Evangelical leader: Check Rep Omar’s ties to Muslim Brotherhood

“How can a representative of the US raise money for terrorist groups that seek our demise while serving as a member of Congress?”

 

Arutz Sheva Staff, 07/03/19 12:47

 

Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar

Reuters

Laurie Cardoza-Moore, president of Proclaiming Justice to The Nations (PJTN) has called upon the U.S. Justice Department to launch a full and thorough investigation into Ilhan Omar’s possible connections to the subversive Muslim Brotherhood group. Cardoza-Moore, who hosts the popular Christian television program Focus On Israel which reaches a global weekly audience of over one billion viewers in 200 nations, has launched a nationwide campaign and petition demanding Omar’s dismissal from Congress. Now she has revealed that Omar may be in violation of a federal statute by fundraising for Muslim Brotherhood affiliates whose mission is to destroy America.

“While she has already established her credentials as a vehement anti-Semite, Ilhan Omar is far worse than that. Omar may be in violation of a federal statute for fundraising for two Muslim Brotherhood charities that seek to destroy America. We the people demand that the Justice Department conduct a full and thorough investigation into her possible connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates. Omar’s anti-Semitic comments do not reflect the values of Americans,” said Laurie Cardoza-Moore. The recent revelation of Omar’s participation as a keynote speaker at events for the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups IRUSA and CAIR suggests her support for subversive factions aligned to destroy America and Western civilization itself.

Cardoza-Moore added: “American patriots have signed our petition in the tens of thousands. We won’t stop our national campaign until Ilhan Omar is fully investigated and justice is served. How can a representative of the United States raise money for terrorist groups that seek our demise and equally serve on the House Foreign Relations Committee, or for that matter, as a member of Congress?”

Omar was a keynote speaker for Islamic Relief USA in Tampa, FL last month and will be keynote speaker at an upcoming Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) fundraiser in Los Angeles. CAIR is the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, in addition to close ties to Hamas and Hezbollah, CAIR was listed as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the largest terrorist fundraising operation in the history of the United States known as the Holy Land Foundation Trial in 2009.

During the Holy Land Foundation investigation, the FBI uncovered an internal Muslim Brotherhood memo, An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America 5/22/1991, which mapped out the organization’s plan to infiltrate and destroy America. The memorandum stated: The Ikhwan [brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

At the conclusion of the trial, David Kris, then Assistant Attorney General for National Security stated, “These sentences should serve as a strong warning to anyone who knowingly provides financial support to terrorists under the guise of humanitarian relief.”

Additionally, IRUSA is an arm of the largest Muslim fundraising group globally whose leaders have ties to terrorist groups. According to a 36-page report from the Middle East Forum, the founder of Islamic Relief, Hany El-Banna, has been involved with several organizations with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, including once serving as the trustee of the Muslim Aid charity that has funneled money to Hamas.

As a student, El-Banna was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood organization Federation of Student Islamic Societies. El-Banna has also praised the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan Al Bana for being “held in so much awe and respect.”

Is IRUSA hiding behind the same “humanitarian-aide” cloak the Holy Land Foundation did? Is Ilhan Omar helping to advocate the support of the Muslim Brotherhood’s overthrow of our Government? American citizens demand an answer to these questions!

Under 18 U.S. Code § 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government: “Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof-Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned…”

Proclaiming Justice to The Nations (PJTN), a 501c3 non-profit organization, was established to educate Christians to stand with Jews and Israel against the rise of global anti-Semitism. In recent months the organization has led the struggle against BDS in America with a wave of state resolutions and as exposed textbooks used in U.S. schools that are indoctrinating our children with inaccurate historical information, bias and values that do not reflect our nation. Laurie Cardoza-Moore, president of Proclaiming Justice to The Nations is the show host of the Evangelical docu-style program Focus On Israel which reaches a weekly global audience of over 1 billion in 200 nations.

antisemitism, amending the the Israeli Law of Return, the Diaspora and UNGA Resolution 194(11)

B”H

Rabbi (Et. Al.) –

 

My thoughts on the rise of antisemitism, amending the the Israeli Law of Return, the Diaspora and UNGA Resolution 194(11) :

First, “Anti-Semitism has become mainstream – from the halls of Congress to the leader of the opposition in Britain,” Ya’acov Berman, Chabad Activist, NY.

