Louis and Katz- Will We Survive Gog and Cohorts?!

.... and don't miss out on our Tanak Talk Broadcast!

 

Read more »

Growing With The Ger

Parashas Shelach

The Ger In High Definition

Rabbi David Katz

In this week’s Parsha, we cover the three most distinct angles of the Ger [in relation to Israel] that serve as the main function of the Ger [Toshav] in the Land, setting precedent from within and throughout. The Parsha begins with the spies, and the two spies who don’t speak evil speech, [loshon harah] will go down as two of the biggest pioneers in Jewish – Ger history; none other than Caleb and Joshua. What they stand for, [spreading Seven Laws as a method of subduing idolatry as opposed to military might] shall lend itself to the next phase – a Ger in land [and his obligation/ability to sacrifice [Olah Offering], leading to the last position of the Parsha – tzitzit; religious identification/uniform in the Land – in the merit of Shem, he who founded Jerusalem, and by these means the Land itself [Canaan would then be to Shem as the Caananite Nations standing before Israel]. The three topics could easily be pinned down to three perspectives: The Jewish confronting [potential] Gerim, the Jews and Gerim facing each other, and the Ger gazing at the Jew; spies, sacrifices, and garments respectively. [The Gra identifies this as three distinct stages of daughter – sister- mother in relation to Torah]

When the decision is made to spy out the Land, twelve spies are elected from amidst the Children of Israel, highlighted in historical context by Joshua and Caleb. These two were existentially different than the rest, even for the mere fact that where the others stood to deride the Land of its harshness, Joshua and Caleb offered tunes of praise. However the key in understanding where it went right for these two [and a point of digression for the others], is to consider the path of Caleb – a destination with the Avot!

It should be very clear by now, that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were the Patriarchs of Israel, yet a Jewish People would not stand until crossing over through Sinai. That makes everyone before Sinai a Ger [Tzedek], and the standard as such, carrying on a legacy that began with Adam, was entrusted to Noah, and was perfected and influenced by Shem, who made it an eternal path of righteousness. [This follows the Zohar that explains the words of Torah were actually spoken as vessels that belonged and originated with Gerim.] Caleb, as he had “a different spirit within him” would then seek to connect not with his Jewish Brethren [and thus speak an evil report], but would cling to his forefathers who saw Judaism from the eyes of the Ger [hence the perspective point of view of this Parsha], and would, ultimately draw influence from them specifically [and perhaps it is for this reason it is said that the forefathers along with Adam sleep (w/o decay) in the Cave of Machpela; a well of inspiration for he who wishes to connect to their reservoir].

Caleb [and Joshua – who also led a life of devotion to Gerim for the sake of the truth; both Caleb and Joshua deliver their seed into the vessels of Gerim, under the lens of “The Righteous spiritual level of Elijah”] takes a different route of operation in the Land in conjunction with God’s commandments from within the Torah, concerning Derech Eretz in the Land; he chooses to fight as the Avot fought – with Torah. The other spies were limited in their view of success, as they thought in terms of bows and arrows; for that Hashem showed them [in their enemy’s hands] AK 47’s and Merkava Tanks so to speak. For Caleb and Joshua, the view was different, for they chose to fight as Samson – with the Seven Laws of Noah; Hashem then promptly and quite clearly showed them signs of victory. Where the ten evil reports of the spies cried over destruction, Joshua and Caleb were busy preparing the Land as ancestral heritage, laying the seeds of what would be conquered land in the name of God and His Torah.

The loshon hara would go down as the quintessential Tisha b’ Av the day commemorating a Temple’s destruction and a near eternity of agony for Israel. Joshua and Caleb are then essentially in stark opposition, laying foundations for even the Third and eternal Temple of God.  Joshua lays a foundation in the House of Rachav, and Caleb becomes the most recent Patriarch of Hebron [in merit of his influence there from the Avot] – to your seed, an inheritance, says Hashem.

Essentially, “the spies” chose poorly and this resulted in destruction by military might, whereas the other two saw that Hashem’s command of conquering Israel can be done through Torah and Noahide Laws, allowing for the Jewish – Shem pipeline to become once again live and well. This is seen by the Parsha closing with the command of Tzitzit – a mitzvah of the white strings in merit of Shem, while the blue string is the merit of Abraham; a true depiction of heaven and earth – the Jew- Ger pipeline.

[*The Mechilta points out, that the most effective way of securing Israel’s borders, ending idolatry, and even erasing Amalek’s memory, is best accomplished through the Noahide Laws. Jewish history would end up going down this road as its correction against the spies, an acknowledgement of Caleb and Joshua. Only as the Edomite exile intensified has this tradition become lost, amidst Israel’s Second Temple crisis [that Edom destroyed]. We can be sure that as Gerim are returning, Edom’s run is nearing its end, and this time the Jewish People are poised to return to their [Caleb /Joshua – Joseph Judah; ancestors to Messiah’s ben David and ben Joseph who complete the task] roots and bring the World to the Ger Toshav [Shem/Abraham inspired vision] position is was created to exist as.]

This concludes an introduction to a Jewish View of the World coming out of the Land of Israel, from the focal point of first contact, i.e. the spies.

Once Gerim would become common place in the Land [or even as Ger Toshav throughout the World], the Parsha states that they have rights in performing Offerings to God. It is at this junction where the Ger and the Jew truly stand side by side. [If the previous perspective was as a mother - daughter relationship (in nurturing and education), this no doubt would be the sister-sister progression; for wisdom is called “my sister”] The Ger [who wishes to be a Ger and/or operate within Torah precincts] is encouraged to make an Olah Offering, should it be for Thanksgiving or in order to be a proper Ger for example [which today can be achieved through a Ger – Shabbat]. The Jewish – Ger shared experience would be in the learning/physical process of delivering God’s aroma.

The Ger is considered like a High Priest when he learns Torah, and it is the Olah that opens the door to his World of revelation and light. Under the catalyst of his Olah, he may now learn [with sky as the limit when done with the Wisdom of Torah; who again, is called Wisdom] to perform, invest in an expansive nature should he desire to, and he even now has cause to exist in tandem with Israel through his inheritance, the Torah. For a Ger Toshav [within or throughout Israel and the World], this would constitute his independence in the Land, and now would be able to operate with quite ease under the Seventh Noahide Law – to establish the necessary statute of  Beis Din. The Ger would be fully operative in the Land, and the Torah goes on to state, in the areas of interest, there shall be one Torah for the Jew and the Ger alike. 

Today Jewish cooperation and assistance is frail, coupling with Ger hesitation of delivering an Olah, as per the knowledge to identify the appropriate Offering [as one must know with intent the nature of the Olah, i.e. for Thanksgiving or for finalizing one’s soul as a Ger]; the Torah seeks to mend the distance and to improve both sides’ education levels for the sake of the other, through the partnership in the Olah. Should the Ger Toshav of today realize the gift of God that he possesses, the Olah, and were to take full privilege, the Offering [which literally means to draw close] would in fact have the power to draw each other close, into full eternal embrace. The Holy Temple built [and such that it was built by the inertia of Caleb and Joshua as opposed to the spies] which functions as the Divine locale of such Service to God, will forever express this union before God.

This now shows two of three perspectives: Jewish view of the Land and Ger – Jewish view together. The third and final view is the Ger who gazes upon Israel – in the name of Tzitzit.

