The Bible Teaching Ministry of David Hocking
“The Word of our God shall stand forever” Isaiah 40:8

Archive for November, 2011


Wednesday, November 30th, 2011

by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu (IsraelNationalNews)

The explosion earlier this week that Iran said was at a uranium enrichment site actually damaged a nuclear plant and was far from accidental, The London Times reported.

The newspaper quoted Israeli intelligence officials as saying that satellite photos revealed extensive damage from the explosion at Isfahan, near Tehran. The Israeli sources, so far unconfirmed, added that smoke was seen pouring out from a conversion plant and that it was clear that the blast was not accidental.

The government-controlled Fars News Agency had claimed that the explosion was caused by a military exercise, after having initially denied any incident took place.

Two week ago, an explosion at a military base that killed a top general and 16 others also resulted in extensive damage, according to published satellite images.

The Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security told The New York Times, “It was pretty amazing to see that the entire facility was destroyed. There were only a few buildings left standing.”

The institute’s report author Paul Brannan added that his sources indicated the explosion occurred during work that was supposed to be “a major milestone in the development of a new missile.”

One of the casualties was Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, founder of Iran’s missile program, and the explosion appeared to take place at a missile base.


Wednesday, November 30th, 2011

by Gavriel Queenann (Arutz Sheva News)

The Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee delayed a discussion entitled “Jordan is Palestine” citing the “sensitivity of the issue,” according to MK Aryeh Eldad.

Eldad, who called for the discussion, said “the discussion is relevant and more urgent than ever. The shocks and upheavals in the Middle East will not pass Jordan by.”

A long-time proponent of defining Jordan as the ‘Palestinian state’ over creating such an entity in Israel’s biblical heartland, Eldad has pressed the government to abandon the bilateral track instituted by the Oslo Accords and pursue a separate diplomatic track with Jordan.

Earlier this year King Abdullah II of Jordan rejected the long-held formula of the Hashemite monarchy that “Jordan is Palestine,” saying “The so-called ‘substitute homeland’ exists only in the minds of the weak.”

Abdullah, responding to comments by Eldad, told reporters “the Jordanian option is an illusion. Jordan is Jordan, and Palestine is Palestine.”

Analysts say, despite Jordan’s couching its opposition to the Jordan is Palestine formula in terms of support for the current bilateral peace track and “protecting the interests of Palestinians,” that Amman’s motives are likely rooted in its own demographic and security concerns.

Last week Abdullah said, ““A Fatah-Hamas joint platform of action, which may put an end to any prospect of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, would be viewed with great concern in Amman. The absence of any negotiations may drift into violent friction between Israel and the Palestinians with dire consequences for all concerned, Jordan included.”

Eldad earlier responded to Abdullah’s statements, saying “Abdullah knows full well that there is no other justification for Jordan and he is overwhelmed with fear of the masses in Amman today to do what they did Mubarak and Gaddafi.”

MK Eldad today recommended, “It is better Abdullah announce today that Jordan is the national homeland for the Palestinians – or else seek asylum in London.”

Sources close to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee told Arutz Sheva the government is concerned raising the issue for discussion at this time would sour already strained relations with Amman.


Tuesday, November 29th, 2011

(Article in FLAME)

The United Nations’ Durban III Conference Reasserts Its Racist, Anti-Israel Agenda

While those of us who support Israel know that the United Nations consistently, hopelessly stands against Israel, surely the epitome of this bias is reflected in the U.N.’s Social, Humanitarian Cultural Affairs Committee.

Way back in 2001, this group organized the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which was held in Durban, South Africa and hence dubbed Durban I. That conference adopted the notorious Durban Declaration, which singled out Israel for condemnation among all 192 U.N. member states and reasserted the U.N.’s 1975 resolution stating that Zionism is racism.
It’s been downhill from there. At the Durban II conference in 2009, Iran’s President Ahmahdinajad famously gave a speech that attacked Israel and denied the Holocaust. Now, most recently, Durban III is being held in New York City, and this week it put forward a restatement of the Durban Resolution, which casts the Jewish State of Israel as “racist oppressors of the Palestinian victims.”

Unsurprisingly, last Wednesday, the U.N. General Assembly approved a draft resolution of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA)—with a vote of 126 in favor, five opposed and 43 abstentions. The countries that heroically voted against this nefarious resolution—which in itself is far more racist than anything it accuses Israel of—may be considered Israel’s strongest friends: Australia, Canada, Israel, the Marshall Islands and the United States.

