God Rains Down Divine Retribution Upon Detractors of Israel

B”H

Breaking Israel News

“And if in spite of these things ye will not be corrected unto Me, but will walk contrary unto Me; then will I also walk contrary unto you; and I will smite you, even I, seven times for your sins.” Leviticus 26:23-24 (The Israel Bible™)

Margot Wallström, Sweden’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister, has earned a reputation for Israel-bashing. The first blatant anti-Israel offense came in 2014, when she became the first European Union foreign minister to recognize the state of Palestine.

After the horrifying terror attacks in Paris last November, she came out with a statement linking Islamic anger to the lack of a two-state solution. Even worse, after months of terror in which Palestinians were attacking Israelis in the streets on an almost daily basis,  she accused Israel in January of carrying out “extrajudicial executions”.

Israel reacted through diplomatic channels, but a more powerful force stepped in. Three days after Wallström accused Israel of executing Palestinians, it was revealed that she had jumped to the head of an eight-year waiting list for apartments owned by a labor union. Stockholm is suffering from a serious shortage of housing and this was viewed by the Swedish public as an egregious misuse of her position. Anti-corruption prosecutors are investigating the case now to determine if it constitutes bribery, which carries a potential two-year prison term.

This type of instant karma is the rule and not the exception when it comes to politicians that treat Israel badly. One of the clearest examples of divine slap-down came on January 21, 1998, when US President Bill Clinton gave Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a decidedly cold reception at the White House, and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright refused to have lunch with Netanyahu. Things looked grim for Israel, but later that day, the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke out, ultimately resulting in Clinton’s impeachment.

President George H.W. Bush signed the Oslo Accords on October 30, 1991, setting the stage for the disastrous “Land for Peace” process. The very next day, a hurricane dubbed “The Perfect Storm” hit the east coast of the United States, destroying Bush’s house in Kennebunkport, Maine.

Occasionally, divine intervention can take an ironic turn. As president, Jimmy Carter was not nearly as involved with Israel as he has been since leaving office. In his book, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, he blames Israel’s “colonization of Palestinian land” as being “the primary obstacle to a comprehensive peace agreement”.

Carter was a proponent of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) since it seemed to produce results and bear pressure on Israel to negotiate. He has also met with many leaders of Hamas and during the 2014 war in Gaza, called for Israel to negotiate with Hamas.

One year later, he was diagnosed with cancer and melanomas were found in his brain and liver. After only a few months of treatment, the doctors  pronounced him cancer-free. Pembrolizumab, a drug developed in Israel, was a key element in his treatment. His adherence to boycotting Israeli products and innovations obviously had its limits.

Carter’s miracle cure may not have been solely attributed to Israeli science. His sins against the Jewish people may have been forgiven in December 2009, when Carter published an open letter apologizing for any words or deeds that may have upset the Jewish community. In the letter, he said he was offering an Al Het, a prayer of repentance, said on Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement.

Divine retribution is not restricted to non-Jews. Ariel Sharon had achieved almost legendary status in Israel. After a spectacular army career, he entered politics and, at the head of the Likud party, was elected prime minister in 2001. He endorsed the Roadmap for Peace and began plans to remove the Jewish population of Gush Katif from the Gaza Strip. The dismantling of the Jewish settlements was scheduled for August 15th, 2005, the day after Tisha b’Av, the anniversary of both Jewish Temples being destroyed.

In July, one month before the IDF dismantled Gush Katif and evicted almost 9,000 Jews from their homes, Rabbi Yosef Dayan, a member of the nascent Sanhedrin who can trace his lineage back to King David, led a group of ten rabbis in performing an obscure, ancient Kabbalistic ceremony, the Pulsa diNura, on Sharon. The Pulsa diNura invokes the angels of destruction to block heavenly forgiveness of the subject’s sins, causing all the curses named in the Bible to befall him and resulting in his death.

Sharon’s health deteriorated, and by January, he suffered a hemorrhagic stroke, entering a vegetative state from which he never recovered. Rabbi Dayan also led rabbis in the Pulsa diNura against Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin a few months before he was assassinated. Rabin was shot and killed in 1995 by Yigal Amir, an extremist who  opposed Rabin’s peace initiative and particularly the signing of the Oslo Accords.

Rabbi Dayan told Breaking Israel News that none of these events were simple coincidence, but divine justice. “Today, there isn’t prophecy. God presents circumstances for us to try to understand him, to express our belief in him,” he explained. “These aren’t things that happen by chance or coincidence. This is not just true for politics, but it is also true for politics. Politicians are, after all, simple servants of God, no less or more than the rest of us.”

 

 

 

The Kingdoms of David and Solomon

“And the L-RD preserved David whither-so-ever he went. And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed judgment and justice unto all his people.”

Bible History OnLine
Map of the Kingdoms of David and Solomon
(Enlarge) (PDF for Print) (Freely Distributed)

Map of the Kingdoms of David and Solomon

After King Saul’s death, David was proclaimed king of Judah at Hebron, and after the murder of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, David was crowned king by the tribes of Israel. David extended his kingdom north, south, east, and west. His son Solomon brought the Kingdom of Israel to its greatest extent and even became a world power comparable to Assyria and Egypt. (Also compare with the 1949 map of Israel.)

David conquered Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made it his capital and center of worship. He expanded his kingdom by victories over the Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites, and suppressed many rebellions.  Solomon made treaties with Egypt, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Sidon, and the Hittite nation.

1 Kings 1:37 – As the LORD hath been with my lord the king, even so be he with Solomon, and make his throne greater than the throne of my lord king David.