Tzitzit come under the merit of Shem and Abraham [white and blue strings respectively] and are the article of clothing that a Jew can be seen in the Land. This obviously points to the Ger in the Land [who now is as a “Mother” in Torah, as Torah can be said in his name; having gone through the three stages of Torah – daughter, sister, and mother. The Ger is now the fourth branch of the mystical letter Shin, having expanded like the Land of Israel – into a fourth branch. The Land of Israel is said to expand like the skin of a deer, with the addition of Gerei Toshavim.] who with his gaze upon the Tzitzit, reminds the inhabitants of the Land [and throughout the World if need be] of God’s Holy Domain above and below, and in the name of the Fear of Heaven in performance of His Commandments. The Jew would then find the proper drive to reach this pre-requisite Awe through the gaze of the Ger, and Ger would benefit from a World filled with Torah [that in the relative sense always did begin with the Ger].

This constitutes a rectified society in the Land of Israel, from the starting point of the bravery of Caleb and Joshua, developing into a people of worship [not in the mold of religion or idolatry], and culminates with a proper people who are a part of the fabric within the Land’s borders as a society of God. If the Land was ever to bear fruit [and multiply] both the Jewish People and the Gerim would be delivered to full Mother [Torah expertise] status in result of the Unity that can, should, and will exist between the sons of Shem, encapsulated within the Torah command through Tzitzit, in the merit of Shem and Abraham.

As the final war of Gog V’ Magog is quite literally [after an extremely Jacob’s ladder-esque long process] an attack against Torah, through the agency of Japheth in opposition of Shem. Thus the World is, was, and will be a saga of sons of Noah. For all that Parashas Shelach stands for as an eternal reminder of Tisha’ b’ Av, B’’H, it also stands as the eternal rectification as such. The Parsha preserves and delivers the Messianic message that is contained in the sons of Shem, a path of unity, one of which is treaded upon by none other than those who inherit Shem.

The Gerim and Yehudim – who serve as the white fire agent in the Parsha, or the Tzitzit of Shem [white fire with blue flame?], contain the intensity and purification to bring Japheth back to his Noahide prophecy – of dwelling in the Tents of Shem, roots and tradition that the other spies were all too quick to forget.

In a Land that is inhabited by God’s Gerim, the Path to Moshiach is best walked in the shoes of Caleb and Joshua, the two spies who in face of military might, chose to pay visage to the Gerim who walked the same Land before them, and who are destined to walk again…for the key to unlocking David and Joseph’s door, lies within the Fourth Craftsmen [the others being sons of David and Joseph along with Elijah], he who is dressed in white – the Righteous Priest, Shem son of Noah –who in conjoined merit with Abraham, will forever remind us, as they did Caleb: You are Gerim in the Land of God.

Parashas Shelach will always then stand to remind the soul destined for Tisha B’ Av – of the soft bubbling river that pours out of the Temple in the End of Days, one that stands to reverse the destruction of the spies, and can begin to build as sons of Shem, a project that laid its foundations with Shem and Abraham. As witnessed by Caleb, the Kol Hator [the voice of the spy] will be heard in the Land, signaling a return to the voice of Caleb, echoing the Torah in its original and authentic voice as God always intended it to be, a true insight to God’s reality.

Don't Forget Class Time: 11 P.M. Motzie Shabbos [Tzfat]

Enter Here:  https://www.ivocalize.net/#room/YeshivatShemV'Ever

Read more »

WWIII Catalyst? True CIA Opp? Patriots? Strange.

Kim - Jong - Un, Dennis Rodman, Iran, Syria, The Pope, etc. - is this really how Hashem draws up Gog V' Magog?

Bombs flew in Boston today, and if one of the axis of evil that be claims this as its prize, a serious message has been sent to USA, and a re-examination of "no missile technology" needs to be addressed, as, "no, 12 years of silence is not a good thing since 9/11" - i.e. sleeper cells could be a literal mine field - World-Wide.


Korea Today:


DailyMail:

Federal investigators are looking into possible connections between today's bomb attack on the Boston Marathon and the Patriot's Day anniversaries of the Branch Davidian compound seige in Waco, Texas, and the Oklahoma City bombing, a Justice Department source tells MailOnline. Today's attack took place on Patriots' Day, which marks the first battle of the Revolutionary War and the 'shot heard 'round the world.' It is a day held in reverence by right-wing domestic groups and others who oppose the federal government. President Barack Obama himself acknowledged the significance of the holiday during his briefing this afternoon. 'Today is Patriots Day,' he said. 'A day that reflects the freedom Boston has celebrated throughout its history.'

Shadows of the past: Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City was heavily damaged by a truck bomb explosion on April 19, 1995 - the day after Patriots' Day

Rallying point: The April 19, 1993 federal siege of the Branch Davidian Cult became a rallying cry for right-wing anti-government groups The 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, which killed 168, occurred the day after Patriots' Day. Bomber Timothy McVeigh was said believe the date was significant. The federal siege of the Branch Dravidian compound, which left 82 members of the cult dead, began on Patriots' Day in 1993.

More... 'At least two people dead and up to 100 injured' as two explosions rock finish line of Boston Marathon leaving behind scene of carnage 'Somebody's leg flew past my head': Eyewitnesses describe scenes of unimaginable horror as Boston Marathon bomb blasts injure more than 100

Significant: Timothy McVeigh, the man behind the Oklahoma city bombing, held Patroits' Day as a significant date Today is also Tax Day, when federal income tax returns are due. In recent years, it has been seized on by members of the Tea Party as cause to protest federal government policies and tax rates. A Justice Department source tells MailOnline that authorities are looking into the possibility that the Boston attack, which killed two and injured 86 more at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, could have been planned to coincide with Patriots' Day. Patriots' Day marks the April 19, 1776 Battles of Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts. Since 1969, residents of Massachusetts and Maine have celebrated Patriots' Day on the third Monday in April. The Boston Marathon has been scheduled on Patriots' Day since it began in 1897. The Oklahoma City federal building bombing took place on April 19, 1995. The federal siege in Waco began on the same date two years earlier. Right-wing groups that oppose the federal government have cited the Waco siege as an example of federal authorities over-stepping their power. The Virginia Tech massacre, the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, took place on April 16, 2007. 

Whats With The Athletes?
Rodman, Runners, Football Players, etc.


Just weird. As Gog V' Magog most likely will be.

Read more »

Director's Cut: World War III - Take 39 - Action!

They say [North] Korea is hell on earth; while South Korea lays claim to it more literally: Seoul [שאלה].

Are these guys serious about WWIII?
Is this some kind of End of Days trigger that guarantees an apocalypse type Gog V' Magog?
So far it seems these guys are the most intent on making it happen.

This idea is not new, as it has been blogged many times over, to watch for Korea in the End of Days.

Also, [something that has been blogged many times over] the Obama 2nd visit to Israel, which from a Gog perspective, is supposed to wreck havoc in the World by the time his fateful expiration comes on the 3rd and final visit.

Whether or not he is Gog, may very well rest in the hands of Korea's desire for End of Days glory.


CNN.com:

North Korea stirred up fresh unease in Northeast Asia early Thursday, threatening attacks by a "smaller, lighter and diversified" nuclear force and warning, "The moment of explosion is approaching fast." The new threat came after the North Koreans locked South Korean workers out of a joint factory complex and announced plans to restart a nuclear reactor it shut down five years ago. Meanwhile, the United States announced it was sending ballistic missile defenses to Guam, a Pacific territory that's home to U.S. naval and air bases. 