Let’s be clear on two issues related to the United Nations. First: Its votes are dominated by several blocs—primarily the Arab-Muslim states and the so-called developing nations, which includes most African and many Latin American countries. These countries comprise a majority and can be counted on in most cases to oppose Western (and Israeli) initiatives and to support those condemning the West and/or Israel.

The second issue is that these countries support the notion that Israel is a colonial invader of the Middle East and oppose the notion that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and that the Jewish State has a right to exist in its ancient and continuous homeland of Palestine.

Back in September the U.N. sponsored “Durban III,” an event intended by Islamic states and U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay to breathe new life into the ten-year-old anti-Israel vendetta which began in South Africa in 2001. Despite the unprecedented boycott by all Western veto-holding members of the Security Council – the U.S., Britain and France – Durban and its insidious message have popped up a mere two months later.

The regenerative nature of U.N. armaments, in the form of cyclical resolutions and “follow-up” mechanisms, makes them not merely annoying but dangerous. Due to this circuitous nature, battles that are won must be fought again and again. This is particularly true of the libelous 1975 U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism, which was revitalized in the 2001 Durban Declaration and Program of Action (DDPA), accusing only one state among all U.N. members of racism – Israel – and casting Palestinians as the victims of Israeli bigotry.

By all accounts – except the one emanating from the U.N. press office – Durban III failed to deliver the credibility boost that its fans were craving. In a strong rejection of the Durban III political program, 14 nations, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, the United States and, of course, Israel all boycotted. A simultaneous counter-conference held directly across the street from the U.N., involving Nobel Prize laureate Elie Wiesel and a bipartisan group of Jewish and non-Jewish luminaries, mounted a resounding historic challenge to the U.N. campaign.

The U.N. response, however, has been to rewrite history. On September 22, 2011, at the opening ceremonies of Durban III, South African President Jacob Zuma fictionalized the original conference, saying “in Durban the world spoke with one voice” – notwithstanding the very public departure of the United States and Israel. A few hours later, the General Assembly adopted a “political declaration,” “reaffirming” the DDPA and calling the declaration “united against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.” Today, the U.N. website says of Durban III that “world leaders adopted by consensus a political declaration,” paying no notice to the fact that the world’s leading democracies had already voted with their feet.

The U.N. has even issued a document titled “frequently asked questions” which purports to answer charges of U.N. discrimination against Israel. Ironically, it confirms the worst.

Question: “Why is Israel the only member state mentioned in the DDPA?” Answer: it is “a reflection of the international concern about the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian situation.” In other words, spotlighting Israel, and what the DDPA labels Palestinian “victims,” is properly part of an “anti-racism” manifesto.

With the transcripts of Durban III now available and the U.N. spin-masters hard at work for the vote this week in a “follow-up” to the event, the details of what actually took place on September 22 warrant exposure.

The day was comprised of three parts: an opener in the General Assembly Hall, two roundtables and a closing session summarizing the day’s output. Only six state representatives were selected to speak during the opening session. The 55 states in the African group chose Sudan – a country whose president has been indicted by the U.N.’s own International Criminal Court for genocide.

Here is a sampling of what Durban’s enthusiastic supporters contributed over the course of the day:
• The foreign minister of Tunisia, co-chair of one of the roundtables, said that the Durban anniversary provided an opportunity “to highlight…first and foremost, the Palestinian people” so as to avoid “exacerbating intercultural tensions.”
• The foreign minister of Iran ranted about “the racist Zionist regime” while proclaiming the DDPA to be “one of the richest record of achievement of humanity in today’s world against racism.”
• The Lebanese minister of foreign affairs denied the meaning of anti-Semitism: “Anti-Semitism is not known in the Arab world because Arab nations are Semitic.” He then manifested his own anti-Semitism by objecting to the “Jewish character of Israel” as “contrary to any vision of a future based on peace and tolerance.”
• The Syrian U.N. ambassador complained about “unpleasant practices in our region” – by which he didn’t mean his own government’s habit of butchering its people – but “the racist concept of a ‘Jewish state of Israel,” “the Facist racism of Israel” and “the mass racist violations by Israel.”

Durban III was also a golden opportunity for countries to attack the West, undermine democratic freedoms and play dress-up as a human rights advocate.
• The deputy foreign minister of Cuba railed against “subjugated” Palestinians and against institutionalized racism “in Europe and North America.”
• The Islamic Republic of Mauritania hailed Durban’s “significant achievements, in particular, condemning slavery,” and Mauritania’s stellar record of following Durban’s directions – despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are enslaved in Mauritania and that its government jails anti-slavery activists.

