Friday, January 21, 2011

Letter to Pastors

January 21, 2011

Dear Douglass:

You questions concerning Allen Dulles, Jack Philby, Ibn Saud, Joe Kennedy, Henry Ford, Charles Lindberg will have to wait for another email. What I can and will say here is that Terman intelligence also mounted code-breaking operations against Allen Dulles where he had asked Wartime OSS Commander Donovan to transfer him under the cover of Luftfahrforschungsamt, the radio and telegraph research institute of the Nazi Air Force. The German records were captured at the end of the war, added to the Dulles file, but, as far as I knew in the late 1980s, those records have never been released to the public.

However, bear with me, and let us presently turn our attention outwardly, as Lebanon sinks deeper into crisis, to Hizballah's Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah as he projects a strong façade and nerves of steel to show his following and his foes that he is in full control and undeterred from action to undo the Special Lebanon Tribunal's indictment of his top officials for the 2005 Hariri assassination.

If he can't overthrow the caretaker Prime Minister Saad Hariri and install a Hizballah-led government for declaring the SLT's indictments null and void, he will seize control of Beirut.

But the pugnacious Hizballah leader's repeated shows of strength are beginning to be countered by setbacks.
Cracks are showing in his mask of self-confidence and his hand has been held back from further moves by two fresh blows, which were reported by intelligence sources:
1. In the small hours of Tuesday night, Jan. 18, at 3:00 a.m., Syrian President Bashar Assad abruptly summoned the Lebanese Chief of Staff Gen. Jean Qahwaji to Damascus for an extremely urgent nocturnal interview.
When he arrived, the Lebanese general was surprised to find Assad flanked by Syrian defense minister Ali Habib and Syrian chief of staff Gen. Dawoud Rahja, indicating the supreme importance the Syrian ruler attached to the interview.
Mid East sources can disclose here the two key guidelines Assad handed the Lebanese chief of staff:
"We have no interest in abandoning Saad Hariri and yourself or any desire to see Hizballah victorious and in control of Lebanon" – was one, and: "'This very night I am sending a message to Michel Aoun (Hassan Nasrallah's Christian ally) not to overdo his backing and momentum for Nasrallah's moves so as not to help him gather himself to seize power in Beirut by force."
This sudden withdrawal of Bashar Assad's longtime patronage and protection bit deep into Nasrallah's self-esteem.

2. Nasrallah had begun to pick up rumblings in Intelligence quarters suggesting that Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would have no compunctions about having him assassinated if he failed to counteract the investigative work of the International Lebanon Tribunal, the STL.
The prosecution is believed to have concluded that the high Hizballah security and intelligence officials complicit in the murder of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri were acting on orders coming down directly from Ayatollah Khamenei.
When he received word of Assad's betrayal and sudden switch in favor of his arch foe Hariri, Nasrallah aborted his ultimate power move, which was on the point of going forward Wednesday in Beirut.
The crumbling of his normally authoritative manner stunned the Hizballah fighting units standing ready to undertake Step Two of his master-plan for capturing the capital.

Step One had just been successfully accomplished, as described by our military sources:

Early Tuesday, January 18, the Hizballah leader proved that together with Lebanon's second Shiite movement, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri's Amal, he commanded the strength to seize control of the capital. He did this by placing thousands of militiamen, unarmed but clad in black uniforms, in positions in seven Beirut districts. By the time the first Lebanese army units reached the streets, the city's traffic was gridlocked and several schools and government institutions unable to open their doors.
That night, the Shiite loyalists were ordered to withdraw to barracks as high-ranking Hizballah sources declared confidently: "The time for talking is over, it is time for action now. The other camp wants confrontation, so be it."

Another official boasted how Hizballah and Amal personnel were able to capture several Beirut neighborhoods without weapons. "This action told foreign interests (the US and Israel) as well as the country that the Shiites were about to raise the stakes in Beirut," he said.
Middle East's military sources report that this exercise was a practice run-through for units trained in recent months to take over central Beirut, its main traffic hubs and government offices and to demonstrate its feasibility. They showed that Shiite forces could move at lightening speed to take over government installations before being stopped by the Lebanese military.

Events 48 hours later showed that the last word may not have been with the Hizballah leader.

But, building on the success of Step One, Nasrallah was meanwhile approaching Step Two, which was timed for Wednesday night, January 19.
Hizballah's militiamen were to lay siege to all the UN offices in Beirut and their 1,000 UN workers, including the UN Economic and Social Commissioner for Western Asia –ESCWA; the UN Special Envoy to Lebanon Michael Williams; the UN Commissioner for Refugees in Lebanon - UNRWA and the logistical facilities of UNIFIL peacekeepers.

In the south, Hizballah forces were instructed to surround UNIFIL patrols with armed fighters and pin them down.

The object of Nasrallah's Step Two was to show UN Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon who runs the show for the world body in Beirut and blackmail him into negotiating with Hizballah changes in the international Lebanon Tribunal's procedures and powers. At the last minute, the Hizballah leader called this desperate venture off. He had received word that the night before, Assad had pulled the rug from under his feet and he no longer enjoyed Syrian protection.

The next day, Thursday, Jan. 20, he found the Lebanese army suddenly willing to stand up to Hizballah's superior strength. That afternoon, special military measures were set in place for guarding Prime Minister Saad Hariri and warding off Hizballah's takeover of Beirut's centers of government and traffic hubs. Military units accompanied by tanks placed concrete blocks at the main city intersections and moved in to man them.

A Lebanese military official commented that these measures were prompted by "concerns over movements on the ground by some parties."

Clearly, the Lebanese chief of staff Gen. Qahwaji had taken aboard the guidelines he had received from Assad at their nocturnal meeting in Damascus. This gave Hizballah's leader pause.

The international tribunal was not standing idle either, having been kept abreast of the turbulent events in Beirut through UN and Western intelligence informants. Its action aimed to deter Hizballah from its bid to deepen the crisis in Beirut by demonstrating that nothing Nasrallah did could impede the course of international justice.

Tuesday, the STL registrar Herman von Hebel confirmed a recent forecast on Dec. 24, 2010 that Hizballah officials refusing to appear before court faced trial in abstentia.

Von Hebel said that "September/October, if things go well, we may see the start of the trial… with or without an accused." He said the pre-trial judge was keen to expedite proceedings now that the chief prosecutor had submitted his findings.

Directing a barbed warning at Hizballah, Von Hebel added: "The tribunal's budget of 65.7 million dollars (49.4 million euros) for 2011 should not be affected by the collapse of the Lebanese government… The obligation is for the state, not a government."

This comment told Hizballah that even if it overthrows the government in Beirut, the court will hold the state of Lebanon responsible for obeying its decrees. What this means is that flouting the tribunal would lay Lebanon open to UN Security Council sanctions.

Iranian sources report that even that warning concerned Hassan Nasrallah less than anxiety for his personal security that had increased after it dawned on him that Iranian intelligence assassins might be gunning for him.

On the day the Hizballah leader made his moves on the Lebanese chess board and was countered by the STL, a voice from Paris confirmed his worst fears.

In certain circumstances, Ayatollah Khamenei may well order the Hizballah leader's assassination, said Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of Shiite revolutionary Iran (1980-1981), and its founder Ruhollah Khomeini's right-hand man.

The veteran revolutionary, who lives in a villa in the Paris suburbs under close guard by French security, wrote those ominous words Tuesday in the journal Jomhuri-e Eslami .

If in the course of the STL proceedings, supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei's involvement in the Hariri murder comes to light, he is capable of having Nasrallah liquidated, according to Bani-Sadr, who appears to have good access to the French intelligence sources monitoring the ties between Tehran and Hizballah.That estimate was backed up on the same day by US intelligence sources, who reported the suspicion that Rafiq Hariri was indeed murdered on the personal orders of Ayatollah Khamenei.

This report made waves in all the Arab media, especially in the Persian Gulf, and caused a major upset in Tehran.

If the prosecution proves that Iran's supreme leader ordered Hizballah security chiefs headed by his close confidant, the late Imad Moughniyeh, to murder Rafiq Hariri, Khamenei could find himself convicted of murder by an international court. (Moughniyeh, a professional assassin among his other talents, was murdered in Damascus in February 2008.)

Bani-Sadr is of the opinion that Khamenei may be moved to liquidate Nasrallah in order to snap the chain of evidence against him, bring the international investigation to a dead end without culprits and save the Islamic Republic of Iran from becoming embroiled in an outrage that the world would not tolerate.
Although Khamenei has issued many assassination orders, this one would be to save his own skin.

Conscious of his peril, Hizballah's leader is reported by intelligence and counterterrorism sources to have instructed his intelligence and security experts to look into the possibility of knocking off the President of the Special Lebanon Tribunal, the Italian jurist Prof. Antonio Cassese (the first President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia), and the Canadian Chief Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare who is responsible for the indictments.

This option is also under still-friendly discussion between Hizballah's "wet operations" pros and their counterparts in Tehran.

Motives Douglass, in the above paragraphs are easily seen. Motive for Allen Dulles getting himself assigned by OSS to Switzerland was simple. Dulles could not move his clients’ money from the United States Because FDR had frozen all Swiss Bank Accounts on the ground that they contained disguised Nazi Assets. Dulles had to go to Switzerland if he wanted to control the pruse strings of those Nazi businessmen he had connnections through Jack Philby and Ibn Saud to. The foxes were guarding the henhouses, but Roosevelt’s "wolves" were waiting in the dark, and watching. Thats all WW Two.

What is above in the paragraphs about Lebanon and Iran is present-day —THIS WEEK! Douglass, we need keep our ears glued to soundpieces and our eyes watching. Events just might pour out in Lebanon against Northern Israel very soon. I don’t know. But, I am watching.


Wednesday, January 19, 2011


January 19, 2011

Dear Pastors:

At 2:15 this morning unbearable pain drove this ole aching body from the bed, so I have been up now for 2 hours and 45 minutes working on the "Booklet" we are to produce of "Lessons from Football about Combat" and then give to IDF soldiers who view our American Football Demonstrations next month in Israel.

One of those lessons has to do with the Village of Hanita in North Western Israel and the very famous battle which took place there back in 1938 on the night of March 21st. That Battle will be included in the booklet.

However, my letter to you today only includes some of the history about Hanita. I do hope that I will be privileged to take those Deaf Football Players to Hanita and let them learn something about this famous battle.

Today is the Birth Day of our Second Son, Lorne Matthew Vineyard, who went home to be With the Lord when he was 3-1/2 years old back on July 18th, 1967. Lorne was escorted by Angels through the realm above the earth by angels after dying during a simple tonsillectomy. His death allowed his father to become a Funeral Preacher, and as I wrote recently, the Lord has allowed, with the funeral of my wife’s mother, this ole preacher to preach 1270 funerals, if my count is correct.

With all that the Jews of the World are going through in the rise of "anti-Semitism" this story of the settlement of Hanita is a good story. Tomorrow, the Lord Willing, I shall tell you of the Battle that went on that night back in March 1938 at Hanita.


When we read the history of the present-day nation of Israel, it is always a pleasure to read of the heroism of the pre-WWII settlers of that Nation. In 1938 the Jewish National Fund, at David Ben Gurion's direction, which was seeking to re-settle Jews into their Everlastingly Covenant Land, acquired several hundred dunams of land in that north western corner of what is called "upper Galilee," flush up beside the border of Lebanon. The JNF notified the British Administration which at that time had the Mandate for control of Palestine of its intention to establish an agricultural colony on the newly purchased territory. As a history buff, stories like the story of Hanita really appeals to me.

Today Hanita is a kibbutz in northern Israel. Located in western Galilee approximately 15 kilometers northeast of Nahariya, it falls under the jurisdiction of Mateh Asher Regional Council. In 2006, it had a population of 447.

Back in the time of the 12 tribes of Israel, the area northeast of present-day Nahariya fell under the tribe of Asher. That area is rich in Bible History as well. In Bible days, that area was one of the most densely settled and most flourishing agricultural areas in all of Palestine, but, with the blessings of G-d Almighty taken away, it had become a howling wilderness of rock and treeless solitude.