"The moment of explosion is approaching fast. No one can say a war will break out in Korea or not and whether it will break out today or tomorrow," North Korea's state news agency KCNA declared in its latest broadside. "The responsibility for this grave situation entirely rests with the U.S. administration and military warmongers keen to encroach upon the DPRK's sovereignty and bring down its dignified social system with brigandish logic."

DPRK is short for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the official name for North Korea. Most observers say the North is still years away from having the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead on a missile. U.S. officials have said they see no unusual military movements across the Demilitarized Zone that splits the Korean Peninsula, despite weeks of bombastic rhetoric from Pyongyang, and many analysts say the increasingly belligerent talk is aimed at cementing the authority of the country's young leader, Kim Jong Un. But the North does have plenty of conventional military firepower, including medium-range ballistic missiles that can carry high explosives for hundreds of miles. 

And U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Wednesday that the North Korean threats to Guam, Hawaii and the U.S. mainland have to be taken seriously. "It only takes being wrong once, and I don't want to be the secretary of defense who was wrong once," Hagel told an audience at Washington's National Defense University.

But Hagel also said there was still a "responsible" path for the North to take. "I hope the North will ratchet this very dangerous rhetoric down," Hagel said. "There is a pathway that is responsible for the North to get on a path to peace working with their neighbors. There are many, many benefits to their people that could come. But they have got to be a responsible member of the world community, and you don't achieve that responsibility and peace and prosperity by making nuclear threats and taking very provocative actions." Shows of force and flights of bombast

The United States has in turn made a show of its military strength in the annual drills, flying B-2 stealth bombers capable of carrying conventional or nuclear weapons, Cold War-era B-52s and F-22 Raptor stealth fighters over South Korea.

KCNA blamed the U.S. and its South Korean allies for the situation, however. "We formally inform the White House and Pentagon that the ever-escalating U.S. hostile policy toward the DPRK and its reckless nuclear threat will be smashed by the strong will of all the united service personnel and people and cutting-edge smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear strike means of the DPRK and that the merciless operation of its revolutionary armed forces in this regard has been finally examined and ratified," it said. "The U.S. had better ponder over the prevailing grave situation." Caitlin Hayden, National Security Council spokeswoman, slammed North Korea's statement as "unhelpful and unconstructive."

"It is yet another offering in a long line of provocative statements that only serve to further isolate North Korea from the rest of the international community and undermine its goal of economic development. North Korea should stop its provocative threats and instead concentrate on abiding by its international obligations," she said. Robert Carlin, a North Korea expert at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University in California, told CNN that the rhetoric is still "too hot. It needs to be cooled down." But he added, "If we say that we don't see any actions yet from them, I have to assume that the U.S. military still thinks the situation is under control."

North Korea's Wednesday decision to prevent South Korean workers and managers from entering the Kaesong Industrial Complex, which sits on the North's side of the border but houses operations of scores of South Korean companies, is a tangible sign of the tensions between the two sides. North Korea has demanded the withdrawal of South Korean workers by April 10 from the complex, South Korean semi-official news agency Yonhap said Thursday. But South Korea's ministry of unification denied the report. It's a move that could end up hurting Pyongyang financially, since Kaesong is considered to be an important source of hard currency for Kim's government. More than 50,000 North Koreans work in the zone, producing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of goods each year.

Those workers earn on average $134 a month, of which North Korean authorities take about 45% in various taxes. The North had threatened over the weekend to shut down the industrial complex. North Korea has yet to grant permission for South Koreans to enter the complex, South Korea's ministry of unification said Thursday. The nearly 800 South Koreans remaining inside the complex are still able to leave, the ministry said. U.S. sends missile defense to Guam North Korea's new nuclear threat to U.S. Should the world worry about N. Korea? Live fire drills out of North Korea South Korea returns rhetorical fire North Korea's elaborate game of chicken with U.S. A 'cash cow'

"We are highly skeptical that they will close this cash cow, as some recent reports have suggested," Stephan Haggard, professor at the School of International Relations and Pacific Studies at the University of California, San Diego, wrote in an article published Monday.

"But if they did, the costs would be higher for the North than for the South," Haggard wrote in the article for the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington-based research organization. Seoul said it "deeply regrets" the North's decision to stop South Koreans from entering Kaesong. "North Korea's action creates a barrier to the stable operation" of the complex, the South Korean Unification Ministry said in a statement, urging its neighbor to "immediately normalize" the entry and exit process. And South Korean Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin said military action could be taken if the safety of the South Koreans in the zone were to come under threat.

"If there is a serious situation, we are fully ready, including military measures," he said at a meeting of lawmakers, the semiofficial South Korean news agency Yonhap reported. U.S. moves warship, sea-based radar to watch North Korea The North has blocked the crossing into Kaesong before. In March 2009, also during joint U.S.-South Korean military drills that it said were a threat, Pyongyang shut the border, temporarily trapping hundreds of South Korean workers in the industrial complex.

It allowed many of the stranded workers to return to South Korea the next day, and fully reopened the border about a week later without explaining its reversal. It was unclear whether the latest drama over Kaesong would play out in similar fashion. At the start of the day, when the North informed the South that it would prevent new entries to the complex, there were 861 South Korean workers in there, according to the Unification Ministry. The North said it would continue to let people leave the zone. Hundreds of workers rotate in and out of Kaesong each day in a series of scheduled entries and exits. Many of them stay there for several nights.

During the late morning and early afternoon exit windows, only a trickle of workers was seen returning to South Korea from Kaesong, far fewer than the scores who were registered to leave at those times. South Korean authorities didn't immediately provide an explanation for the discrepancy, saying the individual companies decide when to send workers back.

Kim Kyong-sin, the manager of a textile manufacturing company in Kaesong who came back into South Korea on Wednesday, said some people were staying in the complex because "they are worried they might not be able to come back in." During the March 2009 crisis, many South Korean companies with operations in the zone chose to keep more workers there to compensate for those not being allowed in. Kim said he was scheduled to go back into Kaesong on Thursday, but wasn't optimistic. "I think if this continues there, business will be affected," Kim said. "I think the damage will be serious." Kerry calls North 'reckless' U.S. and South Korean officials have kept up their criticism of the North's actions in recent days. John Kerry, the U.S. secretary of state, warned Tuesday that the United States will not accept North Korea as a "nuclear state."

"The bottom line is simply that what Kim Jong Un is choosing to do is provocative. It is dangerous, reckless," Kerry said during a joint briefing in Washington with South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se. "And I reiterate again the United States will do what is necessary to defend ourselves and defend our allies, Korea and Japan," Kerry added. "We are fully prepared and capable of doing so, and I think the DPRK understands that." The North has conducted three nuclear bomb tests, the most recent in February. It has said that its nuclear weapons are a deterrent that are no longer up for negotiation.

Carlin said North Korea's longer-range missiles may not be ready to be used for three to four years, and its nuclear program is a "low-level threat" at this point. He said Washington's most recent moves could be caused by it seeing some sort of movement around North Korean missile facilities, or it could be "misreading and over-reading North Korean propaganda but fulfilling their obligation to be on guard and prepared." "We're going to get out of this particular crisis, it seems to me, without anything really blowing up," Carlin said. "But down the road, things are going to get more serious." "What we should be looking at, really, is the decisions and the policies and the approach that we're going to have to take over the next four or five years to deal with these things," he added. "Because for the last five years, we really didn't do a very good job of doing that."