2 Samuel 8:11-15 “Which also king David did dedicate unto the LORD, with the silver and gold that he had dedicated of all nations which he subdued; Of Syria, and of Moab, and of the children of Ammon, and of the Philistines, and of Amalek, and of the spoil of Hadadezer, son of Rehob, king of Zobah. And David gat [him] a name when he returned from smiting of the Syrians in the valley of salt, [being] eighteen thousand [men]. And he put garrisons in Edom; throughout all Edom put he garrisons, and all they of Edom became David’s servants. And the LORD preserved David whithersoever he went. And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed judgment and justice unto all his people.”

2 Samuel 5:7-10 “Nevertheless David took the strong hold of Zion: the same [is] the city of David. And David said on that day, Whosoever getteth up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind, [that are] hated of David’s soul, [he shall be chief and captain]. Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house. So David dwelt in the fort, and called it the city of David. And David built round about from Millo and inward. And David went on, and grew great, and the LORD God of hosts [was] with him.”

King David’s Political Situation in the Bible Encyclopedia – ISBE

David
3. Political Situation:

There is no doubt that the expansion of the boundaries of Israel at this period almost to their ideal limits (Dt 11:24, etc.) was largely due to the fact that the two great empires of Egypt and Assyria were at the moment passing through a period of weakness and decay. The Assyrian monarchy was in a decadent state from about the year 1050 BC, and the 22nd Dynasty–to which Shishak belonged (1 Ki 14:25)–had not yet arisen. David, therefore, had a free hand when his time came and found no more formidable opposition than that of the petty states bordering upon Palestine. Against the combined forces of all the Israelite tribes these had never been able to effect much.
 Full Article

2. Conquests Abroad:
King of all the Israelite tribes, David found his hands free to expel the foreigners who had invaded the sacred territory. His first step was to move his headquarters from the Southern Hebron, which he had been compelled at first to make his capital, to the more central Jerusalem. The fort here, which was still held by the aboriginal Jebusites, was stormed by Joab, David’s nephew, who also superintended the rebuilding for David. He was in consequence appointed commander-in-chief (1 Ch 11:6,8), a post which he held as long as David lived. The materials and the skilled workmen for the erection of the palace were supplied by Hiram of Tyre (2 Sam 5:11). David now turned his attention to the surrounding tribes and peoples. The most formidable enemy, the Philistines, were worsted in several campaigns, and their power crippled (2 Sam 5:17 ff; 8:1). In one of these David so nearly came by his death, that his people would not afterward permit him to take part in the fighting (2 Sam 21:16,17). One of the first countries against which David turned his arms was the land of Moab, which he treated with a severity which would suggest that the Moabite king had ill-treated David’s father and mother, who had taken refuge with him (2 Sam 8:2). Yet his conduct toward the sons of Ammon was even more cruel (2 Sam 12:31), and for less cause (10:1 ff). The king of Zobah (Chalkis) was defeated (2 Sam 8:3), and Israelite garrisons were placed in Syria of Damascus (2 Sam 8:6) and Edom (2 Sam 8:14). The sons of Ammon formed a league with the Syrian kingdoms to the North and East of Palestine (2 Sam 10:6,16), but these also had no success. All these people became tributary to the kingdom of Israel under David (2 Sam 10:18,19) except the sons of Ammon who were practically exterminated for the time being (2 Sam 12:31). Thus, Israel became one of the “great powers” of the world during the reign of David and his immediate successor.
   Full Article

David in Smith’s Bible Dictionary

David
3. David’s reign.–
1. As king of Judah at Hebron, 7 1/2 years. 2Sa 2:1 … 5:5 Here David was first formally anointed king. 2Sa 2:4 To Judah his dominion was nominally confined. Gradually his power increased, and during the two years which followed the elevation of Ish-bosheth a series of skirmishes took place between the two kingdoms. Then rapidly followed the successive murders of Abner and of Ish-bosheth. 2Sa 3:30; 4:5 The throne, so long waiting for him, was now vacant, and the united voice of the whole people at once called him to occupy it. For the third time David was anointed king, and a festival of three days celebrated the joyful event. 1Ch 12:39 One of David’s first acts after becoming king was to secure Jerusalem, which he seized from the Jebusites and fixed the royal residence there. Fortifications were added by the king and by Joab, and it was known by the special name of the “city of David.” 2Sa 5:9; 1Ch 11:7 The ark was now removed from its obscurity at Kirjath-jearim with marked solemnity, and conveyed to Jerusalem. The erection of the new capital at Jerusalem introduces us to a new era in David’s life and in the history of the monarchy. He became a king on the scale of the great Oriental sovereigns of Egypt and Persia, with a regular administration and organization of court and camp; and he also founded an imperial dominion which for the first time realize the prophetic description of the bounds of the chosen people. Ge 15:18-21 During the succeeding ten years the nations bordering on his kingdom caused David more or less trouble, but during this time he reduced to a state of permanent subjection the Philistines on the west, 2Sa 8:1 the Moabites on the east, 2Sa 8:2 by the exploits of Benaiah, 2Sa 23:20 the Syrians on the northeast as far as the Euphrates, 2Sa 8:3 the Edomites, 2Sa 8:14 on the south; and finally the Ammonites, who had broken their ancient alliance, and made one grand resistance to the advance of his empire. 
Full Article