In order to counter “antisemitism” and the [Palestinian] Arab’s claim for a right of return based on UNGA Resolution 194 (11); the State of Israel should amend the Law of Return and collectively naturalize (viz “PATRIATE”) all Jews of the Diaspora (e.g. Orthodox, Conservative and Reform) under the Law of Return – In this way, all Jews would be provided Israeli Consular Services and “enhanced protection services” at Synagogues and Jewish Community Centers would be ensured  and Jews would outnumber, that is, hold a demographic majority over the Arabs even if all Arabs of Palestinian extraction were absorbed by M’dinat Yisrael (the State of Israel)!
Second, UNGA Resolution 194(11) is premised on two conditions: the “return of Palestinians to Eretz Yisrael at the earliest practicable date, & on those wishing to live at peace with their neighbor” – Given the rise in antisemitism in the Arab world it does not appear that the Palestinians wish to live at peace with their Jewish neighbor.
The earliest practicable date at which the Palestinians could have “returned to Eretz Yisrael” is any time before they were “collectively naturalized” by King Abdullah I which is December 13, 1949. See my argument below for why they chose their status in international law; whether or not that decision was a good one or a bad one is not my concern. The Palestinian’s case is one against the Hashemites, not the State of Israel.

According to wikipedia – the total number of people who hold or are eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return — defined as anyone with at least one Jewish grandparent, and who does not profess any other religion — is estimated at around 23 million, of which 6.6 million were living in Israel as of 2015. Figures for these expanded categories are less precise than for the core Jewish population.

Based on these 2015 figures, there are an estimated 17 million Jews in the Diaspora who are eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return. This number may not include the number of converts to Judaism or those Anusim (descendants of Jews forced to convert to a non-Jewish religion) who might be eligible under the Law of Return.

****

King Abdullah I of Jordan collectively naturalized all Arabs of Palestinian extraction.
The subject of collective naturalization is discussed at length in Boyd v. Thayer, 143 U. S. 135, (1892) and many cases cited and illustrations given.

Collective Naturalization can occur by legislation or by treaty.

In the case of Jordan –

On December 13, 1949, King Abdullah of Jordan passed a law amending the Law of Nationality of 1928. Accordingly, Jordanian citizenship was granted to all persons who were holding Palestinian citizenship and were habitually residing in Transjordan or in the “western area that [was] administered by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” (i.e., Jerusalem and the West Bank). (Of note is that this law excluded Jews from possessing Jordanian citizenship! But of course the Jews were ethnically cleansed from Jordan and Judea and Samaria by the Hashemites in violation of Article 15 of the Mandate for Palestine and the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924 –

Talk about APARTHEID….)

(On the matter of why the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan was established in violation of Articles 5, 15, and 25 I can make a clear argument on each point but that is not the purpose of this –  Article 15 states, “No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.” The ethnic cleansing of Jews from “Palestine” was an official act of antisemitism. No different than that of the ethnic cleansing of the rest of the Jews of the “Middle East Diaspora”…! The Anglo-American Treaty of 1924 while it replicated the Mandate for Palestine, and has expired; the right guaranteed under it to the Jewish People [see Article 80 of the UN Charter] do not expire. This is particularly true since that Treaty became the Supreme Law of the Land (USA) under our Constitutional law system, [enshrining the Mandate for Palestine and the Balfour Declaration into the official PUBLIC policy of the USA] see Howard Grief’s Book: The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law (9789657344521).)

