Sunday, March 23, 2014

Was Esther Bossy? Purim occurs amidst “Ban Bossy” Campaign Posted by: Princella Smith March 19, 2014 , 1:17 pm Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12481/esther-bossy-purim-occurs-amidst-ban-bossy-campaign/#jDjAqrft3qDSrCLd.99

Sheryl Sandberg, the COO of Facebook, wants to ban the use of the word “bossy” as it pertains to young girls. She feels that it affects their desires to want to lead in the future. According to Sandberg, by the time these young ladies reach puberty, they are less and less likely to assert themselves or to aspire to lead because they do not want to be labeled negatively as an overbearing female.

Sandberg is no stranger to success. In 2013, she was ranked #8 on The Jerusalem Post’s  list of “The World’s 50 Most Influential Jews.” She has also been named one of Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world, and is one half of a true power couple as her husband is David Goldberg, the current CEO of SurveyMonkey.

Sandburg clearly is no weak woman and overcame the label “bossy” which was applied to her during her ascent to the upper echelon of society.

Considering Sandberg’s impressive history, it is a curious notion that she selected this approach to empowering young women. It appears that addressing the root of the problem of young women’s lack of confidence in themselves would go much deeper than the use of such a petty adjective like “bossy”.

While the underlying premise of Sandberg’s campaign is both admirable and necessary, banning a common word is not the answer. In fact, it trivializes the larger issue with the negative psychology on our young women which can be loosely summed up by saying that even though women around the world are climbing the corporate ladder, becoming elected officials, and leading on the international stage in foreign affairs, there is still a strong undercurrent of pop culture which seemingly overpowers these advances by telling young women that their worth still boils down to a bottom line of how physically attractive they are.

It is sad but true that our young women are regularly inundated with the words “bitch,” “trick,” “hoe,” and “scandalous,” which are used as normal lexicon in music and movies. “Rape jokes” have an amazingly high popularity in their favorite comedies.

One wonders if Sandberg celebrated the Purim holiday as a child and if her family continues to celebrate it now. Queen Esther’s timeless story of standing in the gap for her people to prevent genocide at the hand of Haman will forever serve as an inspiration to Christians and Jews as it is a pivotal story in the Tanakh and the Christian Bible.

As was custom in those days, no one spoke to the king unless they were summoned or spoken to first—especially a woman, but Esther knew that she had to speak up to save her people. It is certain she did this with a level of finesse and grace that moved the king. Whether she was a man or a woman addressing the king at that point, it would have been important that the words said were succinct, strong, measured and controlled—not demanding, rattling, or “bossy”.  There is a real difference in being bossy and being a leader.

Both bossy men and bossy women are off-putting. The exercise of leadership is not only being courageous enough to take a stand but attentive enough to surroundings and details of a situation to know how to approach a situation. This should be taught to our young boys and young girls alike with an effort to revert back to raising young gentlemen and young ladies as opposed to today’s popular brand of “I’m brash, bold, and in your face.” Nothing—nothing AT ALL—can take the place of the charm and grace of a well-mannered, even-spoken young man or young woman.

Katie Rogers and Ruth Spencer wrote an interesting piece for The Guardian in which they interviewed parents on the topic. Here are excerpts from the most interesting quotes:

“… In my experience, the people who I’ve admired were leaders, not bosses. They were empathetic and listened to the people they were leading. That’s what I want my daughter and son to do, and that’s why I’m still OK with telling them not to be bossy. I understand that there is a lot of nuance associated with the word, which is why when I use a word like “bossy” with my children, I take the time to discuss the positive attributes I want them to demonstrate.” — Naama Bloom, age 41 and CEO of Hello Flo

“…[My daughter] can choose what she wants to wear and eat even at her young age. I want her to have her own opinion and be her own person. But sometimes she is bossy. What do I mean by that? She demands and does not ask. She gives orders instead of participating in the conversation – and I have flat out-looked at my daughter and said ‘don’t be bossy’. I’m not trying to take away her opinions, or stifle her in any way, but like every other person on the planet (no matter their sex), she needs to learn to be polite. And teaching her how to be articulate – and express herself in an appropriate way – will only help her be a successful, independent woman when she grows up. People will respect her opinions and not deem her as ‘bossy’ since she will be able to communicate what she thinks while respecting others… I will continue to tell my daughter when she is being bossy in hopes that she learns how to be assertive while also being respectful to others.” –Natascha Hainsworth, age 30, Runs a theatre company.

“Banning a word like bossy isn’t the answer. For some reason, as society progresses, we are failing our kids by not teaching them how to deal with adversity. As parents, part of our job is to help prepare our children for when they embark on their journey without us. If we try to simply remove struggle from their lives, and shelter them from what this world – positive or negative – might have in store for them, it is a disservice to our children…This is not a perfect world – by far – and utopia is but a dream. I am not saying we should crush all things that are positive, but learning to deal with some of the negative is a necessary component somewhere.” — From Brandon-Regina Payne-Hilton, Parents responding on Twitter

March is Women’s History Month. At the heart of women’s history is one brave young Jewish woman named Esther whose great stand has been characterized as leadership—not bossiness.

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12481/esther-bossy-purim-occurs-amidst-ban-bossy-campaign/#jDjAqrft3qDSrCLd.99

Cunningly, Christ Being Used to Thwart Support for Israel Posted by: Earl Cox March 19, 2014 , 1:17 pm Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12478/cunningly-christ-used-thwart-support-israel/#voAAXfsS7SwowCwI.99

This article is sure to push the hot button of many, even my Christian brothers and sisters who have, despite facts, made up their minds that Israel is the aggressor and guilty of oppressing the poor Palestinians along with other non-Jews.  Because many have been duped and brainwashed into believing this absolute lie, anti-Semitism is alive and spreading throughout the world.  If there is anyone out there who does not know what it is, it is the hatred of the Jews and is diametrically opposite of our Christian belief.  To the modern mind, the phrase “anti-Semitism” generally conjures up images of goose-stepping Nazis, Germany and the Holocaust.   These very caricatures are what cause many today to miss the new and subtle anti-Semitism message catching hold everywhere at an alarming rate of speed.