David in the Bible Encyclopedia – ISBE

David
2. Conquests Abroad:
King of all the Israelite tribes, David found his hands free to expel the foreigners who had invaded the sacred territory. His first step was to move his headquarters from the Southern Hebron, which he had been compelled at first to make his capital, to the more central Jerusalem. The fort here, which was still held by the aboriginal Jebusites, was stormed by Joab, David’s nephew, who also superintended the rebuilding for David. He was in consequence appointed commander-in-chief (1 Ch 11:6,8), a post which he held as long as David lived. The materials and the skilled workmen for the erection of the palace were supplied by Hiram of Tyre (2 Sam 5:11). David now turned his attention to the surrounding tribes and peoples. The most formidable enemy, the Philistines, were worsted in several campaigns, and their power crippled (2 Sam 5:17 ff; 8:1). In one of these David so nearly came by his death, that his people would not afterward permit him to take part in the fighting (2 Sam 21:16,17). One of the first countries against which David turned his arms was the land of Moab, which he treated with a severity which would suggest that the Moabite king had ill-treated David’s father and mother, who had taken refuge with him (2 Sam 8:2). Yet his conduct toward the sons of Ammon was even more cruel (2 Sam 12:31), and for less cause (10:1 ff). The king of Zobah (Chalkis) was defeated (2 Sam 8:3), and Israelite garrisons were placed in Syria of Damascus (2 Sam 8:6) and Edom (2 Sam 8:14). The sons of Ammon formed a league with the Syrian kingdoms to the North and East of Palestine (2 Sam 10:6,16), but these also had no success. All these people became tributary to the kingdom of Israel under David (2 Sam 10:18,19) except the sons of Ammon who were practically exterminated for the time being (2 Sam 12:31). Thus, Israel became one of the “great powers” of the world during the reign of David and his immediate successor.
Full Article

Solomon in the Bible Encyclopedia – ISBE

II. Reign of Solomon.
1. His Vision:

It was apparently at the very beginning of his reign that Solomon made his famous choice of a “hearing heart,” i.e. an obedient heart, in preference to riches or long life. The vision took place at Gibeon (2 Ch 1:7, but in 1 Ki 3:4 f the ancient versions read “upon the altar that was in Gibeon. And the Lord appeared,” etc.). The life of Solomon was a curious commentary on his early resolution. One of the first acts of his reign was apparently, in the style of the true oriental monarch, to build himself a new palace, that of his father being inadequate for his requirements. In regard to politics, however, the events of Solomon’s reign may be regarded as an endorsement of his choice. Under him alone was the kingdom of Israel a great world-power, fit almost to rank beside Assyria and Egypt. Never again were the bounds of Israel so wide; never again were north and south united in one great nation. There is no doubt that the credit of this result is due to the wisdom of Solomon. Full Article

The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel

What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.

Bedouin nomads from Arabian Peninsula on the move (Photo – Pintrest)

The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.

UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.

The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.

The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.

As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.

The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.

The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.

From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.

The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.

Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.

With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.

The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.

Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”

Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.

According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.

The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:

 

It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.

It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.

Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):

Al-Turki – Turkey

Sultan – Turkey

Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey

Al Masri – Egypt

Masrawa – Egypt

Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt

Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt

Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt

Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt

Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt

Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt

Al Bana – Egypt

Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq

Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq

Zoabi – West Iraq

Al-Faruki – Iraq

Al-Tachriti – Iraq

Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq

Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)

Tamimi – Saudi Arabia

Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia

Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia

Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia

Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria

Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)

Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria

Al-Qudwa – Syria

Nashashibi – Syria

Khamati – Syria

Lubnani – Lebanon

Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon

Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon

Al-Yamani – Yemen

Al-Azad – Yemen

Hadadin – Yemen

Matar – Matar village. Yemen

Morad – Yemen

Khamadan – Yemen

Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco

Al-Araj – Morocco

Bushnak – Bosnia

Al-Shashani – Chechnya

Al-Jazir – Algiers

Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan

Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)

Al-Hamis – Bahrain

Zarqawi – Jordan

Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon

 

These are the locations of some of the Arab tribes in Israel who are mistakenly referred to as “Palestinians”:

Hebron – Tamimi, Natshi, Ja’abri, Abu Sanina, Qawasma

Jericho – Erekat (Arikat)

Beith Lehem – Touqan , Shak’ka

Schem* (Nablus) – Al-Masri

Tulkarem – Al-Carmi

Ramallah – Baraguthi, Tawil, Abbas

Um Al-Fahm (Israeli citizens) – Jabrin

East Jerusalem – Hejazi (The Hejaz region is the eastern shoreline by the Red Sea, Saudi Arabia)

Gaza – Al-Masri, Tarabin, Al-Abid

____________________

Rotem Ninkovsky is the media consultant for the Kedem Forum For Israel’s Public Diplomacy and Middle East Studies

Daniel Seaman, Editor of  Mida English Edition, contributed to the writing of this article

[Find this article interesting? You can find more in depth articles on Israel and the Middle East @en.mida.org.il]

What is Israel’s next move as Turks and Saudis duel over Jerusalem?

Turkey is spending millions of dollars a year to gain influence on the Temple Mount in coordination with a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood known as the Islamic Movement in Israel.
Muslims visit at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem's Old City on Feb. 28, 2020. Photo by Sliman Khader/Flash90.

Muslims visit at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem’s Old City on Feb. 28, 2020. Photo by Sliman Khader/Flash90.