On April 11, 1950, parliamentary elections took place in Jordan, covering both the East Bank and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Following these elections, the Jordanian House of Commons approved the amended law and parliament’s decision concerning the “unification of the two Banks.” Thus, Palestinians who were living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank became Jordanian citizens [by collective naturalization].
The recent de-naturalization of Jordanian citizens of “Palestinian Extraction” by King Hussein and by King Abdullah II has been found to violate the Jordanian Nationality Law. See HRW Report “Stateless Again” – The act of “disengagement” from Judea and Samaria by the Hashemites and declaring those Arabs of Palestinian Extraction (who have been de-naturalized) as Palestinian Citizens can not confer “Palestinian citizenship” on them as Palestine is not a state under the criteria of “Statehood” and must be viewed as a political stratagem designed to demographically destroy the State of Israel! (See Joel Gilbert’s documentary, “Farewell Israel” – Bush, Iran and the Revolt of Islam.) His attempt to cede Judea and Samaria in 1988 to the PLO is null and void as he renounced all claims to “the West Bank” and “what was not his to begin with was not within his power to cede!”
King Hussein explained his decision as one of deference to Palestinian wishes for national autonomy.
This statement flies in the face of the Jericho Conference of December 1948 led by Sheik Muhammad Ali Ja’abari, Mayor of Hebron and the April 1950 Parliamentary Elections wherein the Arabs of Palestinian Extraction exercised political independence and elected King Abdullah as their Sovereign!
Thus, the Palestinians acquired national autonomy when their duly elected representatives voted at the Jericho Conference in December 1948. Within a year all “non-Jewish Palestinians” were all “collectively naturalized” with the consent of the people through their elected Monarch, Abdullah I.
Just because the Hashemites have suspended the rights of the Arabs in the Lower House of Deputies and de-naturalized them should not place the onus on the State of Israel to accommodate them with a “right of return” under UNGA Res. 194(11) as they have exercised “self-determinism” under the Jericho Conference and the April 1950 Parliamentary Elections.
The US Dept. of State 1950 Report states the Jericho Conference determined the political status of the Arabs of “Central” Palestine “which took place as a result of a free expression of the will of the people.” Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa Volume V, Page 1096
How many times do the “Palestinians” get to decide their political status? It is evident that they chose their status (as monarchists) and are barred by the doctrine of estoppel in pais from asserting a claim of the “right of return” (to wit, a claim of Palestinian Citizenship) based on inconsistent “political” positions.
Anyways, these are my thoughts on the subject of Collective Naturalization.
Be well, blessed and a success,
Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham

Daniel prophesied about Muhammad

I think Daniel prophesied about Muhammad:

“he shall think to change the law and seasons”

“he shall not honor the desire of women” and

“he shall not honor the gods of his fathers” and

“he shall honor the god of war”

“he shall speak blaspheme against the Most High”

“he shall wear out the righteous of HaShem”

“he shall put down three rulers”

Never Forget Yathrib!

Expel Ilhan Omar From Congress

It’s not easy to get kicked out of Congress.

As evidenced by the recent proceedings of Harlem Democrat Charlie Rangel, a “censure”—which entails no actual consequences, other than those enforced by the party caucuses, usually involving removal from leadership positions and committee chairmanships—is considered harsh punishment in the halls of the U.S. Capitol, while the allegedly less serious “reprimand” triggers even less (than zero) punishment.

Only 20 members of Congress have ever been expelled since Congress began, 15 from the Senate and five from the House. Most of those cases had to do with the Civil War.

In the instant matter, Ilhan Omar is an avowed Muslim who believes Muhammad, (who had sex with Aisha when she was merely nine years old and still playing with her dolls) was a prophet.

She is alleged to have married her brother and committed immigration and student loan fraud.

Muhammad got four historical facts wrong and therefore could not be a prophet:

1) He claims Miriam, the sister of Moshe was the mother of Yeshki (Jesus), Quran – Suras 19:27-28, 3:35-36, 66:12;

2) he claims Haman of Megillat Esther was in the “court” of Pharaoh; confusing the Building of the Tower of Babel with Haman and Pharaoh, Quran – Sura 40:36-37;

3) and he claims that Pharaoh used the Roman method of crucifixion as a form of the death penalty, Qur’an – Suras 7:124, 12:41, 20:71, 26:49; 38.12, 89:6-12;

4) and conflicting Islamic sources claim either Isaac or Ishmael was offered on the Altar by Avraham.