The Saudi Arabian “undersecretary for multi-relations affairs” never showed up, but, in an extraordinary breach of protocol, the U.N. uploaded his “speech” to the Durban III site anyway.

Here are the words of the world’s leading practitioner of gender apartheid and the country which criminalizes public displays of religion other than those of Islam: “Islam calls upon us to refrain from offending other religions and faiths;” “the Kingdom established…agencies that call for the spread of human-rights culture;” “freedom of speech should never be used as a tool for injustice;” and “the highest degree of racism and discrimination…the clearest illustration of such comprehensive racial discrimination lies…against the Palestinian people.”

Durban III also had its carefully-orchestrated non-governmental message. NGO participants had to be vetted and only those NGOs not vetoed by a U.N. member were permitted to attend. Organizations dedicated to eradicating discrimination against Dalits,sometimes called untouchables, were barred from this anti-intolerance charade. The one individual chosen to represent all of civil society in the main opening session could be counted upon to condemn the United States. Sarah White of the Mississippi Workers’ Center for Human Rights denounced racism in America where, she said “black workers are still…forced to work under conditions that look a lot like slavery.”

The U.N. meticulously chose ten of the 88 registered organizations to speak at the roundtables. Here’s why:
• The American Civil Liberties Union opened with “We thank you for the opportunity to call attention to racial discrimination in the United States.”
• The “December 12 Movement International Secretariat (US)” claimed the United States was guilty of “undermining the development of over 40 million black people in its borders” and “the forced under-development of African people within the US.”
• The director of the “Malcolm X Center for Self-Determination” appealed to the U.N. for help in implementing the DDPA “on behalf of all US counter-intelligence-program-era political prisoners and persons currently held on US racist death rows across the country.”

In fact, the only specific state directly criticized by the U.N.’s hand-picked NGOs in a global anti-racism conference was the United States. At day’s end, with grand aplomb back in the General Assembly Hall, Prime Minister of Swaziland Barnabas Sibusiso Dlamini summarized the contributions of Durban III. In two contiguous sentences, he managed to lay bare the twisted dishonest U.N. game. “Several speakers referred to…the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories. The importance of not singling out a specific region or country was also emphasized.”

In short, Durban is not a “united” front against racism, but a divisive anti-Semitic and anti-Western bonanza. Nevertheless, the Durban license for intolerance continues.

Only a month later, the U.N.’s “Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective Implementation of the DDPA” met in Geneva to produce recommendations “on the role of education in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.” They began with a draft set of recommendations which mentioned the Holocaust. They ended on October 28, 2011 with the Holocaust having been excised.

Their initial draft said the U.N. should: “encourage Governments to ensure that textbooks and educational materials reflect accurately historical facts, in particular with regard to…” among other things, the trans-Atlantic slave trade and the Holocaust. What happened?

As soon as negotiations began, the EU demanded that all specifics be deleted – anything after the words “historical facts” – because the list “looked like a Christmas tree” and “will introduce a hierarchy of victims.” The EU was unhappy about being the target of the trans-Atlantic slave trade reference and was unperturbed about ditching the Holocaust along with it.

The rest of the negotiations consisted of various parties demanding additions and subtractions to the list that would be unpalatable to others so that, in the end, the no-list argument prevailed. In the final minutes, Belgium and Turkey made a deal to incorporate a reference back “in particular” to the “list in paragraph 99 of the DDPA,” which names only “slavery, the slave trade, the transatlantic slave trade, apartheid, colonialism and genocide.”


Monday, November 28th, 2011

by Ryan Jones (Israel Today News)

Egyptians went to the polls on Monday in the nation’s first election since the toppling of former dictator Hosni Mubarak. Across the border in Israel, government officials and military commanders were keeping a wary eye on the situation.

While democratic freedom was purportedly what the Egyptian revolution was all about, since Mubarak’s ouster in February dangerous Islamist elements like the Muslim Brotherhood have been gaining in both power and popularity at an alarming rate.

Ahead of Monday’s vote, analysts predicted that the Muslim Brotherhood would win control of at least 40 percent of Egypt’s parliament, putting it in a commanding position in the next government. Should the party win even more seats, it could rule Egypt outright.

A Muslim Brotherhood win in the election would more likely than not spell the end of the Israel-Egypt peace treaty. The group has repeatedly vowed that if it ever came to power, it would annul the Camp David Accords. Recent polls show that a majority of Egyptians are in favor of such a move, or at least in favor of demanding sweeping changes to the peace treaty that Israel would never be able to accept.