Tensions have run increasingly high between the Jordanians and Saudis on one side, and the Turks and Qataris on the other over control of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

“Turkey’s neo-Ottominism in its foreign policy seeks to re-establish its empire; however, the audience is not Western elites, but is meant for domestic consumption,” said David Wurmser, who served as a senior adviser on the Middle East to former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and is currently an executive at the Dephi Global Analysis Group, which he founded.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is driving “an internal policy outward, tapping into the primordial roots of what Turkey once was with the dissolution of the Ottoman caliphate,” Wurmser told JNS.

It all goes back to the modern struggle within Turkey of whether or not the country is meant to be a secular democracy or the leader of the Islamic world, says the former senior U.S. official.

Jordan and Saudi Arabia are pushing back against Islamist supporting Turkey and Qatar that’s pushing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the world.

According to a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute, the former Jordanian Minister of Information, Saleh Al-Qallab, was quoted as saying earlier this month on Al-Arabiya that “Erdoğan is currently the supreme guide of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

“The Muslim Brotherhood is an actual terrorist organization,” says Al-Qallab. “What is he [Erdoğan] doing in Arab countries? Is he an Ottoman?”

According to Harold Rhode, a longtime former adviser on Islamic affairs within the U.S. Defense Department’s Office of Net Assessment, and who worked for a time as the Turkish desk officer in the Pentagon, many “young Turks say they hate Islam—they see themselves as Deists but not Muslims.”

“Nevertheless, Turkish culture is so deeply rooted in Islam. And in Islam, Muslims are regarded as brothers, and that is why when it comes to the Palestinians, most of these youth support the Palestinians anyway.

“Why is that?” continues Rhode. “Because these Turkish Deists, regardless of their ideological or political affiliation, apparently do not realize that their opinions about the Muslims are still informed by Islam, which they claim to have abandoned.”

Saudis and Turks battle for Jerusalem

Turkey is spending millions of dollars a year to gain influence on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in coordination with the branch of the Muslim Brotherhood known as the Islamic Movement in Israel.

According to an article by Nadav Shragai in the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, “Turkey is working diligently to deepen its involvement and influence on the Temple Mount, in the Old City of Jerusalem and in east Jerusalem neighborhoods.”

Rhode says Turkey is getting the millions of dollars from Qatar—the major funder of the Muslim Brotherhood—to invest in Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations throughout the Muslim world, and in this case, to gain influence among Israeli Arabs in Jerusalem.

“Turkey is carrying out actions in cahoots with Qatar,” he says. “This also explains Turkey’s great interest in Gaza, where Qatar is a major backer of the Muslim Brotherhood offshoot Hamas.”

According to a report in the Israel Hayom newspaper, Israel and Saudi Arabia are in secret talks with the United States since last December about giving the Saudis a stake with Jordan in the Islamic Waqf Council at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

The report said that the Jordanians initially rejected diluting its power over the Waqf Council, but later changed its position to counter Turkish interference.

A separate article published in Al Jazeera in May 2019 also spoke about this ongoing feud over Jerusalem and sated that the rising popularity of Turkey among Palestinians “was worrying Saudi Arabia.”

Rhode says that the Saudis, as Wahhabi Muslims, follow the teachings of their intellectual godfather Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328), a Muslim theorist who hated Jews along with most other non-Sunni Muslims.

“Ibn Taymiyyah also proved, using early Islamic sources, that the attempt to make Jerusalem holy in Islam was nothing more than a Jewish plot to Judaify Islam,” explains Rhode, adding that Ibn Taymiyyah stated that the only holy cities in Islam were Mecca and Medina, and not Jerusalem.

So for the Saudis, Jerusalem is not holy, but it is important only because of the battle with the Muslim Brotherhood leaders of Turkey for the soul of Sunni Islam.

Therefore, adds Rhode, “the Saudis cannot disavow Jerusalem because it has become a political issue and it now sees Islamist Turkey as a threat there. And the Jordanians are terrified by the Turks.”

“In the grand scheme of things, it is the impoverished Jordanians who cannot stand up alone against the Turks by themselves because they don’t have the financial resources,” and that is why “the Jordanians asked the wealthy Saudis to join them in stopping the Turks from taking over control of the Muslim Waqf on the Temple Mount.”

The Saudis and the Jordanians are united in their battle against the Turks, Qataris and the Muslim Brotherhood, which are all trying to take over the Temple Mount.

‘It would not serve a good purpose for Israel’

Asked what Israel’s policy should be on this issue, Rhode suggested that “Israel stay out of this Muslim battle and not publicly take sides, meaning, do what Israel did in Syria: Take no side in the Syrian civil war, but only intervene when Israeli interests are at stake.”

Because if Israel says anything in favor of the Saudis and Jordanians, the Turks, Qataris and other Muslim Brotherhood activists “would accuse the Saudis and Jordanians of being Zionist stooges.”

Wurmser asserts that letting the Saudis, Jordanians, Turks and Qataris to battle it out is not a bad idea in principle, though it depends on how it would be played out in reality. “If the battle is perceived by the Saudis and Turks as a battle over the ruins of Israel, and that it would accelerate its marginalization and eventual surrender, then it would not serve a good purpose for Israel,” he says.

However, adds Wurmser, “if Israel would take a strong role as judge in the dispute by being the power broker, then this would put Israel in a position of power.”

The former U.S. official says this is also how the United States needs to approach its role in the Middle East so as not to be marginalized and lose its influence.

Therefore, he notes, Israel needs to take a strong position and not surrender Jerusalem to the Muslims. He suggests that when Israel is invested in a side publicly, “then that side can hold it hostage such as what Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas does.”