Al-Tabari, considered to be one of the premiere Islamic historians, lists the divergent views held amongst the Muslim umma (community) in regard to this very issue:

The earliest sages of our Prophet’s nation disagree about which of Abraham’s two sons it was that he was commanded to sacrifice. Some say it was Isaac, while others say it was Ishmael. Both views are supported by statements related on the authority of the Messenger of God. If both groups of statements were equally sound, then – since they both came from the Prophet – only the Quran could serve as proof that the account naming Isaac is clearly the more truthful of the two.” (2: p. 82).

 

Moreover, Muhammad claims Yeshki was a prophet but it can be demonstrated that Yeshki falsely prophesied the restoration of the Kingdom of David within the lifetime of his disciples – Matthew 16:28, “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Luke 9:27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

According to the Torah, every matter of false prophesy has to be established by two or three witnesses. Here, Matthew and Luke are witnesses AGAINST Jesus and establish his false prophesy twice!

Ilhan Omar supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the State of Israel, an American ally.

In 2018, Omar came under criticism for statements she made about Israel before she was in the Minnesota legislature, which the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported had “earned her notoriety in the pro-Israel community.” In a 2012 tweet, she wrote, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” The comment, particularly the notion that Israelis had “hypnotized the world,” was criticized as drawing on anti-semitic tropes. New York Times columnist Bari Weiss wrote that Omar’s statement tied into a millennia-old “conspiracy theory of the Jew as the hypnotic conspirator”.

In February 2019, Omar was criticized for tweets that appeared to imply that money spent by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was the primary motivation for American politicians’ support of Israel. These comments were criticized by Democratic leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, with the Democratic House leadership releasing a statement that called Omar’s tweets antisemitic and “deeply offensive.” The Jewish Democratic Council of America also denounced her statements.

Omar is scheduled to speak at a fundraiser for CAIR which is a front organization for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) will be the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the Los Angeles branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on March 23.

“Ilhan Omar pushes for release of jailed Muslim Brotherhood leader,” by Jordan Schachtel, Conservative Review, April 3, 2019:

Rep. Ilhan Omar — whose short tenure in Congress thus far has been rife with controversy — made a shocking appeal Tuesday, openly pushing for the release of a senior member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

Omar took to Twitter Tuesday evening demanding that “Trump” call for the release of Hoda Abdelmonem, a senior member in the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s women’s affiliate.

VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: Look Ilhan Omar has made statements, anti-Semitic comments, statements against our most cherished ally Israel, that ought to be rejected by every American. And frankly the fact that very recently, she’s been trying to blame the United States of America for the deprivation and the poverty brought on by the dictatorship in Venezuela. It just, it tells me -look the people of Minnesota will decide whether or not she remains in Congress. But Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has no place on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Democratic leadership ought to remove her.

In an article about U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), the manager of the Turkish state-run news channel TRT World’s Research Centre, Dr. Tarek Cherkaoui, encouraged readers to donate to Omar’s campaign fund. The article, written for the English-language website of the Turkish pro-government daily Yeni Şafakand published April 1, 2019, was titled “Media Flak Directed At Ilhan Omar No Surprise At All.” At least seven other Turkish media outlets ran the same article, in both English and in Turkish. It should be noted that U.S. federal law prohibits foreign nationals from donating to political candidates. <https://gellerreport.com/2019/07/state-run-turkish…>

As Breitbart news has noted:

In 2007-8, CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. That case, in turn, led the FBI to discontinue its work with the organization. In 2009, a federal judge ruled that the government “produced ample evidence to establish” the ties of CAIR with Hamas, the Palestinian terror organization. The United Arab Emirates labeled CAIR a terrorist organization in 2014 (a decision that the Obama administration opposed).

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood seek the destruction of not just the United States of America and Israel but of Western Society.

It’s time to remove Ilhan Omar from Congress.

Sign the Petition

the “NEW” Jordan – Sharia compliant?