And, then, in character with their "attitudes" toward the Jews from the Balfour Declaration time of 1917 onwards for the next 21 years, the High Commissioner, Sir Harold Mac Michael, based his veto on the argument that colonists taking up residence in so remove and isolated district would present a "constant temptation to Bedouin raiders," both from across, but also from inside the borders of Palestine.

The nearest Jewish habitations were in eastern Galilee, too far for their settlers to come to the aid of an establishment in western Galilee in the event of Bedouin danger or attack. If the Jews, the High Commissioner intimated, instead of starting the extreme northern wilds of Galilee, would establish colonies in the south of that province and then gradually push northward establishing colonies chain wise or rather like steppingstones in the direction of the frontier, something might perhaps be said for the reclamation of Galilee.

But, Mr. Mac Michael said, " establish the first settlement at the extreme limit of Palestinian territory, in a godforsaken "sort of no man’s land," was "too hazardous an enterprise" for which he, Sir Harold, would not assume responsibility.

The directors of the Jewish Agency replied that they would be glad enough to establish an entire chain of colonies, but that the administration’s land-buying regulations had so far precluded the purchase of sites that might serve as steppingstones on the road to the north.

They must, therefore, start where they could—that is, on the spot which had just recently become the property of the Jewish people. Sir Harold proved adamant. His interpretation of the mandate which had charged Britain with facilitating "the close settlement of Jews on the land" worked out in practice in placing, by order of the government of Great Britain, of course, as many "obstacles" in the way of the purchase of land by Jews as possible and after that, if the Jews still were to succeed in getting hold of a plot of barren, rocky, desert land on which no human being in his right senses would live, in discouraging them from the settling of it.

Only the Jews would not take "no" for an answer. They could not abide by the High Commissioner’s decision. In withholding his official fiat, the High Commissioner may well have been carrying out his duty in that they acted in the spirit of these restrictive measures designed against and imposed upon Jewish Palestine by a narrow-minded, anti-Jewish bureaucracy in the sole interests, not of the British Empire, but of a handful of feudalist Arab landowners.

The Palestinian Jews, on the other hand, could not do otherwise than what they did at that time. They insisted again and again that the High Commissioner’s decision be revoked and that the colony be opened up—that particular colony and others, always more colonies and settlements "by hook or by crook."

For the Palestinian Jews felt behind their backs the ever-growing anguish and desperate pressure of the homeless and hopeless Jewish masses in Europe still seeking "a way out" of what had become to millions of them "a gruesome death trap" or a living hell after Hitler’s advent to power.

After months of wearisome palaver, pleading and insisting on the one side, haggling and quibbling on the other, with references to the Colonial Office in London going to and fro, the High Commissioner finally, reluctantly, gave in.

The Jews were permitted to establish the colony on their own land in their own country. They could go out there to that desolate spot in Galilee if they wanted to, but they must not blame the administration if "Bedouin disaster" should overtake them on the pioneer trail.

"Mi yivne ha-Galil? Who will build Galilee?" the young Jews sang that night all over Palestine, when the government’s decision became known. "El yivne ha-Galil! God will build Galilee!" came the answering chorus.

The tract of four thousand dunams had been thoroughly explored and surveyed in the meantime. It would provide a living for eighty families, or five hundred souls, if they could engage in mixed farming, sheep raising and poultry breeding, with tobacco the chief crop. All this had been settled by the agronomical experts who had examined the land.

One third of the area was to be used for pasturage, and one of the first tasks of the settlers would be the planting of a forest of eucalyptus trees, for deforestation and consequent soil erosion constituted one of the worst blights of the Holy Land.

The candidates to take up the work were in readiness, too. The occupation group consisted of ninety young people, eighty men and ten women. They were to proceed ahead of the bulk of the settlers and make the place fit for habitation. The pioneers had been carefully selected from many localities with reference to their fitness and courage for occupying a new tract in a frontier region where only recently "fierce battles" had raged between government forces [Ord Wingate’s boys] and Arab bands.

The occupation [March 21, 1938,] took place in what then became in later years the usual form for establishing new settlements in Palestine: the colony was completed in all essentials between sunrise and sunset in one single day. The danger from their Ishmaelite throat-slitting enemies necessitated this "sunrise to sunset" time frame.

Back at the foot of {Bible} Mount Carmel [oh, so much rich Biblical history is there,] the preliminary preparations were made in the workers quarters in Emek Zebulon.

Let Me give you a story from Emek Zebulon from July of 1938:

On the afternoon of 11 July 1938 Lily Tobias (née Shepherd, 1887-1984), from a Yiddish-speaking immigrant family in the Swansea valley, was at home in Mount Carmel putting the final touches to her novel The Samaritans. An aunt of the future famous Welsh-Jewish poet Dannie Abse and his flamboyant politician brother Leo, she was already a published writer. Her The Nationalists, and other Goluth Studies, a book of short stories, had appeared in 1921; her novel In My Mother’s House, which tells of a Welsh-born Jew who rejects, and then reclaims, his heritage, in 1931; her anti-war novel Eunice Fleet, about a conscientious objector, in 1933; and The Tube in 1935.

Lily had made aliyah in 1935, the year before the eruption of Arab disturbances in Palestine, with her husband Philip Vallentine Tobias, who was originally from South Africa, and her widowed father, a retired furniture dealer from Poland. Philip Tobias, who had been active in the Cardiff Jewish community before moving with Lily to London, where he was a founder and leading member of the Finchley Hebrew Congregation, ran a glass company in Palestine.

And on that afternoon, as Lily was at work on her latest novel’s closing chapter, he was alone in his car en route to Haifa.

Philip knew that Palestine was in the grip of what an official report covering 1937 termed "a campaign of murder, intimidation, and sabotage conducted by Arab law breakers", a "terrorist campaign" which entailed "isolated murder and attempted murder; of sporadic cases of armed attacks on military, police and civilian road transport; on Jewish settlements and on both Arab and Jewish private property". He knew of such violent incidents as an assassination attempt on the Mayor of Haifa and another in Jerusalem on the Inspector-General of Police; of the brutal murders near and in Beisan of a young Jewish agriculturalist and a Jewish doctor; of the slaughter by marauding livestock-stealers of five Jewish shepherds in hill country to the south of Lake Tiberias, and of two others near Nazareth; of an unsuccessful attack on a crowded passanger train on the Lydda-Haifa line; of a series of attacks on Jews’ vehicles on the Jerusalem-Jaffa road in which one Jewish passenger lost his life. And so forth.

Nevertheless, alone on that drive, Philip Tobias had no firearm or other weapon. He seems to have been confident that, going about his lawful business in British-administered Palestine in broad daylight, he would personally encounter no danger. The assumption proved deadly. For, all of a sudden, in Haifa, his car was surrounded by a 30-strong mob of young Arab men in their teens and early twenties. They dragged Tobias from his car and stoned and stabbed him to death. According to a pressman, who accordingly described "the circumstances" of the murder as "intolerable", the killing of Philip Tobias "it is reliably reported", took place in plain view of "a British police patrol led by an officer who witnessed the whole outrage but did not go to the rescue".

By an eerie coincidence, the book on which Lily was working when her husband met his end in cold blood was on a similar theme. Published the following year, The Samaritans proved to be her final book, although she continued to write articles for Jewish papers and to lecture on Israel and literary matters.

Tobias was the second British civilian killed in Palestine that year (the first was J. L. Starkey, director of the Marston-Welcome Archeological Expedition to the Near East, murdered by Arabs on the evening of 10 January, when he was on his way from his camp at Tell Duweir to Jerusalem) and the first British Jew slain during Arab disturbances in Palestine since the murder of Levi Billig in 1936. Billig, born in London’s Whitechapel in 1897 to a cigar/cigarette maker and his wife, both from Russia, was a Cambridge graduate who in 1926 had been appointed Lecturer in Arabic Language and Literature at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He was at home at his desk working on a book based on his recent research, in Persia, into early Sh’ite texts, when an Arab gunman opened fire through the window and killed him. Ironically, Billig was an advocate of Jewish-Arab reconciliation. His An Arabic Reader (1931, reprinted 1963) remains a highly regarded introductory text. (Coincidentally, his co-compiler of that work, Avinoam Yellin MBE, of the Palestine Ministry of Education, was also a victim of Arab violence; shot near his Jerusalem office on 21 October 1937, he succumbed to his wounds two days later.)

The murder of Philip Tobias was symptomatic of a crisis that had gripped Haifa since the opening days of the month; in a report filed 15 July the Jewish Chronicle’s stringer wrote of the eruption nine days earlier of what was "the complete usurpation of authority by unruly elements and the virtual handing over to what amounts to mob rule in the Eastern Quarter, main artery to the Hospital and industrial zones of Haifa and principal lines of communication between Emek Zebulon and Emek Jezreel". Noting that the authorities seemed "powerless in spite of increased forces at their disposal" and that police and marines landed from HMS Repulse seemed oddly inert in the face of Arab hooliganism, he continued:
"What is most surprising about this situation is that the numerous outrages day after day happen at almost the same hour and the same places, so much so, that the Haifa correspondent of a Palestinian newspaper for some days on end ordered a taxi at the same time to go the rounds and ascertain what was happening! On one occasion he helped to take an injured Jewish passer-by to hospital, having arrived on the scene within a couple of minutes of the assault. It seems strange, to say the least, that the authorities could not have been as far-sighted and placed heavier patrols in that area to break up the mobs and hooligans. Today’s issue of Davar, the Hebrew Labour daily of Tel-Aviv, declared that the continuing lawlessness in Haifa represented a riddle. There were hundreds of troops, marines, and supernumerary constables available, yet in a busy street, within a few yards of the Central Police Station, a man was battered to death in broad daylight; shots were fired and bombs thrown at vehicles; knives were thrust into the backs of passersby; shops were looted, and houses set on fire."
And then, let me give you a further bit of History about Hania:
Hanita was an ancient Jewish settlement, situated in the land belonging to the tribe of Asher. The name is mentioned in the Talmud, in the 2nd - 3rd century, in the description of the Jewish settlements on the northern border. The source of the name is "Hanaya", an encampment, a place of rest for travelers going between the plains of Lebanon and the ports of Achziv and Acre.

In those days, The purpose of the settlements was to guard the passes from the mountains to the fertile valley below.

In the 1930s, with the increase in settlements, the Arabs demanded that the British stop Jewish settlement. When they perceived that their demands were not being met, they turned to violence. The Jewish Agency set up a series of 'overnight towns' relying on an un-revoked Ottoman Law allowing any building to remain intact once a roof has been placed on it. The settlers prefabricated the walls and roof of the new kibbutz's dining hall. Its double wooden walls were filled with gravel for protection against Arab snipers, and a prefabricated wooden watchtower was likewise at hand. During the course of the Tower and stockade campaign, 52 new Jewish settlements were established throughout the country.

Against protests from his cabinet, David Ben-Gurion decided to purchase 5,000 dunam of hilly non-arable land. A group was chosen to settle the land, to ascend to a point one kilometer from the road and to erect a base camp, and to prepare food, water, ammunition, clothing and tools ahead of time, in case of need. On the morning of 21 March 1938, fifty trucks carrying 500 people arrived to break a trail, and to carry all the provisions made ready to lower Hanita. With 100 men remaining at the camp, an Arab gang attacked, killing two men. The following day help arrived and work continued. On the fifth day, the road was completed to lower Hanita. After six months, there was a change of personnel. The 'Shimron' group took over responsibility of establishing the agricultural community on the mountain. They were joined some time later by the 'Segev' group.

In November 1947, the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine gave the Western Galilee, with its seven Jewish settlements, to the Arab state. When war was declared, Hanita was isolated from the Jewish section, and several battles were waged in the area, so the kibbutz members evacuated the children from Hanita to Haifa. On the day of Israel's declaration of independence, the Jewish army broke through, and the Western Galilee became part of the new state. The kibbutz came to demarcate Israel's border with Lebanon in the Western Galilee
From Emek Zebulon, Mt. Carmel, the caravan of trucks was on the way while the moon still hung over the dark waters of the Mediterranean. 37 lorries loaded with tents, planks, mattresses, cots, length of iron pipes, provisions, and water, rumbled off into the future. The orders were that they must stay closely together, that there was to be no singing on the road, and that no one change from one truck to another.