Abbas frequently threatens to cut ties with Israel and stop security cooperation even though he never follows through, says Wurmser, yet “it makes Israel appear weak and without leverage in the situation.”

Judea Samaria council comes out against US peace plan, fearing rise of Palestinian state

The council said it would lobby against the so-called deal of the century after it is unveiled Tuesday.

By Batya Jerenberg, World Israel News

The umbrella organization that represents all Jews living in Judea and Samaria came out Tuesday against the American peace proposal because it will endanger the growth of their communities and even their lives, they say.

The YESHA Council’s foremost objection to the plan, dubbed the ‘deal of the century,’ it that it gives the Palestinians some form of a state.

In the letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signed by 80 heads of Jewish villages, communities and outposts rejecting the plan, the Yesha Council also objected to other, unconfirmed details of the plan that they said would be a recipe of disaster.

They wrote that even if Israel is allowed sovereignty over 30 percent of the disputed territory, most of it is in the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea area. This would mean only 10 percent of the rest of the land liberated in 1967’s Six Day War would be annexed, which is a far cry from the entire Area C that is under full Israeli civilian and military control even now.

Area C is necessary for the growth of their communities and to ensure their safety, they wrote.

Netanyahu brought several council members on his trip to Washington to meet President Donald Trump. He spoke to them after his meeting with the president on Monday.

“We cannot come to terms with a situation that allows the Palestinian Authority the ability to build up to the gates of our communities, turning them into a right that strangles us,” they wrote.

“He tried to sell us on the idea that it wouldn’t really be a Palestinian state,” Council head David Elhayani told the Times of Israel on Tuesday. The website reported that he said worry over the plan kept him awake at night.

Elhayani rejected Netanyahu’s view that Israel could accept such an entity because it would be demilitarized, have no control over its borders, and would allegedly be largely non-contiguous, said the report.

Agreeing with analysts in international law that demilitarization is essentially impossible to demand of a sovereign state, Elhayani asked rhetorically, “Who are we to tell a sovereign entity not to have an army or not to have an airport?”

Gush Etzion Regional Council Chairman Shlomo Ne’eman said that accepting the plan as a whole – a Trump demand – is not worth the risk of a Palestinian state in Israel’s heartland, even if it allows Israel to annex some territory.

“That is something you can never walk back, whereas you can always enact sovereignty over settlements a year or two from now,” he told the website.

 

Hilltop youth outpost in Samaria entirely populated by girls

World Israel News

In the only hilltop outpost of its kind, eight girls have taken to pioneering living in Samaria.

By David Isaac, World Israel News

‘Hilltop Youth’ is a term that usually brings to mind young, deeply religious men. Sometimes they clash with Israeli authorities as the outposts they set up aren’t built with approval. But one outpost breaks from the mold in at least one important respect – it’s made up only of girls.

Maoz Esther, (or “Esther Stronghold”) is a small outpost in the middle of Samaria in the hills of the Binyamin region.

Eight girls, ages 13-19, who left their homes and schools live there in a plywood home which they built themselves.

Efrat Atia, 16, tells Carmel Dangor of Channel 11 News: “I left [school] in order to invest my life now in what is needed. Now I am a soldier. Where am I needed? On a hilltop? Fine. So I leave and go to the hilltop.”

Atia says friends, teachers and parents were against the idea. They ridiculed their attempt, saying they’d be back in school in a matter of months.

They’ve already proven the naysayers wrong. Some of the girls have lived there for a year, others already two years.

The conditions are relatively good, Atia says, noting that they have running water which isn’t always the case. They have a bathroom and showers, which they didn’t six months ago.

They don’t yet have electricity but they do have a solar charger.

The girls live a few kilometers from a Bedouin village but none of the Bedouin have approached their outpost. Atia says the reason is that it’s Jewish territory and the Bedouins understand that.

“I’m aware that in principle there could be an attack here, but we’re in a war here for the land, and in a war as in war you have wounded. This is the mission now,” said Shalhevet Goldstein, 16.

The girls see themselves as part of a historic process to take back the Land of Israel for the Jews.

“If tomorrow in the morning they’ll apply sovereignty on Maoz Esther, we’ll advance to the next hill.” Goldstein said.

“And if they apply sovereignty to the next hill, and on all of Judea and Samaria, we’ll go forward. There are two banks to the Jordan River. And if [there’s sovereignty] on the two banks of the Jordan, then we’ll advance to the entire Land of Israel,” Goldstein said.

 

The rabbi sent a letter to Trump: ‘NO’ to the peace plan

Rabbi HaLevi sent a letter to US President Donald Trump which states the several reasons why this new peace plan can NOT be accepted as is.

Israel News Talk Radio , 22/06/20 02:08

 

Donald Trump

Donald Trump                                                                                                           Reuters

How can a plan for peace be bad? Well, with US President Donald Trump’s “Deal of the Century” Peace Plan, which is the same formula as the failed “two state solution” and goes against the Bible, and the fact Mahmoud Abbas has already refused and rejected it, this plan has nowhere to go.

Tamar Yonah speaks with her fascinating guest, Rav (Rabbi) Meir HaLevi, an Israeli who shares with us his family’s background being Levites from the Tribe of Levi, one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

He explains that as a Jew and a Levite, his ancestors stood at Mount Sinai when the Torah was given. His family served G-d in the Holy Temple that King Solomon built in Jerusalem. His ancestors were eventually exiled to Babylon with other Jews, and remained there for 2500 years.