Mudar Zahran: Will the “NEW” Jordan be Sharia compliant or will it be exclusively a Democratic state with a dissolution of the Monarchy? Inquiring minds want to know….
By Sharia compliant I mean to ask, will the New Jordan allow punishment for blaspheme against Muhammad, or will there be freedom of expression? Currently, Jordanian law permits punishment for the crime of blaspheme against the sensibilities of Jordanian Muslims even if “committed” in another country over the internet <https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/…/national-laws-on…>
It is an acknowledged fact that Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was 9 years old. It can be demonstrated that Muhammad was a false prophet as Daniel prophesied: “he shall put down three rulers” (7.24) (this transpired in Yathrib
three large Jewish clans — the Banu-Nadir or “Sons of Nadir,” the Banu-Korayzeh and the Banu-Kainuka — dominated the city until Muhammad ordered their men to be slaughtered)
“he shall think to change the seasons and the law” (7.25)
“he shall not regard the desire of women” (11.37)
“he shall honor the god of war” (11.38); and,
“he shall speak words against the Most High” (Devarim 30.1-10 prophesies a restoration of the Children of Israel to HaShem and to the land of Israel; while Surah 1 condemns the Children of Israel as invoking the wrath of G-D…!)

Also, he changed the Qiblah contrary to King Solomon’s tefillah 1 Kings 8.41.

Muhammad got four historical facts wrong and therefore could not be a prophet:

1) He claims Miriam, the sister of Moshe was the mother of Yeshki (Jesus);

2) he claims Haman of Megillat Esther was in the “court” of Pharaoh;

3) and he claims that Pharaoh used the Roman method of crucifixion as a method for the death penalty;

4) and conflicting Islamic sources claim either Isaac or Ishmael was offered on the Altar by Avraham.

Moreover, Muhammad claims Yeshki was a prophet but it can be demonstrated that Yeshki falsely prophesied the restoration of the Kingdom of David within the lifetime of his disciples – Matthew 16:28, “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” Luke 9:27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

According to the Torah, every matter of false prophesy has to be established by two or three witnesses. Here, Matthew and Luke are witnesses AGAINST Jesus and establish his false prophesy twice!

So, again, I ask, in the “New Jordan” will freedom of expression be allowed?

Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham

Muhammad, The Pedophile Prophet

How could anyone vote for someone (Ilhan Omar) who believes a pedophile (Muhammad) was a prophet? Muhammad “married” Aisha when she was 6 and consummated that “marriage” when she was 9 and still playing with her dolls.

The Islamic source materials state that Aisha was 9 when they consummated their marriage.

From the hadith of Bukhari, volume 5, #234

“Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.”

Bukhari vol. 7, #65:

“Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: “I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).””

From the hadith of Muslim, volume 2, #3309

Aisha reported: Allah’s Messenger married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine….

From the hadith of the Sunan of Abu Dawud, volume 2, #2116

“Aisha said, “The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old.” (The narrator Sulaiman said: “Or six years.”). “He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old.”

From “The History of Tabari”, volume 9, page 131

“Then the men and women got up and left. The Messenger of God consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me”…(The Prophet) married her three years before the Emigration, when she was seven years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine years old, after he had emigrated to Medina in Shawwal. She was eighteen years old when he died.

 

Muhammad got four historical facts wrong and therefore could not be a prophet:

1) He claims Miriam, the sister of Moshe was the mother of Yeshki (Jesus), Quran – Suras 19:27-28, 3:35-36, 66:12;

2) he claims Haman of Megillat Esther was in the “court” of Pharaoh; confusing the Building of the Tower of Babel with Haman and Pharaoh, Quran – Sura 40:36-37;

3) and he claims that Pharaoh used the Roman method of crucifixion as a form of the death penalty, Qur’an – Suras 7:124, 12:41, 20:71, 26:49; 38.12, 89:6-12;

4) and conflicting Islamic sources claim either Isaac or Ishmael was offered on the Altar by Avraham.

Al-Tabari, considered to be one of the premiere Islamic historians, lists the divergent views held amongst the Muslim umma (community) in regard to this very issue:

The earliest sages of our Prophet’s nation disagree about which of Abraham’s two sons it was that he was commanded to sacrifice. Some say it was Isaac, while others say it was Ishmael. Both views are supported by statements related on the authority of the Messenger of God. If both groups of statements were equally sound, then – since they both came from the Prophet – only the Quran could serve as proof that the account naming Isaac is clearly the more truthful of the two.” (2: p. 82).