When otherwise decent westerners, particularly church-going Christians, equate the phrase “anti-Semitism” with Nazis, Germany and the Holocaust only, we fail to recognize and accept our own guilt thus making us blind to the rising tide of anti-Semitism that has been slowly flooding our local churches, communities, families and even our own hearts and minds.

Anti-Semitism is an ancient evil that can be found in writings as far back as 270 B. C. and its basis is in religion.  Modern anti-Semitism stems from a concern for social or moral justice, but does not exclude the religious element.

In truth, most Christians did not participate in the pograms (massacres) of the past that caused the slaughter of countless Jews.   It was only a handful that actually participated, but this is fact:  a huge portion of society became convinced of the validity of the pograms and of Jewish guilt; these pograms were allowed to take place because the vast majority remained silent.

The new face of anti-Semitism in today’s world and today’s Church must be recognized.  The Muslim Brotherhood has been working patiently and quietly under the radar screen for years.  They have been infiltrating and embedding themselves into positions of influence in countries throughout the Middle East, Europe and, yes, even America.  So too, are they and other nefarious groups, working under the guise of the Christian faith, to influence the Christian Church in America and around the world to adopt a pro-Palestinian stance.  This Palestinian stance, of course, translates into anti-Israel bias.  They are targeting other arenas, such as the universities, but we as Christians are a huge target because American Christians have historically been pro-Israel.

Anti-Israel groups are subtle, sly operators and very patient.  Also there is a general ignorance of history on the part of the American public combined with their failure to recognize when they are being manipulated.  These groups often work through those who claim to be Arab Christians who have obtained places on the speaking circuit addressing church congregations and university students across America. Beware of these wolves in sheep’s clothing – as warned in God’s Holy Word – who will deceive even the elect.  They begin by talking about how we should love one another, followed by a subtle shift in the monologue.

Without a discernible transition, the talk becomes about how the poor Palestinians are suffering in refugee camps and how it is all because of Israel.  The thought of this injustice fills the audience with righteous indignation.  The speakers omit the fact that Palestinians are being used as spawns by Arab nations.  They are keeping them in squalor as refugees and this serves to keep the Palestinians stirred up so as to keep pressure on Israel.  The people then sympathize with the Palestinians and hate Israel and the Jews.  While these people claim to be Christians, the truth is their nationalism has been placed above their love for Christ.  Am I guilty of Judging?  No, I am just a simple fruit inspector and the Lord says we will know our Christian brothers and sisters by their fruit.

Many devout Christians visit Israel and the Palestinian territories on a regular basis.  They care deeply about the world we live in and have a genuine desire to make a positive contribution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.  Innocent, people-loving tourists believe all tour guides are created equal, that they provide their services without personal, social or political agendas and that they will provide just the history and the facts.  These tour groups often innocently hire tour-guide services (licensed by the State of Israel) that indeed have an agenda to slant participants against Israel and in favor of the Palestinians.  Unless tour participants have their antennas tuned to be on guard against all forms of subtle manipulation, they will be duped.  After all the guide is licensed by the State of Israel so what they say about Israel must be the truth.

It is important to know that not all Arab Christians are cut from the anti-Israel/anti-Jewish cloth.  Many, many Arab Christians know and understand the Bible and the significance of Israel and the Jews.  Yes, they, too, suffer severe persecution for their faith, even to the point of death.  They suffer discrimination, harassment, loss of income, physical assaults and death.  Yet they have remained faithful.  This persecution was not at the hands of Israel or the Jewish people.  The perpetrators were Arab Palestinians, their own people.

Many today are being taught “Replacement Theology” which has pulled the wool over the eyes of many.  This theology teaches that where the Bible talks about Israel and the Jews, it is today referring to Christians and the church.  It also teaches that God is through with the Jews.  They are no longer His chosen people. ”After all,” some say, “Didn’t the Jews kill Jesus?”  The answer to that question is, “NO!”  The Bible, in the New Testament, clearly teaches that Jesus suffered on the cross to pay the price for the sins of all mankind.  In the New Testament in the Book of Romans the Bible emphatically teaches that Christians are only branches grafted onto the natural olive tree (the Jews) and that we (Christians) should be careful never to think ourselves “as supporting the root” but rather to be mindful that it is the root (the Jews) which supports us.  Remember we Christians worship a Jewish Messiah.

Be vigilant my brothers and sisters.  Recognize what is happening right before our eyes.  In a famous quote attributed to George Santayana he said, “Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.”  God promised He will bless those who bless Israel.  We must not be ignorant of foundational Truth and we must possess knowledge of history, otherwise the doors are wide open for the enemy to manipulate the hearts, minds, souls and spirits of all—especially those who claim the name of Christ.  The Bible clearly states that the Jews are God’s chosen people and Israel is His special land.  It is the only land in the world whose surveyor was God Himself.  The Bible warns us about touching the ’apple of His eye’ and we must not take this lightly.

Reprinted with author’s permisison

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12478/cunningly-christ-used-thwart-support-israel/#voAAXfsS7SwowCwI.99

The Ever-Elusive Peace: A History of Rejection Posted by: Yonina Pritzker March 20, 2014 , 9:21 am Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12490/ever-elusive-peace-history-rejection/#gVigFEgUb4E4ACdw.99

As pressure to reach a peace agreement mounts, strong voices urge Israel to relinquish the land that has borne the name and history of the Jewish people for four millennia.

Chaim Weizman, the first President of Israel, was once asked, “Why don’t you just accept the offer to establish a Jewish State in Uganda?” He answered, “That’s like me asking why you drove 50 miles to see your mother when there are so many other nice old ladies so much closer to your home.”

The Land of Israel is the Jewish National Homeland. The history, faith, religion, culture, and identity of the Jewish people has been, is, and forevermore will be, tied to this land which bears their name, from its ancient name of Judea, to its modern name of Israel.