“The IDF needs to be prepared for any changes in the situation and to be prepared for the day after elections in Egypt,” said lawmaker Shaul Mofaz, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, during a tour of the Tel Hashomer IDF induction base on Monday.

Lawmaker Aryeh Eldad (National Union) speculated that if the Muslim Brotherhood wins, it could move the Egyptian army back into the Sinai Peninsula, effectively ending the Camp David Accords. “World public opinion should be prepared for the fact that this would be a casus belli,” said Eldad.

Beyond relations with Israel, an Egypt ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood would put the entire region one giant step closer to universal Sharia Law en route to the reestablishment of an Islamic caliphate – a stated goal of the Muslim Brotherhood.


Sunday, November 27th, 2011

by Elad Benari (Arutz Sheva News)

Iran has threatened to target NATO’s missile defense installations in Turkey if the U.S. or Israel attacks the Islamic Republic, The Associated Press reported.

Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards’ aerospace division, made the threat, saying the warning is part of a new defense strategy to counter what he described as an increase in threats from the U.S. and Israel.

“Should we be threatened, we will target NATO’s missile defense shield in Turkey and then hit the next targets,” Hazijzadeh was quoted as having told the Mehr news agency.

Turkey agreed in September to have the NATO anti-defense missile shield installed in its territory, prompting criticism from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who claimed the defense system was meant to protect Israel against Iranian missile attacks.

Hajizadeh said the United States also plans to install similar stations in Arab states and was quoted as saying, “Based on orders from the exalted commander in chief, we will respond to threats with threats.”

Another senior Guard commander, Yadollah Javani, threatened that Tehran will target Israel’s nuclear facilities if the Jewish state attacks Iran.

“If Israel fires a missile at our nuclear facilities or vital installations, it should know that Israel’s nuclear centers will be the target of our missiles,” the ISNA news agency quoted him as saying.

Tensions have been rising between Iran and the West since the release of a report earlier this month by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which said that Tehran was suspected of conducting secret experiments whose sole purpose was the development of nuclear arms.

There have been speculations whether Israel will attack Iran to stop its nuclear program. Former Mossad Chief Danny Yatom said this week that Israel cannot afford not to attack Iran.

“As steep as the price for hitting Iran may be, a military strike on Iran will be less painful than the cost of living with an Iranian nuclear weapons threat,” Yatom said at a conference. “The backlash from a strike on Iran’s nuclear sites will not be as bad for Israel as will an Iran armed with nuclear weapons. I don’t think that those predicting apocalyptic repercussions of a strike on Tehran are correct, and even if they are, Israel can’t afford to wonder if Tehran will go crazy and bomb us.”


Friday, November 25th, 2011

by Elad Benari (IsraelNationalNews)

The Palestinian Authority may soon fail financially and cease to exist, its Prime Minister warned on Thursday.

Salam Fayyad warned that if Israel does not resume the transfer of tax revenues it collects for the PA, the entity will collapse economically and thus cease to exist. Already now, Fayyad claimed, the PA cannot pay salaries to its employees.

Channel 10 News reported that Fayyad made the comments following a meeting with Norway’s Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. According to the report, Fayyad said that the collapse of PA institutions “is advancing rapidly toward the point at which they will stop operating.”

“We have no money,” Fayyad was quoted as having said. “It’s not about donations or international assistance we receive,” he added, blaming the Israeli decision to freeze the taxes it collects for the PA as being the reason for the impending collapse.

A recent World Bank report, while admitting that the PA is undergoing a financial crisis, said the crisis was primarily due to the lack of donor countries fulfilling their pledges to fork over billions of dollars to Ramallah.

Israeli officials decided to halt the transfer of taxes to the PA as part of a round of sanctions against the entity, following its ascension as a ‘full-member state’ to UNESCO. Last week, Israel’s cabinet voted to maintain the freeze. Israel transfers some $100 million in tax payments to the PA every month.

Foreign Minister Støre reportedly said Fayyad is correct in saying that the PA will soon cease to exist, and compared the Israeli decision to waterboarding, the method of torture used by the United States on security prisoners, when interrogators simulate drowning by pouring water on the head of the prisoner.

“This is waterboarding-style torture, only that it has to do with the economy,” Støre was quoted as having said.