 

Maimonides refers to Muhammad as hameshuga “that madman” in his Epistle to Yemen!

Where is the Imam? 11th US Court of Appeals grants stay of execution

11th US Court of Appeals grants stay of execution because of lack of imam in execution chamber for muslim prisoner, Dominque Ray:

“Ray was convicted of raping the [fifteen years old] teen and robbing her of approximately $6 she had in her purse.”
And now it has taken him 20 years of litigation to find out his “spiritual adviser” won’t be present in the execution chamber. I would say this about his “spiritual journey” – how could one profess Muhammad was a Prophet? since when did a pedophile, Muhammad become a candidate for prophethood?

Muhammad married Aishah when she was six and consummated the “marriage” when she was still playing with her dolls at the age of nine!

Muhammad also ordered a man, Zayd to divorce his wife so Muhammad could marry her. He had ELEVEN “wives” while The Quran has four historical mistakes in it:

Islam claims –

1) Miriam the sister of Moses was the mother of Jesus

2) Ishmael rather than Isaac was offered on the Altar by Abraham

3) Haman, (in the Book of Esther from the historical event of Purim) was in the “court of Pharaoh

4) Pharaoh used crucifixion as a form of capital punishment

No “prophet” would conduct himself as Muhammad did.

No “prophet” would get historical facts wrong!!!

This condemned prisoner needs to find another “spiritual adviser” preferably from the Noahides.

Never Forget Yathrib! 

Israeli teen raised as a Muslim returns to Judaism

Arutz Sheva – Israel National News

Mordechai Sones, 20/12/18 19:32

Young man born to Jewish mother but raised in Arab village returns to Judaism.

 
Binyamin wears tefillin

Binyamin wears tefillin

Yad L’Achim

No family came to accompany 19-year-old Kamel when a Brit Yosef Yitzchak organization member performed his hatafat dam procedure, drawing a drop of blood with a pin-sized lance for those who have been circumcised but not for the sake of the Covenant of Abraham. At this time he was given his new Jewish name, Binyamin.

No family member was there, but members of Yad L’Achim who accompanied Kamel (Binyamin) in the past two years stood by him now, a day later, when he immersed in a mikveh to accept Judaism before the judges of the Haifa Rabbinical Court, and thus completed his “return to Judaism” ceremony – a special track for Jews who left their religion and are now returning to Judaism of their own free will.

Binyamin was born in a Arab village in the north of the country to a Jewish mother who immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union, and an Arab father. Two years after the mother converted to Islam and married the same Arab in an attempt to start a new life in the Land of Israel – to which, ironically, she immigrated from Moscow so she could live as a Jew.

After years his mother divorced the Arab father after undergoing a life of suffering and violence, but the Arab father, who was well versed in local law, succeeded in deceiving her and Binyamin was transferred to his custody.

Binyamin, who grew up as Kamel, was educated in Islam and grew up as an Arab in every respect. The torture he suffered as a son of a hated Jewish mother caused him to flee the village when he was 15 years old and roam the streets of Acco and Haifa.

His life quickly degenerated into brawls and wars of survival until he was directed to Yad L’Achim by a passing Jew who heard his story and understood that he wanted to return to the Jewish People and open a new and better chapter in his life.

Yad L’Achim hurried to meet with Binyamin and immediately began combined treatment: First, a suitable accommodation was found in an educational institution for young people from difficult backgrounds. At the same time, the organization worked to connect him with a mentor who was especially assigned to him and taught him the Hebrew language and later Judaism and Jewish heritage.

Yad L’Achim even purchased a pair of tefillin for him, helped him find suitable work during the evening hours, and gave him coupons every month for food, clothes, and personal furniture. Only a half-year after he had been picked up from the street, with much help from Heaven and greater willpower than most, Binyamin knew how to open a siddur or a Chumash and read them like one accustomed.