The Jewish nation lived and worshipped as a free and sovereign nation in the Land of Israel, from the time Joshua re-entered the land with the Israelites, until the Babylonians destroyed the holy Temple in Jerusalem in 586 BCE.  Seventy years later, the Jews rebuilt this Temple, which then stood for centuries until the Romans destroyed it in the year 70 CE. The Temple Mount in the holy city of Jerusalem remains the holiest place within Judaism, and unto this day, every Jew turns towards the Temple Mount to pray.

Throughout the centuries, many conquerors tried to incorporate the Land of Israel into their own empires: the Babylonian empire, Persian and Greco-Assyrian, Roman, Byzantine, Arab Caliphates, Turkish, Crusader, Ayyubid, Mameluke, and Ottoman.

But despite these attempts, Israel remained the country of the Jewish people, where they have lived continuously since ancient times; and Jerusalem has served as the capital of only one nation: the Jewish nation.

Through every banishment and forced exile, the Jewish people looked to their ancient homeland, prayed to return to their land, included the mention of Israel and Jerusalem in daily prayers, and imbued each life-cycle celebration and festival gathering with the yearning for Shivat Tzion, for a return to the land of their ancestors.

Wherever a Jew was, his heart was always in Jerusalem. When he sat by the waters of Babylon, he wept as he remembered Zion. “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning. May my tongue cleave to its palate… if I put not Jerusalem above my highest joy” (Psalm 137). From Spain in the 12th century, Yehuda HaLevi cried “Libi B’Mizrach, Va’Ani b’sof ha’Ma’arav;” “My heart is in the east, though I am at the ends of the west.”

In the modern era, the historical and religious rights of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel were codified in international law at the San Remo Conference of 1920, a meeting of the Allied Powers of WWI to decide the future of the former territories of the Ottoman Empire. At this conference, a binding agreement was enacted between these world powers “to reconstitute the ancient Jewish State within its historic borders.”

At the same time, Arab national entities were designated for other areas of the former Ottoman Empire. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and ultimately, Jordan were all established out of what had been provinces of the Ottoman Empire.

For the Jewish National Homeland, this international forum in San Remo allocated all the land that is between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, as well as, the land that currently comprises the country of Jordan, along with the Golan Heights, and Gaza. They allocated these regions of the former Ottoman Empire for the Jewish homeland in recognition of the fact that these were the areas where the Jewish people lived, where the history of the Jewish nation took place, and where the prophets of Israel delivered their message.

In these regions, we find Hebron which was the first capital of Israel, burial place of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs of Israel. Here we also find Bethlehem, the city where the Matriarch Rachel is buried, where Jews visited and prayed through the centuries. In 1830 the Turks issued a royal decree recognizing Jewish rights at this Jewish holy site. The governor of Damascus instructed the Mufti of Jerusalem that “the tomb of esteemed Rachel…they (the Jews) are accustomed to visit it from ancient days; and no one is permitted to prevent them or oppose them (from doing) this.”

Shechem was the capital of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. It is the city where Joseph is buried. Shiloh, the city of Priests, housed the holy Tabernacle before it was brought to Jerusalem. We read of Joshua in Jericho, Amos in Tekoa, Jeremiah in Anatot, and Jacob in Beit El. These regions of Shomron (Samaria) and Yehuda (Judea) constitute the Jewish spiritual heartland which is steeped in Jewish history dating back to Biblical times.

The word “mandate” means trust. As stated in Article 6 of the Mandate, the British were entrusted with assuring the “close settlement of the Jews on the land.” This was in keeping with a unanimous vote of the League of Nations which wanted to restore the Jewish people to their native land, thereby correcting an historical injustice. The British affirmed the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel, stating unequivocally that the Jewish nation was in this land “as of right and not on sufferance.”

The British, nonetheless, went on to violate their obligations under these binding acts of international law by giving 77% of the lands allocated exclusively for the Jewish homeland, to create the Arab country of Jordan, or Transjordan, as it was initially called. The British gave away these areas that were steeped in Jewish history, areas where the tribes of Israel had made their homes, thereby leaving only the land that was between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River for the Jewish National Homeland. The Jewish right to settle anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea remains enshrined in international law to this day.

Additional attempts to wrest the Jewish homeland away from the Jewish people have continued throughout the decades since San Remo. And we are seeing the current rendition today, as once again, pressure is being brought to bear on the Jewish nation to forfeit its legacy in order to appease those who reject her right to exist.

The Peel Commission advanced another such attempt. In 1937, it proposed a partition of the 23% of remaining Mandate land, after the British withheld 77% of the Mandate to create Transjordan. The Arabs rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission, just as they would reject every proposal that included a Jewish state within any borders. Instead, the Arab Bludan Conference, in September of 1937, proposed a boycott of “all Jewish goods and activities,” a tactic often used to criminalize the Jewish presence in the region. It is a tactic that is being utilized against the State of Israel again today.

The Partition Plan was yet another attempt to wrest away from the Jewish people additional portions of the Jewish homeland. Ironically, this November 29, 1947, vote of the General Assembly of the United Nations on Resolution 181 which, similar to the Peel Commission, tried to partition the remaining 23% of the land allocated for the Jewish homeland, has often, erroneously been viewed as the legal basis for the modern State of Israel. In fact, this Partition Resolution, which reserved for the Jewish State only 17% of the original Mandate, in illegal abrogation of Jewish rights to this land, was true to its name: it was yet one more attempt to subdivide the Land of Israel in order to appease those who have repeatedly rejected the right to sovereignty and self-determination for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland.