After the Modern State of Israel came into existence in 1948, his family was finally able to come to the Promised Land. Rav Meir HaLevi became the first child in his family to be born in Israel after 2,500 years of Exile. Today, he is the spokesperson of the “Nascent Sanhedrin.”

Rabbi HaLevi helped draft a letter to US President Donald Trump which states the several reasons why this new peace plan can NOT be accepted as is, that it would create a terror state, and that Israel cannot be ‘split’ or ‘divided’.

The articles stating that Israel can apply sovereignty to Jewish communities in its Biblical Heartland, or, Judea and Samaria, or as some incorrectly refer to as ‘The West Bank’, is a positive and correct move. However, it cannot stop there. Listeners call in, and make their comments. This is an intriguing show.

‘Shatter the Two-State Illusion, It Will Never Happen,’ Says Israeli Ambassador to US

Ron Dermer

For decades, “Palestinian leaders have rejected every Israeli peace overture while systematically promoting a culture that rejects peace and glorifies terrorism,” Ron Dermer wrote in the Washington Post on Friday.

By Ezra Stone, United with Israel

“The extension of Israeli sovereignty to certain territories in Judea and Samaria will not, as many critics suggest, destroy the two-state solution. But it will shatter the two-state illusion,” Israel’s ambassador to the United States Ron Dermer wrote in a blunt Washington Post opinion piece this week.

Dermer adds that not only will the current “two-state illusion … never happen,” it is preventing the emergence of “a two-state solution that might advance peace.”

Dermer wrote the op-ed in response to resistance in the U.S. and Europe to Israel’s plan to extend sovereignty over Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, where around half a million Israelis live.

Under Netanyahu’s plan, Israel will annex territory in Judea and Samaria that it gained from Jordan in 1967’s Six-Day War, when four Arab nations launched an onslaught on Israel. Judea and Samaria served as the Jewish people’s breadbasket during biblical times and preserved a continual Jewish presence throughout millennia of occupation by the Romans, Islamic armies, the Ottomans, the British, and the Jordanians Hashemite family

For decades, Palestinian leaders have demanded control of Judea and Samaria for an “independent state,” despite the fact that the so-called Palestinian people never existed before the creation of the Jewish state, nor has there ever been a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria

Dermer sees Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria as a step that will “open the door to a realistic two-state solution and get the peace process out of the cul-de-sac it has been stuck in for two decades.”

“For 20 years,” Dermer continies, “Palestinian leaders have rejected every Israeli peace overture while systematically promoting a culture that rejects peace and glorifies terrorism, including by providing a lifetime of financial support for terrorists who murder Jews.

Dermer reminds the world, “The rejectionism of Palestinian leaders has been no surprise to those who understand that this century-old conflict has never been about establishing a Palestinian state. It has always been about rejecting the Jewish state.”

Unfortunately, “The past two decades of Palestinian intransigence, incitement and terror” has not “convince[d] many international leaders to reconsider their assumptions and rethink their approach to the peace process,” and “they continue[] to ignore the root cause of the conflict and [keep] doubling down on a failed strategy, hoping to thread a needle through the so-called final status issues (territory, security, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, etc.) that could magically weave together a deal.”

Dermer encourages the world to accept “reality on the ground” and stopping making “unrealistic proposals that have zero chance of being implemented.”

Finally, Dermer exposes the hypocrisy of those who condemn Israel’s “unilateral” annexation plan for Judea and Samaria, but also “applauded Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005,” a move that “empowered Hamas, endangered Israel and dealt a heavy blow to the prospects for peace.”

“By shattering the two-state illusion and advancing a two-state solution, Israel hopes [annexation] will open up a realistic path to peace,” Dermer concludes.

This Ongoing War

This Ongoing War

By Arnold Roth

Friday, June 19, 2020

19-Jun-20: Aljazeera on the Tamimi extradition: Our commentary

Jerusalem’s Sbarro pizzeria, minutes after the bombing led by Tamimi

It’s an intense time for us on multiple fronts. We’ve been doing a lot of tweeting and ZOOMing and Whatsapping. But somehow not much – and not enough – blogging. Time to do some catching up.

Over at Aljazeera, an English-language piece, “‘Close the file’: Jordan king urged to deny US extradition demand” by Ali Younes takes an inevitably sympathetic look at the efforts currently being made by a fugitive terrorist, Ahlam Tamimi, the most wanted female terrorist in the world (Fox News) to stop certain pesky efforts by US law enforcement to call her to account. And to escape being incarcerated in a US Federal prison for a very long time.
To the writer’s credit, he offered Arnold Roth an opportunity to be heard on an issue that, it goes without saying, is at the very heart of our deepest concerns. In the end, and we’ll get to this below, the article deals far more with viewpoints we don’t like and think are lacking in accuracy and logic than with ours.
Quote:  Al-Tamimi – a Jordanian citizen who was convicted in Israel and sentenced to multiple life sentences after 15 people, including two Israeli-Americans, were killed in the blast – was released to Jordan in a prisoner swap between Hamas and Israel in 2011.
We say: The “multiple” in that sentence is 16. Sixteen. Six. Teen. One for each of her victims. Think back to the last time you heard about a prison sentence anywhere as large as that. But note that the “including two Israeli-Americans” isn’t right. Two of the murdered were females with American citizenship: our daughter Malki, an Israeli citizen as well as a US citizen, who was 15 and had lived here in Jerusalem since she was two years old. And Shoshana Hayman Greenbaum, a beloved school teacher living in New Jersey, her parents’ only child and pregnant for the first time. Shoshana wasn’t an Israeli-American; she was simply an American who was visiting Israel. A tourist who is now buried a short walk away from our Malki. A third American female living in Israel, the mother of a two year-old child who was with her in the pizzeria but survived uninjured, has remained in a vegetative coma through all the years since the massacre. Tamimi doesn”t mention her. Nor do most news reports about how many people were murdered there that day. Because that young mother – whose daughter is now a mother herself – is alive. Only she’s comatose. The tragedy of the human losses inflicted by Tamimi’s evil get very little attention generally and especially in Aljazeera’s stories.
Quote: Her family acknowledged that Jordan was under pressure by the US government to extradite her, but urged the king to work to “close the file” and “reject the US demands that are based on political considerations, not legal ones”.