 

Isn't This Option At Least A Bit Better If There Must Be An Option?

Read more »

Korean Passover

Is it a Chag Sameach - or Bombs Away?

North Korea [along with all of her End of Days Prophesies] is retching up the heat.


CNN.com:

North Korea's leader approved a plan to prepare standby rockets to hit U.S. targets, state media said Friday, after American stealth bombers carried out a practice mission over South Korea.

In a meeting with military leaders early Friday, Kim Jong Un "said he has judged the time has come to settle accounts with the U.S. imperialists in view of the prevailing situation," the state-run KCNA news agency reported. The rockets are aimed at U.S. targets, including military bases in the Pacific and in South Korea, it said. "If they make a reckless provocation with huge strategic forces, (we) should mercilessly strike the U.S. mainland, their stronghold, their military bases in the operational theaters in the Pacific, including Hawaii and Guam, and those in South Korea," KCNA reported.

Kim: "Time has come to settle accounts" B-2 exercise over Korean Peninsula Little: We will protect South Korea Analysis: Just what is Kim Jong Un up to?

North Korean state media carried a photo of Kim meeting with military officials Friday. In the photo, the young leader is seated, leafing through documents with four uniformed officers standing around him. On the wall behind them, a map titled "Plan for the strategic forces to target mainland U.S." appears to show straight lines stretching across the Pacific to points on the continental United States. South Korea and the United States are "monitoring any movements of North Korea's short, middle and middle- to long-range missiles," South Korean Defense Ministry Spokesman Kim Min-seok said Friday. Kim's regime has unleashed a torrent of threats in the past few weeks, and U.S. officials have said they're concerned about the recent rhetoric.

"I think their very provocative actions and belligerent tone, it has ratcheted up the danger, and we have to understand that reality," Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday at a news briefing. Some observers have suggested that Washington is adding to tensions in the region by drawing attention to its displays of military strength on North Korea's doorstep, such as the flights by the B-2 stealth bombers. Hagel argued against that assertion.

"We, the United States and South Korea, have not been involved in provocating anything," he said. "We, over the years, have been engaged with South Korea on joint exercises. The B-2 flight was part of that." Washington and its allies "are committed to a pathway to peace," Hagel said. "And the North Koreans seem to be headed in a different direction here." But Pentagon spokesman George Little said it was important to remain calm and urged North Korea to "dial the temperature down." "No one wants there to be war on the Korean Peninsula, let me make that very clear," he told CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" on Thursday. Amid the uneasy situation, China, a key North Korean ally that expressed frustration about Pyongyang's latest nuclear test, also called for calm.

"We hope relevant parties can work together to turn around the tense situation in the region," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hong Lei said Friday, describing peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula as "a joint responsibility." B-2 exercise over Korean Peninsula U.S. response to North Korea threats South Korea honors 'Day of Terror' Behind North Korea's heated words about missile strikes, one analyst said, there might not be much mettle. North Korea's threat: Five things to know

"The fact is that despite the bombast, and unless there has been a miraculous turnaround among North Korea's strategic forces, there is little to no chance that it could successfully land a missile on Guam, Hawaii or anywhere else outside the Korean Peninsula that U.S. forces may be stationed," James Hardy, Asia-Pacific editor of IHS Jane's Defense Weekly, wrote in an opinion column published Thursday on CNN.com. North Korea's latest threat Friday morning came after the United States said Thursday that it flew two stealth bombers over South Korea in annual military exercises. The mission by the B-2 Spirit bombers, which can carry conventional and nuclear weapons, "demonstrates the United States' ability to conduct long-range, precision strikes quickly and at will," a statement from U.S. Forces Korea said.

The North Korean state news agency described the mission as "an ultimatum that they (the United States) will ignite a nuclear war at any cost on the Korean Peninsula." The North has repeatedly claimed that the U.S.-South Korean military exercises are tantamount to threats of nuclear war against it. The disclosure of the B-2 flights came a day after North Korea said it was cutting a key military hotline with South Korea, provoking fresh expressions of concern from U.S. officials about Pyongyang's recent rhetoric. Tensions escalated on the Korean Peninsula after the North carried out a long-range rocket launch in December and an underground nuclear test last month, prompting the U.N. Security Council to step up sanctions on the secretive government.

U.S. officials concerned about North Korea's 'ratcheting up of rhetoric' Pyongyang has expressed fury about the sanctions and the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises, due to continue until the end of April. The deteriorating relations have killed hopes of reviving multilateral talks over North Korea's nuclear program for the foreseeable future. Indeed, Pyongyang has declared that the subject is no longer up for discussion. While Kim appears to have spurned the prospect of dialogue with U.S. and South Korean officials, he met with Dennis Rodman during the U.S. basketball star's bizarre recent visit to North Korea. 

Sharp increases in tensions on the Korean Peninsula have taken place during the drills in previous years. The last time the North cut off military communications with the South was during similar exercises in March 2009. North Korea has gone through cycles of "provocative behavior" for decades, Little, the Pentagon spokesman, said Thursday.

"And we have to deal with them. We have to be sober, calm, cool, collected about these periods. That's what we're doing right now," he said. "And we are assuring our South Korean allies day to day that we stand with them in the face of these provocations." The recent saber-rattling from Pyongyang has included threats of pre-emptive nuclear strikes against the United States and South Korea, as well as the declaration that the armistice that stopped the Korean War in 1953 is null and void. On Tuesday, the North said it planned to place military units tasked with targeting U.S. bases under combat-ready status.

Most observers say North Korea is still years away from having the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead on a missile, but it does have plenty of conventional military firepower, including medium-range ballistic missiles that can carry high explosives for hundreds of miles. Little said Thursday that the United States was keeping a close eye on North Korea's missile capabilities. "The important thing is for us to stay out ahead of what we think the North Korean threat is, especially from their missile program," he said. "They've been testing more missiles, and they've been growing their capabilities and we have to stay out ahead."

May it be Soon

Read more »

Coming To Obamastine

Well, its about time nu.

And now is appropriate to bring up the infamous Zohar: Gog will visit Israel three times; between the 2nd and 3rd times intense Din will erupt - such that it will lead to the demise of Gog.
This is Obama's 2nd visit, so he's "practically mishpacha." Let the games begin.


Jpost.com:

Both the White House and the Prime Minister's Office said Tuesday that President Obama had spoken with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in January about a presidential visit to Israel this spring, which would be the first since Obama assumed the White House in 2009.

“The start of the President’s second term and the formation of a new Israeli government offer the opportunity to reaffirm the deep and enduring bonds between the United States and Israel and to discuss the way forward on a broad range of issues of mutual concern,” said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor.

He pointed to Iran and Syria but did not mention the Palestinians.

The trip, however, is widely seen as an effort by Obama to kick-start a moribund peace process between Israelis and Palestinians amidst other roiling regional concerns, such as the Arab Spring and Iran nuclear program.

Vietor said further details about the trip, including the dates, would be released at a later time.

Israeli media reports, however, have identified late March as the expected arrival time. Channel 10 reported that the visit will take place as part of a regional tour also expected to take Obama to Ankara, Riyadh, Cairo and Ramallah.

Obama came under a great deal of criticism for not visiting Israel during his first term, something which many believe would reassure a jittery Israeli public of his support, even though he did visit countries nearby such as Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. He was last here as a presidential candidate in 2008.