At the head of the procession rode a party of ghafirs, or supernumerary constables, themselves Jewish Pioneers. Behind them, in motorcars [remember, it was 1938,] were 400 laborers, who were to return in the evening after the colony was established.

At the tail end of the trucks trotted a contingent of donkeys needed to carry loads up the hill. A second group of ghafirs brought up the rear.

Remember where you are in this story, and I shall come back to it, the Lord Willing, tomorrow, with the Battle for Hanita.

Saturday, January 15, 2011

Letter to Pastors

January 15, 2011

Dear Preachers:

Today in my office at WHBC I had the privilege of leading Iryna Perzhanitsa's mother, a Belarusian to my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Iryna came to us as a result of Dr. Alexander deChalandeau who ministers all over the former Soviet Union. Iryna and Phillip Burns are marrying in just a few days, and her Mama has arrived for the wedding. What a privilege it is to be a Soul Winner - Proverbs 11:30 & Daniel 12:3!

From news in the Middle East, we have learned that Tehran believes it can turn the tables on Israel's spy agencies, using the transition of Mossad directors from Meir Dagan to Tamir Pardo to catch the new man off-balance.

Iran's intelligence minister Heidar Moslehi boasted Tuesday, Jan. 11, that his agents had penetrated several of the Mossad networks operating inside Iran and among several of its neighbors. Gone were the days, he said, when Israel's clandestine agents and their Iranian hirelings enjoyed free rein in Iran as they did under Dagan.

He was giving Pardo due warning, middle east intelligence and Iranian sources report, that he had ratcheted up the Iranian-Israeli intelligence contest and was taking aim at Mossad footholds among the Iran's neighbors in the Middle East, the Persian Gulf, the Caucasus, the Caspian region and Central Asia.

Moslehi told a news conference in Tehran that while Israel-linked networks had been set up among Iran's neighbors, "we… have created intelligence bases next to them through which we could strike heavy blows on [Israel intelligence]."

Tehran's latest offensive was sparked by a number of factors:
One: An entire year went by after nuclear physicist Prof. Massoud Ali Mohammadi was murdered in Tehran without Iranian law enforcement laying hands on the culprits.

Public pressure had been building up and so, Tuesday, June 11, the day before the first anniversary of the attack, was chosen for the intelligence minister to claim a breakthrough to a solution for a slaying that had stunned the regime and the country.

Mohammadi's car was booby-trapped outside his home by two helmeted motorcyclists and blew up when he took his seat.

Iran's leaders never imagined that anyone knew the professor, officially described as a quantum field theorist and distinguished professor of elementary particle physics at the University of Tehran's Department of Physics, was also a head of Iran's military nuclear program.

Officials were at a loss to explain to the public how his killers, assumed to be Mossad, knew his real job and his private address.

They needed to produce answers - not least to calm the thousands of scientists, engineers and technicians employed in the program and their families, who have been living in fear of the Mossad's long arm ever since the assassination.

This pressure became acute when a second nuclear physicist, Prof. Majid Shahriari was killed and another, Prof. Majid Fereidoun Abbasi, was injured in coordinated attacks in Tehran on November 29, 2010.

Prof. Shahriari was in charge of the nuclear program's secret code systems and Prof. Abbasi, director of centrifuges at Natanz.

Both were faculty members of Shahid Beheshti Space University in Tehran, a center of nuclear research.
Two: Iran had finally found In the Turkish intelligence agency, the MIT, a strong collaborator for its clandestine war against Israel.
Its intelligence chiefs believe the partnership has grown solid enough for them to start relying on the MIT - and especially on its pro-Iranian director, Hakan Fidan - for support in their campaign against Mossad.

On August 1, 2010, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that Ankara and Tehran were deepening their intelligence ties. He said: "The nomination in recent weeks of a new chief of the Turkish secret services who is a supporter of Iran worries us."

This warning, which was addressed to Washington, fell on deaf ears at the time.

Five months later, the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu are preparing to bolster Turkey's position in Iraq according to joint plans hatched by Turkish MIT chief Fidan and Iranian intelligence minister Moslehi.

Washington was finally stirred into pressing Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to cancel their anticipated visits.

And so, Ankara announced officially on Tuesday, Jan. 11, that Davutogul's visit to Iraq scheduled for Jan. 10-11 was postponed – but only for now.
It is expected to take place in the next couple of weeks, with Erdogan arriving in Baghdad soon after his foreign minister.

This slight setback was not enough to dent the Iranian leadership's high expectations of Turkey's assistance in the intelligence war against the Israeli Mossad in countries like Qatar, Azarbaian, Turkmenistan, Armenia and others – not least because Ankara and Tehran share the same interest in cutting down Israeli influence in those places.
The intelligence minister therefore felt confident enough to threaten regional and neighboring countries at his press conference Tuesday for the first time that their interaction with Israel and any facility they provide the Zionist regime would be judged hostile to the region and the Islamic Republic.

Apparently referring to electronic tracking stations used to monitor military and nuclear activity in Iran, Moslehi stated those facilities would be seen as a legitimate target for Iran's "heavy blows."

Confidence and the undermining thereof is integral to Iran's latest intelligence-oriented campaign against its foes, ME intelligence and Iranian sources report.

Iran's intelligence minister Moslehi believes that if the Mossad's Tarmir Pardo, CIA Director Leon Panetta and the British MI6 chief John Sawers are confronted head-on with a new and more aggressive Iranian intelligence, backed by the Turkish, Syrian and Hizballah secret services, they will lose confidence in Meir Dagan's tactics, ditch them and re-evaluate their covert plans of operation against Iran.

Ahead in the coming days or even weeks, are therefore more TV interviews with "Zionist spies" freely describing their "terrorist training" and role in the assassination of Prof. Mohammadi - and other apparent crackdowns.

Iranian intelligence has more than one reason for highlighting these charges of Israeli espionage
1. Moslehi's minions are drawing up indictments for the trials of its leaders Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mahdi Karroubi framing them for collaboration with Israel and the West - an extreme charge subject to the severest penalties which the regime hopes will finally discredit and eradicate Iran's opposition Green Movement.

Supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khamenei opened that door when he charged in a speech last week that last July's street demonstrations in Tehran against the alleged rigging of the presidential election were organized by Israel and the west and their leaders – Moussavi and Karroubi - had collaborated with the enemy.

2. Deterrence. The regime's opponents at home are put on notice they had better refrain from collaborating with the regime's enemies and foreign elements on pain of humiliating exposure – like Majid Jamali who was put on television Tuesday to admit he took part in murdering Prof, Mohammadi on behalf of Israel's spy service – followed by extreme penalties.

3. Intimidating Arab and Muslim governments and nationals into abandoning ties of cooperation with Israel.
4. Making an example of the Israeli Mossad for the benefit of Western governments.

They are advised to bear in mind that Israel does not stand in the dock alone on charges of espionage, subversion and assassination.

The US and Britain are frequently mentioned too as partners in the foreign intelligence conspiracy against the Islamic Republic of Iran and could experience the same roughshod treatment.

With all these events coming down the pike, it behooves us, as truly Born Again Christians, to be on our knees daily praying for the Peace of Jerusalem [Psalms 122:6].


Letter to Pastors

January 14, 2011

Dear Pastors:

I am working feverishly on my upcoming DEAF FOOTBALL TRIP [2-12 to 2-23] to Israel.

But, for this letter, let us took to events in the Middle East.

President Barack Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have thrown all their weight into propping up Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri and are backing to the hilt the international tribunal-STL probing the 2005 assassination of his father, the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. Transforming Lebanon into the primary arena of confrontation between the US and Iran represents a particularly bizarre strategic decision on the part of the American president.

Until the Lebanese crisis erupted this week, the current US administration, like its predecessor under George W. Bush, took care to avoid tangling directly with Iran on any front, including Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf – barring covert operations and sanctions. Suddenly, a week before nuclear negotiations begin in Istanbul (Jan. 21-22) between the Six Powers and Iran, the Obama administration changed course.

His decision is hard to explain in the light of America's ill-fated Lebanese ventures in the past.

Twenty-eight years ago, in 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon in pursuit of Palestinian terrorists, President Ronald Reagan forced the IDF to withdraw from Beirut for fear that the Arab and Muslim world not tolerate Israel's occupation of an Arab capital.
American and French marines were brought in within the framework of the Multinational Force in Lebanon-MNF to take the place of Israeli troops.
But less than 18 months later, the US Marine units shook Lebanese soil off their boots on Feb. 26, 1984 after two terrible terror attacks, in both of which Iran, Syria and Hizballah took a hand: the bombing of the American embassy in Beirut in which 19 top CIA agents in the Middle East and Near East lost their lives, and the blasting of US and French Marine headquarters which left 241 American troops dead - 220 of them Marines.

I was never so ashamed of an American President, as I was of Reagan, for sticking his tail between his legs and getting out of Dodge. Liberal Dems in both the house and Senate put so much pressure upon him, he took that course. It's there in history! Read it!
At that time, that was the deadliest single attack to take place against Americans overseas after World War II.

After singeing their fingers so badly, US administrations fought shy of getting involved in Lebanon, which had always proved to be one of the most unpredictable countries in a volatile region.

Much later, in 2005, right after the shock of the Hariri assassination, the second President Bush briefly forced Syrian President Bashar Assad to cut Lebanon loose, remove his troops from Lebanon and take his meddling hands out of Beirut. Within a short time, Syria was back through the back door.

In 2006, when Washington pressed Israel to counter Syrian influence by waging war on Hizballah for which it was unprepared in response to a grave provocation, the contest ended in a flop with grave repercussions for the US and Israel: The IDF performed inadequately and failed to defeat Hizballah, a disadvantage on which Tehran and Damascus subsequently capitalized for transforming the small Shiite organization over the years into one of the most powerful and effective military forces in the Middle East.

Hizballah now commands 50,000 rockets, an arsenal unmatched by any power in the Middle East, including the US military. [In June of this year, in Northern Israel, with a Brigadier General in the IDF, Jonathan Magas and I looked out over Bint Jbail in Lebanon, and was briefed that they then had 40,000 rockets in underground bunkers. This assestment shows 50,000! Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem -Psa 122:6.]

Middle Eastern military and intelligence sources report that in deciding to play the Lebanese card against Iran, the Obama administration is counting on four advantages:
1. The expected Special Lebanese Tribunal indictments of Hizballah officials for the Hariri assassination five years ago, is one. President Obama is preparing to press on with his drive against Hizballah and has charted a series of moves and counter-moves.

Should the Iranian-backed Shiite organization's attempt to establish an alternative government in place of the Hariri administration and have it pronounce the SLT – and hence its indictments – invalid, the US will counter by arranging to have the tribunal try Hizballah defendants in abstentia.

Tehran and Hizballah will then have to choose between aggravating their political or military disruptions or accepting growing international isolation.
The Obama administration is consistent in that it is applying to Lebanon the same rationale of international sanctions and isolation it pursues for bringing Iran's nuclear program to a halt. This means placing Hizballah, Iran's military arm in the eastern Mediterranean under international pressure, a ploy that may work because many Muslim countries and some other powers like Brazil and India support the UN and the international Lebanese Tribunal's mission.

In this way, Washington hopes to drive a wedge between Tehran and its Lebanese proxy by non-military tactics, an objective which a direct confrontation with Tehran was unable to achieve.
2. President Obama is adding an extra layer of muscle to the US Sixth Fleet cruising the eastern Mediterranean. This week, he dispatched to Lebanese waters the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise and its Strike Group of five warships – altogether 6,000 sailors and marines with 80 fighter-bombers on deck, together with the USS Bainbridge missile destroyer.

3. Israel's recovered military prowess. The IDF has staged several war games practicing both strikes against Iranian military compounds and responses to devastating Hizballah assaults on Israel's armed forces. Simulated too was a three-front war fought against Syrian units coming to Hizballah's aid and Palestinian organizations attacking from Gaza.