We say: Under pressure? That’s a strange way to frame it. The US has been asking Jordan since 2013, meaning for seven years, to apprehend Tamimi and to make her available to US law enforcement. The US claim is based on the 1995 Extradition Treaty signed (but now repudiated) by the Jordanian king’s father and the US government of Bill Clinton. Are those American demands based on political considerations? No, unless you’re a Tamimi ally. Tamimi says without the slightest remorse or apology that she brought the bomb to the pizzeria and placed it there. She boasts about this and about the children she blew to pieces. She’s proud of the things she did. They made her a VIP. She says [here] she wishes she had killed more than the mere 15 lives she extinguished that day. And this: Tamimi doesn’t make any pretence to political considerations in the atrocity she calls “my operation. It wasn’t about politics. Or occupied territories. Or Green Lines. What was it about? She tells it plainly here: “08-Oct-17: Why kill religious Jewish children? Because, says Hamas celebrity-jihadist, this is a religious struggle“. Tamimi sees herself as a holy warrior. The US sees her as a fugitive from justice. And Aljazeera sees her as a victim of political trickery.
Quote: Seven members of the US Congress sent a letter to the Jordanian embassy in Washington DC last May demanding that Jordan “hand over” al-Tamimi to the US government.
We say: Actually, no. The letter was sent on April 30, 2020 by Representatives Greg Steube (R-Fla.); Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.); Ted Yoho (R-Fla.); Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.); Brian Mast (R-Fla.); Scott Perry (R-Penn.); and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). It personally addresses Jordan’s ambassador in Washington, Dina Kawar. The text is reproduced here [“05-May-20: From Congress, concern about how Jordanians deal with the fugitive terrorist in their midst“]; the whole letter is online as a PDF here. And no, the words “hand over” don’t appear as anyone who has read it would notice. The lawmakers refer to the treaty in their very polite and respectful letter and to those US requests of Jordan that started in 2013. And then they say this:
The Hashemite Kingdom refused. It continues to refuse until today. This is a matter of grave and growing concern to the Congress and to all Americans.
Here’s their “demand”:

We believe it is of the highest importance to US/Jordan relations that an outcome is found that honors Jordanian law while ensuring this unrepentant terrorist and murderer of innocent Americans is brought to US justice. Extraditing Tamimi within the framework of a long-standing, effective treaty is a powerful statement that Jordan will not tolerate terrorism nor its promotion. We reaffirm our appreciation for His Majesty King Abdullah II and his inspirational leadership and look forward to the further flourishing of our mutually important alliance.