On Tuesday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon asked Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to resume the transfer of taxes to the PA, saying that transferring tax money to the PA would be in line with Israel’s legal obligations.


Thursday, November 24th, 2011

Psalm 100:1-5 cf. I Chron. 29:10-13

Famous hymn entitled “Old Hundredth” was written by William Kethe in 1594 a.d. and another version written by Isaac Watts (1674-1748 a.d.) and arranged by John Wesley (1703-1791 a.d.).

William Kethe’s version:
All people that on earth do dwell, sing to the Lord
with cheerful voice; Him serve with fear, His praise
forth tell. Come ye before Him and rejoice.

The Lord, ye know, is God indeed; without our aid
He did us make; We are His flock, He doth us feed,
and for His sheep He doth us take.

O enter then His gates with praise, approach with
joy His courts unto; Praise, laud, and bless His
Name always; for it is seemly so to do.

For why? The Lord our God is good; His mercy is
for ever sure; His truth at all times firmly stood,
and shall from age to age endure.

Isaac Watts version:
Before Jehovah’s awful throne, ye nations bow with
sacred joy; Know that the Lord is God alone; He can
create and He destroy.

His sovereign power, without our aid, made us of
clay, and formed us men; And when like wandering
sheep we strayed, He brought us to His fold again.

We’ll crowd Thy gates with thankful songs, high as
the heavens our voices raise; And earth, with her
ten thousand tongues, shall fill Thy courts with
sounding praise.

Wide as the world is Thy command; vast as eternity
Thy love; Firm as a rock Thy truth shall stand, when
rolling years shall cease to move.

Psalm 100:1-2

The EXTENT of that rejoicing – “all ye lands” – Some translate “all ye inhabitants of the land” referring it to Israel primarily. However, it would seem to extend beyond Israel if we consider Psalm 96:1; 97:1; 98:4

The EXPRESSION of that rejoicing

1. Shouts – “a joyful noise” – NIV says: “Shout for joy” NASB – “Shout joyfully”

2. Service – NIV translates “serve” as the word “worship” – Hebrew ‘abad used 294 times and means service, even used of a slave – it is to be with “gladness” – Hebrew word simchah is used 97 times – Psa. 4:7;
16:11; 30:11-12; 43:4; 68:3

3. Singing – NIV – “joyful songs” or NASB “joyful singing”

Psalm 100:3a – there are three important issues:

1. COMMITMENT to one God – His Name is Yahveh – He alone is God – cf. Isa. 44:6, 8; 45:5

2. CREATION of human life – “it is He that hath made us” – cf. Isa. 45:18

3. CONDEMNATION of secular humanism – “and not we ourselves” – NIV translates “and we are Him” – KJV is preferred.


1. His PEOPLE – Psalm 23:1; 95:7

2. His PASTURE – Psalm 78:52; 79:13


1. THANKSGIVING – Hebrew towdah – used of the “thank-offering” in Leviticus 7:12, 13, 15; 22:29; Psalm 50:14, 23; 69:30-31; 95:2; 107:21-22; 116:17-19; 147:7

2. PRAISE – Psalm 92:1; 103:1-2, 20-22; 104:1; 106:1; 107:8, 15. 21, 31; 113:1-3

Psalm 100:5

1. The GOODNESS of the Lord – Psalm 119:68

2. The GRACIOUSNESS of the Lord – “His mercy” -Hebrew: chesed – used 249 times, 129 times in the Psalms – “lovingkindness”

3. The GUARANTEES of the Lord – “His truth” NIV/NASB – “faithfulness”



Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011

by Ryan Jones (Israel Today News)

Republican presidential candidates held yet another public debate on Tuesday, and much of the talk was devoted to foreign policy. And much of the foreign policy talk was devoted to American relations with Israel, and whether or not the US should help Israel attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Frontrunner Mitt Romney was vague on whether or not he would join Israel in a military strike on Iran, but strongly stressed his support of Israel in general. Romney said that if elected, his first foreign state visit will be to Israel.

Romney also took current US President Barack Obama to task, accusing him of being unfriendly toward Israel. Despite a strong focus on Israeli-Arab peace efforts over the course of his first term, Obama has yet to visit the Jewish state.

Former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich, who has been gaining steam in the primary race of late, also stressed his unwavering support of Israel, and said he would likely join Israel in striking Iran, but would first want to make sure there was no other option to military action.

Even if he did not commit US forces to such an attack, Gingrich said it would nevertheless be absolutly necessary to support Israel in a military strike on Iran, as not doing so would leave the Jewish state isolated and encourage an attack by its enemies.