4. The pro-Western forces in Lebanon united in Lebanon's ruling March 14 bloc headed by Prime Minister Hariri are seen in Washington as an American ace in Beirut. The Obama administration must try and calculate in advance the strategic advantages versus the risks of pitting a pro-Western Christian-Sunni bloc against the Shiite Iran-Hizballah combination.
Much depends on which of the two sides Sunni Muslim Damascus and Ankara chooses to back – or join.
A. Hizballah is native to Lebanon and very much in control of many parts of the country supported by a powerful militia and intelligence system. The supreme commander of its military force is not a local man but Iranian Revolutionary Guards General Hassan Madavi, who answers directly to the Al Qods Brigades chief Gen. Qassem Soleimani, supreme chief of Iran's covert campaign against the US in Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan.

Since no Lebanese force, including the national army, is a match for Hizballah, Iran and its proxy face Obama's challenge in Lebanon with a definite military and intelligence edge.

B. Iranian strategists believe American optimism regarding Syrian and Turkish behavior is misplaced. They see great advantage in Lebanon being surrounded by pro-Iranian, Sunni Muslim governments in Damascus and Ankara and are certain of their support. Tehran calculates that neither President Bashar Assad nor Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan will welcome large American air, naval and marine forces massing opposite their shores. They both worked hard to get US troops to leave Iraq and away from their eastern borders and will not be happy to see American ships foregathering to their west.

Therefore, Iran believes it can enlist the backing of Syria and Turkey against the American drive for influence in Lebanon
C. The war planners in Tehran are confident that if Washington gives Israel the green light as it did in 2006 to mount an attack on Hizballah, Iran can stop that offensive in its tracks by an order to Hizballah to release thousands of rockets against Israel's military command centers and main cities and instruct the Palestinians of Gaza to open a second front with hundreds of missiles.

Tel Aviv and its heavily-populated environs on the Mediterranean coast are within the range of both Hizballah and Hamas thanks to Iranian upgrades of their arsenals.

Tehran will be able to calibrate the levels of attack from both fronts by means of its military presence in Lebanon and the Gaza.

In short, the Obama administration by choosing Lebanon as its arena of confrontation with Iran will be starting out in a proxy game in which Revolutionary Iran is an old hand. Military and strategic planners in Washington, Tehran and Jerusalem will need strong nerves for a gambit that could last far into 2011 with Lebanon's fate in the balance.

But if Hizballah's Hassan Nasrallah succeeds in his effort to muster a parliamentary majority behind a new government which he heads, the contest between Washington and Tehran which the Obama administration planned will be resolved before it gets underway.

Just a tad bit of information about the Middle East for your reading. Also, Pastors, I am in dire need of help to pull off this DEAF FOOTBALL TRIP. [VPM Moshe "Boogie" Ya’alon thinks it is a great idea.] But, as of now, the financial part of it "is weighed in the balances and found wanting." Many, many of you have helped on past projects — the Sep. 2008 Normandy trip, the Feb. 2010 Police Officers-Counter Terrorism trip. But, if you could write Yedidim of Israel a $1000, or $500, or $400, or $300, or $200, or $100 check and send it to me, this ole man would be more than grateful. Please apprise me by email of the incoming check, and I’d be more than obliged, as they say in the Panhandle of Texas.


Wednesday, January 12, 2011

"2011 Haman"

January 12, 2011

Dear Pastors:

Two years ago today I was between Sderot and Gaza in Southern Israel when a 13 foot long Katyusha rocket fell some 200 yards from me and three IDF Artillery Lieutenants. I carry a piece of shrapnel in my pocket which dug into the ground and came to rest just a few feet from me. Colonel Guy Markizano, who had previously commanded that Reshef Battalion used to tell his men, "When the Preacher arrives, God’s presence is now with us!" Colonel Markizano will be our "enabler" when we are there on the Deaf Football Player’s trip to the IDF in February! Now, if you were to talk to the Bride of my youth, she would doubt what Guy said simply because of my being such a mischievous person.

This morning in our Bible Reading together, Chapters 14, 15, 16 & 17 of the Gospel of Luke, I was impressed once again with my own "unworthiness" to be in the Lord’s Service. Had I gotten what I deserved, as a "hell-raiser and whore-monger" I would be in the Lake of Fire right now, crying out for just one drop of water to cool my tongue, as the Rich Man [Luke 16] we read about this morning did!
The News from Arizona on the Jared Loughner:

An enlarged picture of Jared Loughner, the Skinhead, in an editorial, has his picture, with these words around his "wickedly smiling face:"
* This is not Sarah Palin!
* This is not the Tea Party!
* This is not A Divided America!
* This is not a Reason to limit Free Speech!
* This is not an indictment of Rep. Giffords Record!
* This is not a reason to take away Constitutional Rights!
* This is not Rush Limbaugh!
* This is not the Result of Today’s Political Discourse!
* This is not the Result of a Dim-witted Sheriff politicizing a Tragedy!

An article:

Mysterious black bag in hand, Jared Loughner ran into the desert, his angry father stopping pursuit in his truck.
Hours after Randy Loughner’s futile confrontation with his 22-year-old son Saturday morning, six people were shot dead and more than a dozen others wounded – and Jared Loughner was in custody.
The sheriff’s deputies who swarmed the Loughners’ house removed what they describe as evidence Jared Loughner was targeting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who doctors said Tuesday was breathing on her own for the first time after taking a bullet to the forehead. Among the handwritten notes was one with the words "Die, bitch," which authorities told The Associated Press they believe was a reference to Giffords.
Investigators with the Pima County Sheriff’s Department previously said they found handwritten notes in Loughner’s safe reading "I planned ahead,""My assassination" and "Giffords." Capt. Chris Nanos said all the writings were either in an envelope or on a form letter Giffords’ office sent him in 2007 after he signed in at one of her "Congress on Your Corner" events – the same kind of gathering where the massacre occurred.
On the morning of the shooting, a mumbling Jared Loughner fled after his father asked him why he was removing a black bag from the trunk of a family car, said Nanos and Rick Kastigar, chief of the department’s investigations bureau. Investigators are still searching for the bag.
In one apparent reaction, the FBI said background checks for handgun sales jumped in Arizona following the shootings, though the agency cautioned that the number of checks doesn’t equate to the number of handguns sold.
Still, there were 263 background checks in Arizona on Monday, up from 164 for the same day a year ago – a 60 percent rise. Nationally, the increase was more modest: from 7,522 last year to 7,906 Monday, a 5 percent jump.

[Opinion of JAV: In dealing with scores and scores of "troubled youth" over the years, I have advised Parents and Grandparents to keep all possible weapons —butcher knives, paring knives, Guns, Ball Bats, etc., from those "troubled youth." We live less than three miles from such Grandparents who have a troubled Grandson. That boy has the potential of doing the same as Jared Loughner, but, as I have told the Grandpa, "He will kill you and your wife; so get your guns, as he will go and do mayhem to others." Now, The black bag held the gun, which Loughner’s parents had locked up in the trunk of their car to keep it away from Jared! Whether that will come out or not, will yet be seen.]

Other News:

There are many heroes who showed indomitable courage and grace under fire during this weekend’s horrific Tucson massacre. Blowhard Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik was not one of them.
If the White House has any sense, President Obama will stay far away from the demagogic Dupnik and his media entourage when he visits Arizona on Wednesday to memorialize the victims. Indeed, if the White House is truly committed to unifying the country, it will explicitly disavow Dupnik’s vulture-like exploitation of the shooting rampage.
Within hours of the bloody spree, Dupnik mounted more grandstands than a NASCAR tour champion. A vocal opponent of S.B. 1070, the popular state law cracking down on illegal immigration, Dupnik immediately blamed Arizona for becoming a "mecca for prejudice and bigotry."
To date, there is no public evidence that accused shooter Jared Loughner was in any way motivated by the national rancor over illegal immigration and the Arizona law (though open-borders extremists from the Justice Department on down most certainly wish it were so). When he complained about non-English speakers, Loughner’s nonsensical diatribes were aimed at illiterates in general — not illegal aliens — and "grammar control" by the government.
No matter. Dupnik vehemently singled out "people in the radio business and some people in the TV business" like Rush Limbaugh for creating the New York Times-patented "Climate of Hate." Sounding more like an MSNBC groupie (which, surprise, he confesses to be) than a responsible law enforcement official, Dupnik baselessly suggested that the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy and railed against "vitriol" from limited-government activists who are stoking "anger against elected officials."
Dupnik’s mouth has done more to stoke self-inflicted ire against elected government clowns than anything the right could muster against him. Had the hyper-partisan Democrat been more in tune with his job than the media airwaves, the murderous, maniacal gunman might have been stopped.
As Dupnik himself has now admitted, Loughner leveled death threats against others that were investigated by law enforcement — and then apparently shrugged off. Locals note that Loughner’s mother worked for the county and may have had some pull. Pima County College campus police reported five serious confrontations with the mentally unstable young man before he was kicked out of the school, which he decried as an unconstitutional "torture facility." Classmates said they feared for their lives. His friends say he was a pothead, a 9/11 Truther and a UFO conspiracist so kooky that even flying-objects adherents spurned him.
Despite zero evidence that Rush Limbaugh, cable news, the tea party movement or immigration enforcement activists had anything to do with Loughner’s warped attack, shameless Sheriff Dupnik shows no signs of shutting up.
The worst sheriff in America is walking in the footsteps of another infamous law enforcement official who put fame, ambition and ideology above public safety: disgraced Montgomery County (Md.) Police Chief Charles Moose, the publicity-hungry Keystone Cop who grossly bungled the Beltway sniper attacks in 2002.
Like Dupnik, Moose let politically correct assumptions drive his investigation and incessant press conferences. He insisted on hunting the wrong vehicle while the snipers’ Chevy Caprice (spotted by several witnesses and whose license plates had been checked by police at least 10 times during the shooting spree) got away.
The hapless Moose clung to the notion that white militants in a nonexistent white box truck were to blame — leading to a string of unnecessary murders as the real shooters escaped capture for several deadly weeks. No matter. Moose cashed in on his notoriety, inked a fat book deal and beat a hasty retreat to Hawaii.
Dupnik is now following the same ill-gotten path. But decent Americans understand that he and his civilian counterparts have traveled a smear too far. Despite desperate attempts by the progressive left to pin the massacre on the "harsh tone" of its political opponents, a vast majority of Americans reject the cynical campaign to criminalize conservatism, suppress political free speech and capitalize on violent crime for electoral gain.

At the risk of being accused of inciting violence, you might say they’ve done gone and shot themselves in the foot.

Now, as I have already written, a "Truther" is a 9/11 conspiracist, a UFO-alien and mind-control freak. Laughner was all.

Reading in the above, "I planned ahead,""My assassination" and "Giffords." Capt. Chris Nanos said all the writings were either in an envelope or on a form letter Giffords’ office sent him in 2007 after he signed in at one of her "Congress on Your Corner" as far back as 2007 tells this ole man, this "skinhead" was a JEW HATER, a 2011 HAMAN!

And Dupnik, like Moose in Maryland, is letting "politically correct miss-assumptions" guide him in his remarks. When, and if the right investigator can get to the bottom of this, this ole "not a gambling" preacher, will bet you his socks they’ll come up with "motivation on Laughner’s part," I hate the Jews!

** Let me mention some illustrations: First, the Seligman brothers. Joseph [1819-1880] emigrated from Bavaria to America in 1837 at the age of 18. After working for a while in a small mining town in Pennsylvania, he sent for his brothers and together they went peddling dry goods, first in Pennsylvania, then in Alabama and Missouri.

By 1846 they had settled in New York, where they went into business as wholesale clothiers. Two years later, with the Gold Rush in full swing, they presciently set up shop in San Francisco, where they had no competition in the sale of clothing and were paid in gold for what they sold.

From there it was a short step into banking and in the fullness of time to the financing of railroad construction, the Panama Canal, and many industrial firms like General Motors and Republic Iron and Steel.

Second, there is Marcus Goldman, who left Bavaria for America in 1848 at the age of 27, and who later founded the investment banking firm of Goldman Sachs. He also started as a peddler.

Third, so did Meyere Guggenheim, who arrived in the same year as Goldman at the age of 20. In his case the route out of peddling led not to Wall Street but first to a business dealing in stuff he had previously peddled from a wagon and then ultimately to the purchase of silver, lead and copper mines, leaving the Guggenheim family, wealthy beyond their farthest dreams.