Since Obama will come here, it is less likely that Netanyahu will travel to Washington for the annual AIPAC policy conference in early March, an opportunity Israeli prime minister's usually use to meet with the US president.

That visit, however, was already in doubt because of the possibility that Netanyahu may not have a new government in place by the conference, which begins March 3.

Tzipi Livni, who relentlessly slammed Netanyahu during the election campaign for poisoning ties with the US, issued a statement welcoming the visit, saying Israel-US ties were an important element of Israel's national security. Livni, whose party is currently in talks with Likud Beytenu about joining the coalition, said she hoped Netanyahu and Obama would re-start the diplomatic process which serves both Israeli and US interests.

Meanwhile, new US Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to make his first visit to Israel in his new role sometime next week.

Read more »

Damascus Will Cease To Be A City - Oy!

Damascus

Could the plot thicken any more?!

Just after Israel bombed Syria, I was in a cab, and we began to talk about it [I like to get the local's opinions, rather than my daas as the dumb American].

He says in response to my 'will Iran hit us now?' - "Iran, no, this is the end of the World [if they do this]."

Every moment this just gets more and more complicated: Russia checking America and Israel, throw in Iran and Syria [and I guess Turkey now is coming in], the whole Middle east  and esp. Egypt.

This is nothing new obviously, but the intensity is up many levels; my Israeli friends in the North are taking it serious...the last time that happened was '66 [Lebanon War].

Point being, all the players are [still] here, acting accordingly, and it seems now everyone is on the same page: waiting.

The Voice of Russia:

Israel has become involved in the Syrian conflict. The Israeli air force has delivered a blow on a research centre on the outskirts of Damascus. Syria, Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah are threatening Israel with retaliation. Experts of the Voice of Russia say that Israel’s tactics have considerably increased the risk of a new conflict in the Middle East.

Russia has condemned Israel’s activities calling them an unprovoked attack against a sovereign state. This is a gross violation of the UN Charter and is unacceptable, whatever its motives are, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s manifest reads.

Syria’s representative in the UN has declared that Damascus reserves the right for retaliatory measures. Khaled Davud, a representative of the National Salvation Front, expressed the opinion of most Syrians in his interview with The Voice of Russia.

There are several versions of the incident. The radical Syrian opposition states that Israeli aircraft bombed the chemical weapons research centre headed by the Syrian president’s brother. The Washington Post reports that Israel did not destroy the centre but only a motorcade transporting Russian-made anti-aircraft guns to Lebanon. Another version is that the motorcade was carrying Yakhont anti-ship missiles or even Skad strategic/tactical missiles.

Israel refrains from comments but Lebanese political scientist Imad Rizk says that they are not required because explanations lie on the surface.

"The timing of the attack is symptomatic. Binyamin Netanyahu has returned to big politics. He needed that operation to consolidate the Israeli government and his own position in it. Next, a new Secretary of State, John Kerry, has been appointed in the US. The Israeli and US military held consultations the day before the bombing. It looks like the attack became the US and Israel’s joint declaration of intending to participate in the Syrian conflict. We can expect an open coordination of activities between Israel, the US and their allies in the Middle East.”

This week witnessed Israel’s first but not last blow on Syria, Vladimir Sotnikov from the Institute of Oriental Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences believes.

“Israel will keep delivering blows on facilities or forces participating in the Syrian conflict. They would be either Islamist groups of troops loyal to Bashar al-Assad. I can foresee that as the crisis becomes worse Israel could expand its participation in such attacks. Israel fears the Islamic element in the Syrian crisis. The main reason for concern is not so much Islamists’ raising their heads in Syria but the prospect of a link between Islamists in Syria and Hamas and Hezbollah groups that are Israel’s traditional enemies. It would be a nightmare for Israel to find itself surrounded by them.

Herbie Keynon, The Jerusalem Post’s diplomatic editor, told The Voice of Russia that Israel was ready for a counterattack.

Israel’s attack against Syria took place immediately after Turkey deployed NATO Patriot missile systems on the Syrian border.

Under the circumstances, efforts on the settlement of the Syrian crisis become especially important. The main expectations are associated with special envoy of the UN and the League of Arab States Lahdar Brahimi’s new peace plan. Russia has announced that it supports his efforts. Moscow finds it reasonable to continue discussions in the Action Group for Syria which consists of the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the main regional forces.

Does Zionism Burn Until Jordan?

Read more »

Cowboys and Indians In The Middle East

There will be a straw that breaks the [Yishmael's] camel's back. This thing is getting more and more tense by the moment; Iron Dome is now in Tzfat.



USAToday.com:

Israel launched a rare airstrike inside Syria, U.S. officials said Wednesday, targeting a convoy believed to contain anti-aircraft weapons bound for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. The attack adds a potentially flammable new element to tensions already heightened by Syria's civil war.

It was the latest salvo in Israel's long-running effort to disrupt the Shiite militia's quest to build an arsenal capable of defending against Israel's air force and spreading destruction inside the Jewish state.

Regional security officials said the strike, which occurred overnight Tuesday, targeted a site near the Lebanese border, while a Syrian army statement said it destroyed a military research center northwest of the capital, Damascus. They appeared to be referring to the same incident.

U.S. officials said the target was a truck convoy that Israel believed was carrying sophisticated anti-aircraft weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the operation.

Regional officials said the shipment included sophisticated Russian-made SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, which if acquired by Hezbollah would be "game-changing," enabling the militants to shoot down Israeli jets, helicopters and surveillance drones. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media.

In a statement, the Syrian military denied the existence of any such shipment and said a scientific research facility outside Damascus was hit by the Israeli warplanes.

The Israeli military declined to comment. However, many in Israel worry that as Syrian President Bashar Assad loses power, he could strike back by transferring chemical or advanced weapons to Hezbollah, which is neighboring Lebanon's most powerful military force and is committed to Israel's destruction.

The airstrike follows decades of enmity between Israel and allies Syria and Hezbollah, which consider the Jewish state their mortal enemy. The situation has been further complicated by the civil war raging in Syria between the Assad regime and rebel brigades seeking his ouster.

The war has sapped Assad's power and threatens to deprive Hezbollah of a key supporter, in addition to its land corridor to Iran. The two countries provide Hezbollah with the bulk of its funding and arms.

A Syrian military statement read aloud on state TV Wednesday said low-flying Israeli jets crossed into Syria over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and bombed a military research center in the area of Jamraya, northwest of Damascus.

The strike destroyed the center and damaged a nearby building, killing two workers and wounding five others, the statement said.

The military denied the existence of any convoy bound for Lebanon, saying the center was responsible for "raising the level of resistance and self-defense" of Syria's military.

"This proves that Israel is the instigator, beneficiary and sometimes executor of the terrorist acts targeting Syria and its people," the statement said.

Israel and Hezbollah fought an inconclusive 34-day war in 2006 that left 1,200 Lebanese and 160 Israelis dead.

While the border has been largely quiet since, the struggle has taken other forms. Hezbollah has accused Israel of assassinating a top commander, and Israel blamed Hezbollah and Iran for a July 2012 attack on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. In October, Hezbollah launched an Iranian-made reconnaissance drone over Israel, using the incident to brag about its expanding capabilities.

Israeli officials believe that Hezbollah's arsenal has markedly improved since 2006, now boasting tens of thousands of rockets and missiles and the ability to strike almost anywhere inside Israel.