Popular but maligned candidate Herman Cain said he, too, would support an Israeli attack on Iran, and would likely commit US forces.

The only candidate to outright reject the idea of support an Israeli strike on Iran was Ron Paul, who said he did not think Israel would take such action, anyway.

“Why does Israel need our help? We need to get out of their way,” said Paul, which he clarified also meant an end to US financial aid to Israel.

“We don’t even have a treaty with Israel. Why do we have this automatic commitment that we’re going to send our kids and send our money endlessly to Israel? So I think they’re quite capable of taking care of themselves,” said Paul.

Ron Paul’s objection to foreign aid to Israel or any other nation is well known. What is likely to irk most Republicans about his debate remarks is the fact that he would not use US power to help Israel in the event of a massive Iranian counter-strike.

If Israel attacks Iran “that’s their business, but they should suffer the consequences,” Paul said.


Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011

by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu (Arutz Sheva News)

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is to meet with Hamas leaders in Cairo Thursday to sum up a unity deal based on “resistance,” a Palestinian Authority state based on the temporary 1949 Armistice Lines and non-recognition of Israel.

Abbas, head of the rival Fatah faction, formally signed a formal unity agreement with Hamas in May, but it quickly became nothing more than a ceremonial act following disagreements.

The failure of the Palestinian Authority to gain admittance as a full member in the United Nations has been a game-changer. Following the American and Israel decision to cut off funds to the PA after it won membership on the U.N.’s UNESCO agency, Abbas has made it clear he considers the Obama Administration an obstacle to his plans for Palestinian Authority statehood.

Spokesmen for Hamas and Abbas have confirmed this week’s meeting will be full of substance as Abbas had apparently decided to bank on Asian and pro-Arab countries in Europe to give him the diplomatic backing he has lost with the United States.

Hamas opposed Abbas’ bid for U.N. membership, and the failure has represented the terrorist organization with a golden opportunity to exercise weight. The failure of a unified Palestinian Authority has hampered Abbas’ influence in the West, with Hamas ruling Gaza and the Fatah faction ruling Arab areas of Judea and Samaria.

Hamas spokesmen said the unity agreement will be based on a policy of ”resistance,” an Arab code word for terror; a Palestinian Authority country being defined by the temporary 1949 Armistice Lines that were in effect until the Six-Day War in 1967; and non-recognition of Israel.

Abbas previously has said he recognizes Israel as an entity, but not a Jewish state. Presumably, Abbas will claim he recognizes Israel only according the temporary borders. Their inclusion in the Palestinian Authority would mean the expulsion of nearly 10 percent of Israel’s population and the forfeiting of lands and property in PA-claimed areas.

One of the bones of contention between Fatah and Hamas has been the choice of Prime Minister, a post held by Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza and PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in Ramallah. Under the new agreement, neither of them would serve in office.

The planned meeting this week between Abbas and Khaled Mashaal, the supreme leader of Hamas, is bound to upset the Obama Administration even more than the bid for membership in the United Nations, a move that effectively buried the American-led ”diplomatic process.”

A further provocation could be the participation of the Islamic Jihad in new PA elections in May, a move the terrorist organization said it is considering.

Abbas still is trying to stay on good terms with the Obama Administration, commenting that the United States “is considered our friend” because it “helps us financially and it provides us with a considerable amount of aid.” The cut-off to aid following the PA’s acceptance to UNESCO proved temporary but still remains a threat.


Friday, November 18th, 2011

by David Wilder, Hevron

In honor of ‘Shabbat Hevron’, when Abrahams’s purchase of Mearat Hamachpela [Tomb of the Patriarchs] is in the Torah reading, thousands will make their way to the second holiest city in Judaism to spend an uplifting and spiritual Shabbat praying at the Meara and learning about the city. Arutz Sheva brings you the city’s history, written by the tireless spokesman of the Jewish Community of Hevron.

Hevron is the first Jewish city in the land of Israel , home of our patriarchs and matriarchs — Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and Sarah, Rebecca and Leah.

King David ruled from Hevron for more than seven years before moving the capital to
Jerusalem . Jews have lived in Hevron almost continuously for thousands of years. At Tel Hevron, commonly known as ‘Tel Rumeida,’ artifacts were discovered dating to the era of the Patriarch Abraham. ‘L’Melech’ (King) seals, 2,700 years old, inscribed with the word ‘Hevron’ in ancient Hebrew were uncovered there by archeologists.