The San Remo Conference along with various treaties following World War I succeeded in establishing independent countries sought by the Arab nationalists: the country of Iraq gained full independence in 1932, the country of Lebanon was established in 1943, and the country of Syria attained their independence in 1946. Nonetheless, when the modern State of Israel similarly exercised its sovereign right and formally declared statehood in 1948, the Arab armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Transjordan, Syria, and Iraq immediately attacked the nascent state. Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League announced: “It will be a war of annihilation. It will be a momentous massacre in history…”

Then, in 1949, when the Armistice Demarcation Lines were drawn, this line, which is commonly called “The Green Line,” and which many today attempt to reinvent and claim as borders – namely, so called “’67 borders” – was rejected vehemently by Syria, Jordan, and Egypt as delineating any type of border. The Armistice agreement with Egypt stated,

“The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary…”

The Armistice agreement with Jordan included the following statement:

“The provisions of this article shall not be interpreted as prejudicing, in any sense, an ultimate political settlement between the Parties to this Agreement. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles v and vi of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.”

And Syria was adamant that there be no misunderstanding, stating,

“It is emphasized that the following arrangements for the Armistice Demarcation Line between the Israeli and Syrian armed forces and for the Demilitarized Zone are not to be interpreted as having any relation whatsoever to ultimate territorial arrangements affecting the two Parties to this Agreement.”

These agreements were emphatic in ensuring that the Armistice line would not be considered a formal boundary, once again, rejecting a Jewish state within any borders.

Whether by further subdivision of the land, or through boycotts to criminalize the Jewish State, these tactics stem from the ongoing rejection of the Jewish people’s right to sovereignty and self-determination in their ancestral homeland. And while much attention is focused on the years of 1948 and 1967 as the lynchpins for strife in the region, in fact, attempts to rid the land of the Jewish people, as well as, violent attacks on Jews, were as clear before these dates as they were after these dates.

There was the Hebron massacre of 1929, when Arabs slaughtered their Jewish neighbors who had resided in Hebron for, literally, thousands of years. There was no “Green Line” at this time; there was no modern State of Israel at this time.

In 1938, in Tiberius, terrorists went from house to house killing parents and children. Again, there was no “Green Line,” no Jewish State.

In 1954, in Scorpion’s Pass (Maale Akrabim), 11 men and women were murdered as their omnibus travelling from Eilat to Beersheba was attacked. This was long before the 6 Day War of 1967.

In 1956, in Shafrir, terrorists fired on a synagogue full of children and teenagers.

In 1972, Israeli Olympic athletes were killed in Munich, Germany.

In 1974, schoolchildren on a field trip from Tzfat were executed in Ma’alot in northern Israel:

Time’s David Halevy was among the first to enter. “…The movement of stretchers seemed endless.” The carnage, once the shooting ended, included 17 teen-agers dead and 70 wounded. (Time Magazine; Monday, May. 27, 1974).

On June 1, 2001, a terrorist detonated a bomb while standing in a crowd of mostly teenagers outside a discotheque in Tel Aviv. Twenty one people were killed and 120 were wounded.

Year after year, there have been terrorist incidents, too numerous to mention here.

The message has been consistent: it is the absolute rejection of the right of the Jewish people to security, to self-determination, and to peace.

The right of the Jewish people to live in their historic homeland of Israel was rejected before 1948, and after the reestablishment of the modern State of Israel in 1948; before 1967, and after 1967, when, besieged by hostile Arab armies, Israel recovered those lands that had been internationally mandated and guaranteed to the Jewish people at San Remo; and this basic right is still being denied today.

In fact, after the war in 1967, Israel attempted to make peace with her neighbors. But, similar to every previous rejection of a Jewish state within any borders, the Arabs rejected Israel’s desire to negotiate peace, and instead, issued the “The Three No’s” of Khartoum, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. This resolution prompted Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban to declare, “This is the first war in history which has ended with the victors suing for peace and the vanquished calling for unconditional surrender.”

Had the neighboring countries and peoples ever offered Israel any kind of reciprocity, any acknowledgement of the rights of the Jewish nation to a sovereign state in her ancestral homeland; any recognition that the Jews, like the Arabs, were entitled to self–determination in their own homeland carved out of the vanquished Ottoman Empire; had they welcomed, or at least, tolerated, the Jewish people’s right to their sliver of the Middle East, the right to one Jewish state amidst 21 Arab states – there would be peace.

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12490/ever-elusive-peace-history-rejection/#gVigFEgUb4E4ACdw.99

Allah's Sword Of Terror Posted by: Raymond Ibrahim March 17, 2014 , 9:56 am Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12364/allahs-sword-terror/#5Yvo5jA5EEOtURc2.99

The first time I heard about Khalid bin al-Walid—the 7th century Muslim jihadi affectionately known in Islamic history as “The Sword of Allah”—was when I was in college researching for my MA thesis on the Battle of Yarmuk, when the Muslims, under Khalid’s generalship, defeated the Byzantines in 636, opening the way for the historic Islamic conquests.

Nearly a decade and a half later, Khalid, that jihadi par excellence, has come to personify a dichotomy for me—how the jihad is understood in the West and how it really is: officially, Western academia, media, and politicians portray it as defensive war to protect Muslim honor and territory; in reality, however, jihad is all too often little more than a byword to justify the most primitive and barbaric passions of its potential recruits and practitioners.

Based on the English language sources I perused in college, Khalid was a heroic, no-nonsense kind of jihadi—fierce but fair, stern but just.  He was the champion of the Apostasy Wars, when he slaughtered countless Arabs for trying to leave Islam after the death of Muhammad.

Modern day Muslims writing about Khalid—see for example Pakistani army lieutenant-general A.I Akram’s The Sword of Allah—had naught but praise for him, the scourge of infidels and apostates.

But as years went by, I came across more arcane and Arabic sources telling of the “darker side” of The Sword—a depraved and sadistic side.

For example, only recently I came across a video of a modern-day Egyptian Salafi explaining how Khalid raped Layla, the wife of Malik bin Nuwayra—but only after he severed her husband’s head, lit it on fire, and cooked his dinner on it.

Khalid was recalled and questioned by the caliph—not because he killed and dined on an apostate’s head and “married” his wife, but because some believed that Malik was still Muslim, not an apostate to be treated so, and that Khalid killed him on the accusation of apostasy only as a pretext to take possession of his wife, whose beauty was renowned.