The decisive stage of his return to Judaism also recently ended. The request submitted by Yad L’Achim to the Beit Din for Binyamin’s return to Judaism encountered difficulties due to missing documents relating to the Jewishness of his mother, who had no family member or acquaintance in Israel. In the end, after many efforts by Yad L’Achim overseas they managed to obtain some documents, and the court decided on a special genetic test that proved beyond any doubt that Binyamin was 100 percent Jewish and derived from a Jewish family in Poland.

“Binyamin is waiting impatiently for the official document of his return to Judaism, and at the same time he began to observe Shabbat and observe kashrut and so this time too, despite the difficult personal story, we were moved to see that Israel is aware of G-d and His Torah,” Yad L’Achim said this week. “These success stories only encourage us to continue to care for thousands of Jews with similar life stories who are desperate for help. We won’t rest until we can bring them home.”

Justice delayed is justice denied

Jpost Arab – Israeli Conflict

By Irwin Cotler September 6, 2012

The Arab countries targeted the Jewish nationals living in their respective countries, thereby creating two refugee populations.

Jewish refugees from Triploi arrive in Haifa.

Jewish refugees from Triploi arrive in Haifa 521. (photo credit: Arnold Behr/Jerusalem Post Archives)

 

This November will mark the 65th anniversary of the UN Partition Resolution of November 29, 1947. It is sometimes forgotten – and often not even known – that this was the first-ever blueprint for an Israeli-Palestinian “two states for two peoples” solution. Regrettably, while Jewish leaders accepted the resolution, Arab and Palestinian leaders did not, and by their own acknowledgment, declared war on the nascent Jewish state while also targeting the Jewish nationals living in their respective countries.

Indeed, had the UN Partition Resolution been accepted, there would have been no 1948 Arab- Israeli war, no refugees, and none of the pain and suffering of these past 65 years. The annual November 29 UN-organized International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People might well have been a day commemorating a Middle East peace, and the establishment of both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine.

Be the first to know – Join our Facebook page.

Yet the revisionist Middle East narrative – prejudicial to authentic reconciliation and peace between peoples as well as between states – continues to hold that there was only one victim population, Palestinian refugees, and that Israel was responsible for the Palestinian nakba (catastrophe) of 1948.

The result is that the pain and plight of 850,000 Jews uprooted and displaced from Arab countries – the forgotten exodus – has been both expunged and eclipsed from both the Middle East peace and justice narratives these past 65 years.

Indeed, the upcoming United Nations commemoration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People – celebrated on the anniversary of the Partition Resolution – will likely ignore, yet again, the plight of Jewish refugees, thereby indulging and encouraging this Middle East revisionism.

Moreover, this revisionist narrative has not only eclipsed – and erased – the forgotten exodus from memory and remembrance, but it also denies that it was a forced exodus, and one that resulted from both double rejectionism and double aggression. This is the real nakba – the real double catastrophe.

Simply put, the Arab countries not only rejected a proposed Palestinian state and went to war to extinguish the nascent Jewish state, but also targeted the Jewish nationals living in their respective countries, thereby creating two refugee populations – the Palestinian refugee population resulting from the Arab war against Israel, and the Jewish refugees resulting from the Arab war against its own Jewish nationals.

Indeed, evidence contained in the report entitled “Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries: The Case for Rights And Redress” documents in detail the pattern of state-sanctioned repression and persecution in Arab countries – including Nuremberg-like laws – that targeted its Jewish populations, resulting in denationalization, forced expulsions, illegal sequestration of property, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and murder – namely, anti-Jewish pogroms.

And while the internal Jewish narrative has often referred to pogroms as European attacks on their Jewish nationals, it has often ignored Arab-Muslim attacks on their Jewish nationals. Moreover, as the report also documents, these massive human rights violations were not only the result of state-sanctioned patterns of oppression in each of the Arab countries, but they were reflective of a collusive blueprint, as embodied in the Draft Law of the Political Committee of the League of Arab States in 1947.

This is a story whose voices are only now being heard by many for the first time. It is a story whose painful testimony has been shared too often only among the victims themselves. It is a truth that must now be affirmed, acknowledged, and acted upon in the interests of justice and history.