Our community offices are in a neighborhood founded in 1540 by Jews exiled from Spain in 1492. When returned to Hebron in 1967, Jews did not occupy a foreign city; rather, they came back home.

Jewish presence in Hevron came to an abrupt end only in August 1929, when Arab riots led to the murder of 67 Jews and the wounding of 70. All survivors were exiled from the city by the ruling British.

Following the riots, massacre and exile in 1929, a small group of Jews returned to Hevron in 1931. About thirty families lived in the city until just after Passover, 1936, when they were expelled by the British.

Following the 1967 Six-Day War, Jews again had access to the first Jewish city in . It must be clearly understood: when returned to Hevron in 1967, Jews did not occupy a foreign city; rather, they came back home.

In 1968 Jews officially came back to Hevron . The day before Passover in April, 1968 a group of families arrived at the Park Hotel in Hevron . The proprietor rented them half of the kitchen, which they promptly koshered. The women and children slept in the rooms; the men and boys slept in the lobby and on the floor. It was the first Jewish Pesach in Hevron in decades.

Moshe Dayan, then Minister of Defense, arrived in Hevron shortly after Passover. Following several weeks of discussions he offered the group two choices: either be forcibly removed from the city, or go live in the Hevron military compound, several kilometers outside the center of the city. This building, originally a British police station, had been transformed into the Israeli military Headquarters of Judea. It was not overly conducive to a civilian lifestyle.

Dayan must have expected that the young families, including women and babies, would soon throw up their arms in frustration at the poor living conditions and leave of their own accord. Dayan was partially correct. The group did eventually leave. But first they lived in the military headquarters for two and half years, until the first neighborhood of the newly founded Hevron suburb, Kiryat Arba, was completed.

There was, however, a yearning to return to Hevron , to Beit Hadassah, to the 450 year old Jewish Quarter, home of the ancient Avraham Avinu Shul, to reside adjacent to Ma’arat HaMachpela. Attempts were made, again and again, all leading to failure. Only in 1979, when Menachem Begin was Prime Minister, did a group of 10 women and 40 children succeed in setting up house in the basement of the old medical center, Beit Hadassah, in the middle of the city. Living in adverse conditions for close to a year, these women and childen became the nucleus of Hevron ‘s renewed Jewish community.

In 1980, following the murder of six young men outside Beit Hadassah, the Israeli government finally gave official recognition and authorization of Hebron ‘s Jewish Community.

The present Jewish Community of Hevron numbers more than 1,000 people, including almost 100 families, hundreds of children, and some 250 post-high school yeshiva students studying at Yeshivat Shavei Hevron in Beit Romano. The reason there aren’t more people living in Hevron is simply because of lack of space. There are not any apartments available.
That is, perhaps, a misnomer. There are apartments available that we are presently unable to utilize. We have been unjustifiably expelled from 12 apartments that we lived in. Clearly, were there more room in Hevron , there would be many more Jews living in the city.
However, in spite of the small size of the community, according to the statistics received from the IDF and Civil Administration, hundreds of thousands of people visit Hevron annually. Worldwide support, including Jews and Gentiles, is overwhelming. Groups from Europe, Scandinavia and even the Far East tour Hevron .


Again, the answer is quite simple. A few years ago, a group of people associated with the New Israel Fund visited Hevron . Following a short visit on the Jewish side of the city, they crossed the ‘border’ and met with Hevron ‘s Arab mayor, Mustepha Natsche. They asked him whether Jews were allowed to pray at Ma’arat HaMachpela, the second holiest site to the Jewish people in the world. His answer greatly surprised them. He said no. ‘Ma’arat HaMachpela is a mosque, and only Moslems can pray in a Mosque,’ said Arab Mayor Mustepha Natsche. This was reiterated by Natsche’s deputy, Kamal Dweck. In an interview he also stated that Jews and Christians may not pray in the Tomb of the Patriarchs ‘because it is not a church or a synagogue; it is a mosque and only Moslems can worship in a mosque.’ This lie was raised again by the Arab world when Israel put Hevron on its list of Heritage Sites.

The Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs was off-limits to Jews for 700 years. During that time Jews, (as well as Christians), were not allowed inside the 2,000 year old Herodian structure atop the Caves of Machpela. Today we are told by Hevron’s Arab Mayor and deputy mayor that should the Palestinian Authority ever regain control all of Hevron, again this holy site will be closed to anyone not Moslem.