Some demand. Some journalism.
Quote: Jordan’s highest court ruled in 2017 that al-Tamimi cannot be extradited to the United States because a 1995 extradition treaty signed between the two countries was not ratified by Jordan’s Parliament, making it unconstitutional for Jordanian courts to approve US requests.
We say: True up to a point but lacking in essential context and consequence. A more diligent journalist might have gone on to note that (a) the US, which has solid reasons for believing this, says the treaty is fully valid today and always was; (b) Jordan’s rubber-stamp parliament could have ratified the treaty with the kingdom’s most important ally every single day since June 1995 including today. But it chooses not to; (c) the Jordanians extradited fugitive terrorists to the US repeatedly right up until the Tamimi decison in March 2017. And there’s this: if the Aljazeera reporter had asked us, we would have told him what a State Department official told us for the record last year: that the government of Jordan provided the US with instruments of ratification back in 1995 before the treaty went into effect. We wish American government officials cared a little less about hurting the feelings of the lying Jordanians and a little more about the damage that’s being done to justice.
Quote: Multiple US officials, however, told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity, because they were not allowed to speak to the media, that Wooster’s statement [our insert: that the US would consider “all options” to press Jordan to extradite al-Tamimi, including leveraging US aid to Amman] did not veer from traditional diplomatic language used at the State Department, and did not indicate the US government will withhold US aid to Jordan.
We say: The vagueness of this claim is damning. Jordan’s problem isn’t the language being used by the Americans. Their problem is with US law. The reporter could have said something about the “all options” terminology because to anyone paying attention it actually means something with meaningful punch. Congress enacted a law that President Trump signed into effect on December 20, 2019. That law, which has widely analyzed these past few weeks in Jordan’s media, provides a powerful sanction that while it doesn’t mention Jordan clearly targets it. The details are here.
Quote: Extraditing her to the United States is impossible from a Jordanian legal perspective, said Laith Nasrawin, a constitutional law professor at the University of Jordan. “The 1995 extradition treaty, having not been ratified by the parliament, does not carry the weight of the law and is invalid from the court’s perspective,” Nasrawin said. “The extradition treaty may carry weight on an international level between the US and Jordan, but domestically and legally, the treaty is unconstitutional.”
We say: We don’t know Professor Nasrawin. We do however know more than most people about the legal claims being put forward to argue how and why Jordan “cannot” extradite Tamimi. None of the legal experts we have consulted thinks there’s any merit at all in Jordan’s position. As for the quote from Nasrawin, the way it’s reproduced in the article, we think it’s gibberish. What he said might even be something different from what he said. We don’t know. But it certainly doesn’t have the sound of serious legal expertise. Perhaps the reporter ought to be asked to clarify it. What for instance does “invalid from the court’s perspective” mean? Is it invalid or just sort of? What’s more, the US lawmakers’ letter to Ambassador Kawar asks questions about other current and valid Jordanian extradition treaties. There are many of them. If those questions get answered frankly, this whole charade will be over. So far, Jordan’s Ambassador Kawar has stayed silent on the letter. And when we asked her essentially the same questions in a December 2019, she never bothered to respond. Galling but it’s a strategy.
Quote: In 1995, Jordan extradited Eyad Ismail Najim, a Jordanian citizen implicated in the 1993 New York City bombing, immediately after the two countries signed the treaty. But Najim was extradited only after he signed documents agreeing to stand trial in the US, not because of a court ruling, according to Jordanian officials familiar with the case.
We say: This is a bizarre piece of reportage. The 1995 treaty was signed because of the US insistence on bringing the 1993 World Trade Center bombing suspect to justice. Here’s how the LA Times reported it at the time: “U.S. intelligence has long known where to find Najim but the FBI was unable to request extradition until a treaty was worked out with Jordan in March, the sources said. The final instruments of extradition were completed and exchanged last Saturday, allowing the FBI to proceed. The indictment had been sealed to ensure that Najim would not learn that he had been identified and try to flee again.” The notion that he consented to being convicted in the US is homorous but absurd. And by the way, does Aljazeera know of any other Jordanians who were extradited to the US under the treaty? We certainly do. Happy to share that information with them. If they care to know.
Quote: In an interview with Al Jazeera in 2017, Ahlam al-Tamimi said she never knew American nationals were killed in the bombing and the Israeli government never mentioned that during her trial. “The first time I ever knew that Americans were killed was when the Interpol in Jordan told me about the charges filed in the US against me,” she said.
We say: Actually we carefully analyzed – and tore to pieces – that 2017 interiew here: “24-Mar-17: Our daughter’s grinning killer is shocked the US is pursuing her and for no obvious reason“. It happens to be written by the same reporter as this one. But here’s the point. Does anyone care what Ahlam Tamimi says she knew about her victims and their citizenship? Why does the man from Aljazeera? The matter has no consequence and interests no one. It’s irrelevant to the law and it ought to be irrelevant to his analysis.
Quote:  The article quotes Arnold Roth saying this: “None of the lawyers with whom I have discussed it thinks the Jordanian claim has any real basis. Jordan has extradited terrorists to the US again and again … As the father of one of the children she targeted for murder, I don’t need much explaining by Jordanians about what makes extraditing Tamimi so different,” he said.
We say: And that’s all. But Arnold Roth actually said much more than that in the letter he sent to Aljazeera’s Ali Younes this past week, after being invited to offer a comment. We don’t complain about Younes quoting him briefly – that’s legitimate. But for more serious-minded readers, here’s the whole Roth quotation:
Terrorism charges were filed by US Federal prosecutors against the confessed Sbarro bomber, Ahlam Tamimi, a Jordanian, in 2013, years before we knew about their existence.
They were kept sealed by law. Meaning no one, not even the US Congress, knew about them until they were announced four years later.
But from my conversations with American law enforcement officials, I believe they were not an absolute secret. That’s because Jordanian government officials certainly knew about them. Multiple rounds of futile negotiations took place secretly between the US and its close strategic ally Jordan during those four years. The US goal was to get Tamimi extradited and brought into a Federal court to answer to the very serious charges that are still facing her.
And the Jordanian response was to keep her safe and in Amman.
Less than a week after the unsealing of those charges against Tamimi, Jordan’s Court of Cassation ruled for the first time that the King Hussein/Bill Clinton 1995 treaty was constitutionally invalid and she could not be handed over to the Americans.
That area of law is not my personal field. [Roth is a lawyer.] But none of the lawyers with whom I have discussed it thinks the Jordanian claim has any real basis. Jordan has extradited terrorists to the US again and again. Tamimi is different. As the father of one of the children she targeted for murder, I don’t need much explaining by Jordanians about what makes extraditing Tamimi so different.
Jordan’s brazen refusal to comply with a treaty that undoubtedly was valid until Jordan decided it could not remain valid has gone on for years. The demand to see her handed over is not new. The $5M reward on her head is also not new.
As a technology entrepreneur, I have spent time in Jordan building commercial relations that would have benefitted both sides. I had friends there and enjoyed my visits. I will not be going there again. Today, like many others, I look on aghast at Jordan’s celebration of Tamimi as a figure of national admiration, as an inspiration to more and larger acts of terror, as a reason to deny justice and as a cause worth imperilling Jordan’s relations with the United States. It all amounts to a colossal lost opportunity for Jordan, for the US and even for Israel.
The Congress enacted a sanction targeting Jordan this past December. Like most rational people, I think it will be a terrible shame if that sanction has to be applied. But I believe in the logic of carefully applying sanctions in specific situations. The Tamimi case underscores how Jordan has lost its way. It needs to rediscover the role that justice plays in every decent society.
We look forward to seeing much more coverage on the Aljazeera site of ongoing US efforts to bring Tamimi to justice in a Washington court. And we’re ready to help them get their facts less wrong every time they ask.