Israel suspects that Damascus obtained a battery of SA-17s from Russia after an alleged Israeli airstrike in 2007 that destroyed an unfinished Syrian nuclear reactor.

Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of the dangers of Syria's "deadly weapons," saying the country is "increasingly coming apart."

The same day, Israel moved a battery of its new "Iron Dome" rocket defense system to the northern city of Haifa, which was battered by Hezbollah rocket fire in the 2006 war. The Israeli army called that move "routine."

Syria, however, cast the airstrike in a different light, linked to the country's civil war, which it blames on terrorists carrying out an international conspiracy.

Despite its icy relations with Assad, Israel has remained on the sidelines of efforts to topple him, while keeping up defenses against possible attacks.

Israeli defense officials have carefully monitored Syria's chemical weapons, fearing Assad could deploy them or lose control of them to extremist fighters among the rebels.

President Barack Obama has called the use of chemical weapons a "red line" that if crossed could prompt direct U.S. intervention, though U.S. officials have said Syria's stockpiles still appear to be under government control.

The strike was Israel's first inside Syria since September 2007, when warplanes destroyed a site that the U.N. nuclear watchdog deemed likely to be a nuclear reactor. Syria denied the claim, saying the building was a non-nuclear military site.

Syria allowed international inspectors to visit the bombed site in 2008, but it has refused to allow nuclear inspectors new access. This has heightened suspicions that Syria has something to hide, along with its decision to level the destroyed structure and build on its site.

In 2006, Israeli warplanes flew over Assad's palace in a show of force after Syrian-backed militants captured an Israeli soldier in the Gaza Strip.

And in 2003, Israeli warplanes attacked a suspected militant training camp just north of the Syrian capital, in response to an Islamic Jihad suicide bombing in the city of Haifa that killed 21 Israelis.

Syria vowed to retaliate for both attacks but never did.

In Lebanon, which borders both Israel and Syria, the military and the U.N. agency tasked with monitoring the border with Israel said Israeli warplanes have sharply increased their activity in the past week.

Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace are not uncommon, and it was unclear if the recent activity was related to the strike in Syria.

Syria's primary conflict with Israel is over the Golan Heights, which Israeli occupied in the 1967 war. Syria demands the area back as part of any peace deal. Despite the hostility, Syria has kept the border quiet since the 1973 Mideast war and has never retaliated for Israeli attacks.

In May 2011, only two months after the uprising against Assad started, hundreds of Palestinians overran the tightly controlled Syria-Israeli frontier in a move widely thought to have been facilitated by the Assad regime to divert the world's gaze from his growing troubles at home.

 This exercise is one shot from going Global.

YnetNews:

Russia said on Thursday it was very concerned about reports of an Israeli attack in Syria and that any such action, if confirmed, would amount to unacceptable military interference in the war-ravaged country.

The remarks were issued as Hezbollah called on the international community to condemn the alleged strike.

"If this information is confirmed, then we are dealing with unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the UN Charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it," the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Sources told Reuters on Wednesday that Israeli warplanes had bombed a convoy near Syria's border with Lebanon, apparently targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah in what some called a warning to Damascus not to arm Israel's Lebanese enemy.

Syrian state television accused Israel of bombing a military research center at Jamraya, between Damascus and the nearby border. Syrian rebels disputed that, saying their forces had attacked the site.

Russia has been trying to shield Syrian President Bashar Assad from international pressure to end the civil war against opposition forces that has ravaged the country over 22 months and killed an estimated 60,000 people. Moscow has repeatedly spoken against any foreign interference in Syria, especially military action.

'Attack typical of Israel's criminal ways' Meanwhile, the Hezbollah terror organization released a statement condemning the "Israeli attacks on the scientific research center in Syria." The statement said that "the attack is in line with Israel's aggressive and criminal ways and was made in accordance to a policy which attempts to prevent any Arab or Muslim force to develop its military and technological capabilities."

In its statement the Shiite terror organization claimed that "the attack exposes the background to what has been going on in Syria for years, and the criminal intention to destroy Syria and its army, and undermine its central role on the resistance front."

It also said: "The attack requires wide-scale condemnation from the international community and the Arab and Muslim states."

Nevertheless, it also claimed that "we are accustomed to the international community swallowing its tongue and remaining silent, not condemning or taking a stand when Israel is the aggressor."

Hassan Nasrallah's organization also expressed solidarity with the Syrian people, the Syrian leadership and the Syrian army.

They said, in an implied message to the rebel forces, that "some elements should be aware of the severity of the attack against Syria."

"This aggression should lead to a re-examination of their stance and to adopt political dialogue as the only basis to a solution meant to end the shedding of Syrian blood, in order to keep Syria and protect its role in the fight against the enemies."

Read more »

Ethics of The Fathers - Is Damascus Domestic?

This eruption in Syria could literally be at any time. All kinds of questions are being raised: ethics, contingency plans, "whats next", Iran, Jordan, etc. etc.

All in all, it seems there is no way out of this for anyone - Bibi's bomb is lit, no matter how abstract his red lines can be drawn - this is was and will always be about the showdown in the Middle East between Israel and her neighbors; the clock ticks towards inevitability.


Jpost.com:

As news reports are rampant with the possibility of an Israeli or US strike on Syria’s chemical weapons, it is important to recall the law of armed conflict principles which come into play.

There is a range of views on preemptive strikes.

Some hold that preemptive strikes are never permitted, as the UN Charter requires an existing “armed attack” for one to use force and carry out self-defense measures.

In the post-September 2011 world, a growing group of nations take the view that if an attack is “imminent,” a preemptive strike can be justified.

One paradigm case is with nuclear weapons, where even a small “dirty bomb” can cause unimaginable carnage, and many would justify attacking a state’s nuclear weapons capability prior to an attack, which Israel has done in the past.

But Syria’s chemical weapons pose unusual issues.

According to former ambassador to Canada and former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker, there would be a basis for a preemptive strike if “Syria was uncovering the wraps on its chemical weapons and getting ready to use them, with indications they would be used against Israel.”

But what if Syria only meant to use chemical weapons against its own people, such as the Syrian rebels? “If they were using them against their own people, then maybe Israel can’t use the self-defense argument” to initiate a preemptive strike, said Baker.

“There would be no case for anticipatory self-defense according to customary international law if the threat is not against us,” he said.

Baker elaborated on a “Canadian philosophy” of there being a “right to protect” others, namely that if a nation is “of the view that a people are under threat, it could be the interest and right of any state to protect that people.”

The US and its allies invoked such a “humanitarian approach” in the former Yugoslavia in the mid-1990s and most recently in Libya in 2011.

In both those cases, however, especially in Libya, the intervention was based on a widespread and multinational collective intervention with some degree of UN support.

Regardless, Israel has never undertaken such a mission nor claimed such a right.

Baker said that Israel has “never been in a position with its neighbors where it was necessary,” while citing some accounts of Black September in Jordan 1970 which state that Israel had threatened to intervene if Jordan’s regime allowed itself to be taken over by Palestinian nationalists.

All of this creates a difficult dilemma: What if it is clear that chemical weapons are about to be used or transferred, but unclear whether the intent is to use them against other Syrians or to use or transfer them to terror groups for use against Israel? In a situation of “ambiguous intelligence,” Baker said, there might be a justification for “our intervention. The tendency and percentage of likelihood” of an attack on Israel “would need to be pretty high in terms of intelligence indications” to justify a preemptive strike in such a situation.