In the words of Ibn Kathir’s authoritative historical tome, The Beginning and the End (al-bidaya we al-nihaya), “And he [Khalid] ordered his [Malik’s] head and he combined it with two stones and cooked a pot over them.  And Khalid ate from it that night to terrify the apostate Arab tribes and others.  And it was said that Malik’s hair created such a blaze that the meat was so thoroughly cooked.”

More eye-opening is the way the videotaped Egyptian cleric recounts this whole narrative with awe and admiration—boasting, for example, how that when Khalid entered the caliph’s tent for questioning he was “wearing armor all soaked and rusted from blood [of his enemies], with arrows sticking out of his turban.”

As for the near-cannibalistic meal that the Sword of Allah ate, the cleric complained that “People wonder how our lord Khalid could have eaten from such meat?  Oh yes—he ate from it! Our lord Khalid had a very strong character, a great appetite, and everything!  All to terrorize the desert Arabs [apostates].  The matter requires determination; these matters require strength—terrorism.”

Of course, all this accords with the Koran’s many commands to “strike terror” into the hearts of disbelievers, be they born infidels or apostates (see Koran 3:151, 8:12, 8:60).

Now, let us fast-forward to the modern era’s “Arab Spring” and U.S. support for “freedom-fighters” trying to “liberate” Syria (the official, Western narrative of the jihad), and let us reflect on its true nature—from a jihadi (ironically named “Khalid”) biting into the heart of a soldier (and thus striking terror into the hearts of Assad’s “apostate” regime) to Islamic clerics justifying rape and prostitution to gratify the many swords of Allah.

And at last, let us understand that the heartbeat of the jihad—sex, violence, and rapine—has scarcely changed in nearly fourteen centuries.

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/12364/allahs-sword-terror/#5Yvo5jA5EEOtURc2.99

Saturday, March 15, 2014

The Black Hitler of Harlem

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-black-hitler-of-harlem.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+(from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News)&m=1

Saturday, February 15, 2014

Sheikh Ahmad Adnan- "There Is No Such Thing as 'Palestine"

: Sheikh Ahmad Adwan - "There Is No Such Thing as 'Palestine"

Wed Feb 12, 2014 2:16 am (PST) . Posted by:

"Robert Hand" borntolose3@att.net

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Americans For a Safe Israel <afsi@rcn.com>
To: borntolose3@att.net 
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:24 PM
Subject: Sheikh Ahmad Adwan - "There Is No Such Thing as 'Palestine&quot;


Americans for a Safe Israel 
  
February 11, 2014 
    
  
JORDANIAN SHEIKH: 
ALLAH GAVE THE LAND OF ISRAEL TO THE JEWS 
Sunday, February 02, 2014 
  
Al Quds and other Arab media outlets published this amazing article late Jan./early Feb.  
Sheikh Ahmad Adwan, who introduces himself as a Muslim scholar who lives in Jordan, said on his personal Facebook page that there is no such thing as "Palestine&quot; in the Koran. Allah has assigned the Holy Land to the Children of Israel until the Day of Judgment (Koran, Sura 5 - "The Sura of the Table", Verse 21), and "We made the Children of Israel the inheritors (of the land)" (Koran, Sura 26 - "The Sura of the Poets", Verse 59). 

"I say to those who distort their Lord's book, the Koran: From where did you bring the name Palestine, you liars, you accursed, when Allah has already named it "The Holy Land" and bequeathed it to the Children of Israel until the Day of Judgment. There is no such thing as 'Palestine&#39; in the Koran. Your demand for the Land of Israel is a falsehood and it constitutes an attack on the Koran, on the Jews and their land. Therefore you won't succeed, and Allah will fail you and humiliate you, because Allah is the one who will protect them (i.e. the Jews)."

The sheikh added: "The Palestinians are the killers of children, the elderly and women. They attack the Jews and then they use those (children, the elderly and women) as human shields and hide behind them, without mercy for their children as if they weren't their own children, in order to tell the public opinion that the Jews intended to kill them. This is exactly what I saw with my own two eyes in the 70's, when they attacked the Jordanian army, which sheltered and protected them. Instead of thanking it (the Jordanian army), they brought their children forward to (face) the Jordanian army, in order to make the world believe that the army kills their children. This is their habit and custom, their viciousness, their having hearts of stones towards their children, and their lying to public opinion, in order to get its support."

It is worth mentioning, that the above mentioned sheikh visited Israel and met Jewish religious scholars. The "Israel in Arabic" site conducted an interview with him, in which he said that the reason for his openness towards the Jewish people "comes from my acknowledgment of their sovereignty on their land and my belief in the Koran, which told us and emphasized this in many places, like His (Allah's) saying "Oh People (i.e the Children of Israel), enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned unto you" (Koran, Sura 5 - "The Sura of the Table", Verse 21), and His saying "We made the Children of Israel the inheritors (of the land)" (Koran, Sura 26 - "The Sura of the Poets", Verse 59) and many other verses.

He (Adwan) added: "(The Jews) are peaceful people who love peace, who are not hostile and are not aggressors, but if they are attacked, they defend themselves while causing as little damage to the attackers as possible. It is an honor for them that Allah has chosen them over the worlds - meaning over the people and the Jinns until the Day of Judgment. I made the reasons for Allah's choice clear in my books and pamphlets. When Allah chose them, He didn't do so out of politeness, and He wasn't unjust other peoples, it is just that they (the Jews) deserved this." 
  
The Israel in Arabic site, which appears to be an Israeli site, has a much fuller interview in Arabic.

When Adwan visited Safed (Tzfat), it was covered by Israel's Orot TV.