I could further write of Andrew Carnegie, the Rothschilds, Warburg, Kuhn, Loeb, etc.

How did all these Jews make it?

George Washington, the founder of our Christian Nation, assured Jews in his day that Micah 4:4-5 would be the basis of this new nation. Mic. 4:4, "But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it.
5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever."

In America, Jews were able to sit freely "under his vine and under his fig tree" without anyone making them afraid.

Let me quote to you from Louis Berg, "Founders and Fur Traders," Commentary, May 1971— "....the decades between 1820 and 1860 were a period of broad freedom and social acceptance in America....of actual anti-Semitism there was very little ..."

What the Jews found in America was "a country" beyond all doubt a "blessed land of liberty and prosperity." They were free and equal in the economic realm, and also in the political realm, as was seen in Gabby Giffords being elected an Arizona Congresswoman.

Now, let us turn our attention to the French Enlightenment, which, in my opinion, was Anti-Christian, and hence, in line with the adage "that the enemy of my enemy" is "my friend," it could have been expected to be "pro-Jewish." And, in some instances, the French Enlightenment was!

The "Enlightened" part of despot French King Joseph II, said that "the Jews were not demoniac creatures, but human beings; this was the enlightened part of King Joseph speaking.

But, the despotic part added that they had to be "kept in check." Remember now, at the time of the beginning of the French Enlightenment, those who operated under the "guise" of Christianity were severely persecuting the Jews.

The historian Paul Weissman, Anti-Semitism, The Enlightenment, wrote: "...protests against the persecution of Jews— and especially against the Inquisition, the Enlightenment’s bete noire— [French for "black beast," "a person or thing that one particularly dislikes," ] became one of the standard set pieces of eighteenth-century rhetoric." So, in that sense, the Enlightenment was "pro-Jewish."

And, were this all of it, it would add one more powerfully unambiguous reason for the attachment Jews began forming for the "political left."

But, the pro-Jewish aspect of the Enlightenment was very far from "all there was" to its attitude toward the Jews; it was not even the predominant element in the incoherent Enlightenment mix.

Much more typical was the article "Jews [philosophy of]," in the Encyclopedia, the bible [so to speak,] of the philosophers. The Author of this article was the editor of the Encyclopedia, Diderot himself, who declared that the Jews bore "all the defects characteristic of an ignorant and superstitious nation.

Diderot was not the only philosopher who felt this way. Baron d’Holbach, who contributed a number of entries to their Encyclopedia was even more extreme in his contempt and hatred both of Judaism as a religion, and the Jews as a people:

"The revolting policy of the Jewish legislator Moses has erected a stone wall between his people and all other nations. Since they are submissive only to their priests, the Jews have become the enemies of the human race. [The little Austrian Paper Hanger really clued in on this d’Holbach teaching.]

As such, the d’Holbach explained:
"...the Jews have always displayed contempt for the clearest dictates of morality and the laws of nations...
"They were ordered to be cruel, inhuman, intolerant, thieves, traitors, and betrayers of trust...
"All these are regarded as deeds pleasing to God...
"In short, the Jews have become a nation of robbers...
"They have become notorious for deception and unfairness in trade, and it may be assumed that if they were stronger, they would, in many cases, revive the tragedies which occurred so frequently in their own country."

So much for d’Hollbach!

In closing this treatise of Jared Laughner, the Jew Hater, let me quote for you Dr. J. Frank Norris, simultaneously the Pastor of First Baptist, Ft. Worth, and Temple Baptist, Detroit, where during the war, over 30,000 people combined attended the two churches every Sunday:

"I will tell you what you do—you go persecuting the Jew and you are digging your own grave. He isn’t going to bother you, no—he isn’t going to fight you back [this was before they had their own Nation - the 1930s. No, he won’t burn your house down; he won't shoot you in the back----no—no danger of that; he isn’t going to do that—but you lay your hand on him and God will put HIS CURSE upon you—that is what HE says—"I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee!"



January 11, 2010

Dear Pastors:

The Bride of my youth and I are back home in Oklahoma, where, from time to time, we continue to watch the news unfold about Jared Laughner, Congresslady Gabby Gifford’s shooter this past Saturday.

Patricia Maisch looks like a grandmother, but she is being hailed as a hero today for helping to stop alleged Tucson shooter

The FBI states that there is no doubt Gabrielle Giffords was Target. [ Laughner’s favoritism of Mein Kampf, and Gabby being Jewish, tells the whole story. He appears to be a "skin head Anti-Semite!"]

Maisch, 61, effectively disarmed the shooter as several men pounced on him and threw him to ground. As they struggled to hold him down, Maisch joined the scrum on the ground, clinging to the gunman's ankles. aisch and her fellow heroes -- identified as Bill Badger, Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio -- stopped the carnage after 20 people were shot, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Six people died.

Ole JAV watches acts of "anti-Semitism" grow in intensity and greater numbers continually. There are many "Jew Haters" in the Holy Scriptures, of which I shall mention Haman only. History’s greatest anti-Semite probably was Adolf Hitler!

The real root of the extreme hostility within [those who operate under the guise] of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ towards Jews worldwide, and Israel especially, lies in the resurrection of the "previously discredited doctrine of "Replacement Theology," which is also known as "supersessionism," all neatly wrapped in "politics and ideology."

Condi Rice was an admitted "supersessionist." But, probably her "anti Semitic feelings" had more to do with Birmingham’s KKK in September 1963 than anything else.

"Replacement Doctrine Theology" goes all the way back to the 3rd century when Origen, of Alexandria, regarded as the "father of Christian doctrine" by Catholics, concluded that the Jews had lost their "favored position" [as Everlastingly Covenanted People,] with God, and that Christians were now the "New Israel."

There were people in Jeremiah’s day, the princes of the court, whom I simply call "dandies" as there are "dandies" in our day who state that "the Jews’ divine election was revoked and they were ‘destined to stand in perpetual opposition’ to God Almighty!"

Some Jews feel that "this doctrine," which lays behind centuries of Christian hatred of the Jews, was "driven by the Holocaust" underground, which I don’t think I can totally agree with.

However, I do know positively that it is "back," ‘kick-started’ by Palestinian Christian Liberation Theology, which states falsely, that the Palestinian Arabs were the "original possessors" OF THE Land of Israel

Thus, the former Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, Riah Abu El-Assal, claimed that Palestinian Christians are "the true Israel,' adding' no one can deny me the right to inherit the promises, and after all the promises were first given to Abraham and [don’t miss this,] [Riah says,] "Abraham is never spoken of as a Jew, just as the father of the Faithful."

This false claim that the "so-called Palestinians" are the true people of the land combines with replacement theology to make the case against the State of Israel. To supersessionist Christians, such as Condi Rice and George W., and some of our present day "dandies," Israel is an ungodly interloper and her defenders are the enemies of God—which is precisely the Muslim and Arab argument, a characterization which has tapped into unsavory echoes deep in church history.

The Middle East Council of Churches, a WCC shootoff, states that we "Christian Zionists" are heretics. During the centuries that the churches in the MECC were under "Muslim rule" they were treated as dhimmi-subjugated minorities-alongside the Jews.

But, the folks of these "Churches" operating under the "guise" of Christianity wanted to exaggerate the theological gulf between them and the Jews "to insure that the Muslims would treat them better. Consequently, these churches, which primarily are "eastern Churches," deeply committed themselves to supersessionism over the Jews, which they believed helped them to have comfortable relations with Islam.

Have you heard of the "Truther Movement?" It says that AIDS was created in a CIA laboratory, Princess Diana was murdered to prevent her from marrying a Muslim, 9/11 was orchestrated by the Bush administration, in some versions [particularly popular in the Muslim word,] was aided and abetted by the Israeli Mossad.

All such "anti-Semitic" nonsensical ideas have been presented in a documentary called "Loose Change," which posits such ideas, and on a steadily enlarging fringe, fevered discussions of UFOs, aliens and mind control veer into allegations of conspiracies by hidden elites amongst the Bilderbergers, Rothschild banks, heavily laden with anti-Semitic paranoia about the alleged sinister power of the Jews.

At Wellesley College, Professor Anthony Martin, taught his students that Greek culture was stolen from Africa and that the Jews were responsible for the slave trade. He was exposed by Mary Lefkowitz in her book History Lessons. Mary found that "The Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews," one of Martin’s texts, accused Jews of instigating a "black African Holocaust" and was drawn in large measure from Henry Ford’s "The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem."

Philosopher Leo Strauss, a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, influenced those called "neocons" in the George W. Administration, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. Strauss was grateful to the United States and deeply committed to liberal democracy.

However, anti-Semites went after Strauss post-haste, using a set of compound misapprehensions: Because neocons supported the war in Iraq, anyone who supported the war in Iraq was a neocon. Because neocons supported the war, they were natural "warmongers." Because they opposed the left, they were "the right." Because a lot of them were Jews, all neocons were Jews.

The neocons were accused of believing in the "lying on principle" in accordance with the thinking of he who had influenced so many of them, Leo Strauss. Strauss, the anti-Semites claimed, had concocted the idea of the "noble lie" without which the "vulgar masses" would become ungovernable. The claim of the anti-Semites was, Straus was "a profoundly tribal and fascistic thinker" with "a profound antipathy to both liberalism and democracy."

In my left pants pocket I carry a piece of shrapnel from a Hamas Katyusha rocket which exploded about 200 yards to my front, two years ago tomorrow, January 12, 2009. While there in Israel during Operation Cast Lead, the "so-called" Palestinians, and their willing dupes in the media, were belaboring the "medieval blood libel," centered on the idea that the Jews are child-killers and blood drinkers.

The Jews, my brethren, are a unique people, with a unique history. I would recommend you read everything Dr. J. Frank Norris had to say about the Jews. The treatment of the present Jewish state is also unique.

There is no other nation in the world that, having been the target of annihilatory attacks for six decades, is expected to make concessions to its attackers even while the assaults continue.
There is no other nation in the world whose right to existence is deemed to be forfeit through its behavior.
There is no other nation in the world whose right to existence is deemed to be forfeit through someone else’s behavior, for which it is made the scapegoat.

On July 2, 1881, after four months in office, President James Garfield, who had survived the Civil War battles of Shiloh and Chickamauga, needed a vacation. He was vexed by warring Republican factions — the Stalwarts, who waved the bloody shirt of Civil War memories, and the Half-Breeds, who stressed the emerging issues of industrialization.

Walking to Washington's Union Station to catch a train, Garfield by chance encountered a disappointed job-seeker. Charles Guiteau drew a pistol, fired two shots and shouted "I am a Stalwart and Arthur will be president!" On Sept. 19, Garfield died, making Vice President Chester Arthur president. Guiteau was executed, not explained.

On Sept. 6, 1901, President William McKinley, who had survived the battle of Antietam, was shaking hands at a Buffalo exposition when Leon Czolgosz approached, a handkerchief wrapped around his right hand, concealing a gun. Czolgosz, an anarchist, fired two shots. Czolgosz -"I killed the president because he was the enemy of the good people — the good working people. I am not sorry for my crime," was executed, not explained.

Now we have explainers. They came into vogue with the murder of President Kennedy. They explained why the "real" culprit was not a self-described Marxist who had moved to Moscow, then returned to support Castro.

No, the culprit was a "climate of hate" in conservative Dallas, the "paranoid style" of American (conservative) politics, or some other national sickness resulting from insufficient liberalism.

Our Holy Bible states in Colossians 2:8, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. "
Dr. Ed Bragg, St. Louis, Mo., after watching Boogie speaking on the DVD’s we made in California last month, wrote me stating:
"Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'Alon used four words that were perfect explanations of Col. 2:8... He used "Solutionalism" and "Nowism". These two words are good explanations of the words, "philosophy" and "vain deceit". He then used the phrase, "self guilt". Self guilt explains the "traditions of men".

Neither "Solutionalism" nor "Nowism" will settle the problem facing the world’s people today. Explaining away conduct won’t cut it either! Americans have to deal with what we are facing, and we, in our dealings, best come down on the side of the NATION OF ISRAEL, THE EVERLASTINGLY COVENANTED PEOPLE!