Do the calculations change if Bashar Assad is toppled, and the Syrian rebels, who some have said have associations with al-Qaida, take over? If the rebels took over, the “question would be the degree to which the threat is realistic. If Israel’s military people, on the basis of their own intelligence and considerations, come to the conclusion that there is a danger” the weapons could “fall into the hands of terrorists,” and that this will lead to their “use against Israel, then a preemptive strike would be justified,” said Baker.

In other words, what is poorly understood by partisans in the debate over preemptive strikes who have not had to deal with anything beyond theoretical considerations, is that much of the legal conclusion will derive from the indications of intelligence about the threat.

Those who say preemptive strikes can never be justified appear to ignore scenarios where intelligence is certain of an imminent and disastrous attack.

And those who invoke preemptive strikes the second there is any change in status of the chemical weapons appear to ignore the possibility that intelligence may show that the threat is not against Israel.

The other dimension that differentiates chemical weapons from nuclear weapons is that not all chemical weapons use, in any quantity, is necessarily an immediate, massive disaster.

In 1988, Saddam Hussein killed 5,000 people in an instant when 20 aircraft dropped mustard and sarin gas on the Kurdish-Iraqi city of Halabja. In 1995, 13 Japanese were killed when sarin gas was released into the Tokyo Metro.

Both incidents were terrible tragedies, but the gulf in the number of fatalities shows that different amounts and capabilities of delivery for chemical weapons can impact how disastrous its use can be.

Baker said that while Israel could strike preemptively to stop an “immediate, overwhelming and overpowering” threat, there might be scenarios where a limited chemical weapons transfer or use might not be significant enough to justify a preemptive strike, or might require limiting the nature of the preemptive strike.

For example, a massive threat may justify a massive use of airpower, whereas a more limited threat might only justify a narrow and targeted air strike or a limited strike by a small group of covert operatives on the ground.

Again, intelligence would be crucial in evaluating the threat and the legality of various responses.

As the world gets more complex with more complicated actors, and smaller states’ acquisition of non-conventional weapons becomes viewed as a greater threat, the interplay of intelligence and law on the issue of preemptive strikes will only become more important.

Notice the Canadian quote; Canada in the Talmud is called Magog. It does seem each day more and more clear that we are witnessing the foundations of Gog Magog. Would it be fitting for this war to ignite on Canadian philosophy? As long as Israel doesn't think for itself, it remains vulnerable to all of its "friends."

Follow @RabbiKSoulMazal

Read more »

Israel In Prophecy: Facing Jordan

Authentic [even a tad radical] Zionism that leans Right claims Israel extends beyond the Jordan. The Left counters with its views as a perfect negative [and opposite extreme]. And nowadays people speak as moderates, while claims of selling out Israel are often heard in the background.

But did anyone notice Arab Spring - and happen to take in the last 100+ years of Zionism to form a long view perspective? We may be looking at the closing of one long tekufa in the making that will bring us to Zionism 1.0 as a conclusion, and into 2.0: the Messiah version [and vision of Eretz Yisrael].

When Zionism first became the vehicle of choice to govern in the Land [and to the Land] while lending itself as a viable method of vision, its extreme blend had a purpose, one that has lasted all the way until today and led to the very threshold that we find ourselves sitting upon today. In 2013 you will hear Zionism speaking of becoming moderate, yet make no mistake, this is not a change of winds; this is the echo of a mission nearly complete.

In 1948, the Jews return to their Land, disheveled from 2000 years of Trauma, and suddenly take to Israel with 6,000,000 questions as to where to go from here. An immediate redemption although poetic to the ear, would be a cause of sure destruction, so a plan would be needed to bring this thing up to speed. Let the  War of Independence begin!

Israel will eventually [seem] to win this war, and the struggle will continue over 60+ years of the same themes and characters, over and over again. The same questions will remain - are we being sold out and when will Israel finally fall victim to her neighbors?

However after much deliberation and commitment to extreme Zionism, something  changed [in the time of the Zohar's predicted times even!]: Arab Spring - in its season.

With perfect deception in perspective, people look to see where it began, however it is the end game that matters in any round of chess - on any level.

The end game here is Jordan.

Jordan possesses the three prophesied gifts to Eretz Yisrael: Edom, Moav, and Ammon, al to be given once The Land - Proper is secured, something that even King David did not do, before his Syrian conquest.

Speaking of Syria: they are about to fall, causing   black hole eruption that will indeed pull in the kingdom of Yishamel - Iran. When that happens, the Middle East is in total collapse [except Israel no less] with refugees seeking to pour into an already [mysteriously] weakened Jordan. If Jordan is the last player in this, Israel is last man standing - but in face of international isolation as the price to pay for victory.

This paves the way for Gog Magog onto Israel. But now there is a catch: Even if America lands on Holy soil to negotiate the final [solution] two state submission, Israel now speaks as moderates?

With Jordan down and last - now Israel can create a Palestinian State from the former Jordan which happens to be the original Palestinian State [if even that existed].

At this point Authentic Zionism served her purpose, paved the path to a redemption scenario, and allows the prophesied lands to be delivered  as if giftwrapped and served on a platter.

So if indeed Zionism caused Arab Spring, and Jordan is the main course [while the Right with Left opposition worked like a charm] we may be looking the frail beginning of redemption, a vision shining through after over 100 years in the making.  No longer is the modern moderate seen as a sellout, but rather as a captain steering the ship into port.

If Bibi signs the draft of a future treifa state, it is my belief that this is no less than divine engineering of a promise delivered thousands of years ago.

Much like the Para Adumah - from the impure comes forth the pure, and as we saw in Parashas Beshalach - from the bitter comes the sweet. Nothing is more bitter than this Palestinian State - and for this we are told, with Hope to Hashem, we will witness those waters become something sweet for the whole World to drink.

May we soon taste the sweet waters of the World through the sweet channel of the Beis Hamikdash, that will be built on The Holy Land, and through its expansion of Promised Territory TransJordan. For Your Salvation [Hashem] - We Hope To You [God]!

Jpost.com:

 While not ready to sign a comprehensive peace deal, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is willing to establish an interim Palestinian state without a final agreement, former deputy foreign minister Yossi Beilin said on Monday.

Speaking during a debate with outgoing settlement council head Danny Dayan, Beilin stated that he had heard from Netanyahu that he would be ready for establishing a “provisional border with the Palestinians.”

“This is something that I heard from him that he would be ready to do it,” he stated.

The debate, held at the David Citadel Hotel in Jerusalem, was organized by the American Jewish Committee.

“Both sides prefer a permanent agreement but are not ready for it under either’s current leadership,” Beilin continued.

Beilin, who was one of the primary architects of both the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Initiative, a framework for peace negotiated outside of official government channels, noted that “what can be done is an interim agreement which establishes a Palestinian state in provisional borders so that Netanyahu will not have to negotiate now about Jerusalem.”

“Netanyahu, far from being a warmonger, is a very cautious person and therefore not the one [to sign] a permanent agreement. This is not because he doesn’t want it but because he is not ready to pay the price.”

Beilin negated the possibility of an accord such as his Geneva Initiative being workable in the current political climate or with the “current government.”

He also asserted that instead of the prime minister being forced to deal with the issue of forcibly evacuating settlements, any settlers who would wish to remain in their homes under Palestinian sovereignty would be allowed to do so. Those not wishing to live within a Palestinian state would be resettled, Beilin said, possibly even in other areas over the green line that Israel would retain.

