateningly that my neighbor not yell. It was clear to me that they were going to show the Jews.

Not surprisingly my neighbor stood alone.

No other Jew in the locker room dared show his face at the scene. I noticed how some quietly slinked away exiting the place as fast as possible.

I was ashamed and outraged at our people. I never blame the Arabs for pushing the envelope. It's us who send them the wrong messages. It is not a new story but it was unfolding before my eyes.


I joined my neighbor in the yelling match. We both knew Arabic and I think that won some points with the mob.

Had this taken place in an isolated area we would likely have been another statistic.

Aware of where they were, they agreed to back off - for now.

I said in Arabic for all to hear, "Damascus gate has arrived in Ramat Rachel. It's a new world"!


One of the Arab workers showed up to see what was happening. I could see that  he was torn between the job he wanted and his shared feelings with the "shabab"  (mob of young people)


. Outside the locker room, one of the managers wanted to hear from me what happened.

I told her and added that this is a familiar process. It is the first time I have witnessed this crucial stage of the process in Ramat Rachel, that she should not be surprised and not continue to shove reality under the rug. I told her that this is not Switzerland. We both know the culture here and how things develop. I told her I know the Arab guests bring in a lot of money and you are proud of your tolerant position but it is not going to end well.

She smiled and asked me to report this to the general manager on Sunday.


shalompollack613@gmail.com


"Jews, Israelis  and Arabs"

Read it


29 May 2022

Medical Tyranny Versus Authentic Torah – Part One

 

Medical Tyranny Versus Authentic Torah – Part One


There is no shortage of treasonous “rabbis” and Trojan-horse “Jewish organizations” that spread misinformation about the Torah to justify whatever the Amalekites promote – perverse “lifestyles”, murdering unborn children, you name it. Thanks to an education system that fails to teach the fundamentals of Judaism and encourage independent thought, the average Jew is overwhelmed by the “authority” behind this misinformation, despite its lack of substance. The average gentile, of course, cannot be expected to discern the true Torah perspective when those who distort the Torah are numerous, well-funded, and backed by the establishment.


We can sit back and lament the situation, or we can do something about it. I choose the latter.


Not surprisingly, the Amalekites are continuing their push to take over the world under the guise of “public health”. They intend for the corrupt, genocidal front known as the World Health Organization – a cynical name if ever there was one – to conquer the world without firing a shot.


It is critical to strengthen our understanding of the Torah's actual position on “health experts” and “public health”, and to loudly proclaim it to all who care to know it. Fortunately, one does not need to be a Torah scholar – or even a Jew – to discern the truth when both sides are presented.


The other side has nothing.

Chazal teach us that for a lie to take hold it needs to be built on a kernel of truth (Rashi on Bamidbar 13:27, based on Sotah 35A). The Erev Rav who serve the Amalekites build elaborate lies on a kernel of Torah to justify positions that are entirely contrary to the Torah.


According to the Torah, doctors play a role in society, and there are cases in which their assessment of a patient determines the proper course of action according to Jewish law. There is also a concept of an expert doctor, whose opinion carries greater weight. In addition, protecting one's health and saving the lives of others override many (not all) considerations.


On the basis of this, the Amalekites and their rabbinic lackeys claim that we must allow “health authorities” to control literally every aspect of our lives. Hence, without any context or examination of actual Torah sources that define and outline the parameters of these teachings, they declare that “Doctor's orders” is no longer just a witty rejoinder, but a rubber stamp for anything the Amalekites have up their sleeve.


The Ibn Ezra on Tehillim 32:10 succinctly outlines the Torah's actual position on the role of doctors in society: “...And know that the Scripture did not permit one to receive medical treatment except for man-made injuries, for Hashem alone is the Healer of Israel…


Obviously the subject of when and to what extent one should seek medical treatment is complex, with a corresponding wealth of Torah sources to guide us. Generally speaking, however, the Torah favors a minimalist approach to medical treatment. The role of a doctor is limited to treating injuries, assisting the body to recover from illness (as doctors cannot cure anything), and advising people on healthy living. The Torah is consistent about this; the rest is commentary.


The role of a doctor is not to conduct medical experiments, serve the interests of pharmaceutical companies, perform medical treatments on healthy people, or impose rules on anyone – let alone all of society – to prevent people from contracting an illness. They cannot hold patients hostage in medical facilities against their will or prevent people from visiting them. They cannot force people to take medical treatments (except in extremely limited circumstances, which do not apply to the present situation), and certainly have no authority over healthy people, ever.

For that matter, doctors have no authority over anyone, ever, unless it is given to them by the individual or his immediate proxy. According to the Torah, the government has no right to impose medical treatments or dictates of any kind on the population, regardless of what any number of doctors believe is necessary. Doctors have no right to force anyone to stay at home, even during a plague.

The Torah rarely allows even criminals to be imprisoned; fear of illness is not a jailable offense for the healthy or the sick.


The Amalekites and their rabbinic lackeys turn the Torah completely on its head. They claim that doctors and “health authorities” should be maximally invasive on all people, all the time. They should not only control the treatments that are available to sick people, and even be forced upon them, but they should force medical procedures on healthy people as well. This begins from the moment of birth and continues unabated through childhood and adulthood.


Doctors should also be the determinants of when someone's life is not worthy of continuing, and should be terminated through wilful disregard or actively snuffing it out. Josef Mengele – himself an Amalekite doctor – waved people to the right or left based on similar considerations. He seems to be the role model for “public health policy” today.


Doctors today are judge, jury, and executioner for people who have done no crime and come to them seeking help. According to Amalek, this is exactly the way it should be. According to Amalek, this is merciful.


There is no basis for this in the Torah. There is only a kernel of truth: doctors' opinions carry weight in determining the proper treatment for an individual patient some of the time, and saving lives is extremely important. That's it. One does not need to be a Torah scholar to discern the truth from the exaggerations and distortions of the Erev Rav.


It is high time doctors are put back in their rightful, extremely limited place – and the Amalekites in theirs.


(For more on these topics, see Public Safety in the Torah, Medical Intervention in the Torah Part 1, Modern Medicine is Idolatrous, and Two Rabbinic Distortions – Part One.)

__________________________

chananyaweissman.com/

rumble.com/c/c-782463

If you received this from someone else and want to receive future articles directly, please send a request to endthemadness@gmail.com.

*   *   *


We've been browbeaten with the term “safe and effective” for so long, I decided to finally look it up and compare what normal people think this means with what the drug-pushers actually mean when they use it. After all, they thrive by playing word games. The same people who can't tell you what a woman is shouldn't be trusted to tell you that something is safe and effective.


What normal people think “safe” means: “It won't harm me, and I shouldn't hesitate to take it.”


What normal people think “effective” means: “It will benefit me in a specific way.”

What they mean: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?FR=860.7


Essentially, “safe” means: “Someone decides based on woefully inconclusive, variable, unreliable “evidence” that the product will “probably” cause more benefit than harm.”


“Effective” means: “Someone decides based on woefully inconclusive, variable, unreliable “evidence” that a “significant” number of people will achieve “clinically significant results” (whatever THAT means).”


Short summary of all the mumbo jumbo: There is very little reason for you to feel confident that a product advertised as “safe and effective” will not harm you or will benefit you. They are largely winging it, and made sure to leave themselves lots of wiggle room to prevent you from pinning them down.

Rabbi Kahana: Parashat Aikev

  BS”D  Historic Patterns of the 15th of Av by  Rabbi Nachman Kahana  |  Aug 17, 2022 The 15th of the month of Menachem Av (which was last F...