Friday, January 7, 2011

Letter to Pastors

January 7, 2010

Dear Pastors:

From my motel room in Brownsburg, Indiana, where the Bride of my Youth and I are, after having conducted her mother’s funeral yesterday, I write you this snowy Friday morning.

This morning one of our Bible Chapters read was Jeremiah Chapter 29, which was written around 599 B.C. during the time that Nebuchadnezzar's carrying the Israelites away into captivity in Babylon.
Thus those "apples of God’s own dear eye," the Everlastingly Covenanted People, whom some of you preachers, bless your hearts, believe like George W. Bush and Condi Rice, and the Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, and even in our day the Huguenots, that, "we of the Church" have replaced the Jews and that God is through with them. It matters not to me whether you are a "died in the wool Texan," as my friend Garry Way is, or red neck as my friend Bryan Sharp is, or a Hoosier as my wife and our three sons are, or a Cajun as my friend Cecil Ballard is, or a Tar Heel as my brother-in-law Woody, whom my wife and I are to eat with he and Sandy and their son Junior and his wife Paula, this evening, are, YOU ARE WRONG, YOU ARE WRONG, YOU ARE WRONG!
But, as one of my Special Forces Colonel friends, James "Bo" Gritz, used to say, "Every man does that which he is big enough to do!" So, if you are big enough to flaunt "Replacement Doctrine Theology" in the eye of Almighty God, and "get away with it," have at it. It won’t be one hair off my leg.
In Jeremiah 29 the Nation of Judah was reeling under the blow of captivity. Jehoiakim, like our "obamessiah", was a ruler, who would have brought even a "strong state" to the brink of ruin. Frivolous and superficial, despotic and brutal, Jehoiakim was greatly detested. And, for three years, Jehoiakim [2 Kings 24] observed his oath of allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar, at the end of which he refused to pay his annual tribute, trusting in Egypt to help him maintain his independence.
2Ki 24:1 In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him.
2 And the LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by his servants the prophets.
3 Surely at the commandment of the LORD came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did;
4 And also for the innocent blood that he shed: for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood; which the LORD would not pardon. [A byword here, the same God that was against the shedding of innocent blood, the sin of the sodomites, and treatment of his chosen people, the JEW, has not changed his mind about those things in 2010.]
5 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?
Then, we read that Jehoiakim goes out into eternity to meet his maker and give "an account" for all he had done, and he was succeeded by his youthful son of 18 years, Jehoiachin, who ruled but three brief months; for Nebuchadnezzar came up against Jerusalem and besieged the city and forced the king and his "queen-mother, his servants, and the officers of his court to go into captivity to Babylon [597 B.C.]
6 So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
7 And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt.
8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. {Jehoiachin is also called Jeconiah and Coniah.]
9 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done.
10 At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city was besieged.
11 And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against the city, and his servants did besiege it.
12 And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign.
13 And he carried out thence all the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king's house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold which Solomon king of Israel had made in the temple of the LORD, as the LORD had said.
14 And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths: none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land.
15 And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon, and the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers, and the mighty of the land, those carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon.
16 And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon.
17 And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah.
18 Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah.
19 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done.
20 For through the anger of the LORD it came to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence, that Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.
Jehoiachin lay in prison 37 long years, till Evilmerodach, the successor of Nebuchadnezzar, released him. 2Ki 25:27 And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, that Evilmerodach king of Babylon in the year that he began to reign did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of prison;
28 And he spake kindly to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon;
29 And changed his prison garments: and he did eat bread continually before him all the days of his life.
30 And his allowance was a continual allowance given him of the king, a daily rate for every day, all the days of his life.
Now, whether I am an "Adopted Okie," a "Hoosier," a "Red Neck," a "Tar Heel," a "Cajun" or a "died in the wool Texan," whatever I say, whatever I write, best be in "tune" with the Holy Word of the Living God relative to the "Everlastingly Covenanted People," or I shall only be "sounding brass and tinkling cymbal."
The Prophet Ezekiel, who shared Jehoiachin’s captivity, regarding him as the last legitimate ruler of Judah as the first 13 verses of Ezekiel 19 brings out, and verse 14 solidifies: 14 And fire is gone out of a rod of her branches, which hath devoured her fruit, so that she hath no strong rod to be a scepter to rule. This is a lamentation, and shall be for a lamentation.
Brethren, the Judah then that remained, no more deserved the "name." Only the miserable dregs remained. The choicest spirits were taken into exile. Ezekiel was among them, and possibly Daniel and his three companions, although, they may have been brought to Babylon at an earlier period.
2Kings 24:14 tells us: And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths: none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land. To these melancholy captives Jeremiah addressed a letter of cheer and consolation in Jer 29:1-14.
I know Brethren that I am no "Jeremiah," but from the perspective which I see when I hear and know of all the "brethren" who are falling for the "Catholic Doctrine of Replacement Theology" hook, line, and sinker, sometimes I think, "Man, you sure do look lonely and pathetic." And, yet, Jeremiah was not absolutely alone; for there were Zephaniah, Nahum and habakkuk, and probably others, who were contemporizes, both in time, and certainly in "doctrine."
The "false leaders" back in Jeremiah’s day, as in ours, for example, said, "Come, and let us devise devices against Jeremiah." Jer 18:18 Then said they, Come, and let us devise devices against Jeremiah; for the law shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet. Come, and let us smite him with the tongue, and let us not give heed to any of his words.
Such words, to Jeremiah, must have been as exasperating. Indeed, it called forth from Jeremiah the most powerful and passionate invective in all his prophecies.
Jer 18:21 Therefore deliver up their children to the famine, and pour out their blood by the force of the sword; and let their wives be bereaved of their children, and be widows; and let their men be put to death; let their young men be slain by the sword in battle.
22 Let a cry be heard from their houses, when thou shalt bring a troop suddenly upon them: for they have digged a pit to take me, and hid snares for my feet.
23 Yet, LORD, thou knowest all their counsel against me to slay me: forgive not their iniquity, neither blot out their sin from thy sight, but let them be overthrown before thee; deal thus with them in the time of thine anger.
And even Ezekiel likewise indulges in caustic sarcasm concerning them, when he said: Eze 13:10 Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter: Brethren, if our "mortar" is untempered, then our built walls won’t stand!
Now, what resulted was a "most instructive contest" taking place between Jeremiah and Hananiah, in the Temple, the priests and the people being judges.
The "question" at issue was the "duration of the Captivity." Jeremiah had said it would last two generations; Hananiah predicted that within two years the exiles would return, with Jehoiachin at their head.
Jeremiah was right; but, the people, of course, sided with Hananiah, using my parlance, saving themselves "time and money," which I’ve always taught one has to expend if you are gonna help people. Jeremiah was put to silence, for it is always easier to believe "smooth things" than it is things which cost "time and money."
The effect of such controversaries, then, as today, was to "confuse" and perplex the people. Remember now, Scriptures plainly teach "God is not the author of confusion." All external criterion was wanting for the "weigh in, in the balances" with God Almighty.
I received a text message from a young preacher this week about another controversary raging in our time, with certainly the textual matter, simply saying "sad." Thats how Jeremiah must have felt. And, thats how this almost 71 year ole beat-up, worn-out, preacher feels about what is being said about "us-the Church" replacing the "Everlastingly Covenanted People."
The fase prophets preached "peace." Jeremiah preached "punishment." They emphasized the Power of Jehovah God; Jeremiah emphasized ‘HIS MORAL BEING AND RIGHTEOUSNESS.’
They stood on the moral level of the masses; Jeremiah was laboring to raise the masses to a higher plane.
Their words did nothing to awaken conscience; Jeremiah was ever reminding them of their sins, and the inevitable retribution that awaited them.
Time alone demonstrated the untruthfulness of their predictions. The cause of their blindness was their "inadequate conception of the ethical nature of Jehovah God."
In justifying "Scripture with Scripture," Brethren, in this context, it is important that we look at the "most graphic picture" painted in Lamentations 4:13 For the sins of her prophets, and the iniquities of her priests, that have shed the blood of the just in the midst of her,
14 They have wandered as blind men in the streets, they have polluted themselves with blood, so that men could not touch their garments.
15 They cried unto them, Depart ye; it is unclean; depart, depart, touch not: when they fled away and wandered, they said among the heathen, They shall no more sojourn there.
Scripture has many applications, and what we need do is apply these scriptures to our
controversaries of today.
To change the subject, but, to stay with the same people, let me mention something that my Jewish Friend Gil Ronen writes from Israel:
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak warned Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Thursday against "any new assault" on Gaza, CNN quoted state-run Nile TV as reporting. Mubarak and Netanyahu met in Sharm el-Sheikh to discuss the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
Egypt's state press said that Mubarak emphasized to Netanyahu "the necessity for Israel to reconsider its position and policies, and to take the initiative and conduct procedures that will build trust with the national Palestinian authorities."
A statement on the Prime Minister's website said that "Netanyahu reiterated that he believes that a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is possible provided that the latter are willing to end the conflict."
Netanyahu "asked President Mubarak to act to persuade the Palestinians to move to direct, intensive and serious negotiations -- in which all core issues will be raised -- forthwith."
The PM's Office added that "Netanyahu said that Israel is committed to aggressively fighting terrorist elements in Gaza that endanger its security and peace."