Saturday, January 11, 2014

LOS JUDIOS DE BARRANQUILLA. Tue Jan 7, 2014 9:56 am (PST) . Posted by: "Enrique Valle" valbircorp

INTERESANTE DEL PROGRESO QUE LOS SEFARDITAS DE CURAZAO TRAJERON AL PAIS ENTERO 

Se sabe que los judíos sefarditas de las Antillas, especialmente Curazao, apoyaron económicamente la gesta libertadora de Simón Bolívar y entre ellos se destacan Abraham de Meza y Mordechai Ricardo. Por ello, en 1819 el gobierno de Colombia les entregó a «los miembros de la nación hebrea» el derecho de radicarse en el país, así como la garantía de su libertad religiosa y los mismos derechos políticos del resto de los ciudadanos. Sin embargo, estos derechos se confirieron con una gran ambivalencia, ya que establecieron restricciones y básicamente a estos judíos sefardíes se les permitiría residir únicamente en la costa del Caribe.

En las primeras décadas del siglo XIX, Curazao padeció los efectos de una grave depresión económica, acompañada de sequías y una epidemia de viruela, muchas familias judías sefarditas emigraron hacia otras islas del Caribe y a Suramérica; algunos partieron hacia Coro en Venezuela y otros llegaron a Barranquilla un puerto sobre el río Magdalena al pie de la costa Caribe de Colombia.

Es importante señalar que el desarrollo y la importancia de Barranquilla están directamente ligados y se debe fundamentalmente a las diversas inmigraciones que encontraron albergue en esta ciudad durante el siglo XIX

Al final de la Colonia, Barranquilla era una aldea poblada por humildes pescadores, artesanos y agricultores. En 1775 Barranquilla fue incorporada como corregimiento de la Provincia de Cartagena, sólo se transformó en Villa el 7 de abril de 1813.

En 1823, el libertador Simón Bolívar le entrega al judío alemán Juan Bernardo Elbers la primera concesión para navegar en barcos de vapor por el río Magdalena, luego algunos correligionarios siguieron sus pasos y formaron compañías de transporte fluvial.

En 1832, Abraham Isaac Sénior establece el cementerio hebreo de Barranquilla, que posteriormente va a ser incorporado al cementerio Universal de dicha ciudad.
Durante este período se van a establecer pequeñas comunidades judías de origen sefardita, tanto en Santa Marta como en Riohacha.

En 1835 Barranquilla contaba 5.359 habitantes y comenzó a transformarse en un puerto importante en la región. En 1844 se establece un cementerio judío en Santa Marta y en 1850, se consolida una pequeña, pero significativa comunidad sefardita en Barranquilla. Poco a poco, Barranquilla comienza a superar la población de Santa Marta, aun cuando el puerto principal de la Costa Atlántica continua siendo Cartagena. No sabemos mucho sobre las actividades de los primeros sefarditas en Santa Marta, Riohacha o Barranquilla, pero es claro que varias firmas de sefarditas como fueron los Salas, los Sénior, los Correa, le pidieron permiso al gobierno nacional para importar mercancías a través del puerto de Sabanilla. Así, el comercio, las importaciones y exportaciones que se van a efectuar a partir de dicho puerto van a marcar un auge que impulsó el desarrollo de Barranquilla.

Según el interesante e importante libro de Adelaida Sourdis Nájera, titulado: El Registro Oculto: los sefardíes del Caribe en la formación de la nación colombiana 1813-1886, va a ser en la casa de Abraham Isaac Sénior, donde se van a reunir los judíos sefarditas de la ciudad en minian para rezar y leer el Pentateuco. En dicho período el rabino de la comunidad es don Moisés De Sola. Según los testimonios de Rodolfo Cortizzos, la comunidad se reunía todos los sábados y se celebraban las fechas de año nuevo y el día del perdón. Y en 1867 se establece un comité local de la Alliance Israelite Universelle.

Para 1871, Barranquilla cuenta con 11.595 habitantes y es el puerto más importante de la región superando a Cartagena que en ese momento contaba con 8.603 habitantes y a Santa Marta con 5.702 almas.

El papel que vino a desempeñar la comunidad judía sefardita en el desarrollo de la ciudad también fue documentado en el cuidadoso estudio: árabes y judíos en el desarrollo del Caribe colombiano, 1850-1950 realizado por Louise Fawcett y Eduardo Posada Carbó. Es claro que la llegada de inmigrantes judíos de origen sefardita, sirio-libaneses, alemanes, entre otros, transformó a ciudad y la convirtieron en la urbe más cosmopolita de país. Entre el grupo de familias sefardíes se destacan los apellidos: Sénior, Salas, Álvarez-Correa, Cortizzos, De Sola, López-Penha, Sourdis, Juliao, Salzedo y Heilbron, por mencionar algunos.

El rápido crecimiento y el desarrollo económico se explica en parte por la favorable ubicación de la ciudad, pero también debido a que se generó una sociedad atractiva, libre de barreras sociales, donde estos grupos de inmigrantes encontraron la posibilidad de interactuar sin problemas ni dificultades porque no enfrentaron las convenciones que hicieron a Medellín y a Bogotá ciudades difíciles y cerradas. Barranquilla como ciudad nueva, pujante, abierta a múltiples costumbres, más generosa que las ciudades tradicionales, tenía que transformarse en la urbe de mayor crecimiento con un 38 por ciento, algo hasta ese momento nunca visto en la historia demográfica del país.

Faucett y Posada Carbó señalan que la elección de David Pereira como Gobernador de la provincia de Barranquilla en 1854 era ya un indicativo de la integración alcanzada por la comunidad judía durante la segunda mitad del siglo XIX. Por ello, la historia de este grupo de inmigrantes está íntimamente ligada a la transformación de la ciudad que llegará a ser el puerto más importante del país.

Es diciente que, en 1871, siete de las veintidós contribuciones más elevadas de impuestos fueron pagadas por firmas originarias de Curazao. Es evidente que estos inmigrantes tenían unos contactos comerciales y un conocimiento económico que no había en la región.

En 1871 en Riohacha se instala un comité local de la Alliance Israélite Universelle.

Fueron múltiples los logros destacados en el ámbito social y cultural que se pueden atribuir a esta ola inmigratoria. Entre los más relevantes hay que señalar el acueducto de Barranquilla, dado al servicio en 1880 y construido gracias al impulso de Jacobo Cortizzos y Ramón B. Jimeno, asociados con miembros de la comunidad sefardí. Según Adelaida Sourdis Nájera, el grupo judío controlaba 255 de los 406 votos. Jacobo Cortizzos fue nombrado presidente del acueducto.