“Knowing Bibi,” he said, using Netanyahu’s nickname, “I believe an interim solution could be realistic.”

However, the Prime Minister’s Office denied Beilin’s statements. Speaking to The Jerusalem Post in response to Beilin’s comments, PMO officials noted that Netanyahu “believes in direct negotiations with the Palestinians with no preconditions that would lead to, as described in the Bar-Ilan speech, a two-state solution based on a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes Israel.”

Settlement council head Dayan also had an alternative peace plan on hand.

Currently, he said, Israel and the Palestinians “are devising a modus vivendi that is moderately satisfying for everyone. It’s not idyllic or what we or Palestinians want, but it’s moderately satisfying, and in this region it’s a hell of an achievement.”

There is currently no long-term solution, he said, but should Jordan experience regime change, it may be possible to push the idea of Jordan as a Palestinian state.

“There is a significant chance for two states, Israel west of the Jordan River and Palestine to the east, with joint functional control over Judea and Samaria, although not shared sovereignty,” he speculated. “That will be the beginning of serious negotiations, in which Israel [eventually] rules the Jewish population there and Palestine rules the territory in which their people live there.”

The debate was held during a dinner for the Board of Governors Institute of the AJC, which is currently in Israel as part of a regional tour.

AJC director David Harris, whose staff organized the debate, noted that members of the board were granted an audience with King Abdullah of Jordan in Amman on Sunday and had met with both President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Netanyahu on Monday.

“This evening is sort of quintessential AJC,” Harris noted. “We always have a major debate as part of our programming. We invite people who are thoughtful and reasoned but have certain perspectives on key issues. We listen to them respectfully and we process the information. Tonight’s debate was very much in that spirit.”

The Voice of Russia:

"Jordan has not avoided Arab awakening or Arab Spring completely but there were actually some protests. And a number of protests that took place in the country over the last two years is actually incomparable with the number of protests that used to take place earlier," Ibrahim Saif, resident scholar at the Carnegie Middle East Center, in Beirut, told the Voice of Russia.

Jordan has not avoided Arab awakening or Arab Spring completely but there were actually some protests. And a number of protests that took place in the country over the last two years is actually incomparable with the number of protests that used to take place earlier. Also the ceiling of the demands by protesters was increasing over time since the Arab awakening. Over the last two years they were demanding the reform of the regime and then they wanted to introduce new issues like constitutional monarchy and to limit the king’s power.

So, there was a kind of movement at the streets level and within the elites level and the need to introduce new changes. So, Jordan is one of the countries that are actually going through I would say a transitional moment now. But we can also argue that it is a smooth and managed transition in a way, that so far the opposition parties, including the Islamist and other parties, are not having the critical mass as yet to have something like a popular uprising similar to other countries, like Tunisia or Yemen, or like Egypt in that regard.

And for that there are several reasons that we can consider in understanding why the protests have been minimal, why that so far has not been going up to a way out revolution. There are reasons behind this regarding the nature of the regime, regarding the nature of the social contacts between the state and the society, and the due politics that has been unfolding in the region for that matter.

Sir, but you said that Islamists have not reached the critical mass in power structures and you said – as yet. Does that imply that you do not rule out the scenario of more turbulent development?

Actually if we think about scenarios for Jordan and what would happen, I wouldn’t rule out any of the scenarios. The most likely scenario is that we will continue in this managed transition. But if there is a sort of severe economic deterioration and there is a severely high rate of unemployment, as we witnessed around the end of the last year, and increasing number of poor people, and also the rising sentiment against corruption and lack of action in that regard – that would drive increasing numbers to the streets and could witness a serious trouble in the country. This is one of the scenarios.

But the second scenario which as I argue is the most likely is that the Government is trying to respond to demands at both levels by fighting corruption and having a more participatory policy making. The latest parliamentarian election which by far at least can be characterized as fair election in the sense that there was no forgery, there was no intervention as happened before in the previous elections, though it was boycotted by the Islamists and some opposition groups. But at least the outcome was uncontroversial compared with other previous elections.

So, now we at least have a legitimate legislative body that can take some more fierce measures regarding the political reform in Jordan and introducing a new election law or a new set of rules for governing the new affairs in Jordan.

Several times I’ve run into an assumption that Arab Spring poses a certain challenge for monarchy regimes. So, does that mean that Jordan might be one of the models to argument that position? Or is Jordan's case absolutely special?

Actually I think there are some certain challenges and there are some certain threats. It depends on how you response to this new political landscape in the region and the new political landscape in Jordan. And this challenge could be turned into a threat if you do not act, if you do not react, also if you are sometimes too active and take serious steps towards changing the way that the state-society relations are shaped and how you gain the public support.

But so far actually, since the revolution or the Arab Spring has started, Jordan has amended its constitution, which is for the first time in 50 years when they introduced some constitutional amendments which reduce the absolute power granted to the king and gave it to the Parliament, also reduce the executive body’s power and empower more the elected legislative body in that regard. So, actually there is a new dynamics that is taking place.

Sometimes you would argue that maybe they are slower than they should be and they are quite hesitant but I think this is quite natural in a country where there is an entrenched interested groups that have benefiting from the existing arrangement for a long time and you would expect them to resist the shift to a new dynamics whereby new elites and new interests would emerge and take positions in the new political and economic landscape.

Of course, if you wait, if you don’t react, if you think that all policies would apply today and would reach a conclusive agreement with your own society – then you are definitely mistaken. And a challenge is how really to predict and draft a new social contract and a new political arrangement whereby you increase the level of participation and you don’t take responsibility as a monarchy on your own part or as an individual institution, or a singular institution in the country.

But Sir, definitely there are other factors which are out of control of the Government, like the situation around the country. So, in what ways does the situation in the neighbouring countries affect Jordan? And can the Government efficiently counter those dangerous effects?

There are actually two aspects to what is happening in the region, and particularly in Syria. One thing is that this refugee crisis, which is a kind of humanitarian crisis which puts more pressure on the Government and its own resources and how they are responding to this. And this event unfolding in Syria, so far we don’t know how this would end and what kind of new political regime would prevail in Syria. That fight and that geopolitical threat is out of the Government’s hands, and I agree that that is something we have to include when we talk about the regional aspect of this Arab Spring in that regard.

The second aspect is actually people at the street when they are watching what is happening in Syria, that devastation, that destruction of their infrastructure, the divide in the society, the casualties, the way that the Government and the Army is dealing with its own people has actually put a kind of break to the protest in the street and the public support in the sense that although we are demanding for reforming the polity and reforming the regime in Jordan but nobody wants Jordan to get into the chaotic state that we are witnessing in Syria in that regard. And therefore they are really backing off from supporting any uncalculated movement.

So, I would say that what is happening in Syria to great extent has weakened the more drastic political demand in Jordan and you would find a lot of people actually leaning towards a managed transition. And probably the outcome of this election is actually the reflection of that, I mean the level of participation and the quality of the parliamentarians who reached the Parliament would reflect that flavor of the opposition but also the flavor of how can we improve the status quo and how can we move forward with the light at the end of the tunnel instead of jumping into the unknown. I think this is where the support and Syria has played a significant role in really creating a group of hesitant people because they are unsure about how this would unfold in Syria and what role could the international community play in the crisis similar to the ones in Syria.

Follow @RabbiKSoulMazal

Read more »