There are those who are skeptical. How then, can one explain what happened to Joseph’s Tomb in Shechem. According to the Olso Accords this holy site was to remain accessible to Jews. However, following the killing of an Israeli soldier at the tomb, Jews were forced to abandon it. The result was the total destruction of the building which was burned to the ground. And if the Arabs had their way, Kever Rachel would have long ago been turned over to the Palestinian Authority. They claim that her tomb, too, is only a Muslim site.

The only reason that Ma’arat HaMachpela is still accessible to Jews is because there is a permanent Jewish presence in the city. The disappearance of the Jewish Community of Hevron would be tantamount to abandoning our Patriarchs and Matriarchs.

Could any Jew, be they religious or secular, dream of abandoning the Fathers and Mothers of our people?

What is our goal, living in Hevron? Despite media reports, the goal of Hevron ‘s Jewish community is not to expel the Arabs living here. Anyone of any race or religion should be able to live in Hevron .

However, we demand that our Arab neighbors accept the fact that the Jews have an eternal, legitimate right to live in the first Jewish city in the land of Israel . This is our goal: living normal lives, just as anyone else, anywhere in Israel. Our goal is to ensure that our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will be able to live in Hevron . Our goal is to make sure that all Jews will have access to Ma’arat HaMachpela, that Jews will never again be told that this holy site is ‘off-limits’ because ‘you are Jews.’

Others ask: how can you stay in Hevron ? It is so dangerous. How can you risk the lives of your families and children in such a place? It was May 2001, about eight months after the Oslo War — otherwise known as the second intifada — began. Daily, Hevron ‘s residents were attacked by terrorist gunmen from the surrounding hills transferred to the control of the Palestinian Authority several years earlier. At 11 one night I was still in the office, five minutes from our home. Again, the sound of gunfire could be heard from the Abu Sneneh and Harat al-Shech hills The phone on my desk rang. It was one of my daughters, Aderet, then 16. Breathless, she exclaimed, ‘Dad, they’re shooting again.’ I answered lackadaisically, ‘Yeah, I hear it.’ In other words, ‘What’s new — it’s the same, every day.’
‘But they shot into our apartment. And I was standing there,’ my daughter cried.
Arriving home, I discovered five holes in a wall opposite the window in the children’s room. Aderet and Ruti had been standing not more than three feet from where the bullets hit. Miraculously, they weren’t injured.

Today, Aderet is married with two children of her own. And she too lives here in Hevron . Another of my married daughters, with three children, also continues to live in the city. Why not leave, due to the danger? Jews in Hevron are willing to risk present dangers because acquiescence can only be defined as a reward for terrorism. Arab terror seeks to expel us from our homes, using murder as a means to an end. However, ‘our homes’ include not only those in Hevron but also in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Haifa . New Palestinian textbooks contain maps of ‘Palestine’ that include the entire state of Israel .

Eviction from Hevron, the first Jewish city in Eretz Yisrael, would be tantamount to the removal of Americans from Boston or Philadelphia upon terrorist demands. Except, of course, that American history is less than 250 years old; Jewish history in Hevron is more than 3,700 years old.

Hevron, home of Abraham, is not just the place where Judaism got its start. It is the source of monotheism for all peoples of the world. Jewish people in and around the world support a strong, vibrant Jewish presence in Hevron . We do not expect any Israeli government to attempt to follow in the footsteps of Arab Nazi Mufti Amin el-Husseini and the British and expel Jews from the city. In any case, we would never abandon our homes. Besides which, why should the state of Israel be forced to chop off its roots to appease Arab terror? We know the result of eradicating the roots of a tree. God forbid that should happen!

Present Defense Minister and Former Prime Minister Barak once blessed Hevron as follows: ‘The test of the renewed Hevron Jewish community, which is the same test of the Arab majority, is the ability to develop good neighborly relationships. Mutual honor and a joint effort are necessary to overcome the scars, the pain and the difficult reminders left from the despicable carnage which desecrated this holy city.’

Hevron ‘s Jewish Community could not agree more with this statement. The time has come for our Arab neighbors to stop shooting at us, to stop trying to kill us for no other reason than because we are Jews living in Hevron . Perhaps they believe that by killing us, or by attempting to murder us, they will scare us away. They cannot be further from the truth, because Hevron is the heart of the Jewish people, the life-blood from which the Jewish people derives its sanctity. This is a simple truth that everyone should not only understand, but also agree with. We truly hope and pray for the day when true peace will prevail, both in Hevron, throughout the land of Israel and all over the entire world.

Web Site Designed and Hosted by Ceronex