Así mismo un buen número de inmigrantes judíos fundó el Club Social de Barranquilla. El primer banco de la ciudad, Banco de Barranquilla, fue establecido por don Jacobo Cortizzos y 17 accionistas judíos que controlaban el 31% de las acciones.

También cabe resaltar que en 1919, Ernesto Cortizzos tuvo un papel determinante en el establecimiento de la primera compañía comercial de transporte aéreo que funcionó en el Nuevo Mundo, SCADTA. Por cierto, para honrar su memoria el aeropuerto internacional de la ciudad de Barranquilla fue bautizado con su nombre.

El mundo cultural y las artes no les fueron ajenos a estos judíos sefardíes. La obra literaria de Abraham Zacarías López-Penha, quien nació en Curazao en 1865 y vivió en Barranquilla desde muy joven, representa una bocanada de aire fresco para la época y aun cuando se pierde en las brumas literarias del país, merece ser redescubierta y reconocida como una de las obras que inaugura una época y una nueva tendencia en la literatura del país. En el estudio titulado Historia de la poesía colombiana, se le reconoce el mérito de ser el primer escritor que estableció contacto con los modernistas franceses. En su publicación Flores y Perlas, un quincenario, tradujo por primera vez a Mallarmé, Baudelaire y Rimbaud. Mantenía correspondencia con Rubén Darío y con Max Nordau, entre otros. Fue amigo del poeta modernista colombiano Luis Carlos López. Y con «el tuerto» López y Manuel Cervera publicaron una antología de poemas titulada Varios á varios. Su poemario Cromos fue prologado por Nicanor Bolet Pedraza y editado por la Biblioteca Azul de París en 1895. Dos años después publica su primera novela Camila Sánchez y en 1898 otro volumen de versos con el título Reflorecencias.

A pesar de las referencias a sus publicaciones en el Diccionario Espasa de 1915, podríamos decir que en Colombia sus poemas y novelas se han olvidado y desconocido. La suya es una cripto-obra dentro de la literatura colombiana. De acuerdo con Alfredo de la Espriella, historiador barranquillero, este judío sefardita goza, entre otras cosas, del mérito de ser el autor de la primera novela esotérica de Colombia titulada La desposada de una sombra, que fue editada por la librería de la Vda. de Ch. Bouret en 1902 en México.

En una nación gobernada en aquellos días por conservadores, que se consagraba todos los años al Sagrado Corazón de Jesús, las composiciones de López-Penha fueron un desafío por su tono escéptico y agnóstico. Vale la pena ver un ejemplo:

¿Presumís dudar que descendemos
de los gorilas y otras bestias asno de Dios?
No; si no aprended a mirar en redor vuestro,
y, luego, contemplaos en un espejo vos...de fijo os convenceréis al cabo, ¡es lógico!
que el mundo, en suma, es un jardín zoológico;que el hombre es un piteco mentecato
con un poco más vicios que el primato;que, tras inventar a Dios á imagen suya,
entre luces, incienso y beatíficas fanfarrias,le exige un cielo en cambio de salmos y aleluyas,
puesto en h`pócrita actitud de parias...en verdad os digo: el templo está desierto,
y el Dios del hombre-mono está bien muerto!

La irreverencia del poeta sefardí impidió que las páginas literarias de los diarios capitalinos, lo reconocieran. Alfredo de la Espriella, en una conferencia que le dictó a la comunidad judía con motivo de los 500 años del Descubrimiento de América y expulsión de los judíos de España, explicó: «No comulgaba con el laurel fachendoso de los poetas bogotanos, o su poesía patriótica o los juegos florales que tanto caracterizaron la producción literaria de su época.»

David López Penha, su hermano, era el dueño de un café llamado La Estrella (tenía grabada en la puerta la estrella de David). Ahí, Abraham Zacarías se deleitó en la lectura de los modernistas. Y por cierto fue uno de sus precursores, como bien lo indican Dino Manco Bermúdez y Paulina Santander Guerra en su tesis sobre el poeta. También los López-Penha, entre sus múltiples negocios, tuvieron a bien establecer el primer el cinematógrafo de la ciudad y fueron dueños de librerías prestigiosas.

El poeta Clímaco Soto Borda, refiriéndose a la actividad periodística y divulgadora de López-Penha, solicitó que: «se estableciera un cordón sanitario en redondo de nuestra Atenas? La pretenciosa denominación con que se tildaba y todavía se tilda a Bogotá para que librase a nuestros bardos de aquel terrible contagio». ¿Cuál era el temor de Soto Borda? ¿Sería que intuía que López-Penha y los modernistas, el cine y las nuevas artes marchitarían el romanticismo floral de los poetas de la Gruta Simbólica?

A pesar de la polémica que despertó en su momento López-Penha, hoy ha caído en total olvido. Siempre me ha extrañado que Colombia, un país de poetas, tan atento a cualquier vate, se descuide y desconozca la obra de López-Penha con tanta pasión. Es inexplicable el olvido al que someten a este poeta sefardí enterrándolo en las bóvedas de la historia literaria colombiana. Me atrevo a pensar que se debe al desconocimiento de sus escritos. Pero, sorprende y resulta sospechoso el desdén y amnesia del mundo poético por sus obras. Tal vez por ello sea apropiado recordar uno de sus versos que dice: «En un rincón de la casa / la araña teje que teje, / y el sol alumbra que alumbra, / y el hombre miente que miente.»

Las actividades tanto comerciales, industriales como artísticas de estos inmigrantes le dieron a la comunidad judía sefardita una eminente posición dentro de la vida social y económica de Barranquilla. Es bueno destacar que la presencia de estos inmigrantes judíos lejos de producir celos, fue recibida con entusiasmo y de manera cordial.