An evangelist that I trained at OBC stated some months ago, in opposition to our positions on the Jews, "What is the big deal about the Jews? What about the Chinamen?" Show me in the Holy Scriptures where Jehovah God made a covenant, an Everlasting Covenant, by the way, with the "Chinese" and I will see your point! It's not there!
As far as this ole man is concerned, it is really a matter of "Whose side are you on?" I am unequivocally on the side of the Jews. You can be on the side of the Egyptians if you want, I am not. Now, yes, I would like for there to be peace between the "so-called Palestinians" and the Jews, but, of Ishmael, the writer of the Book of Genesis said, "his hand shall be against every man...." Throughout the sordid history of the Ishmaelites, that has been the truth.
Whatever the Jews find that Hamas, one of the proxy armies for the Iranians, are doing in Gaza, which endangers the security and stability of the nation of Israel, or its citizens, then, regardless of what Muburak has said, Israel has to take care of "matters."
In what I have mentioned to you from Jeremiah’s writings, the time frame involved Jehoiakim, who had come to the throne as the "vassal’ of Egypt, with the consequence being that the Egyptian party was dominant in Jerusalem.
Jeremiah came on the scene as the chief representative of the party that favored the supremacy of the Chaldeans "as the only way of safety." Time, and history, have both proved Jeremiah right.
Jeremiah 26 shows that the "naysayers" with the populace, brought Jeremiah before the civil authorities, urging that capital punishment should be inflicted on him for his threatening.
There were those, thank the Lord, in Judah, who endeavored to protect ole Jeremiah, and appealed to the precedent of Micah the Morasthite, who had uttered a "like prophecy" in the reign of Hezekiah; and so for a time, Jeremiah escaped.
Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, seems to have had influence to secure Jeremiah’s safety. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah was commanded to write the predictions which had been given him. Brethren, let me say this, "Ole JAV would be "scared to death" to take any position which might contravene the only possible thing of safety which he sees in Genesis 12:3, "Bless the Jews." Otherwise, any other position curses them.
Jeremiah deputed Baruch to write the predictions and to read them publicly on the fast day. Baruch was summoned before the princes, who advised that both he and Jeremiah should conceal themselves, while they endeavored to influence the mind of the king by reading the roll to them.
But, Jehoiakim read three or four leaves and then destroyed the roll. He gave orders for the immediate arrest of Baruch and Jeremiah, who, however, were preserved from the angry king.
The Prophet, at the command of God, rewrote the roll, adding "besides unto them many like words" [Jer 36:22]. To this period is assigned the prophecy in the valley of Benhinnom [Jer 19,] and his ill treatment at the hand of Pashur.
Moving then on to Zedeikah’s reign, B.C. 593, Hananiah prophesied that the power of the Chaldeans would be destroyed and the captives restored from Babylon [Jer 28:3.] Hananiah corroborated his prophecy by taking off Jeremiah’s neck the yoke which he wore by Divine Command [27:2.]
Jeremiah then consequently was told what to prophesy. Jer 28:13 Go and tell Hananiah, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Thou hast broken the yokes of wood; but thou shalt make for them yokes of iron.
It was probably not until the latter part of the reign of Zedekiah that Jeremiah was put in confinement, as we find that "they had not put him into prison" when the army of Nebuchadnezzar commenced the siege of Jerusalem [37:4-5.]
The approach of the Egyptian army, and the consequent withdrawal for a time of the Chaldeans, brightened the prospects of the Jews, and the king entreated Jeremiah to pray to the Lord for them.
The answer, however, received "from the Lord," was that the Egyptians would go to their own land, and that the Chaldeans would return and destroy the city [37:7-8.]
Well, all this angered the "princes," as I am sure some of the words of this ole man does the "dandies" of our day, so Jeremiah’s "dandies" made the departure of Jeremiah from the city the "pretext" of accusing him of desiring to the Chaldeans.
Jeremiah’s "dandies’ got him cast into the prison in spite of his denial, where he would doubtless have perished but for the interposition of Ebedmelech, one of the royal eunuchs [37:12-38.]
The king seems to have been favorably inclined toward the prophet, but, for fear of his "dandies," consulted with Jeremiah secretly [38:14-28.]
In one of those secret interviews Jeremiah obtained a milder imprisonment in the "guard-court" belonging to the royal citadel [37:17,] and while in prison he bought, with all requisite formalties, the field at Anathoth, which his kinsman Hanameel wished to get rid of [32:6-9] THUS SHOWING JEREMIAH’S FAITH IN HIS COUNTRY’S FUTURE.
I am not a gambler. I did marry a "gambler’s" daughter! Bless her heart, even as a member of Bethesda Baptist Church, Brownsburg, Indiana, Mammer, my ‘now-in-heaven’ mother in law, liked to buy her lottery tickets. She would say, "Now, James Allen, you know that one of these days my ship is going to come in!"
But, were I a mind to "gamble," I would never bet on the Ishmaelites against the Jews. That is a bad lottery ticket boys [by the way, I’ve never bought even one lottery ticket.]
Preachers, if you can help me with my "Deaf Football Players" trip, it looks like right now that I am going to have to come up with something in the neighborhood of $7,000.00 by Feb. 12th to pull some of those deaf "chestnuts out of the fire," who are going with me! $50, $100, $500 or a $1,000 would really be a blessing on these expenses which I shall have to come up with. God will bless you as a consequence. Checks should be made out to Yedidim of Israel and sent to Jo Harding, 5517 NW 23rd, OKC, Ok., 73127. Apprise her please what it is for!
When we do the "Booklet" we are going to make up, with the 12 offensive plays [1 per page] to give to the IDF units, we will put your name in the back of that booklet. Each page will show blocking assignments. I will then take those assignments and make "3 Lessons per page from Football about Combat." Thats what we shall leave with the IDF units. All who support us ont his trip will have their names on the back cover of that 12 page booklet.
I remain, on the side of the Jews! You "dandies" can line up with the Egyptians!

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Letter to Pastors

January 5, 2011

Dear Pastors:

From our Motel Room in Brownsburg, Indiana, as my wife and I await the arrival of our three sons, John from California, Tom from Oklahoma, and Paul from Florida, this ole man writes, as he prepares to tell my wife’s kin today at the viewing of her Mother’s body and tomorrow at the funeral for Mammer, this ole man pulled up and read, as he does all her articles, another piece by Melanie Phillips from England.
Melanie is one bright Jewish lady who has her head screwed on right about the "Jewish-[I call it]Ishmaelite [many call it]Palestinian" question.
Preachers, look, all we have to do is get down what the Bible Declares correctly about the Jews, and then our whole outlook will be as it should be.
Take the Psalms, for instance, which I shall be using in tomorrow’s sermon, but, in this regard, about the Jews, Ps. 135:4, "For the LORD hath chosen Jacob unto himself, and Israel for his peculiar treasure."
Ps. 17:8, "Keep me as the apple of the eye, hide me under the shadow of thy wings,"
Preach all the sermons you want to preach, write all you want to write, and say all you want to say, about these passages [in the Psalms, or anywhere else] replacing the Jews with the Church.
Ezekiel 16:60 says, "the length of the Covenant God made with Abraham was an "Everlasting Covenant." Genesis 17:7-8 says, "God’s covenant with Abraham was made "...for an everlasting covenant..." and that the land of Canaan, would be "....for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God."
Concerning the Sun, the Moon, the Stars, God says several times that they will have to change their orbit before this Covenant he made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and King David, would CHANGE. It is not going to happen. It did not happen. The Church did not replace the Jews. "Replacement Doctrine" theology, or, "dispensationalizing away the Jews ‘peculiar’ position with God Almighty," whether you, or anyone else preaches it, says it, writes it, just isn’t so.
Zec. 2:8, " For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye."
Am. 3:2, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."
De. 32:10, "He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye."
De. 11:12, "A land which the LORD thy God careth for: the eyes of the LORD thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year."
Romans 3:1 says, "the Jews have an advantage, because to them were committed the Oracles of God." Romans 1:16 and 2:9 and 2:10 makes it very plain "to the Jew first," as does Acts 3:25-26. Romans Chapters 9, 10 & 11 makes it plain it is "to the Jew First." Galatians chapters 3 and chapter 4 make it plain it is "to the Jew First."
My mother in law was from Indiana, so she was a Hoosier. My wife is a Hoosier. Our son John is a Hoosier. Our son Tom is a Hoosier. Our son Paul is a Hoosier. I am an "adopted Okie," a native born Texas. Bryan Sharp is a red-neck. Cecil Ballard is a Cajun. Garry and Julia way are died in the wool Texans. Dewayne Nichols is from Tennessee. They are Volunteers.
Brethren, we best be very careful in "reading about" or "believing about" the Jews something which the Scriptures do not prove. The 45th Infantry was the National Guard from Oklahoma in WWII. The 36th Infantry was the National Guard from the state of Texas.
Prior to the Italian invasion by the Allies in WWII, in North Africa, in the clubs the 36th fellas would attack the 45th fellas cause the 45th Okies wouldn’t stand and put their hands on their hearts as the "45th Infantrymen sung "Deep in The Heart of Texas." They had many slugfests over such a thing as that.
Well, they were plugged into the lines in Italy side by side and the Krauts were kicking the Royal Backsides of both the 45th and the 36th for awhile till they honed their combat skills and dwelt on the weaknesses of the Krauts.
The German 88 was an antiaircraft weapon originally. But it was very effective as an "anti-tank weapon" and also as "artillery." Both the positions of the 45th and the 36th were getting bombarded by 88 artillery.
From one of the foxholes next to the 36th, there rang out an Okie cry to the Texans: "Hey, you Texans, have you been able to get the Krauts to stand and put their hands over their hearts when you sing DEEP IN THE HEART OF TEXAS?" No answer was the reply from the Texas’ foxholes.
It doesn’t matter if a Texan says it, an adopted Okie says it, a red-neck says it, a "died in the wool Texan" says it, a Hoosier says it, a Cajun says it, a Volunteer says it! Paul the Apostle said in that 3rd Chapter of Romans, "Let God be true and every man a liar."
The validity of what I am saying has to be based on the WORD OF THE LIVING GOD, or whatever this "adopted Okie" [some of the Jews call me "Wingate of Oklahoma"] is saying is a "lie" and GOD BE TRUE!
ANYWAY, I THOUGHT YOU’D ENJOY THIS EXCELLENT PIECE BY MELANIE PHILLIPS. She wrote "Londonstan." I have purchased and given away several hundred copies of that book. It specifically shows what the Muslims are doing in London and in Europe. You would do yourself well to read everything this lady writes about the Muslims. She is "right on."
January 3, 2011
The challenge of public diplomacy vis-a-vis the delegitimisation of Israel
Address to Ariel Conference on Law and Mass Media, 30 December 2010
As we all know by now, Israel has lost the battle for public opinion in the west. Even the Israel government is now acknowledging this fact. Israel and its defenders have been outclassed and outmanoeuvred in a war of the mind being waged on a battleground it never even acknowledged it was on.
Calls for more and better hasbara, however, are meaningless if the message or narrative promoted by Israel and its defenders misses the point of the attack being waged upon it. And it does miss that point, by a mile.
You cannot resist or overcome a threat unless you first understand its nature.
The first thing to say is that this phenomenon is characteristic not just of the media animosity or economic or academic boycotts. It goes across the intelligentsia and political class, spreading well beyond the normal suspects on the left into the mainstream middle-classes.
In Britain, the universities, the established church, the theatrical and publishing worlds, the voluntary sector, significant elements within the Foreign Office, members of Parliament across the political spectrum, as well as the media have overwhelmingly signed up to the demonisation and delegitimisation of Israel.
The scale of this phenomenon is nothing short of a multi-layered civilisational crisis.
The west is experiencing a total inversion of truth evidence and reason. A society’s thinking class has overwhelmingly subscribed to an immoral, patently false and in many cases demonstrably absurd account of the Middle East, past and present, which it has uncritically absorbed and assumes to be true.
In routine, everyday discourse history is turned on its head; logic is suspended; and an entirely false narrative of the conflict is now widely accepted as unchallengeable fact, from which fundamental error has been spun a global web of potentially catastrophic false conclusions.
This has led to a kind of dialogue of the demented in which rational discussion is simply not possible because there is no shared understanding of the meaning of language. So victim and victimiser, truth and lies, justice and injustice turn into their precise opposite.
This madness is being promulgated through a global alliance between state and non-state actors – diplomats and journalists, politicians and NGOs and websites. Many of these are waging war not just against Israel but against the west.
There are two preconditions for an effective fightback. First is to form effective structures of resistance. Those structures, however, depend in turn on a correct understanding of the nature and scale of what we are up against.
So far, the structures are not in place, and more important still, what Israel is up against is grossly — and fatally — underestimated and misunderstood.
The problem is that we are dealing with a pathology — to which we nevertheless respond as if it were rational behaviour.
What’s happened is a pattern of thinking in the west which turns reality upside down. Remarkably, this in turn echoes a very similar inversion of reality within the Islamic world, where such inversion has a theological base.
Because Islam is considered perfect, its adherents can never do wrong. All their aggression is therefore represented as self-defence, while western/Israeli self-defence is said to be aggression.
So in this Orwellian universe the enslavement of Muslim women is said to represent their liberation; democracy is a means of enslavement from which the west must be freed; and the murder of Israelis is the purest form of justice.
Furthermore, this is overlaid by the phenomenon of ‘psychological projection’ in which the Islamic world not only denies its own misdeeds but ascribes them instead to its victims.
So while Muslims deny the Holocaust, they claim that Israel is carrying out a holocaust in Gaza. Antisemitism is central to Jewish experience in Europe; Muslims claim that ‘Islamophobia’ is rife throughout Europe.
Israel gives all Jews the ‘right of return’ to Israel on account of the unique reality of global Jewish persecution; the Muslims claim a ‘right of return’ – not to their own putative state of Palestine, but to Israel. They even claim that the Palestinians are the world’s ‘new Jews’.
These and many other examples are used within the Islamic world to negate Jewish experience and appropriate it for itself to obtain what Muslims want in terms of status, power and conquest.
What is remarkable is that instead of treating this as a pathological deformity of thinking, the western progressive intelligentsia has largely embraced it as rational and true. And to a large extent this is because that same western intelligentsia has itself supplanted rationality by ideology – or the dogma of a particular idea.
Objectivity, evidence and truth have been ditched for ideologies such as moral and cultural relativism, multiculturalism, feminism, environmentalism, anti-capitalism, anti-colonialism, transnationalism, anti-Americanism, anti-Zionism.
Across a wide range of such issues, it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion with the progressive intelligentsia, as on each issue there’s only one story for them which brooks no dissent.
This is because, rather than arriving at a conclusion from the evidence, ideology inescapably wrenches the evidence to fit a prior idea. So ideology of any kind is fundamentally anti-reason and truth. And if there’s no truth, there can be no lies either; truth and lies become merely ‘alternative narratives’.
Moral and cultural relativism – the belief that subjective experience trumps moral authority and any notion of objectivity or truth – has turned right and wrong on their heads.
Because of the dominant belief in multiculturalism, victim culture and minority rights, self-designated victim groups — those without power — can never do wrong while majority groups can never do right. And Jews are not considered a minority because – in the hateful discourse of today – Jews are held to be all-powerful as they ‘control’ the media, Wall Street and America.
So the Muslim world cannot be held responsible for blowing people up as they are the third world victims of the west; so any atrocities they commit must be the fault of their victims; and so the US had it coming to it on 9/11. And in similar fashion, Israel can never be the victim of the Arab world; the murder of Israelis by the Arab world must be Israel’s own fault.
So the way has been opened for mass credulity towards propaganda and fabrication. The custodians of reason have thus turned into destroyers of reason – centred in the crucible of reason, the university.
All these different ideologies are utopian; in their different ways, they all posit the creation of the perfect society. That is why they are considered ‘progressive’, and people on the progressive wing of politics sign up to them. That helps explain the distressing fact that so many Jews on the left also sign up to Israel-hatred, since they too sign up to such utopian ideologies.
But when utopias fail, as they always do, their adherents invariably select scapegoats on whom they turn to express their rage over the thwarting of the establishment of that perfect society. And since utopia is all about realising the perfect society, these scapegoats become enemies of humanity.
For Greens, such enemies of humanity are capitalists; for anti imperialists, America; for militant atheists, religious believers. Anti-Zionists turn on Israel for thwarting the end to the ‘Jewish question’: the redemption of western guilt for the persecution of the Jews — a guilt which can never be redeemed as long as the wretched Jews continue to make themselves the targets of attack.
In short, therefore, the west cannot defend itself against the Islamic jihad because it can’t itself even think straight any more.
But this lethal muddle in the minds of the intelligentsia must be viewed in turn in the context of a global diplomatic process which itself embodies upside-down thinking, which fans the flames of bigotry and defeatism – and in which Israel itself has been tragically, and suicidally, complicit.
It cannot be stressed enough that the reason why those promoting genocidal bigotry are winning is that the western world has not sought to defeat them but instead has appeased them from the very start.
In Palestine under the British Mandate, when the Arabs used terrorist violence to frustrate the will of the League of Nations in restoring the Jewish home, Britain rewarded them by offering them part of the Jews’ legal and moral entitlement. When the Arabs started hijacking planes, the west’s response was to invite them to the UN to plead their cause.
And despite the Arabs’ repeated refused to accept the two state solution, offered in the 1930s, in 2000 and under Ehud Olmert and their current refusal to negotiate at all, America punishes Israel for not making enough concessions to them — while giving a free pass to those who still refuse to accept Israel’s right to exist.
It is astonishing that the west expects Israel to make any concessions to such attackers at all. After all, forcing a country which has endured more than six decades of existential siege to give any ground to its attackers amounts to forcing such a victim to surrender. This is expected by the civilised world of no other country.
Yet we are repeatedly told even by certain supporters of Israel that the Palestinians have a right to a state. Why? In any other conflict, such aggression forfeits any rights at all.
I am not saying that Israel should retain all the disputed territories; it may well be in its own interests to give some of them up. But the point is that Israel has made all the concessions over the years while the Arabs have made none – yet it is Israel, not the Arabs, that is under pressure from the west.
This is diplomacy as scripted by Franz Kafka.
The single greatest reason for the endless continuation of the Middle East impasse is that Britain, Europe and America have continuously rewarded the aggressor and either attacked the victim or left it twisting in the wind.
That’s what needs to be said by Israel and its defenders. But Israel and its defenders themselves have been crippled or cowed by the false analysis of the enemy’s narrative.
Even many of Israel’s friends spout the demonstrably absurd proposition that a Palestine state would solve the problem, that the impediment to a Palestine state is the ‘settlers’, but that Israel is not taking action to remove the ‘settlers’ — and so therefore they too inescapably agree that Israel is the problem.
Israel and its defenders have been fighting on the wrong battleground: the one that has been chosen by its enemies. The Arabs brilliantly reconfigured the Arab war of extermination against Israel as the oppression by Israel of the Palestinians.
That has transformed Israel from victim to aggressor — the reversal of reality which lies at the very heart of the western obsession with the ‘settlements’ and the territories.
Yet since Oslo, Israel has meekly gone along with this mad pressure. It has never said it is totally unconscionable. It has never put the all-important argument from justice on its own account. So it has allowed its enemies to appropriate this argument mendaciously as their own. But if Israel doesn’t make the case properly on its own behalf, how can anyone else do so?
To which Israel says realpolitik dictates it has to go along with the diplomatic game being played. But diplomatic realpolitik is what brought us all to this position — the brink of a terrible war with Iran which is treated by America with kid gloves while Israel is put under the cosh.
For the west to suck up to its enemies while bashing its friends like this is the diplomatic version of auto-immune disease. And eventually this disease will kill it.
What Israel has failed to recognise is that the battleground on which it is being forced to fight is not just military. It is also a battleground of the mind, and the strategy being used against it – and to which it needs to respond in kind — is psychological warfare.
The Arab and Muslim world long ago realised if it set the narrative in its own image, it would recruit millions of fanatics to its cause and also confuse and demoralise its victims. In this it has wildly succeeded.
There is therefore an overwhelming need for Israel to alter its strategy. Indeed, it needs to have a strategy.
And this brings us to perhaps the most difficult challenge in all of this – the fact that the role played by the Israel government is of critical importance. Unless it adopts the correct strategy, its defenders will remain crippled.
Yet any promising initiatives seem to fall victim to Israel’s chaotic political structure, which appears to prevent the Prime Minister from being master in his own house. Good ideas are habitually destroyed by rampaging egos and turf wars between Israeli Cabinet ministers.
This is no way to run a chip shop, let alone a country under existential siege.
The fact remains that both Israel and diaspora Jews have to rethink. They have to realise they must start fighting on the battleground where the attack is actually being mounted against them. And the goal has to be to seize and retake the moral high ground.
This strategy requires two different tactics: one for those who are capable of rational thought, and another for those who are not.
The first group comprises those who are not irrational but merely desperately ignorant. Much of the obsession with Israel’s behaviour is due to the widespread belief that its very existence is an aberration which, although understandable at the time it came into being, was a historic mistake.
People believe that Israel was created as a way of redeeming Holocaust guilt. Accordingly, they believe that European Jews with no previous connection to Palestine — which they believe was the historic homeland of Palestinian Muslims who had lived there since time immemorial — were transplanted there as foreign invaders, from where they drove out the indigenous Arabs into the West Bank and Gaza. These are territories which Israel is now occupying illegally oppressing the Palestinians and frustrating the creation of a state of Palestine which would end the conflict.
Of course every one of those assumptions is false. But from those false assumptions proceeds the understandable belief not just that Israel’s behaviour is unjust, illegal and oppressive but that it is unjust and oppressive by virtue of its very existence.
For these people there is an urgent need for a proactive educational approach. No-one has ever told them that these beliefs are false – and when they are told, the effect is often transformative.
There is a desperate and urgent need to educate such people in Jewish and Middle East history; to enlighten them about the shameful role played by Britain in Palestine in tearing up its treaty obligations; to tell them that under international law Israel is entitled to the disputed territories – land within which Britain undertook to settle the Jews ‘from the river to the sea’ because of their historic and unique rights to that land.
That’s all necessary for those who are still rational. For bigots, however, there is no point arguing with them. They are, by definition, beyond all reason. Their influence simply has to be destroyed. They have to be held to account for their lies and bigotry which should be forensically exposed.
So Israel and its defenders should be demanding of the world why it expects Israel alone to make compromises with people who have tried for nine decades to wipe out the Jewish presence in the land and are still firing rockets at it.
They should expose the pretence of Britain or European countries which claim to have Israel’s security needs at heart but forbid it from using military means to defend itself; and which – as did the British Government recently — turn Israeli self-defence against the jihadi lynch-mob on board the Turkish terror ship Mavi Marmara into an attack to be condemned, or demand the opening of the border with Gaza which would allow in arms to kill more Israelis.
Israel and its defenders should be asking why so-called friends in the west want a Palestine state, since once the IDF depart the disputed territories they will become in short order yet another Iranian-backed Islamic terrorist entity which will pose a further threat not just to Israel but to the west.
They should be asking why the EU is continuing to fund the genocidal incitement against Jews promoted by the Palestine Authority.
They should be asking so-called ‘progressives’ – including Jewish ‘progressives’ — why they support the racist ethnic cleansing of every Jew from a future state of Palestine.
They should be asking them why they are not marching against Hamas on account of its tyrannical oppression of Palestinians in Gaza. Why they are ignoring Arab and Muslim persecution of women and homosexuals.
Why they are not mounting a boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Mahmoud Abbas’s PA and Hamas, on account of Abbas’s Holocaust denial and the clear evidence of continuation of Nazi Jew-hatred in a direct line of descent from predecessors who were Hitler’s supporters in Palestine.
As for western Israel-bashers, Israel and its defenders should accuse them not of Jew-hating motives that cannot be proved but of absurdities and contradictions and untruths they cannot deny. They should ridicule them, humiliate them, destroy their reputations; boycott them, not invite them to social gatherings, show them disapproval and contempt. Treat them as pariahs. Turn their own weapons against them.
They should be telling the Jews ‘own story of refugees and ethnic cleansing – the 800,000 Jews driven out of Arab lands after 1948, and who now make up more than half of Israel’s population. It’s good to see that at last Israel is beginning to bring this to the world’s attention. In Britain virtually no-one knows about it. At a stroke it takes the ground from under the feet of those demanding the ‘right of return’ for Arabs.
They should be holding Arab and Islamic democracy weeks on campus, to expose the oppression and persecution within that world against women, homosexuals and others.
They should be singling out the Anglican church and the revival of ancient theological Jew-hatred being spread within the Anglican world by the Palestinian Christians of the Sabeel centre.
At the same time, they should be focusing on their true friends within the Christian world, not just in America but also in Africa and Asia where there is an enormous reservoir of goodwill towards Israel which could be mobilised into a global fighting force.
They should be campaigning against the UN and the hijacking of international law and human rights by anti-western, anti-Jewish and anti-Christian ideologues.
They should be confronting head-on the false claim that bigotry is confined to the right. They should be pointing the finger at the ‘progressive’ left to show how it is actually supporting the mortal enemies not just of Israel but the west.
And they should be making this case to Israelis themselves, to counter the delegitimisation and ignorance in Israeli universities and to educate the Israeli young in their own national history.
In other words, both Israel and diaspora Jews have to stop playing defence and go onto the offence. Israel has nothing to be defensive about or for which it needs to apologise. It is the enemies of Israel who are promoting injustice and the denial of international law and human rights. Playing defence intrinsically cedes ground to the enemy.
It is time for Israel and its defenders to stop conniving with that smokescreen for the war of annihilation being waged against Israel – the claim that the Middle East impasse would be solved by establishing a state of Palestine to which the settlements, and thus by extension Israel, are the obstacle. It is time for them to stop agreeing that the Jews are to blame for their own predicament.
Israel and its defenders need to make the argument from justice and reclaim that moral high ground from the enemies of Israel and the west, both at home — including within Israel — and abroad. It is those enemies who deny truth, justice and human rights. It is those enemies who should be in the dock. It is time to take the gloves off and put them there.
In short, Israel and its defenders must understand that the tsunami of bigotry against Israel sweeping the west is intimately related to Israel’s seriously flawed diplomatic strategy.
For years, Israel has been playing a defensive diplomatic game, which suggests inescapably that it has a case to answer. Such diplomatic cringing has badly undermined it and hugely strengthened its enemies, who are taking advantage of such weakness over and over again.
It’s time for Israel to realise that military campaigns against its enemies are not enough. It has to call time on its false friends too, and start fighting both these and its more obvious enemies on the battleground of the mind.
For a full analysis of the problem described above, please see my latest book
‘The World Turned Upside Down: the Global Battle over God, Truth and Power‘ published by Encounter.