Regrettably, the United Nations also bears express and continuing responsibility for this distorted Middle East and peace narrative.

Since 1948, there have been more than 150 UN resolutions that have specifically dealt with the Palestinian refugee plight. Yet, not one of these resolutions makes any reference to, nor is there any expression of concern for, the plight of the 850,000 Jews displaced from Arab countries. Nor have any of the Arab countries involved – or the Palestinian leadership involved – expressed any acknowledgment, let alone regret, for this pain and suffering, or for their respective responsibility for the pain and suffering.

How do we rectify this historical – and ongoing – injustice? What are the rights and remedies available under international human rights and humanitarian law? And what are the corresponding duties and obligations incumbent upon the United Nations, Arab countries, and members of the international community? What follows is a nine-point international human rights justice and action agenda.

FIRST, IT must be appreciated that while justice has long been delayed, it must no longer be denied. The time has come to rectify this historical injustice, and to restore the plight and truth of this forgotten – and forced – exodus of Jews from Arab countries to the Middle East narrative from which they have been expunged and eclipsed these 65 years.

Second, remedies for victim refugee groups – including rights of remembrance, truth, justice and redress, as mandated under human rights and humanitarian law – must now be invoked for Jews displaced from Arab countries.

Third, in the manner of duties and responsibilities, each of the Arab countries – and the League of Arab States – must acknowledge their role and responsibility in their double aggression of launching an aggressive war against Israel and the perpetration of human rights violations against their respective Jewish nationals. The culture of impunity must end.

Fourth, the Arab League Peace Plan of 2002 should incorporate the question of Jewish refugees from Arab countries as part of its narrative for an Israeli- Arab peace, just as the Israeli narrative now incorporates the issue of Palestinian refugees in its vision of an Israeli-Arab peace.

Fifth, on the international level, the UN General Assembly – in the interests of justice and equity – should include reference to Jewish refugees as well as Palestinian refugees in its annual resolutions; the UN Human Rights Council should address, as it has yet to do, the issue of Jewish as well as Palestinian refugees; UN agencies dealing with compensatory efforts for Palestinian refugees should also address Jewish refugees from Arab countries.

Sixth, the annual November 29 commemoration by the United Nations of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People should be transformed into an International Day of Solidarity for a Two-State – Two-Peoples Solution, as the initial 1947 Partition Resolution intended, including solidarity with all refugees created by the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Seventh, jurisdiction over Palestinian refugees should be transferred from UNRWA to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. There was no justification then – and still less today – for the establishment of a separate body to deal only with Palestinian refugees, particularly when that body has been itself compromised by its incitement to hatred and violence, as well as its revisionist teaching of the Middle East peace and justice narrative.

Eighth, any bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations – which one hopes will presage a just and lasting peace – must include Jewish refugees as well as Palestinian refugees in an inclusive joinder of discussion.

Ninth, during any and all discussions on the Middle East by the Quartet and others, any explicit reference to Palestinian refugees should be paralleled by a reference to Jewish refugees from Arab countries.

SOME GOVERNMENTS have made welcome progress on this question, such as the US Congress in recently adopting legislation recognizing the plight of Jewish refugees and requiring that the issue be raised in any and all talks on Middle East peace. I have a motion before the Canadian Parliament in this regard which I hope will soon be adopted. Legislatures around the world should hold hearings on the issue to ensure public awareness and action, to allow for victims’ testimony, and to right the historical record – an effort in which I trust that Canada will be engaged this fall.

In sum, the exclusion and denial of rights and redress to Jewish refugees from Arab countries continues to prejudice authentic negotiations between the parties and a just and lasting peace between them. Let there be no mistake about it – as I have said before and will continue to affirm: Where there is no remembrance, there is no truth; where there is no truth, there will be no justice; where there is no justice, there will be no reconciliation; and where there is no reconciliation, there will be no peace – which we all seek.

The writer is a Canadian member of parliament and the former minister of justice and attorney-general of Canada. He is a professor of law (emeritus) at McGill University. He has testified on this issue before parliaments in the US, the UK and Italy.