Sin embargo, el desarrollo que fomentó esta comunidad y el impacto que tuvo en la ciudad caribeña no ayudó para que el gobierno colombiano tuviera una actitud más tolerante y una mirada más benévola hacia la nueva ola inmigratoria de judíos ashquenazitas que vendrían de Europa oriental y judíos sefarditas provenientes de los países árabes durante la década de los treinta y cuarenta del siglo XX quienes huían de la depresión, la guerra mundial y la persecución Nazi.

Colombia siempre fue y continúa siendo un país cerrado a la inmigración. Y las prohibiciones a la venida de judíos durante la década de los treinta cobijaron tanto a las comunidades ashquenazitas como a las sefarditas. Para los antisemitas son iguales unos y otros a pesar de sus marcadas diferencias culturales. Y por consiguiente los que vinieron a Colombia, al comienzo lo hicieron de contrabando (parece ya un patrón histórico en el país).

Durante la preguerra surgió un pequeño tráfico de visas, resultado de las prohibiciones que se establecieron en torno a la inmigración. Los inmigrantes judíos sefarditas y ashquenazitas que ya habían logrado asentarse y que vinieron a Colombia durante la década de los veinte y principio de los treinta, ante las dificultades que vivían sus familiares tanto en Europa como en los países árabes, hicieron lo imposible por traerlos legalmente. El gobierno los obligó a depositar en el Banco de la República la elevada suma de mil pesos para empezar las diligencias legales (en otras palabras, unos once mil dólares de hoy día) lo que hacía particularmente difícil y onerosa la traída de cualquier pariente al país. La angustia los llevó a trabajar en forma tesonera y a ahorrar para pagar la suma que demandaba el Estado para comenzar unos trámites que no necesariamente garantizaban la admisión de los suyos. Los que llegaban debían jurar que eran mecánicos agrícolas o expertos en aguas o riego, cualquier profesión o práctica, pero nunca la del comercio, la única que en verdad podían ejercer.

El Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores del Presidente Eduardo Santos, Luis López de Mesa, quien gozaba entre los círculos de poder de una extraña fama de «sabio» fue el artífice de esta visión discriminatoria. Estudios como el del sociólogo Carlos Uribe Celis, titulado Luis López de Mesa, aproximación crítica a su obra, permite entrever las concepciones racistas y xenófobas de este personaje. Era claro que López de Mesa consideraba inconveniente la inmigración de judíos dadas «sus costumbres invertebradas de asimilación de riqueza por el cambio, la usura, por el trueque y el truco, sin arraigar en las actividades de su producción y transformación.»

Las absurdas teorías racistas de López de Mesa, que en alguna ocasión afirmó que la mezcla entre los indígenas y los judíos daría la peor de las condiciones «un usurero zalamer», lo llevaron a emitir una circular el 30 de enero de 1939 a todas las embajadas donde subrayaba: «Considera el Gobierno que la cifra de 5.000 judíos actualmente establecida en Colombia constituyen [sic] ya un porcentaje [sic] imposible de superar [...] opongan todas las trabas humanamente posibles a las visas de nuevos pasaportes a elementos judíos.»

Y sin embargo, aun cuando existió un antisemitismo oficial en Colombia que dificultó su entrada y la de sus familiares al país, también hay que decir que Colombia, desde los días de la Conquista, acuñó y volvió propia la famosa frase del conquistador español Sebastián de Belalcázar: «se obedece pero no se cumple». Y por más que los decretos prohibieran la entrada de judíos o que llegarán con papeles falsos no se registraron denuncias, devoluciones o extradiciones de quienes consiguieron ingresar al territorio nacional.

Colombia siempre ha mantenido una actitud ambivalente y discrepante con sus propias leyes, y los colombianos se mueven sin problemas entre un país legal y otro real. Por lo tanto, los judíos de Colombia, a pesar de su ilegalidad, en el siglo XX pudieron desarrollar una vida judía sin mayores dificultades y crearon instituciones como sinagogas, colegios, revistas, clubes, carnicerías para sus dietas religiosas, cementerios que todavía persisten y pudieron crecer y prosperar dentro de la cultura que traían de Europa y el Medio Oriente, en un país xenófobo que nunca les dio la bienvenida, pero les permitió refugiarse en silencio en sus tierras.

Sin embargo, su silencio no les sirvió de mucho cuando comenzaron a ser víctimas del flagelo que látigo a los industriales y comerciantes durante la década de los setenta, ochenta y noventa: el secuestro y extorción. La comunidad judía, al igual que la clase dirigente colombiana, vino a ser uno de los sectores afectadas por esta práctica criminal que terminó a financiando a todos los grupos armados del conflicto colombiano.

En el caso de la comunidad sefardita, el secuestro, extorsión y posterior asesinato en 1998 del joven Benjamín Khoudari, miembro de dicha comunidad de Bogotá, por parte de personas vinculadas a los organismos de seguridad del Estado haciéndose pasar por guerrilla, asustó y precipitó la salida de buena parte de esta judería colombiana.

Se calcula que el Centro Israelita de Bogotá ( la comunidad asquenazi) la institución más numerosa de la ciudad, perdió en dicho año un 25% de sus miembros; la Comunidad Hebrea Sefardita de Bogotá cerca de un 30% y la Asociación Israelita Montefiore, la comunidad más liberal y de origen alemán, un 15% de sus miembros. Ahora bien, el 60% de los afectados que salieron del país emigraron a Miami o a la Florida; el 25% a Israel; el 10% a Costa Rica y el 5% a otros países como Panamá y Canadá.

Para concluir, es importante tener en cuenta en este cuadro sobre los sefarditas en Colombia, que fue solo hasta 1991 que el país, ante la crisis y los dilemas de su falta de apertura tanto política como cultural, expide una nueva Constitución en la cual por primera vez acepta y oficializa la libertad de cultos en el territorio nacional.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saudades-sefarad/message/44814;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZGRoaGI0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzM3ODg1NgRncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNzYzMTUEbXNnSWQDNDQ4MTQEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTM4OTE4MzI0OQ--